The government unveiled their planned next steps in income supports for the economic recovery yesterday, starting with an additional month of CERB, after which they will start transitioning people to EI (with relaxed criteria) as well as a new system of support benefits for those who don’t normally qualify for EI, as well as sick benefits. I’m given to understand that part of why they are being transitioned away from CERB has to do with flexibility – the EI computers are more able to handle the ability to allow benefits to flow while a person is still getting incomes than the CRA’s system does, and that is one of the things that are being rolled out here, so that people don’t lose benefits the moment they reach an arbitrary threshold. (More from economist Jennifer Robson in this thread).

Something that came up repeatedly over the day (particularly on certain politics shows), however, was the notion that while the legislative portions of these changes would need to happen fast when Parliament is recalled, that nothing could happen until after a confidence vote on the Speech from the Throne. This is false. Once the Speech has been read by the Governor General, the government can start introducing and debating other bills. They don’t have to simply debate the Reply to the Speech, and they don’t have to have an immediate confidence vote. In fact, they don’t need to have one at all, given that there are other confidence votes coming up in the Supply Cycle. Yes, Trudeau did promise a confidence vote, in what appears to be a dare to the opposition, but that’s not the point here – the point is that they can introduce these measures in Bill C-2, and swiftly pass them before Trudeau has that confidence vote. All of the pearl-clutching that I’m seeing is completely for naught, because people don’t pay attention to process or procedure (and I’m sure a few of them are trying to create an artificial sense of drama).

https://twitter.com/SkinnerLyle/status/1296556887761129476

Meanwhile, a certain senator is grousing that transitioning people to EI is going to be too complicated, so he wants the provinces to start basic income pilots, and I can’t even. Economist Lindsay Tedds has been working on this issue for a long time and has stated that we don’t need more pilots – governments need to simply design programmes that meet their objectives, but it seems that said Senator hasn’t been listening when she’s told him that directly.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1296646779639746560

Good reads:

• WE Charity provided some context to the calls to Bill Morneau in that document dump, saying they were about talking about a second wave and not the CSSG.
• The government has spent $37 million on hotels to quarantine returning Canadians who couldn’t self-isolate at home (and if get parsimonious on this I will scream).
• The federal and Ontario governments are investing in 3M’s ability to start producing N95 masks in Canada, so that we won’t be vulnerable to American protectionism.
• American border officials are putting up a cable barrier across part of the Washington/BC border, citing narcotics smugglers.
• Kim Campbell has come to the defence of Chrystia Freeland’s resumé amidst sexist attacks on her qualifications to be finance minister.
• Word out of the Liberal caucus room seems to be that they are pleased with Morneau’s ouster and Freeland replacing him, because she can communicate.
• Law professor Martin Olszynski explodes the notion that Alberta has a “robust regulatory system” for dealing with its oil and gas sector.
• Heather Scoffield looks at Chrystia Freeland’s first steps as minister with the income support package announced today, and where it needs to go.

Odds and ends:

In a bit of satire, Jason Markusoff lambastes the interchangeability of Peter MacKay and Erin O’Toole on the eve of the Conservative leadership decision.

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