After the morning’s caucus meetings, a series of tributes to Rita MacNeil, and the implication that Justin Trudeau somehow supports terrorism, Wednesday QP got underway. As per usual, Thomas Mulcair started off by reading off a series of condemnations against the ministers of immigration and Human Resources for the Temporary Foreign Workers programme, and James Moore, who remained the designated back-up PM du jour, assured Mulcair that they were creating jobs, and reminded him that NDP MPs were also asking for approvals for their riding. Libby Davies was up next, and condemned the decision to end the funding to the Health Council of Canada. Moore assured her that they had increased health transfers to record levels. Justin Trudeau was up, and brought up the adoption of the Charter 31 years ago, asked asked what the government’s plan was to celebrate its anniversary. Moore said that they were big supporters of history — witness the Canadian Museum of History — and then segued to another riposte about asking for temporary foreign workers, this time by Trudeau himself. (As it later turned out, this was a request for a permit for a Chinese cook to work in a *gasp!* Chinese restaurant). Trudeau then mentioned the downgrading of growth forecasts, and brought that around to his consistent point about the new tariff rates impacting middle class Canadians. Moore insisted that the Liberals preferred higher taxes.
Tag Archives: Temporary Foreign Workers
QP: Tariffs versus carbon taxes
After yesterday’s QP excitement dropped off the news cycle because of the Boston bombings, the dynamic in the Chamber was different today, not only because Harper was off in London for tomorrow’s funeral of Baroness Thatcher, but that sense of anticipation was gone. After a couple of statements on the Boston marathon bombings, QP began with Mulcair reading a statement on the bombing and request for an update on consular assistance. James Moore, the designated back up PM du jour, gave the statement on behalf of the government and called out the “cowards” responsible. Mulcair then went onto his four questions on the Temporary Foreign Workers Programme, his tone still calm and measured, while Moore assured him that they would be investigating, and by the way, your own MPs keep asking for temporary foreign worker approvals for their ridings. Justin Trudeau was up next, and brought up the increased tariffs in the budget, which would impact the middle class. Moore reminded him that Trudeau first ran on the basis of the carbon tax known as the Green Shift. Trudeau’s performance was a little shakier today, referring to his notes on his desk more than he did yesterday, though by no means was it a Mulcair-esque reading-from-the-mini-lectern kind of performance.
QP: Testing Trudeau’s performance
The galleries were packed, including the press gallery, which was something of a rarity. Even more rare was Peter Mansbridge showing up for the festivities. Every leader was present — also a rarity for a Monday, but as Harper is travelling later in the week, he’s making up the day. And so, when things kicked off, Thomas Mulcair read off five questions about RBC and the use of temporary foreign workers, and called on Jason Kenney to apologise. Harper stood up to say that the programme was not intended to take jobs away of Canadians, and they would be investigating, but for his third supplemental, pointed out that eight NDP MPs wrote letters to the department asking for more temporary foreign worker approvals for their regions, which were regions with high unemployment. This set Mulcair off, and he got red-faced as he leaned over his mini-lectern as he yelled back at Harper. And then it was Trudeau’s turn. After a snag with translation, he asked a trio of questions about the increases in tariffs in the budget — not so much reading his questions but checking his notes on his desk occasionally. Harper, after congratulating Trudeau on his win, said that it didn’t make sense to give tax breaks to countries like China, which were no longer developing — to which Scott Andrews heckled “so you’re raising taxes on Canadians!”
Roundup: Assessing Mulcair’s QP performance
PostMedia takes a look at Thomas Mulcair’s QP performance, and the kinds of topics that he ends to cover – in particular, that he tries to focus more on economic issues than shying away from them. That said, I’m not sure that “Why won’t the government adopt the NDP’s plan” is really a question on the economy… Included in the analysis is a critique that Mulcair doesn’t seem to have grasped the way that the Liberals could set the agenda for days while they were the Official Opposition through careful use of QP, which the NDP haven’t been able to master. Indeed, they haven’t quite mastered actual debate as they simply give the same question to several MPs in both official languages, as though there wasn’t a response given that could embarrass them down the line when they asked the very same question again and again. Also, nowhere is it mentioned that he continues to read his questions from his miniature lectern on a daily basis.
Roundup: Beware those scary policy proposals
As the NDP policy convention draws closer, Jim Flaherty sends out a scathing missive about the negative economic impact of their proposals. But this totally isn’t a way to distract everyone from the assault that Flaherty is under for things like the “iPod tax” debacle or anything, right? (Speaking of, the Finance department is doubling down on its insistence that there’s no tariff on MP3 players – despite the all evidence to the contrary). Economist Stephen Gordon takes issue with some of the NDP’s underlying misunderstanding of profit in the modern economy – which they are largely against in their constitutional preamble – and how profit benefits everyone, especially those who live on investment income, such as pensions. The party also looks set to release a “get to know Thomas Mulcair” video at the convention as part of the new charm offensive to head off Justin-mania that is about to sweep the nation.
Roundup: The meaning of Margaret Thatcher
The death of Baroness Thatcher was all over the political scene in Canada yesterday. Susan Delacourt writes about her legacy with respect to political marketing, which shaped campaigns of Stephen Harper, and she also spoke with Brian Mulroney about his recollections of Thatcher – including a famous blow-up in an airport over the issue of sanctions against apartheid South Africa. Anne Kingston writes about Thatcher’s complicated relationship with feminism. John Ivison, who lived through the Thatcher years in Scotland, finds himself a little surprised at the legacy she left behind in reforming Britain’s economy. Michael Den Tandt says that she was popular because of her principles – though he notes that on occasion, she was on the wrong side of an issue.
Roundup: Hopes rest on Trudeau
Saturday was the final Liberal leadership event, the big “showcase” faux convention, which was, well, a bit blah. (My take on it here). Aaron Wherry captures Trudeau’s speech. Tim Harper notes that while Trudeau clearly carried the day, the real work lies ahead of him. John Geddes looks forward to Trudeau’s first QP as leader. Michael Den Tandt says that Trudeau’s biggest obstacle is going to be the party elites who want to control policy top-down rather than from the ground up like Trudeau is proposing. Andrew Coyne sees Trudeau as the best of an uninspiring lot, though he does think Martha Hall Findlay would be the candidate to actually shake up the party. The Toronto Star editorial board endorses Trudeau for leader.
Roundup: Kevin Page’s final battle
After two days of arguments at Federal Court, the judge there will deliberate on whether he should be providing clarity to the mandate of the Parliamentary Budget Officer – and no, it’s not a cut-and-dried question. As lawyers for the Speaker asserted, it is a matter for Parliament to decide upon – and remember, Parliament is actually the highest court of the land – and Parliamentarians should not be going to the courts every time the government doesn’t turn over its numbers. And while Page’s request for clarity was just that – clarity – there are some inescapable and fundamental issues at the heart of the matter, and that is that MPs themselves have abdicated their role as guardians of the public purse. While journalists and the public hail Page as being a hero, what’s missing is that he has been saddled with the role of “watchdog” because MPs have decided they’d rather have him do their homework for them, because math is hard, and they can then invoke the magical talisman that is his independence to prove that the government is in the wrong with its numbers. That Thomas Mulcair sent along his own lawyer as an interested party is part of what muddies this issue and makes it look partisan – because Mulcair and company want Page and his successors to do the dirty work for them. This is not really an issue about the government arguing against the fiscal oversight position that they created, but about Parliament itself, and whether or not MPs on both sides of the aisle can take their own jobs seriously. That they are placing all of the emphasis on Page and his office to do their work for them is an indictment that they continue to refuse to.
QP: Not recognising the best finance minister in the world
Interrupting a day of debate on wanton constitutional vandalism, QP started off with Thomas Mulcair reading off a question about EI auditors “shadowing” claimants, to which Harper responded with some bog-standard response about EI being there when they need it. Mulcair then moved onto a question about Flaherty’s back-and-forth policy changes without consultation, and treated the Peter DeVries and Scott Clark article as though they were still currently employed by the department. Harper sang Flaherty’s praises in response. Mulcair carried on, citing Flaherty’s breach of ethics over the CRTC letter, not that Harper’s vigorous praises were diminished any less. Chris Charlton finished off the leader’s round, asking about EI training funds, but Jim Flaherty assured her that they consulted broadly on the budget. Bob Rae was up next, keeping up the issue of the EI training funds, but Harper touted just how transparent his government is as a non-sequitur response. Rae then brought up Dr. Arthur Porter’s party donations while he was SIRC chair, and wondered how he managed to escape a security clearance. Harper insisted that none of the allegations against Porter had to do with his time at SIRC — skirting the issue of donations. For his final question, Rae wondered why there wasn’t an inquiry into Jeffrey Delisle’s security breaches, but Harper told him that they’re not unique to Canada, and brought up the Bradley Manning case in the States.
Roundup: Supreme Court refines what constitutes hate speech
The Supreme Court handed down its decision on the Whatcott case, which basically refined the definition of what constitutes hate speech in the country. They also said that the “love the sinner, hate the sin” argument is not acceptable either when it comes to hate speech against gays, for what it’s worth. Emmett Macfarlane notes the issues around defining what a ‘”reasonable person” would constitute as hate, as the decision seems to indicate. Charlie Gillis laments the lost opportunity to affirm free speech, no matter the content, because human rights legislation is being abused as a blunt tool in the country. Jonathan Kay sees the decision as privileging anti-Christian censorship because they believe in the fire-and-brimstone retribution for gays, especially because the “love the sinner, hate the sin” argument holds value for Christians. Andrew Coyne laments that the judgement didn’t spend enough time prefacing the value of free speech. And Bill Whatcott himself? Plans to keep up his anti-gay pamphleting because apparently Christ has nothing better to do than ensure that Whatcott denounces the gays.