A couple of hours after the speech in the Commons by the Aga Khan, things had quieted down considerably, and most of the leaders had fled. Thomas Mulcair was still around, and he led off by by asking about the elimination of vouching at the polls. Pierre Poilievre responded that in some 40 percent of cases of vouching, there was no way to contact the voucher to ensure there was no fraud. Mulcair wondered about cases where fraud by vouching was prosecuted and why not fix the system. Poilievre said that the Neufeld report showed that even when they tried to fix the vouching system and better monitoring it, there were still irregularities in more than 20 percent off cases. When Mulcair pressed, Poilievre reminded him that there were documented case of someone using the voter ID cards to vote more than once in his own hometown. Mulcair accused them of trying to make it harder for people who don’t vote Conservative, but Poilievre stuck to the facts around those documented cases, as part of a comedy show or not. Dominic LeBlanc led off for the Liberals, and thrice asked about the cuts to infrastructure spending and called their announcements little more than “creative accounting.” Peter Braid responded, and insisted that they’ve tripled investments in infrastructure.
Tag Archives: Syria
QP: Trying to resurrect questions of the Senate
With much of the media’s attention turned to Rob Ford’s visit to Ottawa, all party leaders were in the House, ready to scrap. Thomas Mulcair led off by pointing out that a certain Senator headlined a fundraiser for Pierre Poilievre — actually not government business — not that Harper took the bait and praised the elections bill instead. Mulcair brought up the Deloitte audit and tried to insinuate that Senator Tkachuk was passing information to the PMO. Harper reminded him that it wasn’t a question for him to answer. Mulcair then asked why it was that the previous draft of the election bill was rejected by the Conservative caucus, but Harper insisted that Muclair’s information was wrong. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up slowing growth figures and wondered why the Building Canada Fund was losing money, but Harper hit back by saying that Trudeau didn’t understand the economy. And on it went for two more supplementals.
Roundup: Exit Chuck Strahl
Late Friday afternoon, Chuck Strahl resigned as Chair of the Security and Intelligence Review Committee, not because he’d done anything wrong in his part-time lobbying for Enbridge to the provincial government, but because he didn’t want his activities to be a distraction for the government, which is fair.
Roundup: Rail safety recommendations released
The Transportation Safety Board released their recommendations following the Lac-Mégantic disaster, which not only includes phasing out the DOT-111 tanker cars (though there is no mandated timeline), but also choosing the safest routes, better emergency measures along those routes, and limiting train speeds along the routes that carry dangerous goods. Routes should also be inspected twice a year. The government accepts the recommendations, but because things are complicated and the systems integrated across North America, talks continue between governments.
Roundup: Eight years later
Today marks eight years since Stephen Harper and his Conservatives gained power. How the time flies. Chris Hall writes that those years have honed Harper’s survival instincts (which makes all of those articles about Harper stepping down this year, which are still being published, all the more absurd).
Preston Manning launched a new website to promulgate constitutionally unsound and fairytale notions of Senate reform, coupled with an online poll of which “reform” method Canadians would prefer, with the option of abolition also in there. He plans to give the results to Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre, who will use the unscientific data to make a number of ridiculous Question Period talking points, and our debate on the health of our institutions will be poorer for it.
Roundup: The million-dollar shot
The crass politicking of Harper’s trip to Israel was laid bare yesterday with an incident at the Western Wall when Conservative MP Mark Adler was caught on tape haranguing a PMO staffer about getting past the security line to get a photo with Harper at the wall. “It’s the million dollar shot,” he complained, and reminded him of the re-election coming up. Adler, as it happens, has a large Jewish vote in his riding, and he narrowly took the long-held Liberal seat, so he has reason to be worried. But that said, it demonstrates just how much this trip is more about domestic politics than it is about an actual commitment to international engagement in the region. Speaking of those domestic politics, an anti-gay pastor is a member of the Harper delegation. Naturally. And then there’s the question of Canada’s position on the settlements, to which Harper said our position is well known – that we’re opposed to them – but refused to articulate it, saying instead that he wasn’t going to “single out” Israel for criticism.
Roundup: Another Conservative Senator under suspicion
Conservative Senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen has apparently also been found to have improperly charged per diems for time spent in Ottawa when the Senate wasn’t sitting at one point and promised to repay the amounts – only to come out a few hours later and insist that the amounts were reviewed by Senate Finance and found to be in order. So why say that she was going to repay them and then not? And how can she believe that this isn’t hurting the Senate’s reputation any further if she’s not coming up with a proper justification as to why those per diems should have been charged – especially if she’s on the steering committee of the Internal Economy Committee, which adds another layer of distrust to the issue. I guess we’ll see if her tune changes in the next day or two.
Roundup: More humanitarian aid for Syria
At the end of the G20 conference in Russia, Canada is pledging another $45 million in humanitarian assistance for Syrian refugees, while Harper had more harsh words about Putin and the fact that it was unacceptable that he has a veto on Security Council taking action. But Harper also put distance to the notion that we’ll be making concessions on the Canada-EU Free Trade Agreement, and said that “significant gaps” remain. Okay then. And then the biggest news of all – that Harper has basically asked Barak Obama to dictate what emissions regulations targets he wants us to set in order for the Keystone XL pipeline to be approved. It’s likely an attempt to get a firm set of numbers rather than the nebulous talk that we’re currently mired in, but so much for setting our own sovereign environmental goals and policies.
Roundup: A contract flawed from the outset
A leaked government report gives a rather stinging indictment of the Sea King helicopter replacement procurement, calling it flawed from the outset. At the time, the government treated it like they were buying “off-the-shelf” helicopters, but with so many procurements, the military loaded it up with new specifications until it was no longer “off-the-shelf,” but was rather something that should have been treated like an in-development contract. And so we get delays, and penalties, and intransigence. The report recommends re-scoping the contract in order to treat it as an in-development project so that they can start accepting delivery of helicopters and phasing in new features, but there’s no word on if the government will accept this proposal or not, or if they’ll just continue to blame the Liberals for it rather than taking responsibility or action.
Roundup: Votes on Syria and the question of Responsible Government
In the fallout of last Friday’s vote in the British Commons regarding military action in Syria, there are some very serious questions being asked about what it all means. In part, the concerns come from the nature of Responsible Government – if the House has not expressed support for the government’s foreign policy goals, which as a Crown Prerogative – then how can they continue to claim to have confidence in that government? How is foreign policy any different on a substantive level when it comes to the conduct of a government than a budget? Philippe Lagassé and Mark Jarvis debate the issue here, and I’m going to say that I’m on Lagassé’s side with this one – MPs can’t just deny the government the ability to exercise their prerogatives without also taking responsibility for it, meaning declaring non-confidence in the government. It’s not how Responsible Government works, and if they’re going to start changing the conventions of such a system of governance that works really quite well, then they need to think long and hard about the consequences of their actions. But that’s part of the problem – nobody wants to look at how actions affect the system as a whole, rather than simply patting themselves on the back for a nebulous and not wholly correct interpretation of what democracy means. And once people start tinkering with the parts without looking at the whole, then big problems start to happen, which we really should beware of.