It really was Brent Rathgeber’s day yesterday, from the very start when CBC’s Laura Payton caught up with him at the airport, and he said a lot of wonderfully civically literate things about the role of backbenchers to act as a check on the executive, and how executive control nowadays has bled so far into the committee system that it is a threat to our Westminster-style democracy. Rathgeber explained more on his blog, and his intention to largely vote with the Conservatives going forward, but will evaluate all decisions on a case-by-case basis. At the press conference he called in his riding, he also put the boots to the PMO, basically saying that they run themselves without involving Harper, which really makes one wonder who is running the show, since they’re the ones writing the scripts that they expect the backbenchers to read. Colby Cosh looks at the seven Conservative MPs who were responsible for gutting Rathgeber’s bill in committee. The one who moved the amendments, Brad Butt, gave Huffington Post an excuse that it was to avoid big bureaucracy getting involved, and to try it at the most senior levels first, but it seems fairly nonsensical.
Author Archives: Dale
QP: Harper has been very clear
With the raw wound of Brent Rathgeber’s resignation still palpably present, and Harper sat through Members’ Statements, his mood inscrutable. Thomas Mulcair led off QP with another round of prosecutorial questions, first asking if Nigel Wright or any other staff member was present when he instructed Duffy or the caucus as a whole about repaying inappropriate instructions. Harper insisted that he insisted that all claims be legitimate and any illegitimate ones must be reimbursed, and that he was under the impression that Duffy had repaid them on his own. Mulcair then asked if he instructed anyone to make the Senate expenses scandal go away. Harper said that Duffy made a pledge to act honourably, and will have to face the consequences if he didn’t. For the Liberals, it was up to Rodger Cuzner to lead off, and he asked about Rathgeber’s statement that the PM doesn’t seem to be in control of the PMO, and was that why he could claim that he knew nothing about the Wright-Duffy payment. James Moore got up to take that bullet, and deflected it with an untrue swipe about Senator Merchant. Garneau closed up the round and asked why Harper didn’t insist that Duffy still repay those expenses on his own, even if it meant garnishing his wages. Moore’s response didn’t change.
Roundup: Exit Brent Rathgeber from caucus
In amidst the votes on the Estimates last night, a bombshell was dropped – Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber, lately called something of a maverick because he had become conversant and vocal about civically literate things like the roles of backbenchers, resigned from the Conservative caucus. What precipitated this was his bill on salary disclosures for public servants, which his own caucus gutted in committee. After what seemed to be a fairly brief period of consideration, Rathgeber decided that his party no longer stood for transparency and open government, and that enough was enough. The PM’s comms director tweeted shortly thereafter that Rathgeber should run in a by-election – which is a ridiculous position because a) he didn’t cross the floor, b) this was never an issue when David Emerson, Joe Commuzzi or Wajid Kahn cross the floor to the Conservatives, and c) people elect MPs, not robots to be stamped with the part logo once the votes are counted. As reactions continued to pour in, it does continue the narrative that not all is well in the Conservative party.
QP: Prosecutorial versus crowd-sourcing
Wednesday, caucus day, and MPs filled the benches on both sides. Thomas Mulcair started things off short and sharp once again, asking what clarification Mike Duffy sought after caucus back in February. Stephen Harper said that he simply stated that any improper expenses needed to be repaid. Mulcair asked if Nigel Wright was present for that meeting, but Harper’s answer didn’t change — even after Mulcair asked it again. Mulcair then tried to press about the amount of Nigel Wright’s severance package, but Harper refused, stating that he was only being paid the minimum amount required by law. He then asked if Harper authorised the statement on May 17th that said that Nigel Wright would be staying on. Harper spoke about how Wright made an error in judgement, and he accepted his resignation, before finally breaking out the “You sat on a bribery allegation for 17 years.” Justin Trudeau called into question the logic of Wright paying Duffy’s expenses to spare the taxpayers and asked for the real reason for Wright’s resignation. Harper gave the same talking points. Trudeau asked the same in French before pointing out that Nigel Wright was the director of the Conservative Fund for seven years, and asked one more time which Harper appointed Duffy. Harper didn’t really respond, and took a swipe a Trudeau instead.
Roundup: Treating LeBreton with justifiable suspicion
As expected, Marjorie LeBreton tabled her motion to call in the Auditor General to conduct a “comprehensive audit” of the Senate and senators’ expenses. So far so good. The Liberal senators said that sure they’d support it – when it comes up for debate. You see, the Senate rules say that motions need 24 hours before they can be debated unless they get unanimous consent to bypass said rule – and the Liberals weren’t going to give it, because they wanted time to study said motion. It’s pretty vague, and nobody knows what a “comprehensive” audit entails, or even if the AG’s office is able to handle it. But oh, the Conservatives cried – the Liberals are trying to block it! Um, no – they’re just following the rules, and they’re justifiably suspicious of anytime LeBreton tries to push things through with unanimous consent – like the Duffy audit report. Turns out it was hiding all kinds of goodies that the media ferreted out, and that report got sent back to the committee in that rather exciting evening when Duffy got tossed under a bus. Had LeBreton gotten her way and passed the reports unanimously in one fell swoop, well, that may not have happened. Senator Cowan, the Liberal Senate leader, is also concerned that LeBreton is trying to use the AG as another distraction from the ClusterDuff questions, since none of their new rules or the AG would have stopped the whole issue of Wright writing the cheque to Duffy in the first place. Cowan explains more about the dynamics here.
The fanciful nonsense of defunding the Senate
Once more, the NDP have decided that the constitution be damned, it’s time to pull another too-cute-by-half stunt when it comes to the Senate. Indeed, their Wednesday opposition day motion will be to de-fund the Senate by Canada Day – as though that would actually be something feasible, or without any consequences.
Let’s start with the constitutional reality. The Constitution, which I will remind you is not just a suggestion, stipulates that legislation be passed by both the Commons and the Senate. It’s not exactly something is an option when it comes to the way legislation works. You need a functional Senate to pass said legislation, otherwise the system grinds to a halt. And to have a functional Senate, it requires money.
QP: Another worthy Tuesday
It was a Tuesday with all of the leaders back in the House and ready to face off once again. Before the show could get started, things took a brief pause so that the newest Liberal MP, Yvonne Jones, could be brought before the bar and be given the chance to take her seat for the first time (which she got a bit sidetracked with, trying to go to shake hands with the Speaker and much laughter ensued). Thomas Mulcair started QP off with the prosecutorial style questions again, asking about Senator LeBreton saying that Harper had dealt with the Wright matter on the 14th and not the 15th as Harper had previously stated. Harper responded by saying he had been clear that he found out on the 15th, and that Mulcair said in 2010 that he didn’t know anything about Quebec corruption. Mulcair then asked when Harper had first spoken to Duffy about his expenses, to which Harper said that they had spoken after caucus that one Wednesday in February, and that he told him to repay any improper expenses. Mulcair asked when he ordered the rest of the caucus to repay their expenses, and who in his staff was present, but Harper kept going back to the fact that he was clear about insisting that improper expenses be repaid — and you sat on corruption allegations. Justin Trudeau was up next, and asked for the reason that Nigel Wright gave him for writing that cheque. Harper repeated the tale that Wright wanted to ensure that taxpayers were reimbursed, and tried to insist that Liberal senators were resisting calling in the Auditor General — a falsehood, as Senate rules dictate that all motions need 24 hours’ notice, and it was only tabled today. Thus, they’ll discuss the motion tomorrow, per the rules. Trudeau tried to ask why Duffy was so special — was it because of his status as a high-profile party fundraiser? Harper’s response didn’t change.
Roundup: Call in the Auditor General!
Today in ClusterDuff reverberations, we hear that the Government Leader in the Senate, Marjorie LeBreton, wants to call in the Auditor General to do a full comprehensive audit of Senators’ expenses, not just the systems and administration audit that he did in 2012. There have been concerns in the past that the AG, being an officer of parliament, would be in a kind of conflict auditing his own bosses, but we’ll see if those remain. LeBreton didn’t consult with the opposition about the motion, but the Liberals have since said sure – but audit the Commons’ expenses in as comprehensive manner as well. And the Government Whip, Gordon O’Connor, doesn’t sound like he’s too keen about that idea, pretending that the last AG audit into systems and administration on the House side was “comprehensive” (which it wasn’t). There are also questions as to whether the AG’s office is set to handle this kind of forensic audit, or if it wouldn’t be better to send it to an outside firm with that kind of expertise. Elsewhere, Senator Tkachuk says that they will be setting up a permanent audit subcommittee for the Senate, but they are still discussing whether or not it will have outside members (such as what Senator McCoy suggested, as they do in the House of Lords).
QP: Half points for effort
Monday in the Commons, and there were few leaders in the House — just Elizabeth May and Thomas Mulcair. Mulcair kept up with this short questions, asking first the date in which the Prime Minister spoke with Mike Duffy about his expenses. Baird gave a packaged talking point about how Harper insisted that Duffy repay any improper expenses. Mulcair then asked whether Senator LeBreton recused herself from cabinet discussions involving Senate expenses (though I’m not sure why she would, but whatever). Baird returned to the talking points about how Harper learned about the deal on the morning of the 15th. When Mulcair asked about Senators being paid for campaigning, Baird said that all campaign expenses were paid from by party funds. Megan Leslie was up next, more questions on the expenses, to which Baird gave the same talking point about repaying expenses and hey, Mulcair sat on that bribe allegation for 17 years. Bob Rae was up for the Liberals and asked why not simply call one public inquiry than to have the several separate private enquiries currently going on with regards to the Wright-Duffy affair. Baird touted the Accountability Act, and hey, your caucus has a Senator with an offshore tax haven (which is of course false).
Roundup: The moral panic of campaigning Senators
The Toronto Star has a look at Senators who were reimbursed by various campaigns for work they did during the last election, which seems a bit curious because it’s not unusual that Senators campaign – they just can’t bill the Senate for those expenses, as Mike Duffy did. Not that it’s stopped the NDP from making a giant fuss about it, as though it’s a bad thing that party members help out in a campaign. “Oh, but they shouldn’t campaign at all!” they cry. “They’re on the taxpayer’s payroll!” Um, so are MPs, who also fundraise and do campaign activities outside of writ periods of all sorts. And some of them go to fundraisers while they should be in Ottawa as the House is sitting. And leaders? Well, they’re the worst when it comes to missing House duty for fundraisers and campaigning. They’re also on the public dime. It’s a kind of hypocritical and nonsensical argument that seems to ignore the fact that *gasp!* senators are also party members and partisans! You know, the way our system of government works, where you have governing and opposition parties in both chambers! In other words, the NDP is trying to create a moral panic, which should be paid little heed unless it can be proved that any of the Senators who campaigned billed the Senate for their expenses. And I have little doubt that none of them other than Duffy – and possibly Pamela Wallin – did.