Despite the government’s talk about the “skills mismatch” that is affecting our jobs sector, there is no actual evidence to support this, says TD Economics. And a big part of the problem is that we don’t actually have good data to track these kinds of things, apparently, nor are we tracking underemployment figures either. It also doesn’t appear that there is a real demand for jobs in the resource extraction sector despite the government’s promises of yet more jobs there – but hey, without the data, they can claim whatever they like. Meanwhile, medical specialists not being able to find jobs upon graduation is another problem being recognised and hopes to be corrected with more data on the part of the Canadian Medical Association as they try to steer students to sectors facing more of a crunch in the near future.
Tag Archives: Procurement
Roundup: Shelly Glover and Joy Smith, concern trolls
Shelly Glover, police officer “on leave and planning to return to it once she’s out of politics,” is currently peddling in hysterics and trading upon her time as a police officer that worked undercover on the prostitution beat. Glover says that the laws that were struck down will make it more difficult for police to help exploited women and children – err, except that the laws against human trafficking and child exploitation remain in effect. The laws that were struck down were the ones that made women in those situations be afraid to go to the police for fear of self-incrimination, which seems like a bigger deal than police using those laws to arrest those same women, criminalise them, and hope that it might instead put them in touch with social services agencies while they were locked up. And then there’s her caucus colleague, Joy Smith, who a) doesn’t actually read the literature on the Nordic Model of prostitution laws except for the ones that are devoid of fact and tell her what she wants to hear, and b) conflates all sex work with human trafficking, and all human trafficking with sexual exploitation, which anyone with an inkling of how things work can tell you is a gross overreach. I’m glad that Smith thinks that it’s easy enough to criminalise the buyers of sex to curb demand – because that totally worked with things like alcohol during the prohibition era or illicit drugs today, right, and criminalising those very same drug users is totally saving lives in places like Vancouver’s Lower East Side, right? Oh, wait… Terri Jean Bedford, one of the plaintiffs in the case, says that any new laws need to take consenting adults into account, which may be difficult when faced with an ideology that the exchange of sex for money is inherently bad (while ignoring the other transactions for sex that occur as part of everyday dating and marriage). CBC looks at five questions arising from the Supreme Court decision.
Roundup: In the wake of the Bedford decision
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has struck down the laws around prostitution that related to keeping a bawdy house, living off the avails, and communication for the purposes of prostitution (ruling here). They have given Parliament a year to come up with a new legislative regime before the laws are struck down entirely. Justice Minister Peter MacKay said that he’s disappointed by the finding that the existing laws were unconstitutional, while other Conservatives like Shelly Glover continue to say that these women are now without the “protection” that those laws offered – though the whole point of the ruling was that the laws were not protecting them, but were rather putting them in harm’s way. Part of the debate now moves to the question of how this will affect First Nations women in the sex trade in particular, but it would seem that harm reduction is a good step, particularly if the criminalization made them afraid to go to the police. Emmett Macfarlane writes about the significance of the finding and the way in which the Justices framed their concerns. David Akin looks at how the ruling will affect the various factions of the Conservative base, though it is likely to be more wailing and gnashing of teeth around supposed “judicial activism.” Brenda Cossman worries that the discussion will move toward how to criminalise prostitution rather than how to best regulate a decriminalised environment. Carissima Mathen points out that this court decision is in part because Parliament was negligent over the past three decades when they left these laws in place when they knew that a more comprehensive framework was needed. Andrew Coyne writes about just how very reasonable the decisions is, and how regulation and licensing may be the best choice going forward.
Roundup: Northern Gateway not quite good to go
The National Energy Board has given a conditional approval to the Northern Gateway Pipeline application – and by conditional, they attached 209 conditions to it. There will be additional hurdles with First Nations, as well as the BC government’s own five conditions. In response to the decision, Joe Oliver seems to have toned down his rhetoric around the pipeline proposal, while Harper praises the “rigorous” work of the NEB in this effort. CBC gives you six things to know about the decision. Energy economist Andrew Leach points out that the review is far from a real green light and that it’s not clear that all 209 conditions will be met. Michael Den Tandt counts the many ways in which the pipeline is likely doomed in spite of the NEB decision.
Roundup: And Hyer makes two
As was widely guessed, NDP-turned-Independent MP Bruce Hyer joined the Green Party – not that this was any big surprise. I look a look at how the NDP botched their outraged reaction here. Interestingly, Hyer went on TV later in the day and let it be known that Thomas Mulcair is one of the reasons that he would never return to the NDP, and that the culture of whipping and control is getting worse under Mulcair than it would have been with almost any other leadership candidate. (Hyer backed Nathan Cullen, for the record). Mulcair went on to imply that Hyer didn’t have any values, which just makes the whole bitter act look all the more petty.
Roundup: MPs taking off for home
The House has risen for the break. MPs are going home after their caucus meetings this morning (well, except for the Liberals, who have their Xmas party later tonight). And it’s just as well, given how ridiculous things degenerated in QP yesterday.
The Chief Electoral Officer, Marc Mayrand, was before the Commons Procedures and House Affairs committee yesterday to discuss the issue of Conservative MP James Bezan’s election filings being before the court, and whether he should be allowed to sit and vote in the Chamber until the matter has been dealt with. Things, however, apparently got a bit heated as Conservative MP Scott Reid criticised Mayrand for being “overly aggressive” and that it was inappropriate for him to notify the Speaker about Bezan’s dispute. Um, but if Bezan is in breach and sitting inappropriately, then the Speaker should know because the Act says that so long as the MP’s filings are not correct, he or she shouldn’t sit or vote as a member. Mayrand is doing his job, even if Reid doesn’t like it.
QP: Responsible for his own ministry
For the first time this week, all three leaders were in the House and ready to go. Without adieu, Thomas Mulcair got to the point and ask if Benjamin Perrin was dismissed or if he resigned. Harper said that Perrin left of his own accord nine months ago. Mulcair brought up the guidelines around email retention and asked why they were broken. Harper said that they are expected to follow the rules and they found them. Mulcair changed topics and asked about Jim Love, the chair of the Royal Canadian Mint for his involvement in a tax avoidance scheme. Harper assured him that the matter was a private dispute and his minister has a record for closing tax loopholes. Mulcair changed topics again and asked about the recent rash of military suicides and what was being done. Harper said that their thoughts and prayers went out to their families, and that their support systems were available when they needed them. Mulcair closed the round by asking if they would reverse the closures of the nine veterans offices — to cries of “shame on you!” from the government benches. Harper assured him that the services were still available. Justin Trudeau kept up with asking about the services for those soldiers, to which Harper added that they all understood how these soldiers were suffering and encouraged them to get help. Trudeau changed topics and asked why Senator Gerstein still enjoyed the confidence of the prime minister if he offered an inducement to a sitting legislator. Harper insisted that it wasn’t the case and left it at that. Trudeau pressed, and wondered why he said that Gerstein was not under investigation but the Senate was blocking his testimony to avoid interfering with an investigation. Harper insisted that only Duffy and Wright were under investigation.
Roundup: The AG has concerns
The Auditor General tabled his fall report yesterday morning, but unlike many a report in the past, it was pretty tame. He did kick the crap out of the audit process for the Safety Management System of our railways, and cast a withering eye on food recall systems, and emergency preparedness on First Nations reserves. He wasn’t particularly kind to the CBSA’s lapses in border security, he noted that farmers face a long wait for emergency assistance, and he was really, really unimpressed with the constant delays in implementing financial controls, but he wasn’t too tough on the shipbuilding contracts, and he generally praised CRA in dealing with tax evasion in Lichtenstein – but they need to be better prepared to deal with an increase in tax-haven cases. (Highlights here).
QP: Detouring to mention the Auditor General
Despite the fact that the Auditor General delivered his fall report earlier this morning, as did the Correctional Investigator, it was unlikely either of those would be mentioned anytime before round three. All three leaders were in the Chamber, and there were ClusterDuff questions to be asked. Thomas Mulcair surprised me by bringing up the report chapter on rail safety first thing, to which Harper insisted that the report showed that the system was working overall. Mulcair brought up the chapter on food safety, but Harper again insisted that it wasn’t an accurate reflection, and then read an outside quote about how great things were. Mulcair demanded that the government listen and act on the AG’s recommendations rather than just saying that they agreed. Harper insisted that they always act on the AG’s recommendations. And then it was back to the ClusterDuff — was anyone else being sanctioned for their activities? Harper said he wasn’t going to interfere with the RCMP investigation, and when Mulcair insisted that others be fired, Harper returned to his line about throwing mud and losing ground. Justin Trudeau asked why Senator Gerstein was in caucus and chief fundraiser if was involved in the Wright affairs. Harper insisted that only two people were under investigation. Trudeau brought up Gerstein’s attempt to influence the Deloitte audit, but Harper ignored that and spoke about an improperly reported gift between Wright and Duffy. Trudeau retorted with a dig about Harper losing 40 percent of his vote share last night before wondering why Harper still trusted Gerstein — but Harper shrugged it off and said that the public doesn’t agree with the Liberals when they protect senators.
Roundup: Four by-elections today
At long last, it’s finally by-election day today! Hooray! Toronto Centre has been the centre of a debate on income inequality, while Brandon-Souris, a long-time Conservative stronghold, is being seen as a barometer of the Senate scandals, compounded by alleged shenanigans in the nomination race, which may be driving voters over to the Liberals. Susan Delacourt notices that Bob Rae sent out a letter to Liberal supporters that employed the language of shame-based get-out-the-vote campaigns, talking about names being on voter lists, which NDP MP Craig Scott accused of being coercive, though it has been a proven effective technique where it has been applied. Michael Den Tandt looks at the by-election narratives, and notes the ways in which both the Conservatives and NDP are doing Trudeau’s work, handing him lay-ups, and allowing him to straddle the centre. (He’s wrong that this is Trudeau’s first electoral test – that was in Labrador). Paul Wells is grumpy about the whole thing – and I can’t blame him.