Tag Archives: Status of Women

Roundup: Toxifying a committee

Posted on by

The ongoing denigration of this Parliament continues, as the toxic swamp that committees have devolved into has claimed another victim. Liberal MP Anita Vandenbeld, who has a resumé full of doing work with women and civil society engagement in other countries, removed herself from the Status of Women committee after relentless harassment from Conservative members of the committee, in particular Michelle Ferreri, plus the actions of the Chair, Shelby Kramp-Neuman, in facilitating it, all of it stemming from the set-up that the Conservatives engineered over that so-called “emergency meeting” in the summer where the Chair abused her authority to summon witnesses with no agreement for a study that had not been agreed to, which was being used to try and embarrass the government.

The Status of Women committee used to be one of the most functional and non-partisan committees in the House of Commons, but Poilievre and the Conservatives couldn’t have that. They insisted on replacing the previous committee chair for Kramp-Neuman, who has been doing their bidding, and have made it toxic and dysfunctional, like everything else in this current parliament, because that is part of their overall plan. They need to break everything in order to blame the government, justify an election and to tell people who don’t follow politics and don’t understand what’s going on here that they need to come to power so that they can fix things, when really, the plan is that once they are in power, they will start dismantling the guardrails of the state. None of this is subtle, or novel, and it’s been done in plenty of other countries where their democracies have been dismantled by far-right parties, and it’s happening here while our media stands idly by because both-sides and “We don’t care about process stories,” while the Elder Pundits keep tut-tutting and insisting that it won’t be that bad. We’re getting into some seriously dangerous territory, and nobody wants to sound the alarm.

Big #cdnpoli energy.We are headed in a very bad direction.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-29T14:16:59.724Z

Speaking of committees, the public safety committee heard from top national security officials, who were there to talk about the foreign interference including violence and homicide commissioned by the Indian government, and they made some pretty important revelations, but MPs didn’t really want to hear it, because once again, they were too busy grinding partisan axes. The Conservatives only asked about the embargoed briefing to the Washington Post, which has been falsely termed a “leak,” when it was confirmed that they were contacted by writers from the Post to confirm certain details from their reporting, which they agreed to under the embargo, in part because it was seen as a credible newspaper that could counter the coming disinformation from Indian sources (and we know that certain newspapers in Canada had swallowed Indian disinformation whole on previous occasions). And the Liberals? They were too busy gathering clips of these officials explaining why Pierre Poilievre should get his security clearance. Honest to Zeus, this shouldn’t be this difficult, especially for such a sensitive topic, but nope. MPs have once again beclowned themselves.

Ukraine Dispatch

At least nine people were injured and several apartments set on fire by a drone attack on Kyiv. Russians claim they have seized control of Selydove and are moving to encircle the town of Kurakhove in the east. Also facing imminent Russian threat is Pokrovsk, where the coal mines that fuel the steel mills are still operating as Russians close in.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1851276298242466109

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ministers don’t control committees

Posted on by

In a bid to try and extend the Status of Women committee imbroglio story for another day, The Canadian Press tried to draw the Minister for Gender Equality and Youth, Marci Ien, into the fray to comment on what happened. Ien, who isn’t an idiot, refused, which was the right thing to do. Why? Because as a minister, she has no authority over committees, nor should she, because that’s how Parliament works.

Parliament exists to hold the government, meaning Cabinet, to account. Committees are tasked with holding ministers to account over specific subject matter areas, which is one of the reasons why ministers must come before their respective committees as part of the Estimates cycle (because one of the primary means by which Parliament holds the government to account is by controlling the public purse). Hence, the Status of Women committee is tasked with holding Ien to account for her department, and in fact, they should be doing a whole lot more of that accountability work because frankly, this government’s record on doing gender-based-analysis-plus (GBA+) is actually terrible, and most of the time consists of them just saying “GBA+” and not actually doing the work. A functioning committee would be addressing this, and even though Anita Vandenbeld wrote in her op-ed this week that the committee was functional and worked by consensus, this is a major issue that they have not been tackling like they should, not that this is a surprise. It is absolutely not Ien’s place to comment on what happened at that committee, and it would in fact be a major breach of decorum if she did.

It shouldn’t surprise me that a reporter couldn’t make this distinction for herself before writing the story, but honestly, this is basic parliamentarianism. It should be embarrassing for them to even make this basic error and not understanding the roles between ministers and committees, but this is also the state of political journalism, where actual knowledge of the system has become a rarity among those who are supposed to cover it.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian guided bomb killed two when it hit a schoolyard in the Sumy region. Ukrainian forces have confirmed that they have breached Russia’s Kursk region, sending Russians into disarray and panic, and have launched a massive drone attack further into Russia. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy calls this proof of Ukraine’s ability to surprise on the battlefield.

https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1821336708916347359

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another committee demand

Posted on by

The Conservatives are demanding yet more “emergency” committee hearings, but because it’s a committee they don’t control, they are getting in front of the cameras to make performative demands. Case in point, yesterday Andrew Scheer called a press conference to demand that the NDP and Bloc agree to recall the public safety committee to examine how a suspected terrorist was able to immigrate and obtain citizenship when he may have been videotaped dismembering a prisoner in 2015.

Of course, the Conservatives’ case and rationale is largely hyperbolic, and their blaming the current government for crime rates is both specious and done entirely in bad faith. But then again, Scheer is a lying liar who lies constantly, so he’ll say anything to get attention, and that’s all this is really about—attention. The Conservatives need to get fresh clips for their socials, and summer committee meetings are precisely the kind of thing that they think makes them look good, so that’s why they have been trying to run committees over the summer, and claiming that the other parties want to be “on vacation” rather than doing work in their constituencies. (This becomes one of those areas where you could accuse the Conservatives of projection in that they treat constituency time as “vacation” or a “break” rather than simply doing other kinds of work in the riding).

This is just one more demand for a dog-and-pony show. I’m not sure what exactly a parliamentary committee could do here.

In case you missed them:

  • For National Magazine, I look at BCCLA’s fight to try to see secret documents to hold CSIS to account for possibly improper spying on environmental groups.
  • Also for National Magazine, I delve into the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on annuities the Crown owes for several Ontario First Nations for treaty breaches.
  • My weekend column conducts a thought experiment on how the Liberals could possibly hold a leadership contest under their current rules anytime soon.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take looks at the performative hairshirt parsimony on display as people lose their minds over the purchase of the diplomatic condo.
  • My column goes through some of Poilievre and company’s recent deceitful claims when it comes to drug decriminalisation and safer supply.
  • My feature story in Xtra looks at queer diplomacy in Canada, and how we’ve made great strides in the past decade, but we still have a lot more to do.
  • My weekend column on Jagmeet Singh’s continued announcements that are either economically illiterate, or entirely the domain of the provinces.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine says that their forces downed four Russian missiles and 15 drones overnight. Nevertheless, a missile did strike the Kharkiv region, killing one and injuring twelve. The first group of F-16 fighters are now in Ukraine, and ready to be deployed.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1820400963833958849

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1820799395371110697

Continue reading →

QP: An ejection stunt among the scripts

Posted on by

The prime minister was present, but would only be for the leaders’ round today instead of his usual Wednesday practice of taking all questions, as he needed to head to the École Polytechnique vigil in Montreal. His deputy was absent, as was Jagmeet Singh, who has not been seen in person for over a week now. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he noted the day for remembrance of École Polytechnique before pivoting this to questions of children who are asking Santa Claus for food, and asked if the prime minister “ordered his senators” to vote against Bill C-234. Trudeau read a statement about Polytechnique and gender-based violence. Poilievre then raised a question in the Senate asked of the president of CHMC, who said there wasn’t a plan to add 40,000 housing units and then plugged his “documentary.” Trudeau dismissed the chasing of clicks and praised their housing strategy. Poilievre returned to English to repeat the same question, but called the CMHC the “prime minister’s housing agency,” which is risible. Trudeau read a script that Poilievre chases clicks, and uses homeless people as props. Poilievre blamed Trudeau for causing homelessness, and accused him of attempting to “manipulate and intimidate” senators to vote against Bill C-234. Trudeau quipped that the only farming Poilievre cares about is rage-farming. Poilievre pilloried him for reading talking points from junior staffers, and repeated his same accusation. Trudeau, with a script in his hand, says that Poilievre is so ideologically opposed to climate action that he wants to take parliament hostage, and accused Poilievre of only being fuelled by the sound of his own voice.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he railed about Catherine Tait’s leadership at CBC/Radio-Canada and the cuts being made. Trudeau read some scripts about cancelling Harper cuts and their work on the Online News Act. Blanchet hoped that they would not conclude that Liberal cuts were better than Conservative ones and took another swipe at Tait. Trudeau reminded him that they will look at the protection of French as part of CBC/Radio-Canada’s mandate.

Lindsay Mathyssen rose for the NDP, and read statistics on gender-based violence before accusing the government of cutting funds to women’s shelters (which is not actually the case). Trudeau read a script about supporting shelters and working with provinces and territories on strategies to eliminate gender based violence. Lori Idlout accused the government of deliberately keeping Indigenous women in violent situations by not adequately funding housing. Trudeau read a script about co-developing housing strategies and solutions, while they have already helped build and renovate 30,000 housing units for Indigenous communities. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bad behaviour on committees for clips

Posted on by

The Commons Access to Information, Ethics and Privacy committee released their report on foreign interference yesterday, and much of it was marked by recommendations to do things like finally implement a foreign agent registry (which the government is working on and has been undertaking consultations), and to fix issues that were the subject of leaks from national security agencies. The Conservatives, however, were not on board with the recommendation for web giants like Google and Meta to be held accountable for the spread of disinformation on their platforms, much in the way that the European Union has been doing. The Conservatives claim they are concerned about free speech and journalistic independence, but I have my doubts about that, because cynically, I suspect it’s in their self-interest to be able to continue spreading their own disinformation over these platforms and they don’t want to be accountable for that. Predictably, the Conservatives also used their dissenting report to demand forensic audits of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, even though there is no avenue for the government do really do this as it’s an independent non-profit corporation, and the initial endowment from the government is not at issue in all of the various conspiracy theories that the Conservative shave been pursing.

As for their concern about journalistic independence, they told on themselves some more as their fight to try and haul CBC management to answer questions on their coverage of Hamas and the use of the word “terrorist” took over the Heritage committee with a heated exchange, and Conservative MP Rachael Thomas vowing to make it “hell” for the chair if she didn’t get her own way. Peter Julian kept trying to tell her that the president of CBC, Catherine Tait, is already scheduled to appear next week on other matters, but Thomas kept up this dog and pony show so that she could get clips of her being “shut down” by the committee. But seriously, it is not up to Parliament to make demands of CBC’s coverage, and for the party to claim they respect journalistic independence while pursuing this vendetta just shows how much they are invested in their bullshit, and how willing they are to erode democratic norms (like the independence of the public broadcaster) in order to score a few points.

This use of committees as clip-gathering for social media was also on full display at Status of Women, as MP Michelle Ferreri staged another such stunt, by demanding a study on violence against women on transit as an “emergency,” while Liberal MP Anita Vandenbeld objected because the study she had been trying to launch for months now on the mental health of women refugees who faced sexual violence would be pushed back yet again. Ferreri claimed that she wasn’t doing this for clips—and then put out a shitpost attacking Vandenbeld. It’s shameful that committees are being used like this.

 

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces continue to pound Avdiivka in the east, while Ukrainians say their defensive line is holding. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that they will continue to put their own pressure on Russian-occupied Crimea, and that increasing strikes have force the Russians to pull out their fleet as they are no longer to safely operate it from there. Elsewhere, Ukraine’s justice minister says he’s willing to go after the country’s oligarchs for embezzlement, fraud, and money laundering.

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre tries to play prosecutor

Posted on by

The stage was set for the showdown we have been anticipating for weeks, as the prime minister was finally in the House for QP after missing it in the last sitting week, and it portended to be nasty given the tenor of the previous episodes in the week. Pierre Poilievre led off, and he stated that the prime minister had previously stated he was unaware of certain allegations, which this morning’s Global story seemed to counter. Justin Trudeau first gave some bafflegab about taking interference seriously, but on this allegation he and his National Security and Intelligence Advisor have stated they had no information about financial transfers. Poilievre insisted this couldn’t be the case, and Trudeau reiterated that he had no knowledge of transfers, and then corrected the swipe at NSICOP in stating that its reports to Parliament. Poilievre tried to be clever about the redactions in NSICOP reports before again insisting that Trudeau must have known of these transfers. Trudeau pointed to where NSICOP reports can be found. Poilievre accused the prime minister of playing word games and insisted that he knew Beijing directed funds to candidates. Trudeau stammered about the redactions before repeating again they had no information on transfers of funds. Poilievre recited from the Global story, and one more time, Trudeau stammered about national security bodies. 

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and demanded an independent public inquiry. Trudeau stated that he wasn’t refusing, but he wanted recommendations from the special rapporteur. Normandin insisted that this wasn’t a partisan issue, and that they needed an inquiry, and Trudeau repeated that they needed the rapporteur to ensure they make the best moves, as some experts said an inquiry was not the right move. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he also quoted the Global story, and demanded a public inquiry, and Trudeau reiterate that they wanted the rapporteur to ensure they got the right process. Singh took a swipe at Trudeau before repeating the question in French. Trudeau repeated that there are experts who dispute that they need a public inquiry, which is why they want the rapporteur to weigh in.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Play stupid procedural games, win stupid procedural consequences

Posted on by

My patience for the stupid procedural games being played in the House of Commons is wearing incredibly thin as Liberal House Leader Mark Holland is moving a motion to extend sitting hours to midnight. Now, this would be fairly normal for the last four sitting weeks of the year, but Holland is moving the motion to extend until June. *sighs, pinches bridge of nose* Holland claims it’s because the Conservatives are being obstructionist, and putting up long speaking lists for every bill, so he’s going to accommodate them, and the Conservatives are saying that it’s their job to have vigorous debate on every bill, but this is beyond excessive. (The NDP are also in favour of this, because they too have essentially had a policy of talking every bill to death for the past decade or so). But that should make everyone happy, no?

Of course not. Andrew Scheer is, not incorrectly, pointing out that midnight sittings take resources (read: interpreters) away from committees, and calls this the Liberals trying to kill accountability by stealth. That’s one interpretation, but one could also say that it’s the consequences of the Conservatives decision to fill up the speaking lists like they are. And it’s all so unnecessary. This insistence of filling up speaking lists and having MPs read canned speeches into the record for hours on end is a particularly Canadian phenomenon, and it’s a symptom of our politics being treated un-seriously. It’s stupid gamesmanship that started years ago, and it gets worse with each passing parliament, and we need to stop it. The fact that Holland and Scheer are now exacerbating it even more as a kind of brinksmanship is killing our democracy, and MPs need to grow the hell up, on all sides of the Chamber.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Protecting nominations is corrosive to democracy

Posted on by

Remember back when Justin Trudeau promised that the Liberals were going to be the party of “open nominations,” because this was good for democracy and all of that? Well, it seems like once again, his party is firming up their rules to protect incumbents from nominations, which is not open nominations, and is very bad for democracy. Very, very bad. Nomination races are one of the only tools that grassroots party members have to hold incumbents to account without voting against the party in a general election. It’s how the party is supposed to hold its own to account, and if they can fundraise enough and keep their memberships above a certain level, they’re being given a free pass rather than the accountability the system is supposed to provide. This is a very bad thing for our democratic system. It’s bad enough that under Trudeau, the Liberals tore up their party constitution and centralized power in his office. Now they are short-circuiting one more accountability measure and keeping tight control over the nomination process, which focuses even more power on the leader (for whom the party constitution states doesn’t have to face a leadership review unless they lose an election). This is not how a party is supposed to be run.

The practice of democracy in this country is backsliding, as much as our parties like to pat themselves on the back. They have been undermining the rules at every turn, and have hollowed out the safeguards and the grassroots participation. And yes, I know that sitting MPs insist that they need protected nominations because they’re not in the riding to fend off any nomination challenges, but a) you’re in the riding an awful lot, because the number of sitting days has been in decline, and b) you have incumbency advantage already, and if you keep up the door-knocking and activities that you’re required to for these protections, you might as well do it for real stakes. Because yes, grassroots democracy matters, and we desperately need to rebuild it in this country before it’s too late. Protecting nominations just corrodes the system even more than it already has been, and the Liberals cannot pat themselves on the back and talk about how good they are for democracy if they can’t even be bothered with the fundamental basics.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 260:

Russian Forces made a big song and dance about pulling out of Kherson, saying they can’t supply it, but Ukraine is sceptical because it looks like Russia is setting a trap, because they tend to do the opposite of what they say they’re going to. And indeed, they say that they haven’t actually seen signs that Russians are completely leaving the city. Meanwhile, here’s a look at the task ahead of rebuilding Kharkiv after Russian occupation.

https://twitter.com/StratCom_AFU/status/1589649656338067464

Continue reading →

QP: In the din of clinking glasses, talk of a political marriage

Posted on by

It was to be the only day that the prime minister was going to be present this week, given that he’ll be off on a red-eye flight to Europe tonight for NATO and G7 meetings over the rest of the week, and all of the other leaders were present as well. With Speaker Rota recovering from scheduled heart surgery, his deputy, Chris d’Entremont, was again in the big chair. Candice Bergen led off, script in front of her, and she railed about the “secret backroom deal” between the so-called new NDP-Liberal government, to which Trudeau calmly noted this was about stability in order to deliver the things that Canadians asked for in the election, instead of the toxicity we had seen. Bergen falsely stated that inflation was because of government spending, and that the “new NDP-Liberal government” would spend even more. Trudeau returns to the line about working across party lines to avoiding the toxic atmosphere that has developed. Bergen worried that natural resource and fisheries jobs were in danger because of this deal, for which Trudeau worried about how toxic partisanship slowed down delivery of help for Canadians, while this job would get good jobs for Canadians while respecting Parliament. Bergen insisted that the deal disrespected Parliament and voters—which is blatantly absurd—before railing about gas prices and demanding taxes on it be cut. Trudeau cautioned her about spreading misinformation and that they had plenty of room for debate and disagreement under the agreement like Parliament works. Luc Berthold took over in French and acted confused about who was in charge and trolled that Jagmeet Singh should be named deputy prime minister, and Trudeau repeated that this deal would allow the House to operate more constructively.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried that the basis of the agreement, with pharmacare and dental care, would trample over provincial jurisdiction, to which Trudeau insisted that they believe in working collaboratively with provinces, but they would ensure all Canadians get high-quality healthcare. Blanchet worried that the NDP were hostile toward Quebec’s Law 21, to which Trudeau gave a paean about the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded support for their Supply Day motion on higher wealth taxes, to which Trudeau reminded him of their previous actions, and the investments they are making, but did not signal support. Singh repeated the question in French and got the same answer. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Breakaway caucuses are more headaches for O’Toole

Posted on by

Things in the Conservative caucus seem to be getting increasingly precarious, as a “small number” of MPs continue to remain unvaccinated, and others refuse to disclose even if they are vaccinated, which is going to be a problem for Erin O’Toole in two weeks when they need to show proof of vaccination to enter the parliamentary precinct, their offices, or reach the House of Commons.

As if this weren’t enough, you have more unofficial “breakaway” caucus groups forming – one of them calling themselves the “civil liberties caucus,” apparently headed by Marilyn Gladu, who are concerned with the loss of “medical privacy” over vaccine status; the other is allegedly rallying around fiscal and deficit issues (and I would be tremendously surprised if this isn’t a faction led by Pierre Poilievre). And for context, particular “caucus” groups are fairly normal, but they tend to be around things like friendship groups with other countries, or other soft parliamentary diplomacy. This is not it, and while Gladu insists that this isn’t about O’Toole’s leadership, but it’s hard not to see it that way – especially as he should have been clamping down on the anti-vax contingent in his caucus and party more broadly because there is still a pandemic going on, and pandering to a group that is heavily influenced by conspiracy theories is frankly insane.

Nevertheless, this is where we find ourselves. O’Toole continues to try and play both sides of the fence, saying he’s encouraging vaccination but won’t enforce it when people refuse for no good reason at all. The fact that the party has made itself beholden to its social conservative and more fringe base because they’re the ones who both fundraise and volunteer is a problem for the party over the long term, as the need to keep appeasing this base isn’t going away. That makes it harder for the rational, moderate Conservatives from having influence (witness the savaging they gave to Michael Chong in 2017, and Peter MacKay last year, even though MacKay wasn’t even a real Red Tory). So long as O’Toole refuses to put his foot down in the face of a global pandemic, he’s enabling more of the decline and that bodes very poorly for the future of the party, and Canadian political discourse.

Continue reading →