Tag Archives: Jason Kenney

Roundup: Whistle-blowing potentially illegal instructions

Posted on by

A lawyer in the Department of Justice is taking his own department to Federal Court because of what he deems to be illegal instructions with drafting bills that could contravene the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but without notifying Parliament. Think about all of the court challenges to those “tough on crime” mandatory minimum sentences, and how they’re being struck down. And for his efforts at transparency and accountability, he’s been suspended without pay. Because it’s not like this government is trying to politicise the civil service or anything – right?

Speaking of which, the Liberals want the Government Operations committee and the Clerk of the Privy Council to look into the issue of the M-4 Unit – err, Julian Fantino’s partisan letters on the CIDA website, even though CIDA staff insist it was all a mistake, that these letters were mixed in with a large volume of material they were uploading. Not that the Liberals are buying it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Page takes aim at the real problem of Parliament

Posted on by

iPolitics‘ Colin Horgan had a good talk with Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page, who breaks down some of the key concerns that his office has – that the political executive is now steamrolling budgets through without due diligence and telling MPs to trust them and check their work afterwards, when the Public Accounts come out, because the process is so convoluted. And he’s right – it is broken, but not only because the executive has gamed the system, but because MPs have decided to abdicate their responsibility to scrutinise the estimates because they have other priorities, like their eleventieth Private Members’ Bill that won’t see the light of day, or scoring political points in the scandal of the day, or pet hobby projects that yes, they may care about and may be important, but ultimately at the cost of their actual job of scrutiny. Add to that how they’re using their staff to shepherd through passports and immigration files rather than assisting them in the actual analysis work. Yes, the system needs to be fixed, but I will caution that the changes need to come from the ground up. Voters need to demand that their MPs do their due diligence, and MPs need to take that job seriously and not fob it off onto the PBO, as they have been doing, often under the rubric that his numbers can be trusted because he’s non-partial. Meanwhile, there is insufficient pushback – especially from the government backbenchers, who aren’t supposed to just parrot mindless slogans – and we wind up with a situation like we have today. At least Page is talking about the actual problem and laying the blame where it needs to be laid, rather than just pouting about the current government being mean (as so many others are doing).

Continue reading →

QP: Pursuing peace and human rights

Posted on by

It was all hands on deck in the Commons today, for the first time in what seems like ages. Even the Bloc leader, Daniel Paillé was present – albeit from his perch in the diplomatic gallery, as he doesn’t actually have a seat. Thomas Mulcair kicked things off by reading off a question about the leaked proposed foreign policy plan, whereby the government would be abandoning their pledge not to sacrifice human rights on the altar of the almighty dollar. Harper stood up and in his usual shrugging manner, said the document wasn’t official policy and that his government always works to pursue peace and human rights. Mulcair went on to talk about the violence happening in the Congo, and the fact that Harper was just there talking about trade in the region. Harper disputed that characterisation, however, by saying that he did meet with opposition groups and expressed his concern over human rights abuses while at the Francophonie Summit in that country. Peggy Nash was up next, and wondered why Harper didn’t want to meet with the premiers when they were going to be discussing the economy. Jim Flaherty took this question, and pointed out that Harper regularly meets with the premiers. Bob Rae was up for the Liberals, and asked if Harper would consider doubling the flow of the gas tax to the municipalities by the next budget, so that they can engage in some long-term planning for infrastructure. Harper pointed out that they are consulting, but it was his government that made the gas tax transfers permanent, before the two of them had some back-and-forth over who can take credit for the gas tax revenues flowing to the cities.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Alerted to mischief days before the vote

Posted on by

Uh oh. Access to Information documents show that the public were raising concerns about misleading robo-calls to Elections Canada before the election took place, and that Elections Canada was already in contact with the Conservative Party’s lawyer about said mischief. These new clues fit in with the testimony given by the owner of that one phone bank company regarding the calls they were making for the Conservatives in the days leading up to the campaign.

Some 11,000 jobs have been cut so far in the public service, 7500 of them by attrition, says Tony Clement.

There has been some drama in the Senate over amendments to the Cluster munitions treaty.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another year of deficits

Posted on by

Jim Flaherty delivered his fiscal update yesterday, and what do you know? All of that global economic uncertainty and lowered commodity prices means that we’ll be in deficit for an additional year. Looks like all of those “wait until the budget is balanced” promises from the last election won’t happen before the next one. Meanwhile, Macleans.ca’s Econowatch explains the difference between the $5 billion and $7 billion deficit figures (which boils down to choosing optimistic or pessimistic forecasts), while economist Stephen Gordon says that Flaherty should pretty much stay the course (thanks in large part to the thicker cushion left to him by the debt reduction efforts of Paul Martin and company).

Embattled minister Peter Penashue didn’t hold a meeting yesterday as promised to explain the irregularities with his campaign spending and donations. Constituents were told they could write him if they have questions, while a one-question phone survey has been going around the riding about whether or not people would vote for him again. It’s all a bit odd. Penashue did put out a letter on his website, in which he pretty much blames his former Official Agent for everything, which is convenient, and would show negligence on his own part for not keeping an eye on things as the candidate who is ultimately accountable.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Long-term damage and hidden changes

Posted on by

The former Chief Electoral Officer has big concerns about what Thursday’s Supreme Court decision on Etobicoke Centre means for future elections – especially when it come to people trying to vote at polls they’re not assigned to, and the future court challenges around those rules. Meanwhile, here are five of the outstanding issues that remain from the last election.

CBC delves in the Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge and finds 22 changes in the fine print to things like public sector and military pensions, changes to environmental legislation, eliminating boards, changes to the Indian Act, and so on. It’s definitely worthwhile reading. Oh, and those changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act? Are about navigation because of changes made to the bill through the back door four months ago when the government gutted the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act in the first omnibus budget bill.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Opitz keeps his seat

Posted on by

In a 4-3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld the election result in Etobicoke Centre, allowing Ted Opitz to remain as the MP. It’s a difficult decision, because it leaves open some questions as to how many procedural errors we bother to enforce so long as we ensure that people can vote, whether or not it is actually proper for them to do so in that manner, rather than see anyone’s right to vote taken away. Here are the reactions, from Opitz, Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Bob Rae, and others. Paul Wells parses some of the meaning of the split decision, the players on both sides, and throws some cold water on those conspiracy theories of stacked courts (and if anyone believes them, then they obviously haven’t paid any attention to the Supreme Court of Canada in the past). Emmett Macfarlane, who has literally written a book on the Court, discusses what he believes would have happened if they had ruled the other way. Adam Goldenberg uses this decision as a reminder about how our Supreme Court is not partisan, unlike the one in the States.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Laundering future abuses of power

Posted on by

After pushing through new legislation that gives him extraordinary powers to determine who can be barred from entering the country, immigration minister Jason Kenney now says he’ll let a parliamentary committee determine the guidelines around it. Instead of, you know, putting limits in the legislation in the first place so that he’s not vested with so much arbitrary power in the first place. Also, it launders any potential political fallout when the powers are abused, because he gets to say “the committee set those limits, not me.”

The rebranding of the Canadian Museum of Civilization means it is now the Canadian Museum of History, which will be more of a unified history museum, which we don’t really have here in the Nation’s Capital. It won’t be another war museum, and no, the minister can’t exert curatorial influence. Part of this idea of networking smaller museums around the country is one where they can share artefacts between them for focused exhibits, which is great – assuming, of course, that they have the budgets to transport these artefacts around the country.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Joint embassies ahead

Posted on by

Apparently we’re going to be part of a network of joint embassies with other British Commonwealth nations, in an attempt to head off the rising influence of European Union diplomats. It’s being billed as a cost-cutting measure, but there already questions about sovereignty being raised, as well as some fairly grossly inaccurate statements about how we’re under the same Queen (which we’re not – the Crowns are separate, even if Elizabeth II wears them all).

Here’s the strange case of an Ottawa communications firm involved with the F-35 blocking media access to aspects of the story. This, of course, while there are more questions as to whether or not the F-35 is really the pinnacle of fighter jet technology that its creators claim.

Thomas Mulcair was in Edmonton over the weekend to attend the provincial NDP convention there (despite saying that he stays out of provincial affairs when asked about happenings in Quebec). There, Mulcair told the audience that they need to boost the Canadian manufacturing sector (in other words, build refineries and upgraders in Alberta and not the Keystone XL pipeline to send said bitumen for processing in the States), while provincial leader Brian Mason claimed that his party were the true heirs to Peter Lougheed’s legacy.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No information on the cuts

Posted on by

Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page can’t get any information on government cuts, and feels the government is deliberately keeping people in the dark. Pat Martin says that the government should provide the PBO with the information so that MPs know what they’re voting on. Or, you know, MPs could compel the production of papers using the powers they already have and demand to know for themselves rather than involving a middleman like the PBO.

The NDP have agreed to wrap up the committee hearings into the Auditor General’s report on the F-35 procurement process because they heard from the witnesses they wanted to during their Potemkin committee hearing in the summer. You know, the one that’s not official, and not on the record? Good job.

Continue reading →