Tag Archives: Immigration

Roundup: Munk debate a success

Posted on by

The Munk Debate on foreign policy was actually really well done – probably the best and most substantive debate we’ve had so far during this election, with a good format, good moderation, and bilingualism that more or less worked out (though there could have been a bit more effort into the French). (Kady’s liveblog here). We also started to see a bit more of a change in the leaders. Harper was more or less his usual self, and in foreign policy, well, he’s got ten years of experience, but he also has a record to defence. Trudeau stepped up his game in this debate, and was the most confident and self-assured he’s been of any debate. The improvement was marked, and given the low expectations going in, where people figured that foreign policy was his weakest area (especially as it’s where most of his notable gaffes going into the election were), but those fears were largely put to rest. As for Mulcair, people expecting a statesmanlike performance were largely dashed as he tended to more personal attacks and swipes, while avoiding a number of answers – possibly because his party’s foreign policy platform is the thinnest of the three. Trudeau also defended his father’s record from attacks by Mulcair, and seemed to have a few of his best moments doing so, and it did get notice over the Twitter Machine. (It was also, he noted the fifteenth anniversary of his father’s death, so that certainly did weigh on his mind at the time). Here is some debate reaction from Michael Den Tandt, the Ottawa Citizen’s panel, and over Twitter, Bob Rae (who was subject of another of Mulcair’s swipes on stage). Oh, and audience polls seem to indicate that Trudeau was the big winner. Make of that what you will.

https://twitter.com/carbonexplorer/status/648663698819694592

https://twitter.com/kateheartfield/status/648657546933325824

Continue reading →

Roundup: Two senators are not enough

Posted on by

After Thomas Mulcair indicated that he’d been approached by a couple of Senators who would be willing to help him pass his agenda, we now get a couple of names – Liberal Senator Larry Campbell, and Conservative Senator Nancy Ruth, though the latter isn’t talking about it (and personally I wonder why she would volunteer considering how shoddily she’s been treated by the NDP after she made that joke about camembert, and yes, it was a joke). But it’s not quite as cut-and-dried as Mulcair seemed to make it out to be. Campbell, in an interview with CBC, said he’d be willing to ensure that bills get due credit, but that’s not exactly putting oneself in the position of shepherding through an entire NDP agenda. I also have my doubts when Campbell says that the Senate doesn’t need a leader of the government and a leader of the opposition, largely because it clashes with our system of Responsible Government. The current framework allows for Senators to hold the government to account in the way that MPs can, by asking questions of a member of cabinet – nominally the leader of the government in the Senate, never mind the fact that Harper’s current leader is not in cabinet because he churlishly is trying to distance himself from the Senate. And one of the most underrated ways in which Senators perform this accountability is in the leader’s ability to take questions on notice and provide written responses. Losing this ability would be a blow to the Senate’s accountability function, which is a vital part of their role of Sober Second Thought. You need answers from government if you are to properly consider their legislative agenda, and losing that conduit is going to hamper that ability. Campbell and Senate Liberal whip Jim Munson also mused about making the Senate Speaker elected by the chamber, but I’m not sure how easily this can be accomplished considering that the Senate Speaker has duties beyond what the Commons Speaker does in terms of protocol and diplomatic duties, which is one of the reasons it’s a Governor-in-Council appointment. He or she is the “Queen’s man” (or woman as the case may be) for a reason, and there may be a lot of hoops to jump through in order to make that change. I’m not saying it’s not doable, but it may not be easily doable – particularly if you have an NDP prime minister who has no interest in doing anything for the Senate. Suffice to say, it’s not enough for Mulcair to use these couple of senators as an excuse to ignore his constitutional obligations.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The big infrastructure spend

Posted on by

It all being official that the Liberals are willing to run a small deficit in order to finance infrastructure spending in the hopes of boosting a stalled economy have turned the election into one with some real differences between parties, which incidentally seems to have also energised Harper’s performance at his own stops. The issue for the Liberals would seem to be now not only having to sell the idea of deficits – which they are attempting to do with the line of being the only party that’s being honest about the current state of the nation’s finances – but ensuring that the infrastructure spending they’re doing is going to be actually useful in the longer term. Sure, there is a big infrastructure deficit in this country for which this new funding is but a drop in the bucket, but if he wants to ensure that this is the kind of kick that will grow the economy, it should be in things that will have bigger impact – port infrastructure to get goods to market, ensuring that there is the kind of broadband access in places that need it to grow their business and attract investment, and so on. It shouldn’t be about short-term stimulus, lest the Liberals repeat the mistakes of the Conservatives in 2009-10. Not unsurprisingly, Toronto mayor John Tory and the president of the Canadian Federation of Municipalities both liked the announcement as it means more money for cities. Former PCO Clerk Kevin Lynch talks about the need for fiscal policy rather than just relying on monetary policy to try to grow the economy – and includes infrastructure spending as an example. Kevin Milligan examines the case for infrastructure spending at this time, and finds there is a plausible case for it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Fobbing off your work to the Senate

Posted on by

With MPs having gone home for the summer to start the campaign in earnest (well, not including the one in six who aren’t running again), the Senate is still hard at work to get through the last of the government’s agenda before they rise. Included in this are three bills that were passed at all stages in the dying days. Now, none of these are controversial so far as we can see, but the fact that they were all rammed through on a voice vote with zero debate is not exactly an encouraging trend. More to the point, it forces the actual due diligence onto the Senate, which is their job, but once again, it seems that they’re doing the work that MPs can’t be bothered to do because they’re too busy doing things like holding concurrence debates on nine-month old Health committee reports on the dangers of marijuana (never mind that said report was a sham rammed through the committee thanks to the government’s majority, and that it ignored the bulk of witness testimony) in order to try and hammer the Liberals on their pot policy. Because that’s an effective use of time. It’s also extremely ironic that the NDP insists the Senate does no valuable work ad should be abolished – and yet they once again fobbed off their work to the Senate to deal with because they couldn’t be bothered. There is no such thing as unflawed legislation, and it’s the job of MPs to scrutinise it in order to hold the government to account. But for a party who believes so strongly in the infallibility of the House of Commons that they don’t want an upper chamber, they gave bills a free pass with zero debate. Wow. Way to go there, guys. Really showing that you’re taking your jobs seriously, and that you’re doing the job of accountability like the official opposition is supposed to. Kind of like how they’ve taken to fobbing off their homework to the Parliamentary Budget Officer. It’s behaviour like that that undermines the NDP’s whole argument for Senate abolition – not that I mind. But MPs should be embarrassed when they pass any legislation with zero scrutiny. You’re just making the case for your own growing irrelevance, which serves nobody’s interests.

Continue reading →

QP: One last scattershot attempt

Posted on by

It was likely the final Commons Question Period of the 41st Parliament (but it looks like not), and not a moment too soon. Not unsurprisingly, most of the leaders have already fled for the pre-writ campaign trail, with the exception of Elizabeth May, who dutifully remains at her desk until the bitter end. Megan Leslie led off, raising the moral issue of climate change per the Pope’s encyclical, but turned it into an NDP pitch instead of a question. Leona Agulkkaq chose a climate change talking point and recited it dutifully. Leslie then moved to the issue of sexual harassment in the military, to which James Bezan rose to denounce the comments made by the Chief of Defence Staff and to note that the wheels were already in motion for a change of command. Leslie asked for an inquiry into missing and murdered Aboriginal women, to which Kellie Leitch insisted that they were taking action. Niki Ashton picked up, denounced the government and raised a report on the wage gap between First Nations and other Canadians. Bernard Valcourt noted the measures the government has taken to improve the lives of First Nations. Ashton then raised a plethora of social issues faced by First Nations children and asked a rhetorical question about the government discriminating against them. Valcourt insisted that they were taking action to improve their lives. Ralph Goodale led for Liberals, decrying the government’s economic performance to which Kevin Sorenson read some talking points about lowering taxes and the Liberals raising them. Goodale dug in, but Sorenson repeated his usual talking points about how great ever high was. Dominc LeBlanc took the final slot to further the condemnation in the other official language, to which Candice Bergen stood up to defend the government’s record of keeping promises.

Continue reading →

QP: Like a greatest hits package 

Posted on by

All of the leaders were present today, for probably the last time in the 41st parliament. And hey, government computer systems were under a cyberattack as it went off, so that was exciting. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking about General Lawson’s comments on “biological wiring” as it relates to sexual harassment in the military and what the government would do about it. Harper denounced the comments and noted that Lawson apologised immediately and that they would implement the recommendations of Justice Deschamps. Mulcair asked again in English, demanding a personal commitment by the PM to changing the culture of the military, but Harper repeated his response but cautioned Mulcair against slurs against all members of the military. Mulcair then changed topics to the RCMP deletion of those gun registry records and wondered about the PMO role in encouraging them to do so. Harper insisted that they acted under the law. Mulcair then brought up the Senate audit, and wondered about the residency of Senator Carolyn Stewart Olsen (who was not named in said audit). Harper, a bit testy, brought up the NDP satellite offices. Mulcair turned to another senator’s mileage claims, to which Harper said that they were inventing things and reminded them of the satellite offices again. Justin Trudeau was up next, returning to the issue of sexual harassment in the military, and wondered why the PM would not immediately dismiss the Chief of Defence Staff for comments that he himself condemned. Harper returned to his previous response, following a dig at Trudeau. A second round in French got the same response again, and for his final question, Trudeau touted his plans for a revised Supreme Court appointment process, and rhetorically asked why the PM doesn’t commit to appointing bilingual judges. Harper insisted that the institution was already bilingual, and not every member was required to be.

https://twitter.com/davidakin/status/611239298713698305

Continue reading →

QP: More reconciliation scripts

Posted on by

Even though it was a Wednesday, all of the party leaders were off in Rideau Hall for the closing ceremony of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. That left Megan Leslie to lead off, asking about the refusal of the government to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Mark Strahl responded by reading a talking point about those rights already being entrenched in the constitution. Leslie listed off the various ways in which the government was failing Aboriginals, to which Strahl listed their successes, like the apology and striking the TRC in the first place. Leslie demanded the education funding gap for First Nations be closed, and Strahl read a condemnation of the attitudes that gave rise to the residential schools. Peter Julian then picked up, repeating Leslie’s first question in English. Strahl gave a list of accomplishments, and when Julian closed with a blanket condemnation, Strahl repeated his admonishment that the NDP voted against the good things they did. Dominic LeBlanc led off for the Liberals in French, saying that his party immediately accepted all 94 recommendations in the report and wondered if the government would do the same. Strahl said that they would consider the recommendations in light of the full report, to be delivered at the end of the year. Ralph Goodale then picked up in English on the same topic, and got much the same answer from Strahl. For the final question, Marc Garneau called out Conservative contradictions on supply management as part of Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, and Maxime Bernier  gave a single-word response that they would protect it.

Continue reading →

QP: Scripts on reconciliation

Posted on by

It was all leaders present for one of the few remaining Question Periods of the 41st parliament where we’ll see them all together. Thomas Mulcair led off, acknowledging that they were on unceded Algonquin territory, and noted the Conservatives voting against an NDP bill to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Mulcair wondered if the government would adopt it, to which Stephen Harper reminded him that Aboriginals are already included in the constitution and that the UN Declaration is an “aspirational document.” Mulcair repeated “aspirational” with a vitriolic tone, then demanded a nation-to-nation relationship between First Nations and Canada. Harper reminded him that they established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and they were working to improve the living conditions of all Aboriginals. Mulcair noted that at least 6000 children died in residential schools, and wanted Harper to acknowledge that they were “cultural genocide.” Harper insisted that he addressed the damage of forced assimilation seven years ago, and that the NDP consisted voted against the concrete steps the government was taking. Mulcair then noted poor education outcomes for First Nations currently, to which Harper reminded him of measures in the budget. Mulcair demanded that the funding gap for First Nations students be closed, to which Harper said that they were trying to reform the system and that the NDP vigorously opposed them. Justin Trudeau was up next, asking about unfinished Reconciliation action for Métis and Inuit, and wanted nation-to-nation engagement. Harper reiterated the various achievements they’ve made, and encouraged the Liberals to stand with when. Trudeau said that his party accepted and pledged to adopt the TRC Reports recommendations and wanted the same pledge from the government. Harper said that they would study the report, before returning to his slap that the Liberals voted against concrete measures. Trudeau gave it one last attempt, to which Harper said that there was no ideal relationship in our history and they were working to improve the living conditions of First Nations.

Continue reading →

QP: Committing to reconciliation

Posted on by

Monday, and none of the leaders were present for QP, as is usual now. In fact, the Prime Minister had planned a photo op at the very same time, because this is apparently how he shows respect for the institution. Megan Leslie led off, noting the a forthcoming Truth and Reconciliation report, and asked if the PM would heed the call of the First Nations. Bernard Valcourt responded by reminding the House of the government’s apology to Residential Schools survivors, and that it was important to support the work of the commission. Leslie asked again for engagement on the file, and Valcourt said they were encouraging reconciliation. Leslie noted the legacy of the Residential Schools, such as poverty and crime, and wanted a commitment to honour the findings of the report. Valcourt thanked the commission and looked forward to receiving the report. Romeo Saganash expressed his dismay at the government’s actions following the apology, to which Valcourt reiterated the commitment to reconciliation on the part of the government. Saganash brought up the underfunding of on-reserve First Nations, to which Valcourt noted they had taken significant steps to improve the situation of Aboriginals across Canada. Carolyn Bennett also brought up the forthcoming report, and wanted a commitment to concrete actions to promote healing and reconciliation. Valcourt repeated their thanks to the commissioners and survivors, and their commitment to work with a First Nations to address the challenges they inherited. John McCallum was up next, and asked about pension insecurity in the private sector, and wanted an admission that voluntary programmes were not enough. Kevin Sorenson stood up to deliver the half-truth talking points about Trudeau’s comments on Ontario’s plan. McCallum gave it another go in English, and got the same answer.

Continue reading →

QP: He was talking about Greece

Posted on by

Thursday, and wouldn’t you know it, and to my great surprise, Stephen Harper was actually present for a change. Neither Thomas Mulcair nor Justin Trudeau were present to face off against him, however, so make of that what you will. That left Peter Julian to lead off, and wouldn’t you know it, he started off with yet another Mike Duffy question, on the altered audit report. Harper, of course, rejected the premise of the question and noted that Duffy was before the court for his own actions. Julian moved to the pro forma question about Duffy’s residency, and Harper responded with a pro forma response about the NDP satellite offices. Julian moved onto the Senate invoking privilege to keep their internal audit from the court — not actually government business — and Harper responded again with the satellite offices. Niki Ashton was up next, and asked about the lack of response to the First Nations housing fund, and Bernard Valcourt read a statement about significant resources being allocated to meeting housing needs. A second round was much the same. Scott Brison led off for the Liberals, asking about relaxing labour laws that would make it easier to fire Canadians, which Joe Oliver supported. Harper insisted that Oliver was talking about Greece, not Canada, and slammed the Liberal record. Brison pushed on the issue, and Harper read the latest Conservative attack line about how Trudeau apparently wants a new mandatory payroll tax. Marc Garneau closed the round, asking about the same issue in French, and got the same answer about it being a discussion about Greece, and that the Liberals would raise payroll taxes.

Continue reading →