With it being an early end to the week in advance of Easter long weekend and a two-week constituency break, QP was held at the usual Friday time slot of 11 am. And while it was on a Friday schedule, there was better than usual Friday attendance, including one major leader — Thomas Mulcair. Mulcair led off by reading a rambling question about balancing the budget on the backs of the middle class. Andres Saxton responded by reading some talking points about the family tax cuts, and warned that the opposition would take them away. Mulcair made some digs about Senator Nancy Ruth, to which Candice Bergen responded with some non sequitur talking points about those same family tax cuts. Mulcair then read some concerns about the Future Shop job losses, and Pierre Poilievre got a turn about those same talking points. Charlie Angus then got up to ask an out of bounds question about Senate travel — which earned him a warning from the Speaker after the fact, to which Paul Calandra reminded the House about their satellite office spending, and then they had another go around of the same. Marc Garneau led off for the Liberals, demanding infrastructure spending, to which Poilievre gave the same response. Scott Brison took another go of it in English, and Candice Bergen got another turn to deliver the approved lines. Brison then noted the amount of government advertising dollars that could go toward creating summer jobs, but Pierre Poilievre delivered a tired “forty million dollars” line before returning to the family tax cut talking points.
Tag Archives: Fiscal Austerity
Roundup: $3 billion or else
Rarely does a day go by that the government doesn’t like to rub the Liberals’ noses in their past on defence spending, and that line “decade of darkness” is uttered. Never mind, of course, that it was Paul Martin that started the major recapitalisation of the Forces – no, the Conservatives like to take ownership of it. The problem is that all the money they poured into the Forces was almost immediately clawed back as their own spending restraints kicked in, most of the capital projects have been for naught thanks to botched procurement process after botched procurement process, and now, they’re facing the real killer – inflation. While sure, they may have poured in a high dollar amount of money at one point, those funds are being eaten away at by inflation as it goes unspent on said aforementioned capital projects, and it buys fewer and fewer ships and planes than it might have when it was supposed to go forward. Now, the Parliamentary Budget Officer is warning that the current spending is unsustainable, and unless the government can pour at least another $3 billion every year into the Forces, that they’re going to have to start cutting capabilities within three years. It must be pretty sobering, but even when these kinds of figures have been presented in the past, the government’s response is always “DECADE OF DARKNESS! MOST MONEY INTO THE FORCES EVER!” without those figures ever really bearing out. But hey, so long as they look like the only party to care about the armed forces, right?
Roundup: Cheap outrage and bad design
An op-ed in the Ottawa Citizen caught my eye yesterday, which talked about the reason why we get so much bad architecture here in the Nation’s Capital. Much of the government’s real estate is controlled by the department of Public Works, and there is a legitimate fear that anytime there’s good design, they’ll be criticised for spending money. And this is where I get both sad and angry (or “sangry,” as one fellow journo has dubbed). We have developed a culture of cheap outrage in this country, thanks to groups like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, and media outlets keen on cashing in on the cheap headlines that a high dollar figure out of context will generate. One of the worst offenders was Greg Weston, formerly of Sun News and later CBC (since retired from journalism). Anytime money was spent, well, he’d be all over how awful it was. New “temporary” committee rooms for Parliamentarians that have *gasp!* wood panelling! Millions of dollars! We can’t have that! (Never mind that “temporary” means something on the order of 20 years). The renovations to the West Block which includes the glassed-in courtyard that will house the temporary House of Commons? Millions of dollars! Outrageous! (Never mind that that same glassed-in courtyard will find new life as committee rooms after the Commons moves back to the Centre Block). Apparently it’s terrible if parliamentarians are not made to sit in portables during renovations, or that the context of those high dollar figures is something akin to them being halfway reasonable considering what has to go into that kind of work. How much do you expect a glass roof in keeping with the neo-Gothic architecture is supposed to cost anyway? It’s the same with the government selling off diplomatic residences and insisting that our ambassadors serve Ritz crackers and ginger ale at functions. Gods forbid that we actually put on a good face for stakeholders or visiting dignitaries, or even other Canadians to show a hint of prestige, that this is the national capital. No, anything that even hints at costing money must be treated as heresy. It’s sad that we perpetuate this mindset, and not reserve the outrage for legitimate boondoggles and wastes of money. No, instead we make it so that nobody can have nice things, and we all suffer as a result.
Roundup: London Liberal retreat
With the Liberals kicking off their winter caucus retreat in London, Ontario, there were some defensive press releases sent out by the local Conservative MP, and later by Joe Oliver regarding comments that Trudeau said about the economic situation in the region – a region that has seen a “lost decade” compared to the rest of the province. Trudeau did make remarks about the economy in the evening, and while he still won’t lay out policy planks, he can now claim that it’s been a prudent move because he hasn’t committed to any grand spending plans in a time of falling oil prices. That said, he has made infrastructure spending one of his priorities, something that Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne made an explicit call for while in Ottawa yesterday, to the tune of five percent of GDP. It’s ambitious, and this government isn’t exactly going to be receptive – look at how they continually pat themselves on the back for back-loading their infrastructure spending plans as is – but Wynne was making some interesting points that this didn’t have to be all money in the next fiscal year, but other options about leveraging surpluses when approaching the markets for capital loans. Add to that, but economists like Mike Moffatt have been talking about the need for better infrastructure in southwestern Ontario in order to help them regain their productivity – after all, it’s hard to get your manufacturing business off the ground if you can’t get high-speed Internet in the area. It will be interesting to see how this will all play out in the upcoming election.
Do we get to look forward to missives like these every time Justin Trudeau enters a Conservative riding? #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/I78AqYfqTO
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) January 20, 2015
So the solution is what? Keep pumping more subsidies into the sector? #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/KqdtgkvQWS
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) January 20, 2015
Roundup: Family-friendly has its consequences
It’s one of those kinds of piece that rolls around every few months, and Laura Payton has again taken a look at the toll to family life that an MP’s job takes, especially as several MPs have opted not to run again, citing that very reason. And that’s well and good, but the moment we get to talking about making Parliament more “family friendly,” we immediately start talking about things without acknowledging any of the very detrimental unintended consequences. Beyond better access to childcare on the Hill for MPs (as opposed to staffers), they immediately start talking about things like cancelling Friday sittings, electronic votes, and attending committees by video conference – all of which are actually terrible ideas. Losing Fridays would mean having to make up the time somewhere else, and since we’ve already cancelled evening sittings to make Parliament more “family friendly,” well, that’s out, and let’s face it – nobody wants to sit in July or August because Ottawa is pretty humid and gross – especially in some of those old stone buildings that aren’t very well air conditioned, never mind that MPs generally want to be on the barbecue circuit or spending time with said families now that their children are out of school. Electronic voting is also a bad idea because half of the point of Parliaments are the very important symbolism of having your representatives stand and be seen to be standing for what they believe in. An electronic tally may be more convenient, but it also damages the meaning of the act. The other reason why it’s terrible is because that’s one of the few times that MPs are all together in one place and can see each other and make contacts, whether that means cornering a minister about an issue that they need to have addressed, or simply building relationships. It’s the same with attending committee by video conference. You’re not forming those relationships either with fellow MPs, or with any of the witnesses appearing before you, and even while some witnesses to appear by video conference, that face-to-face contact and the conversations in the hallway afterward are all lost. Those are tremendously important. There are other ways for MPs to better schedule themselves, but already the parliamentary calendar has changed a lot to accommodate families and travel. The loss of evening sittings had a demonstrable impact on collegiality because MPs no longer ate dinner together. Losing more of that contact will have a crippling blow on the institution.
Roundup: A surprising defection
The NDP have lost another MP, but this time the defection is very surprising. Sudbury MP Glenn Thibeault has decided to leave federal politics and run for the provincial Liberals in that riding. Thibeault said that it was a long decision making process, and that he felt the Liberals’ plans for the region were something he felt strongly about, but then he hinted to CBC Sudbury that he was not seeing eye-to-eye with the federal NDP, and that’s when the warning lights go off – especially because Thibeault was caucus chair until a couple of weeks ago. He wouldn’t elaborate on that fact when later asked about it on Power & Politics, but it is still a big klaxon that all is not as it seems in the NDP caucus. Remember this is the caucus that is always united and solidarity in all things. When cracks form below the surface, it’s always a bit of interesting Kremlinology, and while clues may be hard to come by as to what the divisions are, the fact that they are present does add more grains of salt to the constant assurances that the party has never been more united – a phrase they trot out every time they lose another MP.
Roundup: An ignored anniversary
A very important anniversary passed yesterday that concerns our history and development as a country, but you didn’t hear a single MP remark on it in the Commons yesterday. It was the anniversary of the Statute of Westminster, which not only gave Canada full control over its foreign affairs – one of the final pieces of sovereignty from the United Kingdom that had not yet been transferred to our control – but more crucially was one of the defining moments in the independence of the Canadian Crown. The Statute helped solidify the notion that the Crown is divisible, and henceforth the same monarch would wear separate Crowns for each of the realms that he or she ruled. That’s why the Queen of Canada, the Queen of the UK and the Queen of Australia are separate legal entities even though Elizabeth II wears each hat. It’s one of the most fundamental underpinnings of our sovereignty and constitutional architecture, but not a single MP could be bothered to mention it. Well done, everyone. Also of note: Royal historian Carolyn Harris uses the discussion around the DNA of Richard III to remind us that our current Queen reigns by an Act of Parliament, not by divine right, which is a worthwhile lesson when it comes to how the modern monarchy works.
https://twitter.com/onshi/status/542685207938084864
Roundup: Backtracking and disowning
Having pretty much run out the parliamentary calendar for the year, Stephen Harper started dropping bombshells yesterday – some obvious, some subtle – as he answered questions in the Commons. The first was the more obvious one, that those long-promised oil and gas emissions regulations weren’t going to come anytime soon because the Americans weren’t onboard with them, and apparently it would be crazy – crazy! – to get a head start on them. It wasn’t a complete surprise, given that the Conservatives have mentioned needing a continental approach before, but the blanket refusal, wrapped up in this kind of “aww, shucks, I’m as disappointed as you guys – really!” approach, was what was new (and Paul Wells digs into that here). The other, more subtle bombshell, was Harper disowning the New Veterans Charter as he defended Julian Fantino’s disastrous handling of the Veterans Affairs file yesterday. As he was questioned about the government lawyers going to court to say that the “sacred obligation” to veterans was just political rhetoric, Harper shrugged it off saying that the New Veterans Charter at the centre of the legal dispute, which was implemented by his own government, was a “Liberal programme.” Nobody picked up on the significance of this disavowal during the remainder of QP enough to come back about it, and Harper won’t be in QP tomorrow either (nor will Trudeau or Mulcair for that fact), so there won’t be the ability to press him about just what he meant by it. And that’s probably how he wants it too as Parliament prepares to rise for the Christmas break.
QP: Trying to protect bureaucrats
After the government unveiled their much ballyhooed price gap legislation, it remained to be seen if that would lead off QP, or if Julian Fantino would remain in the line of fire. Before things got started, however, the two new Conservative MPs from the recent by-elections, Jim Eglinski and Pat Perkins, took their seats. Thomas Mulcair had not yet returned from Paris, leaving Peter Julian to lead off, asking about the US Senate torture report, and how CSIS and the RCMP could use information obtained by torture. Harper insisted it had nothing to do with Canada. Julian moved onto the veterans file and demanded the resignation of Julian Fantino, to which Harper said that the NDP were more interested in protecting bureaucrats and cutting services. Nycole Turmel was up next, and asked about processing times for EI applications, and the decision to hire temporary workers to clear the backlog. Jason Kenney responded that they were dedicated to giving good levels of service, and thanked his parliamentary secretary for the report on processing. Turmel tied in the Social Security Tribunal and the Temporary Foreign Workers programme, calling Kenney incompetent, but Kenney repeated Harper’s line that the NDP is averse to efficiencies. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the sacred obligation to veterans, wondering why the priority was a tax break for wealthy families instead of veterans. Harper insisted that they provide benefits to both families and veterans, and the current court case was against a previous Liberal programme. Trudeau listed a number of veterans programmes cut or underfunded by the government, to which Harper recited of list of programmes that he claimed the Liberals voted against before trotting out his line that they were trying to protect bureaucrats. Trudeau asked again in French, and Harper claimed that 100 of the jobs they eliminated existed solely to delay benefits payments. (Really?!)
Shorter Jason Kenney: OH NOES! Dozens of thousands of unionised government employees! #QP
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) December 9, 2014
Roundup: A largely fictitious distinction
While the battle over what’s happening at Veterans Affairs continues to rage, we are continually reassured by both the Prime Minister and the Original Series duotronic computer system known as Julian Fantino that we shouldn’t worry – that any cuts that have been made are all “back office” bureaucrats, and that front-line services haven’t been affected. Really! And while the example of cutting 12 photocopy clerks by moving to digitised medical records may be an example of those “back office” cuts, we should stop kidding ourselves – there is no neat dividing line between what is a front-line service position and a back-office bureaucrat because it’s the job of those bureaucrats to process the work of the front-line providers. If anything, this notion that back-office positions are being eliminated means anything, it’s that it forces more front-line workers to do the processing work themselves, essentially increasing their workload and making them less able to help veterans because they’re the ones busy processing the paperwork rather than focusing on the service aspect. Using the excuse of it being “back office” is largely a fictional distinction made for the sake of optics – but then again, that is the way that this government likes to operate, by photo op and announcement rather than by actual results, so this really should surprise nobody.