Michael Den Tandt writes that Thomas Mulcair is the most effective parliamentarian that we have today – which makes me weep a lot, mostly because it simply isn’t true. Den Tandt focuses on the three main party leaders, and tries to rate them on performance versus the attention that they get, and his thesis is that Mulcair may be the most effective but gets least attention for all manner of reasons. But in his construction of said premise, he gets a few things wrong. For one, he claims that Mulcair ditched his speaking notes, which is absolutely not true. What Mulcair did was ditch the mini-lectern on his desk, but not until the heyday of Duffy questions, which really was Mulcair’s moment. It was his “prosecutor-in-chief” moment, which lasted for about two days, and then petered out, and he has yet to re-create the moment or the energy since. He still has his notes – they’re just on his desk, and he still reads from them, and it’s evident in both the tone and substance of his questions – particularly as he rarely asks direct follow-ups, and may not ask a follow-up until 20 minutes later in QP, or not at all until the next day. The problem remains that much of the commentariat remains fixated on this vision of Mulcair as “prosecutor-in-chief” and “best performer in the House” even though it was a two-day experience that has not been repeated since. Of course, they don’t attend QP and one isn’t sure how often they watch the forced perspectives on CPAC, so they can stick with this image and not have it shaken by daily exposure to what Mulcair is really like as a performer. And there are far better parliamentarians as a whole – those who show up for debates, fully researched and able to speak off-the-cuff, to ask or take questions, and to do more than simply read speeches into the record. They’re few and far between, but they do exist. Mulcair is not one of those MPs – not by a long shot. But somewhere along the way, those couple of days during the Duffy heyday has given pundits a narrative that they refuse to be shaken from. And it makes me sad that after watching Bob Rae wipe the floor with his opponents during QP for nearly two years, for whom Mulcair was a non-entity in comparison day in and day out, that his far superior performance is so easily forgotten.
Tag Archives: Canadian Forces
Roundup: Destroyed text messages
Access to Information emails have uncovered another decision that doesn’t pass the smell test – in this case, the Canada Revenue Agency directing Shared Services Canada to purge their archives of BlackBerry PINs and SMS text messages. The claim is that these are transitory communications that don’t have any business value, but that claim is utterly laughable. Of course business communications are being one PIN-to-PIN, and anyone who believes otherwise is kidding themselves. Sure, some of them may be “don’t’ forget to pick up milk on your way home,” but that doesn’t mean that the CRA shouldn’t still be collecting these communications and sorting out the ones with business value. Oh, but wait – that’s the point, isn’t it? Having a channel of communication that isn’t being picked up by ATIP requests, just like when managers declare, “We’re not taking any notes this meeting” – never mind that it’s in contravention to the government’s own rules around this kind of thing. The Information Commissioner has agreed to look into this case, and has previously warned that this information isn’t being collected in most departments, when all it takes to capture it is to flick a single switch on the servers. As a result, we’re going to find ourselves in a position where there is no paper trail for decisions taken by departments – in this case, CRA – and future governments and future generations will be left to puzzle what was going on. You know, the exact opposite of the point of records retention and archives. That Shared Services meekly went along with the directive is also suspect when they should have pushed back to defend the value of the corporate memory contained within those archives. In other words, a failure all around.
https://twitter.com/tinapittaway/status/547389195669757952
Roundup: Some context around the defection
While Danielle Smith continues to declare victory as she defends her defection, insisting that the Wildrose had held two premiers to account and that they had managed to shift the PCs to their position under Prentice, there are one or two things worth noting. While I spoke to other day about the problems with calling this defection a “reunification” of conservatives in the province, I think there are a couple of other facts to consider that the pundit classes keep overlooking in their handwringing about the state of democracy in Alberta now that the official opposition has been decimated. The first is that even in a Westminster democracy, there are no guidelines about the strength of the opposition. We’ve even had cases (New Brunswick, I believe) where there were no opposition parties elected, and they had to find a way of including that balance. The other fact is that nowhere in the country is there an opposition so closely aligned ideologically with the government of the day, where you have a nominally right-wing government and an even more right-wing official opposition. That puts a whole lot of context into the unprecedented move of an official opposition leader crossing to join the government ranks, as there is less of a gap to actually cross.
Roundup: Danielle Smith’s problematic tales
The Danielle Smith/Wildrose drama continued yesterday, as details about her decision to defect to the ruling Progressive Conservatives started spilling out, and Smith herself started giving interviews. Interviews that, well, didn’t offer a whole lot of clarity to the issues at hand. The shift in tone from when two of her former MLAs crossed the floor just weeks ago, the statements about the party culture of the PCs, about leadership changes not being the answer – all blown out of the water as Smith equivocated about all of it. There were some tantalizing hints, however, in some of what she said, talking about how the party was already self-destructing, as the grassroots membership voted against policies that would have moved them into the social mainstream rather than keeping them squarely as a protest movement of cranks and what Heather Mallick dubs “angry pyjamas.” As a leader who was increasingly disconnected from her party, she had choices of her own to make. Then comes in revelations about talks with the centrist Alberta Party to merge – in Smith’s estimation to help get an urban base for a rural protest party – and that Preston Manning had a hand in convincing the other Wildrose MLAs to cross the floor. It’s incredible to read, but I still find myself unmoved by this notion that it’s a kind of “reunification,” and that it’s all about the conservative movement as a whole. The problem with that is that it’s hard to consider the PC party as conservatives to a great extent because they’re more populists than anything, and that’s what allows them to remain as amorphous as they are and keep reshaping themselves to allow the One Party State™ to continue carrying on. That it merely absorbs the more strident fiscal conservatism of the Wildrose members is merely a sign of the times. By that same token, the federal Conservatives are also more populists than they are conservatives, if you judge by their fiscal policies, so it’s hard for me to swallow this narrative around the merger. It’s also hard to see how nine MLAs would cross out of the sake of careerism, but again, I go back to Smith’s comment about the party in a state of self-destruction. I’m sure more stories will continue to tumble out, but it’s a lot to try to wrap your head around. Kathleen Petty offers some thoughts, while Jen Gerson pitches for the leadership of the merged party – in 2042.
If Danielle Smith quit as Opposition Leader to get that sweet, sweet cabinet-minister salary, she’s in for a disappointment: they’re equal.
— Colby Cosh (@colbycosh) December 19, 2014
Roundup: A surprising defection
The NDP have lost another MP, but this time the defection is very surprising. Sudbury MP Glenn Thibeault has decided to leave federal politics and run for the provincial Liberals in that riding. Thibeault said that it was a long decision making process, and that he felt the Liberals’ plans for the region were something he felt strongly about, but then he hinted to CBC Sudbury that he was not seeing eye-to-eye with the federal NDP, and that’s when the warning lights go off – especially because Thibeault was caucus chair until a couple of weeks ago. He wouldn’t elaborate on that fact when later asked about it on Power & Politics, but it is still a big klaxon that all is not as it seems in the NDP caucus. Remember this is the caucus that is always united and solidarity in all things. When cracks form below the surface, it’s always a bit of interesting Kremlinology, and while clues may be hard to come by as to what the divisions are, the fact that they are present does add more grains of salt to the constant assurances that the party has never been more united – a phrase they trot out every time they lose another MP.
Roundup: Another unhappy premier
He still won’t meet with Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne, dropping by Toronto for a meeting with new mayor John Tory on Thursday instead, and yesterday, Stephen Harper met with Paul Davis, the new premier of Newfoundland and Labrador. That meeting, however, did not go happily as the premier is accusing the PM of changing the rules unilaterally regarding their agreed-upon compensation for fish processing losses under the EU trade agreement in such a way that the province will never see those funds. So, still trying to win the province over, I see. Meanwhile, PostMedia imagines how the conversation between Harper and Wynne will go when it eventually does happen, and Paul Wells has some thoughts on the affair as well:
https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/543599417958629376
https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/543599850051620864
https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/543600261449936896
https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/543600752879763456
Roundup: Wynne questions the prostitution law
Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne has announced that she has grave concerns about the anti-prostitution bill, which came into effect on Saturday, and that she will ask her Attorney General for a legal opinion on the law so as to be sure that the province is not being asked to uphold an unconstitutional law, given the concerns that were outlined in the Bedford decision by the Supreme Court. It’s a fairly interesting challenge that Wynne is making, having a provincial government coming out against federal legislation in this sense, but as the province has the duty to enforce the Criminal Code, her asking for options so publicly is an interesting case. As Emmett Macfarlane notes, it’s also interesting that she didn’t directly ask the Ontario Court of Appeal for a reference and their opinion on the law, but that could still come once the Attorney General and her office have had time to weigh in. It probably won’t make Wynne any more popular in Harper’s eyes, and will be one more reason for him to avoid meeting with her, but it could also be the first shot in a Supreme Court challenge of the legislation, which could conceivably be much faster-tracked than it would be if we had to wait for a Charter challenge the traditional way, which could conceivably help save lives, going back to the thrust of the Bedford decision in the first place.
https://twitter.com/HisFeministMama/status/541696722196787200
https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/541659937022414848
QP: Demands that Fantino resign
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.
David Anderson had to let Aglukkaq know that the question was about her so that she put down her newspaper and listen. #QP
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) December 1, 2014
Roundup: Protection through body cams
One of those bizarre incidents that happens from time to time overtook the conversation last night as Conservative MP Peter Goldring put out a statement at the end of the day declaring that he wears a body-mounted camera to protect himself from people who would otherwise abuse their authority or hide behind a cloak of anonymity – making clear connections to the current harassment allegations on the Hill – and suggests that others do so. A few hours later, the PMO sent out a statement claiming that Goldring was having trouble sending a statement of his own, but that he retracted it because it was ill-thought, and that was that. While people have been poking fun at Goldring all night – and equally being horrified that he would basically accuse the complainants of making up the allegations in order to trap the accused MPs, apparently – much of Goldring’s obsession with body-mounted cameras has gone ignored. I interviewed Goldring a couple of months ago (paywalled) after he put out a different release calling for the RCMP to all be issued body-mounted cameras, talking about all of the cost savings in court time that would be a result because there was a visual record and not just a notebook written in pencil that police officers could change at will. Most of this stems from this 2011 arrest for failing to provide a breath sample, for which he was cleared in 2013, but Goldring is now promulgating a notion that police routinely lie, and that video evidence is the answer to everything. These harassment allegations against those two suspended MPs seem to have pushed Golding over the edge, it would seem. Goldring, incidentally, is not running in the next election.
Wow – Peter Goldring will now wear a body-mounted camera because of those NDP harassment allegations. #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/mVWCbomRBV
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) November 26, 2014
Peter Goldring, via the PMO, just sent a retraction. #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/lfCDsNuIfs
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) November 27, 2014
https://twitter.com/laura_payton/status/537807683743940608
https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/537825035529244672
QP: Rerunning the AG questions
On caucus day, we finally had all of the leaders present in the Chamber. Thomas Mulcair led off, returning to yesterday’s Auditor General report about the Nutrition North programme, seeing as he wasn’t there yesterday to ask when the topic was fresh. Stephen Harper insisted that the government spends over $60 million to help those in the North, and there has been an increase in the amount of food shipped and a decrease in the cost to families. Mulcair noted the APTN report about people in the North scrounging in landfills for food, to which Harper insisted that they are trying to help people in the North. Mulcair brought up the report on mental health services for wait times, to which Harper selectively quoted the report’s findings on the complexity of the process and the commitment to improve it. Mulcair asked about those soldiers being released before being eligible for pensions, to which Harper insisted that the report noted important health measures were in place. Mulcair then turned to thalidomide survivors, to which Harper reminded him of the minister’s comments that there was a settlement in the 1990s and the department and minister are meeting with groups. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the École Polytechnique tragedy and tied it to concerns with the current gun control bill being debated. Harper insisted that there were no conceal and carry provisions and that there were restrictions on transportation. Trudeau pressed, stressing that decisions on classification were being taken away from police and given to politicians. Harper called Trudeau’s statements “reckless and false,” and accused him of wanting to bring back the long-gun registry, despite Trudeau explicitly saying otherwise. Trudeau changed topics to spouses of veterans suffering from mental health issues, to which Harper again selectively quoted the AG report.