And it’s buh-bye once again to Rob Anders, as he failed his second attempt at a nomination race, this time in the Southern Alberta riding of Bow Valley. There, the mayor of Brooks won the race, in spite of his questionable choices in haircut, beard and waxed moustache (seriously?), after he labelled Anders a “drop-in candidate.” Anders must have secured the party’s consent to contest a second nomination, but now it remains to be seen what he’ll do next. Oh, and he didn’t even bother to show up at the nomination meeting that he ended up losing in. Apparently Alberta has tired of him and his antics. I just can’t wait for him to denounce that riding as having been infiltrated with liberals and communists, as he tries to find the last vestige of a people who wear their prejudices as proudly as they drive their pick-up trucks.
Tag Archives: Canadian Forces
Roundup: Crowing over a very little
The NDP spent an inordinate amount of time crowing over social media yesterday about how they scored a “procedural coup” and “forced” a debate on the report of the special committee on missing and murdered Aboriginal women. The problem is that it’s not really true. Yes, they moved a concurrence motion during Routine Proceedings after QP on Friday, as is their right – but they didn’t surprise the government or catch them off-guard, as Romeo Saganash said during QP that they would be moving such a motion. Giving 20+ minutes notice is not “catching the government off-guard.” And when they forced a 30-minute vote and proceeded to this concurrence motion, the government voted with them and agreed to the debate, which again, puts the “forced” or “coup” narrative to the test. The report itself doesn’t recommend a national inquiry, seeing as it was a Conservative-dominated committee, and while the NDP wanted to highlight their dissenting report appended to it, it still gave the government side plenty of time to discuss their version of said report. So with these facts in mind, you will forgive me if I find the social media triumphalism a bit much.
Roundup: Voices from the past
A number of has-been pro-life (and homophobic) former Liberal MPs sent out an open letter to Justin Trudeau decrying his decree that a woman’s right to choose is a Charter issue and not a matter of conscience. They decried it as “anti-democratic,” never mind the fact that this was the policy voted on by the party’s membership during the policy convention before Trudeau won the leadership. Oops. The pedigree of these former MPs is also worth mentioning, as several of them quit the party to join the Reform Party, while others left over the same-sex marriage issue. Not surprising, most Liberals simply shrugged off the whole thing, while Trudeau tweeted out a fairly decent comeback.
The days when old men get to decide what a woman does with her body are long gone. Times have changed for the better. #LPC defends rights.
— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) September 18, 2014
QP: About this local issue…
With both Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau off in Southern Ontario for events, Thomas Mulcair was the only major leader in the Commons. He led off by asking about the coming demolition of the Mirabel airport — likely because he has Quebec seats to shore up, and Lisa Raitt responded first by reminding him that she’s a she and not a he, and that it’s the Montreal Airport Authority that is the responsible authority. Mulcair shot back that he was referring to the Minister of Infrastructure, before he angrily wondered when the government when the government would listen to indigenous women about missing and murdered indigenous women. Kellie Leitch responded that families were thanking her for the Action Plan™ being tabled. Mulcair then switched to the bus-train collision in Ottawa a year ago, and asked about a train derailment in Slave Lake. Raitt was back up, and said they were working on rail safety. Chris Charlton was up next and bemoaned the declaration of bankruptcy by US Steel in Hamilton, which Mike Lake gave a somewhat shrugging response, and when Charlton demanded that the government protect the pensions of the affected retired workers, Kevin Sorensen touted all the ways they have cut taxes. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, asking about job losses in the last month and suggested changing the EI tax credit to one where employers get a credit for a net job created. Sorensen insisted that the Liberals were making up policy on the fly, and made random potshots at the Liberal record on EI. Goodale’s final question was about the latest report on income splitting and how it would affect provincial budgets. Sorensen responded that Harper said that income splitting was a good policy. Well if Harper says so…
Roundup: An emergency debate, such as it was
The Commons had their “emergency debate” on the situation in Iraq last night, using debate loosely, of course. After all, “debate” these days tends to largely mean reading monotonous speeches into the record that were all pre-written and don’t actually debate what has already been said. The NDP hammered away at demanding a vote on deployment, never mind that military deployment is a Crown prerogative and thus not subject to a vote, and in fact, shouldn’t be because it launders the prerogative and the accountability. But if Mulcair wants to give Harper political cover so that he can, in the future, say that the Commons decided on the matter and that they are culpable when things go wrong because there was a vote, well, it makes it kind of awkward for the opposition, no? It’s part of Responsible Government – the Commons has given the government the authority to govern, and if they don’t like it, then they can withdraw confidence. Voting to “make decisions” is not actually their role – accountability is. The NDP were also childishly mocking the Liberals for largely not being there for the debate – except that they only got two speaking slots the whole night, which they used near the beginning, and as we’ve established that it’s not a real debate, it does seem fairly pointless to have a bunch of people there to simply endure repetitive prepared speeches – and make no mistake, they are repetitive – with no real ability to respond or add to what’s been said. But this is the state of our parliament these days.
QP: 69 pairs of boots on the ground
The second day of the fall sitting, and the Conservative Members’ Statements were beyond hysterical. Thomas Mulcair led off, and demanded to know how many Canadian Forces’ members were in Iraq. Harper responded that it was 69. Mulcair railed on about military deployments needing the approval of the House — undercutting his own accountability role given the practice of Crown Prerogatives. Harper reminded him that the current mission was not the same as the 2003 war. Mulcair changed topics, and asked if Harper would hide behind parliamentary privilege to avoid testifying at the Duffy trial. Harper suggested that Mulcair would be an expert witness on the misuse of public funds. Mulcair, after some hubbub, wondered why Harper didn’t fire anyone involved in the “bribery” of Duffy, but Harper hit back that Mulcair should probably fire himself. Mulcair changed topics again and mentioned a report on the Champlain Bridge that said that a toll would make traffic surge on other bridges instead. Harper reminded him that they were still in a contracting process. Justin Trudeau was up next, and returned to the problems with the EI tax credits which incentivize firing instead of hiring employees. Harper shot back with a couple of non-sequiturs about the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and Trudeau musing about cancelling income splitting. Trudeau shot back with a different quote about the CFIB and called on him to give a break on premiums. Harper read a quote from the CFIB, and accused Trudeau of wanting to raise rates.
Roundup: Proposing a premium holiday
Given that the government’s EI tax credit actually has the perverse incentive to fire employees or reduce wages instead of hiring new staff as was intended, Justin Trudeau offered up a different solution yesterday, which is to offer employers a two-year holiday on paying the EI premiums of new staff. One wonders why he just doesn’t suggest setting the rate at the break-even rate in the actuarial report, which is a mere 0.02 percent above what the government’s “tax credit” effectively reduces it to, but would be across the board, but hey, he’s putting ideas on the table, right?
QP: Four new members
The first day back in the Commons kicked off with the four MPs who won by-elections at the start of the summer — two new Liberals and two new Conservatives. When things got underway at last, Thomas Mulcair led off by asking, in both languages in the same slot, how many members of the Canadian Forces were being sent to Iraq. Harper gave a general figure of Air Force members flying in supplies, and “several dozen” members of the Special Forces for an advisory role. Mulcair asked — again in both languages — why there wasn’t a vote on the deployment. Harper reminded him that a government that has the confidence of the Chamber can deploy Forces, and this wasn’t a combat mission. Mulcair switched topic to working parents with poverty, to which Harper reminded him that labour markets were largely provincial responsibility and there was no need to reinstate a federal minimum wage to create two classes of workers. When Mulcair tried to press, Harper reminded him of all the great things they were doing for families. Justin Trudeau was up for the Liberals, and without visibly reading, asked about why the EI tax credit offers more incentives to fire workers than to hire them. Harper insisted he didn’t know what Trudeau was talking about, and when Trudeau spelled it out, Harper fell back to the “45 day work year” canard.
Obligatory note: Newly elected MPS aren't supposed to pretend to resist being dragged into the Chamber. That's just new speakers. #QP
— kady o'malley (@kady) September 15, 2014
Someone shouts "Where's yours, Tom?" #QP #cdnpoli
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) September 15, 2014
Roundup: Back with a countdown
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?
Roundup: Ratifying the FIPA – everybody panic!
The big news is that Canada ratified the Canada-China Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement (FIPA) yesterday, after months of delays. Immediately the NDP freaked out, while Elizabeth May called it the worse day for Canadian Sovereignty since 1867 (never mind that Canada never actually got treaty-making powers devolved from the UK until the 1920s and control over foreign policy in the Statute of Westminster in 1931). Apparently ensuring fair treatment for Chinese companies in Canada, and perhaps more importantly Canadian companies in China – where the rule of law is not really the same as it is here – is a terrible, terrible blow to our sovereignty. Economist Stephen Gordon, however, is trying to remain the voice of reason:
There is a *huge* chasm b/w what foreign-investor protection agreements do and what excitable nationalists say they do.
— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) September 12, 2014
All that FIPAs do is ensure national treatment. Govts don`t get to jerk foreign investors around because they`re foreign.
— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) September 12, 2014
You want to regulate in the national interest, fine. Apply the same rules to foreign and domestic firms.
— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) September 12, 2014