The Commons had their “emergency debate” on the situation in Iraq last night, using debate loosely, of course. After all, “debate” these days tends to largely mean reading monotonous speeches into the record that were all pre-written and don’t actually debate what has already been said. The NDP hammered away at demanding a vote on deployment, never mind that military deployment is a Crown prerogative and thus not subject to a vote, and in fact, shouldn’t be because it launders the prerogative and the accountability. But if Mulcair wants to give Harper political cover so that he can, in the future, say that the Commons decided on the matter and that they are culpable when things go wrong because there was a vote, well, it makes it kind of awkward for the opposition, no? It’s part of Responsible Government – the Commons has given the government the authority to govern, and if they don’t like it, then they can withdraw confidence. Voting to “make decisions” is not actually their role – accountability is. The NDP were also childishly mocking the Liberals for largely not being there for the debate – except that they only got two speaking slots the whole night, which they used near the beginning, and as we’ve established that it’s not a real debate, it does seem fairly pointless to have a bunch of people there to simply endure repetitive prepared speeches – and make no mistake, they are repetitive – with no real ability to respond or add to what’s been said. But this is the state of our parliament these days.
Tag Archives: Foreign Policy
Roundup: Proposing a premium holiday
Given that the government’s EI tax credit actually has the perverse incentive to fire employees or reduce wages instead of hiring new staff as was intended, Justin Trudeau offered up a different solution yesterday, which is to offer employers a two-year holiday on paying the EI premiums of new staff. One wonders why he just doesn’t suggest setting the rate at the break-even rate in the actuarial report, which is a mere 0.02 percent above what the government’s “tax credit” effectively reduces it to, but would be across the board, but hey, he’s putting ideas on the table, right?
Roundup: A guilty verdict for Sona
The verdict is in, and former Conservative staffer Michael Sona has been found guilty of aiding and abetting the fraudulent robocall scheme in Guelph in the last election – though the judge made it clear that Sona was not the only one involved, and cast a lot of doubt on the testimony of Andrew Prescott, who was given immunity in exchange for said testimony. All throughout the process, Sona had tweeted about the poor quality of the Elections Canada investigation, and the judge seemed to echo some of those sentiments, but nevertheless found Sona to bear some culpability. The Conservatives, meanwhile, insist that they ran a clean and ethical campaign, and that this is just a couple of bad apples – but as Michael Den Tandt notes, the number of bad apples are piling up on the watch of this prime minister, and that question of judgement which Harper claims to be an issue when it comes to Justin Trudeau can be laid as much at his feet as well. Sona won’t be sentenced until mid-October, and he sounds like he’s preparing for the worst – prison time. There remains the possibility for him to appeal, but the grounds for appeal are fairly narrow and they would have to prove that the judge erred, and they couldn’t introduce new evidence in the case, such as having Sona testify in his own defence, which he didn’t during the trial.
Roundup: Simultaneous praise and condemnation
In an interview with the Vancouver Sun, Justin Trudeau gave a somewhat confusing response to what he would do around the First Nations accountability legislation that has made the salaries of chiefs and band councils public. While on the one hand he said it was a good thing that the questionably high payments to certain chiefs were aired, he nevertheless said the law should be scrapped, but that same information be made available to band members so that they could make their own decisions. I’m not sure that it’s just enough to say that the government is trying to force their opponents to be more open and transparent – being First Nations and unions – while their own top political staff salaries remain secret (which isn’t really true because salary ranges are public). If he really were concerned with open and transparent government, he could have others – like top political staff – disclose their salaries to the same levels as the “opponents” of the government. It just seems like trying to hard to paint the current government as bad guys (I know, I know – politics) when in the same breath he praised the results of the same legislation.
Roundup: A good kid
Correctional Services’ own reports show that Omar Khadr is a “good kid,” non-radicalised and highly compliant, but that hasn’t stopped the government from trying to paint him as a heinous war criminal as they continue to deny journalists’ requests to interview him in prison. It looks more and more like they are trying to protect the narrative about him that they have built up for political cover.
Roundup: Hacking very valuable data
Hackers, allegedly from China, have hit the National Research Council’s systems and have compromised them, leading to them being shut down. While we don’t know what kind of damage there is or what has been accessed, this is the country’s premier research institution, which has more recently been billing itself as a partner for businesses around the country to help them develop and get to market new technologies. It’s suspected that employee personal information and client data may have been compromised. It’s no wonder that it would be a prime target for industrial espionage. China denies that they were involved, but CSE seems to believe that the hackers originated from there. It may be a year before NRC has a more secure platform for their data, though curiously, they have been working on quantum communications, which promise to be unhackable and secure. Not soon enough, however, it would seem.
Roundup: CRA takes exception
Things with the CRA seem to be taking a turn for the bizarre as they are getting into a fight with well-known charity Oxfam over the charity’s stated goal of trying to prevent poverty around the world. According to the CRA, that’s not an acceptable goal – they should only try to alleviate poverty, as preventing it might benefit people who are not already poor. Yeah, I’m still trying to figure that one out too. According to CRA, the courts haven’t found that that the risk of poverty is the same as actually being in need, so this splitting of hairs means that they can’t put “prevention” in their purpose statement. And it’s not like this is part of the supposed “crackdown” on charities either – this had to do with a regular process of renewing Oxfam’s non-profit status, but it has been noted that Jason Kenney singled them out earlier in the year over their opposition to Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Why the CRA would play petty politics for any minister – especially one that they don’t report to – sounds a little too odd, but this whole situation is just so strange that it will invite conspiracy theory.
Roundup: Mulcair’s high hopes for Alberta
Despite having already lost their star candidate for the riding, Thomas Mulcair remains confident that the NDP can still win Edmonton Centre in the next general election – never mind that the confluence of factors that favoured Linda Duncan aren’t really present in that particular riding. Mulcair then headed to Calgary, where he scoffed at the notion of Harper as national unifier, and pointed to the current voluntary national securities regulator project as an example of sowing divisions with provinces like Alberta, who don’t want to sign on. Erm, not sure how it’s relevant, or why the Supreme Court would shut down a voluntary scheme, but whatever.
Roundup: Momentum or not after the by-elections
I hope that everyone has enjoyed their Dominion Day celebrations. The Liberals and Conservatives certainly have, after their by-election wins, the Liberals not only holding Scarborough–Agincourt and winning Trinity–Spadina, but they made impressive gains in Fort McMurray–Athabasca. Their voter share went up in pretty much every one of the ridings, which probably says something. In fact, the Conservatives took less than 50 percent of the vote in Fort McMurray, which is actually a fairly significant thing, and perhaps not all that surprising given how upset they are with the changes made to the Temporary Foreign Workers Programme, which has a significant impact on their local economies, not to mention the myriad of ways in which the Harper government has ballsed up the Keystone XL file, and made it harder for the Americans to come to an agreement on it. As well, the Green Party scored more votes in Macleod than the NDP, which must also give them some pause as they keep insisting that they are making headway into Alberta. Kady O’Malley notes the increase in Liberal voter share, and the stumbling NDP momentum leading into 2015. Aaron Wherry muses about the meaning of the victories for Trudeau, and whether it really is disaster for Mulcair and that it probably wasn’t the NDP’s Outremont, as many Liberals were trying to suggest. Of course, with the really low voter turnouts (getting the turnout nerd crowd to declare that we need mandatory voting now), Pundit’s Guide looks at that factor, and how these contests may play out in 2015 after redistribution, which could be important once Fort McMurray–Athabasca gets broken up.
Roundup: Four by-elections today
It’s by-election day in four ridings across the country – two in Alberta and two in Toronto. Despite the usual lazy story ledes about how this is somehow yet another “test” for Trudeau, it would seem to me that this is more of a test for Mulcair with the two Toronto ridings, as to whether or not he can hold the one seat he had there or make gains with the other, while in Alberta, it’ll be a test as to how much Harper can retain his own base – something he has had trouble with in the past few by-elections, whether in Calgary Centre or Brandon–Souris, where significant leads were lost and their wins were narrow and marginal compared to resurgent Liberals who had not had traction in those regions in decades. And Fort McMurray will be a very interesting race to watch, not only because of the amount of attention that Trudeau in particular paid to the region, but because of the deep unhappiness with the industry there to the changes to the Temporary Foreign Workers programme, which they rely on heavily because of an overheated market with no labour available. That may be the biggest upset if they decide to punish Harper at the ballot box. All of which is a far more interesting lede than whether the Liberals are being “tested” once more.