Tag Archives: Parliamentary Budget Officer

Roundup: Following a failed policy really badly

Posted on by

While Canada continues to follow Australia’s failed policies around detaining asylum seekers, there are some important differences – in Australia, the dedicated refugee detention centres are focused on their wellbeing, and are designed not to be prisons. In Canada, detained refugee claimants are sent to overcrowded provincial jails, with the convicted criminal populations. Yeah, this is really going to end well.

On the Robocon file, online postings from before the 2011 election match the complaints that Elections Canada was getting about calls telling people that their polling locations had changed. Meanwhile, over in the Federal Court case where those six ridings are being challenged, the Conservative party lawyer has filed a factum that says that there’s no evidence that these calls actually dissuaded anyone from voting.

Kady O’Malley outlines the next steps in the battle over Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Re-election and nuclear reactors

Posted on by

Barak Obama has been re-elected as President of the United States. Hopefully we can now stop obsessing about this and get on with our lives. Incidentally, Thomas Mulcair was first out to offer a congratulatory press release, Harper’s was a little later, while MPs from all parties are shocked and dismayed at the ridiculous $6 billion spent over the campaign.

During Harper’s trip to India, a deal has been signed to sell Canadian uranium for their nuclear reactors and they promise not to make bombs out of it this time. The government there also gave Harper a pointed warning about Sikh extremists back in Canada.

Peter Penashue, during his brief and flustered moments in QP yesterday, said he’d been travelling around the country. Kady O’Malley looked into that, and found that almost all of his travel has been to his riding to make government announcements, and that as Intergovernmental Affairs minister, he hasn’t even visited a number of provinces. Meanwhile, he did also briefly speak to the media, and promised that he won’t quit, but he will address campaign financing questions on Tuesday next week.

Continue reading →

QP: Toews attacks, Penashue lost

Posted on by

On the anniversary of the very first sitting of the Canadian parliament in 1867, it was a somewhat heated day in the Commons today during QP, and Vic Toews gave another gob-smacking performance. When the PM’s away, the ministers will balls everything up – or something like that. Thomas Mulcair started off by reading out a question on our impending nuclear agreement with India would include independent verification that the materials were used only for peaceful purposes. John Baird, once again acting as back-up PM du jour, assured him that the government takes nuclear non-proliferation seriously. Mulcair then asked why China was getting better briefings on agreements than Canadians were, to which Baird talked about how the FIPA was signed on the margins of another trade conference, and for his final question, Mulcair recounted his doomsday scenario of China buying up Alberta’s natural resources with nobody to stop them. Baird suggested that Mulcair was wearing his tinfoil hat, and touted the safe environment for Canadian investment that the FIPA would create. Peggy Nash was up next, trying to wrap the PBO’s latest report on spending cuts with the issue of Harper’s armoured limousines in India, but Baird deflected it with a defence of the RCMP’s recommendations. Bob Rae was up next, asking a pair of questions on whether Harper would meet with provincial premiers, given how he likes to travel abroad to meet other world leaders. Baird responded that he regularly meets with premiers of all stripes, and hey, look at all the good work they did together with the Economic Action Plan™! For his final question, Rae quoted the trade minister about the “opaque investment climate” in India, and wondered what we told them about the opaque climate in Canada, given that there is no clarity on what constitutes “net benefit.” Baird instead used the opportunity to recite a bunch of trite talking points about the jobs and the economy, and the fictional NDP “carbon tax.”

Continue reading →

QP: The committee has spoken

Posted on by

The Conservatives had a bit of Halloween-themes fun as QP was about to start by getting Corneliu Chisu, an MP who hails from the Transylvanian region of Romania, to affect his best affected accent before warning of the “scary” NDP fictional carbon tax – a tacit admission that this whole carbon tax nonsense is really one big joke. When QP officially got underway, Thomas Mulcair read off a trio of questions around the Canada-China FIPA, promising to cancel it if he should one day form government. Harper’s response was that the investment community has been looking for this kind of long-term protection. Peggy Nash was up next, asking why the Parliamentary Budget Officer was not getting the information he requested, to which Flaherty assures her that the House already gets this kind if information on a regular basis. For his first pair of questions, Bob Rae wondered why the Canada-China FIPA had a 15-year notice period as opposed to the usual six months, to which Harper reiterates the point about long-term protection. For his final question, Rae asked why there was such secrecy around the FIPA and the Nexen deal, and asked, “What would Preston do?” But Harper would not rise to the bait of invoking Preston Manning, and spoke about the FIPA providing a legal framework for investment.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Combing through the Public Accounts

Posted on by

The public accounts were released yesterday, which give a detailed accounting of where money was actually spent. Whether or not MPs will take the time to compare the public accounts with the last year’s estimates – you know, like they’re supposed to in order to hold the government to account – remains to be seen, but in the meantime, We The Media have combed through them for salacious details. Things like a strip club being among the recipients for G20 compensation, or the loss of $1.9 million in stolen government property – including weapons from the military.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer – who is no doubt also combing these documents – is waiting on that legal opinion about his mandate, incidentally.

Food bank use in the country is still on the rise, despite the “fragile economic recovery” and all of those net new jobs that the government keeps touting.

Continue reading →

QP: The projections are on track

Posted on by

The House was a bit sleepy today, where Thomas Mulcair started off by reading out a pair of questions on the rules around foreign takeovers, the English one of which using the phrase “like a thief in the night.” John Baird, acting as the back-up PM du jour, thanked him for raising the tone of debate before proceeding to remind him how much the government supported foreign investment and that the minister was reviewing it. For his last question, Mulcair asked about the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s lowered growth projections, but Baird offered up some bland talking points about growth! And jobs! And warnings against the fictional NDP carbon tax! Megan Leslie followed up with a pair of English questions on the very same topic, for which Ted Menzies assured her that we are in a period of slow global recovery, and that the projections were on track. Bob Rae was then up and asked a pair of questions about the cancelled EI programme that offered five additional weeks of benefits in hard-hit areas, to which Baird responded that the measures were always meant to be temporary. For his final question, Rae wondered why Peter Penashue was still sitting in cabinet after his campaign overspent in the last election – along with additional allegations of improper donations. Baird assured him that the new Official Agent was working with Elections Canada, before launching into an angry rant about how the Liberals needed to get their own house in order before casting aspersions elsewhere.

Continue reading →

Roundup: What fake parts?

Posted on by

The Americans discovered a problem that some of their military hardware was being sold to them with counterfeit parts, most of them from China. We buy most our military hardware from the Americans. So what is DND doing about this possible threat? Nothing. You’re welcome, Canada.

The Conservatives have consented to allowing ten different committees study aspects of the Omnibus budget bill, for what it’s worth. The NDP moved a motion to break it up into eleven parts, not that the government will take them up on it. Meanwhile, John Geddes parses what the changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act means, and why the government talking points about it aren’t really all that accurate.

Not unsurprisingly, the recession derailed the government’s debt retirement plans, and even less surprising is the fact that they haven’t come up with any new plans. Seeing as long-term planning isn’t really this government’s forte and all.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A no thank-you for transparency

Posted on by

In its response to the report from the Government Operations committee, the government has opted not to make certain changes that would make the estimates process more transparent. Currently the estimates reflect the previous year’s budget, and MPs wanted to change that so they have a better idea of what they’re voting on – by Tony Clement has said no. Because you know, it’s not like the estimates process is the backbone of why we have a parliament in the first place or anything. Not unexpectedly, they also rejected the call for a more independent Parliamentary Budget Officer as part of this report.

The government announced that three by-elections – Victoria, Durham, and Calgary Centre – will be held on November 26th. This precludes the possibility of Etobicoke Centre being included in that because a Thursday decision from the Supreme Court will be outside of the minimum time frame. The Conservative Party spokesperson then inexplicably stated that majority governments don’t win by-elections, which Kady O’Malley thoroughly debunked. (Also, the wouldn’t win Calgary Centre? Really? Unless he’s foreshadowing how unpopular Joan Crockatt really is…) Thomas Mulcair, meanwhile, calls these by-elections a warm-up for 2015.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The MP pension agreement

Posted on by

With a bit of negotiation, the portion of Omnibus Budget Bill 2: The Revenge that deals with MP pensions was hived off and passed unanimously yesterday morning, and it’s now on its way to the Senate for consideration. This after a brief hiccup where it seems that the original Liberal motion would have included RCMP and public sector pensions in there as well, despite meaning to only pass MP pensions. Oops. One can imagine that this will likely be law before the end of next week, even if the Senate does want to actually study it, but seeing as it’s two clauses, I can’t imagine it’ll be that much. Now the opposition parties want other sections hived off, but fat chance of that happening – the government talking points seem to be that by agreeing to this deal, the opposition agreed that the rest of the bill should be able to stand intact. Sigh.

But wait! Former Conservative and now “Independent Conservative” MP Peter Goldring calls this pension move “cowardly” because it appeals to base populism and further distances MPs from fair compensation. Not that I don’t necessarily disagree, however we’ve so poisoned the discourse around political compensation that we may soon expect sackcloth and ashes for the privilege of service.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Salary freezes vs casework

Posted on by

MPs say they’re fine with continuing the freeze on their own salaries, but they don’t want their office budgets cut – and indeed, some want an increase – because their offices are busy doing front-line EI and immigration casework because of cuts to Service Canada. All of which is infuriating because MPs offices aren’t supposed to be doing this kind of work, and it’s something that should be addressed. It’s not only not your MP’s job to do this paperwork, but it starts blurring lines between the political offices and the civil service, which is a Very Bad Thing. This is how bribery and corruption happens, and we need to start putting those barriers between these offices and the civil service in before things get any worse.

The political loans bill is moving ahead, but the Liberals have concerns that it puts too much ability for banks to decide who should be able to run for office or not, seeing as they’ll be the primary entities able to make political loans once it passes. The NDP say they want to limit the same kinds of loans from previous Liberal leaderships – while their own last leadership contest features their own candidates taking out loans from private individuals. Imagine that.

Continue reading →