Angry in the Great White North

Last week, Jane Taber of the Globe and Mail reported on Mike Duffy Live about an embarrassing episode that was witnessed in the Liberal Party caucus.  You can see the video for yourself, but in a nutshell, Garth Turner did a presentation on the Maxime Bernier controversy, and allegedly used images of scantily clad biker babes.  His off-colour presentation offended the women in the caucus (and presumably embarrassed the men, but I'm just speculating).  It was so bad that Stephane Dion took it upon himself to tell Garth Turner, in front of the entire caucus, that he had crossed the line.

The real story here is not Garth Turner's allegedly embarrassing performance.  Hey, we all say stupid things (though maybe we don't all make a PowerPoint presentation out it).  It's that someone has decided that Garth Turner no longer deserves the protection of caucus confidentiality. 

The whole point of confidentiality is to allow the members to speak freely.  Yes, sometimes that means that dumb things are said, but sometimes that helps in the debate.  In any case, knowing that you won't be called out in public over what you said is what enables MPs in caucus to debate issues vigorously and to not censor themselves.

Garth Turner allegedly said something stupid.  But guess what?  We all know about it, and we all know what Stephane Dion said about it too.

If Garth Turner realizes he longer enjoys the protection of caucus confidentiality, then why would be treat what he hears as confidential himself?  Getting burned this way by a fellow caucus member is a surefire way to turn Garth Turner into a potential liability.

Is that what someone wants?  To turn Garth Turner into a risk?  To what end?  To compel Stephane Dion to do something about it?

This leak included a mention of Stephane Dion in a starring role.  Breaking caucus confidentiality about the party leader is a sure-fire way to get chucked from caucus.

So either this person is powerful enough to avoid that fate, or or she has powerful friends, or she doesn't care.  But this person has delivered a message to Garth Turner that he cannot expect the same protection offered to other Liberals. 

Offered to real Liberals?  Is that part of the message?

Will this chasten Garth Turner, or will it embolden him?  And is this meant to tempt Garth Turner into making another mistake in an attempt to settle the score, a mistake that sees him out of the Liberal Party?

Or maybe it was just a backbench MP with a juicy story to tell who wanted to pretend to be important.