On test cases

Kady has the text of Wayne Wouters' letter responding to Marlene Jennings' complaint about a partisan departmental press release. And it's even worse than I'd thought this morning, as it seems to leave the door open for the Cons to insert whatever partisan attacks they want into departmental materials as long as they're said to originate with a minister.

Or to put Wouters' distinction in simple terms...

Inserting "Neener neener neener, Ignatieff's a weiner" in a departmental press release: not OK.

Inserting "According to the Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Minister of Veterans Affairs and Minister of State (Agriculture), 'Neener neener neener, Ignatieff's a weiner'" in a departmental press release: OK.

Needless to say, I'm skeptical as to whether that's where most Canadians think the line ought to be drawn in the use of public resources for partisan purposes. And if the individual currently charged with interpreting the rules thinks otherwise, then Parliament may want to take a close look at how it can go about making reality reflect what people should expect.

On half measures

It's undoubtedly for the best that Wayne Wouters has acknowledged that the Cons' use of departmental press releases for partisan attacks was improper. But it's hard to see much prospect of improvement based on Wouters' conclusion as to how the matter was handled:

Canada's top bureaucrat admitted a news release from the Justice Department announcing the appointment of new Senators to clear the way for the Conservatives law and order agenda was partisan and didn't conform with federal communications policy.

In a letter, Privy Council Clerk Wayne Wouters said the breach was discovered the same day as it was posted and publicly released, but it was 'swiftly' handled to clarify that the partisan statements were the views of the minister and not the department. The changes were made the same day.

Of course, it's certainly a problem for the Cons to be imputing their views to federal departments. But that's far from the only - or even the most important - problem with the release reviewed by Wouters.

What's obviously left out of Wouters' letter (at least as reported so far) is any analysis as to why it's supposed to be acceptable for minister to use a public department's resources to broadcast his or her own partisan views - which seems to be the inevitable inference if the "clarification" is seen as having brought the Cons back within the rules. And given the Cons' track record of pushing the limits of non-stop partisanship, it'll be a shock if we don't get to see that apparent loophole in Wouters' decision tested in the very near future.