Tag Archives: The Senate

Roundup: The next SCC justice

Posted on by

Stephen Harper surprised pretty much everyone when he suddenly announced that the next Supreme Court justice will be Suzanne Côté, a Quebec litigator and the first woman to be appointed to the top court directly from private practice. Côté is known for her expertise commercial contracts, banks, bankruptcy, shareholder disputes, real estate law and the Competition Act, and yes, the Quebec Civil Code. What is different this time is that there was no parliamentary process when it comes to vetting the appointment in any way, or in drawing up a short list, after the disaster that was the Nadon appointment. While the government insists that they were concerned about leaks, the opposition parties have consistently insisted that any leaks came from the government side. Carissima Mathen gives some of her thoughts on the appointment.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Protection through body cams

Posted on by

One of those bizarre incidents that happens from time to time overtook the conversation last night as Conservative MP Peter Goldring put out a statement at the end of the day declaring that he wears a body-mounted camera to protect himself from people who would otherwise abuse their authority or hide behind a cloak of anonymity – making clear connections to the current harassment allegations on the Hill – and suggests that others do so. A few hours later, the PMO sent out a statement claiming that Goldring was having trouble sending a statement of his own, but that he retracted it because it was ill-thought, and that was that. While people have been poking fun at Goldring all night – and equally being horrified that he would basically accuse the complainants of making up the allegations in order to trap the accused MPs, apparently – much of Goldring’s obsession with body-mounted cameras has gone ignored. I interviewed Goldring a couple of months ago (paywalled) after he put out a different release calling for the RCMP to all be issued body-mounted cameras, talking about all of the cost savings in court time that would be a result because there was a visual record and not just a notebook written in pencil that police officers could change at will. Most of this stems from this 2011 arrest for failing to provide a breath sample, for which he was cleared in 2013, but Goldring is now promulgating a notion that police routinely lie, and that video evidence is the answer to everything. These harassment allegations against those two suspended MPs seem to have pushed Golding over the edge, it would seem. Goldring, incidentally, is not running in the next election.

https://twitter.com/laura_payton/status/537807683743940608

https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/537825035529244672

Continue reading →

Roundup: Two Conservative holds

Posted on by

The Conservatives held both ridings in the two by-elections last night, Jim Eglinski winning in Yellowhead and Pat Perkins in Whitby–Oshawa. That said, the Liberal numbers are probably the ones to keep an eye on, because they increased a whole lot between last night and the last election. In both cases, they went from third-place to second – from something like two percent to 19 in Yellowhead, and from 14 percent to 42 in Whitby–Oshawa, taking the lead at some points in the evening. (Note: Both figures were before all polls had reported in). Liberals will tell you that it means that they have momentum in two ridings that they didn’t previously hold, while the NDP will dismiss these as unimportant by-elections in Conservative ridings, but it does seem to complicate the narrative that they’ve been trying to tell of New Democrats being the only ones who can defeat Conservatives. Their numbers didn’t tell that story once again.

Continue reading →

Roundup: What to do about Dean?

Posted on by

The question of what to do about Dean Del Mastro has seized the Commons, and the government seems amenable to going along with the NDP motion to suspend him without pay immediately, and further send the matter to the Procedure and House Affairs committee for further study, particularly for what it means for his staff and his constituents. This is a bit of a change from the government’s original position of wanting the committee to rule before they did, but apparently they’re going with the flow of public opinion on the matter. (The NDP’s unwillingness to let debate collapse so that the vote can proceed on its own accord, however, means that the government will likely invoke closure to ensure a vote later today). There is also a battle raging over Del Mastro’s pension benefits, while the NDP used a committee hearing on John Williamson’s private member’s bill to try to lay a trap. The bill would see MPs lose their pension if convicted of an indictable offence, and the NDP moved an amendment to specifically include elections expenses, which the government defeated because it wasn’t necessary, and wouldn’t apply to the Del Mastro case anyway – not that it stopped Mulcair and the NDP of using Question Period to say the government was trying to protect Mulcair. Because apparently they’re not yet too clever for their own good.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Deployment debate continues

Posted on by

As the debate on the Iraq combat deployment carries on, with the vote set for later tonight, there are already questions as to just how effective air strikes can actually be given that ISIS has already taken lessons to heart about scattering in advance of a raid and reforming after the planes leave. In other words, could that really be the right use of forces. The government made a bit of a show of also adding another $10 million in aid yesterday, including for victims of sexual violence, which the NDP had specifically asked for – but the NDP responded that it’s not really enough to do anything, and then moved an amendment to the government motion to forbid combat and impose strict time limits. (Aaron Wherry recaps the debate here). Liberal advisor and potential candidate, former lieutenant general Andrew Leslie, made the case that an armed non-combat relief mission was a better use of resources because it wouldn’t divide our attention and resources the way doing both combat and aid would, while Roland Paris later noted on P&P that Canada didn’t necessarily need to participate in combat operations, but simply needed to be part of the coalition to help give political cover and legitimacy to the US-led operation. Hillary Clinton, during her speech in Ottawa yesterday, said that military intervention against ISIS was critical – but also not enough to really stop them. Andrew Coyne writes that there is no safe moral ground in this particular fight.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Buh-bye once more, Rob Anders

Posted on by

And it’s buh-bye once again to Rob Anders, as he failed his second attempt at a nomination race, this time in the Southern Alberta riding of Bow Valley. There, the mayor of Brooks won the race, in spite of his questionable choices in haircut, beard and waxed moustache (seriously?), after he labelled Anders a “drop-in candidate.” Anders must have secured the party’s consent to contest a second nomination, but now it remains to be seen what he’ll do next. Oh, and he didn’t even bother to show up at the nomination meeting that he ended up losing in. Apparently Alberta has tired of him and his antics. I just can’t wait for him to denounce that riding as having been infiltrated with liberals and communists, as he tries to find the last vestige of a people who wear their prejudices as proudly as they drive their pick-up trucks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An emergency debate, such as it was

Posted on by

The Commons had their “emergency debate” on the situation in Iraq last night, using debate loosely, of course. After all, “debate” these days tends to largely mean reading monotonous speeches into the record that were all pre-written and don’t actually debate what has already been said. The NDP hammered away at demanding a vote on deployment, never mind that military deployment is a Crown prerogative and thus not subject to a vote, and in fact, shouldn’t be because it launders the prerogative and the accountability. But if Mulcair wants to give Harper political cover so that he can, in the future, say that the Commons decided on the matter and that they are culpable when things go wrong because there was a vote, well, it makes it kind of awkward for the opposition, no? It’s part of Responsible Government – the Commons has given the government the authority to govern, and if they don’t like it, then they can withdraw confidence. Voting to “make decisions” is not actually their role – accountability is. The NDP were also childishly mocking the Liberals for largely not being there for the debate – except that they only got two speaking slots the whole night, which they used near the beginning, and as we’ve established that it’s not a real debate, it does seem fairly pointless to have a bunch of people there to simply endure repetitive prepared speeches – and make no mistake, they are repetitive – with no real ability to respond or add to what’s been said. But this is the state of our parliament these days.

Continue reading →

QP: 69 pairs of boots on the ground

Posted on by

The second day of the fall sitting, and the Conservative Members’ Statements were beyond hysterical. Thomas Mulcair led off, and demanded to know how many Canadian Forces’ members were in Iraq. Harper responded that it was 69. Mulcair railed on about military deployments needing the approval of the House — undercutting his own accountability role given the practice of Crown Prerogatives. Harper reminded him that the current mission was not the same as the 2003 war. Mulcair changed topics, and asked if Harper would hide behind parliamentary privilege to avoid testifying at the Duffy trial. Harper suggested that Mulcair would be an expert witness on the misuse of public funds. Mulcair, after some hubbub, wondered why Harper didn’t fire anyone involved in the “bribery” of Duffy, but Harper hit back that Mulcair should probably fire himself. Mulcair changed topics again and mentioned a report on the Champlain Bridge that said that a toll would make traffic surge on other bridges instead. Harper reminded him that they were still in a contracting process. Justin Trudeau was up next, and returned to the problems with the EI tax credits which incentivize firing instead of hiring employees. Harper shot back with a couple of non-sequiturs about the Canadian Federation of Independent Business and Trudeau musing about cancelling income splitting. Trudeau shot back with a different quote about the CFIB and called on him to give a break on premiums. Harper read a quote from the CFIB, and accused Trudeau of wanting to raise rates.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Proposing a premium holiday

Posted on by

Given that the government’s EI tax credit actually has the perverse incentive to fire employees or reduce wages instead of hiring new staff as was intended, Justin Trudeau offered up a different solution yesterday, which is to offer employers a two-year holiday on paying the EI premiums of new staff. One wonders why he just doesn’t suggest setting the rate at the break-even rate in the actuarial report, which is a mere 0.02 percent above what the government’s “tax credit” effectively reduces it to, but would be across the board, but hey, he’s putting ideas on the table, right?

Continue reading →

Roundup: A tax credit, not a cut

Posted on by

Joe Oliver announced cuts to EI premiums for small businesses yesterday – but it’s not quite as easy as it sounds. It’s actually more of a tax credit only on the employer side, and only for two years, which Oliver insists is not a sign of worry, but “confidence” that they’re on the right path. Um, okay. Economist Stephen Gordon, meanwhile, shows that this kind of tax credit is actually more counterproductive because it encourages these businesses to stay small for tax reasons, and that by not actually cutting payroll taxes, they are not actually creating the right conditions for all small businesses to hire.

Continue reading →