Tag Archives: François-Philippe Champagne

Roundup: The problem with giving everyone a title

Posted on by

There has been a lot of talk over the past few days about the choices that Pierre Poilievre made with announcing a shadow Cabinet as large as he did, and lo, the CBC had even more commentary over the weekend about it. Suffice to say, I’m not sure I really buy the take of “it gives everyone something to do.” Why? For starters, the whole point of a shadow Cabinet, particularly as it is practiced in the UK, is to have people who are ready to go into ministries if there is a change of government, and these are people who know their files, and can slot into the positions easily and quickly. That doesn’t really happen in Canada because our Cabinets have a lot of other considerations in play, such as regional composition, and balance with gender and other diversity, but region is the big one, and therefore, we can’t really have people ready to go into ministries because we don’t know how the regional dynamics will play at a time when they form government. (This is one reason why I’m not keen on calling critics “shadow ministers,” because they don’t have the same function). If you give everyone jobs that are not related to how Cabinet is composed, you’re not really living up to the purpose, particularly if you’re assigning made-up portfolios to certain MPs to exercise their hobby-horses as a reward for loyalty, even though as a reward goes, it’s not much because there is no added pay that goes with it.

My other problem, however, is that MPs already have a lot of work that they’re already not really doing, and many of them have offloaded those responsibilities on to independent Officers of Parliament, and that’s a problem. Committee work is supposed to take up the bulk of an MP’s time, but if they’re playing “shadow minister” for their hobby horses, they’re spending less time doing the work in committee or elsewhere that they’re supposed to be doing. There is also participation-trophy syndrome at play, where (almost) everyone gets a title (but not pay), even though we should remember that backbenchers are supposed to play important accountability roles in our parliamentary system. If we’re training the caucus to all expect titles and roles and not that they have jobs to do as backbenchers, we’re really weakening the ability of our parliament to do its job, and that is worrying. Not that the current crop of MPs in the Commons seems to care much about Parliament and its ability to function correctly, and this goes for all parties (and it’s really not helped when the prime minister has been a constitutional vandal when it comes to the Senate and the role it plays). This is a problem, and we should be talking about it, rather than patting Poilievre on the back for such a “strategic” move.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 235:

Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk say that their mayor’s office was hit by a rocket, which the Ukrainian military has not claimed responsibility for, while Russian rockets struck the town across from the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Over the weekend, a missile strike seriously damaged an energy facility near Kyiv,

https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1581636027487178754

Continue reading →

Roundup: The aftermath of Fiona

Posted on by

In the wake of Hurricane Fiona battering the East Coast, Justin Trudeau has cancelled his trip to Japan for Shinzo Abe’s funeral, and has been convening meetings of the Incident Response Group in order to coordinate federal efforts for assistance. Provincial requests for military assistance have all been approved, and there are constant assurances that yes, the federal government will help rebuild, and there are already provisions in place for that to happen.

Meanwhile, thousands have been without power, and at least one fatality has been recorded. It is expected to be a slow recovery because of the scale of the damage (some photos here).

 

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 214:

While Russia’s sham referendums continue in occupied territories in Ukraine, they have resumed shelling civilian targets. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling Russia’s decision to mobilize reserves and conscripts as a sign of weakness, and offers safety to those who surrender. Protests are continuing in Russia against the mobilization.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Grifters fail to secure Trudeau’s resignation

Posted on by

While the organisers and the American mouthpieces they fed their PR to claimed that the grifter convoy would see 50,000 trucks and 1.5 million people descending upon Ottawa (a city of a million people over a fairly vast geography), it was a couple of hundred trucks, and a couple of thousand people—nothing even remotely close to a Canada Day in the Before Times. Some are saying it was relatively peaceful in that there were no riots, but its denizens were certainly belligerent and forced the closure of the mall near Parliament Hill, along with many other businesses in the area, most of whom will remain closed today. Liquor stores in the area were also closed because of the same belligerence, and the honking rarely ceased all weekend. (The Ottawa Citizen has a rolling blog of events over the weekend here, while Justin Ling has the definitive account of the event and its lead-up).

The reckoning for certain Conservative MPs will begin soon enough, particularly Michael Cooper, as he was filmed talking to reporters while in front of an up-side down Canadian flag that had a swastika on it. (Not-so-fun fact: swastikas were doing double-duty over the weekend, both sported by extremists like those who organised the event, while others were using them to denounce the government as being Nazis, because nothing says sore loser like calling the prime minister in a hung parliament after a free and fair election a tyrannical dictator). Cooper insists it’s not his fault there were swastikas around, and that he’s the victim here—erm, except he knew damn well that extremists organised this event and that these kinds of symbols and flags always turn up at these events, so it would have been better for him not to show up at all. (Reminder: Cooper is also the guy who read the New Zealand mosque shooter’s manifesto into the record at committee, because reasons). Also, I cannot wait for all of those Conservative MPs to have a meltdown about the grifters who urinated on the Cenotaph at the National War Memorial, the way they did when that rando did it on Canada Day in 2006. Because they’ll have the same reaction, right?

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1487763389522849795

As for what happens next, we’ll see. It already started to peter out yesterday because there’s a) nothing to do, and b) they’re accomplishing nothing. The extremist organisers insist they’ll stay there until all of the vaccine mandates are rescinded (good luck with that—they’re mostly provincial jurisdiction), and that the government resign, and even more, that the Liberal Party is dismantled. Yeah, that’s not going to happen, buddy. Police became way more visible on Sunday, and the play seems to be that they let these grifters have their fun and make their on Saturday, then made their presence known in a big way on Sunday, so that if they’re not gone by the end of Monday, they’ll start taking action. But we’ll see. Nevertheless, this is a big waste of everyone’s time, and everyone is out of patience.

Meanwhile in Alberta, a smaller convoy headed to the province’s legislature on Saturday, while a separate group of trucks blockaded a southern border crossing. It took a day for Jason Kenney to condemn said blockade, but after all of the noise he made supporting the original grifter convoy only for its same proponents to turn on him and his province is pretty much fitting. Kenney keeps thinking he’s the smartest guy in the room and can outrun the fires he starts to pretend like he’s putting them out, but once again, he’s getting burned.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A late start isn’t an extra week off

Posted on by

I’m not sure whether it’s because it’s a very, very slow news season, or if the basic knowledge of how Parliament works is that lacking, but we got a lot of really bad headlines yesterday about how the Senate plans to take an “extra week off.” Which is not actually true, and distorts the situation. And in some cases, it’s being spun this way by certain media suspects completely out of bad faith, because anytime they can badmouth the Senate they’ll grab the opportunity and run.

To clarify: The Senate does not have a fixed sitting schedule the way the House of Commons does, and in no way are they bound to match the sitting schedule, because they do different work, and the timelines are different. The Senate frequently doesn’t convene at the same time as the House of Commons after the winter or summer break because they simply don’t have enough work on their Order Paper to justify it. They passed all of the bills that the Commons sent to them before they adjourned for the break, so coming back at the same time makes no sense—especially when they are competing for IT resources and interpreters with the Commons in the current hybrid context (which has, frankly, screwed the Senate over, but they’ve also allowed it to happen). More to the point, there are many years where the Senate will sit for weeks after the Commons rises for its break, and they will have break weeks out of sync with the Commons every now and again because their workloads are different. But this isn’t communicated effectively, either by the Senate itself, or by the media reporting on it—and it most especially isn’t communicated or even mentioned by the bad faith actors whose only agenda is to paint the Senate in a bad light. It’s disappointing, but not unexpected.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An unsuccessful distraction attempt

Posted on by

Erin O’Toole emerged from hiding yesterday, and tried to set the narrative of the day about a supposed scary coalition between the Liberals and the NDP – which isn’t happening. A coalition government means that both parties have Cabinet ministers at the table, and given that we just had the dog and pony show of a Cabinet shuffle not two weeks ago, and there was nary an NDP MP among them, we can be reasonably assured that there will be no coalition government. Nevertheless, even a supply and confidence agreement, or some other arrangement, remains unlikely in the extreme because the Liberals know the NDP are in a vulnerable position, broke an unable to afford another election, so they will ensure the government survives regardless – there is no need to give them any leverage or excuse to try and take credit for the government’s actions (not that anything has stopped them thus far).

But while O’Toole tried to make big noises about the “coalition” that isn’t and never will be, he was trying to deflect from the ongoing problem in his party around MPs like Marilyn Gladu and Leslyn Lewis, who have been stoking vaccine hesitancy (while insisting otherwise), conceding that they have “caused confusion,” which is just more soft-peddling and mealy-mouthed refusal to take leadership or to put his foot down. Indeed, when asked about whether there would be any discipline for these remarks, O’Toole stated that they would deal with it “as a team,” which basically means that no, he’s not going to do anything about it.

While my upcoming column will delve further into just why O’Toole refuses to put his foot down, Gladu can insist all she wants that this isn’t a challenge of O’Toole’s leadership, the simple fact is that she continues to undermine it at every opportunity, and that is going to eventually erode what little trust or credibility O’Toole has left.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Time to change the dress code?

Posted on by

NDP MP Randall Garrison is pushing for the House of Commons to update is dress code, in particular around the gendered rules that men need to wear a jacket and tie in the Chamber in order to speak and vote. Part of Garrison’s stated motivation is to make it easier for future trans and non-binary MPs, even though accommodations are already routinely made, such as allowing Indigenous MPs to wear beaded necklaces or other symbols in place of a tie. I don’t see why it would be any different to accommodate a trans or non-binary MP in a similar manner without any fuss – a mere notice to the Speaker would suffice.

On the one hand, there is a certain amount of archaic assumption in the “contemporary business attire” around jackets and ties for men, and only men – there is no dress code for women in the Chamber (and these rules apply to those of us who sit in the Press Gallery in the Chamber, incidentally). Business attire in the current context is starting to slide down the scale – particularly in this era of work-from-home – so I’m leery of loosening the restrictions too much, particularly as it is not beyond the realm of possibility that you would have a bunch of MPs in track suits, yoga or sweat pants, hoodies, and mom jeans (and I have seen male MPs in mom jeans with jacket and tie in the Chamber, which was not a pleasant sight). Printed t-shirts are also a very real concern, because we will immediately slip into them being used as props, particularly during Members’ Statements, and we do not want that to happen. On the same token, I wouldn’t have minded imposing a few more rules for women in the Chamber, such as mandating jackets as part of “business attire,” because sometimes the definitions of what constitutes “business attire” for some female MPs has been particularly…challenging. (Flashback to the old Megan Leslie Outfit Watch on my former blog).

I get that ties suck. I really do. I used to really hate them, but I’ve somewhat reluctantly grown to accept them and now I have no issue with it. And once we’re into late May and early June and the humidity starts to climb, wearing suits is not fun (and whereas I have threatened to show up to the Gallery in shorts and sandals – but with jacket and tie – one reporter has actually done so and was my hero for the day). But at the same time, I think there should be some kinds of standards, for both men and women, because frankly there can be a demonstrated lack of both maturity and good taste among MPs and there need to be some guidelines. Can they be loosened a little? Sure, that should be okay, and maybe we won’t require a tie at all times – within reason. It does merit a discussion in any case.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An errant tweet begets irresponsible reporting

Posted on by

As I reserve the right to grouse about bad journalism, I’m going to call out a particularly egregious CBC article that appeared over the weekend about a deleted tweet about a judicial appointment, and the way in which the story was framed, being that said potential judge was a donor to the justice minister’s nomination campaign and later to the riding association. The fact that a tweet was made and quickly deleted because the appointment process was not completed is bad form, and embarrassing for the minister’s office, but it need not be a sign that there is anything improper going on if you look at the facts in their totality. But that’s not what happened. Instead, the article omitted any context about how the appointment process is made, framed it like the minister is appointing his donors out of patronage, and got quotes from the Ethics Commissioner to “prove” that the conflict of interest rules are too lax.

The minister does not get to appoint anyone he wants on his rolodex. I mean on paper he has that ability, and constitutionally it’s his responsibility, but in practice it’s not how it works. The judicial appointments process – and I have written extensively about this – starts with lawyers applying to Judicial Appointments Committees in provinces, who then vet them and those which are deemed “Recommended” and “Highly Recommended” are forwarded to the minister’s office. At that point, there is a political vetting process because the government is politically accountable for these appointments if they go bad, but this particular process has been routinely mischaracterised both by media and the opposition – so much so that they have dragged in others on this point. In this case, it is likely that the candidate in question had passed the JAC and was forwarded to the minister’s office as either Recommended or Highly Recommended, and it was in the process of the political vetting when the errant tweet was made, but by deliberately omitting the role of the JACs in these appointments, the CBC article deliberately created a false impression for the sake of building their narrative.

It’s a problem when the media refuses to report this particular situation properly, with context of how appointments work, because they are more interested in a narrative that there is either rampant patronage, or that any lawyer who wants to be a judge should never donate to any party ever for fear of somehow tainting themselves. Political donations are part of how our system works, and it’s not a sign that someone is either a rampant partisan, or that they are trying to buy a judgeship – as the CBC seems to be alleging – especially given the donation limits in this country. Whether that is because there is an element of American political envy here, where we want to feel like we have the same problem of money in politics like they do (seriously, we do not), or whether there is a particular streak of misplaced moralism, in either case the reporting is tainted, and it’s completely irresponsible.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Budget cuts and accountability for advice

Posted on by

There was an interesting piece in the Globe and Mail yesterday where a couple of former top doctors enumerated some of the problems at the Public Health Agency of Canada that have been festering for years in spite of repeated warnings, which started creeping in with the budget cuts that started in 2011, and which were compounded with the loss of scientific capacity to the point where the president who just resigned had no scientific background at all. Which isn’t to say that you necessarily need someone with a science background in an administrative position like that (as opposed to the Chief Public Health Officer, which is a different kettle of fish entirely), but it points to some of the ways in which the civil service in this country has been losing capacity for a while. Suffice to say, it would appear to point to the fact that the current government wasn’t paying enough attention to what was going on at PHAC, though to be fair, there has been a fair bit on their plates, as they were dealing with medically assisted dying, legalised cannabis, and completely restructuring First Nations and Inuit healthcare delivery, which were all health-related files. The fact that emergency stockpiles weren’t being properly managed has come up repeatedly, but this does start with the cuts made under the Harper government.

Meanwhile in Queen’s Park (where premier Doug Ford made cuts to public health before the pandemic began), there is a piece in the Star that starts to ascertain just who is as the premier’s “health command table,” and ascertains that it’s Ford pulling all the strings and making all of the decisions. Which is as it should be – any “command table” should be merely advisory, because in our system of government, Cabinet makes the decisions, and Cabinet gets to wear them. I worry that trying to expose who is at this table will try to blame them for the advice they’re giving to Ford, rather than Ford making decisions on that advice – particularly when we’ve seen him ignore advice on things like school re-openings. There is a debate to be had about the transparency around the advice being given, so that we can ascertain whether or not Ford is actually following it, which I get, but I also wonder if there isn’t also a need for that table to be a place of frank discussion without it all coming out in the press – like why we have Cabinet confidentiality. And it’s a fair debate to be had, but again, let me reiterate that this is 100 percent on Ford, no matter what advice he may or may not be getting. That’s how Responsible Government works, and we need to quit finding ways to give Ford a pass, or an out on his shite decision-making.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More deficit vapours

Posted on by

The deficit pearl-clutchers have continued their parade through the op-ed pages of the nation, and some of them worry that the government’s planned green and inclusive recovery package could cost *Dr. Evil finger* ONE HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS! Some of the usual suspects are getting the vapours over this, so here are a couple of reality checks to start your long weekend off with. Enjoy.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1301931200152567809

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1301933193436819456

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1301933884750401536

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1301944987043627012

Continue reading →

Roundup: Alberta’s big budget hole

Posted on by

Alberta released a fiscal update yesterday, and it was pretty abysmal, projecting a record-breaking $24.2 billion deficit. The problem? Was that the province’s finance minister spent much of it lying to the legislature and Albertans about the state of their books going into the pandemic, not to mention not having a real plan for the recovery. But it to put some of the staggering numbers in context, the province is taking in more revenue from gambling, alcohol and cannabis than they are from oil revenues – you know, what they have based their economy on. Meanwhile, their non-existent recovery plan is bro-heavy, and they still insist that they have a spending problem on services rather than a revenue problem from having the lowest tax rate in the country and no sales tax – and you know that’s going to mean the province is looking to slash and burn services, and they’ve already started by picking fights with doctors in the middle of a global pandemic, and those doctors are already shutting down their clinics and moving away. So yeah, Alberta’s got problems.

Economists Andrew Leach and Lindsay Tedds have more, starting with this preview thread by Leach that set the stage for the speech of lies that was to come.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1299171987655327744

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1299173816577347584

Continue reading →