Former Prime Ministers Brian Mulroney, Kim Campbell and Jean Chrétien are joining Stephen Harper at Nelson Mandela’s funeral in Johannesburg. Also joining them will be former Governor Generals Adrienne Clarkson and Michaëlle Jean, premiers Stephen McNeil, Alison Redford, Bob McLeod and Darrell Pasloski. Thomas Mulcair will be joining, as will MPs Deepak Obhrai, Irwin Cotler, Peter Braid, Joe Daniel, Roxanne James, and retired Senator Don Oliver, plus AFN National Chief Shawn Atleo. Joe Clark will be leading a delegation from the National Democratic Institute.
Tag Archives: Fiscal Austerity
QP: Treasury Board rules are being followed
With Michael Chong’s Reform Act having taken up the morning’s news cycle, it was going to be a switch to get back into battle mode over the outstanding questions in the ClusterDuff affair. As well, Thomas Mulcair was the only major leader in the House once again, owing to appearances at the Demarais funeral in Montreal, which meant another lacklustre QP. Mulcair started off with by wondering who in the PMO asked to find Benjamin Perrin’s emails. James Moore got up, acting as back-up PM du jour for the first time in months, and reread parts of the PCO letter to the RCMP in response. Mulcair wondered why the head of legal operations wasn’t aware that the emails were frozen, but Moore’s response was little different. Mulcair went onto the rules around emails and the concerns of the Information Commissioner, to which Moore reminded the House that she is independent and can investigate if she wishes. Mulcair went onto a rambling question about PMO employees being warned of the investigation, and didn’t get a response from Moore. Mulcair finally wondered why those emails had been hidden if it wasn’t to further a cover-up, but Moore rejected that premise. Dominic LeBlanc was up for the Liberals, and wondered how it was possible to be unaware of the existence of those emails. Moore repeated that PCO admitted their mistake, and that those emails were now in the hands of the RCMP. Ralph Goodale took over and wondered how PCO could say that they didn’t have the emails in response to his own request for them, but Moore stuck to the PCO letter.
QP: More ClusterDuff questions, more Paul Calandra obfuscation
With Stephen Harper off making an announcement in Lac Mégantic, we were guaranteed that it was going to be yet another episode of the Paul Calandra Show for QP today. Would he bring up his father’s pizza parlour? Would there be a homily about the lessons he teaches his daughters. Add to that, the only leader in the House was Thomas Mulcair, which promised to make for a rather lopsided day. When QP started, Mulcair returned to his former mode of solilioqusing, and wondered lengthily about why the Prime Minister couldn’t take responsibility. Paul Calandra got up and praised the leadership the Prime Minister showed in his conduct, and that the documents showed that he didn’t know. Mulcair brought up statements regarding the Prime Minister approving actions, thus implicating him in a cover-up. Calandra offered much the same in response. Mulcair then wondered why a senator would require the PM’s approval to repay his own expenses, but Calandra responded with the allegation that Mulcair sat on a bribery allegation for seventeen years. Mulcair wondered why nobody else lost their jobs if they were involved, but Calandra reiterated the alleged bribe story. Mulcair’s final question got cut off for unparliamentary language, and the Speaker moved on. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, and asked about the “good to go” statement. Calandra shrugged it off and carried on battering at Mulcair. Goodale brought up the sentiments of this affair in the riding of Brandon in his follow-up, which gave Calandra an opening to batter the Liberals about a panoply of their ills. For his final question, Goodale brought up the interference in a Senate committee proceeding, but Calandra decided that returning to the days of the Sponsorship scandal was the way to go.
Roundup: The AG wants MP oversight
The Auditor General says that there needs to be an independent, non-partisan body to deal with MPs expenses in order for Canadians to be confident that they are being managed. The NDP immediately point out that this is what they have been looking for since the issue of Senate expenses exploded into the public consciousness. I would say that it’s too bad that we are reaching a place where we can no longer treat MPs like grown-ups, and that we need yet more mechanisms to police them.
QP: Paul Calandra, once again
With the Rob Ford sideshow still sucking the oxygen out of the news cycle, and none of the leaders in the House, it was either going to be a quiet QP, or an utter gong show — rarely is it anything in between when the leaders are away. Megan Leslie stated off by asking a question about the relief efforts to the Philippines after the typhoon. Chrisitian Paradis stood up to laud the efforts of the DART, and that the government commitments to relief stand at nearly $40 million. Nycole Turmel was up next, and asked about the expedited immigration for those affected. Costas Menegakis reiterated some of the measures that the government was taking. Turmel and Leslie then returned to the issue of ClusterDuff timelines, but Paul Calandra responded with the usual lines about how the Prime Minister was unaware of what happened. For her final question, Leslie asked about the revelations about Michael Sona being in Aruba when he allegedly bragged about the robocall scheme — which isn’t actually government business — and Calandra didn’t really give an answer in any case. For the Liberals, Ralph Goodale returned to the topics of the staffers in the PMO involved in the ClusterDuff affair, but Paul Calandra told him to repeat the allegations outside of the Chamber. For the final question, Marc Garneau asked about a February 20th email that directed some PMO staff to assist Senator Duffy, and why were they still employed? Calandra insisted that the PM was clear that he wouldn’t have stood for these actions.
Roundup: Another underfunded procurement
As we await the Auditor General’s report, due next week, we hear that he is expected to report that the National Shipbuilding Programme doesn’t have enough money to fulfil its goals. Not that this should surprise us, as the constant delays and rising inflation have driven up the costs. Because this government has clearly done their bit for the procurement file every chance they get.
Roundup: Premiers still saying no to Kenney
The premiers met in Toronto yesterday, and the Canada Jobs Grant programme was again up for discussion, and it should be no great surprise that the premiers are still united in their opposition. In fact, they said that they are looking for some clear alternatives from Jason Kenney, if he is serious about there being flexibility in the programme. The premiers also wanted some clarity around foreign investment rules, never mind that Harper has previously said that he doesn’t want too much clarity in order to have wiggle room in the event that they want to block any acquisitions they find to be undesirable.
Roundup: Appalling arguments about federalism
Day two of the Senate reference hearings at the Supreme Court saw submissions from the rest of the provinces and territories (minus the Yukon) – some of whom had appallingly bad arguments, which the Justices picked apart to their logical ends – as well as Francophone groups and a couple of senators. The Francophone groups, in particular those outside of Quebec, pointed out the Senate’s role in protecting linguistic minorities that wouldn’t stand up the same way during elections. Senator Serge Joyal, however, had the most eloquent of all submissions so far, and as someone who was in the room when they drafted the constitution in 1982 and who helped draft the amending formula to it, he provided some much needed perspective, as well as on the entrenchment of the system of constitutional monarchy and Responsible Government that included two chambers in 1982 (hence why there is no mechanism to abolish the Senate – because it was unthinkable). Paul Wells points out that regardless of the arguments made to date, there is pretty much no chance that the Senate could be abolished, and that the reforms couldn’t happen without a constitutional amendment. Senator Elaine McCoy weighs in after the first day’s submissions, and calls out the government’s reform plans as red herrings.
Roundup: Brad Wall’s sound and fury signifying nothing
The news had the NDP crowing, but it’s a lot of sound and fury signifying almost nothing. Over in Saskatchewan, Brad Wall’s government decided to repeal their senate “nominee election” legislation, and pass a motion to declare that they are calling for Senate abolition. Which is all well and good, but that legislation was of dubious constitutionality since the Senate is federal jurisdiction, the selection of Senators explicitly spelled out in the constitution as a Governor-in-Council appointment, not to mention that Wall refused to actually hold these “elections” because Ottawa wouldn’t pay for them. And then there’s the fact that abolition would require the unanimous consent of the provinces to achieve. So Brad Wall set out a marker, for what it’s worth – but it’s hardly going to get any ball rolling, especially before the Supreme Court hears the reference case.
Roundup: Kenney and Rajotte back Wright
More signs of independent thought emerge within the Conservative caucus, as Jason Kenney has proclaimed that he’s still going to defend Nigel Wright’s character while Harper has taken the route of demonizing him in the wake of the whole ClusterDuff affair. Later in the day, James Rajotte joined that chorus. That Kenney, a minister, has a message deviating from Harper’s, is the third minister now who has had a different message from the boss, which John Geddes points out, is a blow for the notion of cabinet solidarity, which is a pretty fundamental notion in Responsible Government as the executive needs to speak with one voice. I’m not sure what it all means yet, but it’s certainly interesting – especially on the eve of a party convention where unity in the face of adversity will no doubt be the message that they are trying to put forward.