On contempt

David Akin reports that the Cons are apparently refusing to allow any of their MPs to testify about the circumstances of Maxime Bernier's departure. But while the Cons are going to ever-more-comical lengths in trying to stonewall against investigation into what they've done wrong, this particular refusal to answer questions to looks to do far more harm than good for the Cons unless there's significantly more to the story than has gone public so far.

After all, however unlikely the Cons would be to offer any full account of what happened from their perspective, any appearance would at least allow them to try to repeat their own spin a few more times. But rather than taking the opportunity to rag the puck, the Cons are instead avoiding the whole process - meaning that the entire focus for now will be on the testimony of Julie Couillard, who's presumably not the first person they want put in the public eye.

And it's worth seeing as well whether the committee will seek to fill out its witness list with others who can provide insight into what happened without being under the Cons' partisan control. Presumably civil servants who don't hold the MP privilege being claimed by the Cons would be in at least as good a position as the cabinet ministers to describe both what's supposed to happen, and what actually did happen both during Bernier's tenure and at the time of his departure. And the more the opposition is able to get that story in front of the public, the more the Cons may end up wishing they'd taken the committee's invitation to appear.