Tag Archives: Thomas Mulcair

QP: Demands that Fantino resign

Posted on by

The second-last Monday of the sitting year, and there were a large number of empty seats in the Chamber, which sadly is not too much of a surprise. Thomas Mulcair was present, and led off by asking about the AG report on mental health in veterans affairs, and the funding announcement being led over 50 years, and then accused the minister of fleeing the country. Fantino stood up and robotically insisted that he asked for the AG review and that he accepted his recommendations, before insisting that he was on a trip with veterans in Italy. Mulcair lashed out, calling him a coward, for which the Speaker cautioned him, before they went for another round. Mulcair demanded his resignation, but Fantino simply uttered robotic talking points. Mulcair changed topics to the final dismantling of the Wheat Board, to which Gerry Ritz insisted that they were still accepting bids. Mulcair then launched into Aglukkaq, but because he used “dishonesty” in his salvo, the Speaker shut him down. Ralph Goodale led for the Liberals, and calmly demanded the resignation of Fantino. Fantino simply returned to his talking points about making improvements to veterans benefits. After a second round, Fantino hit back a little more, and for the final round, Marc Garneau repeated the resignation demand in French, Fantino restored to his script about making significant improvements for those benefits.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Shrugging off other harassment allegations

Posted on by

A suit was filed in Ontario Superior Court yesterday alleging harassment by an NDP MP Sylvain Chicoine, according to a former staffer – but it’s not quite the same as the other allegations that have gripped the Hill this week. Instead, it was another staffer in that office that harassed the female staffer who filed the suit, while she alleged that nothing was done because Chicoine acted in a sexist and misogynist manner by doing nothing about it, until he eventually fired her. The party closed ranks around Chicoine by saying that the staffer’s union had investigated and found nothing to be amiss, but were silent about the fact that they offered her a lesser data-entry job in the leader’s office if she agreed to drop her suit. Mulcair tried to claim that it had nothing to do with Chicoine but was simply a dispute between staffers – not true, according to the suit – and even went so far as to opine that as a lawyer, he thought her case was without merit – a rather unusual move for someone who was so concerned about re-victimization of other complainants just a day before. The change in tone between the two incidents is quite something.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Two suspensions and a resignation

Posted on by

Two Liberal MPs – Scott Armstrong and Massimo Pacetti – were suspended from caucus yesterday following complaints of harassment by two NDP MPs. Thus kicked off a firestorm of calls for independent investigations, bringing in the Speaker, and yes, political gamesmanship. There was, of course, a time when this kind of thing would be handled by the whips and party leaders behind closed doors, but in light of the Jian Gomeshi allegations and the conversation the nation is having about sexual harassment more broadly, Justin Trudeau felt he had no choice but to suspend the members pending an investigation, so that justice was seen to be done. But the fact that he didn’t inform the unnamed accusers – who had brought the matter to his attention in the first place – that he was doing this is suddenly bringing up accusations that he “re-victimised them,” as opposed to leaving him open to accusation that he did nothing when he was made aware of the allegations. The details of all of what happened remain sketchy, and the NDP are even more opaque on what happened and won’t confirm the details that the Liberal whip has revealed, and even the allegations are mostly couched in terms of “personal misconduct,” which both suspended MPs deny, Pacetti going so far as to say that he still don’t know what it is he’s being accused of. Aaron Wherry has collected the various letters and statements that were put out from the Liberal Whip, the Speaker, Thomas Mulcair, Trudeau, and the two suspended MPs. Chantal Hébert recalls the kinds of harassment that was on open display when she first arrived on the Hill in the late 70s. The Ottawa Citizen editorial board says that this story, now part of that conversation about sexual harassment an assault in this country, will hopefully start to bring about change. Similarly, Canadian Business discusses the need to stop treating sensitivity training with mocking, but rather as a way to shift reporting away from the victims alone and putting more onus on bystanders.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Del Mastro found guilty

Posted on by

Conservative-turned-Independent Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro has been found guilty, along with his official agent, of election overspending in 2008, and Del Mastro faces the possibility of three years in jail plus $6000 in fines. Del Mastro, obstinately, believes that the conviction is just the judge’s opinion, and that it’s not over, though there’s no indication on what grounds he would appeal. He told CBC that there’s more evidence of his innocence that wasn’t introduced at trial, but if he thinks he can introduce that at the appeal stage, well, good luck, because they almost never allow that. The question of his fate comes next, because there is some ambiguity as to whether he will be forced to vacate his seat and lose the ability to run in another election for five years – as stipulated by the Elections Act – or if they plan to wait until he is out of appeals, which could be a lengthy process. Del Mastro says he plans to be at work on Monday (sentencing isn’t until near the end of November), but the Government House Leader has recommended that the matter be referred to the Procedure and House Affairs committee, where a determination could be made there. It appears that Del Mastro had been offered a plea deal earlier that would have had him pay a fine, probably enter into a compliance agreement, and have it be over with. Instead, he went to court, and had the judge call out his credibility, which is going to be very, very difficult to recover from. And while the former Law Clerk of the Commons, Rob Walsh, said that it would be in Del Mastro’s best interest to resign to minimise the damage, Del Mastro’s behaviour to date would seem to indicate someone who doesn’t know when to quit, and who will likely obstinately push this to the bitter end.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Little hysteria in the face of a gunman

Posted on by

The brief recap of yesterday’s madness here in Ottawa – a gunman identified as Michael Zehaf-Bibeau shot and killed Corporal Nathan Cirillo at the National War Memorial before he headed up to Parliament Hill, made it into the building and injured one guard before he was eventually taken down. (Timeline)

Continue reading →

Roundup: Contempt, tempers, and losing the plot

Posted on by

Thomas Mulcair’s snide exchange with the Speaker during yesterday’s QP continues to resonate around Ottawa, with reminders that Scheer doesn’t currently have the powers to police the content of answers (MPs would have to agree to give him those powers), and musings about this kind of contempt of parliament and remonstrations about how this is what makes people cynical. And the worst part? That even over the Twitter Machine, Paul Calandra continues to play the part. It has also been noted, and I fully agree, that by losing his temper and going after the Speaker, Mulcair made the story about himself rather than Calandra and his utter nonsense.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Back with a countdown

Posted on by

Parliament is back! Yay! Now let’s obsess about how everything is a pre-election narrative, start polling relentlessly, and speculate wildly about the mere possibility that there would be an early election call without any hint of a justification for there to be one! Oh man, aren’t fixed election dates and the year-long campaigning in advance of them just the bestest thing ever?

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lost ship found

Posted on by

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.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Prentice the winner

Posted on by

It’s not a huge surprise, but Jim Prentice won the PC leadership in Alberta, and now needs to win a seat in a by-election. The turnout for said leadership was incredibly poor in comparison to leadership contests past, which some are reading as a bad sign for the state of the party. The fact that their e-voting system was one giant colossal disaster didn’t help either, and once again serves as a warning as to why paper ballots remain best. It also serves as one more reminder as to why we need to return to the system of caucus choosing the leadership, given how ridiculous the whole contest was from start to finish. (Also, please stop using the term “premier-designate.” It’s not a Thing.)

Continue reading →

Roundup: Passing knowingly flawed bills

Posted on by

The Senate, it turns out, passed a tough-on-crime private members’ bill that contained a gaping error in it, and they knew it had an error in it and passed it anyway – with observations attached about the errors. Why? Because said private member had become a parliamentary secretary, and sending it back to the House to fix the error would have basically killed it because its sponsor could no longer sponsor it. It seems to me that there should have been a fix for that – generally a unanimous vote in the Commons that someone else take it on, as has happened when an MP retires while their bill is in process – but more to the point, if the government was so enamoured with it, then they should have drawn up a government bill that fixed the errors and put it through the process, which likely would have been expedited since it had already had committee hearings in its previous form. But hey, let’s keep up this nonsense of backbenchers sucking up to the government with these nonsense bills, and let’s keep up this bawling that the Senate shouldn’t overturn flawed bills that passed the Commons because they’re not elected. It’s really helping our legislative process, clearly.

Continue reading →