Tag Archives: Fiscal Austerity

QP: Waiting on income splitting

Posted on by

Despite it being only Thursday, most leaders were absent from the Chamber today, Harper off in Vaughan to deliver his income splitting announcement, and Justin Trudeau campaigning for the by-election in Whitby. Thomas Mulcair did show up, and started off bringing up the request from three esteemed former Justices who warned against knee-jerk legislation after last week’s attacks. Stephen Blaney assured him that the new CSIS was balanced. Mulcair didn’t want this to be a partisan issue and wanted a multi-party committee to study the issue (never mind that all Commons committees are multi-party), to which Blaney said that all parties were being offered technical briefings. Mulcair brought up Stockwell Day’s endorsement of the creation of a parliamentary oversight committee for national security, but Blaney said that SIRC was robust enough. Mulcair sniped about Deborah Grey’s interim leadership of SIRC, before turning to the issue of income splitting. Kevin Sorenson told him to stay tuned for the announcement, and proclaimed that income splitting was good policy. Mulcair and Sorensen took another round at it, before Scott Brison led for the Liberals, recalling Jim Flaherty’s opposition to income splitting. Sorenson quoted an old Brison line about how income splitting was a good thing. Brison quipped that he said a lot of stupid things when he was a Conservative, and the House roared. Sorenson repeated the praise for the plan, before Emmanuel Dubourg asked about the plan in French, Sorenson not varying the substance of his response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Deployment debate continues

Posted on by

As the debate on the Iraq combat deployment carries on, with the vote set for later tonight, there are already questions as to just how effective air strikes can actually be given that ISIS has already taken lessons to heart about scattering in advance of a raid and reforming after the planes leave. In other words, could that really be the right use of forces. The government made a bit of a show of also adding another $10 million in aid yesterday, including for victims of sexual violence, which the NDP had specifically asked for – but the NDP responded that it’s not really enough to do anything, and then moved an amendment to the government motion to forbid combat and impose strict time limits. (Aaron Wherry recaps the debate here). Liberal advisor and potential candidate, former lieutenant general Andrew Leslie, made the case that an armed non-combat relief mission was a better use of resources because it wouldn’t divide our attention and resources the way doing both combat and aid would, while Roland Paris later noted on P&P that Canada didn’t necessarily need to participate in combat operations, but simply needed to be part of the coalition to help give political cover and legitimacy to the US-led operation. Hillary Clinton, during her speech in Ottawa yesterday, said that military intervention against ISIS was critical – but also not enough to really stop them. Andrew Coyne writes that there is no safe moral ground in this particular fight.

Continue reading →

QP: A break from the Iraq debate

Posted on by

With the debate on the Iraq deployment underway, QP was a break in the proceedings. Stephen Harper, however, was elsewhere, as was Justin Trudeau, who was off watching the Hillary Clinton speech down the road instead. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking for a national inquiry on missing and murdered Aboriginal women. Kellie Leitch responded that they were already taking action rather than waiting for more reports. Mulcair changed topics and demanded to know why Canadian Forces personnel were being deployed to Iraq before a vote had been held. Rob Nicholson listed some of the forces they would be sending over. Mulcair decried the fact that the government would give tacit support to the Assad regime by getting permission before any air strikes in Syrian territory. Nicholson responded about the threat of ISIS in the region. Mulcair pressed and wondered about the Americans lowering their standards for certainty with air bombardment, giving Nicholson the opportunity to badger him about their support for taking down ISIS. Marc Garneau led for the Liberals, and asked about the humanitarian crises in Turkey and Jordan given the flood of refugees they have accepted, to which Christian Paradis assured him that Canada was sending millions of dollars in aid to those regions. Garneau returned to the question of air strikes within Syrian borders and under what conditions they would negotiate with Assad. Nicholson said that currently they would only make strikes in Iraq, and if that changed Syria might be included.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Announcing a combat mission

Posted on by

Much ink and many pixels are being spilt over this Iraq announcement yesterday, and I’m not a foreign affairs person, so I’ll leave most of that analysis to people who are. Harper has announced that we’ll be sending six CF-18s, one refuelling jet, two Aurora surveillance aircraft, and that the up-to-69 special forces military advisors will remain on the ground for another six months, and that they are not to engage in combat operations. The air strikes would only be in Iraqi territory unless the Syrian government authorized strikes in their territory as well, which is unlikely (and who wants to be seen to be supporting the Assad regime?) He also worded his motion that he’s presented to the House in such a way that it’s not authorizing the deployment, but that it support the decision to send those forces. (This part is important because it’s less of a trap when it comes to accountability). In response, Thomas Mulcair gave a categorical no, while the Liberals said they can’t support this motion – key distinction there – but they don’t think that the PM has made the proper case for why air strikes are the best tool when we could probably contribute more in other areas, and while Harper says that it’s not an either/or proposition, it could easily be pointed out that the government really lowballed the figures for the Libya mission until the final totals came in, and that those other areas would suffer if we put more eggs into the air strikes basket. Calling our CF-18s aging and casting doubt on their capabilities probably wasn’t the smartest move, however, and insisting that we can do more in a non-combat role does give the impression that the Liberals are becoming pacifistic and shirkers of the heavy lifting that needs to be done. Elizabeth May also made some good points about the road to hell being paved with good intentions, which we have in spades in this situation. David Pugliese gives a Q&A on what the proposed mission entails. Robert Fisher talks about the positive response from the region. Steve Saideman parses the politics of it all, reminding us that this is the land of lousy policy alternatives.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Whipping out our CF-18s

Posted on by

While making a speech at the Canada 2020 conference about how Stephen Harper hasn’t yet made a case for a combat mission in Iraq, and about the various other options that Canada has at its disposal to aid in the conflict, Justin Trudeau made a dick joke about “trying to whip out our CF-18s to show them how big they are.” And suddenly the scolds were out in full force, going on about it being juvenile and an insult to the troops, and how dare he not be a statesman on this eve of war (as though 26 Special Forces personnel and the likely deployment of a six-pack of fighters were a thousand ships sailing for Troy). Apparently everybody needs to talk in platitudes that have the consistency of pabulum, and he can’t make a point about being quick to take some options at the potential cost of others (though I will add that Canada is part of military alliances, we have the capability to deploy forces and the fiscal means to do so, artificial budget austerity aside, so not doing some heavy lifting would make us look like shirkers in the eyes of said allies). And hey, the fact that he says his mind isn’t made up and that he’s looking to be convinced is probably a good thing because he’s not briefed on the matter, he’s not a member of the Privy Council, and is in no position to come up with a war plan based on no information. Even one former Canadian Forces general says that we shouldn’t be giving out all of this information in public, and he might even have a point there too. But oh, dick joke. Scold, scold. Or maybe we can all grow up and stop getting apoplectic the moment somebody says something slightly off-colour. Maybe?

Continue reading →

QP: Baird delivers relevant answers

Posted on by

The day was already off to a shaky start, where Peter Van Loan spent the NDP’s supply date motion on amending the Standing Orders to have the relevancy rules apply to QP, by arguing that QP shouldn’t be a one-way street and that the NDP should answer the questions they pose back to them. It really was mystifying. No major leader was present in the Commons for QP, where Megan Leslie asked about plans to send CF-18s to Iraq to conduct airstrikes. John Baird said that they were dealing with humanitarian operations over there, but no further decisions had been taken. Leslie demanded a vote on increasing participation, to which Baird insisted that they would hold one on a combat mission. (Wait — it’s a trap!) Hélène Laverdière picked up the same questions I’m French, and asked how many of the planned 69 special forces were on the ground. Baird said that he would get back to her on the number, and reiterated the threat posed by ISIS. Leslie got back up for the final question, and trawled for support for the supply day motion, to which Van Loan assured her that our Parliament has the most accountable Question Period in the world, and that the government should be able to pose questions too. And then my head exploded. Dominic LeBlanc led off for the Liberals, and cited media leaks on extending the Iraq deployment, and wanted more details on the parameters that cabinet was considering. Baird replied that cabinet had not yet weighed in on it. Joyce Murray asked about the time period that they were considering for an extended deployment. Baird spoke with exaggerated slowness to insist that no decision had not yet been made.

Continue reading →

QP: A debate or a vote

Posted on by

The President of Germany was visiting the Centre Block today, no matter that Harper was still in New York for the United Nations, and Justin Trudeau was off campaigning in Oshawa, leaving Thomas Mulcair once again the only major leader present. He led off by asking about the Prime Minister’s revelation in New York that we were being asked to contribute more troops to Iraq. Rob Nicholson responded by saying that the request was just received and that it would be reviewed, along with our current non-combat mission at the end of the 30 days. Mulcair wanted the letter made public, and asked how many more troops were being asked. Nicholson repeated that it would all be part of the review. Mulcair wanted the disclosure of the permission given by Iraq, to which Nicholson assured him that they had proper permission. Mulcair moved onto the burgeoning refugee crisis in Turkey, to which Chris Alexander gave a pro forma response about how many refugees from Iraq we have already settled and how many more we planned to. Mulcair pressed for detail on Syrian refugees, and Alexander said that more than 1500 Syrian refugees were present in Canada. Marc Garneau led off for the Liberals, and asked for details on the new Iraq request, and that it would be brought for debate in the House. Nicholson repeated that they would be reviewing everything. Joyce Murray noted the recall of Parliament in the UK to debate their Iraq deployment, to which Nicholson invited the opposition to use their supply days to debate further. Adam Vaughan reiterated the need for debate in parliament before any deployment was extended, and Nicholson noted how forthcoming the government has been.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Voices from the past

Posted on by

A number of has-been pro-life (and homophobic) former Liberal MPs sent out an open letter to Justin Trudeau decrying his decree that a woman’s right to choose is a Charter issue and not a matter of conscience. They decried it as “anti-democratic,” never mind the fact that this was the policy voted on by the party’s membership during the policy convention before Trudeau won the leadership. Oops. The pedigree of these former MPs is also worth mentioning, as several of them quit the party to join the Reform Party, while others left over the same-sex marriage issue. Not surprising, most Liberals simply shrugged off the whole thing, while Trudeau tweeted out a fairly decent comeback.

Continue reading →

QP: About this local issue…

Posted on by

With both Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau off in Southern Ontario for events, Thomas Mulcair was the only major leader in the Commons. He led off by asking about the coming demolition of the Mirabel airport — likely because he has Quebec seats to shore up, and Lisa Raitt responded first by reminding him that she’s a she and not a he, and that it’s the Montreal Airport Authority that is the responsible authority. Mulcair shot back that he was referring to the Minister of Infrastructure, before he angrily wondered when the government when the government would listen to indigenous women about missing and murdered indigenous women. Kellie Leitch responded that families were thanking her for the Action Plan™ being tabled. Mulcair then switched to the bus-train collision in Ottawa a year ago, and asked about a train derailment in Slave Lake. Raitt was back up, and said they were working on rail safety. Chris Charlton was up next and bemoaned the declaration of bankruptcy by US Steel in Hamilton, which Mike Lake gave a somewhat shrugging response, and when Charlton demanded that the government protect the pensions of the affected retired workers, Kevin Sorensen touted all the ways they have cut taxes. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, asking about job losses in the last month and suggested changing the EI tax credit to one where employers get a credit for a net job created. Sorensen insisted that the Liberals were making up policy on the fly, and made random potshots at the Liberal record on EI. Goodale’s final question was about the latest report on income splitting and how it would affect provincial budgets. Sorensen responded that Harper said that income splitting was a good policy. Well if Harper says so…

Continue reading →

Roundup: Back with a countdown

Posted on by

Parliament is back! Yay! Now let’s obsess about how everything is a pre-election narrative, start polling relentlessly, and speculate wildly about the mere possibility that there would be an early election call without any hint of a justification for there to be one! Oh man, aren’t fixed election dates and the year-long campaigning in advance of them just the bestest thing ever?

Continue reading →