Nincumpoopery
Bernard Shapiro had to investigate the allegations of impropriety levelled by certain members of Parliament. Quick, all you lawyers out there: Does being offered a minister's job constitute "furthering private interests"? The role of minister is a public job. Shapiro quickly concluded that ministerial perks are not "private interests" in the meaning of the act.
However, Shapiro should have ended his report at that. Beyond that, there was no subject for inquiry. Shapiro felt the need to explain how even though Emerson did not break the rules, what he did was problematic given the public reaction to his decision.
Should the Ethics Commissioner be telling parliamentarians that their rules may not be good enough? "Uh, sorry guys, he didn't break the rules... So maybe you should think about changing the rules. Better luck next time." This is the essence of Shapiro's message. Has he grossly overstepped his bounds?
What is Shapiro's job? According to the law, it is to 1) administer the Members code, 2) provide confidential opinions to members, and 3) conduct inquiries into whether there has been a breach of the code. Nowhere does it say that the EC should undertake to examine the code itself, or recommend changes to it, or recommend public debate. Has the EC overstepped his bounds?
This has nothing to do with the Emerson issue being gross and slimy. It has to do with the depoliticization and legalization of politics, the abdication of public responsibility by parliamentarians to censure its members according to their own judgements.
However, Shapiro should have ended his report at that. Beyond that, there was no subject for inquiry. Shapiro felt the need to explain how even though Emerson did not break the rules, what he did was problematic given the public reaction to his decision.
Should the Ethics Commissioner be telling parliamentarians that their rules may not be good enough? "Uh, sorry guys, he didn't break the rules... So maybe you should think about changing the rules. Better luck next time." This is the essence of Shapiro's message. Has he grossly overstepped his bounds?
What is Shapiro's job? According to the law, it is to 1) administer the Members code, 2) provide confidential opinions to members, and 3) conduct inquiries into whether there has been a breach of the code. Nowhere does it say that the EC should undertake to examine the code itself, or recommend changes to it, or recommend public debate. Has the EC overstepped his bounds?
This has nothing to do with the Emerson issue being gross and slimy. It has to do with the depoliticization and legalization of politics, the abdication of public responsibility by parliamentarians to censure its members according to their own judgements.
posted by Lt Smash at 4:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home