Yesterday after QP, NDP trade critic Tracey Ramsey raised a question of privilege in the Commons, claiming that the tabling of CETA implementing legislation was contrary to the rules, not only because it didn’t follow the 2008 departmental policy on tabling treaties which lays out that 21 sitting days be given before introducing any such bills, and because it didn’t contain any explanatory memorandum.

They key phrase to remember in there is that it’s a departmental policy and not a standing order or other rule of the House of Commons, which means that this point of privilege is pretty much doomed to fail – and this was pretty much Bardish Chagger’s brief submission to the Speaker in advance of a more robust response to come at a later date. I would add that while Ramsey says that it’s unfair that Parliamentarians have to digest all 1700 pages of the treaty on their own without these explanatory memoranda, it’s not like these details have been in the dark. The text of the agreement has largely been available for a year now at least, which is a lot of time for the parties to do their research on the agreement, and yes, this is why they have research budgets and staff who can assist with these sorts of things. And it also sounds a bit like the opposition is complaining that the government isn’t doing their homework for them. Maybe I’m wrong, but that would certainly fit with the trend that has developed across the board in the House of Commons – that MPs expect everyone else to do that homework on their behalf, whether it’s the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the Auditor General, or any other Officer of Parliament.

I would also add that many of the changes that the Conservatives made policy-wise to things like treaties and military deployments were done under the illusion of giving the House of Commons a greater role to play when many of these matters are actually Crown prerogatives that they were looking for political cover in exercising, or in partisan gamesmanship designed to divide the opposition. I’m not sure how much this particular 2008 policy is a reflection of that Conservative mindset, but if the way the government went about this was a more traditional exercise of prerogative powers, then that’s all the more reason for them to do so, rather than to continue to indulge some of the bad habits that the Conservatives put in for their own purposes.

Good reads:

• The Federal Court smacked down CSIS for illegally storing metadata after they were supposed to destroy it, and for not telling the court about it earlier.
• Justin Trudeau also said that he got assurances from CSIS and the RCMP that they are not currently targeting any journalists for surveillance like in Quebec.
• Trudeau says he’s open to fundraising rules changes, but also pointed to the way the Conservatives just appointed fundraisers to the Senate and set them loose.
• Marc Garneau announced that the government would be opening up foreign ownership rules for airlines, and bringing in a passenger bill of rights.
• Coastal protection plans could mean that the Kinder Morgan pipeline is the only one reaching the West Coast.
• Shared Services Canada is a complete gong show, but its executives still get performance bonuses.
• The Auditor General says his look into the Phoenix pay system debacle won’t be complete until 2018.
• Non-aligned senator Francis Lankin hit back at the Conservative senators calling the new appointees Liberals in sheep’s clothing.
• The Canadian Press’ Baloney Meter™ weighs in on the Conservatives’ claim that Canadians are doing worse than a year ago.
• Lisa Raitt formally launched her campaign yesterday and wants to focus more on economic issues, and not identity politics.
• Peter MacKay says that he’s not endorsing anyone’s campaign, but also warned against the identity politics “swamp.”

Odds and ends:

The federal government approved another loan guarantee for the Muskrat Falls project, blaming Conservative mismanagement. Expect apoplexy from the Bloc.