With the March for Life happening on the lawn outside — mostly Catholic high school students bussed in for the occasion, and disrupted by topless protesters — and with the House not sitting tomorrow because of the Day of Honour for the mission in Afghanistan, it was a bit of a Friday-on-a-Thursday day in the chamber. Well, attendance was a bit better, but not much. Megan Leslie led off for the NDP and brought up the government collecting data by “creeping” Facebook pages. Tony Clement assured her that the government wants to listen to Canadians, and they were engaging with the Privacy Commissioner, before accusing them of trying to shut down Canadians who were letting their views be known. Leslie changed topics to the Nadon appointment and the reports that he was advised to resign from the Federal Court and rejoin the Quebec Bar. MacKay accused her of conspiracy theory, and touted the consultation process and the expert legal advice they sought. Françoise Boivin carried on with the same line of questioning in both languages, to which MacKay continued to tout the process that they followed. John McCallum led off for the Liberals and accused the government of hating the Canada Pension Plan and being dismissive of Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario pension plans. Clement responded and decried the “massive tax grab” that would ruin jobs and opportunity. McCallum moved onto the topic of market wages for foreign workers and driving down Canadian wages, to which Kenney took a shot at the opposition parties.
Tag Archives: Temporary Foreign Workers
Roundup: Whips and grandfathered MPs
Given that it’s the big March for Life on the Hill, reporters asked Justin Trudeau yesterday about the whole pro-choice thing for the party (I’m guessing since it’s a fun game to try and catch the Liberals out on being a nominally pro-choice party with a few pro-life MPs still in the caucus). Trudeau said that as was decided by the membership in the 2012 policy convention, the party is officially pro-choice, that such votes would be whipped, and that the existing pro-life MPs are being grandfathered in, but all future candidates must follow the pro-choice party line. “So much for open nominations!” the commentariat cries, ignoring the kinds of conditions – or indeed groupthink – that other parties employ with their own candidates. And pro-life Liberals like John McKay kind of shrugged and said that it’s normal to have some disagreements within a party and left it at that. And now everyone else will try to make hay of this, because that’s the way it works.
QP: Concern about Boko Haram
It being caucus day, it was all hands on deck in the House (more or less), and everyone was raring to go. Thomas Mulcair brought up the kidnapping of those Nigerian girls by Boko Haram and what the government was willing to do about it. Stephen Harper said that the government stood willing to help the Nigerian government and was waiting for word. Mulcair then returned to the issue of the spat with the Chief Justice, and noted that law deans from across the country were also calling for an apology. Harper simply reiterated yesterday’s response, that he was aware there may have been an issue going forward and that he sought independent legal advice for the potential that it went before the courts. Mulcair noted that the Federal Court was keeping the suit open in case that Harper tried to reappoint Nadon, but Harper once again insisted that he had no plans to do so, and then launched into a tirade about how the Nadon Reference made Quebec judges on the Federal Court second-class citizens. Mulcair changed topics once again, and wanted a guarantee that any World War II veteran would not be out of pocket to attend a D-Day ceremony. Justin Trudeau was up next, and invited Harper to withdraw his remarks about the Chief Justice. Harper, however, regurgitated his line that he was aware there might be an issue. Trudeau changed topics, and wanted government support for their plan to make changes to the Temporary Foreign Workers programme. Harper insisted that they’ve been making improvements for three years and those steps had reduced applications by 30 per cent.
Roundup: The AG’s spring report tabled
It was the release of the Auditor General’s spring report, and among the findings are a major lack of long-term planning when it came to expansions in the prison system which will lead to more overcrowding in a few years, risks with the long-term sustainability of the public sector pension plan, the government’s relocation services contract being completely botched from the start, that First Nations policing is failing and falling behind provincial standards in some places like Ontario, that the CRA faces some notable gaps in how it deals with aggressive tax planning, that Statistics Canada isn’t adequately collecting data that reflects smaller geographic areas – a particularly salient issue right now with labour market issues, and that the company that manages federal buildings is getting billions in bonus payments for no apparent reason. The government, of course, thanks the AG for his findings and agrees with his recommendations.
QP: Seeking independent legal advice
After the Auditor General released his Spring 2014 report this morning, the question was whether its findings would lead off QP, or if some of the other matters of recent import — the telecom data, the fight with the Chief Justice, the deployment of our forces to Eastern Europe — would take precedence, given that Stephen Harper was present today. Thomas Mulcair led off by wondering which version of the story around the call from the Chief Justice or her office was correct. Harper said that it was suggested that he wasn’t aware there was an issue with appointing Nadon, and insisted that he was aware there was an issue and that he acted according to the legal advice he had been given. Mulcair wondered why nothing was said if the call was so inappropriate. Harper said that he didn’t refuse the call, and repeated that he was aware of a potential legal issue that could wind up before the courts, which is why he got legal advice. Mulcair wondered why there was so much trouble spent having this fight, and wanted Harper to categorically rule out attempting to re-appoint Justice Nadon. Harper said that he was clear he wouldn’t, and repeated his previous answers. Mulcair stuck to his script and repeated it in French, to which Harper complained that the ruling would undermine the ability to appoint Quebec judges and harm the federal institution. Mulcair brought up the objections of the former bar association presidents, and called on Harper to apologise to the Chief Justice. Harper dodged, and repeated his earlier answers. Justin Trudeau was up, and called on Harper to withdraw his remarks about the Chief Justice. Harper fell back on his line about independent legal experts. Trudeau changed tracks, and noted that Canada was on track to bring in more temporary foreign workers than immigrants, but Harper tried to insist that the Liberals wanted to bring in more TFWs and he wanted Canadians to get a first crack at jobs. Trudeau wanted Harper to agree to their opposition day motion on fixing the TFW programme — dubious with regards to being a question on government business — and it was no surprise that Harper didn’t agree.
Roundup: Accusations of intimidation
As you may have noticed during QP, the narrative around Harper’s spat with the Chief Justice is now being characterised by the NDP as an attempt to intimidate her and the courts, which is kind of unsettling. Mind you, Thomas Mulcair isn’t exactly pure when it comes to attacks on the Supreme Court based on conspiracy theories, as recent history shows. Aaron Wherry rounds up more reaction to the dispute here. Brent Rathgeber blasts the PMOs use of selective and disingenuous facts to try to smear the Chief Justice for the sake of fundraising dollars. Irwin Cotler took questions about the situation over the Twitter Machine. Andrew Coyne wonders when Conservatives of good faith will start to challenge the party’s leadership over the damage they are doing to our institutions.
QP: The Attorney General’s silence on protecting the courts
It was a gorgeous spring day in Ottawa, but it was too bad that neither Stephen Harper or Justin Trudeau weren’t around to enjoy it, as they apparently all found better things to do than to attend the grand inquest of the nation. Thomas Mulcair was in attendance, and led off by asking if the Attorney General felt it was his job to ensure that there were never any attempts to intimate the courts of the country. Peter MacKay rejected the premise of the question, and said that after the Chief Justice met with special committee, she called him and he decided that the Prime Minister didn’t need to speak to her, then gave the line about the inappropriateness of discussing cases with judgments. Mulcair carried on, about the separation of powers, to which MacKay carried on with talking points about the legal opinions they received. Mulcair was not impressed and accused MacKay of being a henchman of the PM. MacKay waxed about Justice Rothstein being appointed from the Federal Court, to which Mulcair blasted back about the difference in Quebec law, hence requiring special judicial requirements. MacKay kept on with the justifications of legal opinions and the special committee. Mulcair hammered away at the difference rules, but MacKay tried to play down Mulcair’s own reading of the Supreme Court Act. Stéphane Dion led for the Liberals, and echoed in English by Sean Casey, brought up the anonymous Conservatives who complained to the media and appeared to be leaking confidential information from the special appointment committee, but MacKay shrugged the questions off as “convoluted.” Casey hammered away at the loss of confidence in the selection process, and wondered if the minister would make any changes to restore confidences. MacKay insisted that the process was the most open and inclusive in history, and that even the opposition justice critic had praised Nadon.
Roundup: Inciting a feud with the Supreme Court
A rift between the government and the Supreme Court of Canada appears to be opening as a bunch of anonymous Conservative ministers and backbenchers bravely approached National Post columnist John Ivison under the cloak of anonymity and trash-talked Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, insinuating that she lobbied against Nadon’s appointment. The Executive Legal Officer of the Supreme Court put out a release that denied any lobbying, and said that the Chief Justice was consulted by the committee of MPs that were creating the short-list of nominees, and that because of the issue of appointing a Federal Court judge in a Quebec seat was already well known, the Chief Justice also advised the justice minister and the Prime Minister’s chief of staff that it could be an issue. This happened back in July. The PMO, late in the day, put out a release of their own, insinuating that McLachlin made a cold call to Harper, which he refused because it would be inappropriate to discuss a matter before the courts – only it wasn’t before the courts, because that consultation, which was made to his chief of staff and not Harper directly, was in July – a fact that they only confirmed when the Toronto Star pressed them on it. It’s really worrying that the PMO is trying to assert that the Chief Justice did something untoward as Prime Ministers and Minsters of Justice often consult with her when there are vacancies on the bench, because the Chief Justice can advise them on what particular subject areas the Court is looking for an expert to fill. In the context of advising on a replacement for Justice Fish, there would have been nothing wrong with McLachlin consulting the government, nor with raising the point of caution about Federal Court judges. That this government has made a mess of the appointment process with their opaque committee process under the window dressing of greater accountability and transparency – of which there is actually none – and to try and come after the Court like this, is extremely unbecoming of any government. Especially when they were warned there would be a problem and went ahead with it anyway.
QP: A million criminals at work?
Despite it being only Thursday, only one major leader was present in the Chamber — Thomas Mulcair — which continues the worrying trend that QP somehow doesn’t matter. Mulcair led off today by asking why government agencies needed to collect telecom information on over a million Canadians. James Moore assured him that they were being used by law enforcement agencies for necessary actions. Mulcair mockingly wondered if there were a million criminals being tracked, but Moore insisted that Section 7 of the privacy legislation spells out why this information is necessary. Mulcair brought up the reports that there may be as many a thousand missing and murdered Aboriginal women, to which Stephen Blaney assured him of the measures they had taken. Jean Crowder and Niki Ashton followed up with increasingly outraged calls for a national public inquiry, but Blaney repeated that they were taking measures to keep the street safe. Chrystia Freeland led off for the Liberals, noting the record levels of unemployment in Southwestern Ontario while large numbers of Temporary Foreign Workers continued to be brought in. Jason Kenney insisted that anyone who cut corners and tried to bring in workers illegitimately would face consequences. John McCallum noted that the Canada Experience Class was created as a tool of diplomacy, and was since co-opted by the department of immigration for their own ends. Chris Alexander insisted that the programme benefited Canadians, and when McCallum noted that the previous minister went to Ireland to seek potential immigrants when youth unemployment levels were high, Alexander extolled the relatively buoyant job market in Canada.
QP: The authorities always seek warrants — really!
On a rainy day, after the various caucuses met, MPs gathered in the House for our daily exercise in government accountability. Of note, it was also Stephen Harper’s 55th birthday, not that anyone expected the opposition to go easy on him because of it. Thomas Mulcair led off and sharply asked who authorized the release of that telecom data of a million Canadians. Harper said that he rejected the premise of the question and assured him that agencies follow the rules and get warrants. Mulcair pressed, but Harper reiterated that they get warrants and that there is legislation before the House to modernize investigative tools. Mulcair insisted that the legislation would exculpate the need for warrants, to which Harper once again reiterated that agencies get warrants when needed. (That might be the key, given that they don’t seem to need them if they get the data for the asking). Mulcair wondered what information the government was seeking, and which telecom companies were cooperating. Harper said that it was not the government seeking the data, but law enforcement agencies, and that there was independent oversight. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the Temporary Foreign Workers intakes for areas which don’t seem to need them, to which Harper gave his usual bland assurances that they had created jobs and they were reviewing the programme. Trudeau reminded him that five years ago, Sheila Fraser warned of the low quality of Labour Market Opinions that were open to abuse, but Harper stuck to his talking points, same again when the question was asked in French, adding that Trudeau himself had asked for a permit for his riding.