As the Conservatives grasp their diminishing influence in the opposition benches, their threats of using the Senate to get their way seem to be increasing. Yesterday, as the Liberal government announced their bill to repeal two of the anti-union private members’ bills that passed in the last parliament, at least one Conservative MP was beating his chest and threatening that the Senate would be used to defeat the bill. The problem? That he’s unlikely to find allies in the Senate to carry out this threat. You see, one of these bills badly fractured the Conservative Senate caucus in the last parliament, which is almost certainly what led to Marjory LeBreton tendering her resignation as Government Leader early, and her threats to the caucus very nearly provoked a revolt. Given how much trouble they went through to pass the bill in June, and how much they had to crack the whip and still have dissenters, those who abstained or who just refused to show up for the vote, I really doubt that they would have any fight left in them on this bill. It makes the insistence from their MP caucus that they will somehow be a rearguard action to stop bills they don’t like from being passed as not only fanciful, but actually pretty insulting to that Senate caucus, who they’re treating as just another group of backbenchers that they can push around, and with a leadership contest soon to get underway, they’re going to find that their senators are about to start getting a lot more independent, as the guy who appointed them is no longer around and his influence has almost faded entirely as even his MP caucus swallows themselves whole to reverse their previously held positions now that he’s gone. If they think that they can still wield that influence to preserve this unpopular and contentious bill, well, they may soon find themselves getting a rather rude awakening. (Meanwhile, the Conservative allegation that the repeal of those bills was somehow repayment for an illegal union donation that the Liberals didn’t even know about, and which was repaid as soon as it was uncovered, is laughable considering that the repeal of these bills was in the bloody platform).

Good reads:

• For the first time, CSE’s watchdog held a public briefing on his annual report, which showed problems with the agency’s metadata sharing.
• SIRC’s annual report on CSIS was also delivered yesterday, and showed a couple of problems by that agency as well.
• Stéphane Dion hints that the Office of Religious Freedom is coming to end, and that we’re not saying yes to all allied proposals in the Syria mission.
• Dominic LeBlanc is talking about eliminating Friday sittings. (Here’s why I said this is a bad idea).
• Senators want to ensure they’ll be part of the new parliamentary national security oversight committee (though this has generally always been discussed).
• One bank economist said that legal pot could reap $5 billion in revenue annually, though the government hasn’t booked any planned revenues.
• The former head of the UNCHR praises Canada for helping to turn the tide of negativity around refugees.
• Former MP Stephen Fletcher appeared at the special committee on doctor-assisted dying.
• It looks like the Conservatives’ supply day motion on Energy East is heading for defeat.
• Jen Gerson looks closely at the Human Rights Tribunal decision on First Nations children, and regards its merits and flaws.
• Adam Dodek writes about Ted Cruz and the lack of birtherism in Canada.

Odds and ends:

Renovations to 24 Sussex could take four years.

One Liberal MP took a paid junket to Israel after the House sat for its first week in December.