Justin Trudeau announced a new advisory council yesterday, co-chaired by MP Marc Garneau and retired General Andrew Leslie, former commander of the Canadian Land Forces Command, and later the author of a report on how to best transform the Canadian Forces in an era of fiscal restraint (most of which has yet to be implemented). Leslie noted that his decision to become a Liberal was cemented last week when Trudeau was the only leader to come out unequivocally against the Quebec Charter of Values, and he certainly puts a big dent in the Conservative claim that the Liberals are bad for the armed forces. Leslie is also considering a run for a seat in the next election, but his high-profile role at this point is a signal that Trudeau is gathering some heavy-weights to his team, which will bolster his credentials in advance of the next election.
Tag Archives: Telecom
Roundup: The commitment to transparency in the Commons
The Procedure and House Affairs held a rare emergency meeting yesterday to declare – unanimously – that they are committed to the ongoing study of ways to increase the transparency in the Commons, and voted to ensure that the House Leader commits to keeping said committee study going once Parliament resumes, and committed to a report on the topic by December 2nd. This allows the committee clerks to start to schedule hearings and lining up expert witnesses during the prorogation – a time when the committee is technically dissolved.
Roundup: Senators in defence of their institution
Liberal Senate leader James Cowan penned an op-ed in yesterday’s Chronicle Herald about the work that the Senate does, and the value that it provides to the legislative process in Canada. And it was an excellent read, which I’d highly recommend – it was about time that a senator was so eloquent in the defence of the institution. I do find it curious that so far it seems to be Liberal senators who are doing a disproportionate share of that defence – even though I know plenty of Conservative senators who feel the institution should be left alone (financial controls tightened, of course). Unfortunately, most of the Conservative Senate caucus, if they do speak up, are only sticking to the absurd and disingenuous party line of “the Senate must change or be abolished,” as though any of the proposed reforms would either do anything about the alleged graft of a small number (it wouldn’t), were constitutional (they aren’t), or that they could measurably be said to actually improve the institution (highly debateable, but when you look at the totality of the Senate and its work, the proposed reforms would only serve to create partisan gridlock with 105 new backbenchers for party leaders to control). I have no doubt that they want to keep their heads down because they don’t want to be accused of trying to protect their entitlements, but they’re liable to find that if they don’t speak up for the institution, that they will be the unwitting agents of their own demise, which would be an absolute shame.
Roundup: Votes on Syria and the question of Responsible Government
In the fallout of last Friday’s vote in the British Commons regarding military action in Syria, there are some very serious questions being asked about what it all means. In part, the concerns come from the nature of Responsible Government – if the House has not expressed support for the government’s foreign policy goals, which as a Crown Prerogative – then how can they continue to claim to have confidence in that government? How is foreign policy any different on a substantive level when it comes to the conduct of a government than a budget? Philippe Lagassé and Mark Jarvis debate the issue here, and I’m going to say that I’m on Lagassé’s side with this one – MPs can’t just deny the government the ability to exercise their prerogatives without also taking responsibility for it, meaning declaring non-confidence in the government. It’s not how Responsible Government works, and if they’re going to start changing the conventions of such a system of governance that works really quite well, then they need to think long and hard about the consequences of their actions. But that’s part of the problem – nobody wants to look at how actions affect the system as a whole, rather than simply patting themselves on the back for a nebulous and not wholly correct interpretation of what democracy means. And once people start tinkering with the parts without looking at the whole, then big problems start to happen, which we really should beware of.
Roundup: Bringing back the tough-on-crime narrative
Because he needs to change the channel of the national conversation, Stephen Harper announced yesterday that one of his government’s priorities coming back in the fall will be a bill to toughen the sentences for child sex offenders. Because nothing says “tough on crime!” like increasing sentences. Harper also blasted Justin Trudeau for putting pot ahead of the economy – as though it were an either/or proposition, or that there were no economic consequences from legalising marijuana, or the resources that it would free up from enforcing the existing laws in a rather futile way. Harper also seems to think that Trudeau is encouraging youth to use marijuana, when in fact Trudeau has said exactly the opposite – that legalising and regulating it will help to keep it out of the hands of children. But hey, since when to sound bites need to be factually accurate? Harper did say that he would take a look at the Chiefs of Police’s report recommending that marijuana possession be made a ticketable offence rather than one meriting a criminal conviction, so baby steps – right?
Roundup: A refresher course in open nominations
Nomination races are the backbone of our democratic system, yet are probably the least understood component – thanks of course to a pretty shite job of civic education in this country that does little to teach people about it. And as Alice Funke of Pundit’s Guide points out, we’ve been out of the habit of proper open nomination races in this country since about 2004 (blame the period of minority governments and the need to be “election ready” that protected incumbents), which means that these particular democratic muscles in the Canadian electorate have become pretty flabby. Fortunately, she’s penned a fantastic guide about getting back into shape, which everyone needs to read. And no, I’m not kidding – everyone needs to read this. Okay? Good.
Roundup: In no hurry to fill vacant seats
Stephen Harper says that he’s currently in no hurry to fill the five vacancies currently in the Senate. Which is all well and good, but he can’t let this reluctance to fill seats go on too long before he finds himself in breach of Section 24 of the Constitution. The appointment of Senators is an obligation – not an option.
In advance of the Liberal caucus retreat in PEI, which starts tomorrow, here’s a look at how the whole Trudeau pot admission is a calculated strategy to present him as a different kind of political leader compared to the others, and that this will hopefully outweigh the attacks about his perceived lack of judgement.
Roundup: Concern for Syria without a plan
John Baird says that there’s mounting evidence of the use of chemical weapons in Syria – not that anyone is actually talking about what kind of response is being warranted. Meanwhile, we should be expecting the first 200 “urgent” Syrian refugee cases to start arriving in the coming months, with 1300 expected by the end of next year.
The NDP have filed a formal request to recall the Industry Committee to hold hearings into the upcoming wireless spectrum auction. Of course, they’ll have to hurry before the official prorogation order happens, at which time the committees pretty much cease to exist and will need to be reconstituted in the next session.
Roundup: Antiquated rifles and policy retreats
Yesterday on Harper’s Northern Tour, he dropped in on the search for the lost ships of the Franklin Expedition, and fired some of the vintage rifles used by Aboriginal reservists who comprise the Canadian Rangers. Apparently they use such old rifles because they don’t freeze up or jam in the harsh environment, though they keep saying they are looking for replacements.
Ahead of his annual closed-door “policy retreat” in Wakefield, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said not to expect any significant spending initiatives in the forthcoming Throne Speech, given that he wants to balance the books before the election, and so on. Oh, and he also has no plans to intervene in the housing market, for what it’s worth. Here’s a list of the invitees, and those of the past six years for comparison purposes.
Roundup: Taunts and regurgitated priorities
Thomas Mulcair has decided to step into the fray over prorogation, and his contribution is that prorogation is fine and good, but suspending Parliament is not, and that since Harper is avoiding Parliament, he’s a coward. Because that’s raising the tone of debate, ladies and gentlemen.
Oh, look – Harper wants the throne speech to focus on the economy and middle-class families. I wonder where I’ve heard that one before? Oh, and safe streets? Tell me more! I’ve totally never heard any of this before. Why, it’s positively game changing!