Tag Archives: Constitution

Roundup: Opposing amendments at committee

Posted on by

I find myself amused by the ongoing stories that some Liberal MPs may vote against the official languages bill when it comes out of committee as amended, and the constant oh noes! Trudeau is losing control of his caucus! narrative that accompanies it. This said, there are egregious amendments that I have a hard time believing that they’re in order, because they reference provincial legislation in Quebec. For example, the change to the preamble of the bill to acknowledge Quebec’s Law 96 should have no place in federal legislation. There is also an amendment that says that if federal and provincial language laws come into conflict, the provincial law (especially Quebec’s Law 96) takes precedence, which is against every single constitutional practice and statutory interpretation principle in this country, and beyond that, it sets an absolutely terrible precedent for other areas of the law where one level of government tries to impose something on another jurisdiction, and because this one went unchallenged its okay. Yeah, we don’t want that to happen.

As mentioned, these are a result of Conservative and Bloc amendments, and the Conservatives are back to pandering to Quebec voters (and François Legault) by being as shameless as possible in trying to out-bloc the Bloc, and in some cases, they are being supported by the NDP’s Niki Ashton. It stands to reason that if the government objects to a number of these amendments, they can vote them down during report stage debate, and that would mean the whole chamber is voting, not just the Bloc and the Conservatives, so it could be enough votes to ensure that these amendments are left out of the final bill, which would mean this “rebellion” by a few Liberal MPs has done its job. There are still a couple of meetings left for this bill in committee, so we’ll see what the final shape of the bill looks like.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 358:

Russian troops are mounting constant attacks, and are claiming to have broken through two fortified lines in the Luhansk region (but they make lots of claims that aren’t true), while the regional governor denies that Ukrainian troops are in retreat. The Russians have been changing their tactics at Bakhmut, moving in smaller groups, without the support of tanks or armoured personnel carriers, and the Ukrainians are adapting to the new tactics. Reuters has a photo essay of one family’s evacuation from the area near Bakhmut, during which their grandmother died in the van.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1625861957549948929

Continue reading →

QP: Re-litigating the hotel room

Posted on by

While the PM and his deputy were on their way back from Hazel McCallion’s funeral in Mississauga, most of the other leaders were also absent from the Chamber for QP. Andrew Scheer led off, like a flashback, and after a preamble of nonsense about inflation, he demanded to know why the prime minister billed taxpayers for a “$7000” hotel room (that number has been inflated) which he neglected to mention was for the funeral of the Queen. Ahmed Hussen got up and listed housing measures that the government put in place that the Conservatives voted against. Scheer tried again, this time comparing the cost of that hotel room to mortgage payments. Hussen repeated his same response. Scheer then raised the National Post story about trying to stifle disclosure of that information, and this time Rob Oliphant raised that this was for the Queen’s funeral, and that the delegation was appropriate for that occasion. Dominique Vien took over in French, and the cost of the hotel room was back to $6000 and demanded the government cap spending. Pascale St-Onge got up to say that the spending was targeted to those who need it most, while the Conservatives seek to cut that help. Vien and St-Onge went another round of the same with little difference.

Alain Therrien led for Bloc, and he thundered about health transfers, saying that provinces don’t really agree and accused the federal government of chronic underfunding, which is not exactly true. Adam van Koeverden read a statement about how pleased they are with the “agreement.” Therrien demanded over and over about “35 percent!” This time Pablo Rodriguez wondered where Therrien was with all of the newspaper headlines talking about an “agreement.”

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and cited a StatsCan figure about people struggling, and turned this into a demand that the government stop the Rogers-Shaw merger. François-Philippe Champagne said that he wanted more competition in the sector. Singh wondered if that meant that he would oppose the merger today, then switched to French to repeat his question. Champagne repeated his enthusiasm for competition.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A baffling way to fast-track a bill

Posted on by

The House of Commons began their fast-tracked debate on Bill C-39 yesterday, which is the bill to delay the onset of making mental disorder the sole criteria for accessing Medical Assistance in Dying, but even before debate got started, the government moved their motion to fast-track it in the most unusual and frankly unserious way possible. The motion extends sittings to midnight Monday and Wednesday (they sat until about 10:30 last night), all in the service of second reading debate. At midnight or collapse of debate on Wednesday, the bill is deemed to have been adopted at second reading, deemed to have been send to committee of the whole, deemed adopted and reported back, deemed to be adopted at third reading, and sent off to the Senate. The same motion also authorized the justice committee to sit as long as they need to today to consider the bill, and to be given priority of resources (i.e. interpreters) from any other committee for their study. But they don’t actually report back to the Commons (remember it is deemed to have gone to committee of the whole), so I’m not sure what the point of the exercise is.

Procedurally, this is bonkers, and furthermore, it just exacerbates the fact that we have a completely broken understanding of what second reading debate is supposed to be in this country. It’s where you debate the overall purpose of the bill, and it should last a single afternoon, with a handful speeches and some debate, and then be sent off to committee where they can do the real work. But instead, our Parliament has decided that second reading debate needs days upon days of canned speeches—particularly on a bill like this where everyone can stand up and say how “deeply personal” the issue is, and where a large number of Conservatives in particular can decry it and repeat a bunch of false assertions and misinformation about what this is supposed to be about. None of how they went about this makes any sense (and I remind you that the bill is one line). If all of the parties decided to fast-track this, there should have been a single speech from each party, and then to send it to committee for actual consideration today, so it can be sent back on Wednesday for final consideration. They didn’t need to contort themselves in this way in order to give everyone speaking time (like they did with the interminable speeches for the invocation of the Emergencies Act).

Once again, this is another signal of how unserious our Parliament is, and that it has devolved into little more than an exercise in reading canned speeches into the record. Nobody is actually being served by this, and our MPs need to grow up and start actually engaging with the material before them.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 356:

Bakhmut and its suburbs are being subjected to heavy shelling as Russia’s new offensive has begun, and Ukraine says that they have fortified their positions in the area. Russians have also struck in Kharkiv, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia regions, and have been fortifying their own positions in the south of the country. Meanwhile, the Secretary-General of NATO warned that Ukraine is using ammunition faster than allies can provide it, and is trying to put pressure on Western defence industries to ramp up production as Russia is with its own industries.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1625178486926196740

Continue reading →

QP: Field-testing a new talking point

Posted on by

While Justin Trudeau was in the building, he didn’t show up for Question Period today, nor did his deputy, but all of the other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and decried that the national debt has doubled (ignoring the reason, being the pandemic), and decried that rent and mortgage payments have doubled, worried about seniors, lamented supposed rising crime rates, and then somehow tied this all to McKinsey contracts, because that makes logical sense. Pascale St-Onge got up to agree that it was a difficult period with high inflation, but the government would be there for people who need it. Poilievre wondered if those most in need were McKinsey consultants, and lamented how much the government was spending on consultants (never mind the explosion in such contracts under the Conservative government and in Poilievre’s department in particular when he was a minister). Mark Holland got up to remind the Conservatives that when they were in government, they never talked about poverty or people using food banks, while praising his own government’s record on lifting people out of poverty. Poilievre then accused the government of telling people that they should stop complaining because they’ve never had it so good. Holland called out Poilievre for doing nothing about the situation other than making YouTube videos. Poilievre went on a tear about rental costs—which is provincial responsibility—and red tape preventing housing development—a municipal issue—and blamed the federal government for it. Holland got back up to insist that Poilievre is just amplifying anxiety. Poilievre then accused the government of trying to silence the debate, and demand they fix the problems instead, and Holland reiterated that the government is playing it straight about the problems the country is facing, while Poilievre’s only solution was to tell people to invest in crypto. Poilievre got back up, but had run out of questions. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc to wonder what the Notwithstanding Clause was for if not preemptive use—which is hilariously wrong. David Lametti got up to talk about minority rights, the dialogue between legislatures and the courts, and why the last word should not be the first. Blanchet rambled for a moment before quoting Pierre Trudeau on the Charter, and Lametti reminded him that Charters in Canada and Quebec were about protecting minority rights, and he repeated his point about dialogue with the courts.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and recalled the horrors that were in long-term care homes early in the pandemic and accused the government of doing nothing since, demanding legislated standards—never mind this is provincial jurisdiction. Kamal Khera got up to remind Singh that she was a nurse, and that the government appreciated the work of the Canadian Standards Association in developing national standards. Singh switched to French to lament increased privatisation, and Jean-Yves Duclos insisted they were holding up the principles of access and the public system.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Fire which gatekeepers?

Posted on by

It sounds like Pierre Poilievre is back on his bullshit again (do the kids still say that?) with his “gatekeeper” nonsense, as in releasing another one of his cringey videos where he promises to “fire the gatekeepers” in order to build housing. Except I’m not sure exactly which gatekeepers he’s proposing to fire, because the biggest impediments to building housing are NIMBY homeowners and neighbourhood associations that oppose any kind of densification, not to mention the elected city councillors who enable said NIMBYism. How, pray tell, does Poilievre propose to “fire them”? I’m sure he’ll tell you that he’ll threaten to withhold federal transfers to municipalities that don’t comply, but then you’ve got elected councillors beholden to voters in conflict with the dictates of a federal leader, so that’s going to be fun.

Poilievre also held a press event in Vancouver yesterday where he unveiled plans to consult on a proposal that would allow First Nations to keep more federal tax revenue from projects on their lands—which sounds like a great policy! But it’s vague, has no details, and is almost certainly going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than he’s making it out to be, especially if he’s going to insist that provincial royalties and taxes won’t be affected either. Listening to the language he used, it also sounds like he hopes that this will be the kind of thing that will ensure projects get built, as though the money from this tax revenue will make concerns over environmental or social impacts evaporate, and I suspect he’ll be surprised when they don’t.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 336:

While Russian forces increase pressure around Bakhmut and Vuhledar, it is expected that Germany will announce today that it will send Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, and allow other countries to transfer them as well. Meanwhile, more officials have been named and fired in relation to corruption allegations, as Zelenskyy’s government continues their pledge to clean up the graft in government so that they can attain EU membership.

https://twitter.com/cfoperations/status/1617887130625413123

Continue reading →

Roundup: Say no to a Consultant Commissioner

Posted on by

Because a lot of people continue to be wringing their hands over government contracts to outside consultants, we’re starting to hear a few…less than stellar ideas. One of them came from Paul Wells yesterday, while on the CBC’s Front Burner podcast (Wells’ portion starts at 20:46). While there is some good context from Carleton University professor Amanda Clarke on the size of the problem (thread here), Wells is wrong about two particular portions, and he would have avoided this had he listened to my conversation with professor Jennifer Robson on my YouTube channel last week.

The first is the notion that when these consultants’ job is done, nobody is accountable for the work because most of their agreements mean that it can’t be subject to Access to Information rules, which is wrong. Fundamentally the minister is accountable no matter what. It wouldn’t matter if the work was done by outside consultants or the civil servants in the department, the minister remains responsible, and people seem to be forgetting this in their rush to condemn the consultants. The other part where he’s wrong is his idea to create a “consultant commissioner of Parliament” or other such independent officer.

No. Absolutely not.

We already have way too many gods damned independent officers of parliament, who are unaccountable, and to whom MPs have completely abandoned their constitutional responsibilities of oversight. Sure, the media and the opposition want someone independent they can quote on command to say mean things about the government, but that winds up just creating more bureaucracy, and doesn’t help the overall situation, especially as it drags us further down the road to technocracy rather than parliamentary oversight. The absolute last thing we need are more independent officers, and I wish to gods people would stop proposing them.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 335:

Russian forces have continued to pound the Donetsk region in the country’s east. Russians are also claiming Ukrainians are storing Western weapons in the country’s nuclear power plants, but have provided no proof. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is promising personnel changes at both senior and lower levels after high-profile graft allegations, as part of the country’s attempt to clean up its corruption problem.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A couple of not-that-scathing reports

Posted on by

The Auditor General released two reports yesterday on pandemic befits programmes and vaccine procurement, and they were…not explosive. Really. There were weak spots from the government, in large part because of the haste in which these programmes were designed because of the pandemic, and some inefficiency, but on the report about vaccines, part of the problem with wastage is because of a lack of provincial data, because the federal government hasn’t been able to sign agreements with the provinces. And as we’ve seen all too often, this is the fault of the provinces.

Nevertheless, the Conservatives were salivating over this release and put on a whole dog and pony show to decry that this was a sign that this government’s “wasteful spending” is what is fuelling inflation, which isn’t true, but this is the narrative they have been trying to push, and these numbers were ripe for the plucking. And as they do with every other officer of Parliament, they misconstrued the report, cherry-picked figures, and cranked up the hyperbole, and lo, this was scandalous. But that’s not what the report found. And it also ignores that they voted unanimously to design the benefit programmes this way because it was more important to get the money out the door.

Anyway, here’s Jennifer Robson’s read of the report, and it’s worth your time.

 

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 287:

Another drone strike within Russia set a third airfield ablaze, though the Ukrainians have not claimed responsibility for the attack. (Video here) More Russian missiles did strike civilian targets in Ukraine, but they were said to be less severe than other attacks in recent weeks. The strikes against Russian airfields have Russian bloggers questioning the competence of their government’s defences.

https://twitter.com/dgardner/status/1600135762179018752

Continue reading →

Roundup: Backseat driving healthcare talks

Posted on by

I occasionally find myself amused by some of the backseat driving/armchair quarterbacking that happens in Canadian politics, and there was no more perfect example that Jagmeet Singh putting out a press release yesterday declaring that if he were prime minister, he would have sat down with the provinces and not left until he was satisfied that they have all the resources they need. On the one hand it’s kind of hilarious because most of the time, Singh can barely recognise that provincial jurisdiction actually exists, or he seems to think that a Green Lantern Ring and sufficient political will would actually solve federalism. On the other, I can’t decide if that means that he thinks he’s got amazing powers of negotiation, or if he’s declaring himself a chump who will fall for the provinces’ strong-arm tactics.

Imagine for just a moment what Singh means when he says he won’t leave the table until he gives the provinces what they need. It sounds an awful lot like he’s going to give them a blank cheque and then pat himself on the back for having fixed healthcare. Meanwhile, the provinces take that money, put a paltry amount back into the system, continue on with privatizing as much as they possibly can (look at what Danielle Smith is up to in Alberta now that she’s fired the entire board of Alberta Health Services), reduce their own share of the funding because of the increased federal dollars, and then give tax breaks in the hopes of getting re-elected. And we know this because all of this has happened before, and all of it will happen again if this funding doesn’t come with some pretty strict conditions and strings. And the sooner more people start calling the premiers on their bullshit, the faster we can get to a deal where they accept strings that will actually do something meaningful with those increased federal dollars.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 269:

Ukraine’s electricity grid operator is warning people that blackouts can last for several hours as Russians continue to pound the country’s electrical systems. Russians are also continuing their push toward Bakhmut with renewed intensity. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy appeared at the Halifax Security Forum by video to ask NATO countries to assist with a ten-part peace plan, and that he hoped Canada would show leadership on one of those items.

https://twitter.com/kiraincongress/status/1593694607459717124

Continue reading →

Roundup: Auditor General day passes with little notice

Posted on by

The Auditor General released a series of reports yesterday, but you almost wouldn’t know it from the dearth of coverage. Yes, The Canadian Press did cover them, and CBC did somewhat, but most of those stories were not headline news, and barely made a splash. The reports didn’t come up in QP save for two NDP questions near the back third of the exercise, and Power & Politics gave it seconds worth of mention in their “five things” segment (while they also spent three blocks on their Power Panel, a block on their ridiculous “Quote of the Day,” and ran the segment on Donald Trump’s pending announcement twice). Power Play did slightly better by actually having the Auditor General on to discuss the reports, but gave her a mere 3 minutes and 42 seconds of airtime, and only a couple of the items actually got mention.

The reports:

  • We don’t know if the federal government’s plan to reduce chronic homeless by 50 percent by 2028 is working because they don’t have enough actual data.
  • Indigenous Services’ handling disasters like fires and floods remains reactive rather than proactive, even though this has been highlighted for a decade now.
  • Federal departments need to do more to ensure secure storage on cloud servers given the rising threat of cyberattacks (which is pretty alarming, really).
  • Our aging aircraft and icebreakers mean we can’t effectively monitor Arctic waters, and there are no plans to replace RADARSAT capabilities by 2026.

Is any of this earth-shattering? Maybe not, but it’s still important and a big part of the way we’re supposed to be holding the government to account, which should be important. There was once upon a time, not that long ago, when Auditor General Day was a big deal in the spring and the fall, and it was a media circus. And now? It barely makes a dent in the news cycle. It’s a pretty sad indictment of where we’re at in terms of our national political media, and how little we’re paying attention to the things that are supposed to matter.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 266:

Russia fired a large number of cruise missiles at civilian infrastructure throughout Ukraine, and throughout this, a pair of missiles appear to have crossed into Poland and struck a farm near the border, killing two people. While everything is being verified that these were in fact Russian missiles (and not, for example, Ukrainian missiles that missed intercepting the Russian missiles), NATO leaders are thus far keeping cool and trying to keep the situation cool, but this is almost entirely unlikely to trigger Article 5. Instead, it’s likely to trigger Article 4, and ramping up their investment into giving more equipment to Ukraine faster, including the plan from Poland to deliver its old MiG fighters to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Counting votes is not a measure of the Senate’s health

Posted on by

The National Post did an analysis of the “new, independent” Senate to see just what has changed since the prime minister Justin Trudeau began his bid to reform the Upper Chamber through the appointment process, and lo, the analysis misses the whole gods damned point. You don’t judge the effectiveness of the Senate by counting votes. It has never operated in such a way, and (quantitative) political scientists and journalists can’t get that through their heads. The Senate is not going to vote down government legislation unless it’s a dire circumstance, and usually they will only insist on an amendment once before they will let a bill pass. How many times they vote against the government is not a measure of independence either, because the objective of most senators is to let a bill get to committee where the real work happens, and they will try to amend any flaws (and even then, we’ve had a problem of this particular government needing to sponsor amendments to fix their flaws that they bullied through the Commons, until the more recent and destructive trend of telling them to pass it anyway and that they would fix the flaw in a future piece of legislation).

There are plenty of other measures by which we could talk about why the “new” Senate isn’t working from the fact that they can barely organise a picnic anymore because most of the Independent senators can’t stick to agreements on procedural matters, or the fact that the pandemic has gutted their ability to be useful aside from adding a few speeches to the record because legislation is being bullied through without time for scrutiny, or the fact that they no longer have the interpretation capacity to run many of their committees like they used to thanks to hybrid sittings burning out the interpreters. Those are all very real problems that are hurting the Senate, but it requires journalists (and academics) who know the place and what is going on, and what questions to ask, and those are almost non-existent. But hey, we counted votes, so that means something, right? Nope.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 265:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the recently liberated city of Kherson to declare it the beginning of the end of Russia’s invasion, but also notes that the city is laced with boobytraps and mines, and that they have a significant challenge ahead in repairing critical infrastructure so that people can get electricity and water.

Continue reading →