Supply day motions – also known as opposition day motions – can be tricky business, and unless the opposition party that moves it isn’t careful, they can wind up giving the government a free pass on supporting said motions without fear of consequence. Never mind that the point of supply day motions is to debate why the government should be denied supply (and hence confidence), these have largely turned into take-note debates on topics of the opposition’s choosing. These free pass motions happened with surprising regularity in the previous parliament, with the NDP frequently offering up mom-and-apple-pie motions that the Conservatives would obviously support the intent of, despite never having the intention to follow through with substantive action on, because hey, the motions are non-binding, and why not look like they support the idea of the motion? And lo and behold, the Conservatives offered up just such a motion around the Supreme Court of Canada, imploring the government to “respect the custom of regional representation” when making appointments to that court, “in particular, when replacing the retiring Justice Thomas Cromwell, who is Atlantic Canada’s representative on the Supreme Court.” While I will quibble with their use of “custom” as opposed to “constitutional convention” (which it really is at this point), this was one of those motions worded just loosely enough that the government could vote for it (and it did pass unanimously, as these kinds of motions often do), and should they go ahead and appoint a non-Atlantic justice to the court, they have room enough to turn around and give some kind of a nonsense excuse like “Oh, we felt that such-and-such diversity requirement was more needed at this point,” or “we felt that the Atlantic nominees were insufficiently bilingual,” or what have you. Or, as the talking points have been turning to, they will point to the number of Atlantic nominees on the short-list and said that they got equal opportunity and were not prejudiced against or some such, and make the merit argument. Suffice to say, there is more than enough wiggle room, and for a party that was so recently in government, the Conservative should have known better than to word a motion in a way that the government can support and later wiggle out of. This having been said, the government has been under enormous political pressure from the premiers regarding this Atlantic seat, so it is not inconceivable that this as a step in walking back from having the nominations being too open, but that remains to be seen.
Good reads:
- On the royal tour, Will and Kate are off to Whitehorse to give local Indigenous children books in their threatened local language.
- Here’s a look at how those royal photo-ops are targeted for maximum impact for the places that they visit.
- The government has given conditional approval to the Pacific Northwest LNG project in BC.
- The Chief Electoral Officer suggested improvements from lessons learned in 2015, and said changing the system should take more than just a parliamentary majority.
- The Privacy Commissioner said that there was inadequate consultation on the impact on rights for the implementation of C-51.
- Jane Philpott said new health accords need to be more than just the federal government opening its wallet, and said legislation to regulate vaping is coming.
- PMO denies that Butts and Telford were properly briefed on moving costs, McCallum said items were entered incorrectly, and Giorno and Trost sniped in the open.
- Senator Patrick Brazeau is back in the Senate chamber three-and-a-half years after his suspension.
- Andrew Scheer will formally announce his leadership candidacy today.
- Former Privacy Commissioner Chantal Bernier says the government hasn’t proven their case yet with powers embedded in C-51.
- Susan Delacourt sees commonalities between Trudeau and Donald Trump. (No, really).
- My Loonie Politics column delves into why regional caucuses in the Senate are a poor choice.
Odds and ends:
Kady O’Malley takes note of the leadership changes among the Senate Liberals.
Liberal MP Celina Caesar-Chavannes spoke more about her battle with depression.
Colleague points out @guygiorno responded to my @BradTrostCPC story on Facebook (what's with all these FB replies?) pic.twitter.com/xJY05tDsSm
— Laura Stone (@l_stone) September 27, 2016
PMs don't approve individual relocation expenses. Once they decide someone is covered by the program, the program criteria apply
— Guy W. Giorno (@guygiorno) September 24, 2016
As @BradTrostCPC has used >$1.5 million free travel and accommodation of course he doesn't understand need for relocation program
— Guy W. Giorno (@guygiorno) September 27, 2016
Relocation program is more accountable than the generous per diems (no receipts, no explanation) @BradTrostCPC claims and collects
— Guy W. Giorno (@guygiorno) September 27, 2016
https://twitter.com/kensingtonroyal/status/780946384052715521