All of the leaders were present today, for a change, and with so much news on offer, it was a question as to which rabbit hole Andrew Scheer would decide to go down for the day. Scheer led off, mini-lectern on desk, and he listed the portents of economic doom — doooooooooom! — and demanded the prime minister fight for Canadian jobs. Trudeau stood up and listed the positive economic indicators and promised they would continue to invest in the economy. Scheer insisted that it was Liberal policies dooming the economy, and demanded businesses be exempted from carbon taxes. Trudeau listed more measures that the government has taken to ensure competitiveness and stated that pricing carbon was necessary to transition to a green economy. Scheer demanded again — as though carbon taxes had anything to do with GM having too many plants globally to meet reduced demand — and Trudeau again listed measures the government was taking before taking a shot at Scheer’s lack of plan. Scheer deliberately misled the House regarding carbon taxes, and Trudeau praised their green transition plan. Scheer accused Trudeau of wanting to phase out the energy sector before the next election, and Trudeau deployed the handy “the economy and environment to hand in hand,” before he switched to French to lambaste Scheer for not asking anything about protecting French language services. Guy Caron was up next for the NDP, demanding a national auto strategy, to which Trudeau spoke about fighting for the sector in NAFTA talks and noted the investments made in the sector under his government. Caron switched to a French to make the same demand, to which Trudeau listed the ways they have been attracting investment in the sector. Karine Trudel demanded that the prime minister fight for jobs in Oshawa, to which Trudeau, with a script, assured her that they were fighting for jobs. Peter Julian made the same demand in English, and Trudeau assured him that they were fighting.
Tag Archives: Official Languages
Roundup: A noble bill with problems below the surface
It’s not often that I’ll go out of my way to comment on poor reporting (as opposed to columns), but in this particular case, I’m going to make an exception. The story is the fact that Rona Ambrose’s bill on mandatory sexual assault training for judges has been stalled in the Senate. Ambrose appeared on Power & Politics to express her shock and dismay, but there was very little research done in terms of the concerns that have been raised with the bill to date, and the fact that its passage through the House of Commons was problematic in and of itself (most especially the fact that it was referred to the Status of Women committee instead of the Justice Committee in order to ensure swift passage, with a committee that was sympathetic and didn’t have the expertise on the matter). The written story on the CBC website was simply a recap of Ambrose’s interview with no comment from anyone else, or recounting any of the concerns or pushback from the debates on the bill.
So I decided to take twenty minutes and skim over the Second Reading debates in the Senate on the bill, and lo, there are some pretty important concerns being raised. Senator Jaffer, who is a lawyer who has done judicial training, pointed to the fact that the bill mandating written rulings in all sexual assault cases not only takes away from the fact that there are procedures for clear oral rulings that can be appealed, but that it will cause other delays. The training also disadvantages rural lawyers, and can tip the hand of a lawyer in a firm that they are applying to be a judge.
Senator Joyal, a formidable constitutional lawyer who had a career fighting for minority rights (and who helped write the Charter of Rights and Freedoms) expressed some serious concerns about the powers given to a federal commissioner to determine what qualifies for training. He raised the very real point that the bill stipulates that training must be done by sexual assault survivors and organisations that support them, which automatically biases the training and the presumption of innocence (and others have raised the point that these trainers are often called as expert witnesses, which creates further biases). Joyal also noted the constitutional implications of the bill given that judicial independence includes the ability to maintain control over their education.
Senator Pratte, while not a lawyer, raised the salient logistical issue that for every 500 judicial applicants, maybe 50 make it through, meaning that if everyone needs training before they can be appointed, it delays assessment of applicants and has the potential to create problems with the quality if the training. He also raised the notion that if sexual assault survivors are needed for this training, how long will it be before other victims’ groups demand to be heard for other judicial training?
Senator Fraser, whose objections were briefly noted in the CBC piece, also made points about the inappropriateness of the bill mandating that reports on the number of judges who have taken the training be tabled in Parliament because judges report to Chief Justices in their regions, not to the minister. As well, because the majority of these cases are actually heard in provincial courts, this could qualify as interference in provincial jurisdiction.
The story also went onto state that Senator Joyal, who chairs the Legal and Constitutional Affairs committee, wouldn’t give a date for when the bill will be studied, but it didn’t mention that government bills always take precedence at committee, and as you can see from the committee’s schedule, they have a pretty full slate for the coming weeks, possibly months.
Frankly, I’m more than a little dismayed at the lazy reporting on this bill. While it may look like a slam-dunk issue on the surface, there’s a lot beneath the surface that’s not being reported on, which is actually fairly irresponsible. Would that political reporters at the CBC take twenty minutes to do some actual research on their stories than simply transcribe an interview.
QP: Demanding action for Oshawa
While the prime minister was present, on a day of tough news for Oshawa, Andrew Scheer was absent yet again. Because why bother showing up to Parliament when you’re the leader of the opposition? Erin O’Toole led off, and said there was a future for manufacturing in Canada if they fought for it, and wanted to know what the government was doing. Justin Trudeau read a statement about their disappointment in the news, and how they would support the workers. O’Toole said that they needed to hear that the prime minister hasn’t given up on the sector, to which Trudeau said that they were working with other orders of government to support the workers. O’Toole asked if GM asked him about trade and tariff concerns that were impacting their competitiveness, to which Trudeau said that the auto companies worked with them as part of the new NAFTA talks, and there was more work to do in eliminating steel and aluminium tariffs. Luc Berthold took over in French to ask again about fighting for the jobs, and Trudeau picked his script back up to read the French version of his first answer. Berthold read some further concerns about the workers, and Trudeau read some further assurances about the industry being solid. Guy Caron was up next for the NDP, and he worried that GM was getting “tax giveaways” while cutting jobs, to which Trudeau read a script about support for the auto sector and how they worked to make it globally competitive and innovative. Caron switched to the Canada Post strike and worried that back to work legislation wouldn’t have resulted in the gains the union made, and Trudeau read a script about all of the measures they took to help get a deal. Karen Trudel asked the same question again, and Trudeau extemporaneously explained how they worked respectfully with unions but the time came to make difficult decisions. Irene Mathyssen read that Canada Post was a toxic environment, to which Trudeau read about his faith in the collective bargaining process.
Roundup: Pausing the birth tourism hysteria
You probably heard last week about the recent report that incidents of “birth tourism” in Canada are higher than previously reported, owing to collecting data from hospital sources rather than local statistical agencies. Given that this became a flashpoint at the Conservative policy convention a few months ago, it’s probably safe to assume that this will become a topic of debate in Parliament in the coming weeks (though it depends on whether or not Andrew Scheer decides this will be the next issue he decides to chase down a rabbit hole, as is his wont). One does hope, however, that we may have a reasonable debate around this, and while Chris Selley may point to the fact that we may want to do something (that won’t violate human rights and create stateless persons), economist Lindsay Tedds has another view that may also be worth considering, especially if we look at the issue over the longer term.
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1066763395578253312
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1066766469545975808
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1066768661434662912
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1066770215784996864
QP: Praising your own record
While the PM was present once again for QP, the finance minister was over in the lock-up for the fiscal update, and Andrew Scheer was…elsewhere. Again. Lisa Raitt led off, and true to form, wanted to know when the budget would be balanced. Justin Trudeau stated that no government in history added more to the debt than Stephen Harper, and praised his own record on growth and employment. Raitt tried again, and Trudeau lambasted the Conservative record on deficits and noted the decrease in the debt-to-GDP ratio. Raitt accused Trudeau of being arrogant for breaking promises, and Trudeau listed off the Conservative record of cuts and low growth. Alain Rayes took over to ask again in French, and this time Trudeau picked up a sheet to talk about how many children in Rayes’ riding were being helped by the Canada Child Benefit. Rayes tried one last time, and Trudeau lauded his party’s record of economic growth. Guy Caron was up next, and he railed about the possibility that the government would legislate an end to the Canada Post labour dispute. Trudeau took up a script to read that they believe in collective bargaining, but that legislation was not a step they took lightly, but they were prepare to act. Caron switched to English to ask the same thing, and Trudeau read the French version of his script. Karine Trudel said the reported mail backlogs were exaggerated and that Canada Post was creating an artificial crisis, to which Trudeau remarked, without script, that they were working in partnership with unions, but they were ready to act if they couldn’t come to an agreement. Irene Mathyssen tried one last time in English, and Trudeau insisted that they transformed the relationship between the government and organised labour.
Roundup: Saudi oil and AG reports
While the issue of Saudi Arabia continues to make headlines, Chrystia Freeland insisted that she doesn’t consider the case closed and more sanctions are being contemplated. She also said in QP yesterday that no future export permits will be granted to the kingdom (in reference to the LAVs we’ve been selling to them).
Chrystia Freeland just said no new export permits will be given to Saudi Arabia re: LAVs. #QP
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) November 20, 2018
Of course, when I tweeted this, my reply column filled up with a bunch of indignant people who demanded to know when we would stop buying Saudi oil and use Alberta oil in Eastern Canada instead. Let me assure you that it’s never going to happen. If we don’t buy Saudi oil, it won’t impact their bottom line in the slightest. The amount we import from them is a rounding error on their books. Add to that, Energy East was never about domestic supply – it was about export via the long route. If by some miracle, a future Andrew Scheer government not only built said pipeline and they demanded that Eastern Canada start using Alberta oil, he would essentially be demanding that Alberta take a $10/barrel discount on that oil, because economics. I seem to recall a former prime minister who remains demonised in Alberta to this day because he wanted to ensure domestic supply, which would mean Alberta got a lower price for their barrels. Why would Scheer want to repeat that very same policy, but wrapped in an “ethical oil” cloak?
Auditor General’s report
Yesterday was the fall report of the Auditor General, and there were reports on:
- The fighter jet procurement programme got a spanking, and particular attention was paid to the retention problems around pilots and mechanics.
- Security at many of our embassies is falling behind; the government blames the Harper era for lack of investment.
- The military isn’t stamping out harassment as quickly as it should because there is no coordination in its programmes, resulting in a number of gaps.
- There is a lack of both a strategy and budget for rural Internet connectivity.
- CRA gives people inconsistent treatment, and where you live can determine how friendly your local regional tax office is.
- Inmates eligible for parole are being kept in prison for longer than necessary because of a lack of halfway houses and parole officers.
- The lack of coordination between departments means the government may not even know which historic buildings they own.
QP: Ignoring the Auditor General
While the prime minister was present today, no doubt still jet-lagged from his international summits, Andrew Scheer was off in Vancouver to make a policy announcement for the election that is still nearly a year way. Lisa Raitt led off, demanding to know the the date the budget will be balanced. Justin Trudeau picked up a script to read about how great their policies including the Canada Child Benefit was, while unemployment was at its lowest rate in 40 years. Raitt said that Canadians’ choice was to keep deficits to $10 billion for year, and this time Trudeau eschewed a script to decry the last years of the Harper government, which nickel-and-dimed veterans and made cuts while his government invested in Canadians. Raitt listed tax credits that were cancelled, and Trudeau noted that those non-refundable tax credits weren’t available to low-income Canadians whereas the CCB was better off for those Canadians. Alain Rayes took over, asked the same again, and Trudeau reiterated this points about low unemployment and enhanced growth in French. Rayes reiterated the demand for a date, and Trudeau reminded him how much debt Harper left as a legacy. Guy Caron was up next for the NDP, raising the Auditor General’s report on CRA not going after rich corporations. Trudeau took up a script to praise the report and said that CRA would examine their internal processes to ensure fairness and uniformity. Caron asked again in English, and Trudeau read a list of investments made in the CRA to ensure more off-shore audits were completed. Alexandre Boulerice raised a report that said Canada’s climate policies would rise global temperatures (somewhat out of context), and Trudeau read a script to say that things were not fine and listed actions that the government was taking. Boulerice switched to French to demand more action, and Trudeau, sans script, insisted that they were taking action to fight climate change.
The PM had his porridge this morning. All fired up in QP.
— John Ivison (@IvisonJ) November 20, 2018
QP: Lies versus pabulum, part eleventy-seven
While Justin Trudeau was not present today, just off of a plane from France, Singapore and Papua New Guinea. That said, Andrew Scheer was not present today either, for whatever reason. Alain Rayes led off, worried that the budget would not balance in 2019. Bill Morneau responded with a question of his own — where are we now? He went on to extol the low unemployment rates and the investments to grow the economy. Rayes repeated the question, and Morneau responded that the Conservatives only wanted to make cuts while the Liberal approach was working for growth. Rayes concerned trolled that the budget was “collapsing” under the weight of deficits, but Morneau retorted with the Conservative record of debts and low growth, while they have turned the growth rate around. Candice Bergen took over to ask again in English, railing that the Liberals were irresponsible, to which Morneau repeated his pabulum points in English about low unemployment and high growth. Bergen tried one last time, and Morneau noted the reduction in small business taxes and the lowest level of debt-to-GDP in the G7. Guy Caron was up next for the NDP, and he worried about the pressure to cut corporate taxes to follow the US example. Morneau said that it was necessary to strike a balance to ensure tax fairness and competitiveness, and that was the approach they were taking. Caron worried about corporate “dead money,” and Morneau reiterated his points about striking the right balance. Peter Julian worried about record levels of personal debt and demanded that they end “corporate giveaways,” to which Morneau assured him that they were investing in Canadians by means like the Canada Child Benefit. Julian demanded investments in pharmacare, to which Ginette Petitpas Taylor recited the implementation on the consultations that would produce a report in the spring.
Roundup: Fiscal update spin incoming
This week is the federal government’s autumn fiscal update, and we’ve already seen a pre-emptive push by the Conservatives to try and set a narrative about the government’s deficit. Andrew Scheer took time out yesterday to hold a press conference to say that he plans to force a vote that would demand that the government set a date for a balanced budget. And yes, the shitposts over social media have already begun.
Reminder: There was a $70 billion hole in GDP when the Liberals took over thanks in part to the brief recession and oil price crash. https://t.co/TkQF0frRoN
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) November 18, 2018
So, a few things to keep in mind this week about the narratives that will be spun:
- The Conservatives will insist that they left the Liberals with a surplus and a “strong economy.” That’s not entirely true – the “surplus” was on paper and it included a lot of “savings” that the Conservatives falsely booked that never came to pass (e.g. Shared Services Canada, Phoenix). The Liberals will also point to stagnant growth rates.
- There was a $70 billion hole between the fiscal situation that the Liberals found themselves in compared to the 2015 budget the Conservatives ran the election on. This would have been there regardless of who won the election. The Liberals had a choice to make – honour their spending promises, or honour their promise to balance the budget. They chose the former, and their spending has been largely in line with what was promised.
- There is no debt crisis looming. The debt-to-GDP ratio is declining, and is the best in the Western world. Government debt is not like credit card debt, so equating the two in shitposts like Scheer does only serves to sow confusion and is a dishonest attempt to look like the government is “bankrupt.” Also remember that much of the deficit spending under this government has been at a time when interest rates were at historic lows, which is not credit card interest rates.
https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1064271285511811072
1) A declining debt-to-GDP ratio doesn’t necessarily mean higher taxes tomorrow.
2) Government debt is not credit card debt. Trying to equate them is disingenuous.
3) He inherited books in $70 billion worse shape than advertised.Could we discuss finances using facts? https://t.co/txnFh53xcT
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) November 19, 2018
I am an economist and I know both that sovereign debt is nothing like an unpaid credit card bill and credit card debt doesn't pass through an estate to heirs in Canada. But, while we're on the subject, would you describe the debt increase of 2008-2014 as intergenerational theft? https://t.co/5utQ1ZJttz
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) November 19, 2018
You can also expect a bunch of calls this week to cut corporate taxes like they did in the US, citing competitiveness, but again, there are things to remember about those US tax cuts – namely that their deficit is currently around $1 trillion, that those cuts are the economic equivalent of a sugar rush for which there are few long-term gains being made, and most of those cuts resulted in larger corporate dividends and share buy-backs rather than re-investment in companies or workforces. There’s a reason why Bill Morneau hasn’t jumped on this, and we’ll see what his response will be.
Roundup: Endorsing the Brexitshambles
In case you haven’t been paying attention, Britain is currently in a state of utter omnishambles as they try to deal with Brexit. A potential deal that was reached resulted in Cabinet resignations, and some very real threats not only to Theresa May remaining as PM, but possibly toppling the government as a whole. It’s lunacy over there right now. Back here in Canada, Andrew Scheer has decided that this was the right time to reiterate his support for Brexit. Because “sovereignty.”
As much as I would like Iannucci to write a Brexit season of “The Thick of It,” I’m not sure anything could top what is going on currently. https://t.co/MPffCweFRH
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) November 15, 2018
While Scheer can bang on about how much control the UK gave up to the EU, and repeating falsehoods like the canard about the EU having regulations around the curvature of bananas, he both ignores that the EU has created a peace that has been unknown in Europe for centuries, and the fact that much of the Brexit campaign was fuelled by straight-up xenophobia. It’s this latter aspect that is particularly relevant because it’s part of a pattern we’re seeing with Conservatives, as John Geddes pointed out a couple of months ago – that they have this inability to orient themselves in a plausible way with the current nationalist populist trends in conservatism globally. Add to that, there is this naïve notion that they can somehow play with just enough extremism without it going into outright xenophobia or racism (and we’re especially seeing this playout with Maxime Bernier who blows the xenophobia tuba and then acts bewildered that white nationalists start showing up in his new party). But you can’t play with “just enough” extremism, because you can’t actually contain it. And when you wink about things enough times, you can’t act shocked and surprised when your adherents spell out what you were saying – like that post from a riding association Facebook account that posted Harjit Sajjan’s photo with the tagline “this is what happens when you have a Cabinet based on affirmative action.” They’ve only stated repeatedly that ministers in the Liberal cabinet are only there to fill quotas (whereas everyone in the Conservative Cabinet was there “on merit,”) but the moment someone puts Sajjan’s face next to that, well no, that’s totally not what they meant at all. Sure, Jan. And that’s why you can’t actually claim that Brexit is all about “sovereignty,” because it absolutely wasn’t. You can’t divorce the inflated sovereignty concern trolling from the xenophobia – it’s the same mentality as trying to assert that you can use “just enough” extremism for your political ends, but not go all the way.
Meanwhile, Andrew Coyne remains boggled by Scheer’s continued endorsement of Brexit, and wonders if he’s trying to appropriate some of its populist nationalism (the aforementioned “just enough” extremism).