After Thomas Mulcair’s testy and evasive appearance at committee, he was in the House, ready for another round — and Justin Trudeau was also in attendance, which is now rare for a Thursday. Mulcair began by bringing up the centennial anniversary of the Komogata Maru incident and wondered why there had not been an official apology. Tim Uppal asserted that there had been an apology, and that they funded a monument in a Vancouver and they released a stamp. Mulcair switched topics and asked if the minister of Justice was aware of the advice that Justice Nadon resign from the Federal Court and rejoin the Quebec bar. Robert Goguen responded about the advice they received. Mulcair wondered if they would try the tactic with another Federal Court judge, to which Goguen insisted that they would respect the Supreme Court ruling. Mulcair switched topics again and brought up the cuts to refugee healthcare, for which Chris Alexander insisted that genuine, approved refugees would still get covered, but not those who are not approved — and he took a swipe at the Wynne government in Ontario while he was at it. Mulcair gave it another go in French, and got much the same answer. Justin Trudeau led for the Liberals and asked what problems the government thought were present in the Temporary Foreign Workers programme and what their solutions were. Jason Kenney didn’t really answer, but instead took swipes at Trudeau and the Liberals. Trudeau asked about the pathways to citizenship proposals, to which Chris Alexander touted their record on immigration. Trudeau asked his first question again in French, to which Kenney gave vague assurances before returning to his swipes.
Tag Archives: Ukraine
QP: Those pesky temporary foreign strippers
With the March for Life happening on the lawn outside — mostly Catholic high school students bussed in for the occasion, and disrupted by topless protesters — and with the House not sitting tomorrow because of the Day of Honour for the mission in Afghanistan, it was a bit of a Friday-on-a-Thursday day in the chamber. Well, attendance was a bit better, but not much. Megan Leslie led off for the NDP and brought up the government collecting data by “creeping” Facebook pages. Tony Clement assured her that the government wants to listen to Canadians, and they were engaging with the Privacy Commissioner, before accusing them of trying to shut down Canadians who were letting their views be known. Leslie changed topics to the Nadon appointment and the reports that he was advised to resign from the Federal Court and rejoin the Quebec Bar. MacKay accused her of conspiracy theory, and touted the consultation process and the expert legal advice they sought. Françoise Boivin carried on with the same line of questioning in both languages, to which MacKay continued to tout the process that they followed. John McCallum led off for the Liberals and accused the government of hating the Canada Pension Plan and being dismissive of Kathleen Wynne’s Ontario pension plans. Clement responded and decried the “massive tax grab” that would ruin jobs and opportunity. McCallum moved onto the topic of market wages for foreign workers and driving down Canadian wages, to which Kenney took a shot at the opposition parties.
Roundup: The Chief Justice hits back
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada responded to the government’s media releases and included a timeline of events to show that there was no undue influence in the Nadon appointment. One could question if it was appropriate to flag the issue on July 31, but it certainly doesn’t appear to have unfolded the way that the PMO has insinuated. Harper and company continued to make some baffling assertions, like Harper saying that he discounted any advice about potential problems with nominating a Federal Court judge in Quebec because coming from McLachlin, it would have been improper – it simply makes no sense. So is insinuating that McLachlin should have known that the case would come before her, since she’s not clairvoyant and wouldn’t know that Harper would appoint a judge in such a manner, or that a legal challenge would come. Former Justice Minister Irwin Cotler, who appointed two Supreme Court justices under his watch, confirms that the Chief Justice would have been one of the people consulted in the process because she knows what kinds of expertise the Court needs at the time. Aaron Wherry rounds up more reaction to the dispute here.
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.
Roundup: Skills shortages versus wages
After Jason Kenney suspended the temporary foreign workers programme for restaurants, Alberta restaurants are warning that they are going to have to start closing due to labour shortages, given that they already have a hard enough time retaining staff when the oil and gas sector snaps up relatively unskilled labour in short order. Kenny has said that more employers should try to hire Canadians, but that will likely mean raising wage rates. But will people accept the increase in how much it’ll cost them to eat out? We have become a culture that worships on the altar of cheap, after all.
Roundup: Precious illusions and appeals to reason
As part of their campaign against the Fair Elections Act, the NDP have taken to a number of…precious tactics, from Craig Scott writing to Pierre Poilievre to ask him to withdraw the bill in order to start over with all-party consultation (good luck with that), to targeting individual MPs and ministers to vote against the bill, Michael Chong and Bal Gosal thus far. Chong may seem like fair game considering his new role as the so-called “champion of democracy” with his Reform Act bills, and his curious defence of the elections bills thus far (or at least his evasion of taking a stand until they are through the committee stage). But if they think that Gosal is going to break cabinet solidarity on a government bill, they’ve really lost touch with our contemporary reality, and it makes one wonder how they feel about one of the most important conventions about how we form governments under our system of Responsible Government. Would an NDP government not speak with a single voice? I doubt that very much, which makes this particular tactic all the more eye-roll inducing.
Roundup: Flaherty funeral draws out Harper’s human side
Jim Flaherty’s state funeral yesterday attracted some of the biggest names in politics, current and former leaders on both sides of the aisles both provincially and federally (video here). Everyone wore something green, be it a tie or a scarf, to give a nod to Flaherty’s particular sartorial trademark. Harper’s eulogy was largely lauded, especially for the humour he showed that almost never appears in his public persona here in Ottawa, which is really too bad. There are stories about his self-depricating jokes at Press Gallery Dinners past, before he became Prime Minister and made it a personal policy to not only not attend, but also remove any trace of humanity from any speech he gives. That certain other party leaders plan to use their knack for human engagement as a wedge against Harper makes one wonder about its use as a strategic decision all along.
Roundup: No charges for Wright
News from the ClusterDuff file last night as the RCMP announced that they won’t be seeking criminal charges against Nigel Wright – not that it doesn’t mean that he didn’t do anything wrong. It just means that they didn’t have enough evidence to that they felt that they could secure a conviction, which is a long way off from exoneration. The end of the RCMP investigation means that Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson’s investigation into the activities can now restart, which doesn’t mean that Wright is free and clear (not that those sanctions will be too severe – a slap on the wrist and/or being named and shamed tends to be the extent of it). It also means that he is now free to be a witness in any other ongoing investigations, such as the one into Mike Duffy himself. Wright did put out a brief statement by way of his lawyer that said that he always knew his actions were lawful – but it’s still a stretch based on this turn of events to make that kind of a declaration. It also means that Harper can’t hide behind the excuse of an RCMP investigation when asked questions in the House – unless he tries to use the investigation into Duffy as the smokescreen, which I wouldn’t put past him. CBC put together a special At Issue panel to discuss this turn of events.
Roundup: A damning pre-study report
All day long yesterday, word had it that Conservative senators will be recommending changes to the Fair Elections Act as a result of their pre-study, and that Senate Liberals will be recommending even more changes in a minority report. The nine major ones, however, have unanimous support. Pierre Poilievre said he’d “carefully consider” their ideas, which is pretty non-committal. Of course, if the House passes the bill unamended without having considered the Senate recommendations, it could set up for a confrontation between the two Chambers if the Senate decides to make an issue out of it. That of course, remains the danger – that the Conservatives in the Senate will buckle under the pressure of the PMO, as there are still too many operating under its influence. Incidentally, it seems that even if the bill passes and the sections on the robocall registry are unaltered, they may not be implemented in time for the next election.
QP: Regarding the Commissioner’s testimony…
With caucus day, not only were the leaders all present and accounted for in the House, but so were most of the MPs, which set up for a boisterous day. Thomas Mulcair started off by asking about the grain rail bottleneck and the lack of compensation in the bill due to correct it. Stephen Harper mumbled some vague assurances that they were working with producers and would increase the volumes shipped. Mulcair moved onto the testimony of the Commissioner of Elections, who said that some investigations might be shut down because of a lack of compelled testimony. Harper insisted that the bill gives greater independence to the Commissioner, and took a dig at the NDP’s “branch offices” around the country. Mulcair took a few more digs about Conservative “election fraud” before reiterating about the ability for the Commissioner to compel testimony. Harper responded with yet another dig about branch offices. Mulcair asked the same again in French, and got the same answer in French. For his final question, Mulcair asked if Harper thought that Eve Adams should step down, to which Harper called Mulcair a hypocrite, and the Speaker duly cautioned him for unparliamentary language. Justin Trudeau was up next, and asked about the status of the electoral mission to Ukraine. Harper thanked him for his support, and said that there would be updates as they became available. Trudeau switched to a CIBC report on Canadians not saving enough and having too much debt. Harper retorted that Trudeau didn’t have an actual definition for middle class, and dismissed the question. For his final question, Trudeau asked a boilerplate question on the plight of the middle class in French, to which Harper gave a dig that Trudeau wouldn’t know if he was meeting with middle class Canadians or not.