Article content continued

Like Captain Renault entering Rick’s Café in Casablanca to discover illicit gambling, Liberals pronounced themselves shocked, shocked that anyone could suggest they were taking advantage of a crisis for partisan gain. One senior Liberal said the government needs flexibility to increase benefits or cut taxes without returning for parliamentary approval, although even he conceded a 21-month period with no spending oversight was probably excessive.

The hue and cry prompted the government to rethink, with Trudeau saying that the taxation clause would be removed.

“We’ve been in discussion with the opposition parties to find a way to both get flexibility to be able to get measures out the door and keep in place our democratic institutions and values,” he told reporters.

But the discretionary power of the finance minister to spend “all money required” during a health emergency, not to mention the leeway to borrow any amount of money were not removed, prompting Conservative leader Andrew Scheer to issue a statement saying several aspects of the legislation were still undemocratic.

The House was adjourned for most of the afternoon, with the bill left in limbo.

As the nation grinds to a halt it is reassuring that there is one place where it is business as usual – a bickering House of Commons.

The de facto suspension of our system of government for nearly two years is way, way too much

But the Opposition has a point. There was already unanimous agreement to pass the legislation to get much needed funds to people who have been left with no income by COVID-19. If more money is required, the House can be recalled within 48 hours.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer Yves Giroux appeared to agree, saying that draft legislation “seeks to circumvent Parliament”.

Conservatives said they had negotiated in good faith to expedite the COVID relief measures announced last week. “We had been assured over and over – no surprises,” said one senior member of Scheer’s staff. “Then we got the bill which was full of surprises. Taxes increased by the signature of the minister. Unlimited spending authority for more than a year, in a minority. No opposition party could agree to it. They blew it and blew it massively.”

Why then did the Liberals feel the need to risk the unanimous support it had already been guaranteed? Probably because politicians are by nature opportunistic, impatient and contemptuous of their opponents.

In 2008, Stephen Harper used the financial crisis as cover to attempt to remove the per-voter subsidy for political parties. It nearly cost him his government.

The Liberals have been no better.