Tag Archives: Fiscal Austerity

Roundup: Scrutiny versus populist outrage

Posted on by

The government is backing another private members’ bill, this time about establishing a mandatory minimum sentence on kidnapping a person under 16 – despite the fact that a former Supreme Court justice calls this unnecessary and creating a more patchwork Criminal Code that increasingly is ad hoc and full of loopholes and inconsistencies. It’s like the government were going along with anything that sounded good without giving it proper thought or analysis. Oh, wait –that’s exactly what they’re doing. Who needs proper scrutiny when you’ve got populist outrage on your side?

Thomas Mulcair dismisses the premiers of Alberta, BC and Saskatchewan as “Harper’s messengers” when they go after him about his comments on the oil sands and our supposed “petro dollar.” Erm, okay. Because that makes sense. Paul Wells further dissects that particular line of thinking here.

Continue reading →

QP: Orwell was not a how-to manual

Posted on by

With the NDP now out to turn public opinion to their side on the omnibus budget bill, one wondered if this was going to lead off QP for the day. And in a sort of tangential sense it did, as Thomas Mulcair asked about Jim Flaherty’s comments that OAS changes could save $10 to $12 billion. Harper insisted there would be no actual pension reductions. Mulcair then turned to Flaherty’s “there are no bad jobs” comments with regards to EI changes – and several times was drowned out by Conservative applause when he repeated Flaherty’s statement. (And yet he kept repeating it and kept getting drowned out). After a warning from the Speaker, Mulcair finished and between that and two follow-up questions about how that also applied to seniors and the disabled, Harper insisted that Canada has a superior job creation record, and hey, they have a disabled member in the cabinet, so there’s nothing that disabled people can’t do. Bob Rae was up next, and brought up George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four and how it shouldn’t be a how-to manual for governments, and he related this to the kind of silencing of critics the government has been engaged in, whether it is with the National Round Table on Environment and the Economy, or any other number of NGOs or data-gathering organisations. Harper insisted that they were interested in administrative savings and doing away with duplication where the information these groups provide could be found elsewhere. For his final supplemental, Rae gave a nod to the Auditor General’s return to the Public Accounts committee and his assertion that the government wasn’t giving accurate numbers on the F-35s. Harper turned to his rote talking points about no contracts signed and no purchase having been made, and left it at that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Omnibudget off to committee

Posted on by

The omnibus budget bill has passed Second Reading without any procedural trickery, and is off to committee for study, while it also begins pre-study in a number of different Senate committees. The NDP, however, are promising “novel” ways to engage the public on the issue. My question is why it’s taken them two weeks to start engaging the public.

The reaction to John Baird’s outburst in QP yesterday that they were shutting down the National Round Table on Environment and the Economy because they didn’t like their recommendations has largely been “told you so.” (Said outburst included a slip where he said a carbon tax would “kill Canadians” when he obviously meant “kill jobs.”) While some people say that everything Baird says is calculated, I’m not so sure – this had a bit more of a tone of mocking and an attempt to goad the Liberals that may have backfired, and I suspect that he may have been given a stern talking to by PMO, and will be reading his responses during his next turn as back-up PM.

Continue reading →

QP: A comprehensive plan

Posted on by

Now that the NDP have declared procedural war on the omnibus budget bill, it quite predictably led off QP. Thomas Mulcair started off with a general question about omnibus legislation, reminding us about Young Stephen Harper’s dislike of them, but Harper was not moved, and instead called the bill a “comprehensive” approach to the Economic Action Plan™. Mulcair then moved on cuts to pensions, food inspection and border services, not that Harper was moved by them. For his last question, Mulcair asked about an incident where an ailing fisherman off the coast of Newfoundland’s radio medical services call was routed to Rome, Italy, and how the government would be putting the lives of Canadians in jeopardy. Harper simply told Mulcair to read the budget, as there were no changes on that file. Bob Rae picked up on that non-answer, and was this time answered by the responsible minister, Keith Ashfield, who insisted that an internationally recognised service provider was used as a backup, as always. Rae moved back to the omnibus budget, and the new powers of that cabinet will be gaining as part of the legislated changes, and called the move “dictatorial.” Harper shrugged it off, and spoke about how much clarity investors will get from these environmental changes – which probably speaks volumes.

Continue reading →

QP: No warpath, just general questions

Posted on by

One would have thought that with the Conservatives having rejected the NDP formal request to split the omnibus budget implementation bill that Thomas Mulcair would be on the warpath. But no – he instead started off QP by asking a fairly broad question about the bill and its large environmental component, and Harper answered with a general response about the need to “streamline” review processes. Mulcair then went to the issue of the demise of the Public Appointments Commission in said bill, and he got into a back-and-forth with Harper about the NDP voting to kill it (never mind that it was a non-binding motion rejecting the proposed commissioner). Matthew Kellway then got up to ask about the updated cost figures from the F-35s, and Julian Fantino got up for the first time in ages to assure the House that there is not only a Seven-Point Plan™, but rather a Seven-Point Action Plan™ for the procurement process. Bob Rae rose for the Liberals, and went after the government for their using the CRA to investigate charities they don’t like, never mind that ones they do like get hundreds of thousands of dollars in foreign donations. Harper insisted that the CRA is an arm’s length agency and that charities have to operate within clear limits.

Continue reading →

QP: Polite requests to split the omnibudget

Posted on by

With Thomas Mulcair away, it was up to Nathan Cullen to lead the NDP for Question Period today. After this morning’s presser to put the government on notice that they were going to make a formal request to split the budget bill, Cullen asked a trio of questions about just that – splitting said budget bill. And lo and behold, James Moore – in his capacity as Deputy PM du jour – rose to say that this budget bill was getting more debate than any other in history. Peggy Nash rose to ask the very same thing, calling the bill a “Trojan Horse,” though I’m not quite sure it’s an apt analogy considering it’s not being used to breach any impenetrable walls as the Conservatives have a majority anyway. Regardless, both Jim Flaherty and Diane Finley dismissed Nash’s concerns considering all of the good things in the bill. Bob Rae got up and asked how it was that the government could cut mental health services to Canadian Forces personnel in light of their much-touted support for the troops. Moore talked about how Canada spends more helping its soldiers than any other NATO ally, but didn’t really answer the question. For his last supplemental, Rae asked about the forthcoming meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur on Food, but Moore responded by listing some of the great progress the government has made with First Nations issues.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Six days of debate

Posted on by

So you know that 420-ish page omnibus budget bill, that affects some fifty Acts, completely rewrites the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the Fisheries Act, the Species At Risk Act, removes the Inspector General from CSIS, disappears the immigration backlog and all manner of other measures? Has been subjected to time allocation. The government, feeling generous, is giving it some six days of debate, which really means twenty-something hours in the House at Second Reading, which is hardly anything at all for a bill of this magnitude. The Senate at least will begin pre-studying the bill next week and actually breaking it up into appropriate committees, which the Commons won’t be doing (though as a half-measure, the government will allow a sub-committee at Finance to study all of those environmental changes, which I’m sure will last all of a week, tops). I think John Ivison put it best:

It makes you wonder: What is the point of Parliament? Why not have one whopper of a bill once a year, allow MPs to give it a cursory skim and then send them back to their constituencies to do the ceremonial work of opening supermarkets and attending Rotary barbecues?

If the abuse of time allocation and omnibus legislation continues, that may very well be the way things are headed.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Retroactively changing the facts

Posted on by

The Department of National Defence quietly amended a tabled parliamentary report on the F-35s under the guise of a correcting a “typographical error” when in fact they were changing a significant line about the status of the procurement. With nothing more than a quiet amendment notice on the Treasury Board website, they changed the status from “definitions” phase to “options analysis,” which is really significant. And they did it quietly, hoping nobody would notice – because nobody has anything to hide on how badly this whole file has been handled. Meanwhile, the name of the new procurement secretariat has officially been changed so that it isn’t specifically to procure F-35s, but rather is now the “national fighter procurement secretariat.” And University of Ottawa defence analyst Philippe Lagassé wants the opposition to ask better questions about the fighter since they keep getting distracted by shiny things and missing the real point – which of course is why a rigged process was allowed to happen and why due diligence was not followed.

Today in voter suppression news, an American Republican operative who was convicted and spent time in jail over improper calls says that the various misleading calls here were likely imported American tactics, and that it looks like a systemic and sophisticated operation. Over in the bid to overturn the results of the Etobicoke Centre election, it appears there are missing voter registration certificates, which could point to some improper votes being cast – enough to have changed the outcome. Meanwhile, over in Eglinton-Lawrence, it looks like a flyer was going around trying to get some improper votes cast on behalf of Jewish voters (not that the margin is enough to challenge in court).

DND looks to be set to chop mental health monitors and PTSD monitors. Because that sounds like a genius idea, not to mention totally “supporting our troops.”

What’s that? Major pipeline projects could face lengthy court challenges in the absence of robust environmental assessments? You don’t say!

Liberal Party president Mike Crawley indicates there are likely to be six or seven interested candidates in the upcoming leadership race – whenever it actually kicks off.

Here’s a look at Elizabeth May’s first year in Parliament.

Alison Crawford looks at the use of private members’ business to push through government business – not that it’s what they’re doing with the Woodworth motion.

The Conservatives’ latest proposed elder abuse television spots were panned by focus groups as being “too creepy” and the “worse commercials ever.” Yikes!

And the Procedure and House Affairs committee has tabled its report on the whole Anonymous vs. Vic Toews issue, and basically finds that they can’t do anything about it. Case closed.

QP: The most pressing business of the nation

Posted on by

After a morning of speeches and a whole lot of self-congratulation all around, the NDP decided that the most pressing business of the nation, the one topic to lead off Question Period, for which they are holding the government to account, was that of Conrad Black’s return to Canada. Or rather, as the framing device that they employ says, “notorious British criminal” Conrad Black, or “British citizen Lord Black of Crossharbour” in their subsequent press releases. While this is factually true, it’s still a framing device that they’re employing. And while Mulcair didn’t play the race card today, Harper still called him on yesterday’s usage, and chastised Mulcair for denigrating the work of public servants. Mulcair then moved onto the report about the big bill for the overtime paid to cabinet ministers’ limo drivers, but Harper dodged and touted the country’s economic performance instead. Charlie Angus picked up from here, and yes, Team Decorum still employs the epithets of “Muskoka Minister” when he goes after Tony Clement. Clement, by the way, cited that they were living within the rules and paying out the overtime owed to their drivers per their collective agreement, and hey, these cabinet ministers work long hours. So there. Bob Rae closed off the leaders’ round with a trio of questions about the contradiction in how the Deputy Minister of Defence can dispute the Auditor General’s findings but the government agreeing with the report, but Harper parsed and equivocated, and insisted that Rae was mistaken as to who said what.

Continue reading →

QP: Decisive Action on apples and oranges

Posted on by

Question Period began innocently enough. Thomas Mulcair read out his trio of questions around an admission that Peter MacKay had made that cabinet knew of the alleged two sets of books on the F-35s, and Harper chided him about comparing apples and oranges, and Jack Harris and Peter MacKay had two more rounds of the very same, MacKay asserting that he was talking about the process of decisions flowing through cabinet, but since they AG’s report, they’ve taken “decisive action.” Bob Rae, a bit hoarse, got up to ask about the Deputy Minister of Defence telling the Public Accounts committee that the AG “got it wrong,” and the lingering question about how deputy ministers can disagree with a report that the government says it agrees with, but Harper insisted that Rae was the one getting it wrong, and talked up about how they were proceeding with an oversight committee on the acquisition. Stéphane Dion closed the round by asking the government to withdraw its unconstitutional Senate “reform” bill, but Harper got up and instead of answering the substance of the question, touted the latest Senate “consultation election” in Alberta. Because who needs to worry about the constitution?

Continue reading →