One way to fill blogspace on a pre-long weekend Friday – Liveblogging a PMO background briefing

by kadyomalley on Friday, July 31, 2009 2:15pm - 44 Comments

The Scene:

With just moments to go before the briefing gets underway, there are seventeen media representatives clustered around the table, including ITQ. So far, three of them have expressed amazement and surprise that this room — 112-N — exists, which boggles ITQ’s mind. Have they never covered Procedure and House Affairs?! Wait, don’t answer that.

This now looks like the ultimate revenge fantasy for the press gallery — a committee comprised entirely of journalists, and A Senior Government Official in the witness chair.

The dress code, incidentally, is what you would call “hypercasual”, with the exception of the representative from the National Post, who is otherwise garbed in traditional Friday-before-the-long-weekend gear, but with vibrantly pink socks and loafers. It’s kind of hypnotic, actually.

1:04:40 PM

And we’re off! (What? Apparently I just like recording life in liveblog format.)

Cue the flurry of tape recorders!

Ground rules: background briefing, we can quote this gentleman as A Senior Government (or PMO) official, or whatever we like.

The purpose of this little meet-and-greet? Planning for the Arctic tour, which is coming up soon, and this time, they’re going to provide more detail in advance “to allow for the realities that there are inherent difficulties to filing in the far North”. Which is far.

Oh! Will the PM eat a seal heart? Will he? I bet that’s the first question.

Okay, onto the housekeeping stuff — not, of course, the actual announcements, but a rough timeline, and when – throughout the trip, that is – that they expect to be “making news”. We’ll see about that, Mr. SGO.

Tour kicks off on August 17, concludes on Friday, August 21; in terms of travelling, they’ll depart from Ottawa and most of the travel will be on the Airbus (wait, is that a “the” or an “A”? How many do we have?)

First stop is Iqaluit, where they’ll have a cabinet meeting on August 18th, with a photo op in the morning; it will be an all day meeting, but media will “likely” have to leave before the meeting ends to transfer to HMCS Toronto to take part in Operation Nanook, an Arctic sovereignty mission. They’ll send out a minister or two to talk to us before we troop off to the ship — I’m using “we” in the royalest possible sense, since I’m fairly sure ITQ will not be aboard the vessel.

A reporter asks for more information on Operation Nanook, and is told that there will be a full briefing by Defence at some point before the trip takes place; Peter MacKay will be there, as will some media who are covering the operation in its entirety — again, betting not ITQ — which means there may be some limits for photo ops – one pool, not two.

Wow, this is — even less exciting than I expected, and trust me, I wasn’t expecting much.

1:13:05 PM
The PM will join the hearty crew — the media contingent thereof, that is — of the Toronto on Wednesday morning, via helicopter; his arrival will include a landing shot, although any sign of a Mission Accomplished banner, and he’s turning that chopper around and going home. (Note: The preceding was entirely extrapolated by ITQ, and should not be attributed to ASGO.)

He then gets on an inflateable boat – really? – and heads off to the Charlottetown — that’s a submarine — before heading back to the Toronto — not loving this tradition of naming all our vessels after provincial capitals, by the way, as it makes for a very confusing itinerary.

The Toronto will sort of sail around, I’m gathering, depending on the weather and the presence of Danish interlopers who need to be shown what’s what; it sounds as though the media on the PM’s tour may overnight there, but the upshot is that reporters will be “walking on the ship, and flying off”.

As for filing, as far as *he* knows, it’s possible to file from the Toronto, and they – PMO, that is – is going to try to embargo information in advance, so we can “get a jump” on our stories, since filing times may be limited. That’s as long as we agree to respect the embargo, of course. “That’s something we wouldn’t be doing for everyone in the media,” he stresses; just those sending people on the tour.

On the 20th, it’s off to Pangnirtung, where will be an announcement at some point that morning — they’ll fly in and out from Iqualuit. In the afternoon, there’s *another* announcement in Yellowknife, and the whole gang will spend the night there.

The next morning, it’s off to Whitehorse for a separate announcement at a super secret location — really; he can’t tell us, because it would make it “obvious” what the announcement would be. Hmm. How far is Hans Island? Because apparently, the mystery spot is about an hour away.

Then it’s off to Calgary, and probably back to Ottawa after that, although they’re not sure whether they’ll just stay in Calgary, but the PM will be getting off there.

The cost of this magical Arctic adventure? $1,000 flat rate for travel; accommodations and everything else is up to the media to cover. Which is — actually, surprisingly affordable. It’s like they really *want* us to come!

1:24:27 PM
More chatter about pools — the photo kind, not the watery kind — which is sufficiently technical to leave ITQ’s mind to wander. Blah blah, limited access in some cases; the Toronto — the ship — is “logistically tricky” as far as ferrying reporters back and forth from Iqualuit, since it’s a tight fit in the chopper.

1:26:07 PM
And there goes The National Post Representative and his pink socks.

1:27:12 PM
The PM will take questions from the media after an announcement, but not a photo op, as is the usual practice.

And — that’s apparently it.

1:27:54 PM
Questions! What’s the big difference between this Arctic trip and the last one, and all the other Arctic trips?

ASGO notes that there are “similar elements” to last year’s trip — a cabinet meeting, announcements, various events. “Similar in many respects,” but an “opportunity to highlight an important part of our country that most Canadians don’t get to see,” and of course, they’ll also liaise with Operation Nanook, and “see it in action”. The whole issue of Arctic sovereignty is “central” to this government’s agenda.

1:30:15 PM
A non-Arctic question about Mark Carney, and one about compensation to the provinces, neither of which ASGO will answer. One on Nortel that he refers to “Minister Clement”. “We have cabinet ministers for a reason,” he reminds us.

What about Russia sending paratroopers to the Arctic next spring? Oh, that one he can answer — sort of — the North is of interest to a number of countries, as far as zones, including Russia, and we’re “involved in a process” to figure that stuff out, which is what we’re seeing now.

1:35:54 PM
ASGO notes that “nobody asked about this”, but there is a tentative time for a briefing on the North America Leader’s Summit, which would be next Friday. Dimitri Soudas will be in charge for that Summit, as far as leading the media — logistically, we assume, and not, you know, on a delightful scenic tour of local sightseeing spots — and it sounds like there may be a “side trip” of some sort, not necessarily related to the summit, but not far off the path. Geographically, that is.

1:38:25 PM
And that, it seems, is really that. Man, not a single partisan crack. I feel cheated somehow.

Bookmark and Share
  • http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

    The super-secret reason? He'll be dropping off wireless routers for everybody.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

      But wait! There's more!

      With our PM's declaration that Democracy isn't good for the Economy, and this setting foot upon warships defending our northern sovereignty, I began to wonder who his current role model is? Turns out it's Poitical Action Figure Man!

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8179792.stm

  • KOL

    How can a government official speak anonymously to a room of 17 journalists in this day and age? Am I the only person who thinks this is wrong?

  • Loraine Lamontagne

    Anonymity is the last refuge cowards. I think you should quote him as the Senior Government Coward.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

    Not that I'm defending — or praising, mind you — the practice, but as you can see from the liveblog, this was pretty innocuous stuff, as far as the actual substance of the briefing. It's a bit different when these briefings are used for partisan purposes — launching attacks against the opposition, for instance — under cloak of anonymity, but I don't feel particularly ethically compromised in having taken part in this particular session.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

      Kind of the point though, isn't it? If they insist on anonymity even for the innocuous stuff, how transparent and accountable can we ever expect them to be on things that are serious?

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

      Kind of the point though, isn't it? If they insist on anonymity even for the innocuous stuff, how transparent and accountable can we ever expect them to be on things that are serious?

      I suppose on the flip side, at least we know where we stand, I guess.

  • Mike R

    Not to be persnickity or anything, but while it is fine to refer to a warship as "the Toronto", it is not to refer to it as "the HMCS Toronto". That would mean "the Her Majesty's Canadian Ship", combining a definite article and a personal pronoun.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/KadyITQ KadyITQ

    I'm just amazed I got the letters in the right order for HMCS, but I will correct that now.

    • Mike R

      A common error, but at least you didn't call it a boat (although that's what you would call a submarine – the navy likes to make terminology confusing just so they can act superior). By the way, the Charlottetown isn't a submarine – its a Halifax-class frigate. Are you sure they didn't say it was the Chicoutimi?

  • Mike R

    Oops, sorry, I forgot Chicoutimi was the boat involved in that tragic fire and is still not repaired. So it's definitely not her.

    • someone is asking

      um, so why are ships called her and not just plain ol' it?

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

        Because Captains were generally male, and running a ship requires the same kind of devotion as a spouse, and back in the day, suggesting the captian was married to a man would cause a mutiny.

      • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

        Because Captains were generally male, and running a ship requires the same kind of devotion as a spouse, and back in the day, suggesting the captian was married to a man would cause a mutiny.

        At least, that's always been my suspicion.

        • Ceeger

          Right, and in addition to that, when one springs a leak and is giving you a very hard time, you require the same kind of patience to nurse her back to port.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

    " … travel will be on the Airbus (wait, is that a “the” or an “A”? How many do we have?)"

    Well Mr Wiki says we have 5 Airbus' one of which is outfitted for VIP use ( no more luxurious than a Winnebago they claim). and 14 Canadair Challengers of which 4 are VIP.

    " The cost of this magical Arctic adventure? $1,000 flat rate for travel; accommodations and everything else is up to the media to cover. "

    I bet it's costing the Taxpayer a lot more than $1k / head for this little blubber bake. Did the Libs got traipsing off to the Arctic to hold Cabinet meetings?

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

    " … travel will be on the Airbus (wait, is that a “the” or an “A”? How many do we have?)"

    Well Mr Wiki says we have 5 Airbus' one of which is outfitted for VIP use ( no more luxurious than a Winnebago they claim). and 14 Canadair Challengers of which 4 are VIP.

    " The cost of this magical Arctic adventure? $1,000 flat rate for travel; accommodations and everything else is up to the media to cover. "

    I bet it's costing the Taxpayer a lot more than $1k / head for this little blubber bake. Did the Libs go traipsing off to the Arctic to hold Cabinet meetings?

    • Mike R

      I don't know if they ever had a cabinet meeting there, although various PMs have gone north for photo opportunities before. The symbolism of having regular cabinet meetings in the arctic is, I think.

      While symbolism can be expensive, that doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile. We have tended to neglect the arctic. This government at least seems to appreciate its importance. Making other Canadians appreciate that as well is something that needs leadership, and symbolism.

      • Matthew Fletcher

        Agreed. Its a big country that is expensive to get around.

  • Mulletaur

    "Questions! What’s the big difference between this Arctic trip and the last one, and all the other Arctic trips? ASGO notes that there are “similar elements” to last year’s trip — a cabinet meeting, announcements, various events. “Similar in many respects,” but an “opportunity to highlight an important part of our country that most Canadians don’t get to see,” and of course, they’ll also liaise with Operation Nanook, and “see it in action”. The whole issue of Arctic sovereignty is “central” to this government’s agenda."

    Nothing like some pre-campaign earned media showing Harper single handedly defending the Arctic against those pesky Russians, Danes and assorted foreigners. It's simply breathtaking.

    • William

      —-So glad you`ve seen the light and fully understand the importance PM Harper believes the North (almost half of our land area ) has in the future of Canada.

      I`m not sure I would have called it " breathtaking " but you know what they say about the enthusiasm of those recent converts. You must be really feeling it.

      • Mulletaur

        Well, you really McVety'd that one, didn't you Billy Boah ?

        • William

          Well, that doesn`t make any sense. Could you do us a favour and check your meds—–it seems you`ve torqued them up lately.

  • Sigh

    Seriously, Operation Nanook?

    • Mike R

      Seriously – its inuktitut for "polar bear". This is the third in a series of nothern exercises started in 2007.

      • Sigh

        I didn't know it meant polar bear. I was thinking of that old movie, Nanook of the North.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

      As a wise man once said;

      " watch out where the huskies go and don't you eat that yellow snow "

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

      As a wise man once said;

      " watch out where the huskies go and don't you eat that yellow snow "

      Minister's Speech.

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

      As a wise man once said;

      " watch out where the huskies go and don't you eat that yellow snow "

    • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

      As a wise man once said;

      " watch out where the huskies go and don't you eat that yellow snow "

      Media advisory.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

    In other words, I (Harper) have absolutely no use or respect for the press, but I (Harper) really, need to "use" you now for publicity and photo-ops.

  • Wayne

    You are the first person to use the word persnickety that I have ever encountered – Way To GO! good word

    • Scott M.

      You need to look inside your Tilley Hat more often!

    • Ceeger

      Yes, it is amazing what rapturous levels of language that a blogger can attain through use of a computer's thesaurus.

      • Mike R

        It's a perfectly cromulent word.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/WDM WDM

    After her European excursion earlier in the year will Kady be liveblogging from the Arctic?

  • knick

    Kady, your description of the briefing is far more interesting than the trip is likely to be, unless of course our illustrious leader holds out his hand for a piece of seal heart and then puts it in his pocket…or something…
    Those journalists who are 'lucky' enough to join the tour better keep in mind that if they aren't standing around waiting for permission to board whatever vessel happens to be next on the itinerary, it will definitely leave without them (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/the-…

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/DeliciousLattes DeliciousLattes

    “We have cabinet ministers for a reason,” (a Senior Government Official) reminds us."

    *one million Drudge sirens* This is a huge development!

  • Mikey

    The Charlottetown is in fact a Frigate – not a submarine. It would have been strange had it of been a sub as they are not allowed to divulge their locations, as would befit a stealth platform.

    • Mike R

      According to CP it will be HMCS Corner Brook that the PM will visit. Since this is a demonstration of our ability to operate the fleet in the arctic the public demonstration of that ability will take precedence over the usual "stealthy" activities of the submariners.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Wascally_Wabbit Wascally_Wabbit

    Well – I trust he is taking Minister Strahl with him – to talk about settlement of land claims and honouring treaties and to give the poor folks up there an idea of what he plans to do with the Indian Act…since the High Court gave him some pretty tight deadlines – and the Iniut are just as affected as other Aboriginals…
    Or does he think building a few igloos will be a good photo op. and appear to be addressing the housing problems…?
    And maybe he's welcoming Global Warming because his Big Oil pals are telling him they'd love to run tankers through what used to be icefields…

  • http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

    Breaking news Karlheinz Is getting the heave ho. Darn kind of those hardworking Justice dept. officials to work late on a long weekend Friday to get those papers served. Nothing unusual there no sir.

    • Mulletaur

      About bloody time. Now he can spin all the stories he wants … to his cellmates.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Harbles Harbles

        I wonder if one B. Mulroney will be summoned to testify?

From Macleans