It’s Thomas Mulcair’s birthday, not that he was really going to get any answers out of Harper as a gift for the occasion. Mulcair began by asking a rather lengthy question around the stonewalling around what Nigel Wright knew, but Harper insisted that Wright kept the whole affair to himself. Mulcair brought up Ray Novak and Marjory LeBreton’s alleged call to Mike Duffy telling him that the deal was off. Harper responded that Mulcair was buying into the story that Duffy was the victim rather than the fact of the misspending that got him booted from caucus. When Mulcair tried to clarify whether or not Harper had singled out Duffy at the caucus meeting in February, Harper said that the spending of the three senators was brought up in caucus and he made his emphatic statement then. When Mulcair asked when Harper did threaten to expel Duffy from the Senate, Harper reiterated that rule-breakers had no place in caucus. Leading for the Liberals was Dominic LeBlanc, as Justin Trudeau was speaking away speaking in Washington DC. LeBlanc asked why one former PMO staffer who was involved was promoted despite potentially criminal behaviour. Harper responded by calling out Liberal senators for holding up the suspension without pay of those three senators. LeBlanc pushed, bringing up or their questionable hires by the PMO, but Harper kept insisting that the Liberal senators were keeping those misbehaving from being punished (which is of course false, as they are simply looking to put it to committee to give it due process).
Monthly Archives: October 2013
Roundup: Pamela Wallin and the conspiracy against her
Poor Pamela Wallin – that’s the story she would have us believe, based on her speech in her defence in the Senate today. Only unlike Mike Duffy, who was scorching the earth and taking the Prime Minister down with him, Wallin got personal with other Senators, naming Marjory LeBreton and Carolyn Stewart-Olsen as the architects of some kind of conspiracy against her, and gave the defence that the other Senators resented her because she was an “activist senator” – a bogus and self-aggrandising construct that presupposes that no other senator is also activist. Contrary to the myth of people who do no work and nap all day, most Senators are active in their activism around one cause or another. For most, it’s why they got appointed in the first place. In fact, most of their activism and causes are far more focused than Wallin’s, whose “activism” seemed to be largely about supporting the troops and being a motivational speaker on demand. For her part, LeBreton completely refuted Wallin’s accusations of conspiracy and of the campaign of leaks designed to “discredit” Wallin, and further added that she wasn’t responsible for Wallin’s expense claims. Because yes, those are still at the heart of the issue, and Wallin isn’t exactly offering contrition for anything on her part.
QP: The aftershocks of Duffy’s bombshell
With Parliament Hill still reeling from last night’s ClusterDuff bombshell, and all leaders were in the House, waiting for the big show. It got started with Mulcair asking if Harper threatened Duffy with expulsion on February 13th. Harper said that he didn’t threaten him with expulsion, but he did think the expenses were inappropriate and ordered them repaid or he’d be thrown out of caucus. Mulcair asked if Harper had said that it wasn’t about the rules, but the perception. Harper denied saying that, and gave another rousing defence of following the rules made before the entire expenses. Mulcair pushed, and asked if Wright was present for that discussion. Harper, getting punchy, said that it was a statement before the entire caucus, and did not order Wright to write the cheque, and because that action was wrong, Wright was no longer in his office. When Mulcair asked if Ray Novak was party to those discussions, Harper insisted that Novak was not one of the people that Wright named as being involved, and he obviously wasn’t involved as he never would have approved it. Justin Trudeau began by pointing out that leaders take responsibility, and named the people that Harper hired or appointed at the centre of the scandal. Harper rejected the premise, and hit back at Duffy, saying that since Duffy felt he hadn’t done anything wrong, it was why he was no longer in caucus. Trudeau demanded that Harper answer questions under oath around the affair, but Harper hit back, saying that Trudeau was too willing to let Senator Harb back into caucus (which is not exactly true).
Roundup: Duffy’s scorched earth policy
Well, that was…interesting. After Senator Carignan, the leader of the government in the Senate, spent over an hour laying out the case against Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau, and after a couple of other Senators from all sides expressed their reservations about this move and the lack of due process – let alone the setting of dubious precedents – the real bombshell dropped. Senator Duffy got up to speak to his defence, and he took the scorched earth approach, crying that he didn’t want to go along with this conspiracy “foisted” upon him, that he should have said no, that his livelihood was threatened, and that it all led back to Harper and the Senate leadership. If anything, it made it harder for Harper’s version of events to stand up to scrutiny, which the NDP spent the evening gleefully putting press release after press release about. It’s also going to make QP later today to be quite the show. Of course, what Duffy neglected to mention was his own wrongdoing. He protested that he hadn’t done anything wrong – which is not the case. Both the Deloitte audit and the subsequent RCMP investigation have shown that his residence is not, in fact, PEI, and that’s a constitutional requirement, no matter what LeBreton or Wright told him. A retired constitutional law professor from PEI says that Duffy never actually met the residency criteria, given that when the constitution says a Senator “shall be a resident of the province for which he is appointed,” and that shall means “must” in legal terms, Duffy’s qualification never was valid to begin with, which is how this whole sordid affair got started in the first place. While Duffy may be trying to play the victim, he is still under investigation, no matter that the cover-up has now become worse than the alleged crimes. The same with Brazeau, though there wasn’t really much cover-up there. We shouldn’t forget that, no matter the speeches they gave.
QP: The long-awaited showdown
As the minutes counted down before Question Period, Thomas Mulcair, without his usual mini-lectern on his desk, glared across the aisle, while Stephen Harper casually flipped through a briefing binder, and the Members’ Statements were going on around them. At the appointed hour, the Speaker called for Oral Questions, and the rumble began. Mulcair asked if the prime minister regretted any of his own actions in the ClusterDuff affair. Harper got up and said that he expected people to follow the rules, and if mistakes are made then they would have consequences. Mulcair asked if Harper was telling the truth on June 5th when he said that nobody else knew of the deal between Wright and Duffy. Harper said that Wright took full responsibility, and that he accepted that. Mulcair tried again, but got some economic boosterism in reply. Mulcair pushed, asking if anyone had even asked whether they knew the payment was wrong. Harper tried to veer the topic back to the economy, and when Mulcair, somewhat rhetorically asked if Canadians could trust Harper to tell the truth, but Harper tried to further insinuate that the NDP were against CETA, and that their position kept changing. For the Liberals, Justin Trudeau got up and threw a curve-ball, congratulating Harper and everyone who worked hard to get the EU trade agreement, and asked when the full text would be available. Harper accepted the plaudits, and said more details would be forthcoming. Trudeau segued to the fact that leaders took responsibility for when things when wrong as well as when things went right, and that he was responsible for the various appointments at the centre of the ClusterDuff affair. Harper responded that he was clear about people paying the price when rules aren’t followed.
Roundup: Duffy’s lawyer throws some bombs
It was quite the noon hour revelation, as embattled Senator Mike Duffy’s lawyer took the stage of the Charles Lynch Press Theatre, and lobbed grenades at the PMO on Duffy’s behalf – careful grenades that were all hearsay and accusation with no paper documents to back anything up. He alleged that Duffy didn’t want to have anything to do with the $90,000 repayment – not only because he didn’t think he owed anything as he had his residency cleared with the Senate leadership and Nigel Wright, but that when he was made to repay it, he pleaded that he wasn’t a wealthy man, and that Wright paid it to make the problem go away, and that if he didn’t cooperate, then they would use his residency issue to remove him from the Senate. Because you know, Duffy is the victim in all of this. It was also alleged that PMO instructed Duffy not to cooperate with auditors, and that they fed him media lines to deal with everything. Senator David Tkachuk, who then-chaired the Internal Economy Committee, denies ever threatening Duffy, especially with expulsion, which would seem to put the onus on Duffy and his lawyer to put up and reveal the documents.
QP: Yet another ClusterDuff explosion
Less than two hours before QP got underway, embattled Senator Mike Duffy’s lawyer called a press conference and lobbed a few grenades into the laps of the government, alleging a great many things about how much the PMO was involved in the affairs with Duffy. Thomas Mulcair, however, was not in the House, as he was off giving a speech to a labour group in Quebec City. In his absence, Megan Leslie led off for the NDP, asking about those very allegations dropped by Duffy’s lawyer. Harper replied that they expected all parliamentarians to follow both the letter and the spirit of the law and if they didn’t, then they would suffer the consequences. While he was up, pointed to the somewhat fictitious opposition of the NDP to the EU free trade agreement and said that they were only asking questions like those about Duffy because they couldn’t do so on the big issues. Leslie kept at it, but Harper kept insisting that they had cooperated with investigators. Eventually, Paul Calandra took over answering for Harper, and touted the reforms to the Senate that they’ve proposed (not that they would have done anything about this issue). For the Liberals, Ralph Goodale got up and named the names in the PMO that the lawyer dropped. Harper got up and insisted that he answered all of these questions before, and he was focused on the biggest trade deal in a generation.
Roundup: By-election dates announced
Stephen Harper has finally called those four by-elections in Toronto Centre, Bourassa, Brandon-Souris and Provencher for November 25th. Toronto Centre NDP candidate Linda McQuaig has put out a YouTube video challenging Chrystia Freeland to a debate. Pundit’s Guide updates the lay of the land in the four ridings here.
Alison Crawford looks at five ways in which the impasse over Justice Nadon’s appointment to the Supreme Court can be resolved, including declaratory legislation, which is a novel approach that I hadn’t yet heard mentioned before.
Roundup: Signing CETA
From Brussels, Stephen Harper signed the draft Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, opening up agricultural and automotive markets while eliminating almost all tariffs, though a couple of trade-offs will mean pharmaceuticals will get two added years of patent protection. The agreement will spend the next couple of years being ratified by both the various provinces in Canada and the member countries of the EU. The full text isn’t available yet either, but so far the notes are positive – even from the opposition parties including the NDP (though their language was much more cautious than the Liberals’). CBC has some numbers of what this affects, PostMedia looks at potential winners and losers, while Maclean’s Econowatch has ten things to know about it. Maclean’s also has a look at how Jean Charest got the ball rolling on the agreement. Paul Wells notes that this really is a big win for Harper, and will probably be what he becomes known for once he leaves office. John Geddes is reminded of the portents of doom that the Canadian wine industry faced with the original free trade deal with the US – which turned out to be false – and instead heralded an upturn for the industry as they took the need to compete more seriously and got rid of their crappy vines in favour of top hybrids, which is a lesson to the whinging dairy industry. Andrew Coyne says that consumers will be the ultimate winners of CETA.
Roundup: Suspending errant senators
In a blatant bit of damage control, Conservatives in the Senate have moved to suspend Senators Duffy, Brazeau and Wallin without pay for “gross negligence” in the use of their parliamentary resources. This came shortly after Duffy sent a message out to say that he was going on medical leave due to heart problems. There are concerns from Senators on both sides that this move comes without a lot of due process, seeing as none of the three have been charged with a crime, though Liberal Senate leader James Cowan noted that he felt there had been insufficient sanctions applied back in the spring, but the government didn’t seem keen on action then. I will admit to my own reservations about this move to suspension without pay without due process, but that has been mollified somewhat when it was explained that this particular disciplinary measure is not a reflection of the RCMP investigations, but as a result of the findings by the Senate’s internal economy committee that found that those Senators had broken the rules. There will still be debate on these motions and the opportunity for each Senator to defend themselves – though it was also pointed out that it will be hard to continue to garnish Brazeau’s wages if he’s suspended without pay. To top if off, Thomas Mulcair felt it appropriate to crack wise that these suspensions are a good first step and that he would prefer to see all Senators suspended without pay before they move to abolish the Chamber. Which is hilarious until you realise that no legislation could actually be passed by a chamber that was entirely suspended (and would have had to suspend itself, as only the Senate itself has the power to suspend its membership). Apparently “good public administration” in Mulcair’s books means ignoring the constitution.