Roundup: Chong didn’t explain how his privileges were breached

Posted on by

Conservative MP Michael Chong appeared at the Procedure and House Affairs committee yesterday to discuss the sense that his privileges as an MP—being able to do his job—were breached by Beijing’s threats to him and his family. And so, Chong gave a speech at the committee where he touched briefly on the privilege issue, saying that he wants a formal parliamentary censure of the Chinese diplomat named (and since expelled) in the situation, before going on to whole thing about the prime minister, national security, and what we should be doing in Canada. And he’s not wrong! But that’s not the point of this committee meeting. The point was to discuss his privileges being breached, and what MPs should do about said breach.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1658610455739346944

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1658615915540279297

As expected, the Conservatives on the committee mostly spent the time trying to get Chong to denounce the prime minister, and did they talk about his privileges being breached? Nope. The other thing that bothered me was that Chong kept bringing up the Winnipeg Lab issue, which is where I have lost a lot of respect for him because he has been building a bullshit conspiracy theory around it. What happened at that Lab has been extensively reported on by Dylan Robertson and others. There was no indication that there was a national security issue involving China at all, but rather a policy breach around intellectual property with the two fired scientists. Chong would know this if the Conservatives had allowed NSICOP to view the redacted documents that had been provided to them, but they have steadfastly refused to do so because it serves their narratives not to. Is NSICOP perfect? No, but it’s a very good start, and if we want to transition it to a parliamentary model, there need to be a whole lot more steps than just Parliament making a declaration (one of the most important considerations being the lack of secure meeting spaces and servers on the Hill).

So while there were interesting things raised, the point of the meeting was about privileges, and once again, a committee is being abused to go on a tangent or a fishing expedition. Committees have functions, and this one was supposed to be determining how his ability to do his job was impacted. I didn’t see really any of that in the testimony, which is all the more frustrating.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Overnight attacks against Kyiv saw 18 missiles launched, all of which were shot down—but Ukrainian forces are saying that six of those missiles were hypersonic, and that their new air defences brought them down too, which is proving the new Western systems against the supposed best of what Russia has to offer. One of the Patriot missile systems used by Ukraine may have been damaged in a strike, however. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces appear to be making more gains around Bakhmut, which they say is not connected to the upcoming counter-offensive. Elsewhere, Ukraine’s chief of the Supreme Court has been dismissed after being detained in a bribery case.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1658379904029736960

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1658351720232108034

Good reads:

  • While in South Korea, Justin Trudeau and François-Philippe Champagne will try to salvage the Stellantis/LG deal for the battery plant, but also want Ontario to pay up.
  • Mélanie Joly is also on the South Korea trip, vying to be the “best of friends” with that nation as part of the Indo-Pacific Strategy.
  • The bill to make targeted bail reforms has been tabled, and it mostly creates a reverse onus on a select few offences (because the problem is really provincial).
  • Marco Mendicino has now given formal directions to CSIS about passing along intelligence related to threats against parliamentarians or their families.
  • Omar Alghabra was in Washington to sign a deal about creating a network of charging stations along the corridor from Quebec City to Kalamazoo.
  • Joyce Murray is launching a task force to clarify regulations around potential tidal power projects in the Bay of Fundy.
  • The government announced that the task force monitoring elections for foreign interference will be active during the coming by-elections.
  • The Royal Canadian Navy is launching the “Naval Experience Programme” to give people a taste of life in the ranks, in order to help bolster recruitment.
  • There is another attempt to shut down Line 5 in Wisconsin because spring flooding could expose parts of the line and potentially make it more susceptible to rupture.
  • The Senate foreign affairs committee is calling on the government to upgrade its sanctions regime, so that it can actually do what it’s supposed to.
  • Chrystia Freeland appeared at the Finance committee and after acrimony about the length of her appearance, there were some concessions made.
  • The Commons immigration committee wants exceptions to the revised Safe Third Country Agreement to allow asylum claims on gender-based violence through.
  • New Brunswick’s Youth Advocate is denouncing the government’s plans to review its policies to LGBTQ+ students (as Blaine Higgs made homophobic comments).
  • The Quebec government will not appeal the $385,000 judgment given to Jean Charest for the leaks around anti-corruption investigations.
  • Scott Moe is thumbing his nose at federal clean electricity rules, and is basing his future Net-Zero plans on carbon capture that has not proven itself.
  • Andrew Coyne thinks an inherent contrarianism is driving conservatives to derangement. (I disagree—it’s a need to “own the libs” no matter the cost).
  • My column takes issue with NDP MP Daniel Blaikie’s motion to try and limit prorogation and confidence vote powers as a stupid move that will do more harm.

Odds and ends:

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

One thought on “Roundup: Chong didn’t explain how his privileges were breached”

  1. At no time has Chong said that either he or his family was threatened . Not in person, not over the telephone, not in written form and not electronically. he also says that no threats were communicated to him by anybody.

    If there were no threats, what’s this all about.

Comments are closed.