As a Thursday before a break week, MPs were already starting to filter away from the Hill, all major leader already absent. While Harper is in China, Mulcair was in Whitby to campaign for the by-election there, Justin Trudeau to do the same in Yellowhead. That meant that Megan Leslie kicked off QP, asking about major layoff announcements, blaming the government for them. Peter Van Loan answered, praising the government’s job creation record. Leslie brought up tax evasion and the Public Service Pension Investment Board’s scheme, to which Tony Clement assured her that the board is arm’s length from the government. Leslie noted the depressed staffing levels at CRA as possible explanations for why they are not going after tax cheats. Clement assured her that some 8000 investigations for overseas tax evasion were undertaken. Nycole Turmel asked the same in French, got the same response in French, before Turmel brought up the harassment allegations and the Status of Women committee’s report on harassment in the workplace, asking the committee chair when they would meet. Hélène LeBlanc noted Turmel’s career in the public service and that they should make harassment a thing of the past — not answering the question. Ralph Goodale asked about the economy shrinking, to which Joe Oliver insisted that things were great, and even Standards & Poors reconfirmed the country’s AAA credit rating. Goodale then blasted the income splitting tax credit, to which Candice Bergen brought up the “beer and popcorn” talking point — again avoiding the issue of income splitting. Dominic LeBlanc noted the problems with income splitting in French, and Bergen again avoided the issue of income splitting.
Tag Archives: Refugees
QP: A growing economy will solve it
It was a black morning on the Hill with two MPs suspended for allegations of harassment, and Stephen Harper was absent, headed off to China, making the mood on odd one. While Thomas Mulcair was present, QP was actually led off by Megan Leslie, who raised the Governor of the Bank of Canada’s comments about the job market. Joe Oliver praised the 1.1 million net new jobs since the recession. Leslie asked if the government agreed with Poloz’s (torqued, selective) statement that young people should be willing to live at home and work for free if they can’t get a job. Oliver praised their measures for young people, and that a growing economy would help youth. After another round in the other official language, Libby Davies asked about more childcare spaces, to which Jason Kenney insisted that their tax credit measures and the universal child benefit were better than spaces. When asked again, Candice Bergen praised increased transfers to the provinces, whose jurisdiction childcare belongs to. Justin Trudeau was up for the Liberals, and he asked about the income splitting tax credit, to which Jason Kenney called the premise “rubbish” and said that it would benefit half of families and that their other measures would help more low income families. Trudeau called them out for avoiding income splitting in their responses, and raised something from Scott Brison’s 2003 Progressive Conservative leadership platform. Trudeau retorted with Brison’s line about his misguided time as a Conservative before asking the question again in French. Jason Kenney responded by accusing the Liberals of wanting to take away money from families.
Roundup: What to do about Dean?
The question of what to do about Dean Del Mastro has seized the Commons, and the government seems amenable to going along with the NDP motion to suspend him without pay immediately, and further send the matter to the Procedure and House Affairs committee for further study, particularly for what it means for his staff and his constituents. This is a bit of a change from the government’s original position of wanting the committee to rule before they did, but apparently they’re going with the flow of public opinion on the matter. (The NDP’s unwillingness to let debate collapse so that the vote can proceed on its own accord, however, means that the government will likely invoke closure to ensure a vote later today). There is also a battle raging over Del Mastro’s pension benefits, while the NDP used a committee hearing on John Williamson’s private member’s bill to try to lay a trap. The bill would see MPs lose their pension if convicted of an indictable offence, and the NDP moved an amendment to specifically include elections expenses, which the government defeated because it wasn’t necessary, and wouldn’t apply to the Del Mastro case anyway – not that it stopped Mulcair and the NDP of using Question Period to say the government was trying to protect Mulcair. Because apparently they’re not yet too clever for their own good.
QP: The morality of Del Mastro
With Harper off to China tomorrow, today is the only day that all of the leaders would be present this week, and it was hoped that they could make it count. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking about an amendment put forward by the Conservatives at committee that would exclude those who had been convicted of elections expenses from a bill that would strip the pensions of MPs who had been convicted of a crime, and whether it was “moral.” Harper noted that the amendment had nothing to do with Del Mastro, and that the NDP opposed previous legislation to punish MPs for malfeasance. Mulcair noted that the question wasn’t answered and gave a vague accusation about voter fraud — not government business, to which Harper reminded him that the NDP has not repaid for their illegal mailings or satellite offices. Mulcair brought up Mike Duffy and Pamela Wallin, to which Harper repeated his answer. Mulcair brought up a statement Harper made up previously in Del Mastro’s defence, and Harper reminded him that Del Mastro had not been in caucus for some time. For his final question, Mulcair brought up job losses, but Harper replied by noting the million net new job figures. Justin Trudeau was up for the Liberals, and asked about the unfairness of the income splitting proposal. Harper said that he was wrong and the measures announced last week would help every family and accused the Liberals of wanting to take the measures away. While Trudeau focused on the income splitting portion only in both languages, Harper wrapped it in the larger package of tax credits.
QP: Cautioned questions on Del Mastro
While the Chamber was full for François Hollande’s speech earlier this morning, it was much emptier by the time QP rolled around, the staffers acting as room meat no longer sitting at the desks to the fill the room. None of the major leaders were present for the grand exercise in accountability, leaving Peter Julian to lead off, to which he asked about Dean Del Mastro and election fraud — not government business. Paul Calandra stood up to say that the Procedure and House Affairs committee was looking into it, as they did the issue of the NDP satellite offices. When Julian asked again in French, the Speaker cautioned him that it was not about the administrative responsibility of the government, but Calandra repeated his response anyway. Julian got up and said that it was about the PM’s judgement, but Calandra kept up his own response to turn it back to the NDP, adding in the illegal union contributions. Charlie Angus tried again, got cautioned by the Speaker, asked again, and got Calandra to repeat his answers, while Angus sarcastically catcalled “Good job there, Speaker!” Ralph Goodale stood up to ask about the income splitting tax credit, and how it went agains Flaherty’s advice. Kevin Sorenson praised Flaherty as a response. Goodale noted that single parents were being punished for being single, but Sorenson just delivered praise for the programme. Emmanuel Dubourg asked again in French, to which Sorenson claimed that middle class Canadians were better off since the Conservatives came to power.
Roundup: Del Mastro found guilty
Conservative-turned-Independent Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro has been found guilty, along with his official agent, of election overspending in 2008, and Del Mastro faces the possibility of three years in jail plus $6000 in fines. Del Mastro, obstinately, believes that the conviction is just the judge’s opinion, and that it’s not over, though there’s no indication on what grounds he would appeal. He told CBC that there’s more evidence of his innocence that wasn’t introduced at trial, but if he thinks he can introduce that at the appeal stage, well, good luck, because they almost never allow that. The question of his fate comes next, because there is some ambiguity as to whether he will be forced to vacate his seat and lose the ability to run in another election for five years – as stipulated by the Elections Act – or if they plan to wait until he is out of appeals, which could be a lengthy process. Del Mastro says he plans to be at work on Monday (sentencing isn’t until near the end of November), but the Government House Leader has recommended that the matter be referred to the Procedure and House Affairs committee, where a determination could be made there. It appears that Del Mastro had been offered a plea deal earlier that would have had him pay a fine, probably enter into a compliance agreement, and have it be over with. Instead, he went to court, and had the judge call out his credibility, which is going to be very, very difficult to recover from. And while the former Law Clerk of the Commons, Rob Walsh, said that it would be in Del Mastro’s best interest to resign to minimise the damage, Del Mastro’s behaviour to date would seem to indicate someone who doesn’t know when to quit, and who will likely obstinately push this to the bitter end.
QP: Waiting on income splitting
Despite it being only Thursday, most leaders were absent from the Chamber today, Harper off in Vaughan to deliver his income splitting announcement, and Justin Trudeau campaigning for the by-election in Whitby. Thomas Mulcair did show up, and started off bringing up the request from three esteemed former Justices who warned against knee-jerk legislation after last week’s attacks. Stephen Blaney assured him that the new CSIS was balanced. Mulcair didn’t want this to be a partisan issue and wanted a multi-party committee to study the issue (never mind that all Commons committees are multi-party), to which Blaney said that all parties were being offered technical briefings. Mulcair brought up Stockwell Day’s endorsement of the creation of a parliamentary oversight committee for national security, but Blaney said that SIRC was robust enough. Mulcair sniped about Deborah Grey’s interim leadership of SIRC, before turning to the issue of income splitting. Kevin Sorenson told him to stay tuned for the announcement, and proclaimed that income splitting was good policy. Mulcair and Sorensen took another round at it, before Scott Brison led for the Liberals, recalling Jim Flaherty’s opposition to income splitting. Sorenson quoted an old Brison line about how income splitting was a good thing. Brison quipped that he said a lot of stupid things when he was a Conservative, and the House roared. Sorenson repeated the praise for the plan, before Emmanuel Dubourg asked about the plan in French, Sorenson not varying the substance of his response.
Brison: "I said a few stupid things when I was a Conservative. That was one of them." #QP
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) October 30, 2014
Sorenson "He still says stupid things." #QP
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) October 30, 2014
QP: Give CSIS a hand
Caucus day, and all of the leaders were finally in the Chamber. Thomas Mulcair led off, asking for an update on last week’s events and what new measures were being taken to protect Canadian Forces members at home. Stephen Harper said that investigations were underway, and that he had nothing to add to their public statements. Mulcair noted the concerns of privacy commissioners, both federal and provincial, on new security laws. Harper said that they were interested in the views of various players in issues, and that they didn’t think there was a contradiction between safety and rights. Mulcair noted the need for civilian oversight and the two vacant chairs at SIRC. Harper assured him that things were great at SIRC, and we need to thank CSIS for their hard work protecting Canadians. Mulcair asked about funding cuts to security agencies, to which Harper said that they have adequate resources, then repeated in English the need to thank CSIS for their dedication to the protection of Canadians. Mulcair noted their differences in debating whether the attack was terrorism, but said that they wanted to work together to keep Canadians safe. Harper kept on with the praise for security agencies. Justin Trudeau was up next, and asked about the need for a parliamentary oversight for national security agencies. Harper insisted that the current system works and “we will continue moving forward.” Trudeau pressed again for the need in French, to which Harper repeated his answer in English and got in a dig that police weren’t automatically a threat to Canadians’ rights. Trudeau noted the recommendations for oversight from the Arar Inquiry, wondering when the government would finally act on those recommendations. Harper insisted that they had acted, and repeated that CSIS works hard.
Roundup: A funeral felt by the nation
In Hamilton, the three party leaders attended the funeral of Corporal Nathan Cirillo, the Prime Minister speaking and addressing Cirillo’s son. The city and large numbers of first responders turned out for the funeral, and lined the streets of the procession. The Queen also sent her condolences as the regiment’s Colonel-in-Chief.
Sad exchange of letters. pic.twitter.com/s57rI0qTI4
— Stephen Maher (@stphnmaher) October 28, 2014
US Secretary of State John Kerry was in town yesterday, where he paid tribute to Corporal Cirillo, before he and Baird spoke about last week’s shootings as terrorism, and he and Harper met to discuss topics such as Russia, Ukraine, and the Keystone XL Pipeline. Michael Petrou breaks down the meaning of the visit here.
QP: Ignoring questions on oversight
It was another day without major leaders in the Commons, as they were at the funeral of Corporal Nathan Cirillo in Hamilton, leaving some sparser-than-usual seats in the Chamber as a result. Libby Davies led off, asking about the CSIS bill and the need for more civilian oversight. Stephen Blaney responded instead with a paean to Corporal Cirillo. Davies repeated the need of better oversight, citing the Arar Inquiry, the loss of the Inspector General at CSIS and the vacancies on SIRC. Blaney said that privacy rights were in the bill, and that that there was already strong oversight in SIRC. Davies pointed out the SIRC report citing how uncooperative CSIS, to the point of misleading them. Blaney thanked SIRC for the report, and largely ignored the concerns that were addressed. Nycole Turmel repeated the questions in French, and Blaney praised the bill rather than answer the issue of concerns. Ralph Goodale led off for the Liberals, and wondered about adequate resources for security services, wondering if an analysis of funding levels was being undertaken. Blaney said that the various agencies were reviewing what happened last week, but didn’t answer Goodale’s question. Goodale asked for an estimate of what incremental funding that the RCMP and CSIS would require to increase their operations, to which Blaney repeated his claim that they increased their funding already by one third. Dominic LeBlanc closed out the round, asking again about resources but in French. Blaney repeated his evasion in French in response.