After an abbreviated number of members’ statements, thanks to a vote on closure regarding that prima facie breach of privilege around MP Brad Butt “mis-speaking” on voter fraud, QP got underway in a somewhat strange manner. While most everyone was present for the vote, the benches suddenly emptied and Harper, who was there for the vote was nowhere to be seen. Undaunted, Thomas Mulcair led off, mentioning his meeting with the Ukrainian ambassador and asked about news that Russia tested an intercontinental ballistic missile. Peter MacKay responded with the government’s concerns, and when Mulcair asked about the troops in Ukraine that Putin denied sending, MacKay reiterated the government’s concerns. When Mulcair asked about engagements with Putin, John Baird gave a quick statement about his efforts to date. Harper returned to the House, (as had most of those MPs who fled) and Mulcair asked again about what the government was doing about the situation, Harper told him that Canada was suspending bilateral activities with Russia. For his final question, Mulcair asked about the discussions among G7 partners, to which Harper told him that they were discussing the possibility of a meeting in a few weeks. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, and asked about the status of our embassy in Kyiv. Harper noted that the embassy was closed because of the violence during the protests, and that it wouldn’t be reopened until the threat of violence had passed. Goodale asked about the status of our embassy in Moscow, to which Harper assured him that our recalled ambassador had just returned and would be meeting with Baird later in the day, and that bilateral activities remained suspended. Goodale closed the round asking about the statement made by China with regards to respecting Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty, and Harper noted that this kind of activity hadn’t been seen since the Second World War (to which one of my gallery colleagues muttered “What about Georgia?”)
Tag Archives: Canadian Forces
Roundup: Wall denies ambitions
From the Manning Networking Conference, we saw presentations by Brad Wall, who wants the country to be both a food and energy superpower (and he insists that he has no federal ambitions, which makes one wonder all the more about his motivations as to why he’s constantly carrying Stephen Harper’s lunch among the premiers), by Jim Prentice, who said that there needs to be stronger environmental connections to achieve their energy goals like Keystone XL, and Jason Kenney announced progress on his Canada Job Grant plan before saying that he not only supports income splitting, but he made a somewhat impolitic statement about “stable families” being the best way to help youth find economic success in adulthood – but then couldn’t answer about his apparent abandonment of kids from “unstable families.” (Also, one supposes that such a statement was also a sop to the social conservative base that he’s courting). The party’s pollster gave grave warnings about how the party’s numbers are doing, and it’s not good, as the Liberal brand has rebounded, something that happened even before Trudeau became the leader. He also found that there’s just no interest in a discussion on marijuana on either side, and suggested that they drop it. Andrew Coyne notes that the Conference is like the real Conservative convention – as opposed to the Harper Party one that happened last fall, and that we’re seeing more people starting to disassociate themselves from Harper and his way of doing politics.
Roundup: Trying to court the retired general
A few hours before his speech at the convention, it was revealed that retired General Andrew Leslie would let it be known that the Conservatives tried to recruit him. He was vague about it in the speech, however, saying that he had discussions with several parties (to which both the Conservatives and NDP denied it, Pierre Poilievre trying to dismiss it that they didn’t want him anyway) and danced around it when asked during the press scrum afterward. Leslie did get quite a dig in at Rob Nicholson during said scrum, so there’s that. Later in the day, Leslie produced a series of emails in which he was talking to very senior Conservative staffers about various positions, including running for them in a couple of different Ottawa-area ridings, so those denials were all the more suspect, not that the Liberals minded that he was shopping around – they were glad that he wound up a Liberal. Aaron Wherry had a conversation with Leslie, in which he defended the $72,000 benefit, as part of the conditions of service.
Roundup: Commence the convention
The Liberals’ policy convention is now underway in Montreal, and while things started off with a bit of an oops – the feed from the main stage was live to the reporters’ room while Trudeau was practicing his speech, giving it away before he could make it, and it included his camera directions. He delivered his rah-rah partisan speech to kick things off, which included a couple of digs at Pauline Marois, and to Harper and Mulcair in which he said he wasn’t going to play their game of trying to make Canadians angry, and ended it with a Skype call to his family (as they stayed in Ottawa, his wife due to give birth any day now). A few Senate Liberals, but not many, are in attendance, for which the NDP are trying to get a social media shaming going. Mike Moffatt offers three questions for the Liberals to look at as they try to formulate economic policy during this weekend’s convention. Kate Heartfield notes the implicit populist tones in Trudeau’s economics video, and how it still creates an Us and Them in order to play that populist card, while still trying to look like he’s above tribalism. Michael Den Tandt writes that the broad strokes economic policy will be looking at ways to bring the Red Tories and Blue Liberals back into the fold and away from the Conservative coalition. Paul Wells writes about the Conservatives hoping that the convention will prove to be a gaffe-fest for Trudeau (and along the way, coins the best descriptor for the Fair Elections Act as being “Conservative-fair”).
Roundup: Emoting about the economy
The Liberals put out a YouTube video wherein Justin Trudeau narrated their concerns about the economy, which was a lot of angst about the middle class. Because apparently facts and figures can be displaced with talking about feelings. Suffice to say, reaction among economists has been mixed – while some like the format, they are quick to point out some of the inherent problems with the message. Things like the political nonsense that Prime Ministers directly run economies, or the assertion that the middle class “lives off their incomes and not their assets.” (Do you know which is the class that lives off of their assets? Retirees). And then there’s the assertion that middle class incomes have stagnated over thirty years, when they haven’t – they fell drastically and have recovered over that thirty-year period, so it’s not exactly an accurate description. And as Stephen Gordon points out, the recipe Trudeau offers is largely wishful thinking. But why should we let actual facts get in the way of emoting about the economy?
Roundup: Nicholson doubles down
The issue of retired General Andrew Leslie’s moving benefit payment continued on Monday, and perhaps even gained some steam as Rob Nicholson decided to double down on the partisanship, saying that it was indicative of a “Liberal sense of entitlement,” and claimed that Leslie was wrong when he said that he wasn’t aware of how much they totalled. Never mind that Leslie said that it was a private company that dealt with everything, and that the expenses were almost entirely due to real estate fees (which, on a million dollar house, would be close to that $72,000). Oh, and Nicholson also called it moving from “mansion to mansion,” which none of the photos really showed any house too mansion-like. The Auditor General assessed the programme from which he gained this benefit a few years ago, and that if Rob Nicholson wants to turn the blame to anyone, it may be the real estate companies that his department contracts out to. (Also, that if Nicholson thinks that every departing soldier who avails himself of the programme needs to do an independent assessment, he’s asking a lot of said veterans). Thirteen retired generals have made similar intra-city moves in the past few years, which may be prompting the review, but it would take away from the universality of the benefit. One former general used this benefit to move to the UAE – even though he was disgraced and tossed out for having sex with a subordinate. (This is the same former general currently in an Afghan jail over an issue with the private security company he works for). Andrew Cohen dissects the partisan tenor of the attack, and wonders why anyone would want to serve the public if this is the suspicion and abuse they are subjected to.
Roundup: Partisan questions over a move
The partisan machinery got ramped into full gear over the weekend after CTV aired a story saying that retired General Andrew Leslie legitimately claimed $72, 000 in moving expenses upon his retirement when he bought a new house in Ottawa. Most of that was apparently real estate fees, which the expenses are allowed to cover. But apparently after the years of service he put in, this figure is “shocking” for critics. Sackcloth and ashes, everyone! What wasn’t aired or put in the web version was Leslie’s explanation, which is not only the universality of that programme, its rationale, and the fact that he didn’t know the figure because it was handled by a private company. All of which raises questions as to why that number found its way into CTV’s hands. Not able to resist making a partisan swipe, as Leslie is now an advisor to Justin Trudeau, Defence minister Rob Nicholson announced that he was going to take a look into the expenses, while Leslie explained himself by way of Facebook. Even the head of the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation decided to get in on the game and said that Leslie was an embarrassment to his ancestors and compared him to Mike Duffy. Because he’s classy like that, I guess. I am also struck by the fact that everyone is blaming Leslie for bilking the system, when he made it clear that he wasn’t involved – a private company was. Perhaps they are the one who should be answering the questions, not Leslie.
Roundup: Checking in with the props
With all of the talk about the future of the income splitting promise in doubt, Jennifer Ditchburn checks in with the family that was used as the prop for the announcement during the last election. She found that they’re not really Conservative party members, and they’re waiting to see what else gets proposed instead of income splitting before they make up their minds. Stephen Maher notes Kenney’s intrusion into the file, and how he continues to stoke the social conservative base, which may be in support of his likely leadership bid.
Roundup: Kenney makes things awkward
Those questions of the government position on income splitting dominated the headlines again today, with some new added dimensions as Jason Kenney popped into the controversy. As Harper conspicuously avoided assuring reporters that the proposal was still on the table, Jason Kenney insisted that they keep their campaign promises – something that may be a signal and a warning. If it’s not an official government policy, then disagreement is certainly interesting, but if it is, then a split in cabinet means that cabinet solidarity is being ruptured, and someone is going to have to resign (unless we’re really keen to throw out the rules around Responsible Government). Michael Den Tandt believes that the government should step away from the policy, and the sooner the better.
Roundup: Day of the many leaks
It was a day of leaks yesterday – first a plan to try to “disrupt” the Liberal convention and undermine Trudeau, which seemed a bit foolish and costly, given that their “agents” would have to purchase convention memberships for the purpose of lame buttons and Trudeau-branded rolling papers. (The Liberals, meanwhile, say the attention is flattering). And while that one looked deliberately leaked to the media, the following other leaks weren’t. A 70-page re-election strategy was next to make its way to the Toronto Star, which talks a lot about leveraging Laureen Harper to help put a human face on the government, while totally ignoring Thomas Mulcair in the strategy. And if that wasn’t enough, it was then revealed that the PM’s former chief of staff, Guy Giorno, will be the party’s new legal advisor. Paul Wells notes that even though the party has often ”leaked” false memos in the past this does appear that they have an unintended leaker in their ranks.