Making no apologies here for the repost
A couple of blogs, and the Liberal party no doubt, have published this YouTube clip of Bob Rae singing a parody about Prorogation. Reading between the lines a tweet from Senator Smith signalled the fact that BR was going to sing; and he did. I just wish that if the event was planned the camera sightlines could have been planned more efficiently.
5 comments:
The atmosphere reminds me a bit of the 60's sit-down, folksy stuff. Not being the curmudgeony type, I presume it's perfect for the present too. 200,000 + opposing Harper on the internet translates into.. what... in the flesh ? That is the question. How many fit into Rick's office again ?
I quite liked that, reminded me of when I liked old Uncle Bob.
At least, unlike Iggy or Harper, he appears to be a flesh and blood human, not a cardboard cartoon character.
Judging by all this 'huff'n'puffery', one couldn't be criticized for actually coming to think that 'prorogation of parliament' is a big deal - but is it? If so, why no outcry at the end of every session of parliament when it is prorogued? Every session ends in prorogation except the one that ends in dissolution. Not much of anything gets canceled by prorogation, it just gets put forward to the next session, to be dealt with at some point.
A lot of the wailing seems to be coming from the same folks who complain about the government's failure to "listen", regardless of who has formed the government at that time.
Parliament has been prorogued often enough to render the act as not particularly unique, and it certainly doesn't have a significant impact on the overall objective of governing the country at a federal level. So I say again, what's the big deal - really?
Noise for the sake of noise is silly. If prorogation changes the fortunes of the country, yes, it should be challenged for its use and an explanation is due, otherwise, it's just noise. That explanation should be pursued by our members of parliament when the house resumes sitting in the next session, for all to hear and understand or reject at the next election.
Just do me a favour and spare me all this hyperbolic indignation.
Manfred, if you need to be told why people are angry you must have your head buried very deeply in the sand. I am disappointed although I acknowledge you have every right to your opinion. It just seems you are being deliberately dense on this one.
Deb, I know why some people are 'angry', that's not my point. My question is - do they really know why they're angry, and what the hell's their point?
As I understand it, nothing has been scrubbed, scratched, eliminated, done away with, or anything of the sort. Everything is still on the table, moved down the schedule, yes, but still in full force. If the concern is that the MPs are not 'working' right now, it means they'll have twice as much to do when they do start again. For goodness sake, we have regular closings and openings of sessions that have exactly the same effect and nobody gives it much thought. Why not be PO'd, as Ben might say, that they don't keep the session going from one end to the other of the full term - then you might feel you're getting your money's worth.
Really, give this contrived slight some more thought and put it in an overall perspective within the full term of parliament and figure out just how it will affect the final outcome.
Holy moly, I suspect you can hardly remember the frustrations you expressed five, four, maybe even three years ago, so just how much does it really matter in the years to come? Eventually, it's all just 'static' and 'noise'.
Post a Comment