Victory... but for what?Save this online in Del.icio.us. [?] Vote For this Post
(Cross-posted at BlueGrit)
I'm not a huge fan of Maurice Vellacott. I can't say that I'm particularly bothered by the decision of the opposition majority to remove him as chair of the Indian Affairs committee. Frankly, his general unsuitability for that role given his less-than-stellar reputation among native communities should have been enough for them to do so.
This is the first victory for the Liberal party since losing the election. But that's not saying much. That we can destroy what remained of a loose-lipped Conservative MP's reputation is not only a given, it almost feels like bullying to be picking on such a small fry.
But even more troubling is that Stephen Harper actually made a good point:
"The prime minister, however, has been pointing out in the House the hypocrisy of the Liberal complaints and to a degree media coverage of Vellacott's comments, when similar statements have been made by Liberal MPs in the recent past without great fanfare."
I couldn't agree more. Sure, this is a victory for the Liberals, but we won in the wrong way. We've won through hypocrisy and with a double-standard, and to someone who hates both of those things, that's a lousy way to win. For the Liberal party to be truly consistent on this, it should be censuring Dan McTeague and Tom Wappel etc. every time they say something outrageous or ridiculous, and there's plenty of things they've said, and done, which meet that definition. Frankly, it might expedite the process by which we can rid ourselves of those Liberal poseurs, but more to the point, it would be the non-hypocritical thing to do.