Glass Opposition Benches

Political Animal 86 Comments

Hansard Feb 12;

Hon. Marlene Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, this government is allowing an increasing number of judges’ positions to remain empty. Worse yet, while the Conservatives are going over their list of defeated candidates with a fine toothed comb, they are turning their noses up at qualified candidates. Apparently, it will be a Conservative or no one.
Will the minister put an end to favouritism and appoint qualified, independent members, who are respected by the Canadian legal community?
Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, as we have pointed out repeatedly, we are appointing the most qualified judges.
It is interesting that the member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine would speak about the quality of the appointments being made by our government when her government, in which she was a minister, appointed somebody named Luciano Del Negro to the Immigration and Refugee Board*. I believe he is the husband of the member of Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine.

(h/t reader Paul)

86 Replies to “Glass Opposition Benches”

  1. Wow…couldn’t the Libs find somebody ELSE to ask that question? Or do they all have patronage appointment skeletons in their closets?

  2. Watch for the patronage nominations of women candidates, and trace their connections to past liberals in high places. David Collenettes wife comes to mind.
    I loved it when the minister asked the bloc member, on the same topic of favoritism, to please give him a name of someone from Alberta who wasn’t a conservative supporter. He also sat down with egg on his face.
    We should give those writting the questions a valentine.

  3. Today (Monday) in question period Mrs. Marlene Jennings Liberal MP for Notre Dame-Degrace-Lachine got her t – – – caught in a ringer, when she rose in righteous indignation, and she launched an attack where she accused the Conservatives of partisan political appointments, which she found so reprehensible and morally offensive.
    Peter Vanloan rose to reply to Mrs. Jennings and pointed out that she should be the last one to make that accusation since it was the Liberal government of which she was a member, that appointed Mrs. Jennings under qualified husband, Luciano Del Negro, to a lucrative position on the Immigration and Refugee board. (Canada Gazette Vol139 No. 22 -May 28 2005) . If she wanted to see a politician, who was guilty of participating in partisan political appointments, she should just look in a mirror, and also be reminded every night as she snuggles up to Luciano Del Negro or when she cashes his exorbitant cheque from Canadian taxpayers ( what makes me think she has no pangs of conscience when she does).

  5. I was thinking the same thing as john. Surely there must be someone in opposition who hasn’t yet had their spouse or sibling appointed to a government post that could have been tapped to make this point.
    Apparently, it’s true. The libs don’t really believe, in their hearts, that there’s anything wrong with patronage appointments as long as they’re liberal supporters. The libs live so far away from reality that, if reality exploded, they wouldn’t hear it for three days.

  6. Where is Mark Holland. Where is Belinda. Where is Scott Bisson. Anyone seen Volpe. Dream team seems to have turned into a nightmare team.
    When all the losers of the leadership race were told by liberals they didn’t want them, or trust them, or believed them, why does Dion think the voters would pay any attention to these losers or want them anywhere near the decision makers.
    Dion appointed his team, then put them out to pasture with orders to shut up. And they call Harper a control freak.

  8. J. Ross: That quote is not old, it was yesterday. And it is very telling of the double standard of the libs. As for old Hansard quotes, you don’t want to go there, too many fuddle duddle quotes there. Also lots dealing with libs promising never to allow abortion, abolishing the gst, nafta, believing in marriage is between a man and woman only. On second thought, go ahead and do the research. Might open your eyes as to what the liberals really think of the cdn people and their flipflops an important issues. They plan to do another flipflop this week on a law they put in place re terrorism.

  9. I posted other quotes, but this Stephen Harper response to an answer from Paul Martin during Question Period on May 4, 2005 has to take the cake:
    “Mr. Speaker, it is not this party that has brought this process into disrepute. It is a top official of the Liberal Party of Canada that has done that. A top official, a man in the know, has revealed that the Liberal Party of Canada has corrupted the system of nominating, vetting and appointing judges.
    The Prime Minister knew about these allegations two weeks ago, yet he has done absolutely nothing in terms of reacting, according to his answer.
    Is this not a perfect example why that party should be removed from office?”

  10. Why are they still appointed? I’m miffed that the CPC democratic reforms are stalled because of the toxic partisanism sitting in the opposition benches.
    I hate to say it but we will need a majority government to use majority force to actually offer democratic reform to Canadian governing systems…but that is Canada for you….a classic study of compromise and contradiction

  11. “Will the minister put an end to favouritism and appoint qualified, independent members, who are respected by the Canadian legal community?”
    How do these people keep a straight face?

  12. With no sense of irony at all, the Liebrals, who created the judocracy, are now all outraged that the Conservative government might be trying to restore some balance to that benighted institution. Unfortunately for the country, it will take at least a generation in power for the Conservatives to correct the extreme outrages visited upon us by the liebral social engineers.
    In addition to lacking any sense of irony, it also appears that “Jonathan Ross” has a strange sense of timing, as he considers Kate’s reference to yesterday’s Hansard as “digging up old Hansard quotes”.

  13. So the govt should be kicked out because they told the truth that a top liberal outed some wrong doing. Proves that J Ross and his kind prefer crooks.

  14. mary T.
    This statement:
    “Is this not a perfect example why that party should be removed from office?”
    came out of the mouth of STEPHEN HARPER.
    The anager of “corrupt[ing] the system of nominating, vetting and appointing judges” should go both ways, demonstrating why mary T. is blind partisan.
    When my party needs to be criticized, I have no problem doing so out in the open – I have years of proof regarding that.

  15. “Is this not a perfect example why that party should be removed from office?”
    Jonathan Ross,
    A little advice – deal with the unbelievable corruption and outright criminality of your own party, before attempting to point out any wrong-doing with the Conservatives.
    You and your party are drowning in it.
    Furthermore, any person who still pushes the Liberal party the way you do, regardless of the corruption that permeates the party from head to toe, is at the very least a dishonest broker and not to be trusted, or have criminal tendencies themselves.

  16. It is apparent that the role of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition is little understood here. But the faux howls of disdain do give me a chuckle.
    One wonder’s if Mary T.’s I.Q. number in paticular is roughly equitable to a slightly warm room.

  18. Do you realize, Jonathon, that there are Liberal appointed judges on the bench who preside over criminal trials who have never tried a criminal case?
    Or that a Liberal appointed member of the Supreme Court of Canada once asked for a lie detector test to be administered?
    And I presume you didn’t see the research done into Liberal party donations by the judiciary a few months ago.
    As I said, glass opposition benches. Given their history, the Liberals would be well advised to sit down and shut up. The best they can aspire to is hypocrisy.

  19. Johnathon,
    The context of Harper’s comments were about how all of the judges appointed seemed to have made significant contributions to the Liberal Party.
    Some of them were not Liberal party memebers but they made contributions. Which is worse appointing only those who reflect your philosophy or selling the judgeship for a party contribution.
    In my world the second is far worse.

  21. If nothing else it demonstrates stupidity and arrogance. She probably didn’t even consider it was something she should avoid, but that’s what entitlement will do. When entitlement and corruption are so ingrained that you don’t even realize you are doing or saying something wrong it’s pretty sad, but typically liberal.

  22. Jonathan,
    The difference is that when Mr. Harper tried to put in place oversight of appointments it was the opposition that eviscerated the system/nomimee, it was at this point that the PM announced that appointments would be done “in the usual way”. The opposition is only reaping what they have sown.

  23. jonathan – you seem to be arguing against the current system of appointing (rather than electing?) judges. But, this system can’t be changed until and unless parliament agrees to it.
    Can you imagine that the Liberals would agree to electing judges? No, they wouldn’t, for they ran our government as a private corporation, handing our largesse and favours to their followers.
    After all, the Liberal Senate sat on the Accountability act for SIX months, trying to reduce its force, and insisting that there be no accountability for the Senate. They are now sitting on Senate reform, which is just asking that terms be limited; the Liberal Senate is sitting on that, refusing to pass it. Why?
    The Conservatives therefore, can instead appoint according to merit rather than kinship, payment for past favours and assurances of future loyalty. The fact that an appointment is also a member of a political party does not mean that they are without merit. The point is, the CPC appointments are not based on kinship, past favours and future favours. That’s quite a difference from the Liberal era.

  24. I truly believe the opposition parties have completely lost their way. The idea is not to take the opposite stance of the governing party for the sake of soundbites. The scary thing is that they believe they’re fighting the good fight this way. Truly frightening.

  25. *
    To be perfectly fair, Liberal patronage appointments
    are easily distinguishable from all the rest.
    “Call me wacky, but if you’re handing out rewards to
    political hacks, maybe a sexual predator shouldn’t be
    on your A-list    .”
    *

  26. Mouth-as-Big-as-all-Outdoors Jennings got whacked by Van Loan yesterday for sure. She still appeared on TV smiling like a twit anyway.
    Does anyone remember her despicable performances in Committees last parliament?
    Looks like their Dream Team has gone into hiding.
    Something serious going on when they silenced their “Pit Bull”. They’re in deep shit and they seem to be aware of it.

  27. I do know the role of the opposition, but the liberals seem determined to oppose all the laws and procedures that they themselves put into place. What does that say about how serious they were when the laws were passed. I wonder if many of those sitting on those opposition benches in the lib caucus even knew they were opposing their own legislation.
    Their reasons for opposing the terrorism law, because it has never been used, is no excuse. Ever think maybe the terrorists, knowing how the libs support the Hezzies and others, are just waiting for the legislation to die. Just think WHAT IF. Better to have a law not used, than no law and needed. Of course with more law and order type judges, these guys might actually be punished for their plots.
    First they get a Kerry look alike to run as leader, and now they are adopting Kerry’s flipflopping. They were for law and order before they were against it.

  28. Slimy, smug Liberals like Marlene Jennings seem to think they are above it all. How can she ask that question and keep a straight face?
    And anyone who constantly defends that Liberal party should seriously question their sanity.

  29. Oh, how quickly they forget!
    When Irwin Cotler was Liberal minister of justice, the following became judges:
    Michael Brown, Cotler’s executive assistant and policy adviser.
    Yves de Montigny, Cotler’s chief of staff.
    Randall Echlin, legal counsel to the Ontario Liberal party.
    Rosalie Abella, named to the Supreme Court of Canada, wife of Cotler’s close friend Irving Abella.
    Marsha Erb, Alberta Liberal fundraiser and close friend of Alberta Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan.
    John J. Gill, co-chair of the 2004 Alberta federal Liberal campaign.
    Vital Ouellette, unsuccessful Liberal candidate in the 1997 and 2000 provincial elections.
    Bryan Mahoney, Liberal candidate twice defeated by Calgary Tory Myron Thompson.
    Edmond Blanchard, former Liberal minister of finance in New Brunswick.

  30. Jonathan: I can see from your comments that you are having a very difficult time dealing with an honest and upright man like Stephen Harper.Of course that is a concept totally foreign to a Lieberal.

  31. Jonathan: I can see from your comments that you are having a very difficult time dealing with an honest and upright man like Stephen Harper.Of course that is a concept totally foreign to a Lieberal.

  32. Jonathon . . check out Rosie Abella and then come back and tell us about a quality Liberal SCC appointment.
    Utterly pathetic, useless – prime pork.
    of course as a Liberal judge, maybe she will help find the missing Adscam millions of taxpayers dollars stolen by YOUR Liberal party.
    The money hasn’t been returned, much of went to corrupting the democratic election process and all real Canadians, loyal Canadians wait with baited breath for the soon to be laid RCMP charges.
    Throw the LIberal thieves in jail . . every last one of them.

  35. Jonathon,
    found this gem, mixed in with the usual paranoia crap, over at G&M comments as posted by Wendy Smith of Toronto:
    “It’s on occasions like this that I’m glad I subscribe to REALity, the bi-monthly publication of REAL Women of Canada.
    In its January/February edition, they give a sampling of appointees to the courts. When Irwin Cotler was Liberal minister of justice, the following became judges:
    Michael Brown, Cotler’s executive assistant and policy adviser.
    Yves de Montigny, Cotler’s chief of staff.
    Randall Echlin, legal counsel to the Ontario Liberal party.
    Rosalie Abella, named to the Supreme Court of Canada, wife of Cotler’s close friend Irving Abella.
    Marsha Erb, Alberta Liberal fundraiser and close friend of Alberta Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan.
    John J. Gill, co-chair of the 2004 Alberta federal Liberal campaign.
    Vital Ouellette, unsuccessful Liberal candidate in the 1997 and 2000 provincial elections.
    Bryan Mahoney, Liberal candidate twice defeated by Calgary Tory Myron Thompson.
    Edmond Blanchard, former Liberal minister of finance in New Brunswick.
    These are among the appointees whose dispassionate political neutrality Harper was assailed for having questioned.”
    Also, if there were 33 placements and 16 were filled with right wingers, that means 17 were filled with left wingers. What the heck is your point?
    An observation I have made is that Harper seems at least interested somewhat in the best person for the job concept. Also, as Mary T has pointed out in the past, Harper nominated a great Canadian, Gwyn Morgan, to oversee the appointment process, for a buck, and the Liberals/Bloc/NDP alliance smeared him and used character assination, the great silencing weapon of the left, see climate change denier, effectively telling all Canadians that wanting to influence govt. outside of the socialist model of doing business is an exercise of futility. Google Maclean’s and Gwyn Morgan. Quite the read. Maybe you can get your IQ up to Mary T’s.
    Glenardo

  36. Watching the Libs actions and the media inaction is like watching a tennis match where the boundary lines for the Conservatives are about 1/10th the size of regulation, and the boundary lines for the Libs are non existent.
    The media sits back and referees the match. Awfully tough for the Conservatives to make a point even with excellent shots. Even great shots are scrutinized and discounted.
    Libs on the other hand can spray the ball anywhere and be awarded points. As such they dont really have to be very good or get any better in order to be in the match.
    We see great examples of this lack of qualification in the basic fundamentals every day, Mrs Jennings the most recent.
    This lack of honest oversight by the media referees has created the Liberal Party that we see today. Sadly it is not getting any better. All one has to do is declare themselves a Liberal switch teams, and you can then hit balls into the stands if you desire. Media will ensure the shot is called in (note: see Garth Turner)

  37. MUNGMAN hit the nail on the head. Harpher and the Conservatives attempted to reform the appointment system and were prevented by the opposition and shouted down by the MSM. So, as Harper indicated, since that’s the way you want it, that’s the way you get it. The Libranos are the last ones who can complain.

  39. Problem with Liberals and their partisan appointments was that they couldn’t even find a competent Liberal to appoint in most cases.
    Has Jonathan alread forgot the David Dingwall fiasco where the Liberals theselves had to give him the hook – what a disgrace but the Liberals were beyond embarassment and even had the nerve to rush and give him a huge settlement of taxpayer’s money before the government changed last January even though they came to the conclusion he was incompetent.

  40. Those accusing the Conservatives of politicizing judicial appointments should recall what then MP Richard Marceau (Charlesbourg-Haute-Saint-Charles, BQ) said in the House on June 3, 2005 (item 1010):
    http://tinyurl.com/y4xgns
    “The public perception of a politicized judiciary is based on facts. I would like to refer to the excellent work done by the Gazette and CanWest … Elizabeth Thompson and Cristin Schmidtz, among others, have come up with the statistics. I will begin by quoting from an article by Elizabeth Thompson which appeared on page A1 of the May 6 Gazette. …
    Nearly 60 per cent of lawyers appointed to the bench in Quebec by the federal government since the 2000 election contributed to the Liberal Party of Canada in the years leading up to their appointment, The Gazette has learned.
    If professors and public servants are factored out, the proportion rises even higher.
    Of the 29 law firm lawyers appointed to the Quebec Superior Court or Quebec Court of Appeal for the first time during that period, 21, or 72.4 per cent, had made individual contributions to the Liberals.
    In fact, The Gazette’s investigation reveals that the overwhelming majority of contributions made by those later named to the bench was to the Liberal Party during the 10-year period of contributions studied.”
    And they should also remember this:
    http://tinyurl.com/3xnnnw
    “THE CITIZEN Latest News Federal judges often Liberal donors, survey finds 60% of appointees in three provinces gave money to Grits Cristin Schmitz, with files from Liisa Tuominen, PeterO’Neil and Graeme Hamilton The Ottawa Citizen Friday, May 06, 2005 More than 60 per cent of the 93 lawyers who received federal judicial appointments in Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan since 2000 donated exclusively to the Liberal party in the three to five years before securing their $220,000-per-annum posts. Just a handful donated exclusively to the Conservatives or New Democrats during the same period, according to a CanWest News Service analysis of the appointments. Individual annual donations tended to be small, ranging from $100 to a few thousand dollars, an examination of Elections Canada political donation records reveals as the Gomery inquiry considers allegations that the Liberals handed out federal judgeships as rewards for party loyalists in Quebec.”
    Perhaps the Conservatives are trying to establish some kind of balance, eh? Just like Mr. Dion, who wants to make sure 30% + of Liberal candidates are women.
    On that topic, see the following:
    http://tinyurl.com/36efbn
    “FEW MEN NEED APPLY
    So this is democracy?
    Stéphane Dion’s plan for more female candidates in the next election is being called discriminatory
    Feb 10, 2007 04:30 Am
    Dion may bar male candidates in some ridings …”

  41. Look, the Liberals were far from perfect. In fact, you the Tories had a lot of merit criticizing certain things that were going on, 150%.
    All I am saying is that Stephen Harper rode to office atop a horse of moral indignation, and has now sent the poor animal to the glue factory.
    Both parties are equally as guilty – patronage is part of our parliamentary system. Sometimes good, often bad.

  42. The problem with you Liberals Jonathan is that you think you are God’s gift to humanity and that we should keep appointing incompetent Liberals to government positions.
    It was long past time to give all these boards etc. a good enema and flush the Liberal nincompoops who have been there too long down the drain.

  43. The problem with calling everything sleaze and corruption is you loose the ability to recognize corrupt from the questionable.
    They are not the same in anyway shape or form. No brown envelopes, no major contributions over a series of years that led to the appointment.
    Are there supporters that are rewarded, sure, is this normal and acceptable….to a point. But the Liberals….oh my goodness they were taking money for this stuff, and that was the ONLY criteria. And they did it for Decades!!!!
    There are no horses in the glue factory, maybe its looking tired and a little underfed. Recognize the difference between politics and a patronage machine.

  44. Jonathon – sorry to make it seem like a pile-on, here, but you might be interested in the analysis provided by Bob Tarantino. It seems quelle surprise that much of the outrage is, ummm, overblown, perhaps?

  45. “Look, the Liberals were far from perfect.”
    Let me fix that for you, The liberals ARE far from perfect. Imagine, all the corruption and sleaze that eminates from this group and Johathon’s responce,
    “they’re far from perfect”. Has cbc given you your opinion yet today?

  46. In defeating Mr Morgan, the opposition parties were convinced PMSH would do the same thing Martin had done when his pals were defeated, appoint him anyway. They were caught unprepared for his not doing it. They played the -what if game- and lost. They wanted Morgan appointed so they could vilify the PM for going against the will of parliament. He didn’t do it, and now every partisan liberal, or big donater to the party, that got any kind of job will be exposed.
    As said before, Dion is the gift that just keeps on giving. Big vote coming up tomorrow, wonder how many liberals might get suddenly sick if the PM says this is a confidence vote. I am sure voters will appreciate going to the polls during a snow storm to vote on the dangers of global warming.
    Instead of trying to defeat the government, and in fact defeat themselves, the liberal caucus should have someone come in to give them lessons on how to improve their memory re past liberal govts actions.
    Of course there is always the possibility that the PM could pull a liberal trick and have the vote after hours when no one is there.

  47. After all those years of Liberal patronage why would a Liberal try and get on a high horse ane lecture anyone about patronage – give your head a shake.
    Government has to make appointments to fill positions and if and when they find an honest and competent Liberal they would certainly consider appointing him(her).
    But as the Minister said in the house yesterday in Alberta they would even find it hard to find a Liberal of any kind ( Remember how desparate the Liberals got in Alberta and had to appoint Tommy Banks to the senate – how desparate is that – I am sure all Albertans were thrilled with that appointment.

  48. Jonathan
    The Liberals seem to always believe that there persoal friends need government jobs, so they can give more donations to the Liberal party, just another way the liberal’s steal from the public purse to finance there party instead of asking for it from all the people who are such loyal member’s of there party
    Bryan

  49. Trying to get an even keel, pragmatic perspective from this crowd is hopeless.
    Not everything the Liberals do is horrible or “criminal,” just as many of things that the Conservatives have moved forward on I support wholeheartedly (eg. Harper’s principled and brave stand at the Francophonie summit).
    I’m done. You can go back to your incessant insults and putdowns.

  50. If memory serves me, wasn’t Harper lambasted by the liberals and the MSM for even suggesting that JUDGES might be PARTISAN? The mere suggestion that judges were not beyond reproach or their loyalties should be questioned brought roars from the media. Unbelievable!

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation