Joyce Murray takes office, asks question that is irrelevant to Quadra.

Okay, so I get to be a little disgruntled once in awhile.

Throughout the recent campaign, I was thinking of a million different questions I would have asked on my first day in Parliament.

Would I ask about the economics of adding a carbon tax? Would I question the government on the sorry state of animal cruelty legislation and the ongoing seal hunt? Would I talk about the Conservatives censoring Canadian media? Would I scold the Tories for running an expensive anti-drug campaign focussing on educating parents that green=cannabis? (see here for propaganda)

All good questions, asked by many constituents at various all candidates meetings or by members of the public while we were campaigning. Instead, for her very first question as an MP, Joyce Murray asks the government if John Reynolds and Ian Brodie were involved in the Chuck Cadman affair! Why? Who cares.

This was never an election issue, nor did I hear it asked by any constituent at any all-candidates meetings. There were plenty of real concerns raised in the campaign, but this was never one of them. Stephen Owen, the retired MP, had described Question Period as one of his least favourable experiences and I know he would not have enjoyed listening to this question being asked.

We know it was Tom Flanagan and Doug Finley who talked with Cadman, as published in Tom's book, so I'm not sure what the MP for Quadra was trying to get at. (Tom talks about it in Harper's Team released late last year..I've read much of it at Chapters across multiple visits)

This has nothing personally to do with my MP, but with the whole tactics of the Liberal Party. As you may guess, I really cannot stand the emphasis on the "Chuck Cadman" affair. I see this as a pathetic attempt to try and pin something on the government which has absolutely no impact on public policy. Frankly, while I think the Conservatives deserve to be raked over the coal for many other items, including firing the head of the Nuclear watchdog and possible interference in the US election, when it comes to Cadman, I think the opposition misses the point.

Yes, the Conservative's tried to encourage Chuck to support them, which he didn't. I have no idea what they offered, most likely all of his election expenses paid up front but perhaps even more. However, at exactly the same time the Liberals gave Belinda Stronach a Cabinet position after crossing the floor to prop up Paul Martin's minority government. This equals a $70,000 a year raise which to me is a real immortal financial consideration offered and accepted.

The same "legal" but undemocratic incentive was provided when David Emerson crossed the floor in 2006. If the opposition wants to talk about Cadman, then they should talk about the whole issue of governance and incentives, including how Cabinet ministers and Parliamentary secretaries receive an additional salary on top of their $155,000 a year salary. Want to see bribery! That is real bribery institutionalized in the hands of the Prime Minister. In my world, all MPs should be paid the same.

Anyways, I find the whole emphasis on this supposed offer to Chuck Cadman to be a waste of the public's time and a distraction from issues such as climate change and poverty which should be debated in Question Period. There are much bigger problems in this world to ask questions about and the Liberals are barking at the wrong issues trying to score cheap political points. Chuck Cadman was a person we should all have respect for and its horrible that his memory will not be tied with something that had nothing to do with him.

So Mrs. Murray, your first day is a bit of a bust. Focus on the issues, because you better bet, next election some of us will.

And Parliamentary behavior will be one of the issue that the Green Party is certain to address.