It's a truism bordering on cliché that in Hollywood "when they tell you it's not about the money, believe me, it's about the money." Similarly in Canadian politics, when a parliamentarian suggests that the behaviour of a fellow member of the political fraternity is "sullying" or "beneath the dignity of parliament"… you catch my drift.
The Jaffer Affair, or Guergisgate or whatever the hell the slug writers have decided to dub it this week, is driving the tenor of political life in this country into a moribund sub-basement. Jaffer's performance before a parliamentary committee (neatly captured by Rick Salutin in this morning's Globe) was a symphony of mediocrity on all sides; from the mangled syntax of the various committee members to business partner Patrick Glémaud's mock outrage and subsequent febrile accusations of racism.
Lately I've been reading Halifax professor Laura Penny's new book, More Money than Brains on M&S, commenting on/satirizing the diminution of standards across the Canadian political spectrum. In it she neatly captures the current debacle (of which Guergis-Jaffer is merely a symptom):
"Here's a fun fact: American politicians are actually better educated than their Canadian counterparts. Only 66 per cent of members of Parliament have an undergraduate degree, versus 93 per cent of the representatives in Congress. … The majority of Canadian MPs come from the private sector. Conversely, most U.S. representatives come from other state and local governments; they are part of a political class. U.S. politicos stay in public service far longer than their Canadian counterparts. Parliament has a much higher turnover rate than American political institutions do. This creates an amateurish, short-sighted political outlook, one that rarely sets sights higher than the next election."
Oh dear.