Tag Archives: Tough on Crime

Roundup: Life means life

Posted on by

Because the Harper government can’t keep the good people of Canada too scared, he made a big show about announcing yet another piece of tough-on-crime legislation. One that is completely unnecessary given existing laws in place – one which will give cabinet the authority to permanently deny parole from certain murderers, as though there was any chance that the Clifford Olsons or Paul Bernardos of the world would ever walk the streets again – but the government certainly wants you to think that they could given all those liberal judges and such. Never mind that the recidivism rate for most inmates given full parole is about three percent. Never mind that it has pretty much no chance of surviving a Charter challenge in the courts. Never mind that it sets up the odd dichotomy where this government believes that parliamentarians can’t be trusted with national security but can instead be trusted with denying someone parole permanently. Never mind the impact on the rule of law. No, this government needs people to think that they’re going to be tough on crime, and damn the actual consequences. So here we are. Andrew Coyne eviscerates the bill with his usual aplomb here.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Review or oversight?

Posted on by

With C-51 now before committee, and the process of hashing out hearing schedules and witness lists begun, the debate continues over its merits. The story about the young Edmonton who went to support ISIS and CSIS didn’t stop her – because they’re not empowered to disrupt – is adding fuel to the fire, while it’s also bringing out a lot of conspiracy theories that are way out there, like ones that state that the terrorism angle is just a smokescreen so that the government can go after environmentalists and First Nations who oppose their resource development projects. (For the record, I have a really hard time seeing that, especially when you start intimating that it’s at the behest of corporations). The question of oversight remains top of mind, particularly as the Liberals are making that the hill they want to die on – or at least fight an election over – to which Philippe Lagassé writes a very interesting piece about the nature of parliamentary oversight committees in comparable Westminster democracies. In particular, these committees and the one that the Liberals have proposed here in Canada is not actually oversight either – it’s a review committee, like SIRC, only broader because it would review all national security agencies as a whole rather than in silos as what little oversight or review mechanisms to do currently (an four years later, talk about better integrating oversight remains just that). More importantly, however, Lagassé notes that opposition parties need to be very careful about how much oversight that they demand parliamentarians have because involving them too much can make them complicit in decisions that they should be holding the government to account for, and by swearing in a group of MPs to secrecy to see the materials, it effectively silences them because they can’t talk about what they know, and it can take such material out of sight and out of mind – as what happened with the Afghan detainee documents. Which isn’t to say that we shouldn’t have more parliamentary review of national security, but we need to be cognisant of its aims and limits.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Mandating bilingual tweets

Posted on by

The Official Languages Commissioner has decreed that cabinet ministers should tweet in both official languages, which seems like a fairly concerning decree when you look at how some of those ministers are using the Twitter Machine to engage in some actual dialogue with actual Canadians (and some journalists too) about issues, without it all being canned statements and talking points. The caveat to the Commissioner’s statement is that they must use both official languages when communicating “objectives, initiatives, decisions and measures taken or proposed by a ministry or the government.” In other words, those canned links to press releases. The thing is, those are already being tweeted out by the official department accounts, whereas the ministers tweeting – at least for the good ones – are more “personal” and less filtered. Those are where the value in Twitter lies, and if the objective is to simply turn ministerial Twitter accounts to official releases, then what’s the point? I think this may be an instance where the Commissioner needs to perhaps re-evaluate social media and the engagement that happens over it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Recycled economic planks

Posted on by

Thomas Mulcair spent the noon hour yesterday laying out three of his party’s economic planks for the coming election. (A reminder: it’s still nine months away). To that end, Mulcair promised a cut to small business taxes, an extension of the capital gains cost allowances for companies buying new equipment, and an innovation tax credit for businesses. The first of those is not new – the NDP have been going in this direction since the previous election, and the second is current government policy that is set to expire, but one wonders how much it has been taken up as the government already extended it, and we still hear that Canadian companies didn’t spend the high dollar years investing in this equipment to boost productivity at a time when it was advantageous for them to do so, and now the dollar is much lower and it’s more costly for these businesses to buy this new equipment. The third, geared toward research and development, again sounds suspiciously like what the current government has been trying to do as they retooled the National Research Council to help with commercialisation of technologies. There is, of course, debate on some of the utility of these points as well, with certain experts saying that those small businesses that would benefit from this kind of tax cut are already well off. (Also, small businesses are not the biggest job creators in the country – sorry, but that doesn’t make any mathematical sense). The final point is geared toward revitalising the manufacturing sector, but it’s pocket change in terms of dollars, and the sector has much more entrenched structural problems. Of course, there is no mention of how this is costed, on top of promises for their childcare spaces, restoring the much higher healthcare transfer escalator, and returning OAS eligibility to 65 – and no, raising corporate income taxes won’t get you that much, nor will going after offshore tax havens. Mulcair also added that the NDP would move to protect pensions from bankruptcy proceedings, which again is not new policy, for what it’s worth.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Happy 200th birthday, Sir John A!

Posted on by

Tomorrow marks the 200th birthday of Sir John A Macdonald, our first prime minister and the man who made us. Unfortunately, because we don’t do a good job of recognising him, we’re not seeing too many celebrations around the country, which is a shame. And more recently, we’re seeing a rash of spiteful editorials, like this one, that declare that we should not celebrate him at all because he was a horrible racist drunk, or what have you. Never mind that everyone in the 19th century was pretty terrible, never mind that he was far more enlightened and moderate than most of his peers, never mind context or nuance as we read history – let’s grind some modern day axes on the backs of historical figures who can’t defend themselves! (Macdonald’s biographer, Richard Gwyn, offers a pretty good response to these kinds of articles here). In the meantime, Stephen Harper pens an op-ed in Macdonald’s praise, while Mark Kennedy wonders if any politician today could survive the scandals that Macdonald did (spoiler: probably not), and Aaron Wherry gets a roundtable of experts together to discuss Macdonald’s legacy. In the meantime, celebrate his birthday by watching the CBC film about the first steps toward confederation (online here), listen to some of his speeches as read by other former prime ministers, and certainly have a drink in his honour. Note that his favourite tipple was actually champagne, and not scotch, as so many people like to claim.

Continue reading →

Senate QP: Solitary confinement under scrutiny

Posted on by

The Senate was sitting early on a Friday morning as part of the final push to get the last of the bills that need to be passed done so before they rise for the Christmas break. Routine proceedings in the Chamber proceeded swiftly, and Question Period began early.

Senator Cordy led off, asking about an issue of a specific home care case in Alberta that she had raised with the leader of the government in the Senate weeks ago and had not yet heard a response to. Senator Carignan, who answers on behalf of the government, noted that he had raised the issue with Ministers Kenney or Alexander. Cordy updated the file with issue of work permits for a caregiver who was already in the country as a temporary foreign worker, but whose paperwork was being delayed for several more weeks. Carignan asked Cordy to have the woman in question send a letter directly, so that he could follow up with the ministers directly. Cordy noted that the woman in question has tried already and had no response, nor from her MP who insisted that nothing could be expedited, but would forward all of her correspondence to him in the next few minutes.

Continue reading →

QP: And to all a good night…

Posted on by

The last QP in the Commons of 2014, and only one of the leaders was present, as Stephen Harper was preparing for a photo op in Mississauga, and Justin Trudeau was, well, elsewhere. Thomas Mulcair led off by demanding Julian Fantino’s resignation twice Julian Fantino, slightly more spirited than his usual robotic reply, decried how often the opposition voted against veterans. Mulcair then asked about impaired driving laws, to which Peter MacKay insisted that they were tough on criminals and respecting victims. Mulcair pivoted again, asking about compensation to Newfoundland and Labrador for CETA implementation, to which Rob Moore noted that the fund was created to compensate for losses, not as a blank cheque, so they were waiting for demonstrable losses. Another pivot, and Mulcair demanded specific emissions regulations for the oil and gas sector. Colin Carrie read that a job-killing carbon tax was “crazy.” Marc Garneau led off for the Liberals, and return to cuts to front-line programmes at Veterans Affairs, demanding that the minister be fired. Fantino insisted that the government supported veterans while the opposition voted against them. Joyce Murray noted the government distancing itself from the New Veterans Charter, to which Fantino simply recited his talking points. Frank Valeriote asked about the connection of General Dynamics to the new mental health research for the military, to which James Bezan praised the initiative.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Buttressing the Fantino problem

Posted on by

You may think that Julian Fantino’s days in cabinet are numbered. Tone deaf to his file and to the particular needs of veterans, for a government that has tried to make the military a point of pride, Fantino has pretty much been a robotic disaster on par with the reprogrammed Robot from the Lost in Space reboot film. But don’t think that will be enough to convince Stephen Harper to decide it’s time to shuffle the cabinet and oust Fantino. No – that would be a sign that he made a mistake, and of weakness, and well, that simply couldn’t be done. Instead, there has been a great deal of shuffling of the deck chairs – moving retired General Walt Natynczyk to head the department as Deputy Minister, and now the PMO’s director of media relations, Stephen Lecce, has been reassigned as Fantino’s chief of staff – at least on an interim basis. In other words, everything is being done to buttress Fantino from the outside, but short of completely reinstalling his duotronic databanks with a new personality matrix, I’m not sure that it will help. I will add that Leona Aglukkaq’s decision to spend Question Period yesterday reading a newspaper while serious questions were being asked about the food crisis in her own riding were being asked was also not good optics, but as of yet, there are no calls for her resignation, not that it would have any success either, as she is too much of a needed symbol in the cabinet for Harper to let her go for any reason short of leaving briefing binders within reach of the associates of biker gangs.

Continue reading →

QP: Lapsed spending and a lack of analysis

Posted on by

Despite it being Thursday, the Commons had a lot of empty desks and none of the major leaders present. Megan Leslie led off, asking about Joe Oliver’s admission that his office did not do their own analysis of the EI tax credit. Oliver insisted that their reduction would create jobs, but the NDP would raise taxes. Okay then. When Leslie pressed, Oliver touted the government’s job creation figures. Leslie moved onto the $1.1 billion in lapsed spending on veterans, to which Parm Gill insisted that it was false. Nycole Turmel asked the same is in French, to which Gill repeated his answer. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, asking about spending on housing and infrastructure, to which Denis Lebel said that if Goodale was so concerned, he should have done more when he was finance minister. Goodale laughed, and raised the lapsed veterans spending, to which Parm Gill howled that the Liberals put the Forces through a decade of darkness. Marc Garneau asked the same question again in French, and Gill gave a slightly less hysterical answer about how much they’ve spend on veterans.

Continue reading →

QP: Even Ontario wants NDP childcare

Posted on by

Caucus day in the Commons, and all of the major leaders were again in the chamber, with the Conservatives proud of the new MPs elected in Monday’s by-elections who were visiting in advance of being sworn in, while the NDP were crowing over social media about Maria Mourani joining their party (but not caucus until after the next election). Thomas Mulcair led off by noting that the Ontario legislature voted in favour of supporting the NDP’s childcare plan, and asked about the government’s previous pledges. Harper reminded him that the other night, some Ontarians voted overwhelmingly against the NDP, and that his government has made life more affordable for all families. Mulcair wondered when Harper would meet with the Ontario premier about issues like childcare, and Harper claimed that he meets with premiers regularly — except he’s been avoiding Kathleen Wynne. Mulcair claimed that 65 percent of Canadians live in jurisdictions that want more affordable childcare, and repeated his demand for childcare spaces. Harper insisted that his government has put money in the pockets of Canadians that the NDP were planning on taking back. Mulcair pressed on Harper’s previous specific commitments about the healthcare escalator, to which Harper insisted that they have increased transfers to promises to record levels. Mulcair insisted that the transfer rate change was a cut (which it really wasn’t), but Harper repeated his answers. Justin Trudeau noted that the government would vote against his bill on Access to Information citing bureaucratic increases, and wondered why they opposed the modernization of Access to Information. Harper said that they did modernize the system by bringing 70 new agencies under its aegis and that the Liberals opposed other transparency measures. Trudeau moved to the cuts to infrastructure funds, to which Harper said that the Liberals voted against funding and that they only wanted to “raise taxes to fund bureaucracy.” Trudeau moved onto a conference in Montreal that Harper skipped, and Harper insisted that the government was represented.

Continue reading →