The Commons: Darkness in the mid-afternoon

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, November 17, 2011 at 7:42 PM - 0 Comments

The Scene. The obscenity on the Hill carries on undaunted.

Maybe it is just the season—as soon as the clocks are turned back each fall, Ottawa is suddenly made even darker and colder than usual—but the daily insulting of the public’s intelligence seems particularly dreary of late. For sure, it has been worse. And it may yet get worse. But has it ever seemed so witless? Has it ever felt so leaden? Is it just us or is it getting dim in here?

There is much to be said—with expletives and otherwise—about the government’s recent penchant for shutting down debate. But it is surely more than that.

It is, no doubt, certain practicalities: the temporary status of the two opposition leaders, the prolonged nature of certain disagreements or the lack of some tangible new gazebo-based outrage to focus on, for instance. But it is also the collective and universal decision that sound economics, study and evidence are not particularly necessary when formulating public policy. It is the rote demagoguery. It is general neglect. It is smug disregard. It is the willingness of grown men and women in business attire to stand and allow themselves to be used to read scripted banalities and invective into the official record.

It is not all bad, of course. Continue…

Who will advocate for euthanasia?

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, November 16, 2011 at 10:00 AM - 0 Comments

Neither the government nor the official opposition seem interested in pursuing the recommendations of yesterday’s Royal Society report.

But despite the ambitious proposals, there are no signs Ottawa wants to have a debate. “We have no plans to propose any reforms to this area of the law,” Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said. And the opposition echoed that reluctance: “We don’t want to go down that road,” NDP MP Jack Harris said.

Of the 57 MPs who supported Francine Lalonde’s motion last year, most, owing to the Bloc’s collapse, were defeated this spring. In all, by my count, 10 members who voted for C-384 at second reading remain in the House: Mauril Belanger, Olivia Chow, Denis Coderre, Jean Crowder, Libby Davies, Megan Leslie, John McCallum, Maria Mourani, Massimo Pacetti and Louis Plamondon.

This is the week that was

By Aaron Wherry - Saturday, October 22, 2011 at 3:22 PM - 0 Comments

Paul Dewar and Brian Topp divvied up endorsements. Nathan Cullen proposed joint nomination meetings. Mr. Dewar worked the room in Winnipeg. Mr. Topp dared suggest raising taxes.

John McCallum and Tony Clement exchanged tweets. The shadow cabinet was shuffled. House of Commons redistribution proposals were floated, but Tim Uppal cautioned against believing everything a government source tells you. The Harper government tabled its Wheat Board reforms and took aim at its crime-fighting partners. Dean Del Mastro’s lamented selectively. Steven Blaney sided with the French. Charlie Angus kept on mocking Mr. Clement. John Turner kept on complaining. And Pat Martin tried to explain himself. Continue…

Let’s all have a good laugh about parliamentary accountability

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 1:10 PM - 13 Comments

Unable to get via Twitter to his question about Tony Clement’s promised committee appearance, John McCallum tried the Question Period yesterday. John Baird promptly stood on Mr. Clement’s behalf and assured the House that Mr. Clement would be taking questions from a parliamentary committee at some point.

This segued nicely into a lively exchange between Charlie Angus and Mr. Clement.

When ministers of the crown tweet

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, October 17, 2011 at 7:26 PM - 8 Comments

After QP this afternoon, Liberal MP John McCallum tweeted a little mockery of Tony Clement.

JohnMcCallumMP Minister Raitt responded directly to allegations against her, why does @tonyclementCPC stay seated when he is asked about his conduct?

TonyclementCPC @JohnMcCallumMP The Minister who made the decisions on G8 funding answers the questions in Parliament: John Baird.

JohnMcCallumMP @TonyclementCPC Does this mean you will not answer G8 Legacy Fund questions at your long-awaited appearance before committee?

As of this typing, Mr. Clement has not responded to this last provocation.

The minister’s argument here is that, though he and his mayors came up with the list of projects to be funded and though he took questions during QP about the G8 Legacy Fund a year ago and though he took questions about the G8 Legacy Fund from reporters in the House foyer last month, since it was Mr. Baird who, in his previous portfolio, signed off on the funding of those projects, it is thus now Mr. Baird’s responsibility to stand inside the House and account for the spending.

Preventing inquiry

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, September 27, 2011 at 4:03 PM - 13 Comments

While the Conservatives launch inquiries into the CBC and NDP, another proposal disappears.

The MPs cite the sudden end during an in camera meeting of the Government Operations and Estimates Committee last week of a motion from Liberal MP John McCallum (Markham-Unionville, Ont.) that proposed an inquiry into nearly $50-million the government spent to spruce up cities and towns in Mr. Clement’s (Parry Sound-Muskoka, Ont.) upscale cottage-country constituency for the 2010 summit of G8 leaders.

The motion disappeared after going into the secret meeting, and Mr. McCallum, along with all MPs on the committee, cannot disclose what was said or what happened to the motion while the committee doors were closed.

The Commons: Tony Clement’s one-man sit-in

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, September 26, 2011 at 6:10 PM - 20 Comments

The Scene. The Hill was alive this day with the vigour of public protest. On the lawn, several hundred lay siege to the barricades, anxious with objections to a continental oil pipeline. Inside the House, Tony Clement kept vigil on his seat, resolutely unwilling to remove his posterior from it in defiance of the opposition’s tyranny.

Thomas Mulcair’s first question was actually quite simple enough.

“Mr. Speaker, earlier this year the Prime Minister released an important document entitled ‘Accountable Government: A Guide for Ministers and Ministers of State,’ ” the NDP deputy reviewed. “Could the Prime Minister tell us if it is within the guidelines for a minister to run government funding out of his constituency office? Is it within the guidelines to have inaccurate and incomplete information provided to the Auditor General? Also, is it within the guidelines to have ministers interfere in spending reviews?”

Mr. Mulcair was just wondering these things, mind you. He was not necessarily referring to the latest news concerning Tony Clement’s handling of the G8 Legacy Fund, he was just speaking in the theoretical.

Continue…

Jack Layton 1950-2011

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, August 22, 2011 at 9:03 AM - 11 Comments

A statement issued this morning by the family of NDP leader Jack Layton.

We deeply regret to inform you that The Honourable Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, passed away at 4:45 am today, Monday August 22. He passed away peacefully at his home surrounded by family and loved ones. Details of Mr. Layton’s funeral arrangements will be forthcoming.

9:11am. Bob Rae, Carolyn Bennett, Hedy Fry, Wayne Easter, Cathy McLeod, Keith Martin and Governor General David Johnston are among those paying their respects.

9:23am. John Geddes explored Jack Layton’s life and times for this Maclean’s cover story last June. We wrote about his new fight with cancer for this cover story earlier this month.

9:28am. Condolences from Rodger Cuzner, Lewis Cardinal, Colin Carrie, Mike Sullivan and John McCallum.

9:36am. NDP deputy leader Libby Davies talks to reporters in St. John’s.

“He was a great Canadian. He gave his life to this country. His commitment to social justice and equality and a better Canada in the world and at home and I think that’s how people saw him,” Davies told reporters. “They saw him as someone who deeply, deeply cared for people. And they saw that in the campaign and all his work. They saw the courage that he had. He faced cancer and he kept on working, doing his job, because he felt so strongly about what he believed in, so I think people think of him as a great Canadian and we think of him as a great leader, in a political sense but (also) in a personal sense.”

9:43am. More on the life of Jack Layton from the CBC, Toronto Star and Canadian Press.

He was a believer. He made that clear in the first sentences of “Speaking Out Louder:” ”Politics matters. Ideas matter. Democracy matters, because all of us need to be able to make a difference.”

9:54am. Mr. Layton’s Facebook page has become a makeshift memorial.

9:59am. Greg Fingas marks the NDP leader’s passing.

After spending a decade laying the foundation, Jack Layton has tragically died before getting to complete the house that so many said couldn’t be built. For now, there’s little to do but to offer condolences and grieve the loss of a great Canadian and friend. But hopefully Layton’s inspiration will only encourage us to finish what he started.

10:01am. A statement from the Prime Minister. Continue…

Will the questions be answered?

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 11:46 AM - 2 Comments

While debate continues over who knew what about the G8 Legacy Fund and when (or at least who said what about who knew then), opposition members of the government operations committee hold out hope that Conservative MPs won’t block further investigation.

“The problem is a majority government can control what happens at committee, but I think if we can apply enough pressure and get strong media coverage, the government might agree to it because I think it is an important issue,” McCallum said in an interview..

Martin said he would like the committee to hear from Clement, from mayors of towns that received money from the fund, and from public servants who participated in the process. If Conservative MPs block the hearings they will leave the government open to accusations they are trying to cover up the affair, Martin said. ”We’ll be talking serious, serious coverup — the likes of which we haven’t seen since the sponsorship scandal.”

The Commons: The only thing we have to fear is total doom

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, September 21, 2010 at 6:27 PM - 0 Comments

The Scene. The Conservative government has, to whatever credit should be assigned for such things, recently decided upon a straightforward appeal to you, the well-meaning voter. Vote for us, they now say, or risk the complete and total annihilation of your country. Do as we say, or face the end of everything you hold dear. Don’t even think of quibbling, unless you are willing to be remembered by your children as the monsters who bequeathed them a broken wasteland of despair. Give us a majority, or Michael Ignatieff will shoot this dog.

“Under an Ignatieff-NDP-Bloc Québécois government, nothing would be safe,” the Finance Minister told an audience at a posh Ottawa hotel this afternoon.

“They want to throw it all away. They want to cancel the contract or review the contract,” Industry Minister Tony Clement cried out to the House a short while after, putting scary finger quotes around the word ‘review’ as he responded to a Liberal suggestion that the government had moved too hastily to commit $16 billion to new fighter jets. “The minute they do that, all of those contracts—and there are 60 contracts already extant for this plane for Canadian companies—all of those contracts go on hold, too. That is irresponsible. They are threatening Canadian jobs.”

“Mr. Speaker, it probably should not surprise me, but it still does, to hear how quickly and easily members of the opposition, including the NDP, are approving of jail time or large fines for their fellow Canadians who refuse, out of good conscience, to fill out a 40-page questionnaire with very personal information,” Mr. Clement said later when presented with the possibility that his government had erred in its decision to replace the long-form census. “It is incredible how they will sacrifice Canadians’ rights on this matter.”

“The choice is clear,” Mr. Flaherty finally declared for the benefit of the House. “A Conservative government that creates jobs or a coalition government that will kill jobs.”

In fact, that would seem to put it mildly—Mr. Flaherty declining here to mention previous warnings about the criminal gangs that would rule our streets and the Russian hordes that would be clamouring over our borders were it not for this government’s courageous administration. Continue…

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…

Team play

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, September 1, 2010 at 3:22 PM - 0 Comments

As Chantal Hebert advises the Liberal leader to find a new economic voice, Bruce Anderson advised some weeks ago a greater emphasis on the shadow cabinet this fall, repeating his belief that the Liberals are in need of a new finance critic.

The last shuffle on the Liberal side occurred a little less than a year ago—a few weeks after the House had returned from its summer break—and Mr. Ignatieff will have to fiddle with his shadow cabinet this fall at the very least to fill the spot of Maurizio Bevilacqua.

Iggy’s bus stops

By Mitchel Raphael - Friday, August 20, 2010 at 10:07 AM - 0 Comments

Michael Ignatieff is on his Liberal Express tour across Canada. In Toronto, he stopped at a BBQ in Thornhill just north of the city and then a restaurant downtown in Chinatown.

Continue…

'Rubbish'

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, June 9, 2010 at 1:01 PM - 52 Comments

For those of you scoring at home, last night’s report of merger talks by unspecified “insiders” is now being roundly, soundly and officially dismissed and, in the case of Rob Silver, happily mocked. Indirectly, Mark Marissen, a former Liberal campaign director, strenuously discourages the very idea.

The government-in-waiting

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, May 17, 2010 at 2:42 PM - 51 Comments

Another thing the Brits seem to take more seriously is their shadow cabinet. Indeed, this bit from Bruce Anderson might be the first serious thing ever written about the Ignatieff team.

It seems to me there’s a fair bit of talent in the Liberal caucus, and given the importance of economic issues, Mr. McCallum is the most baffling choice Mr.Ignatieff continues to make. The economy is likely to remain at the top of the public agenda for some time, but the team of Ignatieff-McCallum seems unable or unwilling to muster an argument or a point of differentiation about it. The conclusion one might draw is that they either don’t know how they would improve upon Harper economic policy, or can’t articulate the difference they would make if elected.

The Commons: Does anyone here know how to balance a cheque book?

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, May 13, 2010 at 6:05 PM - 58 Comments

The Scene. Bob Rae opened this afternoon’s session with a vigorous display, lecturing the government on the need to reconcile environmental and economic policy and even thumping his desk with his right hand—his flare seemed to ignite a certain passion on all sides. So this last afternoon before a blessed break week was full of vim, most notably on the matter of our overdrawn national bank account.

“Mr. Speaker, it is the wrong choice to cut taxes for the largest and wealthiest corporations while the global economy remains fragile,” Bonnie Crombie cried from the back row of the Liberal side. “It is the wrong choice to cut taxes for the largest and wealthiest corporations while a debt crisis rages in Europe. It is the wrong choice to cut taxes for the largest and wealthiest corporations when markets fluctuate at the drop of a hat. Why does the government plan to borrow money and mortgage our children’s future to pay for its reckless corporate tax cuts?”

The Finance Minister did not have an answer for this one, but he did have aspersions (and in this place that’ll do). 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: Be serious

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, May 10, 2010 at 6:16 PM - 11 Comments

The Scene. Michael Ignatieff rose and shone—which is to say smiled somewhat—then remembered the subject at hand and his face became serious.

The government side has lately been lamenting that Mr. Ignatieff hasn’t been asking its ministers enough questions about the economy. This is apparently evidence of him not being a leader or just being in it for himself or having not consumed in the past year the necessary amount of Tim Hortons coffee to be considered a Canadian citizen in good standing with this government. Apparently if Mr. Ignatieff would only ask them about a serious matter—nothing to do with Rahim Jaffer or Helena Guergis or Afghan detainees or abortion or Nancy Ruth or the firearms registry—they’d be only too happy to provide a serious answer. (And, for that matter, the public and the press gallery would finally have what both are apparently desperate to hear.)

So here stood the opposition leader to recount the Liberal party’s economic management in the 1990s, to dissuade the Prime Minister from taking any credit and to wonder if Mr. Harper might take heed of the troubles in Europe, accept some Liberal advice now and refrain from cutting corporate taxes any further.

The Prime Minister, alas, was absent, so it was John Baird who stood to take this one. And the Transport Minister, being deathly afraid of heights, steered clear of the high road. Continue…

What they said (IV)

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, April 12, 2010 at 10:58 AM - 0 Comments

On February 1, 2008, a Globe and Mail report tied Asadullah Khalid to allegations of torture. Weeks later, during a visit to Afghanistan, Maxime Bernier stated publicly that Canada would like to see the governor removed, a statement that was then said to set back attempts to remove Khalid. He was ultimately replaced in August 2008.

Herein, a collection of QP exchanges relevant to discussion of governor Khalid. Continue…

The Commons: Smirking towards the future

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, March 29, 2010 at 6:16 PM - 58 Comments

The Scene. John Baird could barely contain his glee. Over the weekend, in response to the Liberal gathering in Montreal, the Transport Minister had apparently convened his own conference aimed at deciding on the absolute right joke to deliver Monday afternoon. Over two days at some undisclosed location, great minds of stand-up and clowning dealt frankly and, at times, contentiously with the concepts of sarcasm, pun, slapstick and mockery. Various one-liners were proposed, debated and amended. For awhile the conference nearly broke up over a proposal that Mr. Baird merely hand Michael Ignatieff one of those cans that, when opened, sprays a number of cloth snakes. But finally, in the wee hours of Sunday night, a consensus was achieved. And so here, just after 2:15pm today, Mr. Baird stood to reveal what had been accomplished.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, struggling to withhold a smile, “the Liberal Party certainly had a taxing weekend.”

The very foundation of the House seemed to buckle under the weight of such wit. Continue…

The Commons: A good day spoiled

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, March 17, 2010 at 6:03 PM - 37 Comments

The Scene. The Prime Minister was having a fine time.

John McCallum asked if the government might commit to ceasing the production of ten-percenters and the Prime Minister took the opportunity to mock Michael Ignatieff’s absence from the House—because, of course, the idea that a political leader would leave Ottawa and travel the country to consult with Canadians is patently hysterical. Asked to account for an increase in employment insurance premiums, he easily mocked the Liberals as reckless and free-spending. Reclining contentedly as he awaited Mr. McCallum’s third question, he tapped out a tune on the arm of his chair.

Gilles Duceppe tried to provoke the Prime Minister on sales tax harmonization and was effortlessly dismissed. Jack Layton wondered if the Prime Minister might commit to a new restriction on prorogation and Mr. Harper thoroughly enjoyed the chance to invoke a Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition. All seemed to be going splendidly, the Prime Minister sporting something of a smirk as he sat and listened.

Then though the NDP leader stood and turned the discussion toward sex, specifically the government’s apparent decision to exclude contraception from its commitment to improve maternal health in the developing world. And here, where normally Mr. Harper would be expected to respond another party leader’s question, the Prime Minister leaned forward and looked down his row to the near corner of his frontbench.

“Bev,” he called. Continue…

Enough to own all podiums into eternity

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, March 2, 2010 at 11:27 AM - 32 Comments

The Liberals figure the Conservatives could save $1.2-billion if they cut advertising, consulting and polling expenditures back to pre-2006 levels and reduced cabinet back to 31 members.

Let us now debate the difference between user fees and taxes

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, February 25, 2010 at 5:50 PM - 43 Comments

John Baird says the government will increase the airport security fee charged to air travelers, the opposition critics say this is a tax and this is perhaps relevant because the Prime Minister once said, “I give you my word, as long as I will be Prime Minister … there will be no new taxes.” (In fairness, he said “no new taxes,” which wouldn’t, one supposes, necessarily preclude him from increasing taxes that already exist.)

Here, for the sake of argument, is how the distinction was explained in a 1987 New York Times story about the Reagan administration’s attempt to navigate this discussion.

Joseph A. Pechman, a leading tax authority and a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, thinks there can be a distinction. A user fee – such as the admission fee to national parks – is, he said, ”imposed on individuals who use certain services provided by the Government and is proportional to the use of the service.” By contrast, he defines a tax as a ”mandatory assessment on an individual family based on certain characteristics, such as income or consumption.”

But Mr. Pechman adds that a user fee is sometimes not very different from an ”excise tax,” which is a tax imposed on particular commodities, such as gasoline, cigarettes and alcohol.

The Commons: The cause of, and solution to, all life’s problems

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 10:04 PM - 81 Comments

Ideas are such mysterious and troublesome things.

Yesterday, for instance, the Prime Minister, penning an op-ed for the flagship newspaper of Canada’s liberal media elite, explained that, as part of hosting the G8 summit later this year, Canada will “champion a major initiative to improve the health of women and children in the world’s poorest regions.”

This seemed almost impossible to quibble with. And yet, soon enough, people were asking questions, namely about what precisely the Prime Minister was talking about. How will he go about this? How much will it cost? What about Haiti? What about the deficit? Does this have something to do with abortion?

A reporter today asked Bev Oda, the minister for international development, which countries this country had so far discussed this proposal with. Ms. Oda declined to divulge specifics, but did assure that, in general, there was some interest in pursuing maternal and infant health in “conceptual terms.” “I can report with confidence that generally, all countries and all organizations we discussed with recognize the need and recognize that something can actually be done that will show results,” she reported.

So perhaps this is less an idea than a general notion. Still, it was enough of a concept for the nightly news to conclude this was somehow a setback for the Liberal side: the primary concern in any discussion of the world’s impoverished women and children being, of course, ‘how does this affect Michael Ignatieff’s chances of getting to be Prime Minister?’ Continue…