With much of the media’s attention turned to Rob Ford’s visit to Ottawa, all party leaders were in the House, ready to scrap. Thomas Mulcair led off by pointing out that a certain Senator headlined a fundraiser for Pierre Poilievre — actually not government business — not that Harper took the bait and praised the elections bill instead. Mulcair brought up the Deloitte audit and tried to insinuate that Senator Tkachuk was passing information to the PMO. Harper reminded him that it wasn’t a question for him to answer. Mulcair then asked why it was that the previous draft of the election bill was rejected by the Conservative caucus, but Harper insisted that Muclair’s information was wrong. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up slowing growth figures and wondered why the Building Canada Fund was losing money, but Harper hit back by saying that Trudeau didn’t understand the economy. And on it went for two more supplementals.
Tag Archives: Fiscal Austerity
QP: No, you ducked out the back door!
With all of the leaders in the House today, it was hopeful that there would be some excitement. Thomas Mulcair led off by bringing up Brad Butt’s “misspoken” voter card story and wondered if there were any real stories about this kind of fraud. Stephen Harper insisted that there were thirty-nine different options for ID available, and left it at that. Mulcair asked about seniors who don’t have most kinds of ID, but Harper reiterated his answer. Mulcair tried to press about Conservatives being charged for voter fraud, but Harper insisted that it was a question for investigators, and hey, your party was forced to pay back union donations. For his final question, Mulcair wondered if there was any investigation into fraud by way of vouching, but Harper merely praised the bill. Justin Trudeau got up and asked about Harper’s promise about income splitting, and if he ever intended to keep the promise. Harper insisted that the budget was not yet balanced, and that they did not balance themselves. Trudeau pressed, but it wound up being a back-and-forth on who was ducking out of back doors instead of facing the press.
Roundup: Trying to court the retired general
A few hours before his speech at the convention, it was revealed that retired General Andrew Leslie would let it be known that the Conservatives tried to recruit him. He was vague about it in the speech, however, saying that he had discussions with several parties (to which both the Conservatives and NDP denied it, Pierre Poilievre trying to dismiss it that they didn’t want him anyway) and danced around it when asked during the press scrum afterward. Leslie did get quite a dig in at Rob Nicholson during said scrum, so there’s that. Later in the day, Leslie produced a series of emails in which he was talking to very senior Conservative staffers about various positions, including running for them in a couple of different Ottawa-area ridings, so those denials were all the more suspect, not that the Liberals minded that he was shopping around – they were glad that he wound up a Liberal. Aaron Wherry had a conversation with Leslie, in which he defended the $72,000 benefit, as part of the conditions of service.
Roundup: Day of the many leaks
It was a day of leaks yesterday – first a plan to try to “disrupt” the Liberal convention and undermine Trudeau, which seemed a bit foolish and costly, given that their “agents” would have to purchase convention memberships for the purpose of lame buttons and Trudeau-branded rolling papers. (The Liberals, meanwhile, say the attention is flattering). And while that one looked deliberately leaked to the media, the following other leaks weren’t. A 70-page re-election strategy was next to make its way to the Toronto Star, which talks a lot about leveraging Laureen Harper to help put a human face on the government, while totally ignoring Thomas Mulcair in the strategy. And if that wasn’t enough, it was then revealed that the PM’s former chief of staff, Guy Giorno, will be the party’s new legal advisor. Paul Wells notes that even though the party has often ”leaked” false memos in the past this does appear that they have an unintended leaker in their ranks.
QP: Questioning the elections bill
Despite it being caucus day, the Conservative benches were surprisingly sparse as QP got underway, but given that all leaders were present, we would at least have some excitement. Thomas Mulcair started off by asking if impersonating an elections official to suppress votes was not already a crime. Harper instead talked up his new elections bill, and all the great things that were in it. Mulcair hit back by accusing the bill of being a cover for an attack on Elections Canada given the various investigations, but Harper insisted that the courts cleared them of any wrongdoing, which wasn’t entirely the case if memory serves. Mulcair turned to the provisions around voter IDs and the vouching system, but Harper rejected the claim that this was discouraging people from voting. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the tariff hikes from the last election, and noted that the lower dollar would make things even more expensive. Harper rejected the claim, and said that it was about levelling the playing field. Trudeau brought up the IMF’s projections regarding anaemic growth, to which Harper insisted that Canada came out of the recession with some of the strongest growth in the world.
Roundup: Poilievre’s questionable moves
Being released today is the new election reform act brought forward by the government which promises to reshape Elections Canada. And yes, the opposition is nervous. Already there are questions as to why Pierre Poilievre was selective in his answers to the House yesterday during QP when he said that he had met with the Chief Electoral Officer about the bill. That meeting, however, was before it was drafted, and not about the actual provision or language of the bill, which is kind of a big deal. One of the big questions about the bill is the provision that the new Commissioner of Elections be appointed by the Director of Public Prosecutions rather than the Chief Electoral Officer, and how that will affect his or her independence. Oh, and the most egregious part? That Poilievre is having his press conference to announce the bill before the technical briefing for reporters takes place. You know, so they won’t have time to read it or understand it before asking questions. Because that’s not a cynical move designed to frustrate the media and keep things as opaque as possible.
QP: Sedate questions sans Fantino
Monday in the House, and the benches slowly filled up before QP was about to get started, but Elizabeth May was the only leader present. As well, it was Deputy Speaker Joe Comartin in the Chair, and the Wooden Mace on the table. That left it up to Megan Leslie to lead off for the NDP, wondering about Julian Fantino’s union-bashing rather than supporting veterans. Parm Gill, Fantino’s parliamentary secretary, insisted that veterans would be better off with the new system as there would be more home delivery of service. Leslie moved onto the topic of CSE using airport Wifi to track travellers, to which Rob Nicholson repeated the talking point that the CSE Commissioner found their activities to be within the law. Jack Harris repeated the same again in English, not that he got a different answer. For the Liberals, Wayne Easter carried on with the questions of CSE’s activities, but Nicholson’s answers didn’t change. When Easter brought up the Commissioner’s report in which he stated that some of the activities may have been directed at Canadians in contravention of the law, Nicholson’s answers didn’t budge from their script. Marc Garneau have one last attempt at the question in French, but Nicholson insisted that CSE was in the business of protecting Canadians, and that should have the support of the Liberals.
Roundup: Reorganizing Elections Canada?
It sounds like the election reform bill will be tabled soon – possibly this week – and sources are saying that it will reorganize Elections Canada, removing the Commissioner of Elections from the organisation into its own standalone office. It also sounds like the Chief Electoral Officer has not thus far been consulted on the bill, so we’ll see just how problematic that actually ends up being.
QP: Fantino gives assurances
With things having calmed down on the Hill somewhat after yesterday’s excitement, and only one major leader in the House, it was certainly a much more sedate day in the Chamber. Mulcair opened with a series of questions about the closures of veteran service centres, and wanted to know if the Conservatives would be allowed a free vote on their opposition day motion. Julian Fantino, in his robotic monotone, insisted that there were over 600 points of service that were nearby these veterans, even when it was pointed out that one the nearest Service Canada centre to one the closed veterans centre in Newfoundland is eight hours away. Stéphane Dion led off for the Liberals, and asked about the recent job numbers. Andrew Saxton touted the government’s job creation record. Scott Brison got up to demand a real plan for jobs, but Saxton disputed his figures, and on the supplemental, Saxton read off a list of programmes the government brought in.
Roundup: Reverberations from the Senate bombshell
So, that whole Justin Trudeau expelling senators from caucus thing. It was a very interesting day to say the least. Trudeau’s speech, with all of its populist bilge about the Senate being “broken” can be found here. Senate Liberal leader (as he is now styled) James Cowan posted some thoughts on what the change means and how it’s more about solving the problem of the perception that Trudeau was issuing orders to his senate caucus when he really wasn’t, and you can see him discuss this on Power & Politics here. And yes, there seems to be some differing ideas on what “independent” means – who would have thought? My own column about the move looks at why it’s a problem with respect to responsible government and the loss of experience in caucus. Emmett Macfarlane, whom the Liberals consulted on the move, writes that there is nothing fundamentally unworkable about a “non-partisan” Senate, and that Trudeau’s move is an attempt at a culture change in the Chamber. Here’s more reaction from Paul Wells, John Geddes, and Michael Den Tandt. Senator Joyal is torn about the move and worries about the loss of collegiality, which is a very good point – it’s easier to use the Senate as a punching bag if you don’t have to see senators at caucus meetings. The NDP are making noise that Trudeau opposed their opposition day motion “on the very same thing” back in the fall, but as you can see, it’s not the same thing, especially as the House can’t legislate the Senate’s activities.