Canadian politics notebook: Rob Ford's alleged crack use

Rob Ford: crack pipe.

Of all the things I would believe about the Toronto mayor, this isn't one of them. Then again, this doesn't appear to be a random accusation.

Initially, a lot of the objection to Ford was based purely on political philosophy, as most criticism of politicians should be. Lately, most of the objection rests on "cries for help." You almost miss the battles over whether new public transportation should be subway vs. light-rail trains.

Journalists from the Gawker and the Toronto Star saw a 90-second clip from an alleged drug dealer. The man in the clip appears to be Rob Ford smoking a crack pipe and making several gay (using the f-word gay slur to refer to Justin Trudeau) and racially inflammatory slurs.

Everyone is innocent until proven guilty, especially when involved with a crack pipe. And anyone who tries to personally profit from a video or similar information is automatically treated with suspicion.

The question is whether the allegations fit a pattern or similar pattern to behavior already exhibited. By that standard, Ford would be guilty in a heartbeat of everything but the crack smoking. The crack pipe itself seems to be the one element out of place.

Councillor Doug Ford, the mayor's brother, said on a radio show that "I have never seen my brother involved with anything like coke." Not as vociferous as other denials to previous allegations, and not much of a denial to what the person in the video said.

Toronto has enough problems for a mayor who is focused and is striving to help solve those problems. Rob Ford hasn't been that person for a long time. In many ways, that is more important to himself and the city of Toronto rather than whether he held a crack pipe and used it.

---

The major thing Canadians and a select few Americans know about Canada's Senate is that its senators aren't elected. They are appointed by prime ministers. For a long time, the Senate was dominated by Liberals since Liberals had been mostly in power. Now Conservatives dominate in the Canadian Senate, but Canada's Senate is more advisory than the U.S. Senate, the place where U.S. bills are diminished or go to die.

Pamela Wallin and Mike Duffy, in separate incidents, recently resigned from the Conservative caucus. Patrick Brazeau was kicked out of the Conservative caucus for a separate incident. Yet all three remain senators.

Wallin, Duffy, and Brazeau will all vote Conservative when votes come along, so the idea of them being an Independent senator is rather insulting to true independents. The U.S. Senate currently has two independent senators: Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is to the left of the Dems and Angus King (I-ME) rests pretty much in the middle of Dems and GOP lands.

Wallin voluntarily left the Conservative caucus, but is under investigation for claiming $321,000 in travel expenses since September 2010. Duffy was also under investigation for $90,000 in fraudulent travel expenses, and claimed to have repaid the money. Turns out, Nigel Wright — Stephen Harper's chief of staff — wrote a personal check for the money while Duffy maintained in public that he personally paid back the money. Wright was forced to resign over the check.

Brazeau is currently in trouble for claiming $35,000 in travel expenses, but was removed from the Conservative caucus in February following a domestic dispute arrest.

The media has to refer to each of these senators as "former Conservative senator." Of course to the ear, this could mean "former senator who is Conservative" or "former Conservative who is a senator." Getting to remove the party label from a disgraced politician is something you would think Americans would have invented.

Removing a party identity shouldn't be that easy. Duffy actually said out loud that he was looking forward to once again being a Conservative senator. There goes subtlety.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been talking about Senate reform, though this isn't what he had in mind. Electing Canadian senators might be a start because clearly accountability is missing from these senators.

---

We've seen cases where a party in Canada loses and its leader loses the seat. Think the federal Liberals and Michael Ignatieff and the Bloc Quebecois and Gilles Duceppe, both in 2011. Kim Campbell was prime minister and her party lost power and she lost her seat in 1993.

The Christy Clark saga in British Columbia on Tuesday produced an unusual scenario where the Liberals retained power, but Clark lost her seat.

What usually happens in these cases is that a fellow Liberal (in this case) steps aside in a riding, and allows Clark to run in that riding in a by-election. The opposition parties usually don't run someone in that by-election. Usually.

Clark reportedly didn't live in her riding, the one she represented and where she did little campaigning. U.S. laws don't require representatives to live in their district, but politics usually makes that a necessity. Canadians don't seem as concerned. After all, the late Jack Layton and his wife, Olivia Chow, represented different ridings in Toronto.

Every major political pundit had the NDP taking over in British Columbia. To Clark's credit, she needed to focus on keeping her party in power. Now, she can worry how to get back to being a MLA.

photo credit: Toronto Star

Comments

[CQ]

It should also be noted that Senators Wallin and Duffy are both former national (Free Trade Agreement Exempted) english-language TV news personalities. Wallin hosted the toprated Canada AM morning show for a few years in the 1980s. She's had a steady career of appointments, both gov't and in business - usually within a Cda-U.S. profile - since. This includes BMO Harris bank. Duffy, until recently, was one of this country's long-time leading political interviewers / cable news hosts.

[Chad]

Thanks CQ for the background on these two. I knew they were both journalists, but didn't know that much of their background. I'll have more on this tomorrow.

[Tyler]

Correct that Clark was not living in the riding she ran in, Vancouver-Point Grey. Her home is in the next riding to the east, Vancouver-Fairview. Both went to the NDP in this election.

If the NDP understood optics (which they obviously don't, given the rather arrogant/presumptuous campaign they ran that featured numerous candidates and their leader looking ahead to being in government before the actual election took place) they would not run a candidate against Clark in the upcoming byelection. But they probably will because, well, this is the BC NDP we're talking about. Many bitter folks.

[Chad]

I was wondering whether the NDP would run someone against Clark for exactly that reason. The (relative) decorum of Canadian politics feels threatened by the stylings of U.S. politics. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

[Tyler]

Yeah, the decorum seems to get worse every time and thus voter turnout is not getting better. Certainly it's not because of a lack of awareness - there's more election coverage on more platforms than ever before!