In the aftermath, there were suggestions that the attorney general should be an MP rather than a cabinet minister, as has been traditional in the British parliament. No coherent explanation was given as to how a Canadian MP could be trusted to be more independent than a cabinet minister, given the understanding of party discipline that prevails in Canada, and the idea was abandoned.
Bolder solutions are possible. As an example of the flexibility that parliamentary systems encourage -- far beyond the imaginings of most commentators and analysts in Canada -- note the process in Israel, where the attorney general is busy organizing the prosecution of the incumbent prime minister on criminal charges. I stress that Israel's political culture is substantially different from Canada's, and no simple one-to-one comparisons are rarely useful. But in Israel the cabinet appoints an attorney general from a shortlist presented by a committee formed of the Chief Justice, former AGs, and legal experts, and the person appointed serves a fixed six-year term regardless of the election and/or defeat of parliaments.
Good idea? Maybe, maybe not. Worth adding to the repertoire of possibilities? Probably.
Hat tip to the Fruits and Votes blog, which has the details here.
