At long last, the government has made its decision on the Northern Gateway pipeline, and it’s not wholly unexpected, but surprising in other ways. For one, it sent it out as a press release rather than making a formal announcement. For another, it gave a half-hearted and somewhat mealy acceptance of the proposal, but only if Enbridge can meet all of the National Energy Board’s 209 conditions, plus having them get the First Nations all on-side, plus getting BC on-side as well. As economist Andrew Leach noted, it’s like the government is trying to distance itself from the regulator, the proponent, and any responsibility to get the pipeline built. After all, they do have a tremendous penchant for absolving themselves of responsibility wherever they can, and in this case, there is almost a sense that they’re inviting it to fail. Reaction was swift from the NDP, who declared that if they form government in 2015, that the pipeline would be cancelled immediately, and warned of “social unrest” in the meantime. The Liberals, however, took a slightly more nuanced approach – while they called for the rejection of this particular pipeline (they do support Keystone XL), but Justin Trudeau made the observation that the Crown – basically the government – has the obligation to consult with First Nations, not companies like Enbridge, so that throws yet another wrench into the plans o f the government. There are questions as to whether the decision will hinder Conservative re-election chances in the province, but I have a hard time seeing how it would with the “Bible Belt” ridings in the southern part of the province that the Conservatives hold quite comfortably. Enbridge says the decision gives them the time they need to get it right. Here are five other pipeline projects to keep an eye on. John Geddes notes the amount of work that Enbridge is being asked to do, while remembering that BC is the home to some memorable environmental protests. Paul Wells looks at the electoral calculus of the decision, while Leach has a Twitter conversation with Elizabeth May about her comments, and how they don’t actually make sense.
Tag Archives: Prostitution
QP: To appoint or not to appoint to the Supreme Court
The last Monday of the spring sitting of the Chamber, and Thomas Mulcair and Elizabeth May were the only leaders in the Commons. Justin Trudeau was in Toronto to help campaign for the forthcoming by-elections, while Harper was, well, elsewhere. Mulcair started things off by asking about the government ignoring the advice on reforming suicide investigations in the military, to which Rob Nicholson insisted that he asked the military to account for the decision and to clear up the backlog, of which only ten cases out of 54 remained. Mulcair pressed in French, and Nicholson repeated his response. Mulcair brought up the Prime Minister’s appointment of a Federal Court judge to the Quebec Court of Appeal, and how this was being challenged by the same lawyer who challenged the Nadon appointment. Peter MacKay insisted that they made appointments based on merit, and listed off the accomplishments of that judge. Mulcair insisted that the government was meddling in Quebec’s courts, not that MacKay’s answer changed. Geoff Regan led off for the Liberals, asking about the decision on the Northern Gateway pipeline, imploring that it be denied. Greg Rickford gave his usual talking points that they were carefully reading a report and the decision would be made soon. Joyce Murray brought up the Request For Proposal that would come out for the fighter jet replacements between 2017 and 2019, and would this mean that an open competition would go ahead. Diane Finley insisted that no decisions had been made, and that they went through an independent process.
Roundup: A blow to cyber-surveillance
As what happens from time to time, the Supreme Court of Canada hands down a ruling and all of the government’s plans get messed up. Granted, that seems to be happening a lot more frequently these days, given that this government has a penchant for pushing the rules as far as they can and not listening to the legal advice they’re given. It happened again yesterday, with a unanimous ruling on a child pornography case that clarified the rules around warrantless access for online data – particularly metadata and ISPs. The Court has judged that these kinds do indeed constitute searches under the law, and that police need warrants (barring exigent circumstances, of course). This puts a huge hole in two government bills, C-13 and S-4, the “cyberbullying” bill and the digital privacy bill respectively, as both deal with data sharing including lawful access provisions. With the Court now having come down against lawful access – a decision being cheered by the new federal privacy commissioner as well as his Ontario counterpart – it’s likely to force the government to put the bills on hold (and indeed, they delayed further debate on S-4 in the Senate to consider the Supreme Court judgement). And hey, this might even mean that they’ll split the actual cyberbullying portions out of C-13 in order to “further consider” the next steps on the rest of the lawful access provisions that they were trying to get in under the rubric of “protecting children.” Then again, they could just as easily forge ahead and force yet another confrontation with the Supreme Court, as they seem intent on doing with everything else, in order to keep playing the victim card and fundraising off of it.
Roundup: Internal pushback on prostitution bill
One of the key Conservative voices on abolishing prostitution, Joy Smith, says that there are things she wants to see fixed in the government’s new bill, which are about the areas where sex workers themselves could still be charged, especially with the provisions around things like being near schools, given that there have never been cases that she’s aware of where sex workers have been trying to sell sex in front of schools in daylight hours. That said, she still wants the Nordic Model to go ahead, and produces conflated arguments around child prostitution, human trafficking, and the bizarre future dystopia where a woman can’t get EI unless she’s applied for work at a brothel, to back up her claims. Meanwhile, the Liberals have formally declared that they will oppose the bill, and listed their reasons why. Brent Rathgeber is also not a fan, seeing this as a cynical ploy to move the base against the courts, while only lawyers and social workers will come out ahead and sex workers won’t get any harm reduction. Even parts of the Conservative base aren’t that keen over the bill. Over in Maclean’s, Colby Cosh writes about where social conservatism and second wave feminism overlap on this issue of sex work, which is all about seeing women sex workers as all victims.
Roundup: Pushing back out of the gate
The new privacy commissioner, Daniel Therrien, went before the Commons justice committee yesterday to talk about the “cyberbullying” bill, and the moment that Therrien did his job and pushed back against the bill – pointing out the overreach into lawful access provisions, the lowered test for getting warrants, the lack of oversight mechanisms, and that the bill should be split so that the more technical aspects of those lawful access provisions could get more detailed study, the government lashed back, turning against him immediately with the bizarre accusation that he hasn’t been a police officer. Apparently because police demand more powers, the government feels that they need to fall all over themselves to provide them, no questions asked – despite the fact that we have a history of showing that when authorities are given new powers without adequate oversight that they tend to be abused (for entirely well-meaning reasons, no doubt). Also of concern is that information could be requested not only by peace officers, but also by “public officers,” which includes elected officials, certain airline pilots and fisheries officers. No, seriously. Peter MacKay, meanwhile, brings up the child porn defence for these new measures, despite the fact that he hasn’t provided an excuse for why they wouldn’t need a warrant to get this kind of information. As well, NDP MP Randall Garrison tried to put in an amendment to the bill to see that transgendered people are protected from hate – you know, like cyberbullying – and the government shot it down for no real logical reason. Well done, everyone.
Roundup: Tony Abbott’s man-crush
Tony Abbott had his meetings with Stephen Harper and the Governor General yesterday, but it was really clear that his man-crush was on Harper. Or “Stephen,” as he kept calling him, with effusive and somewhat obsequious praise for his being a “beacon” for centre-right parties around the world. (This after Abbott inadvertently referred to the country as “Canadia” upon his arrival Sunday). Both took hard lines against carbon taxes, as Abbott is in the process of trying to repeal the one in his country (where the Australian Senate is holding it up and may continue to until the next Senate election in two years), while Harper literally finger-wagged about how at least he was honest about not wanting to kill the country’s economy. Harper also answered a question about the prostitution bill during the press conference, and gave the same line he used regarding Insite and the harm reduction measures there – that prostitution wasn’t harmful because it’s illegal, but it’s illegal because it’s harmful, and woe to all the harm it does. Err, except that the Supreme Court ruled that the illegalities that surrounded it made it so harmful that it killed the sex workers involved. We’ll see if Harper’s reason flies with the Supreme Court when it winds its way back there. Abbott also stood by the Five Eyes intelligence partnership, and said that countries should never apologies for doing what was necessary to protect themselves. Okay then.
QP: Wondering about fighter jet reports
With the Prime Minister of Australia visiting, Stephen Harper was busy elsewhere and not in the House. Likewise, Thomas Mulcair was off in Alberta, campaigning for the coming by-elections, while Justin Trudeau was, well, we’re not sure. Megan Leslie led off for the NDP, decrying the fighter jet procurement process and demanding that the report be tabled before the House rises. Diane Finley responded that no decision had been made, but that they were studying the report. Leslie moved onto the prostitution bill, to which Bob Dechert insisted that it was all about protecting women, children and the vulnerable. Françoise Boivin carried on about the bill and it’s dubious constitutionality, but Dechert had his talking points memorized. Boivin wanted to know about the legal opinions regarding its constitutionality, to which Dechert insisted that it was, and that he looked forward to the debate. Ralph Goodale led off for the Liberals, demanding a growth agenda and that higher EI premiums be rolled back. Joe Oliver insisted that the government was on track to achieve surplus and that they would responsibly advocate for tax cuts — not that it really answered the question. Goodale noted that the Building Canada Fund was not being made available in the current year, but Denis Lebel responded by praising all of the infrastructure investments that his government had made. Stéphane Dion picked up the topic in French, and harangued Lebel for the lack of signed agreements from the Fund, but Lebel was not swayed from his effusive praise.
Roundup: A blistering report
Word has it that House of Commons Administration has an independent report prepared on the NDP’s “satellite offices” that will be presented to the Board of Internal Economy, and that it’s going to be blistering. And because this is coming from Commons Administration and not any of the parties or committees, it’s going to be difficult for the NDP to blame this on partisanship or that they’re being ganged up on, which are their usual defences. Unless of course they’re going to claim that the Commons Administration is also out to get them…
Roundup: Quebec’s “death with dignity” complications
It’s not really a surprise that the federal government is saying that Quebec’s “death with dignity” law is a violation of the Criminal Code, and will likely be challenged in court. That was kind of the point of the way the Quebec law was structured, however – to fit under the rubric of the provincial responsibility of healthcare so as to not trigger the Criminal Code, but it will likely take the Supreme Court to determine if they can justifiably do so. The Supreme Court is already set to hear a case regarding overturning the ban on physician-assisted suicide, so by the time the Quebec law hits the courts, there may already be new jurisprudence that will help to change the calculus around it. And yes, all parties are divided on the issue. Predictably, opponents of the law insist that euthanasia cannot be medical care, and want more palliative care instead. Administrative law professor Paul Daly puts this new law in the context of yesterday’s Supreme Court ruling on a case involving judicial discretion, and how prosecutorial may wind up filling the gap between the Quebec law and any decision to charge anyone who makes use of it.
QP: Acting on “extensive consultation”
The shootings in Moncton hung over the mood in the Chamber, and a minute of silence for the three dead RCMP officers was held before QP got underway. When things did get underway, Megan led off for the NDP, as Thomas Mulcair was off campaigning in Trinity—Spadina. Leslie asked about supports for veterans, to which Peter MacKay pointed to the unanimous report of the veterans committee and that they take it seriously. Leslie pointed to the closure of those offices, but MacKay protested, saying that they expanded services to veterans. Leslie then turned to the new prostitution bill and demanded that it be referred to the Supreme Court immediately. MacKay insisted that it was about protecting vulnerable women and to give police new tools. Françoise Boivin picked up the torch, and listed the flaws in the bill, to which MacKay praised their “extensive consultation” and how they acted in response to those consultations, and most outrageously claimed that it respected the Bedford ruling. As Justin Trudeau was in Regina, Scott Brison led off for the Liberals, noting that it was summer job season and that the the government cut the Canada Summer Jobs programme, making it harder for students and their parents stuck paying the bills. Jason Kenney praised that Canada has one of the lowest rates of youth unemployment in the developed world, and their support for internships in the last budget. Brison asked the government to crack down on illegal unpaid internships in federally regulated industries, to which Kenney deflected and decried tax increases and reckless spending. Stéphane Dion closed the round, asking if MacKay was looking in the mirror when he alleged leaks in the Supreme Court selection process. MacKay decried his innocence and took the opportunity to congratulate incoming Justice Gascon.