QP: In advance of the deployment motion

Posted on by

As Ottawa dug itself out from a record snowfall, everyone was ready to go in advance of the debate on the new ISIS mission that would happen after QP. Rona Ambrose had her mini-lectern ready to go, and she read a question about how the PM could possibly withdraw our CF-18s from the fight against ISIS. Justin Trudeau noted that one opposition party wanted them to do more and the other wanted them to do it less, and they had a comprehensive plan. Ambrose accused him of stepping back against the fight against terror, to which Trudeau assured her that our allies were happy with our stepping up our efforts. Ambrose accused Trudeau of picking and choosing Canadian values, to which Trudeau reminded her about what people voted for. Ambrose then accused the government of burning through the surplus her government left — eliciting laughs from the government benches — and wondered how much deficit they would pile on. Trudeau reminded her that they actually left a deficit, and they were committed to delivering growth. Ambrose lamented job losses, to which Trudeau again noted committing to growth. Thomas Mulcair was up next, and blasted the government for not preventing job losses at Bombardier. Trudeau insisted that they would grow the economy in responsible ways. Mulcair demanded again in English, and Trudeau repeated his answer with an added lament about shouting about problems. Mulcair then changed topics and demanded to know if the new mission was a combat mission. Trudeau said that they were doing what was most effective. Mulcair gave another go, and got pretty much the same answer.

Round two, and James Bezan accused us of giving up the fight when ISIS was on the run (Sajjan: It won’t be won with one capability but by local forces on the ground), Tony Clement pushed the issue from the coalition angle (Dion: Our allies are in favour of the additional resources we’re adding), and then asked about efforts to release a pastor from North Korea (Alghabra: We are engaged on this file), Peter Kent lamented the Palestinian Authority inciting attacks against Israelis (Dion: The government has strict criteria for which groups we give assistance to) and concern trolled about the normalizing of relations with Iran (Dion: We’re still standing up for Israel and we will never have normal relations with Iran). Tracey Ramsay decried the TPP (Freeland: We are consulting as we promised, and we will have a full debate before possible ratification), and Ruth Ellen Brosseau gave the French lament with added concern for the dairy sector (Freeland: You are opposed without even consulting). Lisa Raitt lamented deficits (Morneau: We have measures to grow the economy), and Gerard Deltell asked the same again in French (Morneau: We have started work on growing the economy). Linda Duncan and Matthew Dubé asked about rail disasters related to fatigue (Garneau: We are actively looking into a fatigue issue with CP).

Round three saw questions on pipeline projects, human trafficking, the police officers recruitment fund, demands to let the Toronto Island airport in order to help Bombardier, equalization changes for Alberta and Saskatchewan, seniors poverty, drugged driving, and the signing of the Paris Accord on Earth Day (Trudeau: We will attend, and I’m meeting premiers on March 3rd).

Overall, it wasn’t a terribly edifying day, but it wasn’t a terrible one either. We still saw way too many repetitive questions, and the attempts to try and score points in advance of the debate on the ISIS mission was a bit specious considering that we know that both opposition leaders had their speeches already typed out, so it wouldn’t matter what answers Trudeau gave because it was too late to change them if he told them something new – not that he did. Also, the interminable pipeline questions landed with a dull thud today. I fail to see why the Conservatives think that they can score points trying to rail about human rights abuses related to oil coming from Saudi Arabia considering how they went ahead with that LAV contract with no apparent regard for said human rights. But I supposed that a little logical consistency is too much to ask for.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Michelle Rempel for a grey dress with a black windowpane pattern, and to Michael Chong for a charcoal suit with a white shirt with a purple grid pattern and a purple tie. Style citations go out to Pat Kelley for a medium grey suit with butterscotch shirt and brownish tie, and to Niki Ashton for a dark yellow jacket with a leopard print top and a camel skirt. Dishonourable mentions go out to Diane Watts for a lemon yellow top with a black jacket and trousers, and to Ginette Petitpas Taylor for a bile yellow jacket with a black turtleneck and trousers.