Tag Archives: Privilege

Roundup: Those complicated tariff changes

Posted on by

While the issue of tariffs continues to dominate Question Period to the point of the absurd – witness yesterday’s eye-rollingly ridiculous “tax on fishing” questions – it should come as no surprise that these tariff changes are complicated. So complicated – and without any sense of coherence – that the professor who brought some of these changes to light suspects it was a way of raising revenue that’s so complex that most consumers won’t know why prices went up.

Access to Information documents reveal that a First Nations leader was forwarding Idle No More planning emails to the federal government as a means of keeping them in the loop, so that they wouldn’t do something stupid. These also included emails from Manitoba Grand Chief Derek Neepinak, who was planning on trips to Washington to garner support there.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Loyalty and tight lids on issues

Posted on by

On the continuing Mark Warawa “muzzling” drama, the appeal to the Procedure and House Affairs subcommittee on private members’ business met in camera yesterday, and we should find out their decision this morning. Warawa himself does his best to appear loyal to the PM, and doesn’t want to place the blame for this all on him. Aaron Wherry takes note of the circular logic that the NDP seem to employ when it comes to this debate – how it’s bad that the government muzzles, and yet they should absolutely keep the abortion debate under a tight lid. Bruce Cheadle looks back at caucus divisions over the abortion issue among the past governments of the Liberals and Progressive Conservatives. Chantal Hébert sees the possible seeds of a leadership challenge being sown in this Warawa drama. Andrew Coyne (quite rightly) points to the bigger questions of our parliamentary democracy that are at stake by the heavy hand of the leaders’ offices.

Continue reading →

Roundup: 28 ineligible donations, $47K overspent

Posted on by

It seems that Peter Penashue accepted 28 different improper or illegal donations during the last election, and overspent his campaign by $47,000. You know, small change, and apparently he keeps claiming that it’s not his fault. Err, except that he signed off on all of it, and as the former Chief Electoral Officer said, those signatures mean something, and when the Elections Commissioner completes his investigation, this may yet result in criminal charges – albeit not before the by-election will be called, unfortunately. Laura Payton asks the outstanding questions about what happened in the Labrador election, and Peter Penashue’s resignation – most of it revolving around the money (most of which came from the party itself, it seems). Meanwhile, the former leader of the Newfoundland and Labrador Liberals has announced that she will contest the nomination for the Labrador by-election. She may yet have to battle Todd Russell for that nomination if he decides to throw his hat back in the ring.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Interim PBO and the search for a replacement

Posted on by

In a rather surprising announcement at the end of the day yesterday, the government has named the Parliamentary Librarian as the interim Parliamentary Budget Officer until Kevin Page’s replacement can be found. That process is internal to the Library, and Page has expressed concerns that the makeup of the committee charged with the search is being kept secret, but I do get concerned when opposition parties want input into those processes, because it ultimately erodes the accountability for those appointments. Look at the questions surrounding Arthur Porter these days, and how Vic Toews skirts accountability by pointing out that the opposition leaders were consulted on his appointment. That’s why the prerogative power of appointment should rest with the Governor in Council – because it keeps the executive as the sole resting place of accountability. Meanwhile, the job criteria for the next PBO have been posted, and they include qualities like “discreet” and “consensus seeking” – perhaps not too surprising after the battles that Page had with the previous Parliamentary Librarian over his role.

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: Laundering future abuses of power

Posted on by

After pushing through new legislation that gives him extraordinary powers to determine who can be barred from entering the country, immigration minister Jason Kenney now says he’ll let a parliamentary committee determine the guidelines around it. Instead of, you know, putting limits in the legislation in the first place so that he’s not vested with so much arbitrary power in the first place. Also, it launders any potential political fallout when the powers are abused, because he gets to say “the committee set those limits, not me.”

The rebranding of the Canadian Museum of Civilization means it is now the Canadian Museum of History, which will be more of a unified history museum, which we don’t really have here in the Nation’s Capital. It won’t be another war museum, and no, the minister can’t exert curatorial influence. Part of this idea of networking smaller museums around the country is one where they can share artefacts between them for focused exhibits, which is great – assuming, of course, that they have the budgets to transport these artefacts around the country.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Farewell, Peter Lougheed

Posted on by

Former Alberta premier Peter Lougheed passed away last night at age 84, in the hospital that bears his name. Lougheed started the reign of the Progressive Conservatives in the province, which has kept on for more than 40 years. He was one of the premiers at the centre of the patriation of the constitution, and fought for provincial rights. Here are some statements from Stephen Harper, Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi, and his ultimate political successor, premier Alison Redford.

Looking ahead to the return of Parliament next week, there will be another budget bill this autumn that promises to be pretty contentious as well.

Here is a good summary of the whole issue between the House of Commons and the Auditor General on that Access to Information issue.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Truth and ministerial accountability

Posted on by

As mentioned earlier, the Speaker has ruled that there was no prima facia breach of privilege in the government’s answers on the F-35s in the House. So what does this actually mean. First of all, it should be noted that Speaker Scheer parsed things pretty finely, and in that respect, noted that it was difficult to prove a deliberate misleading, which is why he couldn’t make his ruling. (You can read the text here). Fair enough, one supposes, but there were some additional eyebrow-raising aspects to this, in that he pretty much dismissed the notion of ministerial accountability out of hand. In other words, not his problem. This means that as always, this remains a problem for the Crown, and in that, it means that the only people who can punish the Crown for ministers not taking responsibility would be the Commons, by means of withdrawing their confidence. And of course that would mean in this case that backbenchers would have to be sufficiently exercised to want to punish their own party’s government (which this current lot of spineless louts is highly unlikely to do). Marc Garneau raised the additional point after the ruling that this further insulates a government from the actions of the civil servant because they can henceforth claim ignorance, and ministerial accountability may well be a past concept.

Here is the text of the motion the NDP are proposing for splitting the omnibus budget bill. Elizabeth May blogs about the various changes found within the bill and wonders if government spokespersons haven’t read the bill considering that their talking points don’t match the reality of the text. Maclean’s Aaron Wherry has an extremely trying interview with Peter Van Loan about the bill, and his justifying the omnibus-ness of it all.

The Veterans Ombudsman has released a scathing report about the conduct and performance of the Veterans Review and Appeal Board, saying some 60 percent of cases were handled improperly. The minister’s response? That they’ll soon be launching a new Action Plan™ to deal with it.

The NDP “digital issues” critic wants to investigate if social media sites are doing enough to protect privacy. Fair enough – but I don’t think that labelling them “Big Data” is really helping anyone.

Here’s a look at the number of contaminated sites that need cleaning up across the country.

And a potential Liberal leadership candidate is launching trailers for his “exploratory committee” bid, but there are cautions about what kind of fundraising he can actually do at this stage.

Up today – the Mental Health Commission is releasing their first report, outlining their strategy, priorities and recommendations, which includes the need for $4 billion in new funds over the next ten years.

QP: Polite requests to split the omnibudget

Posted on by

With Thomas Mulcair away, it was up to Nathan Cullen to lead the NDP for Question Period today. After this morning’s presser to put the government on notice that they were going to make a formal request to split the budget bill, Cullen asked a trio of questions about just that – splitting said budget bill. And lo and behold, James Moore – in his capacity as Deputy PM du jour – rose to say that this budget bill was getting more debate than any other in history. Peggy Nash rose to ask the very same thing, calling the bill a “Trojan Horse,” though I’m not quite sure it’s an apt analogy considering it’s not being used to breach any impenetrable walls as the Conservatives have a majority anyway. Regardless, both Jim Flaherty and Diane Finley dismissed Nash’s concerns considering all of the good things in the bill. Bob Rae got up and asked how it was that the government could cut mental health services to Canadian Forces personnel in light of their much-touted support for the troops. Moore talked about how Canada spends more helping its soldiers than any other NATO ally, but didn’t really answer the question. For his last supplemental, Rae asked about the forthcoming meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur on Food, but Moore responded by listing some of the great progress the government has made with First Nations issues.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Illegitimate workloads

Posted on by

MPs are starting to grumble that cuts to the public service are dumping more workload on their offices, while their own budgets are being frozen and scaled back. This is worrying for one very basic reason – that this kind of work isn’t actually an MP’s job. Yes, constituency work has evolved as a means of serving the community and basically showing that they deserve to be re-elected. But it’s not their job. Their job is to hold the government to account, and to do that by controlling the public purse. That means scrutinising the estimates and the public accounts. But along the way, this kind of public service ombudsman role became attached to them, until it’s become the norm for certain departments not to touch a file until the MPs office pushes it forward, and that, my friends is a big problem and it’s something that needs for the person up top to put their foot down, starting with the Clerk of the Privy Council. If, as Bennett alleges in this article, people are just being told to go to their MPs office, then it’s a gross breach of the duties of the public service, and it should be called out.

The government has decided to remove the internal auditors of at least four regional development agencies in favour of letting the Office of the Comptroller General do said audit work. The complication? That the Comptroller General’s budget has also been slashed. Oversight! Accountability! Transparency! Meanwhile, here is a look at the other departments being faced with cuts as of yesterday’s announcements.

Continue reading →