Dec 12
7
Dust-up in the Commons: Rod Taylor
Tempers flared this week in the House over procedural wrangling on the legitimacy of the Omnibus budget and the majority Government’s apparent deafness to any complaints from the Opposition about the process. There were unsuccessful attempts to enter the Chamber by a gathering of First Nations chiefs, indicating their willingness to be consulted; there were thinly-veiled threats of lawsuits and court appearances uttered by NDP House Leader, Nathan Cullen. There were uttered but unrecorded angry words (apparently, including “unparliamentary language”, otherwise known as “swearing”)directed at Cullen by Government House Leader, Peter Van Loan, and a final friendly arm on the shoulder by Defence Minister Peter Mackay, as he cajoled his colleague, the worked-up Mr. Van Loan and led him away to his own corner to cool off.
Although no punches were thrown, the theatrics of this week and the seething testiness of the controlled combatants underscored the deep-seated unease with the current political situation, the non-conciliatory nature of today’s partisan politics and indeed the triumph of style over substance. Perhaps it’s because Canadians are feeling deprived of their weekly spectator sport and the bloodletting normally associated with nasty outbursts in the NHL. Perhaps it’s the constant bombardment of gratuitous violence in the useless TV programming misnamed “entertainment”. Perhaps it’s the increasing rudeness of participants at all levels of political commentary. Whatever it is, Canadians stop what they’re doing and tune in fast when they see grown men about to go at it.
The fact that men and women in the House have different worldviews driving their perceptions of events, the way they describe reality and the solutions they propose for correcting injustice is nothing new. The fact that throughout the centuries, frustrated men have resorted to uncontrolled outbursts and sometimes physical violence is well known to all. The thought that modern man has progressed in self-discipline to the point where rudeness and rancorous name-calling have given place to thoughtful, respectful discourse is clung to by some but the evidence is lacking. Some people in public life can control themselves some of the time when the rewards for doing so are great enough or the costs of failing to maintain their decorum is sufficient. The courts of our land, our prisons, our hockey penalty boxes are full of those for whom the release of emotion seemed—for a small moment—a greater benefit than could be gained by “putting a lid on it”.
Losers often fall into the trap of shooting off their mouth in the pain of their loss. All of us who have ever lost a contest or an argument or an opportunity can understand that natural reaction, although most of us have been urged to be “good sports” even in the disappointment of loss. Mr. Van Loan made an error even more tragic. In the moment of victory for his party (based on the passage of the cumbersome Government budget, with all its potentially significant flaws, with its myriad of critics, with the variety of failed procedural tactics designed to stall it) Mr. Van Loan—to all intents the victor—crossed the floor and exposed himself to ridicule and censure by berating his Opposition counterpart, even dropping his verbal gloves and the aura of respectability normally accorded to all MPs.
On the football field, an undisciplined player who can’t keep his hands to himself but gets penalized for “holding”, “pass interference” or “unnecessary roughness” can lose needed yardage, nullify the great work of a fellow teammate and cost his team the game. By yielding to his passion Mr. Van Loan has turned over the ball to the Opposition and given them the moral high ground. They don’t deserve it but they will milk it. Mr. Van Loan will go back to school where he will learn how to count to ten.
It turns out that the best government is still self-government. An ancient proverb from King Solomon (Pr. 16:32) says: “He who is slow to become angry is better than a mighty warrior; he who rules his own spirit is stronger than one who captures a city”.