It’s not a big surprise, but the NDP’s motion on amending the Standing Orders to ensure that the relevancy rules include Question Period didn’t pass, but three Conservative MPs – Michael Chong, James Rajotte and Brian Storseth – did vote in favour of it, so read into that what you will. Kady O’Malley, meanwhile, provides three suggestions for how the Speaker could clean up QP, though I am unsure about them. In the first case, there are nominations to consider, especially if we want them to be open. In the second, I do have concerns about the theatricality of it, and in the third, the constant jockeying for future votes could become a continual distraction to the business at hand, and given that the position also has to do with the management of the broader precinct, not to mention diplomatic and ceremonial roles. I’m not sure how the possibility a constant revolving door every couple of years helps matters.
Tag Archives: Russia
Roundup: Live from New York…
Stephen Harper is in New York to attend the UN, so of course that means he’ll speak to American media and reveal things he wouldn’t here at home. So we learned that President Obama has asked for more support in Iraq than we have committed at present, but he won’t say anything more than that, other than “we haven’t out” anything as to what we might send. He also started waxing about something that sounded awfully close to the need to find the “root causes” of radicalizing youth. Harper even said that our deficit figures are smaller than expected, though his Wall Street Journal interviewer did challenge the methodology on some of his claims about just how great our economy is performing. He even made some claims about immigrant voters, which can be disputed once you drill down into the numbers. Suffice to say, it’s more than you get here at home, which remains a problem.
QP: A few answers on Iraq
Before Question Period got underway, the Speaker rose to make a statement. Scheer gave a reminder about his role as it is laid out in O’Brien and Bosc, and reminded members that the current practice, upheld by successive Speakers, is that he has no authority over the content of answers, quoting Speaker Milliken several times. He reminded them that it is up to MPs to give him those powers, but did caution MPs to be more judicious in their language. When things got started officially, Thomas Mulcair asked about the end date of the engagement in Iraq. With Harper off in New York, James Bezan stood up to tell him that the clock started on September 5th, and chided the NDP for offering no suggestions for stopping ISIS. Mulcair made a dig about Bezan not being a member of government before asking how many soldiers were on the ground at present. Bezan deferred, but when Mulcair pressed, Bezan said that the commitment was for 69 personnel who would provide assistance to Kurdish forces. Mulcair demanded a vote on deployment, and Bezan noted all of the other deployments that they didn’t demand a vote for. For his final question, Mulcair demanded a full public inquiry into missing and murdered Aboriginal women. Kellie Leitch said that families of victims were thankful to the government for coming forward with their Action Plan™. For his question, Justin Trudeau cited a report saying that this generation of Canadians would be worse off than their parents, and wondered what the government was doing to change that. Joe Oliver responded by touting assistance for low-income Canadians. Citing the inter-generational wealth gap, Trudeau wondered if the government would vote for their EI credit proposal, but Joe Oliver responded by reading his previous statement in French. Trudeau pressed on their plans for the vote, but Oliver said that the last thing the Liberals were qualified to talk about was EI.
Roundup: Crowing over a very little
The NDP spent an inordinate amount of time crowing over social media yesterday about how they scored a “procedural coup” and “forced” a debate on the report of the special committee on missing and murdered Aboriginal women. The problem is that it’s not really true. Yes, they moved a concurrence motion during Routine Proceedings after QP on Friday, as is their right – but they didn’t surprise the government or catch them off-guard, as Romeo Saganash said during QP that they would be moving such a motion. Giving 20+ minutes notice is not “catching the government off-guard.” And when they forced a 30-minute vote and proceeded to this concurrence motion, the government voted with them and agreed to the debate, which again, puts the “forced” or “coup” narrative to the test. The report itself doesn’t recommend a national inquiry, seeing as it was a Conservative-dominated committee, and while the NDP wanted to highlight their dissenting report appended to it, it still gave the government side plenty of time to discuss their version of said report. So with these facts in mind, you will forgive me if I find the social media triumphalism a bit much.
QP: About this local issue…
With both Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau off in Southern Ontario for events, Thomas Mulcair was the only major leader in the Commons. He led off by asking about the coming demolition of the Mirabel airport — likely because he has Quebec seats to shore up, and Lisa Raitt responded first by reminding him that she’s a she and not a he, and that it’s the Montreal Airport Authority that is the responsible authority. Mulcair shot back that he was referring to the Minister of Infrastructure, before he angrily wondered when the government when the government would listen to indigenous women about missing and murdered indigenous women. Kellie Leitch responded that families were thanking her for the Action Plan™ being tabled. Mulcair then switched to the bus-train collision in Ottawa a year ago, and asked about a train derailment in Slave Lake. Raitt was back up, and said they were working on rail safety. Chris Charlton was up next and bemoaned the declaration of bankruptcy by US Steel in Hamilton, which Mike Lake gave a somewhat shrugging response, and when Charlton demanded that the government protect the pensions of the affected retired workers, Kevin Sorensen touted all the ways they have cut taxes. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, asking about job losses in the last month and suggested changing the EI tax credit to one where employers get a credit for a net job created. Sorensen insisted that the Liberals were making up policy on the fly, and made random potshots at the Liberal record on EI. Goodale’s final question was about the latest report on income splitting and how it would affect provincial budgets. Sorensen responded that Harper said that income splitting was a good policy. Well if Harper says so…
Roundup: Lost ship found
At long last, part of the mystery of the Franklin Expedition has been solved, as we have located one of the two sunken ships, and relatively intact as well, meaning that we can likely send divers there within the next few days. It’s caused a bit of a global buzz, and even Her Majesty sent congratulations on the find, which is lovely. While Harper is pleased as punch, and his detractors bemoaning that he’s spending resources on this and not other issues, it bears reminding that this is also part of our bid to map the ocean floor as part of obligations we face under the Arctic claims process before the UN. Not to mention, the Franklin Expedition has captured our imaginations for a few generations now, and it’s nice to see some answers will finally be found.
Roundup: CRA takes exception
Things with the CRA seem to be taking a turn for the bizarre as they are getting into a fight with well-known charity Oxfam over the charity’s stated goal of trying to prevent poverty around the world. According to the CRA, that’s not an acceptable goal – they should only try to alleviate poverty, as preventing it might benefit people who are not already poor. Yeah, I’m still trying to figure that one out too. According to CRA, the courts haven’t found that that the risk of poverty is the same as actually being in need, so this splitting of hairs means that they can’t put “prevention” in their purpose statement. And it’s not like this is part of the supposed “crackdown” on charities either – this had to do with a regular process of renewing Oxfam’s non-profit status, but it has been noted that Jason Kenney singled them out earlier in the year over their opposition to Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Why the CRA would play petty politics for any minister – especially one that they don’t report to – sounds a little too odd, but this whole situation is just so strange that it will invite conspiracy theory.
Roundup: Funerals and personal trainers
Mike Duffy’s charge sheet has been released, which gives us a few more details about the 31 charges he is now facing. Some of those include the contract he gave to a friend for little or no work, of which some of those funds were funnelled elsewhere – including to a make-up artist and personal trainer – and that some of the claimed expenses were to attend funerals or other such ceremonies. Duffy of course denies any wrongdoing. Here is an updated timeline of the whole expenses scandal in the Senate.
Roundup: Sweeping, questionable changes
The House and Senate have both risen for the summer, but as they did, Jason Kenney and Chris Alexander unveiled their massive overhaul of the Temporary Foreign Workers Programme. It proposes to try and make the programme harder to use, with ever-diminishing caps on the number of workers (who were a fraction of one percent of the total workforce in the country, incidentally) with the aim of getting more unemployed Canadians, as well as Aboriginals, new immigrants and people with disabilities into these low-wage jobs. But Kenney seemed tone deaf to some of the massive labour challenges in Alberta, to demographic issues, to incentivising labour mobility, to the problems of aging populations in rural regions that are depopulating, but most especially to the attitude change that needs to happen if they think that university graduates will think that low-wage jobs in the food service industry or even higher-wage jobs in processing jobs like meat packing are going to be the answer to their labour shortages. The NDP condemned the changes without actually reading them, and all of their objections were addressed, not that it mattered. The Liberals made some pretty salient comments about the implausible changes to inspections and the giant loophole going unaddressed through the youth labour exchange programme. The restaurant and small business associations are really unhappy with the changes, which hamstring their ability to find workers in tough markets. John Geddes starts picking out the flaws in Kenney’s case, including demographics and the notion that it’s likely that non-Canadians made for cheaper and more reliable hires. Andrew Coyne says that the changes are simply bad policy, which punishes the service sector where a government goes out of its way to prevent a manufacturing job from offshoring. Coyne notes that if Canadians don’t want to take these jobs, then they shouldn’t be artificially shoehorned into them, but rather to spend their efforts creating value elsewhere in the economy while those who do want those jobs should be made to be Canadians by using the TFW programme as a pathway to citizenship.
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.