The politics of the niqab have slowly starting taking up a lot of oxygen on the election campaign, on a number of fronts. While people over the Twitter Machine tried to skew Harper’s “old stock Canadians” remark as some kind of racist or dog whistle politics (I’m not sure that interpretation makes sense given the context of what he was saying), the government has decided to crank their petulance around the attempted niqab ban up to eleven by declaring that they will ask the courts for a stay of the Federal Court of Appeal ruling on the niqab-at-citizenship-ceremonies case, essentially to deny the woman in question the right to vote. It’s going to be tough for them to convince the courts that there is some imminent danger if they allow her to take the oath before October 19th, much less convince the Supreme Court of Canada to hear the case (and they almost certainly won’t, seeing as this is a fairly open-and-shut case of administrative law, where the minister overreached is authority to implement the ban). But while this pettiness digs in, the panic over the niqab has already begun to spread, with the Bloc launching an attack ad to warn that the NDP will mean pipelines and niqabs in Quebec, while an NDP candidate has stated that while Thomas Mulcair reopens the constitution to try and abolish the Senate (never going to happen), that he deal with the menace of niqabs at the same time. No, seriously. He added that he’s sure the party supports him on that, and as of posting time, the party has not repudiated the statement (much as they did not really repudiate it when Alexandre Boulerice made similar statements about banning niqabs earlier). Justin Trudeau, for his part, said he wouldn’t try to appeal the ban to the Supreme Court. So there’s that. Meanwhile, Tabatha Southey takes on the government’s attempted niqab ban, with her usual acid wit.
Tag Archives: Missile Defence
Roundup: NATO spending commitments
As that NATO summit gets set to get underway in Wales, it looks like the face-saving final communiqué will state that the 2 percent of GDP on defence spending that they hope members will achieve will simply be “aspirational,” since it’s not going to happen with some members like Canada (which would essentially doubling our current defence budget). Stephen Saideman explores why it’s wrong for NATO to focus solely on the spending levels of member countries than it is on capabilities. It also sounds like NATO members are going to discuss making cyberwarfare as much of a threat to member nations as bombs, which is quite true of the modern era. It also sounds like the attention will be split between the threats posed by Russia and ISIS. Michael Den Tandt notes that while Harper keeps sounding tough, there is no escaping that the Canadian Forces are badly under-resourced – possibly as bad as the “Decade of Darkness” – and we can’t have it both ways of doing good work on the cheap. Katie Englehart has more on the broader context of the situation here.
@Murray_Brewster yep 1% of Canadian interoperable, reliable participation >> 2% plus Greece unreliable, sit at home effort
— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman) September 3, 2014
Roundup: Peter MacKay’s “special bonds”
Peter MacKay ignited yet another firestorm by making comments to the Ontario Bar Association that there isn’t enough diversity in federal and federally-appointed courts because not enough women are applying since they have a special bond with children. No, seriously. And when called out on it, MacKay insisted that his comments were “misconstrued,” and then went on say law schools need to do better – never mind that female enrolment is already outpacing males. And no, there was nothing in his explanation about visible minorities, just women. Naturally, this turned into a parade of accusations about the regressive social attitudes during Question Period, laced with all of aggravating qualifications from all sides, MacKay included, about being parents. MacKay also gave a litany of appointment figures, all of them out of context, like how there was only one woman out of the thirteen appointments made last week. There was some great fact-checking over Twitter which pointed out just how ridiculous or outright wrong MacKay’s justifications are.
https://twitter.com/cmathen/status/479732973470638080
https://twitter.com/cmathen/status/479739582615785472
Stats on women applicants to Ontario Court of Justice available since 1989. There is no shortage of women applicants. pic.twitter.com/yvI26uUzwX
— Erin Crandall (@ErinLCrandall) June 19, 2014
How many women appointed to section 96 courts? Fluctuates by year. Numbers not rising with Harper government. pic.twitter.com/dxNZJhwRQM
— Erin Crandall (@ErinLCrandall) June 19, 2014
QP: No current vacancy
The days on the calendar running down, but crankiness among members ramping up, all of the leaders were present in the Commons, which was a little unexpected. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking about Quebec Supreme Court justice appointments and the possible attempt to use a backdoor to put Justice Mainville on the bench. Stephen Harper insisted that this was nothing to do with the Supreme Court, but about putting a good judge on the “supreme court” of Quebec. Mulcair pressed about whether the intent was to elevate Justice Mainville to the SCC, to which Harper reminded him that there was no current vacancy, nor a process to select a new one once a vacancy does become available. Mulcair then accused Harper of starting a war with the Supreme Court, but Harper mocked him for trying to launch into another conspiracy theory. Mulcair moved topics, and demanded that the Northern Gateway pipeline be turned town, to which Harper said that the NDP were against all resource development while they underwent environmental assessments and went through a rigorous assessment process. Mulcair listed the opposition to the pipeline, but Harper dismissed their opposition as ideological. Justin Trudeau carried on that line of questioning and pointed out the impacts a spill would have on that coastline, to which Harper accused the Liberals of holding a “deep hostility” toward the energy sector (really? Given their it boosterism for Keystone XL?) and insisted that they had a rigorous process.
Roundup: A Freudian slip by MacKay?
Peter MacKay apparently misspoke during Question Period yesterday. Whether it was a Freudian slip, or an inability to read the script he’d been provided, it certainly raised eyebrows as he stated that Justice Robert Mainville would be a great pick for the Supreme Court, when Mainville was being moved from the Federal Court of Appeal to the Quebec Court of Appeal. The move had given rise to speculation that it was an attempt to put him in place to move to the Supreme Court when Justice LeBel retires in November, and MacKay all-but confirmed that was the intention, before he back-pedalled and said that he was simply referring to the fact that the Quebec Court of Appeal is the province’s supreme court – a fairly lame back track, and fodder for the court challenge being launched by the same Toronto lawyer that successfully challenged the Nadon appointment.
QP: Hudak math and Kijiji data
For the first time of the week, all three leaders were in the Chamber, possibly for one of the last times before the Commons rises. Thomas Mulcair led off by asking about cuts to job market research, wondering how it could be justified. Stephen Harper responded by insisted that it wasn’t correct and more resources had been diverted into the area, and by the way, we created one million net new jobs. Mulcair retorted with a crack about Hudak math, and looking for information on Kijiji, to which Harper noted that the information came from Statistics Canada. When Mulcair demanded that the hiring tax credit for small businesses be extended, Harper reminded them that they voted against that time-limited measure in the first place. Mulcair changed topics and moved to the fighter jet procurement, and if other companies could put in bids. Harper assured him that the report had not yet been considered by cabinet, but they would soon. Justin Trudeau was up for the Liberals, and noted that the previous chief of defence staff noted that the F-35 was not the only suitable plane for Canada, and whether the process was going to be open and transparent. Harper repeated that cabinet had not yet considered the report. Trudeau moved onto the Northern Gateway Pipeline and the widespread opposition to it. Harper responded that the government was in the process of reviewing the report of the National Energy Board, and they would be coming to a decision soon.
Roundup: Sona, Coal, and the new Privacy Commissioner
Day one of the Sona trial, and we find that he discussed American-style voter suppression at some point during the campaign. Not that he had any intention of acting upon it, or that he had the means to do so, or that he said he had engaged in it – just that he discussed it. Sona’s lawyer also got some of the witnesses to admit that they got promotions and hefty raises after they talked to Elections Canada about Sona – which is all very curious, but no doubt a big part of Sona’s strategy of undermining the credibility of his accusers.
Roundup: I dream of Turks & Caicos
Visions of Turks & Caicos were abounding on the Hill yesterday, as premier Rufus Ewing visited to talk trade, and while no doors were closed on the subject of annexation (except, more or less, by John Baird), everyone had their fun. Even Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall decided to get in on it, offering to make the islands part of Saskatchewan so as not to need to open up the constitution to add an eleventh province, and PEI Premier Robert Ghiz playfully suggested that his island province would be a better fit. Err, except that Nova Scotia beat them to it by a decade, when their assembly passed a unanimous motion back in 2004 to have Turks & Caicos join them. Oops. Regardless, trade and security would be beneficial, where it could be a Canadian trade port to the Caribbean, and possibly even a supply base for our DART teams. It wasn’t all without hiccups either, as a Caribbean news site listed some complaints that the islands have of Canadians, and that they have no idea where Conservative MP Peter Goldring came up with the notion that 100 percent of the islands support a merger with Canada.
QP: Those pesky temporary foreign strippers
With the March for Life happening on the lawn outside — mostly Catholic high school students bussed in for the occasion, and disrupted by topless protesters — and with the House not sitting tomorrow because of the Day of Honour for the mission in Afghanistan, it was a bit of a Friday-on-a-Thursday day in the chamber. Well, attendance was a bit better, but not much. Megan Leslie led off for the NDP and brought up the government collecting data by “creeping” Facebook pages. Tony Clement assured her that the government wants to listen to Canadians, and they were engaging with the Privacy Commissioner, before accusing them of trying to shut down Canadians who were letting their views be known. Leslie changed topics to the Nadon appointment and the reports that he was advised to resign from the Federal Court and rejoin the Quebec Bar. MacKay accused her of conspiracy theory, and touted the consultation process and the expert legal advice they sought. Françoise Boivin carried on with the same line of questioning in both languages, to which MacKay continued to tout the process that they followed. John McCallum led off for the Liberals and accused the government of hating the Canada Pension Plan and being dismissive of Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario pension plans. Clement responded and decried the “massive tax grab” that would ruin jobs and opportunity. McCallum moved onto the topic of market wages for foreign workers and driving down Canadian wages, to which Kenney took a shot at the opposition parties.
Roundup: Whips and grandfathered MPs
Given that it’s the big March for Life on the Hill, reporters asked Justin Trudeau yesterday about the whole pro-choice thing for the party (I’m guessing since it’s a fun game to try and catch the Liberals out on being a nominally pro-choice party with a few pro-life MPs still in the caucus). Trudeau said that as was decided by the membership in the 2012 policy convention, the party is officially pro-choice, that such votes would be whipped, and that the existing pro-life MPs are being grandfathered in, but all future candidates must follow the pro-choice party line. “So much for open nominations!” the commentariat cries, ignoring the kinds of conditions – or indeed groupthink – that other parties employ with their own candidates. And pro-life Liberals like John McKay kind of shrugged and said that it’s normal to have some disagreements within a party and left it at that. And now everyone else will try to make hay of this, because that’s the way it works.