IntenseDebate - AaronWherry

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The House · 1 reply · +19 points

Well, that too.

13 years ago @ Macleans.ca - 'More focus and purpos... · 1 reply · +1 points

My understanding is that the ministry included ministers of state and secretaries of state, while cabinet was restricted to ministers. Chretien and Martin made the distinction and Harper did at first. Harper now includes everyone in cabinet, which is mostly how it worked in the past.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - Looking back and forward · 2 replies · +2 points

"You don't think the bit about trying to force an election on a budget he hasn't read is interesting?"

Not particularly. First, it's a hypothetical. If the budget doesn't meet certain conditions, he doesn't plan on supporting it. Second, he can't force an election. We've been through this before. All three opposition parties have to vote against the budget to bring about an election. We're months away from knowing whether that's going to happen. And given that it hasn't happened in five years, the odds still favour the government not falling.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - Necessary partisanship... · 0 replies · +1 points

Technical mishap.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The Commons: The hango... · 1 reply · +7 points

Three times. Only after three times can one start to get offended. That's the rule.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - Burn the witch · 2 replies · +2 points

I think I meant seven. I think I hate math.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - The Commons: Checking ... · 1 reply · +2 points

Didn't realize that made it to television.

He walked over to joke with Mr. Ignatieff. They had a laugh and then everyone cleared out.

After the all-clear, the procession of MPs heading back into the House included Mr. Ignatieff and James Moore walking side-by-side in deep conversation.

Lest you fear these people aren't in fact capable of human interaction with each other...

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - What if the United Sta... · 0 replies · +1 points

Fixed.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - Duceppe's version · 2 replies · +2 points

Here's Lebel's only QP intervention today.

Monsieur le Président, il y a trois semaines, le Bloc s'est aperçu qu'il y avait un plan pour les infrastructures quand les maires leur en ont parlé, car avant cela, il ne s'en occupait pas. D'ailleurs, les députés du Bloc ont voté contre. Nous continuerons à travailler avec les maires de toutes les villes du Québec et le ministre d’État (Transports) est en lien avec son confrère au gouvernement du Québec. Des discussions se poursuivent et comme à l'habitude, nous allons livrer la marchandise.

14 years ago @ Macleans.ca - 'History will judge' · 3 replies · +11 points

I try to leave this forum to all of you to say as you wish, free of my quibbling or whining, but I feel a bit obligated to respond to this.

That was meant as nothing more than a statement of fact and an attempt at the fullest disclosure possible. I've interviewed the Governor General at length on two occasions now. I don't understand French nearly enough to carry on the conversation in that language so the interviews have been done in English. This, because her first language is French, can be slightly problematic and often leads to wording that might read awkwardly. For the most part, attempts are made to smooth over those moments as the interview is prepared for print. (Always striving for a certain balance between clarity and, if our Andrew Potter will excuse the expression, authenticity.)

In this case, the word "have" was deleted from the answer that will appear in the print edition. But, because of the gravity of the subject matter and the importance of wording when someone like the Governor General is speaking about such a matter, I attached the note above.

That's all. Any connection to my general attitude of smug disregard for others is a matter of perception and has nothing to do with intent.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with AaronWherry

People I'm following

AaronWherry