While Eugene Forsney's post expressed genuine outrage (and rightly so from that perspective), I find several posts by several NDP bloggers to be a little more harsh than is needed in light of what the game is up there on the Hill: politics. And the idea that the Liberals and Conservatives concocted this grand parliamentary conspiracy to thwart the will of the two minor parties is a little rich, even for the NDP.
It's possible, but unlikely; Yasmin Ratansi's motion on the breach-of-privilege fight more or less puts off the date for the committee's vote on the entire issue, after further study by the interested parties. This pisses off the NDP and the Bloc, Siksay and Freeman, because Siksay's own motion was defeated in favour of Ratansi's. Why? It's not too hard to see.
Had Siksay's motion gone forward, Speaker Milliken would have more than likely ruled that the government was in contempt, which would automatically lead to an election, unless there was some saving-grace moment. Far be it that the issue is dead - Ratansi's motion simply furthers study, it doesn't squash it - but, really, do you want to go to the polls now, over this, in the middle of several municipal elections across several provinces?
I don't excuse the actions of the Liberals in the committee, and certainly not the leadership on it. However, it's not a grand Liberal-Conservative conspiracy, and there is a certain logic to the madness. Why go to the polls over an issue that, frankly, is not going to make major headlines for the majority of the population, and can be dealt with in ways that won't threaten the life of Parliament. It's cold, unfeeling realpolitik.
I have some doubts that Layton's party especially would have pursued this all the way had the Liberals even supported Siksay's motion, given the current state of the party.
However, while we're on certain political parties throwing hissy fits, what's going on out in BC? Carole James get a little hot under the collar for being rightly criticized for her lack of, well, anything?