The final debate with the six remaining candidates walking into the workroom and seeing the message that David Bertschi left for them on the mirror in lipstick – just kidding! Only in a perfect universe would the Liberal leadership race play out like RuPaul’s Drag Race. No, instead, all six were on stage in Montreal, with a debate format of opening statements, three-person debates and a series of one-on-ones, before closing remarks. And because only six candidates remain and not nine, it allowed for slightly longer exchanges and for a somewhat more focused debate.
Tag Archives: Liberal Leadership
Roundup: Kevin Page’s final battle
After two days of arguments at Federal Court, the judge there will deliberate on whether he should be providing clarity to the mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer – and no, it’s not a cut-and-dried question. As lawyers for the Speaker asserted, it is a matter for Parliament to decide upon – and remember, Parliament is actually the highest court of the land – and Parliamentarians should not be going to the courts every time the government doesn’t turn over its numbers. And while Page’s request for clarity was just that – clarity – there are some inescapable and fundamental issues at the heart of the matter, and that is that MPs themselves have abdicated their role as guardians of the public purse. While journalists and the public hail Page as being a hero, what’s missing is that he has been saddled with the role of “watchdog” because MPs have decided they’d rather have him do their homework for them, because math is hard, and they can then invoke the magical talisman that is his independence to prove that the government is in the wrong with its numbers. That Thomas Mulcair sent along his own lawyer as an interested party is part of what muddies this issue and makes it look partisan – because Mulcair and company want Page and his successors to do the dirty work for them. This is not really an issue about the government arguing against the fiscal oversight position that they created, but about Parliament itself, and whether or not MPs on both sides of the aisle can take their own jobs seriously. That they are placing all of the emphasis on Page and his office to do their work for them is an indictment that they continue to refuse to.
Roundup: Budget madness!
So, that was the budget – or Economic Action Plan 2013™ – A Responsible Plan For Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity© as the government would otherwise brand it. And there’s not a whole lot to it, with little in the way of new spending, little in the way of tax cuts or measures, extending a few of their existing incentive programmes, and one particular measure for First Nations, tying training dollars to making it mandatory for those receiving income benefits (which Thomas Mulcair dubbed as “workfare” and a slap in the face). It’s also going to fold CIDA into Foreign Affairs as a whole, but it’ll still keep its own minister, so Julian Fantino’s job is still safe. (Scott Gilmore considers this a good move because it will enhance the coordination of our foreign aid, which is often met with the two departments not speaking to one another). Canada Day, Winterlude and the Tulip Festival are being wrested away from the more independent NCC and being handed over to the Department of Heritage, which could be worrying if you hear the horror stories that I do about the competence of the staff in that department. Justin Trudeau predicts the budget will create friction with the provinces after it declared it would create the skills training program and that the provinces have to pitch in – while the government has consistently removed itself from a productive relationship with said provinces. And as if on cue, Quebec calls the budget a “frontal attack” on its economic interests, and “economic sabotage.” iPolitics gives you the nine most inane pieces of wisdom out of the budget. And if that wasn’t enough budget madness for you, iPolitics also has an e-print edition of budget coverage.
Roundup: Carefully managed budget leaks
As is the usual order of business these days, a carefully managed pre-budget “leak” was released yesterday in the form of a private letter to caucus – the “private” being a full wink-wink-nudge-nudge, of course. This is what we call building the narrative and managing the message. In said letter, Jim Flaherty signalled that his priorities will be skills training, infrastructure and “value-added” manufacturing jobs (never mind that “value added” is a misnomer term, as “value-added” is simply labour input + capital input). Maclean’s has produced a preview guide to the budget coming down this week. Michael Den Tandt believes it’s going to be a “stay the course” budget without any transformational change.
Roundup: Exit Penashue
In a surprising turn of events, Intergovernmental Affairs minister Peter Penashue resigned his seat after it was proved that he accepted improper political donations in the last election, which included free flights, an interest-free loan, and dressed up corporate donations. And then he paid back $30,000, which was more than the amount that the CBC had calculated, and they had no idea where the money came from, since the campaign was broke, hence the need for the loan. Penashue won by only 79 votes then, and plans to contest the nomination. His former Liberal Challenger, Todd Russell, has lately been fighting the Lower Churchill project because it hasn’t properly consulted with the Innu communities in the region, and is taking the next few days to consider if he’ll run again.
Roundup: Exit Garneau
In a surprising move, Marc Garneau decided to up sticks and pull out of the Liberal leadership race. The assumptive number two challenger who was providing a lot of the heft in the race did the math and figured that he wasn’t going to be able to win, so it was time to be a loyal soldier and support Justin Trudeau – never mind the number of attacks he launched at him in the past few weeks, and his comments about his lack of depth. Mind you, he probably did Trudeau a lot of good by giving him some good practice for the kinds of attacks that will be launched at him should he win the race and have to face the Commons daily. Oh, but wait, the other challengers said – a preferential ballot where all of the ridings are weighted equally may mean that a sheer numerical advantage may be blunted. Well, maybe. I’m also sure that David Bertschi, who should have sashayed away a long time ago, is overjoyed that he’s no longer in eight place, and that he’s now gaining momentum. Chantal Hébert notes that this exit may have saved Garneau from a humiliating defeat where Joyce Murray might have overtaken him as she has a kind of “ballot box” issue to run on, where Garneau didn’t really. Paul Wells looks to the coming Trudeau Years, and what will likely be two years of people complaining about what a disappointment he’s been as leader. Andrew Coyne looks at how actual party memberships seem to have evaporated under the new “supporter” category, making the party little more than a personality cult that exists more in theory than in practice. Oh, and the party brass acceded to Trudeau’s request to extend the deadline by an extra week in order to work out all of the “technical glitches” with getting all of their supporters registered to vote.
Roundup: Keystone XL silence
Thomas Mulcair is in Washington DC, and while he didn’t actively lobby against the Keystone XL pipeline down there, he did argue that it would cost some 40,000 Canadian jobs (though I’m not sure where that number might have come from). Joe Oliver, meanwhile, thinks that Mulcair is being hypocritical by remaining silent, since he and his party have already made their position on the pipeline clear (and I’m sure that he would like to hit back at the NDP for lobbying against Canada’s interests if that were the case).
They’ve been in government for seven years, but Peter MacKay still insists that the problems in replacing our fleet of search and rescue planes isn’t the fault of the defence department – despite all evidence to the contrary, with allegations of rigged bid processes (once again).
Roundup: Ethical glass houses
Former Senate Ethics Officer Michael Fournier says that the Auditor General should be called in to look at the books of both the Commons and the Senate every five years or so – but also discounts the characterisation of the Senate as some den of corruption that has been painted by the media and the likes of Charlie Angus. Angus, meanwhile, has a selective memory when it comes to the financial practices of the Commons, denying that the AG found any problems with their books when the last audit was done a couple of years ago, except that there actually was a number of problems found with things like procurement practices. And perhaps it also bears reminding that it was only a couple of years ago that a number of MPs were found to be in violation of their own using allowances, and that the Commons is far less transparent with its own attendance and travel records than the Senate is. But oh, the Senate is the one that needs to clean up its act (even though it’s been in that process for the past year).
Roundup: A Métis victory
The Métis of Manitoba won a Supreme Court ruling yesterday that states that the government didn’t fully implement the 1870 promise that led to the creation of Manitoba in the first place. And while there was no remedy attached – so no, Winnipeg, you don’t have to worry about being displaced – it will be interesting to see how this moves forward now that there is this recognition.
Jim Flaherty met with private sector economists yesterday and declared that he was confident in the budget – whenever it may be tabled – thanks to good job numbers.
Jason Kenney says that the lower-than-promised refugee resettlement numbers are due in large part to the civil war in Syria. After promising to resettle a large number of Iraqi refugees who had fled to Syria, well, we can’t process them effectively with a civil war in that country having wreaked havoc with diplomatic missions and resettlement logistics.
Roundup: Interim PBO and the search for a replacement
In a rather surprising announcement at the end of the day yesterday, the government has named the Parliamentary Librarian as the interim Parliamentary Budget Officer until Kevin Page’s replacement can be found. That process is internal to the Library, and Page has expressed concerns that the makeup of the committee charged with the search is being kept secret, but I do get concerned when opposition parties want input into those processes, because it ultimately erodes the accountability for those appointments. Look at the questions surrounding Arthur Porter these days, and how Vic Toews skirts accountability by pointing out that the opposition leaders were consulted on his appointment. That’s why the prerogative power of appointment should rest with the Governor in Council – because it keeps the executive as the sole resting place of accountability. Meanwhile, the job criteria for the next PBO have been posted, and they include qualities like “discreet” and “consensus seeking” – perhaps not too surprising after the battles that Page had with the previous Parliamentary Librarian over his role.