Roundup: To amend or not to amend the motion

As we get ready for another sitting week of Parliament, we are no closer to finding any kind of clarity or resolution to the issue of the suspension motions in the Senate. In fact, there are different stories being floated in the media – some that the Conservatives there are open to compromises in the motions, based on comments that Senator Claude Carignan, the leader of the government in the Senate, made. The PMO, meanwhile, is standing firm that they want the suspensions without pay – not that they actually have a say in the matter, given that the Senate is the master of its own destiny and not at the beck and call of the PMO (despite what many – including a handful of senators who haven’t learned better yet – may think). So that leaves the state of play still very much in motion as things get underway. Justin Trudeau, for his part, wants everyone involved to testify under oath, feeling that’s the only way everything will be cleared up. While Senator Cowan’s motion to send it to a committee would give an opportunity to summon the current and former PMO staffers involved, Parliamentary committees can’t summons Parliamentarians and force them to testify (because of privilege), so the really key players may yet be spared from testimony if that is the case. Law professor Carissima Mathen talks to CTV about the legal arguments in the Senate suspension motions. Tom Clark writes about how this is playing with the Conservative base, and how the push for swift action in the backrooms and behind closed doors is starting to look more like the Chrétien/Martin way of doing things, which is what the Conservatives rode into Ottawa promising to clean up.

Continue reading

Roundup: ClusterDuff contradictions

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

Roundup: Growing bureaucracy, unfunded multiculturalism

For all of his cost cutting, the public service has seen a rather rapid growth under Stephen Harper’s watch. Some of the biggest increases between 2006 and 2012 came in places like CBSA, the civilian staff at the RCMP and Correctional Services of Canada, but there were also increases in places like the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, if you can believe it. Mind you, I’m sure a lot of this growth has been in comms staff and “information technology,” but it still paints a picture.

Continue reading

Roundup: Return of the Commons!

The Commons is back today! Hooray! Oh, my MPs, how I’ve missed (most of) you! Believe me, after weeks of instant constitutional “experts” lecturing me over the Twitter Machine about how we haven an absolute monarchy in this country, where the Queen and GG rule with iron fists and Responsible Government is but a figment of our imaginations, well, I’m ready for a change of pace. So bring on QP!

To prep you for the House’s return, here is Paul Wells’ take on how the three parties are positioning themselves as the sitting resumes. Mark Kennedy lists some questions that will likely need to be answered now. The Canadian Press looks at the fiscal situation, and how that will affect the conversation in the Commons. Michael Petrou shows you the five things that are most pressing on John Baird’s desk right now. Michael Den Tandt believes the energy file will be the one to watch this spring. An here is a look at some of the Private Members’ business coming up for debate.

Continue reading