Roundup: Which party will blink first?

Posted on by

Because it was Saturday, prime minister Justin Trudeau returned to a more casual demeanour for his daily presser – unbuttoned shirt, no tie, sweater, and blazer. There weren’t quite as many announcements today either – that they had reached an agreement with the Americans to extend the partial border shutdown for another 30 days; that there were new ads coming with famous Canadians in order to remind people to stay inside (and notably, the list was different in English than it was in French, because we have different famous people who don’t necessarily cross over); and that some $306 million was being allocated to help more Indigenous businesses who don’t normally get funding through traditional banks, so these funds would be coming through Indigenous financial institutions and administered through the National Aboriginal Capital Corporations Association (and it sounds like this had been asked for weeks prior).  As well, two more plane-loads of N95 masks had arrived, and more were on the way.

The lingering question, however, remains what sort of return to Parliament will be happening on Monday, as the Conservatives continue to press for more in-person hearings with a reduced complement of MPs, while there has been no word whether the Speaker has been able to get any kind of virtual hearings set up (which we don’t actually want, because it will be very, very bad for Parliament in the long-run, and no “surely it’s 2020” is not a good response when I say this). It seems the Conservatives want three or four in-person sittings, while the Liberals’ last known offer was one in-person sitting per week, plus a virtual one for a longer quasi-Question Period, while the NDP want a second virtual one (again, with the reminder that the Speaker hasn’t even said it’s possible, nor do we want them). And then Elizabeth May declared that she didn’t want any in-person sittings and would withhold unanimous consent on any motion that included them (but as the Greens don’t hold official party status, her consent is not required for any negotiation between parties). We’ll see what kind of deal gets struck at the last minute, and which party will blink first, but this is all a bit ridiculous.

Good reads:

  • There isn’t much news coming out about the fate of the two Michaels held in China, as they approach the 500th day of their captivity.
  • RBC admits it’s their mistake that a number of businesses who qualify for the CEBA weren’t able to access it through their services when they attempted to “streamline.”
  • An outbreak at an oilsands work camp raises fears that these workers may become “super-spreaders” as they return to families across the country.
  • Some doctors are saying there’s a “hidden” death toll from the pandemic from people being afraid to go to the hospital for other conditions, often until it’s too late.

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Which party will blink first?”

  1. Perhaps someone can provide or refer to a explanation of why virtual parliamentary sittings are a bad idea. I just cannot wrap my ahead around a blanket prohibition.

    • As I’ve written about a half-dozen times, it is both technologically unfeasible, and the risk that post-pandemic, MPs will demand to continue to meet virtually means the eventual depopulation of Parliament, which people underestimate the danger of.

Comments are closed.