It was a busy news day, with the Fair Elections Act tabled and charges laid against both Senator Patrick Brazeau and former senator Mac Harb. It was a question of which would happen first — denunciations of the bill, or attempting to make a Mac Harb question sound like government business. When QP got underway, Thomas Mulcair first demanded the resignation of Julian Fantino, not that Stephen Harper was going to bite on that one. When he insisted that the veterans service centres be restored, Harper insisted that they had increased services, not cuts. Mulcair moved onto the issue of CSE’s monitoring of airport WiFi and asked who authorised it, Harper assured him that CSE acted within the law. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the elections bill and called it an attack on Elections Canada. Harper insisted that this was simply about ensuring proper independence of the Commissioner of Elections. When Trudeau brought up Elections Canada’s request to have the powers to compel testimony, Harper retreated to the same talking points.
Tag Archives: Mac Harb
QP: A dig about veterans’ mental health
With all of the leaders in the House, it promised to be an exciting QP, but first, there were many Members’ Statements touching on the topic of Bell Let’s Talk Day. Thomas Mulcair began by asking about keeping the veterans service centres open, to which Stephen Harper assured him that they increased the number of centres — the over 600 Service Canada centres across the country. Mulcair brought up the eight recent military suicides to drive home the point, and Harper insisted that the centres being closed were hardly being used. Mulcair hit back by saying that Harper’s commitment to Bell Let’s Talk Day was cutting mental health services for veterans, before asking about his “affordability” proposals. Harper was not amused, and amid cries of “Shame,” pointed out the support they were giving to mental illness which was one of the reasons why he appointed Denise Batters to the Senate, given her advocacy work. Mulcair tried to ask about Senator Mac Harb’s alleged mortgage fraud, but the Speaker rightfully pointed out that it was not a question related to government business and shut it down. For his last question, Mulcair demanded that Harper ask the Government of Brunei to order their former diplomat to cooperate with the RCMP about Harb’s mortgage — because he apparently doesn’t recognise diplomatic immunity. Harper assured him that he had confidence in the RCMP to do their jobs. Justin Trudeau brought up a First Nations youth training centre in Whitehorse that is funded by the Labour Market Agreement that the government proposes to cut in favour of the Canada Job Grant. Harper insisted that youth unemployment was lower now than the average under the whole of the last Liberal government. Trudeau brought up a similar centre in Sudbury, but Harper said that they were making provincial transfers that benefitted these trainees. Trudeau closed by up the PM’s previous statements about provincial responsibility in this area, to which Harper responded that they recognised that job creation was the responsibility of the federal government.
QP: Undaunted in 2014
The first QP of 2014 was ready to get underway, and Members’ Statements were dominated by Holocaust Remembrance Day statements and condolences for the lives lost in the Quebec nursing home fire. Before things got started, the four new MPs got marched into the House by both Justin Trudeau and Stephen Harper, and they took their seats. Mulcair started off by wishing everyone a Happy New Year, and asked his first question about the situation in Ukraine. Harper assured him that they too were concerned about it. Mulcair moved onto the suicide crisis within the Canadian Forces, and wondered if the PM would make this a personal priority. Harper assured him of the quality of mental health programmes available to members of the Forces. Moving on, Mulcair asked banking and ATM fees — a topic of his “affordability tour.” Harper gave some bland assurances, before Mulcair moved onto a question of Access to Information documents around the Senate scandal that the Privy Council Office refused to release — which makes sense as they are almost certainly legal opinions, given that the Senate is not a government department, and legal opinions are protected information. Harper insisted that the ATIP process is independent of government. Mulcair’s last turn was to bring up the alleged mortgage fraud perpetuated by retired Senator Mac Harb, which has absolutely nothing to do with government business. But rather than the Speaker shutting down such a blatantly out of bounds question, Harper got up and noted the independence of the RCMP’s investigations. Justin Trudeau was up, and noted that the provinces had rejected the Canada Job Grant programme, and wondered if the government would abandon it. Harper said that they remained committed to closing the skills gap across the country. Trudeau hammered away at the issue with his remaining questions, but Harper insisted that they were doing their part for job creation.
Roundup: Dismal job numbers
There was some abysmal job numbers released yesterday, which sent the dollar plummeting, and a fresh round of wailing and gnashing of teeth from opposition MPs who demand a jobs strategy, which one imagines pretty much means new infrastructure programmes. Maclean’s Econowatch says that the numbers are showing that Flaherty’s wait-and-see approach to the economic recovery seems to be failing.
It appears that the government has already spent some $1.7 billion on the Sikorsky Cyclone helicopters, despite only a couple of training versions having thus far been delivered (but not actually accepted by the government because they’re not up to snuff). The price tag and the fact that the government decided to proceed with the process as is leads critics to believe the procurement has become “too big to fail.”
Roundup: So long, Mac Harb
It appears that Mac Harb has a sense of shame after all, and has not only tendered his resignation to the Senate, but repaid the full amount that the Senate has determined that he owed, and dropped his legal challenge. Of that challenge, he said it wasn’t about the money, but about the lack of due process within the Senate itself, which seems fair enough. And he does make the point that the ongoing cloud and investigations made his work there impossible, and that he thinks the Auditor General’s audit will turn up a trove of other Senators who interpreted the rules as he did. Um, okay. You know it won’t be a forensic audit, right? Just checking. With Harb’s departure, that still leaves the three embattled Harper-appointed Senators under a cloud of suspicion, and the Conservatives without a convenient whipping boy for the Liberals when it comes to saying that they don’t support the seal hunt (which Harb alone opposed when he was in their caucus).
Roundup: The unfair treatment of Pamela Wallin
Oh dear – Senator Pamela Wallin may have to end up paying back between $120K and $140K in questionable expenses, but she’s not happy about it, and calls the process unfair. And she’s right to a point – that the auditors applied the post-2012 rules to the pre-2012 period, but Wallin seems to forget that the Internal Economy Committee can also decide what seems to be “reasonable” in terms of the expenses claimed, or what should have been her better judgement. There were also concerns that Wallin and her staff retroactively changed her calendar in order to remove riding association events, though Wallin claims that she was just removing personal details, and that the auditors already had calendar copies as well as access to her hand-written diary, and that Senator Tkachuk told her to, because the process was already bogged down and taking too long. Nevertheless, she plans to pay back the expenses with interest while she challenges the rules. Here’s a look at how Wallin’s audit results may affect other Senators who travel to do studies or promote causes that aren’t immediately the subject of committee duties. This of course brings me to the point of the pundit class and various talking heads – including Marjory LeBreton – going on about how this is some signal that the Senate has to “change or die.” Um, change how? This isn’t an issue about the Senate as it operates, it’s about financial management issues, which is largely with in the financial controls of the Senate’s administration. Do those rules need to be tightened? Sure – and they realised that and have been doing that over the past couple of years. Could they be more transparent? Absolutely – and they’re already far more transparent than MPs are, for that matter. But none of this has to do with the structure of the Senate itself, so somehow trying to make the inappropriate expenses of a small handful of Senators into an indictment of the Chamber as a whole is, quite frankly, intellectually dishonest. More to the point, whenever someone says “reform,” the immediate response is “reform how? To what end?” Chances are, they won’t have an intelligible answer for you, which is telling about the problem with the level of debate, where “reform” is treated like some kind of magical incantation, as though it will somehow make everything better without any kind of plan.
Roundup: Mulcair’s summer tour
While in St. John’s, NL, Thomas Mulcair claimed that he won’t raise personal taxes (because apparently people don’t pay for corporate taxes) and that nobody had ever asked him that before (not true). He also pointed to a graveyard on a map and said that the Liberals are headed there – because that’s classy and raises the tone of debate! He then moved onto PEI to kick off his summer tour of constitutional vandalism (aka advocating Senate abolition) and offered nothing but bluster and misleading characterisations.
The Senate’s internal economy committee promises that they won’t “monkey around” with Pamela Wallin’s audit, but it may be damaging enough that they might consider recalling the full Senate shortly to deal with it.
Roundup: Ken Dryden’s leadership debt to himself
In what is likely going to be an optics nightmare for the Liberals, former leadership candidate Ken Dryden said that he has no plans to repay his 2006 leadership debt, because it’s all loans he gave to himself. When the Conservatives and NDP changed the law mid-campaign to restrict donations (for the sole purpose of screwing over the Liberals), Dryden’s ability to secure the necessary donations could no longer happen. Given that Elections Canada can’t enforce the laws around those repayments (thanks again to the dog’s breakfast that the Conservatives and NDP made of the law in their rush to screw over the Liberals), he apparently no longer sees the point in getting strangers to repay his loans to himself. There are plans to make political loans to oneself illegal, but that legislation is stalled, and there are some serious concerns that it would give financial institutions too much power to determine who can and can’t run if they are to be given sole authority to grant loans. So while Dryden’s abandoning his quest to pay back his loans (to himself) looks bad, it would seem that the Conservatives and the NDP have only themselves to blame, and anyone complaining that this whole thing is anti-democratic should also ask themselves how “democratic” it was for two parties to collude to screw over another one. No one walks away from this one looking pure.
Roundup: Apoplectic over unenforceable rules
The Conservative Party is apoplectic with outrage after Elections Canada didn’t put punitive sanctions against those 2006 Liberal leadership candidates who still haven’t repaid their debts. The problem, Elections Canada says, is that the rules aren’t actually enforceable. And guess whose fault that is? The Conservatives, along with the NDP, who were in such a rush to punish the Liberals in 2006 that they passed a really flawed series of changes that made a dog’s breakfast of leadership campaign finance rules. About the most they did was make the ability to fundraise so restrictive that these former candidates with outstanding debts can’t raise that money. So really, well done all around.
Roundup: The premiers demand thus
And that was the premiers’ meeting. Aside from the opposition to the Canada Jobs Grant programme as it is currently structured, they wanted disaster mitigation to stand apart from their infrastructure demands, which of course they want federal funds for both. They also agreed to work together on the issue of cyberbullying, and on some healthcare initiatives related to things like home care, diagnostic imaging, and brand-name pharmaceuticals. John Geddes has a brief rundown of the meeting as a whole, and notes how curiously late the infrastructure working group comes after the federal budget. Andrew Coyne looks at all of the things that these premiers could accomplish that are in their own jurisdiction, and yet they choose to spend their time ganging up on the federal government instead, demanding cash.