Tag Archives: Healthcare

Roundup: Totally not buying votes

Posted on by

With those new child benefit cheques starting to flow, a couple of bits of analysis were done over the past few days. One was to use census data to look at the demographics of ridings where people stood to gain the most from the new cheques, and wouldn’t you know it, of the 338 ridings, most were either Conservative or had a good chance of leaning that way in the next election. The other piece did some detective work into Pierre Poilievre’s big hunt for families who had not signed up for the benefit, and how he was able to derive numbers of how many families in certain regions had not done so. Why target regions? Why, electioneering, of course. There were also some pretty artificial deadlines being floated for getting people to sign up to the programme, so that cheques would handily flow just as the election is kicking off. Because that’s not trying to buy votes with people’s own money either, apparently. Among the places Poilievre visited on his “ finding families” tour were, you guessed it, Conservative ridings, while First Nations communities, who were less likely to be signed up, didn’t merit visits at all as they were unlikely to vote Conservative. So in case you really did think that these child benefit cheques were really about helping families and not about trying to buy votes, well, the analysis doesn’t support that kind of altruistic viewpoint.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/622932565306003456

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/622933109340774400

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/622933409762045953

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/622933528775364608

Continue reading →

QP: Bono’s big visit

Posted on by

With Bono promised to attend, MPs were vibrating with fannish glee during Members’ Statemets. Thomas Mulcair even showed up on a Monday, which is an indication of how big of a deal they were making of it. When he led off, he led immediately with the AG report on the Senate, and asked about PMO interference (not that any has been alleged). Paul Calandra, quite predictably, brought up the NDP satellite offices. Mulcair then raised the mischief-making of the possibility that Senators won’t travel extra city blocks to get cheaper temporary office space, to which Diane Finley made a bland statement about expecting senators to take whatever temporary office space if given to them. Mulcair then went on a soliloquy that he is probably glad he was shielded by privilege for, and asked a rhetorical question about why the PM appointed the senators he did, not that Calandra’s reply changed from before. Mulcair changed topics, brought up Bono (who still had not arrived) and the fact that the government has not committed to actually doing anything about the poverty pledge they are signing onto. Christian Paradis praised the government’s programmes abroad. Mulcair noted the poverty among First Nations, to which Bernard Valcourt listed their success stories in the north. Ralph Goodale led off for the Liberals, asking about the Information Commissioner’s decision to take the government to court over those deleted gun registry records, and wondered who counselled the behaviour. Stephen Blaney touted the destruction of said registry and gave a false point another the will of parliament. Goodale pressed, and Blaney doubled down. Stéphane Dion gave it a go in French, and got the same answer — again.

Continue reading →

QP: Concern over a slight shrinking in GDP

Posted on by

It being Tuesday, the leaders were all present and ready to go, because apparently it only counts two days a week now. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking about the new numbers from StatsCan that showed that GDP shrank ever so slightly last month. Stephen Harper touted his family tax cut legislation instead. Mulcair demanded a budget, but Harper demurred. Mulcair decried “all of the eggs” in the oil basket — actually not true — and continued his demand for a budget, but Harper kept insisting that they are continuing their Economic Action Plan™ and that it was working. Mulcair then moved onto this morning’s PBO report that said that families with older kids and those without kids in childcare will be getting more benefits than those with kids in childcare. Harper first insisted that the NDP wanted to raise taxes, and then insisted that all families would get an increase in after-tax benefits. Mulcair decried those families with kids in childcare being punished, but Harper repeated his answer. Justin Trudeau was up next, and he returned to the reports of negative growth in three months of the past six, and wondered when the government would come up with a plan to get the economy moving. Harper responded with a laundry list of their recent announcements, and insisted that the Liberals only wanted to raise taxes. Trudeau noted that giving a tax break to the rich wouldn’t help, but Harper insisted that forecasts still showed growth, and wanted support for their family tax break bill. Trudeau asked again in French, and Harper repeated his answer in French.

Continue reading →

QP: What about Future Shop?

Posted on by

Monday in the Commons, and as is now usual, none of the major leaders were present. It’s not like holding the government to account is important or anything. That left Nycole Turmel to lead off, haltingly reading a question about the closures of Future Shop stores, and government inaction on job creation. Joe Oliver was actually present for the first time in weeks, but simply delivered a talking point on the the fragile global economy and their low-tax plan. Turmel asked again in French, and got much the same answer. Turmel then turned to the issue of Jason Kenney’s false statements about precision-guided munitions. Kenney stood up and insisted that the U.S. and Canada are the only countries with these capabilities. Jack Harris asked again in English, and Kenney insisted that the Chief of Defence Staff confirmed his statement, which…is not necessarily the case. For his final question, Harris asked about Canadian jets possibly coming under fire in Syria, to which Kenney said that he was told that the Syrians didn’t have radar coverage in that region. Marc Garneau was up for the Liberals, and asked about downgraded economic forecasts. Joe Oliver responded with a quip about high Liberal taxes. Ralph Goodale then asked for more investment in municipal infrastructure, to which Joe Oliver insisted that the Liberals wanted to weaken the oil economy. Huh? Another round offered no further clarity.

Continue reading →

QP: What about those Syrian refugees?

Posted on by

Despite it only being Thursday, and with the debate on the Iraq going on throughout the day, it was perhaps strange for none of the major leaders to be present. Sadly, it’s no longer surprising. That meant that Megan Leslie led off for the NDP, to which she asked about the inaction on asylum requests from Iraq and Syria. Chris Alexander insisted that they have hosted the largest number of resettled refugees from Iraq and Syria. Leslie pointed that the government only met their 2013 promises for Syrian refugees, and wanted the plans to ensure that the current promises will be kept on time. Alexander responded with bluster about goals having been fulfilled and promises made. Leslie asked why the mission extension motion doesn’t have any new money for refugees, but Alexander’s bluster in response increased in volume and exasperation. Jack Harris was up next, and noted that the government has admitted that the mission will likely take years, and that the one-year extension was only a first step. Jason Kenney insisted that the terms of the motion were clear based on the current number of forces deployed. When Harris asked about the legal justifications given, Rob Nicholson raised Iraq asking for international help. Stéphane Dion led for the Liberals, asking about the huge job cuts at CBC. Rick Dykstra responded that CBC was responsible for their own operations, and to put on programming that people want to watch. Ralph Goodale noted that the Alberta and Saskatchewan were able to table budgets despite oil price uncertainty, and wondered when the federal government would do. Andrew Saxton responded with some pro forma talking points about the low-tax agenda. When pressed, Saxton read praise for the government’s plans.

https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/581160408360173568

Continue reading →

QP: Even Ontario wants NDP childcare

Posted on by

Caucus day in the Commons, and all of the major leaders were again in the chamber, with the Conservatives proud of the new MPs elected in Monday’s by-elections who were visiting in advance of being sworn in, while the NDP were crowing over social media about Maria Mourani joining their party (but not caucus until after the next election). Thomas Mulcair led off by noting that the Ontario legislature voted in favour of supporting the NDP’s childcare plan, and asked about the government’s previous pledges. Harper reminded him that the other night, some Ontarians voted overwhelmingly against the NDP, and that his government has made life more affordable for all families. Mulcair wondered when Harper would meet with the Ontario premier about issues like childcare, and Harper claimed that he meets with premiers regularly — except he’s been avoiding Kathleen Wynne. Mulcair claimed that 65 percent of Canadians live in jurisdictions that want more affordable childcare, and repeated his demand for childcare spaces. Harper insisted that his government has put money in the pockets of Canadians that the NDP were planning on taking back. Mulcair pressed on Harper’s previous specific commitments about the healthcare escalator, to which Harper insisted that they have increased transfers to promises to record levels. Mulcair insisted that the transfer rate change was a cut (which it really wasn’t), but Harper repeated his answers. Justin Trudeau noted that the government would vote against his bill on Access to Information citing bureaucratic increases, and wondered why they opposed the modernization of Access to Information. Harper said that they did modernize the system by bringing 70 new agencies under its aegis and that the Liberals opposed other transparency measures. Trudeau moved to the cuts to infrastructure funds, to which Harper said that the Liberals voted against funding and that they only wanted to “raise taxes to fund bureaucracy.” Trudeau moved onto a conference in Montreal that Harper skipped, and Harper insisted that the government was represented.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Misplaced corruption claims

Posted on by

I find myself troubled by this study that shows that a third of Canadians think that politicians routinely accept bribes, because I can’t think of a claim that could be further from the truth, but it’s also something that I think that We The Media need to have a long, hard think about as well. On the face of it, Canada does pretty well when it comes to running clean governments – what corruption there is, is pretty small change, and spending scandals tend to be isolated and low-key. The Sponsorship Scandal was pennies, really, in the grand scheme of things, but it’s been made out to have been a giant kleptocratic conspiracy by both political opponents of the Liberals, and some media talking heads for dramatic effect. Senators padding their expenses? Again, small change and most of it was caught by Senate administration before it hit the media. So where is this perception coming from? I think the preponderance of American scandals is rubbing off on our own politicians a lot, where they don’t have campaign spending limits or limits on corporate donations. So when people here think that the oil and gas lobby has bought off our politicians, I ask “How, exactly?” $1100 doesn’t really buy you a whole lot. And perhaps We The Media need to do a better job of putting scandal into context so that we don’t create this perception that our government is conducting graft at the kind of Third World levels that they’re made out to be. There is a line between accountability and hyperbole, and it’s disappointing to see how often it gets completely ignored.

Continue reading →

QP: Distance from tax evasion

Posted on by

As a Thursday before a break week, MPs were already starting to filter away from the Hill, all major leader already absent. While Harper is in China, Mulcair was in Whitby to campaign for the by-election there, Justin Trudeau to do the same in Yellowhead. That meant that Megan Leslie kicked off QP, asking about major layoff announcements, blaming the government for them. Peter Van Loan answered, praising the government’s job creation record. Leslie brought up tax evasion and the Public Service Pension Investment Board’s scheme, to which Tony Clement assured her that the board is arm’s length from the government. Leslie noted the depressed staffing levels at CRA as possible explanations for why they are not going after tax cheats. Clement assured her that some 8000 investigations for overseas tax evasion were undertaken. Nycole Turmel asked the same in French, got the same response in French, before Turmel brought up the harassment allegations and the Status of Women committee’s report on harassment in the workplace, asking the committee chair when they would meet. Hélène LeBlanc noted Turmel’s career in the public service and that they should make harassment a thing of the past — not answering the question. Ralph Goodale asked about the economy shrinking, to which Joe Oliver insisted that things were great, and even Standards & Poors reconfirmed the country’s AAA credit rating. Goodale then blasted the income splitting tax credit, to which Candice Bergen brought up the “beer and popcorn” talking point — again avoiding the issue of income splitting. Dominic LeBlanc noted the problems with income splitting in French, and Bergen again avoided the issue of income splitting.

Continue reading →

QP: A break from the Iraq debate

Posted on by

With the debate on the Iraq deployment underway, QP was a break in the proceedings. Stephen Harper, however, was elsewhere, as was Justin Trudeau, who was off watching the Hillary Clinton speech down the road instead. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking for a national inquiry on missing and murdered Aboriginal women. Kellie Leitch responded that they were already taking action rather than waiting for more reports. Mulcair changed topics and demanded to know why Canadian Forces personnel were being deployed to Iraq before a vote had been held. Rob Nicholson listed some of the forces they would be sending over. Mulcair decried the fact that the government would give tacit support to the Assad regime by getting permission before any air strikes in Syrian territory. Nicholson responded about the threat of ISIS in the region. Mulcair pressed and wondered about the Americans lowering their standards for certainty with air bombardment, giving Nicholson the opportunity to badger him about their support for taking down ISIS. Marc Garneau led for the Liberals, and asked about the humanitarian crises in Turkey and Jordan given the flood of refugees they have accepted, to which Christian Paradis assured him that Canada was sending millions of dollars in aid to those regions. Garneau returned to the question of air strikes within Syrian borders and under what conditions they would negotiate with Assad. Nicholson said that currently they would only make strikes in Iraq, and if that changed Syria might be included.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Seized with the Iraq debate

Posted on by

The Commons will be seized today with debating the Iraq combat deployment, which will culminate in a confidence vote (which has been phrased in such a way that it’s confidence in the government after they have made the decision, as opposed to a vote to authorize deployment, which would make for fuzzy lines of accountability going forward – and yes, there is a big difference). The issue of civilian casualties being a likelihood given the air strikes is likely to come up, as it is in the States. Rob Nicholson is also refusing to say whether or not there will be an extension, which is all well and good from the point of nobody being able to tell the future, but given that ISIS is already adapting to the threat of air strikes means that our ability to contribute will likely soon be a fairly moot point. Also, the piece led to this interesting exchange.

Continue reading →