With the election called in Quebec, which will no doubt consume the news cycle for the next six weeks, things carried on here in the Nation’s Capital unabated, despite the added media attention to Quebec MPs and any role that they’ll play. When QP got underway, Thomas Mulcair led off by asking whether Canada would be sending observers to Ukraine along with the Americans and others, to which Harper said that we were, as well as freezing some Russian assets and suspending more bilateral operations. Mulcair asked if Harper had reached out to the IMF, to which Harper said that they had. Mulcair changed topics, and asked about the consultations on the elections bill. Harper expressed his disappointment in the NDP’s opposition to the bill (err, kind of their job, you know). Mulcair said that the partisan tactics around the bill were unprecedented (um, not sure about that), to which Harper reminded him that they opposed the bill without reading it. For his last question, Mulcair asked about the lack of sanctions against Brad Butt for his “mis-speaking,” but Harper shrugged it off, saying that Butt had apologised of his own volition. Dominic LeBlanc led for the Liberals, and asked if elections observers would, be sent to Ukraine, and Baird indicated that we would be. LeBlanc turned to the decrease in funding from the Building Canada Fund, to which Denis Lebel insisted that the fund was $70 billion over ten years.
Tag Archives: Estimates
QP: Sombre questions about Ukraine
After an abbreviated number of members’ statements, thanks to a vote on closure regarding that prima facie breach of privilege around MP Brad Butt “mis-speaking” on voter fraud, QP got underway in a somewhat strange manner. While most everyone was present for the vote, the benches suddenly emptied and Harper, who was there for the vote was nowhere to be seen. Undaunted, Thomas Mulcair led off, mentioning his meeting with the Ukrainian ambassador and asked about news that Russia tested an intercontinental ballistic missile. Peter MacKay responded with the government’s concerns, and when Mulcair asked about the troops in Ukraine that Putin denied sending, MacKay reiterated the government’s concerns. When Mulcair asked about engagements with Putin, John Baird gave a quick statement about his efforts to date. Harper returned to the House, (as had most of those MPs who fled) and Mulcair asked again about what the government was doing about the situation, Harper told him that Canada was suspending bilateral activities with Russia. For his final question, Mulcair asked about the discussions among G7 partners, to which Harper told him that they were discussing the possibility of a meeting in a few weeks. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, and asked about the status of our embassy in Kyiv. Harper noted that the embassy was closed because of the violence during the protests, and that it wouldn’t be reopened until the threat of violence had passed. Goodale asked about the status of our embassy in Moscow, to which Harper assured him that our recalled ambassador had just returned and would be meeting with Baird later in the day, and that bilateral activities remained suspended. Goodale closed the round asking about the statement made by China with regards to respecting Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty, and Harper noted that this kind of activity hadn’t been seen since the Second World War (to which one of my gallery colleagues muttered “What about Georgia?”)
QP: Statements instead of answers on Ukraine
After a busy weekend of foreign affairs matters, given the situation in Ukraine, it appeared that everyone forgot about the House as none of the major leaders were present, and there were a lot of empty desks. (It should be noted that Trudeau is at home with his new baby). To add insult to injury, Stephen Harper was holding a media event while in Toronto at the same time. So much for the primacy of the Commons. Leading off for the NDP, Megan Leslie asked about what the government has said to Vladimir Putin about the situation in Ukraine, and Deepak Obhrai read a statement in response. Leslie asked about how many Canadians were in the country and what was done to contact them, to which Obhrai assured her that they were in touch with those Canadians. Leslie changed topics and brought up the objections to the elections bill by Preston Manning and Harry Neufeld, but Pierre Poilievre recited the parts of the bill that Manning liked. Nycole Turmel repeated the same in French, and got the same response. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, and returned to the situation in Ukraine, asking about the status of Russia in the G8. Obhrai repeated his previous statement of condemnation. Goodale changed topics to municipal infrastructure funding and the cuts to the Building Canada Fund. Denis Lebel insisted that the premise was false, and that they had tripled infrastructure funding. Dominic LeBlanc closed the round by asking the same in French, and got the same response.
Roundup: Wall denies ambitions
From the Manning Networking Conference, we saw presentations by Brad Wall, who wants the country to be both a food and energy superpower (and he insists that he has no federal ambitions, which makes one wonder all the more about his motivations as to why he’s constantly carrying Stephen Harper’s lunch among the premiers), by Jim Prentice, who said that there needs to be stronger environmental connections to achieve their energy goals like Keystone XL, and Jason Kenney announced progress on his Canada Job Grant plan before saying that he not only supports income splitting, but he made a somewhat impolitic statement about “stable families” being the best way to help youth find economic success in adulthood – but then couldn’t answer about his apparent abandonment of kids from “unstable families.” (Also, one supposes that such a statement was also a sop to the social conservative base that he’s courting). The party’s pollster gave grave warnings about how the party’s numbers are doing, and it’s not good, as the Liberal brand has rebounded, something that happened even before Trudeau became the leader. He also found that there’s just no interest in a discussion on marijuana on either side, and suggested that they drop it. Andrew Coyne notes that the Conference is like the real Conservative convention – as opposed to the Harper Party one that happened last fall, and that we’re seeing more people starting to disassociate themselves from Harper and his way of doing politics.
Roundup: Inconvenient evidence
When asked about why his concern over the “stagnating” middle class and how it doesn’t fit with the trend lines in the data, Justin Trudeau said that he’s looking at the data since the 1980s – just before two massive recessions – and cited that ESDC report that said that the middle class dream is “more myth than reality.” It certainly raises questions about the supposed commitment to evidence-based policy when it doesn’t fit with the narrative that they’ve decided to fight the next election on.
Roundup: Kenney makes things awkward
Those questions of the government position on income splitting dominated the headlines again today, with some new added dimensions as Jason Kenney popped into the controversy. As Harper conspicuously avoided assuring reporters that the proposal was still on the table, Jason Kenney insisted that they keep their campaign promises – something that may be a signal and a warning. If it’s not an official government policy, then disagreement is certainly interesting, but if it is, then a split in cabinet means that cabinet solidarity is being ruptured, and someone is going to have to resign (unless we’re really keen to throw out the rules around Responsible Government). Michael Den Tandt believes that the government should step away from the policy, and the sooner the better.
Roundup: Unnecessary supplemental estimates?
The Parliamentary Budget Officer wonders why the government is looking for $5.4 billion in the supplementary estimates tabled yesterday, considering that they underspent $10 billion for each of the past three year. It’s another example of the lack of transparency that his government engages in when reporting to the House its fiscal responsibilities. And hey, maybe MPs should be scrutinising these estimates and asking questions, rather than the PBO doing their homework for them – once again. But math is hard, and so on.
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.
QP: Quotas and downshifting
It’s an awful, wet day out in the Nation’s Capital, the precipitation an ugly mix of fluffy wet snow and needle-like ice pellets. Inside the Commons, QP kicked off with Thomas Mulcair reading a question about cuts to services for First Nations including policing. Harper responded that there were no cuts, and that new funds would be announced in due course. Mulcair’s second question was about Flaherty’s letter to the CRTC, to which Harper reminded him that he already answered the question the day before. Mulcair then asked a question about those Senators who have not yet responded to the CBC about their residency. Harper assured him that all Senators respect their residency requirement (though I suppose that remains to be seen). Nycole Turmel was up next to ask a pair of EI “quota” questions, speciously tying in the Senate, to which Diane Finley assured her that there were no quotas or bonuses for achieving cuts. Rae pressed on the issue of bonuses for cuts, to which Harper talked about how they wanted to ensure that EI funds were there for those who paid into them. Rae carried on about how this move was simply downshifting the unemployed onto provincial welfare rolls, but Harper insisted there was no such plan.
QP: Getting Harper on the record, scattershot style
With all leaders on deck on a lovely Tuesday afternoon in the Nation’s Capital, QP got underway with Thomas Mulcair reading a question on why John Duncan was dropped from cabinet over an improper letter, but not Jim Flaherty. Harper responded that in Flaherty’s case, it was an administrative error. Mulcair moved on to the topic of EI “quotas,” to which Harper insisted that they were merely performance audit. Mulcair then moved onto the “scandals” in the Senate, to which Harper somehow turned it into a paean for an elected Senate — not that it would actually address the current issues. For his final question, Mulcair demanded that Harper stay away from the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka, and Harper started off by carrying on his elected Senate paean before saying that he would not attend the meeting. For the Liberals, Bob Rae asked about the house calls that EI recipients are receiving as part of the effort to stamp out fraud. Harper responded by saying that EI was paid into by honest Canadians and they want to ensure that the money is there for honest recipients. For his final question, Rae asked about the Estimates tabled yesterday and the increase in advertising budgets while front-line services are being cut. Harper insisted that said front-line services were not being cut.