Oh, dear -- another day, another whiny CPC talking point. Apparently, when CPC MP, evangelical Christian and total crackpot Maurice Vellacott recently made a total ass of himself, well, that shouldn't be allowed to reflect badly on the party because ... oh, heck, let's let fashion statement and reliable party stenographer Adam Daifallah explain it (emphasis added):
Vellacott handled the situation correctly by putting out a statement apologizing and making he [sic] clear he represented no one but himself.
Dear Adam: No, he didn't. If Vellacott had been raised by wolves, had spent the last 20 years living in a tar paper shack in the woods and had just emerged from the bush and blurted out what he'd said, then he would have been speaking for himself. But that's not what happened, is it, Adam?
Instead, Vellacott is an elected member of the CPC and, additionally, was appointed to the position of chairman of the Commons aboriginal affairs committee. As such, he most certainly does represent the party every time he opens his big mouth.
If Stephen Harper is legitimately upset with Vellacott's comments, then he (Harper) has both a moral and ethical obligation to strip Vellacott of all of his party appointments to make it clear that he disagrees with them. If he doesn't, then any of Harper's posturing regarding Vellacott is just so much hot air.
Either Vellacott is an official, accountable and representative member of the CPC, or he isn't and shouldn't be appointed to any positions of authority. You don't get to have it both ways, Adam. Choose.
4 comments:
Vellacott's one of the people that asked _not_ to be put into cabinet because he thought it would constrain his ability to "speak his conscience" too much.
I think Harper's reluctance to discipline Vellacott speaks to the power of the wingnut factions within that party.
Cheesebrains need to keep talking. That way, Canadians who were bamboozled into voting for these shits will see them for the pathetic little bullies that they truly are. Keep talking boys, keep talking.
Who's next?
Now that the parties with the majority of seats in Parliament have jointly decided to uphold standards required of MPs, and so brought about the resignation of Villacott for his negative comments on the Supreme Court, who is next?
How about the three parties calling on Environment Minister Rona Ambrose to step down as chairwoman of international talks looking into ways to strengthen the Kyoto protocol on climate change? Given the Tory party's decision not to abide by Kyoto, her retention of that position is a mockery and a disservice to Canadians in the eyes of the world.
The only honest course is for her to resign and let a representative of another country which supports Kyoto take her place.
It is not fitting for Canada to support this mockery of world values any longer.
Perhaps the Liberals could table a resolution in Parliament directing her to step down?
CC:
You hit it right on the nail with this: "Either Vellacott is an official, accountable and representative member of the CPC, or he isn't and shouldn't be appointed to any positions of authority. You don't get to have it both ways, Adam. Choose." Thing of it is though Harper and his party appear to epitomize the idea of having it both ways. Repeatedly they have tried to eat their cake and have it from all Provinces being equal (except suddenly not Quebec, only because Harper and the CPC see Quebec suddenly as the means to majority) not appointing political hacks and bagmen to the Senate (Fortier) to not having Cabinet meeting times known publicly despite supposedly wanting Canadians to have better visibility into the government. I can do this on many topics, as I know you can as well.
Vellacott was Harper's choice to run this committee, and therefore his clear unfitness for this position reflects badly on Harper's judgment. Harper's refusal to discipline Vellacott or even to defend the Chief Justice after one of his MPs and committee chairs falsely attributed comments to her that she never made demonstrates even worse judgment and a complete lack of accountability by Harper for the actions of one of his MPs attacking via misrepresentation the Chief Justice of the CSC. Now that I think about it this reminds me of something similar, Grewal last year.
Post a Comment