Tag Archives: CRA

Roundup: A bridge loan, not a bailout

Posted on by

It was a bit of a staggered rollout of the message of the day, starting with Bill Morneau and Navdeep Bains in Toronto to announce the creation of the Large Employer Emergency Financing Facility (LEEFF), which is designed to give large employers temporary bridge financing if they can’t get it by other means, but that comes with a great many strings attached, such as ensuring that jobs and collective agreements are maintained, that climate change plans are not affected, and that there are limits to executive compensation, share buybacks, dividends, and on top of that, these companies will need to disclose their financial structures to ensure that they’re not avoiding taxes with offshore banks or shelters.

Justin Trudeau was up shortly thereafter for his daily presser, noting the start of National Nursing Week, before he spoke about enhanced measures for medium-sized businesses, and then reiterated the messages around the LEEFF, citing that these were bridge loans and not bail-outs, and that the government was only to be a lender of last resort. When asked whether this was some kind of attack on oil companies with the focus on environmental plans, Trudeau insisted that many of them had net-zero-by-2050 plans, so this condition should not have been more onerous on them – but that didn’t stop the usual suspects from complaining that this wasn’t the kind of help that the energy sector was looking for.

During the ministerial presser, Chrystia Freeland said that they working with the US to deal with the inevitable increase in cross-border traffic as economies started re-opening, as premiers express reservations around the possibility of visitors once again coming to Canada.

Meanwhile, here’s economist Kevin Milligan on the path of the labour market and the economy, that’s worth thinking about.

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1259641163989970945

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1259641908436930560

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1259642852260278272

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1259644740460404736

Continue reading →

Roundup: Virtual aggression at committee

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau began his daily presser a little earlier than usual, owing to the fact that the Commons’ Special Committee on COVID-19 was meeting at noon, and today, the announcement was for $252 million in aid for food producers and the agri-food sector – which he assured us was a “first step,” as the industry representatives have been asking for some $2.6 billion in aid. Some of this aid was for beef and hog producers to keep their animals longer, given that meat processing plants have faced outbreaks and been shut down; other funds were for the government to buy stocks of produce that is facing the risk of expiring, in the hopes that it can be distributed elsewhere. During the Q&A, when asked about news that there were eyewitnesses to the crash of the Canadian Forces Cyclone helicopter off the coast of Greece, Trudeau responded that the military has their protocols for notification that he respected.

And then there was the “virtual” Special Committee meeting, which was a decidedly less friendly tone than it had been last week. MPs asking questions were constantly interrupting ministers because they felt they were going too long (because talking points need to be recited), some MPs had signs up in their backgrounds which they wouldn’t have been able to get away with in a regular Commons sitting or committee meeting, and some MPs felt the need to lob personal insults as part of their questions – and the Chair said nothing of it. In fact, had they done so during QP, the other MPs in the chamber would have raised hell, and the Speaker would have been obliged to say something, if only a warning about inflammatory language. But because it’s “virtual” and there can be no heckling, some MPs are feeling emboldened. I suspect it’s also the kind of emboldened attitude that people have when they abuse customer service people over the phone because they don’t have to look them in the eye, and this goes directly to my warnings about the social contagion that will accompany any attempts to solidify “virtual sittings” of Parliament.

The other thing of note was that MPs were asking questions about things that were outside the ambit of the committee, which is supposed to be about the pandemic response. Questions about the assault rifle ban are not about pandemic response, and those should have been ruled out of order. As well, the thing that kept getting asked repeatedly during the hearing was the notion that the government should deny aid to companies who use legal tax havens, because they are “immoral.” It’s a bit galling for MPs to be calling on the government to deny aid to people who work for those companies, particularly since they are not engaging in illegal behaviour. The minister, Diane Lebouthillier, kept repeating that the CRA was investigating anyone using illegal tax avoidance, but wouldn’t call out that what was being demanded was problematic. The other reason why those demands are problematic is they keep saying “Demark did it!” without offering any kind of analysis of how Denmark’s tax system compares to Canada’s, particularly where tax havens are concerned. When Denmark introduced their 75 percent wage subsidy and people kept pointing to it, they ignored the list of caveats that accompanied it, which was vital context. But hey, parties need soundbites and clips for their social media, even now.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bullying through a motion on a false promise

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau once again began his daily presser talking about the tragedy in Nova Scotia, and recounted some of his conversations with RCMP members and Senator Stan Kutcher (who not only represents the province but has a background in mental health). He then turned back to the global pandemic, noting that it has made inequalities more pronounced, and with charities spread thin trying to provide support, he announced that $350 million was being set aside as part of an emergency community support fund. He then announced that the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy would be available as of Monday, and starting today, a calculator would be available on the CRA website for employers to calculate what they would be able to apply for. He also talked about the kinds of contributions that the innovation superclusters have been making to the current situation, for a bit of good news. During the Q&A, Trudeau had more information about the reports of the two planes that returned from China empty that he wasn’t able to answer during QP on Monday, this time noting that because of the severe restrictions in China as for how long they were able to remain on the ground, while supply lines to the airports have been frustrated with checkpoints and delays, it forced them to take off empty for the time being. Trudeau also said that the promised gun control bill was nearly ready to be tabled before Parliament was suspended for the pandemic, but wouldn’t promise that it would be tabled before regular sittings resumed. As well, regarding that meat plant shut down because of an outbreak, Trudeau said they were trying to ensure domestic supply though it could affect prices.

Meanwhile, the Procedure and House Affairs committee was meeting (remotely), and we found out that the Clerk of the House of Commons says that there’s no way they’ll be able to facilitate any kind of “remote” sittings until mid-May at the earliest, and that he told the Government House Leader this before the government bullied through their motion on Monday about one in-person sitting a week and two-virtual ones. In other words, they knew that the virtual ones couldn’t happen, but they acted as though they were, so they can say “Oh dear, looks like we can’t hold those sessions,” and stick to the one in-person sitting per week at a giant waste of resources to keep flying MPs in and out for a single day, rather than at least having the three in-person sittings per week which was perfectly reasonable. And no, this isn’t saving any of the staff exposure, because they would need to be in the West Block whether the MPs were there in person or “virtually” (which will include some MPs in the Chamber). Add to that, they only have the capacity to run at maximum ten “virtual” committee meetings between the Commons and Senate in a week, as the government also likes to pretend that they’ve been trying to ensure that as much of Parliament is functional under the circumstances. That’s not true, and even their planned “accountability sessions” for the next month are not actual sittings, but “special committee” sessions, even though some MPs have tried to paint them otherwise. It’s been one big exercise in preening that only makes the Conservatives look like they were right.

The Queen

Just a quick note to add that yesterday was the Queen’s birthday in her natural capacity. The Queen of Canada’s official birthday isn’t until Victoria Day, for the record. But the Queen and Prince Charles did send condolences to Canada for the tragic deaths in Nova Scotia.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Data-sharing and demanding models

Posted on by

For his morning presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau noted that he was planning a teleconference with the premiers that evening to talk about coordinating their efforts, and better data sharing. He also stated that they had received 1 million new N95 masks the night before, and that they were working to validate the 10 million other masts they got over the past several days and were distributing those to the provinces as well. He got more questions on modelling the pandemic, saying that it was still coming because the data wasn’t there yet, and said that those returning to Canada from abroad posted a “real risk” to the entire country if they didn’t follow the rules and immediately self-isolate.

During the ministerial briefing that followed, Patty Hajdu wouldn’t entertain questions on whether or not she trusted the data coming out of China, saying that they relied on WHO data, and dismissing some of those concerns as conspiracy theories, which had the pundit sphere in a tizzy the rest of the day. Mark Miller also said that they were considering requests from a couple of different First Nations about military field hospitals being set up in their regions, while more money for pandemic preparedness was flowing. Bill Morneau had a separate appearance before a teleconference of the Commons finance committee (which was a bit of a gong show), where he stated that they went with hard-and-fast rules for compensation that could mean that there are gaps in coverage because that was the fastest way to get compensation out the door. (Of course, he didn’t spell out the capacity challenges, which just leaves him vulnerable to more baseless criticism).

[Maclean’s has updated their Q&A on symptoms and where to get testing]

As for the debate over producing the modelling, we’re seeing some provinces promising to roll theirs out – Doug Ford promising it’ll be today – but I’m having a hard time trying to see what it’s going to do at this point that will be of any real help. I am very convinced that we don’t have enough good and consistent data right now (and there are several experts who say we don’t have enough to do proper modelling just yet), and if people want to see how bad it can get, just look at Italy or Spain. I also don’t trust in the capacity of the majority of my fellow journalists to interpret any of this modelling data anywhere near correctly, given that they have proven to be proudly innumerate already during this pandemic (and a good many of them can’t handle basic civic literacy when they cover politics), so I am largely convinced that they are demanding the models for the sake of easy narratives, such as a screaming headline about worst-case scenario death counts. (Seriously – I have been in this industry long enough to know that’s exactly what’s coming). And I also fail to see how it would offer any kind of reassurance to the public, especially as they can see the death counts in other countries as well as they could a headline about worst-case scenario modelling in Canada – add to that the additional confusion of the disputes over methodology that would follow. Models aren’t data, and according to one data analyst I know, no one will read the technical quotes associated with any released modelling, and it will serve as disaster porn – and she’s right. I mean, certain outlets who shall not be named relied on dial-a-quote outrage from certain familiar sources to bolster their case for demanding the numbers be released, in the face other outlets getting opinions from specialists who are saying it’s too soon to have good data on this. But maybe I’m just pessimistic.

https://twitter.com/moebius_strip/status/1245825513072951297

Continue reading →

Roundup: Supplies, spin, and rent

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau’s daily presser was on the theme of medical supplies – signing agreements with three major medical suppliers in the country, MOUs signed with five other companies, and some 3000 other companies who have volunteered to help the government with those supplies in whatever way they can. Trudeau also noted that they have allocated an additional $2 billion for new personal protective equipment, largely by way of bulk-purchasing, and that more supplies would be arriving within days. As well, the government is tasking its next-generation manufacturing supercluster with scaling-up these kinds of producers to meet the domestic and global demand. Why this became a somewhat fraught issue is because there are places in the country where PPEs are being rationed, and Quebec stating that they were days away from running out – though Trudeau said that in some cases, it may be the medical providers who were rationing because they were trying to preserve supplies for an anticipated surge of cases.

[Here is another Q&A with infectious diseases specialist, Dr. Isaac Bogoch, and a discussion on the current debate about masks.]

Meanwhile, the National Post hears from a bunch of government insiders who claim that the attempt to get the power of taxation without parliamentary approval was about trying to hold leverage of the big banks who have been reluctant to loosen lending requirements, which is an explanation that makes absolutely no sense, and makes me again repeat that there appears to be a cadre of jackasses in Morneau’s office who have been responsible for many of this government’s missteps and woes, and we shouldn’t trust them.

And while I’m on the subject of jackasses, I spent much of yesterday on the Twitter Machine trying to remind people that rent is provincial jurisdiction, so constantly hounding the federal government is a waste of time. This was met with numerous people who insisted that the federal government could invoke the Emergencies Act to claim that power. The mind boggles. Why in the hell would the federal government invoke the tool of last resort to intrude into landlord/tenant legislation when the provinces are perfectly capable of doing so on their own. It makes zero sense. Add to that the people crying out that the federal government should immediately give money to renters, as though there were a mechanism to do so. It’s taking the CRA three weeks to retool their systems to deliver the CERB, which is a pretty breakneck speed to ensure that the system can do what’s being asked of it and hopefully not fail doing it (because their computers are not magic, and you can’t just type “give everyone $2000” and expect it to happen. It’s impossible). And no, there is no analogous funding arrangement to healthcare or post-secondary, as others were trying to claim – those are funding envelopes to provincial governments that come with agreements. They don’t go to individuals, and they are not spending in provincial jurisdiction over the objection of any province. The number of people who seem to think otherwise is astounding.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A negotiated solution

Posted on by

In the end, a compromise was reached – MPs shuffled back into the House of Commons by 3 AM, and had passed the bill by six, after grilling the ministers who were present. Parliament did its job, democracy was saved, and the Conservatives spent the day patting themselves on the back to let you know just how brave they were in saving it. As the bill was over in the Senate on schedule – and it had always been scheduled to reach there yesterday for debate and passage and not on Tuesday, as many hysterical media outlets failed to mention – Trudeau held his daily presser, outlining the measures that were passed within it, which included a streamlining of several of the earlier-announced benefits into a more catch-all $2000/month benefit over the course of four months for anyone who wasn’t working, whether they had been laid off or not. Trudeau also announced new support for journalism (mostly ad revenues) and an acceleration of their tax measures. During the ministerial briefing, more details on supports for Indigenous communities was outlined, and shortly thereafter, Patty Hajdu also announced that the Quarantine Act was being invoked to ensure travellers returning to Canada actually self-isolated, even if it meant the government putting them in a hotel room for two weeks and providing them food.

[Maclean’s has updated their information on symptoms and where to get tested].

The tales of the negotiations are fairly interesting to me, in part because there seem to be breakdowns across the board. The Conservatives went into this saying “no surprises” and were surprised by the outsized spending powers, which they say broke their trust. The Liberals were on the one hand apparently surprised to see them in there (and it’s a question of whether it was the drafters in the Department of Justice who are to blame, or perhaps some of the people in Bill Morneau’s office who seem to operate pretty independently of the minister, if testimony from the Double-Hyphen Affair is to be believed), while also justifying that they needed enhanced powers because of the shifting nature of the pandemic emergency, and how fast everything has been changing. Which mostly just reinforces my own previously published points that if we kept the Skeleton Parliament in place, the government could more easily pass new fiscal measures in short order rather than do the song and dance of recalling MPs while providing more constant oversight while still respecting physical distancing and other protective measures. But who listens to me?

Paul Wells gives his take on the whole affair here, which is well worth your time reading. (My own take on what brought us to this point, in the event that you missed it, is here).

Continue reading →

QP: Amateur hour conspiracies in the face of a pandemic

Posted on by

Wednesday, caucus day, and while all of the leaders were present, the benches were not nearly as full as they usually are on caucus day. Andrew Scheer led off, mini-lectern on desk, and he immediately blamed Justin Trudeau for the weak economic growth figure, listing a bunch of disingenuous items that counted as “proof.” Trudeau stood up to talk about investing in Canadians, lifting a million people out of poverty while having the strongest balance sheet in the G7. Scheer listed a bunch of things that the government spent on what were framed in a disingenuous way, to which Trudeau reiterated his previous points. Scheer listed yet more false points about Harper’s record versus this one, before demanding tax cuts and the elimination of “red tape,” and Trudeau got a bit indignant in defending the Canada Child Benefit while calling out Scheer for petty politics. Scheer raised the Berskshire Hathaway pullout from the Quebec LNG plan, to which Trudeau reminded him that the very same company just invested in a wind farm in Alberta. Scheer changed to French to then accuse him of striking a secret deal with the Bloc go keep them from re-opening the Double Hyphen Affair in committee, to which Trudeau stated that he defended jobs while standing up for the legal system. Yves-François Blanchet stood up for the Bloc, and stated that they blocked the committee study to prevent another round of people screaming that all Quebeckers were corrupt, before he switched to COVID-19 measures, to which Trudeau reminded him that they have been taking all measures that their scientific advisors stated. Blanchet demanded more border restrictions, daily press briefings and more purchasing power for seniors, and Trudeau reiterated his reassurances. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, worrying about workers who can’t access EI, and Trudeau assured him that they are working on additional measures. Singh repeated the demand, and Trudeau reiterated that they would be there for all Canadians.

Continue reading →

Roundup: See you at the Supreme Court

Posted on by

In the wake of the Alberta Court of Appeal reference decision on the federal carbon price, both Jason Kenney and his justice minister have been performing a particular song and dance for the media’s consumption, demanding that the federal government immediately remove said “unconstitutional” price, and demanding a rebate for all Albertans under threat of personal lawsuit.
Couple of things:

  1. This was not a court order. It was a reference question, so there is no actual weight to the finding of unconstitutionality. And federal justice minister David Lametti said as much in a letter responding to his Alberta counterpart telling that he would see him at the Supreme Court of Canada.
  2. There is already a rebate. In fact, most people get more back than they pay into it – and they are scheduled to receive the biggest rebates in the country. Demanding refunds is actually a bit gross, because it’s wilfully misrepresenting how the system works.
  3. Suing members of the federal Cabinet is not how the system works. And we actually saw said provincial minister’s old law professor take to Twitter to say that she taught him better than that. So there’s that.

https://twitter.com/cmathen/status/1232874850563260416

Meanwhile, Manitoba is threatening to continue with their challenge to the federal carbon price if they don’t get a deal on the very same thing from the federal government. While the federal government says that they haven’t received a new proposal from Manitoba, you can bet that the province wants to continue pitching a price that won’t rise, which isn’t going to be on because it’s about ensuring a level playing field across the country, and not letting premiers undermine one another in a race to the bottom.

Continue reading →

QP: Lessons from radical activists

Posted on by

While Justin Trudeau was indeed in the building, he was not to show up for Question Period for whatever the reason, so that left Andrew Scheer to lead off by reading that Trudeau, a former teacher, has taught “radical activists” the valuable lesson that they can bring the economy to its knees and that he would do nothing, before he called Trudeau “weak.” Bill Blair said that a commitment to dialogue and reconciliation was not a sign of weakness, and that they trusted the police to do their jobs. Scheer then railed that the government waited too long to decide on Teck Frontier, to which Jonathan Wilkinson reminded him that it was Teck’s decision, and that the CEO demonstrated the need for governments to work together to come up with climate action. Scheer claimed that the current government’s process killed Frontier, to which Wilkinson reminded him it was under the 2012 rules put in when Jason Kenney was in a Cabinet, and that process pushed all of the problems to the back of the process, whereas their new process turns that around. Gérard Deltell railed that the decision dragging out for nine months hurt the fourteen First Nations in the area, to which Wilkinson read quotes from Teck’s CEO. Deltell accused the government of working against those First Nations — as though the price of oil were not too low for the project to be viable — and Wilkinson quoted the letter’s section on global capital markets looking for clean projects. Yves-François Blanchet was up for the Bloc, and he was concerned about a series of crises in the country that the government was not doing anything about, and demanded that Trudeau meet with the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs. Marc Miller stated that they were talking and building trust. Blanchet demanded that they head to BC to resolve the issue, to which Blair reminded him that it was a serious situation which is why they urged people to lift the barricades, and that they trusted law enforcement when those people didn’t. Jagmeet Singh was up for the NDP, and he bemoaned that people need free dental services, for which Patty Hajdu said that the Health committee would be studying the matter and she looked forward to their report. Singh then plugged their Supply Day motion to change the tax changes to divert money toward dental care, to which Hajdu repeated that she would wait for the committee report.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A sledgehammer solution

Posted on by

Talk about the sexual assault training for judges bill has continued, and the Conservatives have continued to float the idea that it should be expanded to include Parole Board officers. The problem there, of course, is that the bill deals with amendments to the Judges Act, which has bugger all to do with the Parole Board, and this too-cute-by-half tactic of the Conservatives betrays how boneheaded their tactics are.

Meanwhile, Gib van Ert, former Executive Legal Officer to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada (who heads the Canadian Judicial Council), has some thoughts on the bill and why it’s very problematic.

Some scholars have shrugged and say “Big deal if it means they get more training,” but the original legislation was far more insidious in that the reporting requirements were a threat do the administrative independence of the court as well. But I’ve spoken to former judges who say this is unnecessary. Another one responded to van Ert. Part of the problem is that there have been high profile cases where the judge has been very wrong on sexual assault law, and that tends to be overturned at the appellate level – but much of the time, the most infamous cases have been provincial court judges, which this doesn’t deal with.

So why are they doing this? Optics. MPs want to look like they’re doing something about the problems or perceived problems, and they’re taking the sledgehammer approach because it looks effective, even when it may not actually be. But that is so much of politics these days, which we need to start breaking out of.

Continue reading →