Legislature dustups have an election feel to them

Alberta’s next election isn’t for another two years (if the government sticks to the spirit of the province’s Election Act), but you’d be forgiven for thinking the campaign started this week in question period.

The first days of the spring session saw the government and opposition parties hammer away at each other in partisan exchanges that seemed to get more hyper by the day.

Take the opening exchange on Wednesday, for example.

I’ll quote at length so you get an idea of the tone of the question and the answer.

Here’s Wildrose Leader Brian Jean: “Crime is up across the province and over the last two years Alberta has seen very serious cases being dropped. The problem is only getting worse, and today we found out that the justice minister sent out a brand new protocol just last week advising prosecutors that it may not be worth pursuing serious violent crimes due to the resources required. We’re talking about murders and sexual assault. This is sickening. This means victims will likely see the accused criminals walking free on our streets. How on earth did the premier or anyone in this government possibly think this was a good idea?”

To listen to Jean you’d think the NDP was happily letting murderers and rapists walk the streets due to a backlog of court cases.

That’s not true, of course. But there is a major jam up of cases in Alberta that have seen several hundred charges dropped, including some for theft, carrying concealed weapons and drunk driving.

Those are serious cases, but the blame for the backlog can be placed at the feet of previous governments, both provincial and federal, for failing to hire enough Crown prosecutors and judges.

(The Alberta government announced the following day it will spend $14.5 million to hire 35 more Crown prosecutors and 30 more support staff).

The topic of Jean’s question was fair game, but he oversold his argument to the point of caricature. But at least you could see where he was headed with his question.

I have no idea where the government was headed with its answer, fielded by deputy premier Sarah Hoffman, who was filling in for an out-of-town premier.

Here’s Hoffman’s reply: “The opposition doesn’t know whether they are coming or whether they are going. One day they call for cuts, the next day they’re calling for more money. Yesterday, another Wildrose bozo eruption and today it’s the Keystone Kops in this house. Those folks broke things. We’re working to fix it. We’ve got real leadership from the minister (Justice Minister Kathleen Ganley). She’ll be happy to answer the remainder of the questions, but I have to say: Wildrose, talk is cheap; lead- ership is action.”

Hoffman’s “answer” didn’t even acknowledge the question’s topic.

It was a laughable non-answer used as a vehicle to take potshots at the Wildrose.

The “bozo eruption” referred to was a Wildrose student club at the University of Calgary getting in much deserved hot water for saying “feminism is cancer.”

(Wildrose headquarters tried to distance itself from that controversy, saying the club was not a bona-fide offshoot of the party).

Hoffman’s non-answer also managed to take a shot at the Progressive Conservatives when she said, “Those folks broke things.”

Which is true, I guess, when it comes to the issue of court backlogs. But, again, she didn’t even pretend to reply to the question.

We’re seeing this happen more and more as the NDP answers questions with hyper-partisan non sequiturs that, in many instances, sound rehearsed.

On Thursday, Environment Minister Shannon Phillips answered a question about her residential retrofit program by saying, “Our government, on this side, is worried about hard hats. … They’re more interested in tinfoil hats.”

It’s like the NDP is trying out campaign slogans: “Wildrose, talk is cheap, NDP leadership is action,” “We want hard hats, they want tinfoil hats.”

Not very good slogans, mind you. But I guess they’ve got two years to come up with something better.