Parliamentary decorum
It seems as though we get one of these calls every session. In other words, we get it already, Ian.
Countering the Nanny State
A blog dedicated to lower taxes, less waste and exposing, and resisting, the ever ubiquitous nanny state that is corroding the way of life and the freedom of the people of New Brunswick, Canada.
Monday, December 3, 2007
8 Comments:
What decorum? lol
Don't get me wrong bill, I agree with the premise of L. Ian MacDonald's article. It's just that, as someone who has actually sat in on a few QPs in my day, this is nothing new. Also, if I'm not mistaken, there were calls for Hon. Gilbert Parent to gain control of the house in 2000 when the HRDC scandal broke. Grandstanding is grandstanding.
Take the cameras out of the HoC.
No audience = No over-acting
So are you suggesting that there was great decorum prior to the cameras coming in? I could have sworn there were some drunken exchanges during the railway dispute back in the Macdonald era.
Oh, my bad, you just mean the cameras contribute to the problem, not that it will get better without them. Understood.
the above was me.
Oh btw, I agree with L. Ian on this guy: "At the ethics committee, with Karlheinz Schreiber as the witness, the NDP's Tom Mulcair once again slagged the reputation of Marc Lalonde, one of the great Liberal cabinet ministers of the Trudeau era. After a life of outstanding service to our country, Lalonde returned to Montreal to practise law at Stikeman Elliott, where his clients included Karlheinz Schreiber. In the worst kind of McCarthyistic smear, Mulcair again linked Lalonde's perfectly legal work on behalf of a legitimate client to the Mulroney-Schreiber matter.
Mulcair is a lawyer and a former law teacher. He knows better. But he is also a shameless opportunist and relentless publicity hound. Jack Layton should haul him in and read him the riot act. While he's at it, Layton should also watch his back."
Not only is Mulcair shameless in his questioning in the Schreiber affair, he is coming across as a McCarthyist.
Honestly nb, the days of the drunkard politician are long gone. I honestly do think that the behavior would be much better without the eye of the media catching every exaggeration, every verbal exchange and replaying it.
Film at 11 is no way to conduct the business of government.
True. But as long as "gotcha journalism" remains strong, then we are stuck with CPAC only replaying the meat and potatoes (they think) of parliament --- Question period.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home