Tag Archives: Auditor General

QP: More swipes before a confidence vote

Posted on by

The PM was away in Halifax, and his deputy was elsewhere, and most of the other leaders were also away. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he accused the prime minister of a litany of economic sins, and demanded he stop raising taxes and “inflationary” spending. Arif Virani said that they were proud of their record and that the Fall Economic Statement would be released on Monday, and praised that inflation as on target and that interest rates have come down. Poilievre mocked that the government wants to bury their record, and wondered if the deficit would remain under target. Jonathan Wilkinson praised the GST cut on purpose-built rentals, and that they are building more houses than ever before. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and Virani got back up, but this time praised how their childcare programme has seen one of the largest rates of female participation in the labour force. Poilievre lied about debt causing inflation (ignoring the pandemic and the global supply shock), and again asked about the deficit target. Virani cited current and former Bank of Canada governors about the current inflation spike being tamed and how Harper muted the recovery from the 2008 financial crisis by cutting too quickly. Poilievre then said that in the spirit of non-partisanship, they took Jagmeet Singh’s words and put them in a non-confidence motion, and wondered if the prime minister was going to let the NDP to vote for the motion. The Speaker warned that this stretched what was permissible under the administration of government, but Karina Gould got up to point out that it was the Conservatives who muzzled their members.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and raised concerns about religion in schools in Quebec, and demanded the federal government stop “undermining” secularism in Quebec. Jean-Yves Duclos reminded him that education was a provincial matter. Therrien insisted that multiculturalism is what is undermining the ability to live together, and Duclos noted that there is strength in diversity before returning to the reminder that education is a provincial matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP to give an anecdote of the plight of a retiree in relation to the demand to extend the $250 “rebate” cheque. Virani got back up to pat himself on the back for their other programmes for seniors, including dental care. Singh retorted that Virani didn’t answer the question, before repeating it he demand in French. Virani said that they always fight against poverty, and the data shows progress.

Continue reading →

QP: Today’s slogan of “border disorder”

Posted on by

Following all of the speculation and accusation about the dinner at Mar-a-Lago, the prime minister was finally present today, along with his deputy, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he said that regardless if you take the Trump’s threats seriously or believe them to be a negotiation tactic, he claimed Trudeau has “lost control” of everything and demanded an election. Justin Trudeau said that they had a good discussion that talked about the good work they can do together, and added a jab about voting against the tax “holiday.” Poilievre claimed that Trudeau’s “destructive” policies were a gift to Trump, and Trudeau again chided Poilievre from voting against the GST “holiday,” as well as programmes like dental care or school food. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and this time, Trudeau cautioned about taking too seriously the erroneous talking points the Americans have weaponised, and that it wasn’t responsible leadership. Poilievre said that his job was not to cover for Trudeau “breaking” things, and listed a bunch of non sequiturs, and Trudeau said that they were stepping up for Canadians, and again listed the things the Conservatives voted against. Poilievre dismissed the programmes, and railed about the carbon levy. Trudeau recited that the carbon rebates puts more money back in the pockets of eight out of ten Canadians.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he demanded a budgeted, detailed plan about the border. Trudeau said that they shared their immigration plan several weeks ago, and that they would continue to reduce the number of irregular migrants thanks to significant investments in staffing levels at the border. Blanchet said that they need a plan for the future, not the past, and listed other files he is concerned about, and wanted a Quebec representative in any future negotiations. Trudeau assured him that they did talk about trade, steel and aluminium, as well as softwood lumber on Friday, and that they will stand up for jobs.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised that Conservatives fired thousands of CBSA officers when they were in power, and wanted them all rehired, more hires on top of that, and their mandate expanded. Trudeau said that he agrees that the Conservatives only know how to cut, and listed other programmes they want to cut as well. Singh repeated the same in French, and closed with accusing Trudeau of coming back from the meeting empty-handed. Trudeau repeated that they have reinvested in the border, and have reduced the number of irregular arrivals.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Speaker imposes the last of the Supply Days

Posted on by

Yesterday began with the government’s attempt to let the opposition parties have their remaining Supply Days (aka “opposition days”) that remain in the supply cycle before the Estimates votes next week, and even though the Conservatives had indicated they were going to move a confidence motion that would force Jagmeet Singh to eat his words about the Liberals, being one giant dare. But when the Government House Leader Karina Gould moved the motion that would let this happen, that would give them a chance to move this confidence motion, the Conservatives decided against it in order to continue the privilege filibuster.

Later in the day, Speaker Greg Fergus decided to step in, given that the ability for the parties to work this out for themselves had clearly failed. To that end, he has imposed that the Supply Days will run Thursday, Monday and Tuesday for the Conservatives, with the Friday for the NDP, and that because Tuesday is the last day of the Supply Cycle, the Estimates votes will happen then. This ensures that the parties get their allotted days (the Bloc already had theirs before the privilege filibuster began), and the Conservatives will have their chances to try and embarrass the other opposition parties into voting non-confidence, the NDP won’t oblige them, and the NDP’s motion will likely be something related to abortion in their own attempt to embarrass the Conservatives, because nobody can be mature about any of this.

I will say that I’m a little surprised that Fergus made this move, because he very well could have used this as something of a “learning opportunity” for the parties—that because they refused to come to a deal about these days that they would lose them because they didn’t use them. But that actually would have been the bigger surprise, because Fergus isn’t exactly a very strong-willed Speaker. As for the Conservatives, one suspects that they turned down the motion in order to push the envelope, so that they could cry foul and try and challenge Fergus if they did lose those days, and send out more fundraising emails that he’s being partisan (which is against the rules), and to try and play the victim. Andrew Scheer was already trying to denounce these moves, but nothing he says has any semblance of truth, so that’s no surprise. Nevertheless, there won’t be a crisis of Supply, government departments won’t shut down, and Canadian journalists won’t get the opportunity to excitedly write about a “U.S.-style government shutdown.”

Ukraine Dispatch

Another Russian drone attack on Trenopil has left it without electricity. And while president Zelenskyy is hoping for quick NATO membership as an avenue to ending the war, NATO members are unlikely to take him up on it.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1863186805463437571

Continue reading →

QP: Revisionist history about CEBA

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, and neither were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he raised the Auditor General’s report, and the $3.5 billion that was given to businesses that didn’t qualify for the CEBA loan programme, and the fact that the government subcontracted out its administration, claiming this was a loss of control and corruption. Rechie Valdez, in English, retorted that during COVID, Poilievre said that they don’t believe in these kinds of supports, while the government stood up for small businesses. Poilievre said that this report shows that he was right all along, and Arif Virani, in French, listed the help they have given businesses, including the carbon levy rebates (finally) being returned to them and the GST “holiday” (which most businesses are not really thrilled about). Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and Valdez cited Conservative MPs who wrote her office to advocate for the loan programme. Poilievre said his members champion constituents who are eligible for the programme, not those who weren’t, and pivoted to another report on food insecurity, and misleadingly blamed the carbon levy. Jenna Sudds praised the work of food banks and cited from the report that praised government efforts for seniors. Poilievre cited the faux talking point about food price increases in Canada versus the U.S., and demanded once again to kill the carbon levy, and Karina Gould cited the ways he has voted against Canadians, that they gave him an opposition day to make his case and he turned it down, which was a sign of his own weak leaders.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and raised the Auditor General’s report that they are not tracking the data for support for seniors, and used this to demand more aid for them. Steven MacKinnon retorted that the Bloc have voted against seniors at every opportunity. Therrien again demanded more aid for seniors, and MacKinnon again listed programmes that the Bloc voted against, calling it “shocking.”

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and in French, worried about the Trump tariffs and accused Trudeau of coming home empty-handed. Dominic LeBlanc agreed the tariffs would be destructive, which his why they spoke to their American counterparts about the integration of the economy. Blake Desjarlais repeated the same in English, and LeBlanc responded much the same way.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Emissions cap unveiled

Posted on by

At long last, the federal government unveiled their long-awaited oil and gas emissions cap draft regulations, mandating that they reduce emissions by 35 percent by 2032, with the expectation that much of these reductions are going to come in the form of reducing methane emissions—much of which is already underway—and that production is still expected to rise by 16 percent over those eight years. (Five things to know about the proposal here). For an industry that insists that it’s going to be “Net Zero” by 2050, this would seem like an achievable milestone to get there along the way, but apparently not.

Danielle Smith had a meltdown and started threatening legal action, but can’t exactly articulate on what basis that would be. Certain newspaper columnists posited that she could somehow invoke the Notwithstanding Clause, which doesn’t apply to this sort of situation in any way, shape or form (and should be disqualifying for someone writing in a newspaper with a six-figure salary).

Industry insists this is going to kill them, but they’ve been promising reductions for decades and have taken plenty of government money to help them fulfil those promises that they are now insisting are impossible. So…at what point do we start calling them on their own bullshit? If their plan is to hope that there will be magical technology by 2050 that will painlessly reduce their emission for them, well, that’s their problem. They made these promises, and it’s time they show how they’re going to live up to them.

Ukraine Dispatch

There was another Russian air attack made against Kyiv overnight, but it’s too early to tell how much damage was caused. South Korea’s defence ministry now estimates more than 10,000 North Korean troops are in Russia, but the Pentagon cannot confirm if they are currently fighting in the Kursk region.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1853389611604615191

Continue reading →

Roundup: Senators won’t be pushed around

Posted on by

The Bloc Québécois are trying to sweeten their demand for their two private members’ bills to pass before October 29th, saying they will help end the current filibuster in the House of Commons if the government does. Couple of small problems there—one is that the Senate can’t speed passage of any private members’ bills, no matter how much MPs or even the government strongly encourages them to; and the second is that the government isn’t going to give a royal recommendation to their OAS bill, because they absolutely don’t want to set a precedent there.

Nevertheless, Mary Ng wrote a letter to Senator Peter Boehm, who chairs the committee studying the Supply Management bill, urging him to speed it along, and it was co-signed by a few MPs from different parties, no doubt to try and demonstrate that they all care about this. Boehm, rightly, responded by telling them to go pound sand. The committee estimates it’ll get to clause-by-clause of the bill in the first week of November, because that’s how long it’ll take, end of story. And let me reiterate once again—there is no mechanism in the Senate to fast-track private members’ bills, and that’s for very good reason. In fact, during the Harper years, they tried to rewrite the Senate rules to allow for it to happen—in part because they were moving some odious legislation through as private members’ bills instead of government bills for various reasons (including the fact that PMBs get very little study and are automatically time-allocated so they can’t really be filibustered), and enough senators pushed back on that attempt that it didn’t happen. Again, for good reason.

As for the Bloc’s frankly boneheaded suggestion that the prime minister needs to get on the phone to order senators “that he appointed” around undermines the entire institutional independence of the Upper Chamber. They are appointed in such a way as to make them largely immune to this kind of political pressure for very good reason, and this is proving that very point. By that logic, should the prime minister be phoning up judges that they appointed in order to pressure them to deciding cases in a particular way? How about the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? This extended tantrum they’re throwing is embarrassing for them, particularly when it began as a ham-fisted attempt at blackmail that it turns out they weren’t very good at.

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people, including a child, were killed in a Russian drone strike in Sumy. The UN estimates that the Ukrainian population has declined by ten million since the start of the invasion, a combination of people being displaced and war deaths. Ukraine has been targeting alcohol plants in Russia over the past several days. With news that North Korea is sending troops to fight with Russians, South Korea is now considering sending weapons to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

QP: Poorer than Alabama

Posted on by

The prime minister was jetting off to Paris for the Francophonie summit, and his deputy was off to Toronto, so other leaders also took the cue to be absent for QP. Pierre Poilievre, however, was there and started off in French by listing times the Bloc leader supported the government, and wondered if the government wanted to thank him. Jean-Yves Duclos talked about dental care, and all of the seniors getting treatment, which the Conservatives claim doesn’t exist. Poilievre then turned to the current privilege fight and that the government is refusing to turn over documents related to SDTC. Karina Gould called this out as misleading and an attempt to overturn Charter rights and politicising police independence. Poilievre repeated that in English, and Gould repeated her response with the added coda that if Poilievre doesn’t understand that, it would be worse if he does understand and doesn’t care about Charter rights. Poilievre turned to the police shooting in Toronto yesterday and trotted out the “hug-a-thug” line. Gould said that while their hearts go out to the officer, but turned to the issue of Poilievre trampling Charter rights. Poilievre complained about the Charter rights of criminals and asked the Liberls “What is wrong with you people?” After being warned by the Speaker about directing questions through the Chair. Arif Virani reminded him that bail is decided upon by provincial-appointed justices of the peace and Crown prosecutors.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and demanded a royal recommendation for their OAS bill or face an election. Steve MacKinnon pointed out that the Bloc voted against dental care when 6,900 people in his riding were signed up. Therrien pointed out the number of seniors on MacKinnon’s riding not getting the OAS enrichment, and MacKinnon reminded him that the government’s track record on taking care of seniors spoke for itself.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and complained about rent, which is a provincial jurisdiction. Duclos got up to talk about how Poilievre dismissed social housing as “soviet.” Bonita Zarrillo demanded immediate enhancement to the Disability Benefit, to which Kamal Khera read her bankrupt talking points about how historic the clearly inadequate is.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bringing in the spouses?

Posted on by

The fallout from Jagmeet Singh’s confrontation with members of the Asshole Brigade who are harassing people in front of Parliament Hill has taken a couple of strange twists. In his post about the incident, Singh said that “That’s the country that Pierre Poilievre wants,” which of course sent the Conservatives into the usual bit of performative victimhood. Among those was Michael Cooper, who was seen hanging out with some of those members of the Asshole Brigade, and he tweeted out that he didn’t know them, that they approached him at the restaurant he was eating in…but there is video that shows him meeting with them before the restaurant, so perhaps that’s a very judicious use of the truth.

The stranger part was that Anaida Poilievre wrote a long Twitter missive to rebut the accusation and to praise Poilievre’s good character, while taking shots at Singh and Justin Trudeau. There has been a long-held convention in Canadian politics that spouses stay out of things, and they get a semblance of anonymity as a result. The fact that she has been very active in Poilievre’s campaign is a sign that she could be much more active in a future where Poilievre becomes prime minister, and that’s a bit of a problem because we don’t have “First Ladies” in this county like the Americans do, because our “First Lady” is Queen Camila. If she plays an active role, does she then become a target for other parties? Does that open up attacks for their spouses? I worry about that given the coarsening of politics as it is, and the fact that far too many people are already targeting MPs’ homes as part of protests. We don’t need them to become fair game as things continue to race to the bottom.

https://x.com/AnaPoilievre/status/1836225640938508466

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian shelling in Zaporizhzhia killed one woman and injured two others, while another attack targeted energy facilities in the central city of Kropyvnytskyi. Ukrainian drones have struck a Russian military base north of Moscow, causing an “earthquake-sized” blast. President Zelenskyy will be addressing the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Angry over an invented grievance

Posted on by

Two new Senate appointments were made over the weekend, both from Alberta, which naturally resulted in a mountain of utter bullshit, because neither were from the so-called “senators in waiting” that Alberta periodically “elects” as a stunt in order to invent a grievance against the federal government. There was also more of this nonsense hand-wringing that one of the two is a habitual Liberal donor and held roles as an organiser in the party in the past, but hasn’t for well over a decade. Nevertheless, clueless journalists and bad faith opposition members decry this as “partisan,” even though there is no actual Liberal caucus in the Senate for them to sit with, nor any Liberal whip to direct their votes (even though that has only ever really been illusory in the Senate).

The whole “Senate consultative elections” schtick in Alberta has only ever been a stunt—even when Stephen Harper appointed those who won them, because he was trying to make a point about reforming the Senate through the backdoor without actually doing constitutional changes. The logic of how they’re “just consultations” and that they are still appointed and don’t have any additional legitimacy within the Senate was laid bare during the Supreme Court hearings when Justice Cromwell asked the person making the argument “So why isn’t a consultative auction just as legitimate?” and they didn’t have an answer. But really, the whole thing was just to invent one more reason to make people mad at the federal government, at a time when there was a political impetus to stoke such regional divisions and resentments because that always helped them score political points, and lo, it’s still working for them decades later as they continue to get angry about something they just invented for the sole purpose of making them angry. It’s predictable, and it’s childish, and we should expect provincial governments like Alberta’s to behave like adults (but good luck with that these days).

Of course, where would we be without the conservative columnists in this country, making pronouncements about this without actually understanding a gods damned thing about it. “Not representative of Albertan thinking”? What exactly is “Albertan thinking?” If the insinuation is that their appointment is somehow illegitimate because they’re not conservatives, then I have news for you because the Senate is often a place where political outliers in a province can gain representation, such as Liberals in Alberta, particularly during the “bad old partisan days” where they may be shut out of the province electorally but could still have representation in the Senate and be present in caucus to provide that representation. That doesn’t happen anymore thanks to Trudeau’s short-sighted decision to boot all of the senators from his caucus, which is also why Ivison’s comments about Trudeau “renouncing” his reforms are such utter nonsense, because if Trudeau had renounced them, he would invite senators back into his caucus. He won’t (even though he should), but hey, Ivison needs to think of something from his perch in Costa Rica, and reinforcing a bullshit narrative is about the best it’s going to be.

Ukraine Dispatch

It was a bloody day in Ukraine as Russian missiles struck a military academy and a hospital, killing over fifty people and wounding more than 200. In the hours since, Russia has since launched missiles and drones against Kyiv and Lviv. This as children are returning to school, and in Kharkiv, those schools are now underground because of constant bombardment. Meanwhile, president Zelenskyy continues to call on Western countries who haven’t yet allowed their weapons to be used for long-range strikes inside Russia to not only allow them, but to supply further weapons so that Ukraine can make crucial hits. It also looks like a major government shake-up is on the way after a wave of resignations.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A decision without the grassroots

Posted on by

There was a shocking announcement out of BC, where the leader of the “BC United” party (former the BC Liberals, which are not the same as the federal Liberal Party) declared that he was suspending his party’s campaign in favour of supporting the upstart BC Conservatives so that they could defeat the provincial NDP in this fall’s election. It’s stunning, and while I don’t really follow BC politics closely, there are a few observations that I am qualified to make from my particular perch.

One of those observations is that BC has a history of parties forming and dissolving in opposition to the NDP, so this is just the latest iteration of the same, and yes, that kind of history does make a difference. The other, more important observation is just how much this was leader-driven, with no real chance to consult or address the grassroots members of the party, which is a very real problem. Political parties are not supposed to belong to their leaders—they are supposed to belong to the grassroots members, many of whom don’t want to have anything to do with the BC Conservatives because the party is led by a climate-denier (he was kicked out of the then-BC Liberal caucus for expressing those sentiments), and is a party that has devoted itself to culture war bullshit (particularly anti-LGBTQ sentiments) and other social conservative nonsense. A lot of right-of-centre but socially progressive voters in the province have every right to be pissed off about this development, because it should be their party and they should be the ones to make the call about whether they will field candidates and run, even if the polls are against them. And if this is an attempted party merger under the rubric of not splitting the anti-NDP vote (and papering over the very big and cultural issues that kept the parties apart since their mutual inception), it’s also being done against the will of the grassroots membership (whose party this is). It sounds like there are a lot of frustrated incumbents and would-be candidates who are incredibly unhappy with this decision, and I’m curious about what kind of fallout will happen, but this kind of move is beyond cynical.

The other thing I noticed during the press conference was the use of catastrophising language with regard to the NDP, and why the BC United leader felt it was necessary to oppose them to the detriment of his own political fortunes. These are supposed to be rivals, not enemies, and yes, that does matter in politics, especially in this day and age where the polarization has become so great because they have personalized it to such a tremendous extent. They should be grown-ups about what has happened here, but I suspect it’ll be mostly a bunch of poll-driven narratives that only serve to alienate the grassroots members, whose party once again is supposed to belong to.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck Kryvyi Rih, which was already observing an official day of mourning for the previous day’s attack that killed four, while a family of four were killed when a Russian bomb hit a home in Izmailivka in Donetsk region. Ukrainian drones continue to strike oil infrastructure in areas outside of Moscow

Continue reading →