Despite it being a Thursday, none of the major leaders were present in the Chamber for QP. Yay accountability! Megan Leslie kicked off by asking about radicalized Canadians who were not stopped before they left the country. Stephen Blaney said that there were 63 investigations underway covering over 100 individuals, and why didn’t the NDP support their anti-terrorism legislation. Leslie asked why they were relying on US intelligence for these radicals, but Blaney gave a non sequitur about supporting the mission in Iraq. Leslie turned to the Ebola crisis, to which Rona Ambrose assured her of all the ways in which Canada was contributing. Libby Davies carried on asking about the Ebola vaccine and reiterated the tale of the intellectual property concerns, but Ambrose assured her that the supply that was given to the WHO did not have those concerns and it was up to them to decide what to do with it. Davies quoted a WHO release stating that the commercializations of the vaccine was held by that U.S. company. Ambrose, somewhat exasperated, insisted that they were two completely different issues, and the intellectual property on the donated doses belonged to Canada. Ralph Goodale asked about the plans to stuff things like copyright changes into the budget bill. Kevin Sorenson insisted that Goodale wait until the bill was tabled. Goodale blasted the plans to change those copyright plans so that news clips can freely been used in political ads, calling it “expropriation without compensation.” Shelly Glover said she wouldn’t comment on rumours or speculation, but gave an excuse about networks censoring content. No, seriously. The round closed with Dominic LeBlanc giving the same question in French, and Glover repeating as well.
Tag Archives: Parliamentary Budget Officer
Roundup: Seized with the Iraq debate
The Commons will be seized today with debating the Iraq combat deployment, which will culminate in a confidence vote (which has been phrased in such a way that it’s confidence in the government after they have made the decision, as opposed to a vote to authorize deployment, which would make for fuzzy lines of accountability going forward – and yes, there is a big difference). The issue of civilian casualties being a likelihood given the air strikes is likely to come up, as it is in the States. Rob Nicholson is also refusing to say whether or not there will be an extension, which is all well and good from the point of nobody being able to tell the future, but given that ISIS is already adapting to the threat of air strikes means that our ability to contribute will likely soon be a fairly moot point. Also, the piece led to this interesting exchange.
@rolandparis you make more sense than Nicholson even if we disagree about creepiness. Being vague about renewal is typical Harper crap
— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman) October 6, 2014
@smsaideman Why do you assume the gov't knows the answer to that question? Surely it depends on how the operation goes.
— Kim Campbell (@AKimCampbell) October 6, 2014
@AKimCampbell the war is unlikely to be over in six months, so they can be clearer about assessing than suggest over in six months
— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman) October 6, 2014
@smsaideman Yes, but the nature of the mission that will be optimal for Canada after 6 mos is not clear.
— Kim Campbell (@AKimCampbell) October 6, 2014
@AKimCampbell I am. It surprised by an initial six month mandate but the spin seems wrong to me, as if a renewal would not be likely
— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman) October 6, 2014
QP: A debate or a vote
The President of Germany was visiting the Centre Block today, no matter that Harper was still in New York for the United Nations, and Justin Trudeau was off campaigning in Oshawa, leaving Thomas Mulcair once again the only major leader present. He led off by asking about the Prime Minister’s revelation in New York that we were being asked to contribute more troops to Iraq. Rob Nicholson responded by saying that the request was just received and that it would be reviewed, along with our current non-combat mission at the end of the 30 days. Mulcair wanted the letter made public, and asked how many more troops were being asked. Nicholson repeated that it would all be part of the review. Mulcair wanted the disclosure of the permission given by Iraq, to which Nicholson assured him that they had proper permission. Mulcair moved onto the burgeoning refugee crisis in Turkey, to which Chris Alexander gave a pro forma response about how many refugees from Iraq we have already settled and how many more we planned to. Mulcair pressed for detail on Syrian refugees, and Alexander said that more than 1500 Syrian refugees were present in Canada. Marc Garneau led off for the Liberals, and asked for details on the new Iraq request, and that it would be brought for debate in the House. Nicholson repeated that they would be reviewing everything. Joyce Murray noted the recall of Parliament in the UK to debate their Iraq deployment, to which Nicholson invited the opposition to use their supply days to debate further. Adam Vaughan reiterated the need for debate in parliament before any deployment was extended, and Nicholson noted how forthcoming the government has been.
Roundup: The Tabulator gong show
Over in the New Brunswick election last night, their new Tabulator machines which were supposed to deliver election results faster all pretty much fried and turned into a big gong show, with missing ballots and unreadable results, while the company who was contracted out to run the machines didn’t answer calls. With no results being trustworthy, parties began demanding manual recounts, and with a virtual tie result, the final results likely won’t be clear in the morning. And so, let this once again be a lesson that paper ballots should always be used with manual counts because that’s the only tried and true way with actual accountability.
Roundup: Ratifying the FIPA – everybody panic!
The big news is that Canada ratified the Canada-China Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion Agreement (FIPA) yesterday, after months of delays. Immediately the NDP freaked out, while Elizabeth May called it the worse day for Canadian Sovereignty since 1867 (never mind that Canada never actually got treaty-making powers devolved from the UK until the 1920s and control over foreign policy in the Statute of Westminster in 1931). Apparently ensuring fair treatment for Chinese companies in Canada, and perhaps more importantly Canadian companies in China – where the rule of law is not really the same as it is here – is a terrible, terrible blow to our sovereignty. Economist Stephen Gordon, however, is trying to remain the voice of reason:
There is a *huge* chasm b/w what foreign-investor protection agreements do and what excitable nationalists say they do.
— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) September 12, 2014
All that FIPAs do is ensure national treatment. Govts don`t get to jerk foreign investors around because they`re foreign.
— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) September 12, 2014
You want to regulate in the national interest, fine. Apply the same rules to foreign and domestic firms.
— Stephen Gordon (@stephenfgordon) September 12, 2014
Roundup: Simultaneous praise and condemnation
In an interview with the Vancouver Sun, Justin Trudeau gave a somewhat confusing response to what he would do around the First Nations accountability legislation that has made the salaries of chiefs and band councils public. While on the one hand he said it was a good thing that the questionably high payments to certain chiefs were aired, he nevertheless said the law should be scrapped, but that same information be made available to band members so that they could make their own decisions. I’m not sure that it’s just enough to say that the government is trying to force their opponents to be more open and transparent – being First Nations and unions – while their own top political staff salaries remain secret (which isn’t really true because salary ranges are public). If he really were concerned with open and transparent government, he could have others – like top political staff – disclose their salaries to the same levels as the “opponents” of the government. It just seems like trying to hard to paint the current government as bad guys (I know, I know – politics) when in the same breath he praised the results of the same legislation.
Roundup: Hostile witnesses
Kady O’Malley looks at how sex workers were treated as hostile witnesses at the Justice Committee, in particular by Conservative MP Stella Ambler – who, it should be noted, isn’t even a regular member of that committee. Any of their experiences in which they stated that they weren’t victims were often dismissed or challenged as being somehow untrue, which is unfortunate but not surprising given that the government has a narrative around this bill that they intend to push.
Roundup: A summit with underlying concerns
Stephen Harper’s Maternal and Child Health summit begins today in Toronto, with some luminaries in attendance like Ban Ki-Moon, the Aga Khan, and Melinda Gates. Critics are quick to say that our foreign aid dollars have not only been decreasing, but are being funnelled into this kind of cynical initiative that does more to fuel domestic concerns – after all, who doesn’t love an mom and apple pie issue like ensuring that infant mortality is reduced – not to mention those who criticise that these same programmes are not doing anything about reproductive health and access to safe abortions for women in developing countries. But on the other hand, we do seem to be making a difference and are visibly standing up for the issue, for what it’s worth. There are also concerns that the government is not being accountable for its Maternal and Child Health spending, that despite all of the data it’s putting out, it’s scattered and the dots don’t connect, making it hard to track or put together an overall picture.
Roundup: Precious illusions and appeals to reason
As part of their campaign against the Fair Elections Act, the NDP have taken to a number of…precious tactics, from Craig Scott writing to Pierre Poilievre to ask him to withdraw the bill in order to start over with all-party consultation (good luck with that), to targeting individual MPs and ministers to vote against the bill, Michael Chong and Bal Gosal thus far. Chong may seem like fair game considering his new role as the so-called “champion of democracy” with his Reform Act bills, and his curious defence of the elections bills thus far (or at least his evasion of taking a stand until they are through the committee stage). But if they think that Gosal is going to break cabinet solidarity on a government bill, they’ve really lost touch with our contemporary reality, and it makes one wonder how they feel about one of the most important conventions about how we form governments under our system of Responsible Government. Would an NDP government not speak with a single voice? I doubt that very much, which makes this particular tactic all the more eye-roll inducing.
Roundup: The sudden demise of Jim Flaherty
Parliament Hill was in shock yesterday when news came down just minutes before Question Period was due to begin – former finance minister Jim Flaherty had died of a heart attack, three weeks after he left cabinet. A flurry of conferencing on the floor between Thomas Mulcair, Peter Van Loan, Ralph Goodale and eventually Elizabeth May erupted, and a decision was relayed to the Speaker. At the end of Members’ Statements, Scheer declared the House suspended, and opposition MPs streamed across the floor to console the Conservatives on the other side of the chamber. A few minutes later, Scheer announced that the House would stand adjourned for the remainder of the day. Harper was meeting with the President of Peru at the time, and was supposed to be holding a press conference at that time (counter-programmed against QP, for the record). Instead, the caucus filed into the Reading Room, and Harper gave a short statement, Laureen Harper standing next to him, dabbing her eyes with a Kleenex, and that was it. The doors were closed and the party mourned in private.