Four-thirty on a Friday afternoon – the perfect time for a government press release that they want to bury. And lo and behold, on schedule comes the news that the government will be carrying on with the Sikorsky helicopter contract and begin decommissioning the Sea Kings next year. Err, except that those Sikorsky Cyclones won’t be fully operational until, oh, 2018 or so, and the current models that they expect our Forces to train on don’t have shielded electronics, meaning that a ship’s radar can knock them out. Oops. There was no explanation in the release as to how Sikorsky plans to get over this hurdle (as the shielding will add a lot more weight to the choppers), only that it would come at no extra cost – in fact, they already owe millions in late penalties for the ridiculous botched job that this whole procurement has already turned out to be. The best part of this drama, however? Diane Finley’s press secretary left the office immediately after sending the release, and nobody would give out his cell phone number, meaning that reporters couldn’t get a statement from the minister about this pretty big deal of a release. Because that’s the kind of professionalism we’ve come to expect from this government.
Tag Archives: First Nations
Roundup: Useless polls make populist noise
A CTV-commissioned poll shows that 69 percent of Canadians don’t think the Senate is useful. (Broken down, the numbers are 34 percent “strongly disagree” and 35 percent “somewhat disagree” with the statement of whether “The Senate of Canada performs a necessary and useful political function.”) The problem with that is that it goes back to the very same issue of asking people a question that they’re not taught anything about. Sure, people have heard about the Senate, but most of what they hear is either a) scandal; or b) distortion, largely arising from scandal as it affects a very small percentage of its membership. Most Canadians, if we’re honest, don’t really know the first thing about the Senate and what it does, and the media hasn’t done a stellar job in covering their good work either, which makes this kind of poll particularly fraught from the get-go. But hey, now we can use a big number to say that populist sentiment doesn’t agree with the constitutionally bound makeup of parliament! One has to wonder if the same kinds of numbers would arise if we asked whether people agreed that their pancreas serves a useful and necessary function in their bodies, or if we’d get the same kind of facile comment of “I don’t know what it does, therefore let’s just get rid of it” that this kind of ridiculous Senate polling results in.
Roundup: In the wake of the Bedford decision
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has struck down the laws around prostitution that related to keeping a bawdy house, living off the avails, and communication for the purposes of prostitution (ruling here). They have given Parliament a year to come up with a new legislative regime before the laws are struck down entirely. Justice Minister Peter MacKay said that he’s disappointed by the finding that the existing laws were unconstitutional, while other Conservatives like Shelly Glover continue to say that these women are now without the “protection” that those laws offered – though the whole point of the ruling was that the laws were not protecting them, but were rather putting them in harm’s way. Part of the debate now moves to the question of how this will affect First Nations women in the sex trade in particular, but it would seem that harm reduction is a good step, particularly if the criminalization made them afraid to go to the police. Emmett Macfarlane writes about the significance of the finding and the way in which the Justices framed their concerns. David Akin looks at how the ruling will affect the various factions of the Conservative base, though it is likely to be more wailing and gnashing of teeth around supposed “judicial activism.” Brenda Cossman worries that the discussion will move toward how to criminalise prostitution rather than how to best regulate a decriminalised environment. Carissima Mathen points out that this court decision is in part because Parliament was negligent over the past three decades when they left these laws in place when they knew that a more comprehensive framework was needed. Andrew Coyne writes about just how very reasonable the decisions is, and how regulation and licensing may be the best choice going forward.
Roundup: Strongly-worded letters toward progress
AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo is optimistic and sees progress after sending a strongly worded letter to Aboriginal Affairs minister Bernard Valcourt over the proposed First Nations Education Act, and Valcourt has been willing to consult further in order to get the bill right. (Strongly-worded letters – so very Canadian). Atleo nevertheless wants education funding boosted in the next budget, before the bill passes, which has been one of the sticking points of their negotiations.
Roundup: Moore denies poverty comments
There was some amount of Twitter outrage yesterday after James Moore was asked about child poverty in a radio scrum, and he responded that he didn’t want to usurp the jurisdiction of the provinces, that Canada was at its wealthiest, and that as the government, it wasn’t his job “to feed his neighbour’s child.” And he’s more or less right about the aspect of jurisdiction, for better or worse, though one could argue about transfer payments and so on. But when Moore stated it was all taken out of context and the headline was wrong, the reporter posted the raw audio and what do you know, it’s all in there. Oops?
As the finance ministers get set to meet about the pension issue later today, Jim Flaherty sounds like he may be bringing his own proposal to the table, which is all about being “more targeted” and not “a bazooka.”
Roundup: MPs taking off for home
The House has risen for the break. MPs are going home after their caucus meetings this morning (well, except for the Liberals, who have their Xmas party later tonight). And it’s just as well, given how ridiculous things degenerated in QP yesterday.
The Chief Electoral Officer, Marc Mayrand, was before the Commons Procedures and House Affairs committee yesterday to discuss the issue of Conservative MP James Bezan’s election filings being before the court, and whether he should be allowed to sit and vote in the Chamber until the matter has been dealt with. Things, however, apparently got a bit heated as Conservative MP Scott Reid criticised Mayrand for being “overly aggressive” and that it was inappropriate for him to notify the Speaker about Bezan’s dispute. Um, but if Bezan is in breach and sitting inappropriately, then the Speaker should know because the Act says that so long as the MP’s filings are not correct, he or she shouldn’t sit or vote as a member. Mayrand is doing his job, even if Reid doesn’t like it.
QP: Whither Santa Claus?
With rumours that the House might rise today, there was the very real possibility that this very well could be the last QP of 2013. Without Harper or Mulcair in the House, it was likely to be another fairly perfunctory day full of Paul Calandra’s classic lines of obfuscation. When things did get started, Megan Leslie decried the failure of an NDP motion at Ethics Committee to look into the once-missing Benjamin Perrin emails, and wondered who in the PMO ordered that it be shut down. John Baird, the designated back-up PM du jour, assured her that PCO took responsibility for the mistake, and the committee was in camera so he didn’t know what happened. Leslie tried again twice to no effect, and Nycole Turmel took over in French to ask if those emails proved there was “no legal agreement” around the Duffy repayment. Baird assured her that the RCMP were looking into things. Justin Trudeau was up for the Liberals, and asked about the funding gap for First Nations education. Bernard Valcourt responded by saying that they ended a comprehensive education regime, which required legislation, and that he remained committed to fixing the system that has failed those children, with funds to flow once the framework was in place. Trudeau moved onto the topic of the replacement of the Champlain Bridge, to which Denis Lebel accused the Liberals of 13 years of inaction on the bridge, but they were committed to a replacement ahead of the original schedule. For his last question, with some rhetorical flourish, Trudeau asked if anyone in the government was embarrassed by the conduct on the ClusterDuff file. Baird responded with a bit of a quip before reverting to the talking point that one person had taken responsibility and only two people were under investigation.
QP: Shouting, whinging, and Speaker’s cautions
With Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair both in South Africa for Nelson Mandela’s memorial, and Justin Trudeau elsewhere, it was shaping up to be another episode of Ask Paul Calandra. David Christopherson led off, shouting his way through a script about the ongoing ClusterDuff affair and whether the PM was telling the truth. Jason Kenney, the designated back-up PM du jour, assured him that the Prime Minister has been since May 15th, as the ITO showed. Nicole Turmel carried on in French, wondering about the role of Harper’s staff not telling him about what was going on. Kenney, cool and collected, stated that Harper was repeatedly clear that he was disappointed that his staff did not inform him about it and there have been staffing changes in his office. Marc Garneau led off for the Liberals, bringing up Senator Gerstein’s role in the affair, and wondered if the government would ask Gerstein and Michael Runia to appear at Ethics committee. Kenney reminded him that such a question had nothing to do with government administration. For his final question, Garneau asked about the “undeleted” Perrin emails, and wanted them tabled for public consumption. Kenney reminded him that PCO regretted their error, and that the PM wasn’t involved.
QP: We expect people to follow the rules
Thursday in the House, and the benches were slowly filling up as a number of MPs, including Thomas Mulcair, made statements about the day of remembrance for the École Polytechnique, which takes place tomorrow. When QP got underway, Mulcair surprised us all by first asking about rail safety and ignored warnings against the company that eventually caused the Lac Mégantic disaster. Harper got up and assured him that the government has invested record amounts in new inspections. Mulcair pressed at length, accusing Harper not not caring enough about the 47 victims, but Harper rather calmly asserted that he was doing a lot for the community and had visited several times. Mulcair switched of English to keep pressing, to which Harper asserted that they don’t know all of the facts, even if Mulcair claimed they did. Mulcair switched tracks, and asked why they weren’t allowing Michael Runia from testifying in the Senate, but Harper insisted that the auditors who performed the audit had already testified that there was no interference. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, and carried on about the allegations against Runia and Gerstein, but Paul Calandra repeated Harper’s talking points. Marc Garneau repeated the he same in French, not that Calandra’s response changed.
Roundup: No breached ethical walls
Auditors from Deloitte appeared before the Senate’s internal economy committee yesterday morning, and revealed a couple of things – that yes, senior Partner Michael Runia did try calling them, but they didn’t tell him anything, thus preserving their “ethical wall.” Also, their audit operated in a closed system and that there wasn’t any way for there to be any leaks of draft copies. But when the Liberals on the committee tried to move a motion for Runia to appear to explain himself, Conservatives on the committee blocked it, saying that they didn’t have the expertise to conduct an investigation parallel to the RCMP’s. Nor has there been any call for Senator Gerstein to appear to explain himself either. The Liberals will be moving a motion in the full Senate next week to give the committee the mandate to pursue these questions, but we’ll see if there is enough support. Kady O’Malley finds three key points from that testimony, and makes the relevant connections to the Wright testimony in the RCMP ITO. Incidentally, PMO has hired three different law firms to deal with the ClusterDuff file.