Canadian Politics - Proroguing? Again?

[Josephus]

So one media guy tells another media guy that this might be a story....

Yeah, CC. This is all one big media conspiracy to sell newspapers.

I am convinced NOT ONE single CAnadian newspaper sold an extra copy cause of this.  If they wanted to boost sales they'd have a front page story about Lady GaGa or something. Proroguing does not sell newspapers.

[Josephus]

I'm of two minds on this - I can't see any good reason to shut Parliament down, but I equally can't see any particular strong political self-interest served. Shutting down discussion of Afgan detainees doesn't strike me as an issue anywhere near the gravity to the government to require such a self-defense move.

I think the fact that there is evidence that the government was aware that prisoners transferred from CAnadian detention to Afghani forces were being tortured, and that they  not only denied it but castigated the whistle blower has some pretty dense gravity.

I could be wrong though.

[Malthus]

I'm of two minds on this - I can't see any good reason to shut Parliament down, but I equally can't see any particular strong political self-interest served. Shutting down discussion of Afgan detainees doesn't strike me as an issue anywhere near the gravity to the government to require such a self-defense move.

I think the fact that there is evidence that the government was aware that prisoners transferred from CAnadian detention to Afghani forces were being tortured, and that they  not only denied it but castigated the whistle blower has some pretty dense gravity.

I could be wrong though.

It's a scandal, sure.

Unless there is some really damming info out there, it simply isn't the sort of issue likely to (say) bring down the government. Nor will prorogation cease any mention of it.

[Neil]

It's a scandal, sure.

Unless there is some really damming info out there, it simply isn't the sort of issue likely to (say) bring down the government. Nor will prorogation cease any mention of it.

And by really damning, it would have to be Harper personally torturing some Afghan women and children.

[Malthus]

It's a scandal, sure.

Unless there is some really damming info out there, it simply isn't the sort of issue likely to (say) bring down the government. Nor will prorogation cease any mention of it.

And by really damning, it would have to be Harper personally torturing some Afghan women and children.

Or worse, making 'em wear that damn sweater of his. 

[crazy canuck]

I think the fact that there is evidence that the government was aware that prisoners transferred from CAnadian detention to Afghani forces were being tortured, and that they  not only denied it but castigated the whistle blower has some pretty dense gravity.

I could be wrong though.

According to the "whistle blower" he says he told people that prisoners might be totured.  His main beef appears to be that he was not, in his opinion, taken seriously enough.   Not that the Canadian government knowing turned over captives for torture.

Am I missing something here.

[crazy canuck]

It's a scandal, sure.

Unless there is some really damming info out there, it simply isn't the sort of issue likely to (say) bring down the government. Nor will prorogation cease any mention of it.

And by really damning, it would have to be Harper personally torturing some Afghan women and children.

Or worse, making 'em wear that damn sweater of his. 

Well you know, that sweater did go missing.  No explanation has been given for its disappearance.  You might be on to something.

[crazy canuck]

So one media guy tells another media guy that this might be a story....

Yeah, CC. This is all one big media conspiracy to sell newspapers.

I am convinced NOT ONE single CAnadian newspaper sold an extra copy cause of this.  If they wanted to boost sales they'd have a front page story about Lady GaGa or something. Proroguing does not sell newspapers.

Fist of all, I didnt say there was a conspiracy.  You are the one who made the point that there was something to this because people were talking about it.  I have simply made the point that political journalists, who are not paid to take about Lady GaGa, simply have nothing else to write about.

[Josephus]

And by really damning, it would have to be Harper personally torturing some Afghan women and children.

Wouldn't put it past him. 

[Jacob]

I'm of two minds on this - I can't see any good reason to shut Parliament down, but I equally can't see any particular strong political self-interest served. Shutting down discussion of Afgan detainees doesn't strike me as an issue anywhere near the gravity to the government to require such a self-defense move.

Doesn't that make you suspicious?

[Malthus]

I'm of two minds on this - I can't see any good reason to shut Parliament down, but I equally can't see any particular strong political self-interest served. Shutting down discussion of Afgan detainees doesn't strike me as an issue anywhere near the gravity to the government to require such a self-defense move.

Doesn't that make you suspicious?

Well, sure, I assume Harper has some reason for prorogation. None of those advanced by the opposition strike me as particularly convincing, though.

For example, assume some truly horrible set of facts linking the government to Bad Behaviour(tm) are out there, just waiting to be uncovered. Does prorogation stop them from comming to light? Or stop the damage to government when and if it does?

Last year, prorogation was used tactically, to disrupt a key vote. What key vote is at stake right now?   

[Josephus]

Malthus. You're right in that the Afghani thing is not a goverment dropping issue. But Harper hates criticism above all else and the idea of returning to Parliament and having to defend the whole Afghani thing and its implications was not something he was looking forward to.

He's placing the gamble on last year's strategy that by the time Parliament resumes, in what is almost spring, the Opposition would know that to bring up this issue is something that is long forgotten by Canadians and they'd be accused of dredging up something long and forgotten. Also, quite possibly, it's giving him time to dig up something positive on the issue.

Prorogation=Procrastination.

In our real lives, its' something like going up to your boss an hour before you go on holiday and he's like.."Hmm...let's talk about it when you get back"...of course by then you've mellowed out and no one brings it up ever again.

[crazy canuck]

I suspect that Buddha nailed it when he said the reason was to take Parliament out of session while the eyes of the world were on us during the Olympics.  Frankly I think that is a good thing.  I would hate for some foreign journalist to actually pay attention to what passes as debate in our House.

[Josephus]

The eyes of the world? Nah...winter olympics is mostly just a curiousity in the rest of the world. So a few Swedish luge journalists will be up here...they won't be near Ottawa.

Although...when the Olympics were in CAlgary, I was at universtiy at the time, in Toronto, and a German tourist did ask me if the subway went to Calgary.

[Jacob]

Well, sure, I assume Harper has some reason for prorogation. None of those advanced by the opposition strike me as particularly convincing, though.

For example, assume some truly horrible set of facts linking the government to Bad Behaviour(tm) are out there, just waiting to be uncovered. Does prorogation stop them from comming to light? Or stop the damage to government when and if it does?

Last year, prorogation was used tactically, to disrupt a key vote. What key vote is at stake right now?

I'm not sure.  That's why I'm not railing.  It doesn't make sense to me.  I can be convinced it's okay, or that it's not okay.  I'm leaning towards "not okay" in the absence of really compelling evidence in either direction; but there's less in favour of "it's okay".  I don't think willy-nilly prorogations are a good thing.  If there's a reason for it, okay.  If there's a shady reason for it, not so okay but at least I want to understand it.

If it's just to reconsistute the committees with more conservatives and appointed senators that makes sense, but is fairly shady.  It's not terminally so, but it's not exactly nice either.  If it's something worse, like torture, then it's pretty shifty.  Andtrying to bury the torture investigations because "people won't care in a  few months when we spring the next big thing we're working on" makes some sense, but it's far from appealing.