Tag Archives: Hugh Segal

Roundup: Draft clean electricity regulations released

Posted on by

The federal government unveiled their draft clean electricity regulations yesterday, which would be the expectation they are setting for a 2035 clean energy grid—meaning there are twelve years for industry to work toward these targets and goals. And yes, there is still some provision for natural gas generation under certain circumstances for those who were worried. These are draft regulations, so there is now a consultation process for how they can be refined to address the concerns of provinces and territories, or industry players, so that hopefully things can be the best for all involved.

Of course, immediately Scott Moe declared this was impossible and that he’s not going to play, and Danielle Smith sulked and played the defiance card. None of this is impossible, and yes, there are unique challenges in both provinces, but immediately declaring defeat and that you’re going to sit this one out is petulant, never mind the wildfires and the droughts affecting both provinces (Saskatchewan especially on the latter). Remember that “entrepreneurial spirit” they have built an entire self-congratulatory myth around? Apparently, that only applies to the accident of geology of sitting on oil reserves, rather than the opportunity for developing an industry and job creation from the green transition. Funny that.

Meanwhile, Andrew Leach and Blake Shaffer have some threads on the announcement and what’s in them, the top post of each are below, so click through them.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile struck a hotel in Zaporizhzhia that is frequently used by UN officials when they are in the area. Russians also destroyed a fuel depot in the Rivne region. Ukrainian officials have ordered the mandatory evacuation of some 12,000 civilians from the eastern Kharkiv region, where Russians are trying to punch through the front line.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Peace bonds and terror suspects

Posted on by

Everyone seems to want to talk about how the Aaron Driver terrorism incident went down and how it relates to the government’s plans to amend the old C-51 into something that better balances Charter rights, so here is some preliminary analysis from the expert, Craig Forcese, and more analysis that he did with Kent Roach for the Globe and the Post. And yes, the Liberals have reiterated that they plan to amend the legislation, while the NDP continue to demand its repeal (which may be difficult given how it interacts with pre-existing legislation). Meanwhile, here’s an interview with Driver’s father and a professor who studies radicalization – who noted that the isolation of the peace bond may have made that radicalization worse – and a reminder about the realities of terrorism like this in Canada versus Europe.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Segal’s misplaced demand

Posted on by

Oh, Hugh Segal. While I can understand your concern for your former colleagues, and that there were problems around due process for the trio of formerly suspended senators, I have to say that your demand for a formal apology from the Senate to Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau seems a bit…off-base. The three were suspended in large part because of the ill repute that they brought to the Senate, and just because the Crown abandoned charges against two of them in the wake of Duffy’s acquittal, nobody is saying that none of them did anything wrong. A finding that Duffy’s actions were not criminal is far from finding that there was no wrong that had been done – the Senate’s own rules were broken, even in Donald Bayne managed to convince a judge that the rules were vague. Segal is also off-base when he says that the Senate should have spent their energies fixing those rules instead of throwing people under the bus – in fact, the Senate has been working on updating their rules for years, even before the Duffy expenses were brought to light, and that trial hastened the reform process that had already been underway. Saying that they are owed back pay and again forgets that they brought disrepute onto the institution, and were punished for it within the rules of the Senate. Yes, as stated, there were problems with the due process of it, but rules were broken. Expenses were claimed when they should not have been. Calendars were altered, meetings were claimed that did not happen. Official addresses were made where senators did not live. These facts are not really in dispute, and the Senate had an obligation to do something about it, if not for any other reason than to be shown to be addressing the problems that were addressed rather than letting them slide and opening themselves up to even more criticism about letting people get away with it just because they’re senators. Was it embarrassing for everyone involved? Yes. Is it “torture” to still demand that Duffy repay expenses that were proven to have broken the rules? Hardly. Is it the Senate’s fault that the RMCP and the Crown didn’t do a thorough enough job? Not really. In light of all of this, I find Segal’s insistence on apologies to be hard to swallow.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Tony Abbott’s man-crush

Posted on by

Tony Abbott had his meetings with Stephen Harper and the Governor General yesterday, but it was really clear that his man-crush was on Harper. Or “Stephen,” as he kept calling him, with effusive and somewhat obsequious praise for his being a “beacon” for centre-right parties around the world. (This after Abbott inadvertently referred to the country as “Canadia” upon his arrival Sunday). Both took hard lines against carbon taxes, as Abbott is in the process of trying to repeal the one in his country (where the Australian Senate is holding it up and may continue to until the next Senate election in two years), while Harper literally finger-wagged about how at least he was honest about not wanting to kill the country’s economy. Harper also answered a question about the prostitution bill during the press conference, and gave the same line he used regarding Insite and the harm reduction measures there – that prostitution wasn’t harmful because it’s illegal, but it’s illegal because it’s harmful, and woe to all the harm it does. Err, except that the Supreme Court ruled that the illegalities that surrounded it made it so harmful that it killed the sex workers involved. We’ll see if Harper’s reason flies with the Supreme Court when it winds its way back there. Abbott also stood by the Five Eyes intelligence partnership, and said that countries should never apologies for doing what was necessary to protect themselves. Okay then.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Mourani renounces separatism

Posted on by

Pauline Marois has managed to do something particularly spectacular – she turned Maria Mourani from a dyed-in-the-wool separatist who ran for the leadership of the Bloc Québécois, into an avowed federalist. Indeed, Mourani announced yesterday that she is renouncing separatism and embracing Canada, because the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the best way to protect minorities and Quebeckers as a whole, as opposed to the proposed Charter of Quebec Values. There remains no word if Mourani will seek to join another party – Thomas Mulcair said that she’d need to run as an NDP candidate before she could sit in their caucus – but it is a pretty big blow for the separatist movement.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Moore denies poverty comments

Posted on by

There was some amount of Twitter outrage yesterday after James Moore was asked about child poverty in a radio scrum, and he responded that he didn’t want to usurp the jurisdiction of the provinces, that Canada was at its wealthiest, and that as the government, it wasn’t his job “to feed his neighbour’s child.” And he’s more or less right about the aspect of jurisdiction, for better or worse, though one could argue about transfer payments and so on. But when Moore stated it was all taken out of context and the headline was wrong, the reporter posted the raw audio and what do you know, it’s all in there. Oops?

As the finance ministers get set to meet about the pension issue later today, Jim Flaherty sounds like he may be bringing his own proposal to the table, which is all about being “more targeted” and not “a bazooka.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: A coming loss to the Senate

Posted on by

It won’t happen for six months, but the news came out yesterday that Conservative Senator Hugh Segal will be retiring from the Upper Chamber before his term is complete, in June. Segal, one of the remaining Red Tories and a bit of a rebel who has pushed back against some of the government’s more egregious bills and actions, will be taking on the new position of Master of Massey College. Given that he has been one of the voices of sanity in the Conservative caucus, it will be a definite blow to the Senate’s membership and to the quality of debate. It will also mean the loss of expertise in foreign affairs, as Segal has also been our representative to the Commonwealth, and served on the Eminent Persons panel that saw the creation of the Commonwealth Charter.

Continue reading →

Roundup: ClusterDuff contradictions

Posted on by

In the wake of Thursday’s ClusterDuff revelations, people have been questioning the Prime Minister’s various statements to date about the affair – things like how no members of his staff were aware of Nigel Wright’s intentions to pay Mike Duffy’s expenses for him – and that in turn leads to questions about whether or not Harper has misled parliament. Not that it would be the first time for that particular practice, mind you. You can see those court documents here and here. Paul Wells recalls similar incidents in the past where the party paid out big money to make problems go away, and how that got them into trouble then too.

Continue reading →