Jim Flaherty has announced that the budget will be delivered on February 11th, in the midst of the Olympics. Because remember that Canadians would be too distracted by the last Olympic games to even have Parliament sitting? Apparently that’s no longer a concern, and Flaherty is confident that Canadians can pay attention to both the games and the budget at the same time. Well, that and he apparently has a few measures that are important to pass sooner than later. John Geddes notes that Flaherty’s tone has changed lately to one of striking informality of late, where he seems to be freelancing some opinions and hinting that others may be to blame if there is added spending in the upcoming budget.
Tag Archives: Dean Del Mastro
Roundup: Enter the telecom spin
Wind Mobile dropping out of the wireless spectrum auction – because the murky rules around foreign investment restricts them from getting the capital they need – pretty much scuppers the government’s chances of getting a fourth national carrier in the system. But then came the spin – Mike Lake, the parliamentary secretary, went on Power & Politics to talk about the ten bidders in the auction – neglecting that seven of them are regional players – while touting the drop in prices in the industry. You know, the kinds of things that his government has been complaining about in ads they’re putting out. Meanwhile, NDP MP Jinny Simms declared that a fourth national carrier was needed for competition – except her party was vehemently opposed to Verizon coming into the marketplace. Well done, everyone.
Roundup: Contradictions in energy policy
Thomas Mulcair’s speech to the Economic Club of Canada wasn’t full of a lot of details, but it raised a lot of questions – especially when he started to contradict himself. While Mulcair spoke about an “alternate vision” of development, with particular attention paid to a cap-and-trade system (which he has not yet outlined), and to resurrecting the home energy refit programme. But he also said that he would remove Cabinet’s ability to override a National Energy Board decision, while in the same breath saying that he would never have allowed the Keystone XL pipeline to go for regulatory approval – even though the NEB approved it. In other words, keep cabinet out of the decisions, but arbitrarily empower cabinet to keep it from being allowed to see a decision. Logic! He reiterated that he wants to increase refining capacity in Canada, grossly inflating the number of jobs that would create and ignoring the infrastructure costs (let alone the GHG footprint), but would have denied any way for that refined product to get to market, since he wouldn’t have allowed new pipelines to get approval. Logic. And then he also claimed that he was leader in 2011, by which point the plot was lost.
Roundup: Assaulting the dignity of Parliament
It’s not the least bit surprising, but it should remain shocking every time it happens. Jim Flaherty announced yesterday that the fall economic update will be released next week, when the House is not sitting, and will be read in Edmonton and not the House of Commons. In other words, one more slap in the face to Parliament by a government that does its level best to devalue it at every opportunity. Because why not go for the cheap optics of a controlled message and release, instead of ensuring the dignity and sanctity of parliament are upheld.
Roundup: No closure, new motions
There remains no resolution to the issue of the proposed suspensions in the Senate, as the Conservatives there found their attempt to impose closure to be out of order and they have pulled the motions in favour of a new one, which ties things up even further. Oh, but apparently their ham-fistedness is the Liberals’ fault, because they won’t stand aside and just pass it. Because yeah, that’s how things work in our parliamentary system. As it stands, those motions may not see a vote until Friday, but may stretch into next week. Glen McGregor checks Mike Duffy’s speech against his speaking notes, and where the deviations from Hansard were. Joe Clark doesn’t think too much of Harper’s handling of the whole Senate situation. Paul Wells dissects Harper’s role in the mounting problems facing him with the Wright/Duffy affair, and how his usual stubborn streak is playing out – in spades. Chantal Hébert wonders about Nigel Wright’s silence in the face of his demonization by Harper, and how he may be the one to bring Harper down. Andrew Coyne bemoans the way in which the Conservatives are chucking away the conventions that govern our parliamentary system.
QP: Harper hitting back
Both Harper and Mulcair were back in the House, and ready for another round. Mulcair began with giving Harper a chance to be “crystal clear” as to whether Nigel Wright resigned or was fired. Harper said that they agreed that his actions were improper which was why he was no longer working in the PMO. Mulcair pressed in French, but Harper dodged once again and repeated the answer in French. Mulcair asked how many cheques were issued to Duffy as “hush money,” which Harper called a false allegation and reminded him that parties help members with legal assistance. Mulcair wondered if a $90,000 payment was a valid legal expense, and Harper assured him that it was not a party expense, and that NDP MPs were also provided with “substantial legal assistance.” Mulcair wondered what was done by the law firm on behalf of the PM that was worth $13,000. Harper simply repeated the line about legal assistance, and further alleged that the NDP paid damages on Mulcair’s behalf in a lawsuit. With Justin Trudeau in Calgary to deliver a speech on energy, it was up to Ralph Goodale to lead off, and he asked when Harper first heard that his staff had counselled Duffy to lie. Paul Calandra got up in Harper’s stead and accused the Liberals of making victims of the three senators plus former senator Mac Harb. Goodale wondered why Harper took a weekend to decide that Wright needed to be fired after previously being called “honourable.” Calandra assured him that the PM was clear, and hey, pipelines! Goodale pressed one last time, and listed the many ethical lapses on Harper’s part. The Speaker warned him about veering into party business, but Calandra got up instead and regaled a parable about his children getting an allowance.
Roundup: The tale of the second cheque
Boom! The ClusterDuff exploded yet again yesterday, with yet more revelations from Senator Mike Duffy, who took advantage of what could be his final days of the protection of parliamentary privilege, and laid out yet more accusations against the PMO. This after a morning where Stephen Harper took to the radio waves and declared that Nigel Wright had been fired, in direct contradiction to all previous assertions that Wright resigned. So while the Commons fixated on this contradiction, Senator Duffy took the floor in the Senate, and detonated his next bomb – that there was not one cheque, but two, and that the talk of an RBC loan was actually a script from the PMO that he had been made to deliver. That second cheque was from the Conservative party lawyer, Arthur Hamilton, which paid for Duffy’s legal fees – and this time, he provided documents to prove it. The party doesn’t deny covering the legal expenses, saying that they will sometimes pay the legal fees of their caucus members. This is likely an indication, according to John Geddes, that the party was still keen to defend him and by extension their decision to appoint him as a PEI senator, with their particular reading of those rules. While Duffy contended that there remains a whole other email chain in the hands of his lawyers that he wants to see turned over to the RCMP, though an envelope was later handed to the CBC which appeared to cast some doubt as to Duffy’s version of events – or at the very least was a good trial run as to his scripting around where the money came from. If there is one bright side to all of this it’s the level of engagement that the public is demonstrating, and the fact that senators are pointing to the number of emails they are receiving from people who want to see due process – and one senator that I spoke with this afternoon brought this up without prompting. And while these senators have zero sympathy for their three embattled peers, they at least want to ensure that there is process followed.
Roundup: Overhauling military procurement?
The CBC’s sources are telling them that a complete reorganisation of the military procurement system will be a highlight of the upcoming Throne speech. Whether that reorganisation is to put it in a new agency under the direction of a single minister, or as a permanent secretariat comprised of bureaucrats (and presumably outside consultants) remains to be seen, but hopefully there will be a system where there is some accountability, and a single responsible authority rather than the murky mess that is the current system where everyone is involved but nobody is responsible or accountable.
Roundup: Del Mastro facing charges
Elections Canada has now charged Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro with four breaches of the Elections Act stemming from the 2008 election, and charged his official agent with three of those offences. Within a couple of hours, Del Mastro was out of the caucus (he says voluntarily, but we all know what that means), which also means that his parliamentary secretary position was also out the door. And of course, Del Mastro insists that he’s innocent and plans to prove it – because Elections Canada just spent the past four years gathering evidence because they’re part of a Conservative-hating conspiracy, apparently. Oh, and if convicted, Del Mastro and his official agent could be sentenced to up to five years in jail plus a $5000 per offence – now multiply that by four, and you’ll see the stakes of Del Mastro’s situation.
Roundup: The PBO and parliamentary fixes
In this week’s Maclean’s, Aaron Wherry talks to Kevin Page about his new job at the University of Ottawa. In a separate but related piece, he talks to parliamentary scholar Donald Savoie about the PBO, and Savoie says some very cogent things about the office – that it is unnecessary because it allows MPs to fob off their homework onto someone else who can be seen as more “pure,” but it simply creates a new unaccountable personality that caters to the media rather than forcing parties to do the serious work of scrutiny and policy that they should be doing. Savoie’s solution is that parliament work to fix its own mess around the estimates process than work to fix the Parliamentary Budget Office, and it’s a position that I think is eminently more sensible if we want responsible government or the Westminster system to mean anything.