Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
How so? It's not like the government didn't deliberately mislead parliamentarians, didn't fail to produce documents upon parliamentary order, didn't order witnesses called upon by committee to not to appear before committee... AFAIK all of those are valid reasons for a citation of contempt. Legally speaking I mean, maybe it doesn't fit your definition of contempt (although really it should, the implication being otherwise that you believe that the executive should not bound by the orders, laws, and directives of the people as represented by the Legislature) but it fits the legal definition of contempt.
Just in case folk don't know though... technically the motion upon which the government fell wasn't a parliamentary contempt finding.
|
I will give you the Bev Oda ordeal, she should have just admitted how that decision was made and that she approved the "Not" on the document, I don't like how she handled it.
As for the documents, for the 50th time, they provided everything they could to the opposition. I am talking boxes and boxes of documents. That wasn't good enough for them, they wanted all kinds of estimates about 10, 15, 20 costs which cannot be provided. No matter what the government gave to them they would not have been happy.
As for the committee's, if you only knew how much of a joke all those committee's ended up being for the last 2 years you would understand why they didn't send people to them. I am talking about every committee having a majority of opposition over the ruling government. Almost every committee was nothing more than a witch hunt. The opposition would do everything in their power to gum up the works of government.
I use to think that minorities were not bad for running the government. The problem is you don't get responsible adults into these committee positions and MP positions. You get a bunch of people (from all parties) who do nothing but grand stand and try to one up each other to make themselves look good instead of conducting business in the best interests of the country.
I would rather have majority governments with a set term of 3 years instead of this crap that we are dealing with now. Much more would get done and if the public didn't like how the government was going, throw them out after three years and try someone new.