Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:

Archives

Terms of reference for Iacobucci are a big stall for time..

..or an attempt to try and justify to the Canadian public that Parliament isn’t supreme in asking for documents, or perhaps they think a 3rd party former SC judge’s opinion would be more respected or believed over themselves for saying this is really about trying to prevent injury to Canada’s reputation/national security (the government’s official line/claim) then it is to prevent documents from getting to the opposition parties/media/public that embarrasses this Conservative government/causes it to suffer political damage (or worse, suffer the consequences of breaking international law).

I basically agree with Steve V’s conclusion:

If I’m the NDP, I continue on with their contempt charge. If I’m the Liberals, I dust off (Derek) Lee (who put his own contempt of Parliament motion on hold until he saw what Iaboucci’s mandate was going to be – Scott) and reject this “inquiry” outright. Now that we know have some clarity on Iacobucci, it’s imperative that the opposition doesn’t allow a probable pre-determined exercise to distract, delay and ultimately relegate. The opposition isn’t obligated to play this game.

The Liberals initial response to this is one of scepticism – as well it should be. It should become even more then that come the return of QP, in my opinion, from all opposition parties.

7 comments to Terms of reference for Iacobucci are a big stall for time..

  • JMR

    I have asked this many times. Why is it retired generals and now a retired judge is allow full access to the detainee documents when elected members of parliament are not. All members of parliament are sworn in not just the government members therefore they should all be equal.

    • Gayle

      @JMR, Exactly. Even if Harper showed the documents to the party leaders only, that would probably mollify the opposition.

  • the rat

    I wonder,if Parliament is supreme, does that mean any document must be surrendered to parliament if parliament orders it? I wonder how many intelligence officers, or agents, or even military commanders would sit by and let an (ex??)communist organizer like Ujjy Dosanjh have a free read through all those incredibly sensitive documents? If the Afghan detainee docs ARE secret for a reason, and you can’t say they aren’t, then how can we trust that the Liberals with Ujjy, or any member of the NDP, or the separatist Bloc, not to disclose what they find for partisan gain? I’m sorry, but claiming the supremacy of Parliament in a minority situation, on an issue that smacks of partisan wranglings, and one that could leave Canadian soldiers vulnerable, well, I hope you will excuse me if I just don’t trust you, your party, or your motives. I’d rather trust Iaccobucci.

    • Red Forever

      Rat

      STRAW MAN ARGUMENT!!!!!

      Do some reading of the Canadian constitution, and then come back here and resubmit your argument.

      Parliament is supreme, and has ordered the release of unredacted documents.

      If we are fighting for human rights, and democracy in Afghanistan, the best wat to honour the sacrifices of our troops is to hold the higher ups responsible for their actions.

      If we are fighting for democracy in Afghanistan, we should fight for it here.

      Frankly the CPC is a disgrace and an insult to democracy.

      The CPC should be ashamed of themselves.

      This whole thing is a farce, and a smoke screen.

      • Gayle

        @Red Forever, Actually, I want Rat to urge the CPC to campaign on a platform that all other parties are communisits and will betray Canada’s secrets so we should only elect CPC MP’s.

  • Big Winnie

    I think the Libs shuld put forth their motion tomorrow morning.

  • Guest

    Big and *expensive* at $500-600/hour. Much like Flaherty’s $10,000 airplane junket for a Timbit photo-op.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.