The b-team was out a little early today, as both Justin Trudeau and Rona Ambrose jetted off to Israel for the funeral of Shimon Peres, and Thomas Mulcair decided he had better things to do. Candice Bergen led off, mini-lectern on desk, conspiracy theorizing at the attendance of Dominic LeBlanc at an event in Toronto hosted by a law firm that does lobbying for the Irvings. LeBlanc stood up to tell the House that he was there to promote the Atlantic Growth Strategy. Bergen noted that he was the lead on litigation strategy for the government and that it was a conflict, but LeBlanc insisted that he cleared it in writing with the Ethics Commissioner. Bergen decried his lack of judgment, but LeBlanc continued to rebuff the allegation. Alain Rayes was up next, and decried the health negotiations with provinces and the possibility of strings being attached, and Jane Philpott noted that the health transfers were going up, and they went one more round of the same. Don Davies led off for the NDP, decrying the healthcare escalator (referring to them as “cuts” when the transfer continues to go up), and Philpott reminded that there is no cut. Davies went a second round, got the same answer, and then Brigitte Sansoucy took over in French on the very same topic. Philpott repeated her answers in English, reminding the NDP that they promised a balanced budget which they wouldn’t have been able to achieve without cuts, and then one more round again of the same.

Round two, and Blaine Calkins, Ben Lobb, Alex Nuttall and Pierre Paul-Hus returned to LeBlanc attending that event (LeBlanc: Your insinuations are fabrications). Linda Duncan decried GHG targets (McKenna: Look at the progress we’re making), and Matthew Dubé demanded the repeal of the ministerial directive that allows information used being obtained by torture (Picard: The directives are being reviewed). Karen Vecchio and Jacques Gourde went back to moving expenses (Chagger: Here’s the same answer as before). Karine Trudel decried the Liberals voting against their anti-scab bill (Mihychuk: Collective bargaining works), and Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet demanded more funds for social housing (Duclos: We are announcing new funds).

WHY ARE YOU REITERATING THE TALE IN THE PREAMBLE? You're not adding to the question, just repeating what's already been said. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) September 29, 2016

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/781562735238713345

Vecchio alleges that Telford and Butts were "bank robbers."#sigh #QP

— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) September 29, 2016

Round three saw questions on tax increases, infrastructure approvals, the length of elections, abandoned vessels, softwood lumber, veteran disability pensions, LeBlanc attending that event, and healthcare transfers.

Demanding support for your private member's bill IS NOT holding the government to account. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) September 29, 2016

Overall, it was a really repetitive and tiresome day. I can understand that the Conservatives think they had something scandalous to go with, but when it turns out that they didn’t, that LeBlanc had cleared it with the Ethics Commissioner, and that no, it’s not really a conflict of interest because there are no actual financial transactions taking place or decisions being made – this was simply a speech at an annual event – then they should be able to pivot to another issue. They not only didn’t, returning to the overplayed issue of moving expenses but their only questions of substance were backloaded to the very end, which just makes the day all the more tiresome. That each new person who stood up to ask about the same issue would restart the whole tale with another long preamble was boring, repetitive, and added nothing – and no, I don’t care that they want to put the YouTube clip on their website. It drags down all of QP and really makes it look like amateur hour, and most of these MPs should know better. (And seriously – learn the meaning of “conflict of interest” because you’re going to look foolish if you spend half of QP banging on a non-issue). Meanwhile, Bardish Chagger was back at it today with her same tired lines, and when she has to preface them with “In case you didn’t hear them before,” then it’s time to get new lines, particularly ones that are helpful and will actually shut down the questions being asked about things like personalized cash payments in the context of those expenses. Do better. It’s alway possible. Oh, and hey NDP – stop demanding answers on your private members’ bills. Your job in QP is to hold the government to account, and your PMBs are not the administrative responsibility of the government. It’s the exact opposite, so stop it.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Andrew Leslie for a grey-blue suit with a crisp white shirt and a blue tie, and to MaryAnne Mihychuk for a black traditional Ukrainian shirt with white embroidery with a black jacket and slacks. Style citations go out to Rachael Harder for a pink and purple floral printed top with a black skirt, and to Larry Maguire for a grey checked suit with a dull pink shirt and a brownish scale-patterned tie with pink and blue stripes.