Mrs. Alexandra Mendes (Brossard—La Prairie, Lib.):In other words, all the opposition has to do to avoid the substance-free bloviations and personal attacks of John Baird or Pierre Poilievre is to impersonate them in framing the questions to be asked. And as an added bonus, they'll get to cycle through nearly twice as many questions for lack of any attempt to answer. So what's not to like?
Mr. Speaker, the minister of fake lakes chose to make cuts to Quebec festivals like FrancoFolies, the New France Festival and the Festival Grand Rire de Québec.
The irony is not lost on Quebeckers who saw a significant amount of support for the tourism industry evaporate, despite the fact that the minister “forgot” to spend $12 million last year.
Can the minister explain how he found the money to drop gazebos into his own riding, but does not have a penny for Quebec culture, nothing for Maillardville and nothing for the people of the Saguenay region?
Hon. Jay Hill (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, we have no minister by that designation and until members actually address their questions in a respectful manner there will not be a minister answering.
All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Can we get that in writing?
It's a cliche of Canadian politics that there's a reason why "question period" isn't called "answer period" - and the Harper Cons have taken the theory that their answering time should bear as little resemblance as possible to the topic of any given question to downright painful extremes. But it looks like one MP may have stumbled onto a way to cut the Cons' non-answers out of the equation:
Labels:
alexandra mendes,
cons,
jay hill,
libs,
parliamentary procedures,
strategy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment