Over in the New Brunswick election last night, their new Tabulator machines which were supposed to deliver election results faster all pretty much fried and turned into a big gong show, with missing ballots and unreadable results, while the company who was contracted out to run the machines didn’t answer calls. With no results being trustworthy, parties began demanding manual recounts, and with a virtual tie result, the final results likely won’t be clear in the morning. And so, let this once again be a lesson that paper ballots should always be used with manual counts because that’s the only tried and true way with actual accountability.
Tag Archives: CBSA
QP: Those pesky temporary foreign strippers
With the March for Life happening on the lawn outside — mostly Catholic high school students bussed in for the occasion, and disrupted by topless protesters — and with the House not sitting tomorrow because of the Day of Honour for the mission in Afghanistan, it was a bit of a Friday-on-a-Thursday day in the chamber. Well, attendance was a bit better, but not much. Megan Leslie led off for the NDP and brought up the government collecting data by “creeping” Facebook pages. Tony Clement assured her that the government wants to listen to Canadians, and they were engaging with the Privacy Commissioner, before accusing them of trying to shut down Canadians who were letting their views be known. Leslie changed topics to the Nadon appointment and the reports that he was advised to resign from the Federal Court and rejoin the Quebec Bar. MacKay accused her of conspiracy theory, and touted the consultation process and the expert legal advice they sought. Françoise Boivin carried on with the same line of questioning in both languages, to which MacKay continued to tout the process that they followed. John McCallum led off for the Liberals and accused the government of hating the Canada Pension Plan and being dismissive of Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario pension plans. Clement responded and decried the “massive tax grab” that would ruin jobs and opportunity. McCallum moved onto the topic of market wages for foreign workers and driving down Canadian wages, to which Kenney took a shot at the opposition parties.
Roundup: Whips and grandfathered MPs
Given that it’s the big March for Life on the Hill, reporters asked Justin Trudeau yesterday about the whole pro-choice thing for the party (I’m guessing since it’s a fun game to try and catch the Liberals out on being a nominally pro-choice party with a few pro-life MPs still in the caucus). Trudeau said that as was decided by the membership in the 2012 policy convention, the party is officially pro-choice, that such votes would be whipped, and that the existing pro-life MPs are being grandfathered in, but all future candidates must follow the pro-choice party line. “So much for open nominations!” the commentariat cries, ignoring the kinds of conditions – or indeed groupthink – that other parties employ with their own candidates. And pro-life Liberals like John McKay kind of shrugged and said that it’s normal to have some disagreements within a party and left it at that. And now everyone else will try to make hay of this, because that’s the way it works.
Roundup: Precious illusions and appeals to reason
As part of their campaign against the Fair Elections Act, the NDP have taken to a number of…precious tactics, from Craig Scott writing to Pierre Poilievre to ask him to withdraw the bill in order to start over with all-party consultation (good luck with that), to targeting individual MPs and ministers to vote against the bill, Michael Chong and Bal Gosal thus far. Chong may seem like fair game considering his new role as the so-called “champion of democracy” with his Reform Act bills, and his curious defence of the elections bills thus far (or at least his evasion of taking a stand until they are through the committee stage). But if they think that Gosal is going to break cabinet solidarity on a government bill, they’ve really lost touch with our contemporary reality, and it makes one wonder how they feel about one of the most important conventions about how we form governments under our system of Responsible Government. Would an NDP government not speak with a single voice? I doubt that very much, which makes this particular tactic all the more eye-roll inducing.
QP: A premier present, but not the PM
BC premier Christy Clark was in the Speaker’s gallery, here to watch QP in the federal parliament after signing some agreements with the federal government. Alas, despite being back in the country, Stephen Harper was not present to take questions in the House. Neither Thomas Mulcair nor Justin Trudeau were there to ask said questions either, for what it was worth. That meant that it was up to Libby Davies to lead off for the NDP, decrying the expiration of the 2004 health accords. Rona Ambrose reminded her that they were still providing record levels of funding to the provinces, that the provinces were asking for funding predictability, and they were providing that. Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet asked the same again in French, and got the same response in English. Boutin-Sweet moved onto infrastructure funding, which Denis Lebel assured her of how great the new Building Canada Fund really was. Scott Brison led off for the Liberals, and asked about expanding the CPP, as recommended by the Finance Department’s own reports. Despite Joe Oliver being present, Kevin Sorensen got up to answer to say that the Fragile Economy™ could not afford more payroll taxes. Brison reminded him that they were keeping EI premiums artificially high to balance the books, and that those payroll taxes could be better spent on CPP enrichment, but Sorensen decried all of the things the Liberals voted against. Ralph Goodale got up to ask about the loss of infrastructure funds coming tomorrow (Lebel: We are giving record funding).
QP: Let me read this quote out of context
It was another day where the two main leaders were again absent from the House today, with Justin Trudeau on the far front bench, and Elizabeth May tucked away in the far corner of the Chamber. That meant that it was up to Megan Leslie to lead off, asking about Pierre Poilievre’s remarks about Harry Neufeld’s report on voter vouching, when Neufeld I himself there was no connection with vouching and fraud. Poilievre continued to selectively read the report and read quotes out of context in order to justify the provisions in the bill. Leslie moved onto the way that Jason Kenney took employment data from Kijiji rather than other, credible sources. Kenney, a little hoarse, listed anecdotes about sectoral skills shortages that need to be taken seriously. Sadia Groguhé repeated the Kijiji question in French, getting the same response. Justin Trudeau was up next, and noted the criticism of the rail grain bill and wondered if amendments would be accepted. Pierre Lemieux touted how great the bill was. Trudeau moved onto the coming 90 percent cut to the Building Canada fund, and insisted that the minister of finance answer. Instead, Peter Braid assured him that they were making plenty of infrastructure investments, neglecting to say that most of the funds won’t be available for years.
QP: No intention of giving a detailed analysis
With Stephen Harper now in Germany as his European trip carries on, and with Thomas Mulcair in Winnipeg, the only leaders present were Justin Trudeau and Elizabeth May. Deputy leader David Christopherson led off by asking about the vouching provisions in the elections bill, to which Pierre Poilievre gave a soliloquy about voter irregularities. Christopherson brought up the robocall registry requirements, to which Poilievre said that the current requirement is zero, so the one year requirement was better. Christopherson moved onto the party fundraisers riding government jets, to which Paul Calandra insisted that the value of the flights were reimbursed, though he neglected to say that the rate of reimbursement was lower than that of an economy flight during a seat sale. Nycole Turmel asked the same again in French and got the same answer, and same with a boilerplate question about the elections bill. Justin Trudeau was up for the Liberals, and asked about cuts to climate change offices in Environment Canada. Leona Aglukkaq responded that they had cut projected emissions without a carbon tax, which basically meant nothing at all. Trudeau brought up the cuts to the Building Canada Fund, to which Peter Braid responded with a weak sauce “thousands of billions” quip before touting all of their infrastructure investments (neglecting to mention that those funds are back-end loaded).
Roundup: Kingsley’s revised praise
Former Chief Electoral Officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley appeared at committee yesterday to give testimony on the Fair Elections Act, and said that unless vouching was reinstated, he could neither support the bill, and said that it could be considered unconstitutional. He also took issue with the provisions that would limit the CEO’s communications with Canadians, that allow parties to contact past donors without counting it as an expense, and for putting the Commissioner of Elections under the eye of the Director of Public Prosecutions – but you know that Pierre Poilievre will only focus on the things that Kinsley liked about the bill. Canadian Dissensus gives a superlative takedown of the bill and Poilievre’s defence of it.
Roundup: “Captain Canada” remaining neutral
An election has been called in Quebec, but in Ottawa, Thomas Mulcair has declared that as there is no provincial NDP, he will remain “neutral.” And yes, he did just last weekend insist that he was going to be “Captain Canada” and fight for national unity. To that end, he says that he’ll support the federalist side (recall that he was once a provincial Liberal), but he doesn’t want people to vote only on that issue, especially because there are some Quebec Liberals who are in favour of private healthcare and so on. But wait – he also said that Marois would try to force a referendum if she wins a majority. So, he doesn’t want federalism to be the only factor, but it’s a major factor because she’ll launch a referendum that nobody wants. No doubt this has nothing to do with keeping the soft nationalists in the party fold. The Liberals, meanwhile, are on the attack saying that Mulcair can’t be neutral while the issue of separatism is on the table, while the Conservatives (who aren’t a big presence in the province) are holding back but saying that they would prefer Quebeckers choose the federalist option. Aren’t Quebec politics fun?
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?