Recently,
Erin Weir, an economist for the
Steel Workers Union spoke to the Commons Finance Committee. His remarks were on the proposed changes to
the Investment Canada Act included
in the latest omnibus bill of the Stephen Harper Party.
A
Harper Party member of the committee, Randy
Hoback let loose with a series of rambling questions and witness abuse I
think is appalling. All because Mr. Weir
is a New Democratic Party member.
The
word used to describe Hoback’s actions was McCarthyism.
Hoback
didn’t challenge the facts that Mr. Weir presented, he attacked the man on his
politics. That is a sure sign of a lost
argument, if you can’t attack the argument, attack the person.
I
think this should be filed under BS. That of course means Blatant Smear.
Our
Constitution includes a section on discrimination. It is illegal to discriminate based on race,
creed, colour, age, and so forth.
Unfortunately the colour of your tie is omitted. If you are an economist with an NDP card in
your pocket, you are not a credible witness according to Hoback.
That is not
Democracy.
The
Harper regime has a history of making bureaucrats shut up and people they can’t
force to shut up get shouted down, like Mr. Weir did. It’s gotten to the point where a bureaucrat
cannot wipe their nose without a signed note from their manager, countersigned
by the Minister in charge.
We elected the
Vogons.
The
Harper Party has killed the F 35 committee, they took the committee behind
closed doors and declared it done. If it
wasn’t for the opposition members on that committee breaking the rules and
telling what happened behind those closed doors, we’d likely never know it
occurred.
The
Harper Party has tabled the most omnibus budget bills and the largest ones at
that. These omnibus budget bills contain many
things that are not budget related, but get tossed in there for
expediency. There are at least 15 items
in the budget that are deserving of their own bill and debate, but that won’t
happen because the Harper Party chose to limit debate on this bill as well.
Stephen Harper used to say
that omnibus bills were undemocratic,
I guess he flipped, or is that flopped?
Limiting
debate certainly doesn’t sound democratic either, does it?
Now,
when they formed the Reform Party
way back when, it was supposed to be about Democracy. Constituency groups would select candidates
and not have Government Issue ones imposed on them. They wanted the power to have members who
didn’t represent their constituencies properly recalled.
Ask
MP David Wilks about Democracy in
the Harper Party. His constituents told
him that they did not support the omnibus bill and he said he would vote
against it. Then after a quick trip to
the wood shed he came back with "I look forward to supporting the bill
and seeing it passed."
The
real Reformers, the farmers and the townsfolk who wanted change in how
government works are not the bad guys, they wanted Democracy. They were the grassroots supporters of the
Party, but they have been Astroturfed by Harper and the rest of the leadership
of his Harper Party. They just haven’t
realized it yet.
I
hope they wake up before it is too late.
I think it was fair for Hoback to ask the question he did- he just did it poorly. The Steelworkers are a highly-Marxist organization who came to the table with an agenda that was set back in the days of the Waffle. They believe strongly in nationalizing mines and other natural resources- so, Weir's testimony is naturally bent against foreign investment.
ReplyDeleteI wrote a more detailed explanation in an article yesterday:
http://www.genuinewitty.com/2012/06/02/steelworkers-are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-a-member-of-the-ndp/
The purpose of committee is to gather information to ensure that proposed legislation is proper. If a committee member is prejudiced towards witnesses before they even speak, if they do not allow the witness to answer, then they should not be sitting on committee. They are obviously either to ill prepared to argue a point with the witness or incompetent.
ReplyDeleteEither that or he was grandstanding, hoping to get a position further from the last row of benches.
In any case, his conduct was unparliamentary and he is yet another member of the Harper caucus who is "honourable by title" only.
I did read your "article". I choose not to comment, because anything I would say would be rude to say the least... Cheers!