Roundup: Recycled economic planks

Thomas Mulcair spent the noon hour yesterday laying out three of his party’s economic planks for the coming election. (A reminder: it’s still nine months away). To that end, Mulcair promised a cut to small business taxes, an extension of the capital gains cost allowances for companies buying new equipment, and an innovation tax credit for businesses. The first of those is not new – the NDP have been going in this direction since the previous election, and the second is current government policy that is set to expire, but one wonders how much it has been taken up as the government already extended it, and we still hear that Canadian companies didn’t spend the high dollar years investing in this equipment to boost productivity at a time when it was advantageous for them to do so, and now the dollar is much lower and it’s more costly for these businesses to buy this new equipment. The third, geared toward research and development, again sounds suspiciously like what the current government has been trying to do as they retooled the National Research Council to help with commercialisation of technologies. There is, of course, debate on some of the utility of these points as well, with certain experts saying that those small businesses that would benefit from this kind of tax cut are already well off. (Also, small businesses are not the biggest job creators in the country – sorry, but that doesn’t make any mathematical sense). The final point is geared toward revitalising the manufacturing sector, but it’s pocket change in terms of dollars, and the sector has much more entrenched structural problems. Of course, there is no mention of how this is costed, on top of promises for their childcare spaces, restoring the much higher healthcare transfer escalator, and returning OAS eligibility to 65 – and no, raising corporate income taxes won’t get you that much, nor will going after offshore tax havens. Mulcair also added that the NDP would move to protect pensions from bankruptcy proceedings, which again is not new policy, for what it’s worth.

Continue reading

QP: Trying to protect bureaucrats

After the government unveiled their much ballyhooed price gap legislation, it remained to be seen if that would lead off QP, or if Julian Fantino would remain in the line of fire. Before things got started, however, the two new Conservative MPs from the recent by-elections, Jim Eglinski and Pat Perkins, took their seats. Thomas Mulcair had not yet returned from Paris, leaving Peter Julian to lead off, asking about the US Senate torture report, and how CSIS and the RCMP could use information obtained by torture. Harper insisted it had nothing to do with Canada. Julian moved onto the veterans file and demanded the resignation of Julian Fantino, to which Harper said that the NDP were more interested in protecting bureaucrats and cutting services. Nycole Turmel was up next, and asked about processing times for EI applications, and the decision to hire temporary workers to clear the backlog. Jason Kenney responded that they were dedicated to giving good levels of service, and thanked his parliamentary secretary for the report on processing. Turmel tied in the Social Security Tribunal and the Temporary Foreign Workers programme, calling Kenney incompetent, but Kenney repeated Harper’s line that the NDP is averse to efficiencies. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the sacred obligation to veterans, wondering why the priority was a tax break for wealthy families instead of veterans. Harper insisted that they provide benefits to both families and veterans, and the current court case was against a previous Liberal programme. Trudeau listed a number of veterans programmes cut or underfunded by the government, to which Harper recited of list of programmes that he claimed the Liberals voted against before trotting out his line that they were trying to protect bureaucrats. Trudeau asked again in French, and Harper claimed that 100 of the jobs they eliminated existed solely to delay benefits payments. (Really?!)

Continue reading

Roundup: A largely fictitious distinction

While the battle over what’s happening at Veterans Affairs continues to rage, we are continually reassured by both the Prime Minister and the Original Series duotronic computer system known as Julian Fantino that we shouldn’t worry – that any cuts that have been made are all “back office” bureaucrats, and that front-line services haven’t been affected. Really! And while the example of cutting 12 photocopy clerks by moving to digitised medical records may be an example of those “back office” cuts, we should stop kidding ourselves – there is no neat dividing line between what is a front-line service position and a back-office bureaucrat because it’s the job of those bureaucrats to process the work of the front-line providers. If anything, this notion that back-office positions are being eliminated means anything, it’s that it forces more front-line workers to do the processing work themselves, essentially increasing their workload and making them less able to help veterans because they’re the ones busy processing the paperwork rather than focusing on the service aspect. Using the excuse of it being “back office” is largely a fictional distinction made for the sake of optics – but then again, that is the way that this government likes to operate, by photo op and announcement rather than by actual results, so this really should surprise nobody.

Continue reading

Roundup: PBO declares the cupboard bare

The Parliamentary Budget Officer appeared before the Commons finance committee yesterday, and said that after the new sorta-income-splitting Family Tax Credit rollout that there won’t be any fiscal room for any further permanent tax cuts or spending measures. In other words, the cupboard is bare (and still reliant on further austerity to keep the budget in balance). Kevin Milligan gives a more detailed breakdown of what all of the family tax credits mean, while Stephen Gordon once again says what needs to be said, especially with what this means for the next election:

Continue reading

Roundup: A surprise trip to Iraq

John Baird quietly took a trip to Iraq along with is opposition critics, Paul Dewar and Marc Garneau, to meet with officials there and to pledge aid. James Cudmore looks at what Canada could contribute if we take the fight to ISIS, which could include special forces or aerial reconnaissance and support, but unlikely boots on the ground, as it’s politically unpalatable in an election year. Whatever we do, Harper has stated that it’ll be done on a tight budget because we really want to be cheap about fighting the kinds of grave threats that Harper is making them out to be.

Continue reading

QP: We’re taking action without a commission

Somewhat amazing for a Monday in this session, there actually was a major leader in the House. Almost unbelievable, I know. Thomas Mulcair led off by asking about the UN special rapporteur on indigenous people’s report on Canada’s Aboriginals, and demanded a public inquiry on missing and murdered Aboriginal women. Peter MacKay responded and touted all of the measures they’ve taken like renewing funding for the Aboriginal justice strategy. Mulcair moved on, and demanded powers to compel testimony for the Elections Commissioner, citing that the Conservative party lawyer gave false information to Elections Canada. Pierre Poilievre insisted that his party was cleared of any wrongdoing, and a second round of those questions — which was more party business than government business — got a similar response. Mulcair then moved on to a small business hiring tax credit, to which Joe Oliver read some good news talking points about job creation. Mulcair noted that unemployment was higher in Toronto than the national average, and decried temporary foreign workers. Jason Kenney insisted that they were cracking down on those who abused the programme. John McCallum was up for the Liberals, and thrice denounced the problems with the government’s Job Bank, and Kenney defended the system, calling it a useful platform.

Continue reading

QP: Those pesky temporary foreign strippers

With the March for Life happening on the lawn outside — mostly Catholic high school students bussed in for the occasion, and disrupted by topless protesters — and with the House not sitting tomorrow because of the Day of Honour for the mission in Afghanistan, it was a bit of a Friday-on-a-Thursday day in the chamber. Well, attendance was a bit better, but not much. Megan Leslie led off for the NDP and brought up the government collecting data by “creeping” Facebook pages. Tony Clement assured her that the government wants to listen to Canadians, and they were engaging with the Privacy Commissioner, before accusing them of trying to shut down Canadians who were letting their views be known. Leslie changed topics to the Nadon appointment and the reports that he was advised to resign from the Federal Court and rejoin the Quebec Bar. MacKay accused her of conspiracy theory, and touted the consultation process and the expert legal advice they sought. Françoise Boivin carried on with the same line of questioning in both languages, to which MacKay continued to tout the process that they followed. John McCallum led off for the Liberals and accused the government of hating the Canada Pension Plan and being dismissive of Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario pension plans. Clement responded and decried the “massive tax grab” that would ruin jobs and opportunity. McCallum moved onto the topic of market wages for foreign workers and driving down Canadian wages, to which Kenney took a shot at the opposition parties.

Continue reading

QP: The authorities always seek warrants — really!

On a rainy day, after the various caucuses met, MPs gathered in the House for our daily exercise in government accountability. Of note, it was also Stephen Harper’s 55th birthday, not that anyone expected the opposition to go easy on him because of it. Thomas Mulcair led off and sharply asked who authorized the release of that telecom data of a million Canadians. Harper said that he rejected the premise of the question and assured him that agencies follow the rules and get warrants. Mulcair pressed, but Harper reiterated that they get warrants and that there is legislation before the House to modernize investigative tools. Mulcair insisted that the legislation would exculpate the need for warrants, to which Harper once again reiterated that agencies get warrants when needed. (That might be the key, given that they don’t seem to need them if they get the data for the asking). Mulcair wondered what information the government was seeking, and which telecom companies were cooperating. Harper said that it was not the government seeking the data, but law enforcement agencies, and that there was independent oversight. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the Temporary Foreign Workers intakes for areas which don’t seem to need them, to which Harper gave his usual bland assurances that they had created jobs and they were reviewing the programme. Trudeau reminded him that five years ago, Sheila Fraser warned of the low quality of Labour Market Opinions that were open to abuse, but Harper stuck to his talking points, same again when the question was asked in French, adding that Trudeau himself had asked for a permit for his riding.

Continue reading

QP: Stronger inspections, a stronger blacklist

After a two-week break, MPs were in good spirits, though the front benches were a little thin. Thomas Mulcair led off and immediately launched into prosecutorial mode around the Temporary Foreign Workers Programme. Jason Kenney responded that they had expanded the powers of inspectors and strengthened the blacklist provisions. Mulcair insisted that Kenney had known of problems for six years, but Kenney said that Mulcair was conflating a number of programmes into one whole, where those few incidents of abuse were being dealt with. Mulcair changed gears, and wondered why the Commissioner of Elections couldn’t get the power to compel testimony or produce papers like the Competition Bureau has. Poilievre insisted that they could get a court order. Mulcair didn’t press, but moved onto the topic of allowing the Chief Electoral Officer, but Poilievre carried on about Information to Obtain orders and demanded an apology for the robocall allegations. Mulcair said that the Federal Court said that calls were made — not actually asking a question. Poilievre pointed this out, and carried on demanding that apology. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, and demanded the Auditor General look into the Temporary Foreign Workers programme, to which Kenney assured him that the AG controls his own destiny and touted the changes they had made. Goodale carried on listing problems and repeated the call for the AG, though Kenney repeated his answer, making a dig at the previous Liberal government. Goodale said that the government needs to increase the number of pathways to citizenship, to which Kenney listed off a number of programmes that his government had implemented.

Continue reading

Roundup: Anders down in defeat

The Conservative members of the new riding of Calgary Signal Hill have spoken, and Rob Anders will not be their candidate in the next federal election. Instead, former provincial finance minister Ron Liepert has managed to win the nomination, apparently by a “comfortable majority,” even though Jason Kenney had taken to not only endorsing but also voicing a robocall on Anders’ behalf late in the game. Liepert, after winning, told Kenney to mind his own business rather angrily, incidentally. Anders has indicated that he would sit the remainder of this parliament, but hasn’t indicated what he’ll do next, though there is some speculation that he’ll still try to contest another Calgary riding’s nomination. Anders had labelled this nomination as a fight for the “soul” of the Conservative party, his “true blue” version versus a more “red Tory” Liepert (but apparently not even really), and in the aftermath, Liepert has said that his victory shows where the mainstream of the Conservative party has moved. It also shows how open nominations give the grassroots members more of a voice for who they want to represent the party on their behalf, rather than being assigned that voice for them. Aaron Wherry tries to search for meaning in this nomination upset here. (And be sure to check out the Herald’s video from the aftermath).

Continue reading