In a rather surprising announcement at the end of the day yesterday, the government has named the Parliamentary Librarian as the interim Parliamentary Budget Officer until Kevin Page’s replacement can be found. That process is internal to the Library, and Page has expressed concerns that the makeup of the committee charged with the search is being kept secret, but I do get concerned when opposition parties want input into those processes, because it ultimately erodes the accountability for those appointments. Look at the questions surrounding Arthur Porter these days, and how Vic Toews skirts accountability by pointing out that the opposition leaders were consulted on his appointment. That’s why the prerogative power of appointment should rest with the Governor in Council – because it keeps the executive as the sole resting place of accountability. Meanwhile, the job criteria for the next PBO have been posted, and they include qualities like “discreet” and “consensus seeking” – perhaps not too surprising after the battles that Page had with the previous Parliamentary Librarian over his role.
Tag Archives: Foreign Policy
QP: Trolling for support for abolition
It was a lovely Wednesday in the Nation’s Capital, the sun out, the snow melting. It being caucus day, the benches were almost full, and the energy level was high. Thomas Mulcair started off by reading a pair of questions designed to troll for support for his Senate abolition motion, but Harper wasn’t going to take the bait, and said that he favoured electing Senators because everybody knows that the provinces won’t agree to abolition. For his final supplemental, Mulcair turned to the issue of EI training funds, which Harper assured him that they were consulting widely on. Chris Charlton picked up on the same topic, to which Ted Menzies got to deliver the points about consultation and how training was helping with the economy. For the Liberals, Bob Rae asked about unemployment figures comparing between October 2008 and today, and whether the budget would address that. Harper didn’t really respond, but simply said that the Liberals voted against their job creating measures. Rae turned to the unilateral decision to reclaim the EI training fund, to which Harper said such a move would go against Rae’s assertion that they weren’t doing anything about the unemployed. For his final question, Rae asked why there hasn’t been an inquiry into security breaches like the Dr. Arthur Porter and Jeffrey Delisle, to which Harper gave the usual non-answer about Porter’s time at SIRC being unrelated to the allegations against him.
Roundup: Meet the new Religious Freedom ambassador
The government has named Andrew Bennett, a former civil servant and current dean of a Christian college in Ottawa, as its new ambassador for the Office of Religious Freedom. We’ll now see what happens with this office – it’s small and its $5 million budget won’t go far, and there will be scrutiny to see if it prefers some religions over others, or if it speaks out against religious persecutions of women or gays and lesbians, or even atheists.
NDP leader Thomas Mulcair went to Calgary to address the Chamber of Commerce there, and talked about making foreign investment criteria more transparent, and then talked doom about the Canada-China FIPA. Experts, however, have panned his apocalyptic reading of the agreement.
Roundup: The omnishambles of a meeting that may not be
Here is the recap of yesterday’s omnishambles that was the drama over whether or not the First Nations meeting with the Prime Minister was going to happen or not. We’re still not sure. (It was so long that it became its own separate blog post). Here is a primer on some of the issues at play with the meeting, assuming it happens, and some of the broader First Nations discussions going on right now. This was the plan for the meeting – assuming it still goes ahead. The CBC looks at the issue with a group of diverse First Nations voices. Michael Den Tandt looks at Harper’s challenge in the meetings and the Aboriginal issue in the broader context.
Meanwhile, here’s a look at the blank slate that is what we know about Chief Theresa Spence’s history, which suits both her supporters and critics. We have learned that her partner and band co-manager has a history of bankruptcy, and yet he’s the one managing Attawapiskat’s books. Also, he claims to have been training for his CGA designation, and yet there is no record of that.
Roundup: Redefining status
The Federal Court has ruled that non-status Aboriginals and Métis should be classified as “Indians” under the constitution, and that the federal government has a fiduciary responsibility towards them. This opens up a major can of worms in terms of the way that policy and duty to consult will have to happen going forward, as well as resources for those individuals based on what the government is obligated to provide, and this will be complicated more because the ruling does nothing to settle how the government will need to exercise this jurisdiction. This will doubtlessly be headed for the Supreme Court, so it may be some years before it is fully settled.
Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence’s boyfriend invites a forensic audit of the band’s finances to prove that there wasn’t any misspending – even though it’s been his job to provide the documentation that’s missing. He also defends his relationship and insists that he reports to the band council as a whole and that Spence doesn’t vote on conflicts of interests. Meanwhile, when Global News sent a crew up to Attawapiskat, they were kicked off the reserve and threatened with arrest – under Spence’s orders – while Spence’s camp on Victoria Island has also banned the media under the rubric that they are “printing lies.”
Roundup: A damning audit
Things on the Attawapiskat file got even more interesting yesterday with leaks of the independent audit of the band’s finances – the full report going online later in the day on the Aboriginal Affairs website. The gist – there was almost no due diligence with spending on the reserve, little to no documentation, and no way to tell if any of the money has been spent effectively. And remember that Spence’s partner is the band’s co-manager, whose job it is to handle the money. Spence has also known the audit’s results since August 28th, and has refused to comment to the audit firm about it. While it was due to be released no later than the middle of next week, the PM’s spokesperson denied that it had been withheld deliberately. And Spence? Shut out the media from her Victoria Island campsite while her spokesperson said that the audit was wrong and wondered about the timing of the release. Paul Wells notes that of all the leaders, past prime ministers and would-be leaders who’ve visited Spence, Thomas Mulcair was conspicuously absent, which may have turned out to be a prudent thing. Jonathan Kay parses the lessons inherent in that year-old CBC report on Attawapiskat, and applies them to the current situation. John Ivison looks at the audit, and the context of Theresa Spence’s ever-changing goal posts, while Andrew Coyne looks at the tensions in the Aboriginal community between those looking to modernise with incremental advancements the way the current government is proceeding with, and those who consider those advancements “genocide.”
Roundup: The continued protests
Despite the meeting arranged with Stephen Harper, Idle No More protests continued across the weekend, including at border crossings. Former Prime Minister Paul Martin met with Chief Theresa Spence on Saturday and said that she’s an inspiration for many. Spence is continuing her hunger strike until she’s sure that “concrete action” will be taken, which seems to be yet another case of goalposts being moved, each one fuzzier than the last. While APTN checks the math that SunTV did on Attawapiskat’s finances and comes to a few different conclusions, a year-old CBC report from the community reappeared over the Twitter Machine yesterday which shows that there are some serious governance problems on the reserve.
As the Parliamentary Budget Officer turns his gaze to the contract for joint support ships that the Royal Canadian Navy has been planning on building for years now, it looks like that particular process is its own mess, but in a reverse fashion from the F-35s, where the civilian side is taking too much control and there seems to be little regard for what the military’s needs are, while the focus remains solely on costs.
Roundup: MPs head home while the F-35 storm rages on
The House has risen, and the MPs are all headed back to their ridings. Not the Senate though – they’re still sitting, and I’ll be heading up their for Senate QP later today.
Okay, so now the big news from yesterday – the KPMG report on the F-35 procurement process. With a cost now pegged at $46 billion over 42 years, the government says that it’s officially pushing the reset button on the process – or is it? The former ADM of procurement at National Defence, Alan Williams, says that it’s meaningless unless the department redraws the Statement of Requirements to make stealth a “rated feature” with a point value rather than a pass/fail and it then goes for open tender. There’s also the problem of attrition and the additional costs of buying replacement aircraft, which is outside of the $9 billion procurement envelope being set. John Geddes rips apart Peter MacKay’s remorseless performance yesterday, and notes that the officials noted that it will be difficult to keep the aerospace contracts for supplying F-35 parts if we don’t end up going with that plane. John Ivison goes through the process and finds that if the Conservatives still end up going with the F-35s, it will look like incompetence. Andrew Coyne takes offence that the government continues to spin the numbers and calls bullshit – it’s not 42 years, but $46 million over 30 years, and that the government tacked on those extra 12 years to cover “development and acquisition,” which costs a few hundred million, but by making it look like a little over a billion dollars a year, the government is trying to make it look more palatable. Paul Wells notes the Conservatives’ tendency toward hubris when they should be listening to their critics, who do have a point. Of course, the US “fiscal cliff” may end up killing the F-35s as it would slash their defence spending.
Roundup: Making way for double bunking
Danger, Will Robinson! Danger! iPolitics has obtained documents that show that Corrections Canada is changing their policy to allow for double bunking to be normal policy, and to eliminate rules around maximum capacity. Not only does this violate our international agreements on corrections policy and it’s been proven to be bad for correctional behaviour period, but it’s like an invitation to a return to the era of prison riots. Well done, Vic Toews!
Here is your rough guide to the remaining stages of Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge in the Commons.
Ruh-roh! New documents show that the government was being briefed about the cost overruns of the F-35 fighters in advance of the Auditor General’s report. How much of this is just bureaucratic ass-covering is a question, but nevertheless, it looks like they knew more than they were letting on.
Roundup: Flaherty wants to stay put
Newsflash: Jim Flaherty says he wants to keep his job as Finance Minister until the budget is balanced, which likely means spring of 2015, in advance of a new election. While it’s unlikely that Harper will shuffle him out before he does his promised major re-shuffle a little closer to the next election, there have been some questions as to how long Flaherty will be sticking around as he’s been looking pretty tired and acting downright cranky the past couple of months.
Peter Kent is patting himself on the back for cancelling a proposed shallow gas infill project in Alberta, despite the fact that this was a decision that took seven years. Even more laughably, Kent is claiming the Orwellian-named “Responsible Resource Development” legislation from earlier this year as the reason for the cancellation – despite, as we mentioned, the fact that this has been a seven-year process.
As the government and the military continue to back away from the F-35s, General Tom Lawson now says the term “Fifth-generation” is unhelpful. Or should I say Fifth Generation™, since it’s a trademarked marketing term and not an actual description of capabilities.