After what appeared to be a breakout of actual debate during the Orders of the Day relating to the NDP’s opposition day motion on climate change, no eruptions of MPs trying to catch the Speaker’s eye during Members’ Statements, and a moment of silence for workers killed on the job, it was time for QP. Tomas Mulcair started things off by reading a condemnation of Joe Oliver’s trip to Washington and his insulting of a climate scientist. James Moore, the designated back-up PM du jour, insisted that the NDP doesn’t understand economics, and that the government was fighting to create jobs. Mulcair then switched topics and read a question about the concerns the Conservative premier of New Brunswick has about the EI changes. Moore assured him that they were working with the premier as they were helping get people back to work. Yvon Godin then asked the same thing in French, turning puce with outrage as he read his script. Diane Finley responded with her stock assurances that they were helping Canadians get back to work. Bob Rae was up for the Liberals, and after making a reference to Harper’s admonition about “committing sociology,” he turned to the party’s topic of the week — youth unemployment. Moore assured him that they had created programmes to help youth and were addressing the problem. For his final question, Rae asked about the growing number of reports of the use of chemical weapons in Syria, to which Deepak Obhrai assured him that they were monitoring the situation, which they found unacceptable.
Tag Archives: Privacy
Roundup: The ruling is enough
It seems that in the wake of the Speaker’s ruling on members’ statements, the restless Conservative backbenches have backed off of their support of the Liberal opposition day motion on making Members’ Statements alphabetical in distribution. The feeling seems to be that the Speaker’s advice that if they want to stand up and be heard, that it was enough for them. Um, okay. We’ll see if that actually happens, especially considering that the delicate balance of party allotments are also in play during both Members’ Statements and Question Period in general, but it seems to me that this becomes a case of everyone being contended with half-measures, rather than any genuine reform. Sure, Warawa might have been surprised to learn that the lists are mere suggestions for the Speaker, but that doesn’t mean that MPs – or Canadians – should be satisfied by this ruling. Rather, it should be the springboard to the restoration of our Parliament to the way it should act – without lists or scripts, where MPs are engaged in the debates, actively participating, capable of delivering actual back-and-forth exchanges with spontaneity and class, rather than the dull recitations into the record that we’re now seeing.
QP: Catching the Speaker’s eye
The press gallery was full at the very start of Members’ Statements, hoping that MPs would take the Speaker’s advice yesterday and start standing up to catch his eye, in order to bypass the dreaded Whip’s list. And no, nobody tried to catch the Speaker’s eye, and the list carried on unabated, with Warawa on said list to talk about a local talent show. Breathless anticipation, all for naught. When QP got underway, Thomas Mulcair read off a gimme question about meeting with Rehteah Parsons’ parents, and the need for cyberbullying legislation. (Funnily enough, the NDP voted against a bill to do just that by Liberal MP Hedy Fry, ostensibly because it was poorly drafted, yet not offering amendments). Harper agreed that there was a problem that needs to be addressed, and that they need to make it clear that the Internet was not a free pass for criminal behaviour. Mulcair moved onto the topic of the Federal Court decision regarding the Parliamentary Budget Officer, to which Harper replied with the implication that the previous PBO, Kevin Page, was partisan. Mulcair changed topics again, and moved onto the issue of privacy breaches, to which Harper assured him that they take those issues seriously and have developed action plans when breaches happen. Charmaine Borg asked the very same again, to which Tony Clement gave her the same reassurances, but with an added gratuitous shot at the former Liberal government. For the Liberals, Joyce Murray asked about the topic of the week — youth unemployment. Harper assured her that they had all kinds of programmes in place to help youth find jobs. For the final questions the round, Bob Rae asked whether Canada would try to get the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting moved here, and to take over the chair from Sri Lanka given their human rights abuses. Harper agreed that they were concerned about the Sri Lankan situation, and would be monitoring the situation. Elizabeth May and Bruce Hyer stood up for pretty much every question in this round, trying to catch the Speaker’s eye, to no avail.
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: Robocall charges laid
Former Guelph Conservative campaign worker Michael Sona has been charged in connection to the misleading robocall affair in the last election. Sona continues to insist he is innocent – without the access or means to pull it off – but one former Elections Canada lawyer suspects that they may be hoping he’ll take a deal and provide more information in exchange for a lesser charge or to have the charges dropped.
In its annual report on plans and priorities, HRSDC notes the likelihood of another incident of loss of personal data because of the proliferation of mobile storage devices, as well as retiring employees who don’t necessarily tell their successors where they’ve left everything. (And as someone who has dealt with records management in federal departments before, let me say that upon retirement, some employees simply shove everything into a box and leave it in a basement for years – not cool).
Roundup: Exit Garneau
In a surprising move, Marc Garneau decided to up sticks and pull out of the Liberal leadership race. The assumptive number two challenger who was providing a lot of the heft in the race did the math and figured that he wasn’t going to be able to win, so it was time to be a loyal soldier and support Justin Trudeau – never mind the number of attacks he launched at him in the past few weeks, and his comments about his lack of depth. Mind you, he probably did Trudeau a lot of good by giving him some good practice for the kinds of attacks that will be launched at him should he win the race and have to face the Commons daily. Oh, but wait, the other challengers said – a preferential ballot where all of the ridings are weighted equally may mean that a sheer numerical advantage may be blunted. Well, maybe. I’m also sure that David Bertschi, who should have sashayed away a long time ago, is overjoyed that he’s no longer in eight place, and that he’s now gaining momentum. Chantal Hébert notes that this exit may have saved Garneau from a humiliating defeat where Joyce Murray might have overtaken him as she has a kind of “ballot box” issue to run on, where Garneau didn’t really. Paul Wells looks to the coming Trudeau Years, and what will likely be two years of people complaining about what a disappointment he’s been as leader. Andrew Coyne looks at how actual party memberships seem to have evaporated under the new “supporter” category, making the party little more than a personality cult that exists more in theory than in practice. Oh, and the party brass acceded to Trudeau’s request to extend the deadline by an extra week in order to work out all of the “technical glitches” with getting all of their supporters registered to vote.
QP: Not recognising the best finance minister in the world
Interrupting a day of debate on wanton constitutional vandalism, QP started off with Thomas Mulcair reading off a question about EI auditors “shadowing” claimants, to which Harper responded with some bog-standard response about EI being there when they need it. Mulcair then moved onto a question about Flaherty’s back-and-forth policy changes without consultation, and treated the Peter DeVries and Scott Clark article as though they were still currently employed by the department. Harper sang Flaherty’s praises in response. Mulcair carried on, citing Flaherty’s breach of ethics over the CRTC letter, not that Harper’s vigorous praises were diminished any less. Chris Charlton finished off the leader’s round, asking about EI training funds, but Jim Flaherty assured her that they consulted broadly on the budget. Bob Rae was up next, keeping up the issue of the EI training funds, but Harper touted just how transparent his government is as a non-sequitur response. Rae then brought up Dr. Arthur Porter’s party donations while he was SIRC chair, and wondered how he managed to escape a security clearance. Harper insisted that none of the allegations against Porter had to do with his time at SIRC — skirting the issue of donations. For his final question, Rae wondered why there wasn’t an inquiry into Jeffrey Delisle’s security breaches, but Harper told him that they’re not unique to Canada, and brought up the Bradley Manning case in the States.
QP: Specious and unclever comparisons
Monday afternoon, and MPs were still filtering back into Ottawa after the weekend. Thomas Mulcair started things off by reading questions on EI inspectors’ guidelines, and how the government could justify that kind of invasion of privacy. James Moore, the designated back-up PM du jour, accused Mulcair of fear-mongering. Mulcair then moved onto the specious comparison between the Senate and its “honour system” and the EI inspections. Moore pointed out that Mulcair was happy to trash people without offering any particular solutions for reform. Alexandre Boulerice was up next, and continued to decry said “honour system” (not that this has anything to do with the business of the Commons, and never mind that MPs’ books are even more opaque). Poilievre stood up to speak to Boulerice’s separatist credentials instead of answering. Bob Rae was up for the Liberals next, wondering about the government’s curious plans for dealing with slow economic growth by means of more austerity and curtailing competition. Moore instead insisted that the Liberals had no credible economic plans. Rae asked then about the EI inspections, not that Moore’s answer differed much. For his final question, Rae asked about how security clearances have become more lax under the present government. Moore insisted that the allegations against Dr. Arthur Porter had nothing to do with his time as an appointee.
QP: Getting Harper on the record, scattershot style
With all leaders on deck on a lovely Tuesday afternoon in the Nation’s Capital, QP got underway with Thomas Mulcair reading a question on why John Duncan was dropped from cabinet over an improper letter, but not Jim Flaherty. Harper responded that in Flaherty’s case, it was an administrative error. Mulcair moved on to the topic of EI “quotas,” to which Harper insisted that they were merely performance audit. Mulcair then moved onto the “scandals” in the Senate, to which Harper somehow turned it into a paean for an elected Senate — not that it would actually address the current issues. For his final question, Mulcair demanded that Harper stay away from the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka, and Harper started off by carrying on his elected Senate paean before saying that he would not attend the meeting. For the Liberals, Bob Rae asked about the house calls that EI recipients are receiving as part of the effort to stamp out fraud. Harper responded by saying that EI was paid into by honest Canadians and they want to ensure that the money is there for honest recipients. For his final question, Rae asked about the Estimates tabled yesterday and the increase in advertising budgets while front-line services are being cut. Harper insisted that said front-line services were not being cut.
Roundup: The unravelling cases of Senators Wallin and Duffy
In the past couple of days of Senate revelations, we find that Senator Pamela Wallin has an Ontario health card and not a Saskatchewan one, which raises the question about her residency – no matter that she spent 168 days in Saskatchewan last year. Wallin also apparently repaid a substantial amount in expense claims before this whole audit business started, which is also interesting news. Senator Mike Duffy, meanwhile, could actually end up owing $90,000 plus interest on his living expense claims rather than the $42,000 that was cited over the weekend. Oops. Tim Harper looks at the sideshow that is Senator Duffy’s non-apology and smells a deal made to save his job. Senator Cowan says that repayment doesn’t answer the questions – especially not the ones about residency, which means he may not be up to protect Duffy – or Wallin and Patterson’s – seats. And those Senators who’ve been silent on their residency claims are now being called before the Senate Internal Economy committee to explain themselves. Terry Milewski goes through the entire housing claims allegations and fixes an appropriate amount of scorn on the idea that two ticky-boxes are “complex” on the forms.