On Tuesday Parliament passed a motion which would ban the practise of MPs sending ’10 percenters” into ridings of other MPs. The motion was initiated by the Liberals and solidly opposed by the Conservatives. The final call on the motion will be made by the Board of Internal Economy, the secretive committee charged with controlling the spending on the Hill.

The government’s response to the motion is that they consider it to be ‘non-binding’. Excuse me? Is Parliament supposed to reflect the will of the people or doesn’t it? Who the blazes is paying those clowns than the people?

Parliament has spoken, therefore neither the government nor the internal board of economy should have any option but to comply.

I suspect there are a lot of Canadians like me who would love to see the practise stopped completely. I’m in a riding where the Conservative incumbent sends a constant stream of his junk mail into my mailbox. When I even bother to look at one, it is usually nothing but self-serving drivel. Save the taxpayers millions and outlaw them all. Let the parties pay for their own self-serving drivel.

But I digress, sort of.

The government initially responded to the motion by calling it ‘non-binding’ and they would ignore it. Then they reversed themselves and said they would support it if it applied to all parties but they don’t have a majority on the internal board of economy.

When the question was put to the panel on CTV’s Power Play yesterday, the responses show the level of game playing going on.

Pierre Poilievre from the Conservatives wouldn’t commit one way or the other, he threw in that the Cons (largest users of the 10 percenters) were going to support eliminating subsidies to political parties. When pressed by Tom Clarke if this support would be through the introduction of a bill in the House or how they would do it, the trained parrot that he is just kept repeating the government was supporting the elimination but nothing about how.

Joe Comartin from the NDP (2nd largest user) avoided saying that the NDP would halt the practise. The closest he came was that if the other parties stopped so would they. Was instructions to stop the practise in play? Comartin’s response was only Jack Layton could make that decision and none had been made. They voted for the motion, do they support it or not?

Wayne Easter from the Liberals (least user) stated unequivocally that directions had gone out to stop the practise while noting that there may be some in the system which can’t be pulled back. He said they had contacted the post office and tried to stop any waiting to go out. Apparently they support the motion through action.

So what was the sense of the motion other than grandstanding if some of those who claim to support it immediately start waffling? As for the Board of Internal Economy, this is a body which determines the spending of taxpayers money. Where do they get off at being secretive about their discussions and decisions?

It is no wonder so many are cynical and disconnected from the political process in this country. They’d rather watch hockey least, it is in fact a game and doesn’t masquerade as democratic government.

These Articles May Be Related:

notice: The content of this post contains my opinions and my right to express them. I will respect your right to express your opinion in the comments as long as you’re not abusive and you respect my right to my opinion.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Related posts