Tag Archives: Space

Roundup: The “fair share” debate

Posted on by

It was the first day of the Council of the Federation meeting yesterday, and it was largely devoted to First Nations issues, and how they want to be included in the “fair share” debate around natural resource development, since much of the development is on their territory, as will pipelines cross it, and they are soon to be an emerging labour force in this country. Meanwhile, with regards to the ongoing Northern Gateway debate, Adam Goldenberg lays out the ultimatum game for the two premiers, while Andrew Coyne calls it out as extortion.

Here’s a look at what some of Alison Redford’s ‘national energy strategy’ entails, and it looks to mostly be about oil pipelines, as opposed to a more diversified energy economy across the country.

Continue reading →

QP: Exit Lee Richardson

Posted on by

With Thomas Mulcair off to Alberta, it was up to Nathan Cullen to lead the charge in Question Period today, which he began by asking about the Environment Commissioner’s comments about changes to environmental assessments, to which Prime Minister Harper replied that they were simply doing away with duplicative processes. Cullen brought up how the EI changes would just force people onto provincial welfare rolls, but Harper again deflected and assured him that people who needed EI would still get it. Nycole Turmel then got up to decry the impact of EI changes on seasonal industries, but Diane Finley basically repeated Harper’s response. Bob Rae got up and asked what the expected cost savings of the EI changes were going to add up to. Harper insisted that this wasn’t about savings, but about getting Canadians back to work. When Rae tried to press about the issue, and the government’s belief that there are people receiving EI that shouldn’t be, Harper turned it around and attacked Rae’s record as Ontario premier instead.

Continue reading →

QP: Tinfoil hats and telecom trouble

Posted on by

While some MPs may have been a bit bleary-eyed from the previous late night, it certainly didn’t make for a dull Question Period. Or perhaps, that’s why it took such a turn for the worse the longer it continued. Thomas Mulcair was up first, reciting his carefully prepared questions on why the government still hadn’t provided any figures for the planned changes to OAS, to which Harper assured him that there weren’t going to be any actual cuts to benefits. Mulcair then turned to the issue of Chinese telecom company Huawei being granted Canadian contracts after the US and Austraila barred them as security risks. Harper insisted that the US doesn’t dictate our policies. When Randall Garrison rose to keep asking about the same questions, Vic Toews said that the CBC story only told half the tale, and that his officials weren’t in opposition, while Conservative backbenchers chirped about people wearing tinfoil hats. Bob Rae got up to ask about the changes to EI and how worker protections were eroding as their rights would no longer be enshrined in legislation, but rather in regulation. But when he demanded that Harper produce said regulation now, Harper dodged and insisted that the appeals process would remain in place. When Rae turned to the issue that the government wouldn’t produce the data on how much would be saved in the OAS changes, Harper reminded him that the measures wouldn’t be coming into effect until 2023.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Taking the omnibudget threat seriously

Posted on by

So, remember what I was saying yesterday about how the opposition – and the NDP in particular would be hammering away at the government in QP about the omnibus budget bill if they truly considered it to be the major priority and affront to democracy that it is? Well, it only took them until the end of the second round – a full 25 minutes into QP – to ask a pair of broad and general questions about the omnibus nature of the bill, and 38 minutes to ask a couple of substantive questions about a particularly troubling measure within it (and didn’t take the parliamentary secretary to task for her nonsense answer during the supplemental question, like they should have). Apparently this constitutes taking an existential threat to parliamentary democracy seriously.

What’s that? More problems with defence procurements that say they’re going to be one thing (in this case vehicular power transmission components) and turns out to be something else (13 armoured vehicles)? You don’t say! Meanwhile, the military says that Peter MacKay would have known the actual cost estimates of the Libya mission when he reported a much lower figure to parliament. I am shocked – shocked!

The RCMP Commissioner has sent warning letters out to provincial commissioners of firearms to warn against setting up backdoor long-gun registries. The problem of course is that he doesn’t exactly have the ability to meddle in provincial jurisdiction like he – and Vic Toews – would like to on this issue.

The Public Service Commission is investigating whether eleven employees were improperly hired at ACOA due to political interference.

Here’s a more in-depth look at the situation that MDA finds itself in while the government drags its feet on signing the contract for the next phase of the RADARSAT constellation.

Harper and his team continue to try and get Helena Guergis’ lawsuit against them dismissed.

The punitive measures that the Conservatives and NDP imposed on the Liberals around campaign financing retroactively on the 2006 leadership race continues to haunt some of the former contenders.

Here’s a bit of an explainer of what some of the latest “Pierre Poutine” revelations mean.

And Lisa Raitt talks about her battle with post-partum depression to help raise awareness of mental health.

QP: A comprehensive plan

Posted on by

Now that the NDP have declared procedural war on the omnibus budget bill, it quite predictably led off QP. Thomas Mulcair started off with a general question about omnibus legislation, reminding us about Young Stephen Harper’s dislike of them, but Harper was not moved, and instead called the bill a “comprehensive” approach to the Economic Action Plan™. Mulcair then moved on cuts to pensions, food inspection and border services, not that Harper was moved by them. For his last question, Mulcair asked about an incident where an ailing fisherman off the coast of Newfoundland’s radio medical services call was routed to Rome, Italy, and how the government would be putting the lives of Canadians in jeopardy. Harper simply told Mulcair to read the budget, as there were no changes on that file. Bob Rae picked up on that non-answer, and was this time answered by the responsible minister, Keith Ashfield, who insisted that an internationally recognised service provider was used as a backup, as always. Rae moved back to the omnibus budget, and the new powers of that cabinet will be gaining as part of the legislated changes, and called the move “dictatorial.” Harper shrugged it off, and spoke about how much clarity investors will get from these environmental changes – which probably speaks volumes.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Failed negotiations and procedural delays

Posted on by

The news that the Conservatives were going to bend ever so slightly and make some very minor amendments to their still massively problematic refugee reform bill yesterday may have buoyed NDP spirits that the government was going to agree to split up the omnibus budget bill – but to no avail. The government decided that no, even if they split it up, the NDP would simply delay seven bills instead of one, so they said no. Nathan Cullen responded by saying they were “afraid” of the debate, and that he would be consulting with his critics about their next steps, but one had to wonder why they didn’t already have that in place considering they were fresh out of a caucus meeting. (Marc Garneau, incidentally, described the NDP as having been slapped in the face by the Conservatives, and that perhaps they had been a bit naïve in believing this government would actually negotiate). So what did the NDP decide to do? Procedural delays, forcing votes in the Commons until time for government orders expired, with no actual debate taking place on said bill for the day. That’s fine, Peter Van Loan said – we’ll simply move your opposition day (scheduled for today) until next Wednesday, after the vote. The Liberals, meanwhile, criticised the NDP tactics as “too cute by half,” since they were only denying debate and not actually changing the voting date considering time allocation (though they fought over that bit of procedure). I guess we’ll see how this plays out over the course of today, because it’s going to mean a lot of procedural tactics if they want to try and delay a full day’s worth of debate, or if they’ll try some other kinds of tactics to prove their point.

Continue reading →