What David McGuinty is thinking

By Aaron Wherry - Saturday, January 14, 2012 at 12:41 PM - 0 Comments

The Liberal MP for Ottawa South wandered into the media room a moment ago and was shortly thereafter surrounded by reporters. He confirmed that he is considering a run for the party leadership.

I’m not ruling out the leadership. I’m giving this serious consideration. I have an obligation to do this. If I’m going to stay in public life, I’ve got to figure out what’s the best way to serve. And that’s what I’m considering.

He was also asked about Bob Rae’s interim status and whatever leadership ambitions Mr. Rae might have.

I have every faith in the good faith of Bob Rae. Bob’s a great guy. He’s very talented, he’s very experienced. He’s a huge net asset for the Liberal Party of Canada. And for that matter, he’s a huge net asset for Canada. A person of that quality and calibre to be in public life today? It’s hard to get good people into public life and keep them there. So Bob will govern himself accordingly. I’m sure he will always do what’s right by him and what’s right by the party and what’s right by Canadians.

Mr. McGuinty joins Mark Holland and Marc Garneau as those who have publicly confirmed that they are considering a leadership run.

What does Canada want now?

By macleans.ca - Friday, April 29, 2011 at 8:00 AM - 3 Comments

Photograph BY Cole Garside

Last week in Toronto, Maclean’s and CPAC hosted an all-party debate entitled, “Election 2011: What Does Canada Want Now?” The participants included Jason Kenney of the Conservatives, Liberal David McGuinty, Peggy Nash of the NDP, and the Green party’s Rebecca Harrison. The discussion, which touched on everything from spending and tax cuts to government accountability and the country’s role in the world, was moderated by CPAC’s Peter Van Dusen and featured Maclean’s Andrew Coyne. The following is an edited excerpt.

Andrew Coyne: Let me put this question to David McGuinty. The Liberal party platform contains about $5.5 billion in new spending to provide a variety of social benefits for students, families with elderly dependents, pensioners. It does not, however, spell out a comparable array of spending cuts, just $500 million in unidentified efficiencies. Federal program spending is now in the range of $250 billion. Is there nothing else that you could find to cut from current federal spending?

David McGuinty: Absolutely there is. We’re going to be examining all government spending. We’ve seen an 18 per cent increase in government spending by the Conservatives before the recession hit. It’s the biggest-borrowing, biggest-spending government ever in Canadian history. We’re not confident that the Conservatives’ numbers are adding up right now. Let’s be honest, there’s only been one Conservative government in Canadian history that’s ever taken this country from a deficit position to a surplus position, and that was in 1889. We’re going to be doing a full government review. In the last four years, I think it’s important for Canadians to know, the Conservative government spent $450 million of our tax dollars on advertising, including $27 million for the billboards that we all have the pleasure of seeing on every street corner in this country. All unnecessary spending. We saw the $50-million slush fund used for Tony Clement’s riding up north, while Mr. Kenney’s own ministry cut $53 million for integration and settlement services in Ontario. So there’s all kinds of opportunity to find efficiencies—to work with our public servants—without compromising our cherished public services.

Continue…

The Commons: One thing he can say for sure

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, December 15, 2010 at 7:49 PM - 46 Comments

The Scene. After the Prime Minister had escorted into the House the two newest additions to the government side, after the government side had delighted in the arrivals, and after the two MPs—Robert Sopuck of Dauphin and Julian Fantino of Vaughan—had officially surrendered their free will and taken their respective seats in the far southwest corner of the room, Mr. Harper returned to his own chair and awaited the first complaint of the leader of Her Majesty’s Official Opposition.

Michael Ignatieff’s lament this afternoon would be for those left waiting hours in emergency rooms across the country. By Mr. Ignatieff’s reckoning, the government had neglected to act sufficiently these last five years and, furthermore, the Prime Minister himself was not adequately supportive of the Canada Health Act. How, Mr. Ignatieff thus wondered, could the government be trusted to protect the public health system?

Mr. Harper stood and dispatched with this perfunctorily, lamenting for cuts to provincial transfers made by Liberal governments during the 1990s and boasting of how many billions his government has dutifully handed over in more recent years.

Having heard this version of events before, the Liberal leader was quick to respond that whatever Mr. Harper’s government had managed to transfer had been budgeted for by a Liberal government in 2004. Switching to English, he shook his fist in the Prime Minister’s direction and reviewed both the premise and the indictment. “The federal-provincial accords run out in 2014. The government has no record on public health. There has been no federal leadership on this issue for five years,” he declared. “The Prime Minister is heard to muse about how he would like to get rid of the Canada Health Act and he says that any plan to bring help to families to look after their loved ones at home is reckless. How can Canadians trust the government to defend public health?”

Mr. Harper stood and repeated his previous points, his right index finger emerging to wag and point variously. But here then the Prime Minister was apparently compelled to punctuate this fall sitting with a statement of great definitiveness. Continue…

Mitchel Raphael on who said what, who dissed who, the first day back

By Mitchel Raphael - Thursday, September 30, 2010 at 3:00 PM - 0 Comments

Let me in, PM!
After the first question period of the new session of Parliament, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff did a round of TV interviews in the foyer sporting a red-striped tie, no jacket and the sleeves of his white shirt rolled up. “Image consultants,” quipped NDP Leader Jack Layton, who was doing a similar round of TV interviews in a dark suit and purple tie. Government House leader John Baird went over to Iggy in the foyer and congratulated him on choosing David McGuinty as the Liberal House leader. Baird noted that since House leaders are supposed to enforce decorum, and that he and McGuinty were the worst shout-out offenders, heckling in the House should now be down by 50 per cent. Taking over the position of top Tory heckler the first day back was LaVar Payne, the MP for Medicine Hat, who wore a white shirt with an odd thick pink stripe on the collar that continued down the front. There were other interesting fashion choices. Halifax NDP MP Megan Leslie sported a piece of a teacup that had been turned into a necklace. It was made by Halifax artist Amy Belanger. “It’s my tea party movement,” joked Leslie. “It’s a recycling movement. And it’s reversible. Now that’s eco-fashion.” The first day had its kinks as well. Security said several of the Hill staff forgot to get new passes to allow them into the lobbies of the House. Among the more prominent of those without valid passes was the PM’s director of communications, Dimitri Soudas. He filled out a special note card which was given to a page to give to Stephen Harper to get him inside.

Continue…

Harper's election plan, in plain view

By Paul Wells - Friday, September 24, 2010 at 9:00 AM - 0 Comments

Sean Kilpatrick/CP

In April 2007, the Harper government, 15 months into its first mandate, opened a 17,000-sq.-foot campaign headquarters far outside downtown Ottawa. They invited TV crews in and gave reporters a tour.

Of course Liberals took the move as evidence of a plan for an election. “They fully intend to defeat themselves at the first opportune moment,” Liberal MP David McGuinty said. “It’s clear they don’t want to do the job.” There was a lot of that talk going around. I collected money bets from senior colleagues and veteran Liberal strategists who were sure an election was weeks away.

But Stephen Harper often talks about an election to delay an election, not to hurry one along. Whatever his strengths, the Conservative leader is no mind-reader. So when he’s not entirely sure the opposition intends to leave him alone to govern, he assumes they need to be scared away from election plans.

Continue…

Yankee, go … get 'em

By Andrew Coyne - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 at 2:35 PM - 0 Comments

The “revelation” (shock! horror!) that the NRA has been offering advice to Canadian groups opposed to the long gun registry — cough, for a decade — has the Liberals watering at the mouth quivering with indignation. Why, Liberal House leader David McGuinty was so furious at this foreign intervention that he was forced to call a press conference:

McGuinty says the U.S. gun lobby has no business being involved at all in a Canadian debate.

”We are here to say that the National Rifle Association and its members and its leadership should butt out of Canada’s gun registry debate,” he said.

He said the Harper government shouldn’t be paying any attention to an American voice.

”This is a government that is choosing to listen to a powerful foreign influence over our own police, our victims’ groups, our medical experts, in fact the majority of Canadians when it comes to gun control.”

Well, bang on. The last thing we need are powerful Americans coming up here and telling us how we should … What’s that? Oh. Never mind:

Nancy Pelosi’s office insists that the most powerful woman in American politics is not out to target the “dirty oil” from Alberta’s oilsands, but green groups and the opposition Liberals in Ottawa wish she would.

The U.S. House Speaker met Thursday morning with representatives from the Pembina Institute and Environment Defence, two groups highly critical of oilsands production.

“As the main customer of tarsands oil, the U.S. has a leadership role to play where our governments at home are failing,” said Environmental Defence executive director Rick Smith…

Liberal environment critic David McGuinty praised Pelosi and the Obama administration for trying to force change in Canada.

“A customer has come calling and said we’d like to see an improvement in the product we buy,” McGuinty told an Ottawa news conference.

That Harper government: they just won’t listen to powerful foreign influences.

Shadow cabinet shuffle

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 at 12:20 PM - 0 Comments

Michael Ignatieff has significantly restructured his government-in-waiting. Ralph Goodale is elevated to deputy leader, David McGuinty becomes house leader, Scott Brison replaces John McCallum in finance, Gerard Kennedy takes over environment, Dominic LeBlanc goes to defence, Ujjal Dosanjh goes to health, Marlene Jennings gets justice and Denis Coderre returns to the shadow cabinet as natural resources critic.

Full list after the jump. Continue…

The Commons: Yelling with purpose

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, May 11, 2010 at 5:17 PM - 32 Comments

The Scene. It was a full 25 questions today before anyone referred to Helena Guergis, before any of Pat Martin or John Baird or, sometime later, Marlene Jennings got involved. And then, yes, there was a reference, from the aforementioned Mr. Martin, to crucifixion. But that there had been a full 25 questions before we came to this point, surely counts for something.

This was indeed, in various small ways, a remarkable day. Daniel Paille and Jim Flaherty entertainingly sparred over securities regulation. Mr. Flaherty and John McCallum very nearly yelled each other hoarse over taxation policy. There were two questions about the potential for train traffic through downtown Toronto.

That it all began with David McGuinty, the booming Liberal backbencher, might not have particularly bode well. But then he seemed to have a question of some relevance. Continue…

The Commons: ‘Whoops!’

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, May 3, 2010 at 6:09 PM - 28 Comments

The Scene. Dominic LeBlanc stood and did as so many great rhetoricians have done before him. In this moment, he stood and sought solace in a complicated law that governs the professional behaviour of elected officials.

“Mr. Speaker, the Conflict of Interest Act specifically states that a public office holder is in a conflict of interest when he or she exercises an official power, duty or function that provides an opportunity to further the private interests of their friends,” Mr. LeBlanc stated.

And so the echoes were sufficiently stirred.

Funny thing about this Gaffer Affair, the longer it remains with us, the more substantive it becomes. What once was a simple tale of well-endowed prostitutes and illicit narcotics is now something to do with the Conflict of Interest Act, a 13-page code of conduct that is understood by perhaps one person in the capital. This is progress. Continue…

The per capita boast (II)

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, November 18, 2009 at 12:43 PM - 27 Comments

It has now been two weeks since Leona Aglukkaq’s office was asked to provide evidence to support the claim that Canada had the highest per capita supply of H1N1 vaccine. Such evidence has not yet been provided.

In the three sessions of Question Period since the Liberal opposition asserted this claim to be incorrect, the government has avoided making a specific per capita claim to this country’s vaccine supply. The closest Ms. Aglukkaq has come to the assertion was in this exchange last Friday. Continue…

And finally, a pun

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, November 6, 2009 at 11:29 PM - 35 Comments

Speaking to reporters after QP today, Liberal David McGuinty adds what has obviously been missing from the H1N1 discussion to date.

Bonjour.  Hello, everyone.  I’d like to start making a few comments about the state of H1N1.  We have come to the conclusion that what we’re facing now in this Conservative government is a plandemic.

The Commons: If we can't talk to each other, we can only talk to ourselves

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, October 29, 2009 at 6:39 PM - 52 Comments

The Scene. The Conservatives cheered as Bob Rae, perhaps their preferred opponent, stood to start Question Period. Then, though, he spoke.

“Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for public health and for H1N1,” said the white-haired one. “It is very clear that there was a delay in the decision of the federal government to order the vaccine. It is very clear that there has been a delay in the distribution of the vaccine. I would like to ask the minister, in light of these two clear facts that are delineated by the evidence, does she not understand that these delays have cost and will cost lives?”

The Conservatives groaned, having apparently expected something more laudatory of their efforts.

On this question of health policy, it was of course Tony Clement, the Industry Minister, who was offered up to respond. Just as Christian Paradis, the Minister of Public Works, would later take a question on climate change, the Treasury Board President Vic Toews would expound on the scourge of organized crime, and Heritage Minister James Moore would stand and account for the government’s approach to taxation.

“Mr. Speaker, in fact our Minister of Health has been working with the Chief Public Health Officer and has been working assiduously with the provinces and territories across this land to deliver the vaccine,” Mr. Clement informed the House

And surely we can all agree that assiduously is a very impressive-sounding word. Continue…

The Commons: Bring it on

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, October 27, 2009 at 6:21 PM - 63 Comments

The Scene. Worried perhaps that his point had been lost amid yesterday’s unpleasantness, David McGuinty stood at the start of Question Period this afternoon and picked up approximately where he had left off the day before.

“Remember the facts,” he said. “One hundred million dollars of partisan propaganda without accountability, infrastructure funds distributed as if they were reward points and more than 60 investigations by the office of the Ethics Commissioner, a minister under investigation for his ties to lobbyists and federal agencies, a Conservative senator linked to key players in a scandal.”

Then, a simple-enough question. “When,” Mr. McGuinty wondered, “are the Conservatives going to clean up this ethical mess?”

The Prime Minister stood, buttoned his jacket, adjusted his left cuff and addressed the Speaker on another matter entirely.

“Mr. Speaker, this is a time of global economic recession,” he said, “but Canada’s performance exceeds that of many other countries and the measures of government are well-supported by Canadians and even the vast majority of provincial governments.”

This much had been said in French, the language employed for Mr. McGuinty’s first question. But, before sitting, the Prime Minister switched momentarily to his first language. “This question,” he said, “reminds me of the old saying: ‘When you throw mud, you lose ground.’”

So there. The Prime Minister returned to his seat then, entirely done dealing with the Liberals for the day. Continue…

The Commons: Unsophisticated debate will not be tolerated in this place

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, October 26, 2009 at 6:25 PM - 40 Comments

The Scene. Ralph Goodale stood and the Conservatives, obviously quite eager to hear and consider his particular concern this day, were yapping and squawking before he’d so much as spoken a clause.

“Mr. Speaker, survey after survey about the H1N1 vaccine show a dangerous trend. Only half of Canadians are planning to get vaccinated. That is down from two-thirds in July. Too many people do not think it is safe, do not think it is necessary. That is a communications failure that could put lives at risk,” Mr. Goodale posited. “How does the Prime Minister justify an advertising tsunami of $100 million for partisan Conservative propaganda, but only a pittance for crucial information about vaccinations?”

The Prime Minister, alas, was not present. In his place, Tony Clement took a turn.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, “the honourable Minister of Health is doing an excellent job in communicating to Canadians about the H1N1 flu situation.

“She has said that the vaccine would be available to every Canadian who needs and wants one,” Mr. Clement reported on behalf of Leona Aglukkaq, seated perhaps 20 feet to his right. “Not only is the Minister of Health urging Canadians to get the vaccine but the Chief Public Health Officer is doing so as well. This is the best way to protect our health and the health of our loved ones. Despite the fearmongering on the other side, we are focused on protecting the health and safety of every Canadian.”

To better convey this fearmongering, the Industry Minister wiggled his fingers in the general direction of the opposition side. Continue…

The Commons: Private peace, public war

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, June 16, 2009 at 6:35 PM - 8 Comments

The Scene. In the sandstone bunker named for John A. Macdonald’s public works minister, a man one biography describes as having left politics in “utter disgrace,” Michael Ignatieff and Stephen Harper honoured their forefathers with a meeting. According to one account, Mr. Ignatieff entered the building, home to the Prime Minister’s Office, around 2pm and exited about five minutes after three. A Canadian Press reporter on the scene claims the Liberal leader left through the Elgin Street exit, skillfully avoiding said reporter’s attempt to question him.

Requests for details of the proceedings would not go completely ignored though. Indeed, in short order there were identical statements from those assigned to speak on behalf of both men. The meeting was described as “productive”—a word that would seem to indicate there was a minimum of swearing and likely a complete lack of physical violence. There are vague promises, as of this writing, that the two will meet again later today. The adjective used to describe those discussions will surely be the subject of intense negotiation.

Across the street and up the hill, the business of Parliament was compelled to proceed without them. And not yet sure of how “productive” the negotiations would be, the parties of Messrs. Ignatieff and Harper were compelled to loudly and forcefully make their claims. Continue…

The Commons: Stephen Harper's real world

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, June 11, 2009 at 6:55 PM - 53 Comments

The Scene. Stephen Harper is not one to leave well enough alone. So having spoken hopefully of his government’s plans to build parking spaces in the Toronto suburbs, a pedestrian overpass in Surrey and a library in Weymouth, his voice switched to a more ominous tone and his pointy finger started wagging near the bottom of the television screen.

He took direct aim at the Liberal leader, informing the viewing public that his rival had vowed “unequivocally” to raise taxes—news that will surely come as some surprise to even Mr. Ignatieff. He bemoaned the boogie men and women of the opposition who continue to insist their majority of seats in the House of Commons holds sway over his 37 per cent mandate. And he warned that only “needless political instability” could harm us now.

The Prime Minister does like to make dramatic-sounding pronouncements. Take, for instance, that moment in late September when he said “the only way” the country would fall into recession was if we were collectively crazy enough to choose Stephane Dion over him. Or that editorial, published on election day a few weeks later, when, with the stock market gone wobbly, he vowed “never” to take the country back into deficit.

Of course, you’ll forgive him if those assertions now seem a bit silly. Indeed, it is entirely unfair to impose the consistency of actual reality on Mr. Harper. A bit like asking Al Pacino to play the same character in every one of his movies. Though perhaps that’s a bad example. Continue…

The Commons: Everything about this is awful

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, June 10, 2009 at 6:24 PM - 55 Comments

The Scene. About ten minutes past the appointed time, the cameras outside the door began to flash, announcing Lisa Raitt’s arrival. A few seconds later she appeared at the entrance to the cramped room in Centre Block’s basement reserved for announcements, explanations and apologies.

Ms. Raitt collected herself, then approached the podium, the standard array of flags behind her. She placed her notes in front of her, sipped quickly from a glass of water and then, with watery eyes, began what had been promoted simply as a short statement.

Opposition anger the day previous had been dismissed as “cheap politics.” Others argued it simply had to be accepted that ministers of the crown would naturally, if in private, find something “sexy” in a potential health care crisis. Given a night to think it over, the minister herself had apparently suffered second thoughts.

Three young men from the Prime Minister’s Office watched from the side. At the front of the room, the Natural Resources Minister apologized to those who might’ve taken offence to a statement she had not intended any of us to hear. She expressed “deep regret” and offered a “clear apology.” She paused at the end of each sentence to take a deep breath.

She spoke of her father and his 18-month ordeal with colon cancer. She spoke of watching her brother die from lung cancer. She struggled to swallow the lump in her throat. With tears welling in her eyes, she made a brief, futile search of the podium for tissue.

She steadied herself, finished her testimony, pledged to carry on, then took her leave. Continue…

The Commons: A thoroughly unsexy day

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, June 9, 2009 at 9:12 PM - 58 Comments

The Scene. Michael Ignatieff wasted few words on the way to a rather devastating question.

“Mr. Speaker, in private, the Minister of Natural Resources said that the isotope crisis was sexy, a means to advance her career,” he began in French. “So how can the Prime Minister explain the words of his minister to a woman who has just discovered she has breast cancer, is waiting for a test, but who cannot due to the isotope crisis?”

Standing opposite and speaking evenly, the Prime Minister proceeded directly to the government’s pat response.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, “the crisis of isotopes is very serious.”

He reassured the nation and enthused about his minister and then returned to his seat.

Mr. Ignatieff seemed genuinely surprised.

“Mr. Speaker,” he exclaimed, “there was no apology, nothing. It’s amazing.”

The Liberal leader proceeded then to up the rhetorical ante. Continue…

The Commons: 'When will it stop?'

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, June 8, 2009 at 6:33 PM - 18 Comments

The Scene. Lisa Raitt arrived in the House sporting newly coloured hair, her blonde locks now brownish red. Perhaps the new look was meant to signal change or, better still, rebirth. Perhaps it was meant to confuse her critics opposite, disguising the Natural Resources Minister and redirecting attacks at the golden-haired government MPs around her.

To their modest credit, the opposition is a bit too quick for that. They can generally pick a troubled minister out of a line-up. And, however slow the MPs opposite sometimes are, even the most fascinating new do could not distract attention from the variously disheartening, troubling and entertaining allegations that now threaten Ms. Raitt’s previously promising political career.

“Mr. Speaker, across the country, thousands of Canadians can not get a cancer diagnosis. The government knew the last 18 months that it would happen. It left a problem at Chalk River to become a crisis for our health care system,” Michael Ignatieff began, opening the afternoon’s session of Question Period. “Instead of blaming young people of 26 years and instead of arguing among themselves, which in this government will take responsibility for this national crisis?”

In this case it would be Leona Aglukkaq, the health minister. She attempted reassurance, but Mr. Ignatieff persisted.

“Mr. Speaker, the government keeps pretending that there is an alternative supply of isotopes but the Dutch reactor will be shut down for maintenance next month and for six months in January,” he continued. “South Africa is already shut down for maintenance this week. The Australians will not come on line for at least six months. When will the minister stop trying to cover up a national health care crisis? When will she start telling Canadians the truth?”

Ms. Aglukkaq stood to answer, but Ms. Raitt was quicker to her feet, eager apparently to engage the opposition leader in a game of musical reactors. Continue…

The Commons: The interrogation of Lisa Raitt

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, June 4, 2009 at 6:12 PM - 18 Comments

The Scene. The afternoon’s session began with the rare seven-part question.

“Mr. Speaker,” said Liberal David McGuinty, “I have several questions for the Prime Minister.”

Did the documents, he wondered, belong personally to the Natural Resources Minister? When did she realize they were missing? Did she inform her deputy minister? If so, when? What secret information did they contain? What commercial information may have been revealed? And, finally, would the government be taking action against the television network that was, previously and inadvertently, in possession of said documents?

Not surprisingly, the Prime Minister chose to answer none of these queries.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, “as I said yesterday, the minister had reasonable expectations that these documents would be kept secret. The minister has acted accordingly, and I support the minister in her actions.”

Even less surprisingly, Mr. McGuinty did not then decide to cease with his examination. “Mr. Speaker, secret documents are those that ‘could reasonably be expected to cause serious injury to the national interest,’” he posited. “We are told these documents contain information on AECL’s financial status, indebtedness, contractual undertakings, obligations, lawsuits and details surrounding its bid for the supply of nuclear power in Ontario. They also deal with the critical issue of medical isotopes for medical testing. Can the Prime Minister explain how the release of this information could not be reasonably expected to cause serious injury to the national interest?”

The Prime Minister returned to his previous point. Then he revived his new favourite trick.

“Let me quote for the member opposite the editorial today in the Toronto Star which says that the minister offered her resignation,” he said. “The Prime Minister rightly refused to accept it. It is time for the opposition to move on to more substantive issues.”

The Conservatives stood to cheer the infinite wisdom of the same editorial board that endorsed Stephane Dion last fall. Continue…

The Commons: So much to answer for

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, June 2, 2009 at 7:11 PM - 26 Comments

The Scene. The good news for the Finance Minister was this: a full 45 minutes of Question Period passed this day without a single query about a federal deficit that may now be on track to total upwards of $170 billion. Not until after QP, surrounded by reporters, did the increasingly gaping hole in the national treasury come up. At which point, Jim Flaherty’s response was as follows.

“Well, you know, economists at TD and economists at the other banks are entitled to their view. I’m sure different economists will have different views. All of them were on average more optimistic than I was in the budget in January but they’re on the low side of the private sector forecasters right now.”

Er. Well, don’t get too worried about that $170 billion then. Indeed, it could be worse. For sure, it might be worse.

That though will be for whoever the Finance Minister is in 2014. Mr. Flaherty, no fool, will have surely bequeathed the position to someone else by then. Denis Coderre, say. Or Thomas Mulcair. Or Pierre Poilievre. Or whoever Prime Minister Gilles Duceppe decides to let handle the books.

In the meantime, the bad news for Mr. Flaherty was this: even without, apparently, the time to prepare some questions about our increasing indebtitude, the opposition still arrived for Question Period ready to press all sorts of issues said to demonstrate some failing or another in the minister. Continue…

The Commons: Those angry days of yore

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, June 1, 2009 at 6:15 PM - 11 Comments

The Scene. David McGuinty rose first with a reminder of days gone by.

It was 18 months ago, he mused. The Chalk River nuclear facility was inactive. A shortage of medical isotopes threatened. Thousands of patients across Canada and around the world hung in the balance. The Prime Minister, Mr. McGuinty recalled, quite rightly deemed the precarious situation a “threat to human health.”

The Liberal environment critic though was not giving the Prime Minister full credit. Indeed, to pick just four of Stephen Harper’s words from those heady days of national crisis, is to do a great disservice to the memory of his performance then. Continue…

Trudeau chills with his old crew

By Mitchel Raphael - Tuesday, March 31, 2009 at 12:54 AM - 26 Comments

Members of Katimavik, Canada’s leading youth service program, were on the Hill for a reception which they do several times a year. Joining them was Montreal Liberal MP Justin Trudeau who used to be Chair of the Board of Directors of Katimavik. Trudeau poses below with a youth and loaf of bread.

The kids were also joined by Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff.

Continue…

Lowered expectations

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, February 5, 2009 at 6:17 PM - 7 Comments

Rona Ambrose, then environment minister, July 5, 2006. “The transit tax credit will not only save people money, but by taking public transit Canadians will be helping to improve our environment. The transit tax credit is part of our government’s made in Canada environmental plan. Our transit tax initiative will take the equivalent of 56,000 cars off the road each year which will significantly reduce greenhouse gases here in Canada.”

Environment Commissioner, December report. “In its 2007 Climate Change Plan under the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act, Environment Canada stated that the Tax Credit is expected to result in emission reductions of 220,000 tonnes each year from 2008 through 2012. This was approximately double Finance Canada’s estimate of the resulting emission reductions in its strategic environmental assessment. In its 2008 Plan, Environment Canada amended the figure for expected reductions to an average of 35,000 tonnes per year—about 16 percent of the original estimate. Given the lowered figure, the Tax Credit will have a negligible impact on Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions. Many factors influence public transit ridership, including the price of gasoline. The result is that it is almost impossible to measure actual greenhouse gas emission reductions attributable to the tax credit. With regard to other air emissions, Environment Canada could not provide any analysis to support the assertion that the Tax Credit would result in measurable impacts.”

Jim Prentice, environment minister, this afternoon. “Well, as I said, there are two ways to measure the tax credit.  One is greenhouse gas reductions.  The other is it’s important as a fiscal measure for people who use bus transportation and it needs to be measured in light of both of those public policy objectives.  But certainly, you know, we will take the report.  We’ve just received it in the last few hours.  We’ll take it.  We’ll study it and we’ll learn from what the commissioner has to say.  They do — they do good work and we can all benefit from their advice.”

David McGuinty, Liberal environment critic, asked to comment on Prentice’s remarks. “Well then give me a tax break for taking out my garbage.”