Tag Archives: Peter MacKay

Roundup: Convenient committee travel

Posted on by

While there is supposed to be a special sub-committee of Finance where environment critics can study the environmental portions of the omnibus budget bill, that has entirely been made problematic by the fact that environment committee – which means the associated critics – will be travelling this week as part of a study on the National Conservation Plan, and they’ll be in Alberta and BC. But it should be noted that this plan was approved weeks ago, so it’s entirely possible the timing of this was not a deliberate ploy (giving full benefit of the doubt).

Parliamentary watchdogs and auditors are starting to collaborate and work together more – much to the chagrin of senior public servants and the Treasury Board, who grumble that these agents of parliament are just looking for trouble to justify their existence.

Poor Peter MacKay – after equivocating within an inch of his life on what he knew about the costs of the Libya mission when he went public about them, he now blames the opposition and media for the controversy. Because nothing he says or does is ever his fault.

BC Premier Christy Clark has also joined in on the criticism of Thomas Mulcair’s take on oil sands development and his warnings of the “Dutch disease.” (And how many people crying about the “Dutch disease” and our “petrodollar” take into account the fact that the Americans have slowly but surely been devaluing their own currency to manage their debt?)

More analysis that the Liberals held more in camera meetings than the Conservatives? Don’t be fooled, says Kady O’Malley, who points out that top-line numbers don’t reveal that committees do go in camera for legitimate reasons – like picking witness lists and drafting reports, and the Liberals drafted a whole lot more reports than the current Conservative majority. Add to that, most of the previous in camera meetings were done by unanimous vote, not under opposition protest. And a reminder about why committees go in camera and what the alternatives might be (which aren’t really good either).

The president of the Canada West Foundation and one of the staunchest defenders of “Triple E” Senate “reform” has now backed away from his position, and actually sees more harm than good in the government’s current “reform” plans. This is big news in conservative circles, and should hopefully prompt some re-thinking of a flawed (and rather boneheaded) attempt to kludge together some reforms that will only make the system worse and will have no added democratic benefits in the long run.

And if you haven’t yet, watch Elizabeth May’s speech in the House on Friday about the omnibus budget bill. It’s probably one of the best denunciations of it to date.

Roundup: Taking the omnibudget threat seriously

Posted on by

So, remember what I was saying yesterday about how the opposition – and the NDP in particular would be hammering away at the government in QP about the omnibus budget bill if they truly considered it to be the major priority and affront to democracy that it is? Well, it only took them until the end of the second round – a full 25 minutes into QP – to ask a pair of broad and general questions about the omnibus nature of the bill, and 38 minutes to ask a couple of substantive questions about a particularly troubling measure within it (and didn’t take the parliamentary secretary to task for her nonsense answer during the supplemental question, like they should have). Apparently this constitutes taking an existential threat to parliamentary democracy seriously.

What’s that? More problems with defence procurements that say they’re going to be one thing (in this case vehicular power transmission components) and turns out to be something else (13 armoured vehicles)? You don’t say! Meanwhile, the military says that Peter MacKay would have known the actual cost estimates of the Libya mission when he reported a much lower figure to parliament. I am shocked – shocked!

The RCMP Commissioner has sent warning letters out to provincial commissioners of firearms to warn against setting up backdoor long-gun registries. The problem of course is that he doesn’t exactly have the ability to meddle in provincial jurisdiction like he – and Vic Toews – would like to on this issue.

The Public Service Commission is investigating whether eleven employees were improperly hired at ACOA due to political interference.

Here’s a more in-depth look at the situation that MDA finds itself in while the government drags its feet on signing the contract for the next phase of the RADARSAT constellation.

Harper and his team continue to try and get Helena Guergis’ lawsuit against them dismissed.

The punitive measures that the Conservatives and NDP imposed on the Liberals around campaign financing retroactively on the 2006 leadership race continues to haunt some of the former contenders.

Here’s a bit of an explainer of what some of the latest “Pierre Poutine” revelations mean.

And Lisa Raitt talks about her battle with post-partum depression to help raise awareness of mental health.

Roundup: Prison closures looming

Posted on by

The government has announced that they are closing down the Kingston and Leclerc penitentiaries, as well as the Ontario Regional Treatment Centre, a mental health facility for inmates within the Kingston facility. But don’t worry, Vic Toews says – they have plenty of capacity in other facilities (which is not exactly true, seeing as there are different kinds of capacity in different facilities, and we have seen a rise in double-bunking), and we haven’t seen the great spike in prisoner population that everyone was afraid of. Err, except they’ve only just passed the omnibus crime bill, and it’ll be a couple of years before that boom will likely happen (and to be fair, the lion’s share of that burden will be borne by provincial institutions, with all of those two-years-less-a-day mandatory minimum sentences). The closure of the ORTC is probably most concerning because as it stands, there is already a gross lack of capacity for mental health services in prisons – and yet psychologists and mental health nurses have been given layoff notices. It’s also concerning that Toews feels that the provinces should be re-institutionalising more mental health patients rather than locking them up in prisons, but provincial health authorities have moved to release more people with mental health concerns into the communities, where they then wind up in prisons. Toews can’t simply wish this vicious cycle away. Suffice to say, Kingston was an ancient facility that was due to close years and years ago, but the fact that there seems to be little in the way of plans to keep up with appropriate capacity, and the fact that the government still hasn’t provided with costing or even detailed plans of their prisons agenda makes this a concerning enough issue.

Given the amount of research capacity that is being cut at Environment Canada, here is a look at how their mandate is going to start changing over the next few years. One of those changes includes the closure of the BC oil spill office, which Peter Kent dismisses as only providing information on sensitive areas and not actually cleaning up oil spills. Seriously. Meanwhile, cabinet is giving itself the veto power over pipeline projects, despite what the National Energy Board may rule on any project, which pretty much makes any pretence of rigour meaningless at this point. But it’s all for the economy, which is still fragile, everyone!

In case you missed it, here is the recap of yesterday’s Public Accounts meeting on how they’re going to handle looking into the Auditor General’s findings on the F-35s. The takeaway – that the Conservatives, by their actions and votes, look like they’re going to use their majority to hold a bare minimum of meetings (say, one hour for the AG, one hour for the PBO, and two blocks of a half-dozen deputy ministers who will each pass the blame around), and the report will come down saying “see, not our fault, blame the bureaucrats. Or maybe I’m being cynical. Meanwhile, The West Block helpfully compiles the F-35 paper trail.

Meanwhile, Peter MacKay has another defence procurement headache at his feet, this time over armoured infantry vehicles, where the process was halted by fairness monitors and now needs to be restarted. How long will MacKay’s Teflon coating resist these mounting, embarrassing, screw-ups on his watch? Or, more importantly, when will the government actually undertake to radically reform defence procurement in this country so that it’s actually a coherent process under a single accountable authority?

And here is Thomas Mulcair’s new shadow cabinet – three deputy leaders and critic roles for almost everybody! Some of the choices are pretty peculiar (Charmaine Borg for digital issues, when she allegedly didn’t even have a cell phone until she was elected? Joe Comartin to democratic reform? Linda Duncan to Public Works? Jinny Sims to immigration?), and I’m especially curious why this was a press release after 5.30 last night. But I’m suddenly picturing a return to scattershot Question Periods where they try to give questions to everyone, and diffuse any momentum that was possible.

Calling out an incompetent minister

Posted on by

In the first of two opposition press conferences on the F-35 procurement today, the Liberals were up first, with both Marc Garneau and John McKay to discuss “accounting versus accountability” with the process, in light not only of the Auditor General’s report, but the government’s defending the differences as being “a difference in accounting.”  The intention had been for Bob Rae to join in by Skype, but this was prevented due to technical issues, some of which were the difficulty in shooting him on the screen behind the two MPs. Nevertheless, Garneau and McKay held their own, as Garneau launched into the Conservative government, saying that they had lied to Canadians about holding an open competition, and then lied to them on the escalating costs.

“There was nothing open and transparent about the way the Conservatives handled the procurement process,” Garneau said.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Just a difference in accounting

Posted on by

Peter MacKay says that we don’t have to worry – that extra $10 billion figure with the F-35s was all just a difference in accounting about what was included in those figures, such as salaries and fuel, and so on. Which seems a bit…dubious, especially seeing as this is the first time they’ve said anything like that, and went on the attack against people like the Parliamentary Budget Officer when his numbers were released a while back that are closer to the $25 billion figure. So clearly, if it was a difference of accounting, they would have said that a year ago, and they didn’t. Even if MacKay’s assertion is true, and I have doubts, it does not excuse the rigged process either, which also needs to be repeatedly called out as well. Meanwhile, here are a bunch of quotes about the F-35 process in the past.

Despite the third party manager being withdrawn, the chief of Attawapiskat is pressing ahead with her court challenges as to what all went down.

Oh noes! BC is delaying their bill to hold Senate “consultative elections” because the private member’s bill proposing them “needs more work.” Not only is it a dumb idea to start monkeying with federal constitutional issues at a provincial level, but doing so in order to try and win some political favour is equally nonsensical, and with any luck this inane idea will die a death by fire.

Here’s a really awful tale about what a family was put through when a young soldier committed suicide.

And here’s a look at the meaning of Thomas Mulcair’s beard. No, seriously. Also, a look at his wife and political confidante.