It’s by-election day in four ridings across the country – two in Alberta and two in Toronto. Despite the usual lazy story ledes about how this is somehow yet another “test” for Trudeau, it would seem to me that this is more of a test for Mulcair with the two Toronto ridings, as to whether or not he can hold the one seat he had there or make gains with the other, while in Alberta, it’ll be a test as to how much Harper can retain his own base – something he has had trouble with in the past few by-elections, whether in Calgary Centre or Brandon–Souris, where significant leads were lost and their wins were narrow and marginal compared to resurgent Liberals who had not had traction in those regions in decades. And Fort McMurray will be a very interesting race to watch, not only because of the amount of attention that Trudeau in particular paid to the region, but because of the deep unhappiness with the industry there to the changes to the Temporary Foreign Workers programme, which they rely on heavily because of an overheated market with no labour available. That may be the biggest upset if they decide to punish Harper at the ballot box. All of which is a far more interesting lede than whether the Liberals are being “tested” once more.
Tag Archives: Parliament Hill
Roundup: Taking apart MacKay’s assertions
The chair of the women’s forum at the Canadian Bar Association calls Peter MacKay out for the real consequences for women in the profession as they are being overlooked for judicial appointments, and that there is a need for more data on appointments, while Thomas Muclair thinks that this is more proof to demand MacKay’s resignation. Former Liberal justice minister Irwin Cotler, however, does the due diligence and systematically dismantles MacKay’s assertions, from his statements that law schools aren’t playing their role, to the claim that women aren’t applying, and most especially the notion that there apparently aren’t enough women who can be appointed on the basis of merit. Cotler takes MacKay to school over the issue, and it’s great to see a fact-based takedown and not more of this open letter nonsense and weird blaming that has thus far taken place.
Roundup: The Sona trial commences
Michael Sona’s trial in the case of the misleading robocalls gets underway in Guelph, Ontario, today, Sona has long maintained that there is no real evidence against him other than some questionable testimony that would have occurred at a time when he was out of the country. That said, it is hoped that with other players on the stand that this trial may be the only hope for getting the real story of what happened in Guelph out there. Sona could face five years in jail and a fine of up to $5000 if found guilty.
Roundup: Sticking to the sidelines
A number of Quebec senators are also shying away from getting involved in the provincial election there, though some are saying that they will play whatever roles they can along the sidelines. The mayors of a number of smaller towns in the rest of Canada are alarmed that their local newspapers are owned by QMI, which in turn is owned by Pierre-Karl Péladeau, especially considering just how concentrated his ownership of that media is. Michael Den Tandt notes that Pauline Marois has been articulating Jacques Parizeau’s vision, where it was “money and the ethnic vote” that lost them the last referendum, and that Marois is sidelining those ethnic minorities with her values charter and trying to bring money on her side with Péladeau. Economist Stephen Gordon writes about the desirability of a monetary union with an independent Quebec, and how Quebec’s debt load would make it a risky proposition for them. Marois tried to insist that it would be “borderless” and would welcome Canadian tourists. No worries, see!
Roundup: Partisan questions over a move
The partisan machinery got ramped into full gear over the weekend after CTV aired a story saying that retired General Andrew Leslie legitimately claimed $72, 000 in moving expenses upon his retirement when he bought a new house in Ottawa. Most of that was apparently real estate fees, which the expenses are allowed to cover. But apparently after the years of service he put in, this figure is “shocking” for critics. Sackcloth and ashes, everyone! What wasn’t aired or put in the web version was Leslie’s explanation, which is not only the universality of that programme, its rationale, and the fact that he didn’t know the figure because it was handled by a private company. All of which raises questions as to why that number found its way into CTV’s hands. Not able to resist making a partisan swipe, as Leslie is now an advisor to Justin Trudeau, Defence minister Rob Nicholson announced that he was going to take a look into the expenses, while Leslie explained himself by way of Facebook. Even the head of the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation decided to get in on the game and said that Leslie was an embarrassment to his ancestors and compared him to Mike Duffy. Because he’s classy like that, I guess. I am also struck by the fact that everyone is blaming Leslie for bilking the system, when he made it clear that he wasn’t involved – a private company was. Perhaps they are the one who should be answering the questions, not Leslie.
Roundup: Mulcair the optimist
Despite his less than stellar polling figures – which he assured us that he does read – Thomas Mulcair says that he’s confident and that he’s got the experience to be the next PM, unlike a certain Liberal leader, whom he characterised as “he’s highly scripted and then he goes off-script.” Erm, he’s not really that highly scripted. Far less scripted than Mulcair himself tends to be, unless he’s banished the years of mini-lectern-on-the-desk QPs down the memory hole already. Also, it’s funny that Mulcair talks of Trudeau’s gaffes when he’s had a few of is own as well *cough*Osama bin Laden*cough*.
Peter Julian wants Commons security to check their cyber-security after media reports that the private company that provides its encryption software took money from the NSA in order to build a backdoor for access.
Roundup: Apoplectic over unenforceable rules
The Conservative Party is apoplectic with outrage after Elections Canada didn’t put punitive sanctions against those 2006 Liberal leadership candidates who still haven’t repaid their debts. The problem, Elections Canada says, is that the rules aren’t actually enforceable. And guess whose fault that is? The Conservatives, along with the NDP, who were in such a rush to punish the Liberals in 2006 that they passed a really flawed series of changes that made a dog’s breakfast of leadership campaign finance rules. About the most they did was make the ability to fundraise so restrictive that these former candidates with outstanding debts can’t raise that money. So really, well done all around.
Roundup: Historical outrage and undermining the Court
A new book claims that then-Chief Justice Bora Laskin kept political leaders informed as to the status of the patriation reference in the days of the patriation negotiations with London, and now the Quebec government is calling it an erosion of the legitimacy of the court and wants the Prime Minister to turn over all of the records from the period. PMO says no, and the Supreme Court said it’ll investigate the allegations. But seriously – trying to undermine a branch of government for narrow partisan gain? Way to go, guys. Slow clap. Martin Patriquin puts this into perspective with the rest of the Quebec perpetual outrage machine.
Roundup: The politics of the Senate reference
The big move by the government yesterday was to send a list of reference questions to the Supreme Court with regards to Senate reform – and yes, abolition. The six questions – more like fifteen with the sub-clauses – come at a time when the notion is being mulled over by the Quebec courts at the behest of the provincial government, and the Supreme Court may opt to hold off on their deliberations until that decision is rendered, so that they can take it into consideration. And then comes the politics behind it all – the government claims this will “speed up” the reform process after years of opposition delay – never mind that this reference process could take up to two years, and the only ones stalling were the government themselves because they never brought their bills forward for debate (not that said bills were actually constitutionally sound). It also buys them time to keep the issue alive for the next election and as a fundraising issue for their base, but also provides them options when it comes to considering next steps, because they may need them if they want to continue this rather foolhardy pursuit. The Liberals are playing the smug game of “We wanted this reference six years ago – thanks for catching up.” And the NDP are accusing the government of “more delay” – even though they simply argue for abolition and give nonsense talking points about how much money they would save if that happened (forgetting of course that all of said “savings” and more would entirely be consumed in the interminable court challenges that would come from flawed legislation that would otherwise be caught in the Senate). And there are the legal arguments – is it really unconstitutional, or is the fact that the Prime Minister is still recommending appointments to the Governor General enough to avoid having to go the route of a constitutional amendment, no matter that they’re ensuring that these appointments are “elected,” and that the “democratic mandate” of these newly empowered Senators will have a tangible – and detrimental – effect on the way our system operates. I argue that the Supreme Court justices aren’t morons and will see a backdoor attempt for what it is and call bullshit. Other constitutional scholars aren’t so sure, and say that according to the letter of the law, it looks just fine. But politics – especially the way our Parliament operates – is more than just the letter of the law. It’s an organic whole, and surely that needs to be taken into consideration when a blatant backdoor proposal designed to get around doing the hard work of constitutional negotiation will have a serious and measurable effect on our democratic process. That has to count for something.
Roundup: BYO-Armoured Car
As the Prime Minister’s trip to India rolls along, we learn that after eight years of negotiation, a foreign investment protection agreement still hasn’t been signed, we’re still haggling out a deal to ship uranium two years later, and Harper brought over his own armoured cars, though that sounds to be more of an RCMP decision rather than his usual case of presidential envy.
A medical journal is warning of increased mental and physical illness as a result of the omnibus crime legislation, as people will be locked up for longer in overcrowded and stressful situations, and will be more exposed to things like Hepatitis C and HIV. The government, of course, doesn’t think the link between violence and overcrowding.
Further to the issue of veterans’ funerals, it seems that the rate has remained unchanged for 11 years. The Liberals are calling for an independent review of the Last Post Fund and its requirements.