Roundup: Mandate letter madness

Posted on by

Yesterday was the big day that the mandate letters for the new cabinet minister were finally released, and the Cabinet committees got a bit shake-up. You can get an overview of the letters here, and some deeper analysis on what’s being asked of Jim Carr in international trade, Dominic LeBlanc in intergovernmental affairs, and Jonathan Wilkinson in fisheries. Reading through the letters, however, I found that almost all of the new letters – either with established ministries or with the new ones that they are establishing – were all giving them specific direction on which other ministers they should be working with to achieve specific goals. Very few of them were goals that they were to pursue on their own, which I find to be very curious from a governance perspective.

The big question mark remains around Bill Blair and just what he’s supposed to do as Minister of Looking Tough on Stuff – err, “border security and organized crime reduction.” We got no insight as to whether he has any actual operational control over a department or an agency like CBSA. Rather, his list of goals included looking at a ban on handguns and assault rifles as part of the existing Bill C-71, and that as part of his duties in relation to the border, he should have discussions with the Americans about the Safe Third Country agreement, but it was all rather vague. (There was also some talk about opioid smuggling as part of his border security duties, for what it’s worth). Nevertheless, it was another one of those letters that was focused on which other ministers he’s supposed to be working with as opposed to providing oversight of a ministry, which I find weird and a bit unsettling as to what this means for how the machinery of government works under Trudeau.

Meanwhile, the number of Cabinet committees was reduced, and some of the files that certain of these committees were overseeing got shuffled around. We’ll see how this affects governance, but it’s all a peek into the sausage-making of governance (which, it bears reminding, that the Ford government in Ontario refuses to give any insight into as he refuses to release his own ministers’ mandate letters).

Good reads:

  • Chrystia Freeland was in Washington yesterday for “constructive” NAFTA talks. Trilateral talks are expected to resume today, and it’s likely to focus a lot on dairy.
  • Here’s a look at how Trump’s threats around NAFTA may be empty ones.
  • An expert panel is calling on the government to create a fund to help calm investors worried about the risk of social finance schemes.
  • The company behind the recently approved roadside drug testing devices defends against the criticisms levelled at them.
  • Here’s a look into the issue of birth tourism, which is statistically insignificant in Canada and could impact on refugees and those waiting for permanent residence.
  • A $5.6 million fund to help women in Afghanistan participate in civic institutions has been criticized for being poorly designed and not helping many women.
  • Here’s some context from Dr. Lindsay Tedds about those figures showing a decline in income from high income earners.
  • The Ethics Commissioner fined the Information Commissioner for not disclosing a change to her assets.
  • The National Post obtained a copy of that stolen/forgotten Dairy Farmers briefing binder obtained at the CPC convention, and put it online.
  • Conservative party lawyers are warning Maxime Bernier against using membership lists from his leadership. He says his database comes from his own website.
  • Alberta NDP MP Linda Duncan has also opted not to run again next year. So many retirements have Conservatives worried (because they want a strong NDP).
  • Colby Cosh takes the Dairy Farmers to task for their briefing binder, and Andrew Scheer’s craven behaviour in his being beholden to them.
  • David Reevely demonstrates how the court ruling against the Ford government’s treatment of Tesla is an object lesson in why you can’t govern through bullshit.
  • My column looks at accusation of just who is being divisive, and how that will become a dominant theme leading up to the next election.

Odds and ends:

Here’s some context around Sir John A. Macdonald’s policies regarding Indigenous peoples (but this focuses solely on those in the prairies, which is an issue).

Help Routine Proceedings expand. Support my Patreon.