Stephen Harper has made the call – four by-elections will be held on June 30th, two in Alberta and two in Ontario. The fifth vacant riding, Whitby–Oshawa, former riding of Jim Flaherty, will remain open for the time being. That means that Fort McMurray–Athabasca and Macleod in Alberta, and Trinity–Spadina and Scarborough–Agincourt in the Greater Toronto Area are now officially in play. It also means that the two GTA ridings will be contesting the by-election in the middle of both a provincial and municipal election. It has also been suggested by the cynical among us that Harper intended to drive down voter participation by holding the by-elections the day before Canada Day. It remains to be seen in some of the more hotly contested ridings, and Justin Trudeau has spent the weekend in both Northern Alberta and Okotoks because of the two by-elections, hoping for a Liberal breakthrough in that province.
Tag Archives: Elections Canada
QP: The Attorney General’s silence on protecting the courts
It was a gorgeous spring day in Ottawa, but it was too bad that neither Stephen Harper or Justin Trudeau weren’t around to enjoy it, as they apparently all found better things to do than to attend the grand inquest of the nation. Thomas Mulcair was in attendance, and led off by asking if the Attorney General felt it was his job to ensure that there were never any attempts to intimate the courts of the country. Peter MacKay rejected the premise of the question, and said that after the Chief Justice met with special committee, she called him and he decided that the Prime Minister didn’t need to speak to her, then gave the line about the inappropriateness of discussing cases with judgments. Mulcair carried on, about the separation of powers, to which MacKay carried on with talking points about the legal opinions they received. Mulcair was not impressed and accused MacKay of being a henchman of the PM. MacKay waxed about Justice Rothstein being appointed from the Federal Court, to which Mulcair blasted back about the difference in Quebec law, hence requiring special judicial requirements. MacKay kept on with the justifications of legal opinions and the special committee. Mulcair hammered away at the difference rules, but MacKay tried to play down Mulcair’s own reading of the Supreme Court Act. Stéphane Dion led for the Liberals, and echoed in English by Sean Casey, brought up the anonymous Conservatives who complained to the media and appeared to be leaking confidential information from the special appointment committee, but MacKay shrugged the questions off as “convoluted.” Casey hammered away at the loss of confidence in the selection process, and wondered if the minister would make any changes to restore confidences. MacKay insisted that the process was the most open and inclusive in history, and that even the opposition justice critic had praised Nadon.
Roundup: Expats voting restored
An Ontario superior court judge has struck down provisions that prevent Canadian ex-pats from voting in federal elections, despite living abroad. Considering that we vote for local constituency MPs, and not parties or leaders, one does wonder how we will determine who these ex-pats will vote for, seeing as they don’t have a current riding for whom they are choosing an MP to represent them in. While some jurisdictions that allow expats to vote decide this on the basis of their last Canadian address, it does make one wonder about that kind of determination as riding boundaries change and you have more people voting at that address than are currently registered. Or maybe I’m letting reality and the rules of the way things work get in the way of more abstract feelings about democracy once again.
Roundup: The Chief Justice hits back
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada responded to the government’s media releases and included a timeline of events to show that there was no undue influence in the Nadon appointment. One could question if it was appropriate to flag the issue on July 31, but it certainly doesn’t appear to have unfolded the way that the PMO has insinuated. Harper and company continued to make some baffling assertions, like Harper saying that he discounted any advice about potential problems with nominating a Federal Court judge in Quebec because coming from McLachlin, it would have been improper – it simply makes no sense. So is insinuating that McLachlin should have known that the case would come before her, since she’s not clairvoyant and wouldn’t know that Harper would appoint a judge in such a manner, or that a legal challenge would come. Former Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, who appointed two Supreme Court justices under his watch, confirms that the Chief Justice would have been one of the people consulted in the process because she knows what kinds of expertise the Court needs at the time. Aaron Wherry rounds up more reaction to the dispute here.
Roundup: Inciting a feud with the Supreme Court
A rift between the government and the Supreme Court of Canada appears to be opening as a bunch of anonymous Conservative ministers and backbenchers bravely approached National Post columnist John Ivison under the cloak of anonymity and trash-talked Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, insinuating that she lobbied against Nadon’s appointment. The Executive Legal Officer of the Supreme Court put out a release that denied any lobbying, and said that the Chief Justice was consulted by the committee of MPs that were creating the short-list of nominees, and that because of the issue of appointing a Federal Court judge in a Quebec seat was already well known, the Chief Justice also advised the justice minister and the Prime Minister’s chief of staff that it could be an issue. This happened back in July. The PMO, late in the day, put out a release of their own, insinuating that McLachlin made a cold call to Harper, which he refused because it would be inappropriate to discuss a matter before the courts – only it wasn’t before the courts, because that consultation, which was made to his chief of staff and not Harper directly, was in July – a fact that they only confirmed when the Toronto Star pressed them on it. It’s really worrying that the PMO is trying to assert that the Chief Justice did something untoward as Prime Ministers and Minsters of Justice often consult with her when there are vacancies on the bench, because the Chief Justice can advise them on what particular subject areas the Court is looking for an expert to fill. In the context of advising on a replacement for Justice Fish, there would have been nothing wrong with McLachlin consulting the government, nor with raising the point of caution about Federal Court judges. That this government has made a mess of the appointment process with their opaque committee process under the window dressing of greater accountability and transparency – of which there is actually none – and to try and come after the Court like this, is extremely unbecoming of any government. Especially when they were warned there would be a problem and went ahead with it anyway.
QP: A million criminals at work?
Despite it being only Thursday, only one major leader was present in the Chamber — Thomas Mulcair — which continues the worrying trend that QP somehow doesn’t matter. Mulcair led off today by asking why government agencies needed to collect telecom information on over a million Canadians. James Moore assured him that they were being used by law enforcement agencies for necessary actions. Mulcair mockingly wondered if there were a million criminals being tracked, but Moore insisted that Section 7 of the privacy legislation spells out why this information is necessary. Mulcair brought up the reports that there may be as many a thousand missing and murdered Aboriginal women, to which Stephen Blaney assured him of the measures they had taken. Jean Crowder and Niki Ashton followed up with increasingly outraged calls for a national public inquiry, but Blaney repeated that they were taking measures to keep the street safe. Chrystia Freeland led off for the Liberals, noting the record levels of unemployment in Southwestern Ontario while large numbers of Temporary Foreign Workers continued to be brought in. Jason Kenney insisted that anyone who cut corners and tried to bring in workers illegitimately would face consequences. John McCallum noted that the Canada Experience Class was created as a tool of diplomacy, and was since co-opted by the department of immigration for their own ends. Chris Alexander insisted that the programme benefited Canadians, and when McCallum noted that the previous minister went to Ireland to seek potential immigrants when youth unemployment levels were high, Alexander extolled the relatively buoyant job market in Canada.
Roundup: Amendments during the meltdown
While the Rob Ford story goes into total meltdown in Toronto, the amendment process for the Fair Elections Act hit close to the halfway mark last night, with just one day left before the clock runs out – and it might go a bit faster if parties didn’t file nonsense amendments (postal codes on ballots? Veiled voting? Letting all candidates be photographed casting ballots instead of just leaders? Seriously?) or go on lengthy tirades about things. But hey, what do I know? Meanwhile, Conservative MPs have been talking to The Canadian Press about the fact that the caucus has had a great deal of input into the changes being proposed to the bill after they too were unsatisfied with the original form.
QP: The authorities always seek warrants — really!
On a rainy day, after the various caucuses met, MPs gathered in the House for our daily exercise in government accountability. Of note, it was also Stephen Harper’s 55th birthday, not that anyone expected the opposition to go easy on him because of it. Thomas Mulcair led off and sharply asked who authorized the release of that telecom data of a million Canadians. Harper said that he rejected the premise of the question and assured him that agencies follow the rules and get warrants. Mulcair pressed, but Harper reiterated that they get warrants and that there is legislation before the House to modernize investigative tools. Mulcair insisted that the legislation would exculpate the need for warrants, to which Harper once again reiterated that agencies get warrants when needed. (That might be the key, given that they don’t seem to need them if they get the data for the asking). Mulcair wondered what information the government was seeking, and which telecom companies were cooperating. Harper said that it was not the government seeking the data, but law enforcement agencies, and that there was independent oversight. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the Temporary Foreign Workers intakes for areas which don’t seem to need them, to which Harper gave his usual bland assurances that they had created jobs and they were reviewing the programme. Trudeau reminded him that five years ago, Sheila Fraser warned of the low quality of Labour Market Opinions that were open to abuse, but Harper stuck to his talking points, same again when the question was asked in French, adding that Trudeau himself had asked for a permit for his riding.
Roundup: Amendments underway
Amendments are proceeding to the Fair Elections Act, and yes, the government is agreeing to a number of them. Others, like those proposed by Brent Rathgeber and Elizabeth May, well, not so much. Kady O’Malley uses the bill as a prime example of how the government’s obstinate and obstructionist communications strategy has not only backfired, but blown up in their faces as they were forced to make a public climbdown as the amendment process is underway.
QP: It was all the Liberals’ fault (once again)
It was a beautiful spring day in the Nation’s Capital, and the Prime Minister was back in the House, which is always an encouraging sign. Thomas Mulcair led off by trying the prosecutorial tactic once again, and asked about when abuses to the Temporary Foreign Workers came to light. Stephen Harper pointed out that the NDP often asked for permits, and then said that they wanted to ensure that Canadians got the first crack at jobs. Mulcair read some quotes and wanted to know again when the government was made aware. Harper was more forceful in his reply when he repeated both points. Mulcair responded that he wanted the Auditor General to investigate the programme — not really a question — to which Harper insisted that the NDP were trying to block the government’s own reforms to the programme. Mulcair changed tactics and wondered why Harper was giving up on Senate reform, to which Harper insisted that his position hadn’t changed, but it was up to the provinces to bring forward proposals. Mulcair tried the same in French, taunting Harper that he didn’t want to speak to the provinces, not that Harper’s answer changed. Justin Trudeau was up next and returned to the TFWs, to which Harper retorted that the Liberals were also blocking their attempted reforms. Trudeau noted that he raised the problems a year ago, to which Harper accused him of revisionist history. Trudeau noted falling wages and youth unemployment in the face of those illegitimate TFWs, but Harper stuck to his declaration that the Liberals were blocking changes.