Tag Archives: Civic Literacy

Roundup: Moving the goal posts

Posted on by

Today in Idle No More news, hunger strike veteran Elizabeth May counsels Chief Theresa Spence to meet with everyone – especially Conservatives, whom she has been rebuffing to date. May also suggests there be a go-between that can meet with Spence and the PM, but Spence’s people rule that out. Spence’s people have also declared that she is no longer giving interviews, nor will she drop the demand that the Governor General be included in the meeting, even though he has stated his desire to stay out of the politics of the situation (as is proper under the rules of Responsible Government). AFN Grand Chief Shawn Atleo has called for a First Nations meeting on the 24th and has invited the PM and the GG to attend, and that could be a compromise that allows both sides to save face – err, except that Spence says that the 24th is too late, and that she intends to fast until the meeting happens (which, it should be noted, appears to be a case of goal posts being moved). And moving the goalposts even more, Spence apparently now demands that the PM and GG meet with aboriginal leaders within 72 hours or there will be “mass demonstrations” around the country – which doesn’t exactly sound either feasible (materials need to be prepared, schedules cleared and leaders assembled), and like a fairly top-down directive from what is supposed to be a grassroots movement.

In related news, Senator Brazeau says he’s getting death threats for his position on the Idle No More protests. Jon Kay looks back at the history of the Attawapiskat treaty, which is a pretty fascinating read (even if you don’t have to agree with his conclusions). Also, despite some of the torque in this piece, there are some pretty interesting questions being raised about the finances of Attawapiskat, where money does seem to be flowing through the reserve despite the third-world conditions there.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Beware the simplistic statements

Posted on by

Today in Idle No More, NDP MP Charlie Angus warns that the demonstrations could get a lot uglier if Harper doesn’t meet with Aboriginal leaders. Columnist John Ivison cautions against the simplistic statements being traded in the protest, as the issues are complex and some of the assertions being made are as disingenuous as they are inflammatory.

The Mint starts withdrawing the penny from circulation in a month’s time.

Environment Canada commissioned an Ipsos poll with some pretty loaded questions about things like carbon taxes, and then the government put out an equally torqued release based on the results.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Late to the planning stages

Posted on by

Are we back? It feels like we’re back now.

Despite the fact that we should definitely be planning now for the 150th anniversary of Confederation celebrations that will happen in 2017, both the federal and many provincial governments remain rather mum on the subject, with the federal government barely giving handwavey signals that they are thinking about said anniversary, with things like the Museum of History announcement.

A report on the death of a Canadian soldier by Israeli forces was quietly removed from the DND website, a move that the soldier’s widow believes is a political move by the government meant to shield Israel from criticism.

As the US gets to work on its cyber-security issues, Canada will need to play a part given how integrated much of our infrastructure is.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Page takes aim at the real problem of Parliament

Posted on by

iPolitics‘ Colin Horgan had a good talk with Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, who breaks down some of the key concerns that his office has – that the political executive is now steamrolling budgets through without due diligence and telling MPs to trust them and check their work afterwards, when the Public Accounts come out, because the process is so convoluted. And he’s right – it is broken, but not only because the executive has gamed the system, but because MPs have decided to abdicate their responsibility to scrutinise the estimates because they have other priorities, like their eleventieth Private Members’ Bill that won’t see the light of day, or scoring political points in the scandal of the day, or pet hobby projects that yes, they may care about and may be important, but ultimately at the cost of their actual job of scrutiny. Add to that how they’re using their staff to shepherd through passports and immigration files rather than assisting them in the actual analysis work. Yes, the system needs to be fixed, but I will caution that the changes need to come from the ground up. Voters need to demand that their MPs do their due diligence, and MPs need to take that job seriously and not fob it off onto the PBO, as they have been doing, often under the rubric that his numbers can be trusted because he’s non-partial. Meanwhile, there is insufficient pushback – especially from the government backbenchers, who aren’t supposed to just parrot mindless slogans – and we wind up with a situation like we have today. At least Page is talking about the actual problem and laying the blame where it needs to be laid, rather than just pouting about the current government being mean (as so many others are doing).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge

Posted on by

Yesterday, the government tabled Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge, and it’s largely tax code changes, along with changes to the Navigable Waters Act (which some call the erosion of those protections), and the bit about MP pensions. Predictably, the opposition is complaining about the size of it – which is their right. But I would also suggest that rather than complain about it day in and day out, they beat the government at its own game and come up with technical critiques, breaking it up by topic among the caucus. It won’t happen, but it would be an interesting tactic that they never employed the last time around.

The tale of Peter Penashue and the federal election in Labrador gets more and more interesting. First the government said it was a “rookie mistake” – err, except the appointed the official agent based on his great business experience, and Penashue stood for office in several Innu elections previous, so he wasn’t a rookie. The Liberal whom he defeated is out-and-out calling Penashue a cheater. And then, we find out that two of the polling stations were closed on election day because an Elections Canada employee drove off with the ballot boxes – mere “hiccups” the agency says. But with the vote so close – 79 votes separating them – perhaps we may see this result overturned as well.

Continue reading →

Lord and Smith Commission, Episode 12

Posted on by

My friend Destine and I have a new episode of the Lord and Smith Commission, where we talk about the “NDP carbon tax” talking points and other fictions during Members’ Statements, Rob Anders, and some of the national security questions that will dominate the House next week.

Roundup: Tremble before the almighty online petition!

Posted on by

In another blow against civic literacy in this country, someone has decided to start an online petition to have Rob Anders removed from office. No, really. I’d like to know exactly what mechanism, pray tell, can do this, because last I checked, we don’t really have a mechanism to unseat an MP. Now, if the residents of Calgary West were serious about unseating him, well, they could challenge his nomination and sign up enough new party members to ensure that he will no longer represent the party in the next election. But oh, that would require organisation, and effort, and well, we couldn’t possibly do that. Oh, and FYI, it will not only be an open nomination before the next election, but with the new electoral boundaries coming into place, Anders is going to have to choose which of the new ridings he’ll be running in, and anyone in that new riding can organise to challenge his nomination. You know, the way that things actually work in our system.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The missing meat inspectors

Posted on by

CFIA says that XL Foods didn’t follow some safety procedures – and then the press conference suffered a meltdown as the minister’s staff shut the whole thing down and offered “one-on-ones” instead – err, except there were some forty reporters in the room. Add to that, during caucus outs, Thomas Mulcair was quoting CFIA cuts in the past tense – err, except that they’re booked for the next two fiscal years and haven’t happened yet. Oops. Meanwhile, the union representing meat inspectors says they can’t find the “700 net new inspectors,” since that figure relates to classification levels, and not job descriptions. In fact, 200 of those “inspectors” are people hired to deal with invasive species of plants.

John Baird is calling for calm after mortar shells were exchanged over the Syria-Turkey border yesterday. Remember that Turkey is a NATO ally, which could bring us into that conflict.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Just another Rob Anders eruption

Posted on by

The big news that got people’s tongues wagging/up in arms yesterday was how Rob Anders spoke of his “theory” about how Thomas Mulcair somehow hastened Jack Layton’s death. No, seriously. He later gave a sort-of apology, and everyone wondered how much longer the PM could abide him in caucus. (Seriously everyone, it’s his riding association’s decision). Meanwhile, Aaron Wherry reminds us of the timeline of Layton’s declining health, while Glen McGregor reminds us of Rob Anders being one of the “celibate” Reform MPs back in the day.

Okay, okay, so it looks like Justin Trudeau is launching his leadership bid today after all (still – it’s a month too soon), and after his initial launch in his riding, he’ll hold events in Mississauga and Richmond, which looks very much to be launching a campaign targeting the suburban ridings of major cities. Jesse Brown looks at Trudeau’s geek credentials.

Senator Roméo Dallaire thinks the Conservatives have been undermining Omar Khadr’s chances at rehabilitation, what with their foot-dragging and attempts to politicise is future parole hearings.

Continue reading →

A note on this week’s opposition day

Posted on by

According to O’Brien and Bosc, the authority on parliamentary rules and procedure, the purpose of supply days is so that the opposition has a chance to demonstrate why supply should be refused. After all, it’s the role of the opposition to oppose the government, and they hold said government to account by controlling supply – the public purse. They are allotted so many days with which to demonstrate why the government should be refused supply.

This is the supply day motion that the NDP have proposed, and which will be debated in the Commons on Thursday:

“That this House acknowledge that the Canadian economy is facing unprecedented risk and uncertainty; recognize that many regions and industries across Canada have already suffered significant job losses in recent years; urge all levels of government to work together to build a balanced, 21st century Canadian economy; and insist that Canada’s Prime Minister meet with his counterparts in Halifax this November at the National Economic Summit being held by the Council of the Federation.”

Could somebody please tell me where in this is an ability to demonstrate why the government should be denied supply? Anyone? Helpful suggestions and attempts to legislate – or even “insist” – from the opposition benches are not the job of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition.