Tag Archives: The Monarchy

Roundup: What fake parts?

Posted on by

The Americans discovered a problem that some of their military hardware was being sold to them with counterfeit parts, most of them from China. We buy most our military hardware from the Americans. So what is DND doing about this possible threat? Nothing. You’re welcome, Canada.

The Conservatives have consented to allowing ten different committees study aspects of the Omnibus budget bill, for what it’s worth. The NDP moved a motion to break it up into eleven parts, not that the government will take them up on it. Meanwhile, John Geddes parses what the changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act means, and why the government talking points about it aren’t really all that accurate.

Not unsurprisingly, the recession derailed the government’s debt retirement plans, and even less surprising is the fact that they haven’t come up with any new plans. Seeing as long-term planning isn’t really this government’s forte and all.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Petronas fallout

Posted on by

In the fallout over the rejection of the Petrnoas deal, Stephen Harper stands behind Paradis, yet still insists we’re open for foreign investment. Economist Stephen Gordon calls bullshit on some of the excuses for turning down deals like Petronas. Andrew Coyne calls for the “net benefit” test to be abolished.

The Prime Minister of Jamaica visited Ottawa yesterday, to celebrate 50 years of friendship and our opening a Canadian Forces supply base in the country to serve the region. When asked about Jamaica’s plans to abolish their monarchy, Simpson said that while she loves and respects the Queen, and Jamaica will always be a member of the Commonwealth, she feels its part of her country’s evolution.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another omnibus?

Posted on by

Here’s a look at what a new omnibus budget bill might contain – things like changes to science and research policies, or minor tax changes. Apparently there is some debate within the caucus about what the changes to pensions should entail, especially around the age of eligibility.

The opposition is concerned that a crackdown on “absentee” permanent residents could negatively impact the investment climate in the country.

We’re signing a nuclear deal with the United Arab Emirates in order to provide uranium to their reactors, and to set an example to Iran, apparently.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Blocking the Auditor General

Posted on by

The House of Commons (as its own entity rather than its occupants) is taking the Auditor General to Federal Court to block an Access to Information request around his correspondence for his committee appearances. The House says this is about parliamentary privilege, and the AG says that privilege doesn’t extend to his office. Kady O’Malley delves further into this, but it does seem unlikely that the Courts could even weigh in on this, and there is also that wee little fact that Parliament is a court in and of itself. Both the PMO and the Liberals say that they’re willing to waive privilege in this case. It was later revealed that the NDP were the originators of said ATIP request, which just makes this all the more curious.

Iran has responded to our embassy closures, and calls it “unwise, uncivilised, and hostile.” Brian Stewart looks at some of the possible intelligence that may have prompted the pullout, and wonders if it wasn’t threats on Canadian soil that they were more concerned with. The ousted Iranian charé d’affairs insists that they did nothing wrong. Meanwhile, Thomas Mulcair seems to be distancing himself from some of Paul Dewar’s comments regarding the embassy closures.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Thrice lobbied

Posted on by

And now the Nigel Wright/Barrick Gold issue gets interesting, as a late disclosure shows that Barrick tried to lobby him on three separate occasions – despite his close personal ties to the owner’s family. I guess that now we’ll really see how narrowly the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner reads the Act before she likely declares it’s not her problem. And subsequently, how long before we hear yet another appeal from the Lobbying Commissioner to give her office some actual teeth.

The Senator Fairbairn “controversy” is now just getting ugly. National Post columnist Jonathan Kay printed the anonymous concerns of a Conservative Senator concern troll. Said concern troll is concerned that Senator Cowan has no authority over the Liberal caucus because he’s a Martin appointee and most of them are Chrétienites, and the Chrétienites wanted her kept in the Chamber. All of which is pretty ridiculous since there would be zero utility in keeping her vote going, and even more ridiculous is the part about how the PMO wants them to keep quiet, which is why said Conservative Senator wants to remain anonymous. Really, this reads like nothing more than a cowardly and ugly partisan attack that is hiding behind both anonymity and a woman with dementia, which needs to be called out for exactly what it is. It also demonstrates that this concern troll seems to labour under the impression that he’s to do the bidding of the leader’s office, which actually isn’t part of a Senator’s job description, but rather, they’re supposed to be independent, which is the half the point of why they’re appointed and not elected in the first place. They’re not supposed to take their marching order from the party leader’s office, and yet he seems to be assuming that they should be. I also find Senator LeBreton’s concerns of what might have happened if the numbers had been closer a bit rich, considering the Conservative majority in the Senate is quite secure, and that’s probably why Fairbairn was being eased out in the manner she was. Retired Senator Sharon Carstairs says that this is why Canada needs a dementia strategy, which we don’t have, and why the Senate needs more robust support systems. Here’s a speech that Fairbairn made on the topic of Alzheimer’s in 1999, with an awareness that she had a family history with it. And while we’re on the topic, can we please stop using this incident to mount up Senate “reform” hobbyhorses? It’s in poor taste, and in fact wrong to somehow equate any of these issues.

Continue reading →

Meeting George Takach

Posted on by

On my travels last weekend, I wound up at an event that was attended by a number of Nova Scotia Liberals, and along the way, had my first encounter with bottom-tier would-be Liberal leadership candidate George Takach (who at last check has not officially declared). Takach, a Toronto-based lawyer who hasn’t run for public office before but has apparently worked on Parliament Hill, was out trying to meet some prospective supporters at the event (as the current rules now allow anyone who totally swears they’re not a member of any other party – really! – to vote for the next Liberal leader). I should note that Takach doesn’t appear to have a website in place for his putative leadership bid either – just a Twitter account and a Facebook page, neither of which actually has a biography. That, I had to find through a Google search and came up with the page from his law firm. So, yeah, points for having a place to drive prospective supporters with a coherent platform or policy ideas in place. Or not.

Just as an observation, let me say that Takach wasn’t exactly working the crowd. Even among a smaller group of fairly prominent local Liberal organisers – you know, the kinds of grassroots organisers who have networks and who can mobilise people to support a leadership campaign – he didn’t pro-actively engage them and waited for people to come to him. And when people asked for his leadership “elevator pitch,” he got bogged down along the way numerous times, not to mention made his foundational platforms – like school meal programmes to help kids get a good start in life – things aren’t actually areas of federal responsibility. Oops.

Continue reading →

Bernier can’t identify our Head of State

Posted on by

Our nation’s lack of civic literacy truly has reached crisis proportions when ministers of the Crown can’t even identify the very basic parts of our system of government. I’ve written before about the public’s general lack of understanding of the Canadian monarchy, and our need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that the monarchy is somehow “foreign” because the Queen doesn’t live in the country full-time. It’s an issue of education and awareness. I get it.

But when a minister of the Crown can’t even make this distinction, there is a problem. And a really big one at that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: False plots to take away votes

Posted on by

There is no set by-election in Etobicoke Centre yet – in fact, the Supreme Court has not yet decided if they will hear the appeal – and the ground war in that riding is already heating up. The Conservatives have been calling voters to warn them that the Liberals were plotting to “overthrow” their votes, and that their votes would be “taken away” by the court decision. Which is a complete distortion, but all’s fair in war and politics, or something like that. Not that the Liberals haven’t started fundraising in preparation for the by-election there either, though not using such patently false claims it should be noted.

Thomas Mulcair blames Stephen Harper for east-west divisions, not his own comments. Shocking, I know. Meanwhile, Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall has some concerns over the “Dutch disease” comments, as does Dalton McGuinty. McGuinty says that the high dollar does pose challenges for the manufacturing sector, but it’s not “Dutch disease,” which really, when you actually weigh what’s going on, is more the case.

Continue reading →

Disabusing the notions of foreign monarchs

Posted on by

Prince Charles and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, have completed their Royal Tour (Diamond Jubilee Edition), and all is well in the land. Support for the monarchy is on the rise in English Canada, the Prince’s Charities are getting off the ground nicely, and Diamond Jubilee medals are being affixed to lapels everywhere.

But as with any royal tour, one starts to get a bit wary of the kinds of depictions used about the Canadian monarchy, and that there remains this ingrained media perception that it is somehow foreign. One CBC anchor event went so far as to call Charles “The future king of England” – never mind that the position of “King of England” hasn’t existed since 1707 with the Act of Union, and the creation of the Kingdom of Great Britain, which later became the United Kingdom. What these anchors, and many of the talking heads in the media, seem to forget is that Canada has a separate and distinct monarchy, which just happens to have the same head of state as the United Kingdom and several other countries.

Continue reading →