Roundup: The PBO immolates his credibility

Posted on by

In their need to constantly frame issues as both-sides, The Canadian Press inadvertently downplayed the severity of what happened with the notice that the Parliamentary Budget Officer quietly put on his website to say that they got some of their analysis on the federal carbon levy wrong. The CP story focused it on a Liberal MP writing the PBO to get him to broadcast the correction, rather than framing the story as the PBO made an error, and giving the briefest of mentions to the MP and his open letter, because that letter shouldn’t have been the story.

The story, as it turns out, is not only that the PBO made the mistake in his analysis, it’s that he is steadfastly refusing to take any responsibility for it, never mind that this particular report has been politically charged and is at the centre of much of the debate over the carbon levy. Putting aside that the report itself was not very well done (the distributional analysis was undermined by his insistence on including average figures and that the calculation on the impact of the price were done in the absence of any kind of counterfactual, and in a binary price/no price way that is in itself inherently misleading, the fact that the PBO didn’t advertise that there was a problem with the report, didn’t include any kind of correction (he’s planning a fully re-done report in the fall), and he’s saying thing that don’t logically follow, such as it’s too complex to recalculate like this…but the outcome from the error is unlikely to change the outcome of that portion of the report (this being the impact on the broader economy, which the Conservatives misleadingly cherry-pick to “prove” households are worse off). So, in addition to refusing to take responsibility, he won’t pick a lane.

But it gets worse. Yves Giroux went on Power & Politics to discuss this incident, and immolated his credibility as he not only continued to refuse to take any responsibility, but tried to prevaricate, and make excuses with a wall of bafflegab, but he also started arguing that his “small office” shouldn’t be responsible for the climate-related economic modelling that MPs are demanding, that the government should be doing it, but his one job is literally doing this kind of analysis to provide an independent analysis from the government’s. Of course, Giroux has always had a problem sticking within the bounds of his legislated mandate, and has preferred to act like a talking head pundit and opining on all kinds of things the government is doing, while still insisting that he’s independent and hence more credible than the government as a result. And I’m not too surprised that Giroux is trying to avoid taking any responsibility, being that he is a career civil servant for whom responsibility is something to be avoided, but in refusing to do so, he has tainted his office. There can’t be trust about his numbers going forward, and as was pointed out, especially if he’s going to be costing election platform promises (which he’s done a pretty shite job of so far, such as sticking his letterhead on Andrew Scheer’s handwaving), but that was something the PBO never should have done in the first place. This should be a resignation-worthy offence, but so should it have been when he decided he wanted to be a television pundit. But we’ll see if he can finally accept responsibility and do the right thing here and step down.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Four people were injured in a Russian missile attack on Kharkiv early Thursday morning. NATO’s secretary general is proposing a way to help Trump-proof military aid for Ukraine, but there will be obstacles that include Hungary’s objections. Reuters has a lengthy look at the front lines in Donetsk.

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau says he will be attending the G7 summit in Italy, followed by the Ukraine peace conference in Switzerland in mid-June.
  • At the CANSEC defence trade show, Bill Blair announced billions in new training and equipment purchases for the Canadian Forces.
  • Arif Virani says the online harms bill provides better avenues for web providers to shield children from graphic material online than the age verification bill does.
  • Mark Holland is defending the need for ministerial powers to pull products off shelves, citing the advent of nicotine pouches as an example of loopholes to close.
  • The federal government offered new guidance on Access to Information documents, including on historical ones, but won’t legislate changes until next year’s review.
  • Canada Post may be bleeding money, but they insist they won’t end daily delivery.
  • Why yes, there is an underlying current to the attacks on Speakers in Ottawa and Saskatchewan, and it is to undermine independent offices.
  • Liberal MP Julie Dzerowicz is speaking out after her office was vandalised by pro-Palestinian protesters, and not for the first time.
  • Pierre Poilievre’s housing bill was defeated at second reading.
  • Poilievre produced a video claiming that thousands of Canadians are “fleeing” to Nicaragua for cheap housing. (People are dubious).
  • Here is the story of the famous football fumble photograph that cost former PC leader Robert Stanfield the 1974 federal election.
  • It turns out that the former Saskatchewan Government House Leader’s gun incident in the legislature was worse than he claimed, and that he didn’t inform security.
  • Kevin Carmichael points out that the government is finally fixing the flaw in the Canada Learning Bond that Paul Martin introduced nearly twenty years ago.
  • Colby Cosh reminds us that parliamentary privilege is fairly inviolable and that Ontario MPP Sarah Jama’s lawyers went ahead with a doomed case regardless.

Odds and ends:

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