The nominee for Privacy Commissioner, Daniel Therrien, will appear before the Commons Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics committee, as well as the Senate in Committee of the Whole, on Tuesday, in the hopes that they will confirm him shortly thereafter. Why this matters is because the “cyberbullying” bill is under consideration and the privacy commissioner needs to weigh in on it as testimony. The outgoing interim commissioner, Chantal Bernier, had opted for a June 5th appearance as opposed to May 29th in order to have more time to prepare, and to see if a new nominee would be named by then or if her term would be extended. This means that she won’t appear to testify on that bill, though it also remains to be seen if Therrien would appear, days into the position and not fully briefed, or if another official from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner will testify instead. Nevertheless, it does raise problems, and is a reminder to the government why they shouldn’t back-load everything to the last couple of weeks before summer, because these kinds of pile-ups happen frequently and it just becomes a huge mess for everyone.
Tag Archives: The Senate
Roundup: A giant loss for Parliament
With a growing list of international projects on child soldiers, genocide, research into PTSD, and two books being written, and a sense of the unhappiness of the institution at present, Senator Romeo Dallaire has decided that he’ll step down next month, around the same time that Senator Hugh Segal is also due to depart. Dallaire’s departure means the incalculable loss of one of our hardest working and most respected parliamentarians, and one of the people most deserving of a Senate seat where his wealth of experience has immeasurably been a benefit to sober second thought, policy development and drafting the expert reports for which the Senate is known for. Dallaire was also not happy with the way the suspension motions around Senators Wallin and so on were carried out because of the lack of due process, but hey, political expediency and all. And of course, the growing number of vacant seats is creating a bigger problem for the institution down the road.
Roundup: Standby for evening sittings
Government House Leader Peter Van Loan is calling for evening sittings for the remainder of the spring sitting of the Commons, in order to get stuff done. Here’s a list of five bills that the government is looking to get through before they rise for the summer. And you can bet that the late nights will make MPs all that much crankier as the last stretch before summer grinds along. Get ready for silly season, ladies and gentlemen.
Roundup: Being cute before committee
And that was Mulcair’s appearance at committee – chippy, evasive, too-cute-by-half, and when he did answer a question, he did it in a sarcastic and fulsome manner (in the actual sense of the word) so as to run out the clock. The answers were full of selective facts and half-truths, raised incorrect facts about Conservatives supposedly co-locating constituency and party offices (in point of fact they were merely in the same strip mall, even though NDP staffers tweeted out photos taken from an angle so that the party sign was in the same shot as the constituency office sign, and thus constructing a wholly disingenuous image). When the NDP members of the committee weren’t busying themselves trying to run out the clock with frivolous points of order, they and Mulcair gave obsequious paeans to how wonderfully the NDP were doing as the official opposition and how the other parties were trying to punish them for it. And when it was all over, their MPs and staffers pronounced both in the House and over social media that they demonstrated “real accountability” and showed how to answer questions. In other words, they behaved as appallingly as the Conservatives do in their evasions and talking points, and patted themselves on the back for it. Well done, everyone! You’ve done parliamentary democracy proud. The committee, afterward, ordered an investigation into who has been leaking information from this whole saga to the media. Meanwhile, CTV has learned that some of those “parliamentary” staff were working in the Bourassa by-election, which may have been run out of that Montreal office. Oh, but they were “on leave,” so it doesn’t count, which makes the insistence that there are strict lines between party and “parliamentary” staff because they have separate unions all the more dubious (as a tweet from this one Liberal partisan demonstrates). At the same time, an investigation by House of Commons administration has advised the Board of Internal Economy that NDP MP Guy Caron broke the rules by sending partisan mailers into Bourassa around the time of the by-election using House resources. Oh, but they always follow the rules, remember? Here is the At Issue panel taking on the day’s events.
Roundup: The baton is handed off
Despite the short window of planning, the Day of Honour went off rather well yesterday, and Stephen Harper didn’t commit a gigantic breach of protocol when he turned over the last flag from Kabul – inside of an ornately carved baton carried by a group of soldiers who passed it along in a relay from the base at Trenton – over to the Governor General after it had been passed to him. This was a last-minute addition to the programme, no doubt sparked by the outcry about the planned breach of protocol. Nevertheless, the fact that Harper inserted himself into that handing off of the flag innately politicised the whole affair, and taints the whole separation from the government of the day by which the military operates. It’s why they answer to Her Majesty and the Governor General is the Commander-in-Chief – so that they are not tied to the politics of the day. And yet Harper needed to become part of that, his presidential envy still evident. While the ceremony included soldiers giving thanks for support and the GG and Harper giving thanks to them on behalf of the country, events took place around the country, Thomas Mulcair in Montreal and Justin Trudeau in Calgary. John Geddes has a fantastic recap of events here, with photos from the event here. Kady O’Malley Storifies how MPs marked the day both in Ottawa and across the country. PostMedia talks to soldiers who are proud of their accomplishments in Afghanistan.
Roundup: Honour and protocol
The government has declared today to be a National Day of Honour to mark the mission in Afghanistan, but not everyone is pleased with the way they’ve handled it. The fact that the last flag from Kabul is being handed to Harper and not the Commander-in-Chief – the Governor General – is a pretty major breach of protocol that really won’t endear Harper to the troops, especially as such a breach looks transparently like a photo-op. Some of us thought that Harper had given up on such outright breaches after Prince Charles was here for Remembrance Day a few years ago and proper protocol was suddenly observed once again. Perhaps Harper’s presidential envy has reared its head again? The Royal Canadian Legion’s Dominion President is none too pleased with the government for the short timelines and lack of communication when it comes to preparations, because it didn’t allow many of the branches across Canada time to plan anything.
A Silver Cross mother whose son died in Afghanistan has told Power & Politics the tale of her difficulties with the system following her son’s death, from being billed for cost overruns at the funeral to being denied support services because her son was unmarried. It’s a pretty awful and wrenching tale to watch, but one that everyone should. It certainly colours the government’s Day of Honour back-patting.
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.
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.
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.
Roundup: Amendments during the meltdown
While the Rob Ford story goes into total meltdown in Toronto, the amendment process for the Fair Elections Act hit close to the halfway mark last night, with just one day left before the clock runs out – and it might go a bit faster if parties didn’t file nonsense amendments (postal codes on ballots? Veiled voting? Letting all candidates be photographed casting ballots instead of just leaders? Seriously?) or go on lengthy tirades about things. But hey, what do I know? Meanwhile, Conservative MPs have been talking to The Canadian Press about the fact that the caucus has had a great deal of input into the changes being proposed to the bill after they too were unsatisfied with the original form.