Former Conservative MP Brent Rathgeber is pleased that the Senate blocked the union transparency bill, and is similarly happy that they called it the “Rathgeber amendment.” In his blog post, he rather gleefully calls it a stick in the eye of the PMO, and praise the Senators for not only doing their constitutional duty, but for pointing out the absurdity of the PMO looking for transparency from others when it wouldn’t apply it to their own mandarins. Tim Harper and John Ivison both look at the Senate demonstrating their mettle, and proving that they’re not simply there to rubber stamp bills.
Tag Archives: First Nations
Roundup: Keystone XL and carbon politics
US President Obama gave a speech yesterday about energy, and as part of that came talk about the Keystone XL pipeline, and basically said that it won’t go ahead unless it can be “carbon neutral,” leaving some to wonder what exactly that means. Over at Maclean’s, Luiza Ch. Savage and Paul Wells parse the speech for themselves, and muse about what it means for Canada, especially as carbon emissions are very much now on the table for discussion. Note that this move from Obama happens as natural resources were expected to be at the centre of Harper’s “rebooted” agenda this fall.
Roundup: Divisions among Conservative senators
The union transparency bill has put real divisions in the Conservative senate caucus, and several of them are planning on voting against it, even more abstaining. These aren’t just the Red Tories either – one of Harper’s own appointees even spoke out against it yesterday, which is indicative that it’s a bigger problem for caucus unity, which is why Senator Marjory LeBreton, the government leader in the Senate, has been cracking the whip so harshly. Of course, the independence of its members is the whole reason why the Senate exists as it does – to provide a better check on the elected MPs when they’re up to no good for populist reasons, and this very problematic bill fits those parameters. John Ivison recounts a somewhat heated meeting between one of the MPs in favour of the bill and Senator Segal, one of the opponents.
Senate QP: Official residences and the rules around them
Normally the Senate doesn’t sit on Fridays, and on days they do sit, things in the Chamber get underway in the afternoon. Today, however, things were different and not only was the Senate sitting, but early in the morning — though one has to say that the sunlight streaming through the stained glass windows added a particularly lovely glow to the Chamber and the proceedings. Senator Terry Mercer was up first, and wanted to carry on the discussion about John Baird’s stay at Macdonald House in London. Given the conflicting values of the House in media reports, Mercer asked for clarification as to its true value — $500 million, or $800 million. Senator Marjory LeBreton, the government leader and answerer of questions, took the question as notice so that she could get back to him. Mercer asked about the sale of our official residences in the capitals around the world, and if that would be diminishing our presence around the world. LeBreton thought the notion preposterous, and used the sale of the Dublin residence as an example, saying the property was too far removed from the centre of activity there. Mercer wondered what other residences or embassies were up for sale next — Washington DC, Paris? LeBreton laughed off those suggestions.
Roundup: Project Amble under way
The RCMP’s investigation into Senators Mike Duffy and Mac Harb has been dubbed Project Amble, apparently, and they’ve seized documents related to twelve election campaigns that Duffy was involved in, and according to court documents, they appear to be pursuing charges related to breach of trust – which is an indictable offence. And if you’re wondering about “Project Amble,” here’s a look into how the Toronto Police Service comes up with their operation names (not that it’s too illuminating).
On top of that, Liberal Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette has asked that the Senate Ethics Officer look into the conduct of Conservative Senator Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu, after he’s been trying to arrange for additional benefits for his former girlfriend/assistant after she got a new job in a Senate administration office. Hervieux-Payette asserts that the former assistant shouldn’t even be working in the Senate because of the relationship, and that he’s trying to get her additional benefits is a breach of ethics, and because nobody would speak up, she wants the investigation launched to protect the integrity of the institution.
Roundup: Farewell to Bob Rae
In what was a surprise to pretty much everyone, Liberal MP Bob Rae announced his resignation yesterday morning, intending to spend more time as a negotiator for the First Nations in Northern Ontario as part of the development of the Ring of Fire region there. Personally, I find this incredibly distressing as it means we have now lost the best orator in the Commons, and one of the few remaining grown-ups when it comes to debate. This loss lowers the bar, as much as it pains me to say it. John Geddes tends to share this assessment, and especially takes not of Rae’s disappointment with how rote things have become in Parliament over the past number of decades. Aaron Wherry collects a number of videos of Rae’s speeches in the House for the past several years.
Roundup: Trudeau offers a refund
Justin Trudeau says that he’s going to “make it right” with that charity that wants him to repay his speaking fee after their event flopped – though the fact that they’d still be in the hole even if he repays the whole amount is indication that there are more significant problems with that charity. Trudeau says that he’s going to show leadership by working with any charity that feels that they didn’t get their money’s worth from him, and repay them if necessary because it’s the “right thing to do.” To which the Conservatives debuted a new attack line that “Justin Trudeau’s favourite cause is…Justin Trudeau.” Bravo, guys. The move does raise a few questions, such as whether he’s now obligated to pay back any charity that can’t get their own affairs in order when they book him for events, and why a speaking fee is any different from say a caterer or venue. Questions have also been raised about the Grace Foundation, who demanded the repayment, after it was discovered that they have been a recipient of several million dollars of government money that was spent almost entirely on staff and administration, and the connections of senior board members with the PMO, and whether those had anything to do with the demand for the money over nine months after the event, while the Liberal leadership campaign was well underway. Aaron Wherry looks at the issue of speaking fees – of which many a Conservative senator also charge – and whether banning parliamentarians from having an outside income will really be that great of an outcome in the long run.
Roundup: Transparency behind closed doors
In the wake of the defeat of Justin Trudeau’s four transparency motions on Tuesday, where the NDP confirmed that they were the ones who denied consent, Nathan Cullen took to the microphones to accuse the Liberals of making it up on the fly, that the NDP weren’t informed about the motions (err, except for that public press conference in front of the Centennial Flame last Wednesday), and that it was all a big stunt so that take credit. Add to that, he went on to laud all the work they were doing behind closed doors to improve transparency. No, seriously. Cullen also says that they’re concerned that female MPs will be put in a position of jeopardy if their places of residence are disclosed under these new rules, which seems like pretty weak sauce because I’m sure it would be a pretty simple amendment that they didn’t need to include their address as part of the line item on housing or hospitality costs. Oh, and after QP yesterday, Elizabeth May moved a motion to investigate MPs using the travel points to participate in by-elections, and it was voted down, Gordon O’Connor in particular making motions to kill it.
QP: In which Trudeau apparently became the PM
With Harper in a plane over the Atlantic, there was little chance of there being any meaningful exchanges in QP again, and it didn’t disappoint. Thomas Mulcair asked first off who Nigel Wright had spoken to in the PMO regarding the Senate expenses issue. James Moore, the designated back-up PM du jour, said that Nigel Wright acted alone. When Mulcair try to ask about the PMO engaging in partisan activities, Pierre Poilievre stood up and said that the party paid for partisan activities. For his final question, Mulcair asked if the party fund would be audited to see if Wright paid for anything else, to which Poilievre said that it is audited every year by Elections Canada. Jean Crowder was up next to note that it was the fifth anniversary of the apology to Indian Residential School survivors, and decried the government’s lack of action on First Nations files. Bernard Valcourt turned around and blamed the NDP for standing in the way of their reforms. Justin Trudeau was up next for the Liberals, and wondered if they ever gave the reason why Nigel Wright gave the cheque to Senator Duffy. James Moore hit back with his swipes at Senators Harb and Merchant, though Trudeau did respond by saying of Harb “if he’s innocent he’s in, if he’s guilty he’s out.” Moore then accused him of changing his position on the floor of the House (which he didn’t), but when pressed on Wright, Moore took a swipe at Trudeau’s speaking gigs and accused him of using MP expenses for them.
Roundup: Schrödinger’s secret fund
The drama of the “secret” party fund won’t let go as government MPs keep contradicting themselves. One minute there’s no fund, then there is one, but it’s the same as the rest of the Conservative Fund, so no story here, then on Saturday, Chris Alexander says it’s the same Fund, but some funds are administered by the PMO because they deal with his schedule… And yeah. It continues to confuse because nobody can get their messaging right.