Wednesday, caucus day, and the benches were mostly full. Thomas Mulcair started off by reading a pair of questions about the improperly reported $3.1 billion in anti-terror funds, and showed just how with it he is by making an Arrested Development reference, asking if the money was in the banana stand. Harper ignored it and once again assured him that the Auditor General said that the money was not misspent. Mulcair then turned to the issue of Treasury Board taking an active hand in the collective bargaining of Crown Corporations. Harper reminded him that the government backstops these Crown Corporations, and with some of them in financial difficulty, they had an obligation to ensure that taxpayer’s money was being treated responsibly. For his final question, Mulcair brought up the demise of the mandatory long-form census, as the National Household Survey data was released today. Harper responded with congratulations to Statistics Canada for the data release and praise for how high quality the data was. Justin Trudeau was then up, and after paying mention to the long-form census, he turned to the question of those Economic Action Plan™ ads, and how each spot they run during the playoffs, it costs the same as 32 student summer jobs. Harper first repeated his congratulations to Statistics Canada, before he moved onto the necessity of informing Canadians of how well the economy is doing by way of those ads.
Tag Archives: Propaganda
Roundup: Economic action tautology
Apparently it’s important that we keep being exposed to Economic Action Plan™ advertisements ad nauseum because Canadians have confidence in the economy – or so says Stephen Harper. Which begs the question – do they have confidence in the economy because of the ads, or are the ads to showcase that they have confidence? At which point it all starts getting circular and resembling a tautology. Scott Brison, meanwhile, wants you to know that for every $95,000 the government spends to air one of these ads during the hockey playoffs, 32 students could get a summer position for that money. But – confidence!
QP: For he has travelled the land…
Another hot day in the Nation’s Capital, but unlike yesterday, all party leaders were in the House. Thomas Mulcair once again began by reading questions about the improperly tracked $3.1 billion in anti-terror funds, but he was restraining himself from the kinds of wild gesticulations of yesterday. Harper stood up to assure him that the AG has indicated there was no sign that the funds were misspent, but that there were discrepancies in reporting between departments. Mulcair then turned to the topic of temporary foreign workers, and the warning that there were approvals being given in places with high unemployment. Harper assured him that while they were making changes to ensure that Canadians got first crack at those jobs, the NDP were voting against the changes and writing to ask for more approvals being granted. For the Liberals, Justin Trudeau boasted of his travels to Winnipeg, Edmonton and the Ottawa Valley over the past week, and decried the money spent on advertising as opposed to helping the struggling middle class. Harper assured him that they were moving forward on economic measures, which Harper insisted that the Liberals opposed — while Trudeau shook his head.
QP: Mansbridge, Levant and Milewski
It was a gorgeous — and hot — Monday in Ottawa, but there were few leaders present in the House. Thomas Mulcair was present, however, and started off by reading off questions about the AG’s report on the improperly tracked $3.1 billion, gesticulating a little more wildly than usual today. Jason Kenney, the designated back-up PM du jour, reminded him that the Auditor General said there was no evidence that any money was misspent, and that Treasury Board had accepted his recommendations. Mulcair carried on, taking the entire leader’s round, and asked about the changes to the collective bargaining for the CBC, wondering if they were going to ensure that Peter Mansbridge wasn’t paid any more than Ezra Levant. Kenney hit back by reminding him that when he was in the Quebec government, they had control over collective bargaining for their Crown Corporations there too. For the Liberals, Ralph Goodale asked about the tax changes in the budget, and how it was affecting the hard done-by middle class. Jason Kenney insisted that the total share of the federal tax burden was at its lowest level since 1965, thanks to the Conservatives. Marc Garneau closed out the round, asking about the tariff changes, but Jason Kenney gave the very same talking point as before.
Roundup: Cooperation to fix electoral woes
In the wake of the rather damning internal report at Elections Canada about the problems that have plagued the last election (but which no doubt have been cumulative over successive elections), the agency has agreed with its recommendations but says that it will likely take political cooperation from all sides in order to implement the needed changes – especially as it will cost more to hire more staff and get additional resources. The former Chief Electoral Officer, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, doesn’t see that as a problem because everyone knows that the system needs to be fixed. Elsewhere, the Conservatives are gloating while a Liberal campaign worker from the 2008 election was charged with failing to file election returns. Meanwhile, it seems that the party’s treatment of Michael Sona has created a rift in the local Conservatives in Guelph.
Roundup: Those complicated tariff changes
While the issue of tariffs continues to dominate Question Period to the point of the absurd – witness yesterday’s eye-rollingly ridiculous “tax on fishing” questions – it should come as no surprise that these tariff changes are complicated. So complicated – and without any sense of coherence – that the professor who brought some of these changes to light suspects it was a way of raising revenue that’s so complex that most consumers won’t know why prices went up.
Access to Information documents reveal that a First Nations leader was forwarding Idle No More planning emails to the federal government as a means of keeping them in the loop, so that they wouldn’t do something stupid. These also included emails from Manitoba Grand Chief Derek Neepinak, who was planning on trips to Washington to garner support there.
Roundup: The meaning of Margaret Thatcher
The death of Baroness Thatcher was all over the political scene in Canada yesterday. Susan Delacourt writes about her legacy with respect to political marketing, which shaped campaigns of Stephen Harper, and she also spoke with Brian Mulroney about his recollections of Thatcher – including a famous blow-up in an airport over the issue of sanctions against apartheid South Africa. Anne Kingston writes about Thatcher’s complicated relationship with feminism. John Ivison, who lived through the Thatcher years in Scotland, finds himself a little surprised at the legacy she left behind in reforming Britain’s economy. Michael Den Tandt says that she was popular because of her principles – though he notes that on occasion, she was on the wrong side of an issue.
Roundup: Kevin Page’s final battle
After two days of arguments at Federal Court, the judge there will deliberate on whether he should be providing clarity to the mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer – and no, it’s not a cut-and-dried question. As lawyers for the Speaker asserted, it is a matter for Parliament to decide upon – and remember, Parliament is actually the highest court of the land – and Parliamentarians should not be going to the courts every time the government doesn’t turn over its numbers. And while Page’s request for clarity was just that – clarity – there are some inescapable and fundamental issues at the heart of the matter, and that is that MPs themselves have abdicated their role as guardians of the public purse. While journalists and the public hail Page as being a hero, what’s missing is that he has been saddled with the role of “watchdog” because MPs have decided they’d rather have him do their homework for them, because math is hard, and they can then invoke the magical talisman that is his independence to prove that the government is in the wrong with its numbers. That Thomas Mulcair sent along his own lawyer as an interested party is part of what muddies this issue and makes it look partisan – because Mulcair and company want Page and his successors to do the dirty work for them. This is not really an issue about the government arguing against the fiscal oversight position that they created, but about Parliament itself, and whether or not MPs on both sides of the aisle can take their own jobs seriously. That they are placing all of the emphasis on Page and his office to do their work for them is an indictment that they continue to refuse to.
Roundup: “Inexperience” and other likely excuses
Peter Penashue’s “inexperienced” former official agents says that the corporate donation was “unintentionally” accepted, that Penashue himself didn’t know about the donation, and that the last four or five days of the campaign, “all hell was breaking loose” trying to get money in before the deadline, so the rush totally explains all of the ineligible donations. So really, it’s nobody’s fault because nobody takes responsibility for the documents they signed off on, right? Well, maybe not. The former Chief Electoral Officer, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, notes that as the Elections Canada investigative process continues, charges may yet be laid, though not in time for the by-election. The CBC’s David Cochrane looks at the whole affair from the local angle and wonders if Labradoreans want a cabinet minister or to re-elect someone who ran an incompetent campaign and blames others for mistakes that he was responsible for.
Roundup: Ethical glass houses
Former Senate Ethics Officer Michael Fournier says that the Auditor General should be called in to look at the books of both the Commons and the Senate every five years or so – but also discounts the characterisation of the Senate as some den of corruption that has been painted by the media and the likes of Charlie Angus. Angus, meanwhile, has a selective memory when it comes to the financial practices of the Commons, denying that the AG found any problems with their books when the last audit was done a couple of years ago, except that there actually was a number of problems found with things like procurement practices. And perhaps it also bears reminding that it was only a couple of years ago that a number of MPs were found to be in violation of their own using allowances, and that the Commons is far less transparent with its own attendance and travel records than the Senate is. But oh, the Senate is the one that needs to clean up its act (even though it’s been in that process for the past year).