QP: Here’s how your riding benefitted!

Posted on by

A rainy Wednesday in Ottawa, and all of the leaders were once again in the Commons, awaiting QP — three days in a row! It’s been a long time since that happened. Andrew Scheer led off, mini-lectern on desk, reading a stilted condemnation of Bill Morneau. Justin Trudeau reminded him that they have an Ethics Commissioner to protect the integrity of the institutions. Scheer insisted that it only works when they disclose, as the villa was not (not entirely true — the villa was disclosed but not the ownership structure), and Trudeau reiterated that they have confidence in the Commissioner. Scheer tried to press on when he learned about the villa’s ownership corporation, and Trudeau reminded him that they have a habit of attacking officers of parliament. Scheer accused the government of “hiding” things from the Commissioner — not really true — and then demanded to know if the Ethics Commissioner was advised of Morneau’s recusals, and Trudeau offered the lecture on the importance of opposition and why it was important to have a Commissioner that was above that. Scheer demanded to know if the Commissioner was advised before Bill C-27 was tabled, and Trudeau reiterated that they work with the Commissioner constantly. Guy Caron was up next, leading for the NDP, and read out statements that Trudeau made about leadership and accountability during the Harper era, and accused him of not living up to his word. Trudeau insisted that he has raised the bar with openness and transparency, and after a second round for the same in French, Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet repeated much the same question in French. Trudeau reminded the House about their move for proactive disclosure that the NDP balked at. Boutin-Sweet repeated the question in English, and got much the same reply.

Round two, and Alain Rayes, Lisa Raitt, and Pierre Poilievre returned to the demands to know when the PM knew about Morneau’s villa ownership disclosure (Trudeau: While you’re launching unfounded accusations, here’s how much children in your riding got from the Canada Child Benefit). Karine Trudel and Scott Duvall demanded that the government drop Bill C-27 (Trudeau: We are lowering small business taxes and we’re helping retirees with boosted benefits). Michelle Rempel tried to resurrect the Bill C-27 conspiracy theory (Trudeau: Our economic plan worked), and John Brassard railed about Morneau “breaking the law” over his villa ownership disclosure (Trudeau: We have a Commissioner who is above partisanship; here’s how much better off kids in your riding are). Anne Quach and Rachel Blaney again demanded the withdrawal of Bill C-27 (Trudeau: Here is how we have helped retirees; Here’s how children in your riding are benefitting).

Round three saw questions on the disability tax credit (Trudeau: We are moving forward with our accessibility legislation, and we gave more tax credits last year than any previous), more demands for withdrawing Bill C-27, infrastructure projects going ahead abroad while they are behind in Canada (Trudeau: We are investing in infrastructure like we promised), the privacy centre of a new data centre being built in Toronto (Trudeau: We are working to ensure that Canadians control Canadian data), Kent Hehr’s use of resources in a municipal election (Trudeau: We will continue to demonstrate that we are worthy of Canadians’ trust), Phoenix pay issues (Trudeau: We are working on capacity), and Nunavut’s ability to raise own-source revenues (Trudeau: We believe in collaboration, and are committed to working with the new territorial government on a new Arctic strategy).

Overall, one is forced to wonder how much longer the current Conservative tactics of asking the same questions, 15-20 times a day, every day, can really last, given that the Liberals are getting inventive in coming up with ways to change the channel, be it by reciting numbered companies back at Conservatives, or saying how much Canada Child Benefit money flowed to a riding, because it beats giving the same response time after time. It doesn’t matter how much more outlandish the questions get — and today, there was some pretty notable conflation of facts in there, particularly around the $200 fine that Morneau paid for filing to disclose the villa’s ownership structure on time (and yes, once again, the villa had been declared). A number of questions asserted that such a fine was in relation to conflicts of interest, which the villa’s ownership was not. But hey, why bother with facts when you can rely on innuendo and Parliamentary privilege? And so this stretch of terrible QPs continues.

https://twitter.com/aaronwherry/status/925793316452618240

https://twitter.com/aaronwherry/status/925794825785565184

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Lisa Raitt for a navy collarless jacket with a black v-neck top and slacks, and to Navdeep Bains for a black suit with a white shirt and orange turban and tie. Style citations go out to Blaine Calkins for a blue-grey jacket, khakis and a white shirt with no tie, and to Michelle Rempel (a rare citation to be sure) for a red dress with loud black and purple florals. Special mention goes out to Neil Ellis for a dark grey suit with a white shirt and a green tie with sparkles (and gods help me, I want to refer to it as his Neil Diamond tie).

One thought on “QP: Here’s how your riding benefitted!”

  1. Delacourt and Maher on ctvpp tonight said that the shark had been jumped on this topic, so watch for a toxic Fife piece in G&M tomorrow.
    You’re welcome.

Comments are closed.