My two bits about Trudeau "The Younger" and the actions of his questionable of his backbenchers

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wherry-liberals-backbenchers-1.4017210

What happens when Liberal backbenchers rise up: Aaron Wherry

Liberal MPs show a bit of independence and the government loses a couple votes

By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Mar 11, 2017 5:00 AM ET

883 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story.


 
 Rona Vain

this is true democracy to allow an elected MP to vote freely

Harper 10 years were more dictator than democracy

David Raymond Amos 

@Rona Vain The Liberal cabinet can't make them follow the leader because there are too many backbenchers who disagree with "The Powers That Be"

If the Liberals and their backroom bosses threatened to give them the boot from the caucus like Harper did I suspect that there would be a non confidence vote in a heartbeat. It was because of all Justin's promises during the last election that caused the lion's share of the backbenchers to get elected in the first place It truly is that simple to one fierce politcal animal (Namely me the Maritime guy CBC refused to talk abut during FIVE elections)

BTW I talked to the lawyer Brent Rathgeber personally. He talked the talk of an Independent but he was too afraid to meet me in 2104 when I was outside his office in Alberta in 2014 and locked the door. Go Figure

 
Danny Zeller

"What happens when Liberal backbenchers rise up"
They get tired and sit back down. Hard days work!

 
C Martyn Tyntof

@Corinne O'Connor Not only Con MPs. Harper also muzzled the RCMP and scientists and diplomats:
“All meetings with RCMP must be approved by Conservatives, documents show: RCMP commissioner denies being “muzzled” but now refers meeting requests to “ministerial liaison”
OTTAWA— The federal Conservatives are directly exerting strict communications control over the RCMP and its new top cop, documents obtained by the Star reveal. Public Safety documents released under Access to Information show that top political staff of Minister Vic Toews oversaw and approved the design of the new RCMP communications protocol that put the national police force on a tighter leash.”
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2012/01/19/all_meetings_with_rcmp_must_be_approved_by_conservatives_documents_show.html

PBO Kevin Page on Harper muzzling scientists:
http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/ex-parliamentary-budget-officer-kevin-page-muzzled-scientists-secrecy-and-broken-government

Harper’s “control of all government communications hit our diplomats particularly hard. It hobbled their ability to publicly speak for Canada, something they have long been very good at. He muzzled them so much that, in 2008, the John Manley commission on Afghanistan publicly criticized him for preventing our embassies and ambassadors from representing our interests abroad. Harper’s latest cut of $523.5 million over four years at foreign affairs comes on top of two earlier ones.”
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2012/04/07/prime_minister_harper_muzzles_diplomats_and_foreign_agencies.html

David Raymond Amos

@C Martyn Tyntof If you don't think that the Liberals aren't playing the same game as Harper dream on or please explain the support of Bill C-51 by Trudeau "The Younger" or his going back on his words on electoral reform or his playing hard ball with the provinces over Health Care or his sending our troops and our money overseas to support or inspire more conflict or his government's recent bills supporting Yankee invasions on our rights or the liberal support of FATCA etc e etc etc

 

jimmysinclair

Of course the imminent defeat of this horrid Trudeauian government will see the Grit back bench rise up.

To save themselves.

David Raymond Amos 

@jimmysinclair Methinks Trudeau "The Younger" and his cohorts will get a second kick at the can but he will not enjoy the huge mandate they have in the 42nd Parliament.

I have no doubt that the backbenchers and even the liberal bosses understand that if they do not pacify their local electorate they will lose too many seats and possibly the election. Hence the liberals allow a certain amount of rebellion in the ranks in order to make it seem that they understand and uphold the meaning of democracy and integrity and justice.Yea Right eh?

 

Richard Bentley

MPs being told how to vote or using the whip is an insult to democracy What is the point of even having a vote as the outcome is already known?

IMO, most votes should be free. If the bill is a good one it will pass. If a bad one, then it will fail.

David Raymond Amos

@Richard Bentley I agree with you wholeheartedly in fact I voiced that opinion in a televised debate on Rogers TV while CBC denied that my name was even on the ballot for the the election of the 42nd Parliament

Listen in to the debate at 47 minutes 30 seconds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cFOKT6TlSE

Then go figure why CBC continued to play dumb aboutmy running for public office for the fifth time a few weeks later

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/fundy-royal-riding-profile-1.3274276

 

John Milkovic

Organized chaos.....the Libs

David Raymond Amos

@John Milkovic YUP

James Bilodeau

How about these first class citizens 'rise up' and boot Meredith out of senate instead of just recommending he resign? Once again two-tiered justice. If it was me having sex with a 16yr old, i would have no job and be in jail on rape charges. Government and senate is so corrupted they can't act as they should cause then all of them would have to 'resign'.

 

 C Martyn Tyntof
@James Smith Vic Toews' case (girl was 16-17 but he is in position of authority) would also apply to Meredith as a Senator:
"The age of consent for sexual activity is 16 years. However, the age of consent is 18 years where the sexual activity "exploits" the young person -- when it involves prostitution, pornography or occurs in a relationship of authority, trust or dependency (e.g., with a teacher, coach or babysitter). Sexual activity can also be considered exploitative based on the nature and circumstances of the relationship, e.g., the young person's age, the age difference between the young person and their partner, and how the partner may have controlled or influenced the young person."
Harper appointed Vic Toews as Minister of Public Safety, after Toews had gotten the underage babysitter pregnant.
Vic Toews promoted his mistress to the Queen’s bench and his other girlfriend (the underage babysitter) to an administrative position with another Conservative member of parliament.
On March 7, 2014, Vic Toews (of “you’re either with us or with the childpornographers” infamy) was appointed to the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench.
http://o.canada.com/news/vic-toews-appointment-seems-to-set-new-standard-for-blatant-patronage/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vic-toews-appointed-judge-in-manitoba-1.2563974
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/vic-toews-lobbying-to-be-reviewed-by-federal-ethics-commissioner-1.3010586

David Raymond Amos

@James Bilodeau Better check the law sir. It politcians having sex with kids used to be legal at 14 . Harper upped it to 16

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wherry-liberals-backbenchers-1.4017210

What happens when Liberal backbenchers rise up: Aaron Wherry

Liberal MPs show a bit of independence and the government loses a couple votes

By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Mar 11, 2017 5:00 AM ET

Liberal MP Rob Oliphant sponsored Bill S-201, which passed the House of Commons despite the government's objections. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Wednesday was an eventful day for the House of Commons. Perhaps even an important one, precisely because it was so eventful.

In the climactic moment, 105 Liberals broke with the government and voted in favour of S-201, a bill sponsored by Liberal MP Rob Oliphant to ban genetic discrimination.

Moments earlier, 27 Liberal backbenchers had provided the decisive votes in favour of S-217, Conservative MP Michael Cooper's bill on detention in custody — again, against the position of the Liberal government.

Less noticed, but still noteworthy, was the cabinet's own move a few hours earlier to amend C-22, a government bill that would establish a committee of parliamentarians to review national security operations.

Liberal members of the public safety committee joined with Conservatives and New Democrats to amend the bill late last year. On Wednesday afternoon, the government brought forward its own amendments to counter some of the committee's changes.

• It might be time to change Parliament
• To reform House, MPs might start by holding their applause

The prime minister has, rightly or wrongly, punted on electoral reform. Parliamentary procedures remain basically unchanged, though the government has at least now released a discussion paper and the Senate continues to be a live experiment in legislative independence.

The access to information system is still awaiting reform. Question period is still a mostly drab exchange of accusations and platitudes.

But interesting things keep happening nonetheless; indications that the House of Commons might be slowly changing.

Liberal MPs go their own way

With a few exceptions, the last Parliament wasn't generally given to such dramatic demonstrations of independent thought. But Wednesday was actually not the first time during this Parliament that Liberal backbenchers have decisively swung a vote.

Liberal backbenchers helped swing two votes against the wishes of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet on Wednesday. (Chris Bolin/Reuters)

On Oct. 26, 103 Liberal MPs voted to support Bill C-243, Liberal MP Mark Gerretsen's bill on maternity benefits. And, that same day, 90 Liberals voted in favour of Bill C-240, Liberal MP Bryan May's bill to create a tax credit for first-aid training.

In both cases, Liberal cabinet ministers voted against.

But C-243 and C-240, along with S-217, were at the second-reading stage of the process and Liberals were merely voting to send the bills to committee for further study.

With S-201, the ban on genetic discrimination, Liberal backbenchers were voting to pass the bill into law.

Siding with committee over prime minister

According to Liberal sources, both the prime minister and Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould addressed caucus Wednesday morning about why the government opposes S-201. As Justin Trudeau explained to reporters that day, the cabinet believes the bill violates provincial jurisdiction.

But nearly the entire Liberal backbench and a dozen parliamentary secretaries disagreed, siding with the House committee that studied the bill.

"I felt that the House justice committee came to the correct result in its deliberation and remain convinced that the important human rights concerns outweigh the concern that the bill might be ultra vires," explained Nick Whalen, the Liberal MP for St. John's East.

Did it feel odd to vote in favour of a bill that the prime minister spoke out against?

"Our obligation to use free votes for the best interest of the country and our constituents was a campaign commitment, and needs to overcome my natural desire to vote with the government," Whalen said. "So, yes. It feels odd, but it is part of a healthy working relationship and what should happen from time to time."

'There are differences in our Liberal caucus, but not a divide,' says MP Rob Oliphant6:48

Immediately after the vote, Oliphant was enthused.

"I think the new reality is that Liberal backbenchers are being empowered," he told reporters. "And I think that we're really trying to see how Parliament can change."

The life of a backbench MP

Excessive party discipline and the limited relevance of the backbench MP are the eternal laments of the Westminster parliamentary system.

But the last Parliament ended amid particularly loud complaint about the state of things — personified by Brent Rathgeber after he quit the Conservative caucus to sit as an independent — and the Liberals came to office with some suggestion things would be somehow different.

Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, the Liberal MP for Beaches-East York in Toronto, is developing a reputation for voting his own way in the House of Commons. (Nathaniel Erskine-Smith)

And things have at least been somewhat different. There were hints of a livelier Parliament last spring and one Liberal MP, Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, has now managed to break from the party line on 13 per cent of his votes — far more than recent precedent and roughly in line with the most independent-minded members of the looser British Parliament.

Oliphant theorizes that Liberal MPs, having campaigned on a promise of more independence for MPs and House committees, are now getting comfortable in their new jobs. And the prime minister, having promised to only whip votes in specific circumstances, isn't whipping every vote.

With S-201, Oliphant says the result wasn't a division within caucus, but a mere difference of opinion. He suggests Conservatives and New Democrats are still getting used to the new reality, too.

"I think we're in a transition time," Oliphant said Thursday, reflecting on S-201's victory.

Delivering change?

Though MPs from the governing party often function as extensions of the government, they are also simply MPs, sitting outside cabinet and with some responsibility to hold the government to account. That was one of the messages Rathgeber tried to convey as he took on the cause of reform.

Brent Rathgeber speaks about his decision to quit the federal Conservative caucus in St. Albert, Alta., in 2013. (Jason Franson/Canadian Press)

And while self-interest often holds partisans of the same stripe together — politics is still a team sport — a system that allows for greater independence could have some benefits. Legislation and spending might be better scrutinized. Public concerns and potential problems might be better aired. MPs who never ascend to cabinet might be able to establish themselves as important legislators.

Or so the reform-minded might dream.

It remains to be seen whether the spirit of Wednesday will continue on or evolve.

• An unruly Parliament shows signs of nuanced life
• Liberal backbenchers, Tory leadership hopefuls among biggest dissenters

Liberals can say this is the change they promised. Wednesday's votes, and the upset that night in a Liberal nomination race in St. Laurent, might suggest a party whose members are not easily controlled anyway.

With the example of S-201, the prime minister might learn to get behind his caucus when its opinion seems to be moving against him. Or his willingness to tolerate dissent might be tested.

But regardless of whatever rules or procedures are rewritten, the potential for change would likely still depend on how MPs assert themselves. And at the very least, Wednesday might suggest that some change is possible.