While word has it that Stephen Harper would make an announcement regarding a combat mission to Iraq tomorrow, neither Harper nor Justin Trudeau were present for QP. Thomas Mulcair led off by asking why the Ebola vaccine had not yet been shipped to West Africa, to which Eve Adams said that they were waiting on the World Health Organisation to coordinate the necessary logistics. Mulcair said that it was in a media report that the issue was actually one of intellectual property and not logistics. Adams reiterated that it was up to the WHO to coordinate logistics, while touting all of the other aid we’ve sent. Mulcair changed topics, and asked what date the Canadian personnel arrived in Iraq, and if it was September 27th as was reported. Rob Nicholson reiterated the number on the ground, the number allowable to be deployed, and that they come and go per needs on the ground. Mulcair insisted that Harper said it was the 15th and that he was being duplicitous. Nicholson dismissed this, and Mulcair launched into a diatribe about clear answers. Nicholson retorted that Mulcair was being duplicitous in suggesting he might ever approve of a deployment. Joyce Murray led for the Liberals, and decried the lack of transparency to parliament regarding the mission. Nicholson insisted that there has been a debate and an appearance before committee, and noted that the Liberals did not bring deployments to Parliament. Murray pointed out the sum by which the Defence budget had been cut, and not increased, and wondered how they could trust the government’s statements. Nicholson hit back with a bog standard “decade of darkness” retort. Dominic LeBlanc closed off the round by asking the same again in French, to which Nicholson insisted that the Liberal position was all over the place.
Tag Archives: Veterans
Roundup: Countdown to an announcement
Word has it that on Friday, Stephen Harper will announce our combat role in the fight against ISIS in Iraq. It also sounds like two of our refuelling jets are being readied for the mission. That will mean that Parliament will become seized with the debate and eventual vote (never mind that it’s a trap) early next week. There’s also no indication where he’ll make that announcement, but it’s unlikely to be in the Commons, because, well, it’s a Friday and Harper never, ever darkens the door of the Commons on a Friday (let alone makes a major announcement there, but that’s another story). Andrew Coyne gives his thoughts on a deployment here. That said, I think this talk about decisions to put soldiers into harm’s way needing some kind of special consent and the knowledge that our parliamentarians have our soldiers’ backs is a bit overblown, while pressing for a vote can simply curtail debate and damage accountability.
https://twitter.com/pmlagasse/status/517337138770083840
https://twitter.com/pmlagasse/status/517337562860359680
QP: Plenty of questions and answers about Iraq
A day after a relatively decent QP (emphasis on relatively), it was hoped that MPs could keep it up, this time with all of the leaders present. Thomas Mulcair led off by asking about the Ebola crisis in West Africa and asked about sending DART. Harper responded that he has spoken with the Director General of the WHO and that we are sending more aid but DART is not the right tool. Mulcair asked about the possibility of sending additional forces to Iraq, to which Harper said that they were still examining next steps and that a vote would be held if it was a combat mission (caution — it’s a trap!) Mulcair wondered if those air strikes could include Syria, and Harper didn’t want to speculate. Mulcair wanted to know when the Iraq plans would be tabled for debate, but Harper wouldn’t give a timeline other than “the next few days.” Mulcair closed by asking for a report on the activities of our forces on the first 30 days of deployment. Harper said that no one should doubt the impact of our forces, but didn’t provide an answer. Justin Trudeau asked about what support we have offered the Americans in Iraq and about our current objectives. Harper repeated that they were contemplating next steps, and that the actions in the region were necessary and noble. Trudeau asked about the accomplishments of the first 30 days and if CF-18s were specifically requested. Harper said that the people in northern Iraq were facing genocide and that it was important work — but didn’t answer the question. When Trudeau wanted more debate on the mission, Harper said that they should put partisanship aside.
QP: About this local issue…
With both Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau off in Southern Ontario for events, Thomas Mulcair was the only major leader in the Commons. He led off by asking about the coming demolition of the Mirabel airport — likely because he has Quebec seats to shore up, and Lisa Raitt responded first by reminding him that she’s a she and not a he, and that it’s the Montreal Airport Authority that is the responsible authority. Mulcair shot back that he was referring to the Minister of Infrastructure, before he angrily wondered when the government when the government would listen to indigenous women about missing and murdered indigenous women. Kellie Leitch responded that families were thanking her for the Action Plan™ being tabled. Mulcair then switched to the bus-train collision in Ottawa a year ago, and asked about a train derailment in Slave Lake. Raitt was back up, and said they were working on rail safety. Chris Charlton was up next and bemoaned the declaration of bankruptcy by US Steel in Hamilton, which Mike Lake gave a somewhat shrugging response, and when Charlton demanded that the government protect the pensions of the affected retired workers, Kevin Sorensen touted all the ways they have cut taxes. Ralph Goodale was up for the Liberals, asking about job losses in the last month and suggested changing the EI tax credit to one where employers get a credit for a net job created. Sorensen insisted that the Liberals were making up policy on the fly, and made random potshots at the Liberal record on EI. Goodale’s final question was about the latest report on income splitting and how it would affect provincial budgets. Sorensen responded that Harper said that income splitting was a good policy. Well if Harper says so…
Roundup: MacKay’s t-shirt choices
Peter MacKay’s judgement is once again being called into question after he showed up at a party fundraiser wearing a t-shirt with the logo of the National Firearms Association on it. He later said it was because he was showing support for an Afghan veteran, but one readily suspects that if an Afghan veteran asked him to wear a t-shirt with a pot leaf on it, say to show support for medical marijuana being used to treat an operational stress injury, I doubt MacKay would go for it. The NFA meanwhile declares that MacKay “believes in freedom!” by which they mean less restrictive gun laws. I’m not sure that MacKay’s explanation will quite get him out of declaring that tacit support.
Roundup: A drunken intrusion, NBD
In a bizarre twist, a nineteen year-old has come forward as the intruder in Justin Trudeau’s home, and claimed that it was all a drunken mistake – that he was trying to find his friend’s place with similar entry instructions, and that when he realized he was in the wrong place he briefly considered stealing the knives and some electronics in the kitchen before changing his mind and writing the note, intending it as an apology. And because he was drunk and didn’t mean any harm, the police have opted not to lay charges, but rather issue him a formal caution – because apparently drunkenness excuses trespassing, and the vaguely threatening note on a row of butcher knives.
Roundup: 18 causes of a disaster
The Transportation Safety Board’s final report into the Lac-Mégantic disaster was released yesterday, and it was pretty damning when it comes to the responsibility that Transport Canada bears for not doing their audits or following up on it with a rail line that was found to be deficient in its compliance several times. (Video recreation of the disaster here). In the end, they came up with 18 different reasons for the disaster, that had one of them been addressed properly, things could have wound up differently. Part of the problem remains the lack of a proper safety culture, which has been criticized by no less than the Auditor General and a Senate committee report, and yet we’re not really seeing movement on it quickly enough. Paul Wells notes the government’s weak response, and asks about just what kind of responsibility they are going to take.
Roundup: Referring the file to Elections Canada
It probably wasn’t unexpected, but the Board of Internal Economy has ruled that the NDP has broken the rules with their “satellite offices,” and wants Commons administration to figure out how much they need to repay for those staffers, most of whom are either working from home or out of Thomas Mulcair’s constituency office. Not only that, but the Board has also mentioned turning over the file to Elections Canada, because of concerns that those staff were not on “leave of absence” when it came to the by-election in Bourassa, where they already spent right up to the limit and this could put them over it. The excuse was that they were using banked overtime and whatnot, but again the rules around in-kind donations would also be triggered here. The NDP, predictably, tried to douse distraction sauce all over it by shouting “kangaroo court!” over and over, and demanding that the Auditor General be brought in to look at everyone’s expenses (um, he’s not your babysitter, guys), so that they can try to spread blame all around. They also kept insisting that the salaries were approved by Commons administration, though the Speaker’s office disputes this with the timeline they published (and it’s fascinating reading). We’ll see if they try to contest this in court as well, but it’s not looking good for them at this point.
Roundup: Minimal amendments
The Commons justice committee did their clause-by-clause review of the prostitution bill, and they agreed to two minor amendments – one that narrowed the reach of the communication provision from anywhere that children could be present, to simply being next to schools, playgrounds of daycares; the other being that they agreed to put in a provision to review the bill in five years, though the NDP tried to get that down to two. The Liberals didn’t put forward any amendments since they voted against the bill in principle at second reading, feeling it is unconstitutional and unsalvageable. The Greens largely feel the same way. Interestingly, Independent MP Maria Mourani doesn’t feel it goes far enough, and wants prostitution outlawed writ large. Here’s a look at some of the criminalization of both the sex workers as well as pimps and johns in Canada, and apparently we have fairly low rates of going after those who abuse sex workers – but one wonders if that also has to do with the fact that the women who were abused or assaulted didn’t feel safe reporting it because they feared being further criminalised.
Roundup: Missing the point about parties
In a piece that bothers me immensely, Susan Delacourt puts forward the notion of abolishing political parties, and then applies a bunch of marginal reasons like branding and narrowing voter pools. The problem is that she ignored the whole point of political parties under Responsible Government – to have a group that can maintain the confidence of the Chamber in the formation of government. Which is actually a pretty big deal and why coalition governments don’t really work as well in our system as they might in others. “Oh, but Nunavut doesn’t have parties” or “most municipalities don’t have parties” people – including Delacourt – will cry, but it’s a nonsense argument because they have a small handful of members, and it doesn’t scale up to 308 MPs on any practical basis. You could not adequately run a government or maintain confidence with 308 “loose fish.” Also, the notion that brokerage is “antiquated” is false – otherwise we’d see all kinds of “bridges to nowhere” riders in government bills to get MPs onside to win support – again something that would be endemic with trying to get the support of a chamber of independents. That’s not to say that there aren’t problems with parties right now, because there are, but the solution is to have more people engaging with them so that the power doesn’t remain concentrated – not to simply throw the baby out with the bathwater. Sorry, but Delacourt’s argument has no merit.