With Stephen Harper entertaining the president of South Korea just down the hall, and Justin Trudeau, well, elsewhere, Thomas Mulcair was once again the only major leader in the Commons, not that this is uncommon for a Monday any longer. Mulcair began QP with a short question about why the PM is boycotting the UN climate conference this week. Colin Carrie responded by praising the government’s action on GHGs in a ridiculous prepared statement. Mulcair decried the embarrassment of the government withdrawing from the Kyoto Protocol, and wondered if the government believed in a healthy environment, to which Carrie read another lengthy statement. Mulcair referenced his time as Quebec environment minister, and wondered if the government would include a right to clean air and water in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Carrie noted that Mulcair once had a smog day named after himself — and read another statement. Megan Leslie was up next, and spoke about the climate March in New York, and asked about regulations on oil and gas emissions. Carrie, undaunted, read yet another prepared statement. Leslie tried one last time to persuade the PM to head to the climate summit, but Carrie reminded her that the environment minister was attending. Rising for the Liberals, John McKay tried to keep up the pressure on the climate summit file, to which Carrie — once again — read a statement prefaced by the fact that the former Liberal leader named his dog Kyoto. Marc Garneau asked again in French, to which Carrie read a statement in French. Scott Brison closed the round asking about the problems with the EI tax credit, and Kevin Sorensen gave Carrie a break by reciting that the Liberals didn’t understand small business.
Tag Archives: Syria
Roundup: The threat of Twitter pabulum
The Language Commissioner’s look into whether or not John Baird’s personal Twitter Machine account constitutes government business and thus possessing a greater emphasis on bilingualism is opening a can of worms, especially because it invites little more than scripted tweets that bureaucrats go through approvals to write rather than the kinds of spontaneous communications that we can now get with ministers that we otherwise can’t. If we clamp down on this medium, we really are dooming ourselves into a political discourse full of nothing but bland pabulum for all time.
Roundup: Taking apart MacKay’s assertions
The chair of the women’s forum at the Canadian Bar Association calls Peter MacKay out for the real consequences for women in the profession as they are being overlooked for judicial appointments, and that there is a need for more data on appointments, while Thomas Muclair thinks that this is more proof to demand MacKay’s resignation. Former Liberal justice minister Irwin Cotler, however, does the due diligence and systematically dismantles MacKay’s assertions, from his statements that law schools aren’t playing their role, to the claim that women aren’t applying, and most especially the notion that there apparently aren’t enough women who can be appointed on the basis of merit. Cotler takes MacKay to school over the issue, and it’s great to see a fact-based takedown and not more of this open letter nonsense and weird blaming that has thus far taken place.
QP: Still making a decision
It was a rainy day in Ottawa, with the Ontario election going on, and the faint thumping sounds of the music being played at the nearby Franco-Ontarian Festival was heard through the walls on the Hill. Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair were present, while Justin Trudeau was off in New Brunswick to glad-hand with voters. Mulcair led off by pointing out that the expert review panel didn’t recommend the F-35s (indeed, they didn’t make any recommendations as it wasn’t their role), and would they hold an open competition. Harper stood up to say that they were still making a decision. Mulcair pressed and wanted the report made public, to which Harper reiterated that they were evaluating the report. Mulcair changed topics and asked point blank how many Syrian refugees were accepted into Canada, citing how Chris Alexander hung up on a CBC Radio interview yesterday. Harper responded that the number was over a thousand, before he slammed Mulcair and the NDP for their problematic spending. Mulcair kept at it, pointing out how many refugees other countries had taken in, but Harper reminded him that most of those displaced Syrians were temporarily displaced, and that they weren’t intended to be settled elsewhere permanently. Joyce Murray, leading for the Liberals, asked that the government turn down the Northern Gateway pipeline, to which Greg Rickford told her that they were still making a decision. Marc Garneau was up next and returned to the issue of the fighter jet replacement, and accused the government of being reckless with public money. Diane Finley assured him that the expert panel gave rigorous and impartial advice, which she thanked them for. Garneau demanded a fair, and open competition, to which Finley reiterated that they launched their Seven-Point Plan™.
QP: Privacy Commissioner conspiracies
It was a scorching Monday in the Nation’s Capital, which always has the potential to make MPs crankier. Thomas Mulcair led off by reminding the Commons of the incident six months ago when a Canadian was denied entry into the States because of treatment for depression, and that his candidate for Privacy Commissioner helped to negotiate the information sharing agreement with the States. Stephen Harper, in the Commons for a rare Monday appearance, reminded him that the appointee was a non-partisan public servant with decades of experience. Mulcair pressed, pointing out all the various surveillance measures that the candidate had worked on, but Harper shrugged it off, saying that Mulcair sees conspiracy theories everywhere. Mulcair went at it again, insisting that there was a conflict of interest of someone who dealt with surveillance legislation — and referring to the Liberal leader as Harper’s pal — but Harper reiterated his response and said that the nominee could explain it before committee. For he Liberals, John McCallum led off — Trudeau again being elsewhere — and noted that Alberta’s labour minister offered to take over aspects of the Temporary Foreign Worker programme in his province. Harper insisted that the Liberal position was confused, and that they opposed strengthening the enforcement measures. McCallum pointed out that there remained no employer on a blacklist for abuse or that been fined, but Harper reiterated in is answer. Marc Garneau asked about grants for federal social housing agreements, to which Candice Bergen said that the Liberals cut funding for housing in the nineties.
Roundup: A damning pre-study report
All day long yesterday, word had it that Conservative senators will be recommending changes to the Fair Elections Act as a result of their pre-study, and that Senate Liberals will be recommending even more changes in a minority report. The nine major ones, however, have unanimous support. Pierre Poilievre said he’d “carefully consider” their ideas, which is pretty non-committal. Of course, if the House passes the bill unamended without having considered the Senate recommendations, it could set up for a confrontation between the two Chambers if the Senate decides to make an issue out of it. That of course, remains the danger – that the Conservatives in the Senate will buckle under the pressure of the PMO, as there are still too many operating under its influence. Incidentally, it seems that even if the bill passes and the sections on the robocall registry are unaltered, they may not be implemented in time for the next election.
QP: Why do you hate the DPP?
As has become tradition, there were no major leaders in the House for Monday QP, which is a sorry comment in and of itself. When things got started, NDP deputy leader David Christopherson led off, shouting about the Conservatives’ dismissal of Sheila Fraser’s warnings about the elections bill. Pierre Poilievre responded that they simply disagreed with Elections Canada’s opinion and that it was reasonable to expect ID at the polls. Christopherson loudly mused dark conspiracy theories about the PMO cooking up smears against anyone who has had anything to do with Elections Canada. Poilievre, undaunted, gave his prepared talking points. Christopherson brought up the fact that the Director of Public Prosecutions was not consulted about the changes in the bill that affect him, to which Poilievre accused him of casting aspersions on the DPP’s independence. Alexandrine Latendresse repeated the same questions in French, eliciting a similar response. Scott Brison led off for the Liberals, worrying about the infrastructure needs of Fort McMurray being hurt by the cuts to the Building Canada Plan. Denis Lebel insisted that they were making record investments. David McGuinty asked the same again in French, but changed the location in need to Ottawa, not that Lebel gave him a different answer.
QP: Burying the Sheila Fraser lede
Despite it being only Thursday, there was only one major leader in the House, as Stephen Harper was in Mississauga to announce a bill, and Justin Trudeau in Fort McMurray in advance of the by-election call there. Thomas Mulcair, still present in Ottawa, led off by asking about a refugee deportation case, to which Chris Alexander seemed to imply that the woman in question was not a genuine refugee. Mulcair brought up the plight of someone thrown in jail in China for assisting the labour movement, to which Alexander gave a paean about how great their refugee reforms were. Mulcair moved onto the elections bill, demanding that it be withdrawn. Pierre Poilievre insisted that his stories about widespread voter fraud were true. Mulcair then brought up former Auditor General Sheila Fraser’s objections to the bill — something I figured would have led off QP — but Poilievre was undaunted in his praise of the bill. For his final question, Mulcair brought up the request that the families of fallen soldiers pay their own way to a national memorial service. James Bezan said that expenses would be covered, and laid blame on the Colonel who sent out the letter. Chrystia Freeland led off for the Liberals, and brought up the changes in median incomes since the Conservatives came to power. Kevin Sorensen insisted that everyone was better off since they were in power. Freeland brought up other worrying figures, but Sorensen praised the government’s job creation record. Emmanuel Dubourg asked the same again in French, and Sorensen accused Trudeau of voting against middle class families time and again.
QP: A premier present, but not the PM
BC premier Christy Clark was in the Speaker’s gallery, here to watch QP in the federal parliament after signing some agreements with the federal government. Alas, despite being back in the country, Stephen Harper was not present to take questions in the House. Neither Thomas Mulcair nor Justin Trudeau were there to ask said questions either, for what it was worth. That meant that it was up to Libby Davies to lead off for the NDP, decrying the expiration of the 2004 health accords. Rona Ambrose reminded her that they were still providing record levels of funding to the provinces, that the provinces were asking for funding predictability, and they were providing that. Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet asked the same again in French, and got the same response in English. Boutin-Sweet moved onto infrastructure funding, which Denis Lebel assured her of how great the new Building Canada Fund really was. Scott Brison led off for the Liberals, and asked about expanding the CPP, as recommended by the Finance Department’s own reports. Despite Joe Oliver being present, Kevin Sorensen got up to answer to say that the Fragile Economy™ could not afford more payroll taxes. Brison reminded him that they were keeping EI premiums artificially high to balance the books, and that those payroll taxes could be better spent on CPP enrichment, but Sorensen decried all of the things the Liberals voted against. Ralph Goodale got up to ask about the loss of infrastructure funds coming tomorrow (Lebel: We are giving record funding).
Roundup: Ignoring previous suggestions
Our Officers of Parliament are saying that Mark Adler’s “witch-hunt” bill to ensure that they don’t have partisan pasts rings hollow considering that they jointly sent suggestions to the Commons about making their offices more transparent in the wake of the Christiane Ouimet affair, and nobody followed up on that. Of course they didn’t, as there wasn’t any partisan advantage to it.