QP: Private data and by-election concerns

Posted on by

While the prime minister was present for Question Period today, Andrew Scheer was elsewhere, leaving it up to Candice Bergen to lead off, and she read a statement of condolence for the shooting in Pittsburgh, and asked the PM about what is being done to combat anti-semitism in Canada. Trudeau read a statement of condolence of his own, and offered whatever assistance was required. From there, Bergen asked the story about StatsCan requesting personal banking information, to which Trudeau read that anonymised data would be used for statistical purposes only, and that they were working with the Privacy Commissioner to get it right. Bergen demanded the “intrusion” he stopped, and this time, Trudeau dropped the script to say that Canadians expected agencies to work with the Privacy Commissioner, before he took a swipe at the Conservatives for killing the long-form census. Alain Rayes took over in French to read the same thing, but insinuated that this was the Liberals getting the data. Trudeau read the French version of his script, and when Rayes tried a second time, Trudeau accused them of trying to create fear, and accused them of attacking data and information. Guy Caron led off for the NDP, worrying about the rise in extremism, and Trudeau read his statement of condolence again. Caron then worried about only one by-election being called while there are other vacant findings, and Trudeau read that he was proud to call the by-election he did, and would call the others in due course. Peter Julian repeated the question with added invective, and Trudeau reiterated, sans script, that they were only vacated a few weeks ago and would be called in due course. Julien tried a second time, railing about all the issues that these voters should weigh in on, saying Trudeau was afraid of them, and Trudeau hit back by noting that if someone wanted to get technical, voters elected representatives to sit for four years in those ridings and they left early.

Round two, and Ed Fast and Pierre Poilievre worried about carbon taxes (Fraser: We have a plan, you don’t; There is an output-based pricing system). Cheryl Hardcastle and Hélène Laverdière worried about the LAV sales to Saudi Arabia (Goldsmith-Jones: We are reviewing the existing permits and are putting a more robust process in place). Ted Falk, Larry Miller, Cathy McLeod, and Leona Alleslev demanded carbon taxes to individual ridings in their ridings (Fraser: We are moving forward with our plan to ensure that pollution isn’t free, and giving rebates to families; MacAulay: Farmers are responsible stewards of the land, and have additional relief for them). Brian Masse and Scoff Duvall worried about steel and aluminium tariffs (Bains: We are defending our industries, with $2 billion in support).

Round three saw questions on James Cudmore as regards the Mark Norman trial (Goodale: These questions are inappropriate), child poverty (Duclos: We have put into place the most significant policy innovation in place, being the CCB, and have a poverty reduction strategy), irregular border crossers (Schiefke: We have increased resources to speed processing and have reduced the numbers coming across the border), the oil sector (Lametti: Bill C-69 will lead to better and more timely reviews), media sector jobs (Rodriguez: We are working hard on this priority), building another naval supply ship (Sajjan: A second interim supply ship is not required at this time), provincial reimbursement for irregular border crossers (Schiefke: We are working with the provinces), and Calgary’s bid for the Olympic Games (Duncan: We must respect the federal hosting policy of dollar-for-dollar matching funds). 

Overall, it was something of a relief to get a different set of questions today than just the focus on the Mark Norman trial, though we didn’t get away from those entirely. I will say that it was almost a change of pace for Trudeau to have some kind of response to the StatsCan issue on the first day that it was raised, rather than just offering pabulum and waiting another 24 hours for a better response, so minor improvements there, bot that his answer was terribly satisfactory. I will also note that Pierre Poilievre continued his Matlock routine, behaving like he got some kind of witness box confession when it comes to carbon taxes, and then taking the answers he gets and spinning them beyond all recognition. To be clear, he continues to be completely disingenuous with the line of questioning, and parliamentary secretary Sean Fraser did push back against the dishonest questions more than the minister does, but possibly not forcibly enough. I was also curious by the decision to put Peter Schiefke up to respond to irregular border-crossing questions as opposed to Ahmed Hussen, who was in the Chamber (Bill Blair was not). Why not have the minister answer? It didn’t make much sense to me.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Raj Grewal for a tailored dark grey three-piece suit with a white shirt and pocket square, light blue tie and navy turban, and to Linda Lapointe for a blue dress with black patterning along with a black jacket. Style citations go out to Melanie Joly for a black dress in a peasant-ish cut with copious florals and green trim, and to René Arseneault for a taupe suit and tie with a light blue shirt.