Roundup: Back-end accountability and second guessing

Even though Good Friday is normally a day where the whole of Ontario shuts down as owing to its strong Protestant roots, prime minister Justin Trudeau nevertheless carried on with his daily presser, talking about how the CERB and the Canada Emergency Business Accounts were now online, and that the wage subsidy was on the way. He also said that his Saturday address would be in the House of Commons instead of at Rideau Cottage, and then he would be spending Sunday and Monday with family, so there will be a brief respite from daily pressers (which have been solid for nearly a month now). He also spoke about his teleconference with the premiers, and upon questions about it, stated that no, they were not looking to invoke the Emergencies Act, and it was the very last thing they wanted to do (so maybe stop asking about it). During the Q&A, he was asked about the G20 energy ministers’ meeting and noted that there had been a decision around production cuts, and with regards to the next Bank of Canada governor, the process was ongoing and they had made no decision on next steps.

During the ministerial briefing shortly thereafter, employment minister Carla Qualtrough said that CRA would deal with the issue from there end where some people got double payments (apparently because they may have applied twice out of confusion) rather than relying on people to call in, and that the accountability measures in this programme were built in on the back-end, in order to speed through the processing of these benefits to those who need them. As well, Indigenous Services minister Marc Miller said that the additional funds to Indigenous communities for the pandemic were flowing, and that they will work together with individual communities and First Nations about what they need.

I’m also concerned with the burgeoning proliferation of stories questioning how quickly the government moved early on – particularly around things like travel bans and quarantine measures. One of there reasons, illustrated by the video here, is that this novel virus has proven to work faster and much deadlier than other epidemics we’ve seen in our lifetime. We’re still in the early phases of this pandemic, so it may be a bit early to second-guess things, given that we were following best practices, and travel bans are generally ineffective because people skirt them and don’t report when they are symptomatic because they don’t want to get in trouble for skirting the ban. This pandemic is unlike any we’ve had before, so it’s hard to start demanding why we weren’t better prepared, given that we were prepared for what we were used to expecting, and that should be something we should keep in mind.

Continue reading

Roundup: The Queen urges calm and restraint

For his Sunday presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau was once again in blue jeans and tie-less, and he spoke about how the CERB opens for applications today, and gave some rough timeline about when people can expect those benefits to start making their way to their accounts. He also said that Health Canada was looking for volunteers to help with things like contact tracing (and as for why these aren’t paid positions, I would imagine that the bureaucratic hoops to make that happen are simply too numerous to contemplate at the moment – federal hiring rules are complex). He also said that farms were looking for workers (given that there may be problems getting the temporary foreign workers that these farms depend on), and that the Canadian Forces were busy turning reserve forces into regulars. During the Q&A portion, he did talk about how he and his Cabinet were cognisant of their own potential for burnout during this crisis, as well as saying that civil servants were working to ensure that the CRA’s systems were not overloaded when the CERB portal opens, and he wouldn’t engage too much on speculation around the American president and his utterances around N95 masks.

During the presser that followed with Dr. Theresa Tam, she said that they were looking at ways to disinfect masks so that they can be reused several times in order to extend supplies, and asked that they not be thrown out.

A couple of hours later, we heard the address from the Queen on the current situation. While it was geared more toward the UK than to the Commonwealth, she did send a separate letter to Canada, which the Governor General posted to her site along with a message of her own.

Continue reading

Roundup: Social distance or else

Justin Trudeau’s Saturday presser had a couple of items of news – the first was that the Northwest Territories was shutting its borders to non-essential travel, which was a move Trudeau supported. That was announced just hours before it was announced that the Territory had its first confirmed COVID-19 case. While other provinces may want to contemplate shutting their own provincial borders (which would be incredibly difficult, particularly given Charter rights around freedom of mobility), the Territories are isolated enough and mostly fly-in, so that makes it easier – something you can’t say about the other provinces except maybe for Newfoundland and Labrador (and to an extent PEI, if they closed the Confederation Bridge and halted all ferries). Trudeau also noted that the government was working with airlines to get flights into countries that have closed their airspace in order to get Canadians out, naming Peru and Spain as their first priorities.

The more salient – and perhaps poignant – point was made by Patty Hajdu at the ministerial presser that followed, where she stated bluntly that if Canadians don’t voluntarily do more social distancing, the government may have to implement measures that will start to encroach on their civil liberties – in other words, harsher police enforcement of quarantine orders and orders to shut down the country like we saw in places like Italy. Where a really big concern is where all of these Canadians – snowbirds especially – are returning to the country and we’ll see how many of them properly self-isolate upon their return. There are warnings to the effect of “Go right home, don’t stop for supplies first,” which will be hard for a lot of people, but that message will need to be drilled home effectively.

We also have some news on the return of Parliament on Tuesday, where 30 MPs will come back to pass the extraordinary spending measures and question Bill Morneau about them, followed by the Senate on Wednesday to pass the bill in their chamber. (My look at what this Skeleton Parliament may look like is here).

Continue reading

QP: Calmly upset versus storming out

With Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh still at D-Day commemorations, and Andrew Scheer at a family event in Regina, there were no major leaders present. Lisa Raitt led off, and she made a statement about D-Day, and offered the government a chance to say how they are commemorating the event. Bill Blair read a statement about service and sacrifice in response. Raitt then moved onto affordability and a plea for a government to “stop the taxes” without specifying which ones, to which Ralph Goodale stood up and reminded her of the Middle Class™ tax cuts and the Canada Child Benefit. Raitt moaned about the loss of boutique tax credits, and Goodale noted that the net of the government’s changes mean that most families are $2000 better off than before. Alain Rayes then cited the false Fraser Institute figure that taxes were raised by $800 per year, to which Jean-Yves Duclos recited in French the same measures that Goodale listed. Rayes tried again, with added theatrics, and Duclos cited that he was upset that the opposition was painting a false picture (in his calm demeanour). Ruth Ellen Brosseau was up next for the NDP, and she read a lament about the settlement that CRA reached with KPMG clients, to which Diane Lebouthillier stated that she had asked the CRA for more transparency around settlements going forward. Daniel Blaikie repeated the question in English with added outrage, and Lebouthillier repeated her response. Blaikie then moved onto a demand for additional aid for homeless veterans, and Blair read that their whole of government approach was getting results with homeless veterans. Brosseau then read the French version of the same question, and Duclos repeated the same response in French.

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/1136701597906558977

Continue reading

Roundup: Problematic leaked recommendations

On Monday, the Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women will give its final report, and judging from the leaked copy, there will be some consternation with the conclusions, particularly that it considers the deaths as the victims of a “Canadian genocide.” While previous inquiries and even statements by the former Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice, Beverley McLachlin, have used the term cultural genocide, this report allegedly drops the qualifier. That will likely be a hurdle because there would seem to be an implication that a genocide implies an organised effort – which there was on the cultural side (because it was inconceivable to think that they shouldn’t be converted to Christianity and “civilised” because that was the dominant cultural framework), but I think it will be hard to stretch that to deaths that are more attributable to poverty and intergenerational violence – we can’t forget that the vast majority of perpetrators of these deaths were Indigenous men (and that there are even larger numbers of Indigenous men who have are missing and murdered).

As for recommendations, the headline one also appears to be problematic – that instances of domestic violence against Indigenous women that result in death be regarded as first-degree murder – and that the use of “Gladue principles” be reviewed with cases of deaths of Indigenous women. That again will be problematic because the Supreme Court ruled on those principles as a way of addressing intergenerational violence that leads to higher rates of incarceration for Indigenous people, and again, if the majority of perpetrators of violence against Indigenous women are Indigenous men, does this recommendation then not demand that more Indigenous men be incarcerated? While the recommendation is rooted in the principles of denunciation and deterrence, I’m not sure that’s sufficient given the broader implications. As well, some of the recommendations like making Indigenous languages official and on par with English and French don’t seem to grasp the practical considerations of ensuring that there be federal services provided in 60 different Indigenous languages.

It also sounds like the government isn’t going to readily accept all of these recommendations Carolyn Bennett has been pre-consulting on what she’s been hearing out of the Inquiry, and she’s not in favour of harsher sentences because it goes against evidenced-based policy as to what is effective. She also noted that their bill on changing child welfare systems for Indigenous communities will do more to prevent the intergenerational violence that the current broken system does. We’ll see what the formal report and its apparent 230 recommendations entail, and what the government’s response will be, but this leak and Bennett’s response sounds like they won’t be endorsing the whole thing.

Continue reading

QP: Torquing the Leslie issue

Despite it being a Monday, many of the seats in the Commons were vacant, and neither the PM nor the leader of the opposition were present. Candice Bergen led off, and tried to make hay of Andrew Leslie being a character witness at the Mark Norman trial. David Lametti assured her that the department of Justice has cooperated and released all documents. Bergen disputed this, and repeated the demand to turn over documents, and Lametti repeated that all obligations were being upheld. Bergen trie a third time, got the same response, and then Alain Rayes took over in French to ask the same question,impressing upon the Chamber that this had to do with Davie Shipyard. Carla Qualtrough stood up to list the contracts that Davie was getting, and when Rayes tried again, Lametti gave the French assurances of cooperation. Jagmeet Singh led off for the NDP, and he demanded an end to fossil fuel subsidies, fo which Jonathan Wilkinson repeated that they were phasing them out by 2025 and would meet their international obligations. Singh repeated the question in French, and read the French version of his response. Singh wants more action on climate change, got more bland assurances from Wilkinson. In English, Singh demanded a return to 30-year mortgages, and Kirsty stood up to praise the national housing strategy. 

Continue reading

Roundup: Dissent without disloyalty

Yesterday on Power & Politics, we saw something that is far too rare in Canadian politics, but should be the norm. In response to the government signing on the US’ recent initiative at the UN to basically renew the “war on drugs,” Liberal MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith went on the show to publicly disagree with his party and the government that his party forms, and more to the point, we didn’t see anyone clutching their pearls about this, or higher-ups in the party make threats. Shocking, I know.

The civics refresher here is that all MPs are supposed to hold government to account, whether they’re in the opposition or in the government’s backbench. Holding the government to account is the very raison d’etre of Parliament, but you wouldn’t know it given how many government backbenchers think it’s their job to be cheerleaders, to give unquestioning support, and possibly to suck up in the hopes of a Cabinet posting or parliamentary secretary position. I also know that this isn’t quite as true behind the caucus room door, but we see very little dissent in public. We see even less dissent in other parties – the NDP enforce solidarity and uniformity in all positions, and have been known to punish MPs who step out of line, while we’ve seen the amount of tolerance that the Conservatives have for dissenting opinions with Maxime Bernier’s post-leadership experiences (though I will grant you, there is still some diversity of thought in there, but it’s rarely expressed publicly). And while I don’t praise Justin Trudeau for many things, I will say his openness to dissenting voices is unquestioningly a good thing in Parliament.

And this brings me back to Leona Alleslev’s defection to the Conservatives last week, and the statements she made about how she didn’t think she could openly criticize the government and not be perceived as disloyal. This is one of those statements of hers that I called bullshit on at the time, and I will call bullshit on it doubly today given this latest incident where Erskine-Smith broke ranks and nobody is calling him disloyal for it. He’s doing the job he’s supposed to do, and which not enough MPs take seriously (and this is also because the lack of proper civics education and training for MPs when they’re elected). I’d like to see him setting an example that others will hopefully follow.

Continue reading

Roundup: On lying with statistics

Over the weekend, Andrew Scheer tweeted that there was “devastating” job news released on Friday, with “zero total jobs created” in April, and that 41,400 jobs had been lost so far this year. Investment is apparently being driven away from the country. It’s all doom and ruins. Except that it’s all complete bullshit. It’s lying with statistics.

What do the actual figures show? For starters, unemployment has been at a 40-year low for the past several months at 5.8 percent. This while the participation rate and employment rate have remained relatively steady throughout. Those “devastating” numbers in April were a net loss of 1,100 jobs, but that net showed a loss of 30,000 part-time jobs and an increase of 28,800 full-time jobs, and industry-wise, the losses were mostly in either construction or retail and wholesale trade. Wages have been increasing over 3 percent year-over-year for several months now. And yes, there was a brief correction in job numbers in January, but it was after a spike in November and December, while the trend cycle remains upward. And if you ask any credible economist, they’ll tell you the underlying numbers indicate that the economy is strong, which puts a lie to Scheer’s tweets.

Of course, I tweeted that Scheer was wrong over the weekend, and I was bombarded with apologists insisting that we should really be looking at the US unemployment rate, which is 3.9 percent. Err, except the Americans use a different measure, and if we used that same measure, our rate would be 4.9 percent. I was also told that all of these new jobs were part-time (not true – as explained above, they’re mostly full-time jobs displacing part-time ones, and have been for several months now), or that this is all because people have run out of EI and have stopped looking for work (please see: participation rate). Oh, and then there were the anecdotes being thrown my way as “proof” that those figures are wrong. Because anecdotes trump statistical data, as we all know. The data are all there. Scheer’s particular cherry-picking is ludicrous on its face, but he’s counting on the low-information voter not having enough know-how to look up the figures at StatsCan, or to read some actual economic analysis about how yes, the economy is doing quite well right now and we can expect interest rates to start going up as a result. It seems to me that if they were in government and an opposition party was doing the same thing he was doing, they would be howling about how awful it was that the opposition was talking down our economy. Funny how that is.

Continue reading

Roundup: Artificial cannabis vote drama

It started with a bunch of headlines about how it was do-or-die day for the marijuana bill in the Senate. Apparently, nobody can canvas vote numbers any longer, so there was the suggestion that it was going to be close, and that that it could be defeated. The Government Leader in the Senate – err, “government representative” even went before the cameras to play up the drama of not knowing the votes. As context, a number of senators were travelling on committee business, and there was a scramble to get them back to town in order to ensure they could vote on the bill (and while CBC gave the headline that it was the “government” scrambling, that would imply that it was actually government staffers doing the calling, not the ISG’s coordinators, as it actually was). The bill eventually passed Second Reading, and it wasn’t even a close vote.

With a new captive audience, reporters who don’t normally tune into the Senate got the Conservative senators’ greatest hits of over the top, ridiculous denunciations of the bill, and the usual canards as though this was just inventing marijuana rather than controlling something that some twenty percent of youths (and the 45-to-65 crowd as well) have used in the past year. Senator Boivenu got so emotional that he called the bill a “piece of shit” that won’t “protect people.” And on it went. From a press event in New Brunswick, Trudeau said that Senators are supposed to improve bills, not defeat them, though to be clear, they do have an absolute veto for a reason, and they refrain from using it unless it’s a dire circumstance because they know that they don’t have a democratic mandate. This bill, however, doesn’t really come close to qualifying as a reason to defeat a government bill (though I’m not sure all of the senators have the memo about using their mandate sparingly).

Since 1980, the Senate has only defeated three government bills, and in each time it was at third reading, which means that they let them go through committee before deciding to defeat them. In two of those cases, it was Charter rights at play, and the budget implementation bill in 1993 included some cuts to programmes and “streamlining” or boards and tribunals that were a straw too far even for some Progressive Conservative senators that they voted against their own government. This particular bill doesn’t rise to either of those particular tests. As for what would happen if it were to be defeated, well, the government can’t introduce the same bill twice in a single session. The way around that? Prorogue and reintroduce it. It would only delay, which may in fact hurt the Conservatives in the end.

Continue reading

QP: Scrapping over data mining

While Justin Trudeau was off to New Brunswick, and Andrew Scheer elsewhere, it was up to Erin O’Toole to lead off, reading a quote about the job of the opposition to ask questions, attributing it to the PM, and wondered why the government wouldn’t let Daniel Jean appear before committee. Ralph Goodale calmly responded that the crux of the motion was around the Atwal invitation, that it was rescinded. O’Toole insisted two more times that MPs had a right to hear the briefing, but Goodale defended Jean’s career and insisted there were no contradictions in the positions put forward. Pierre Paul-Hus tried again twice in French, and Goodale poked holes in the Conservative Supply Day motion in return. Guy Caron was up next for the NDP, and decried that only $15 million out of the $1 billion given to CRA to combat tax evasion. Lebouthillier reminded him that the investment was over five years, and it would be ramped up in order to take a strategic approach. Caron then railed that the CRA’s anti-avoidance committee met in secret, while Lebouthillier said that it was a committee of experts that meets as necessary. Peter Julian took over in French, and demanded taxation on web giants, to which Bill Morneau said that they were conducting studies to ensure that the system would work well. Julian changed to English to insist that studying the issue would mean doing nothing, but Morneau reiterated that they wanted to have a plan before acting.

Continue reading