Parliament

Tuesday March 16, 2021

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday March 16, 2021

Kielburgers accuse MPs of holding political trial during testy committee hearing

September 11, 2020

Craig and Marc Kielburger accused a parliamentary committee on Monday of engaging in a political trial as its members grilled the brothers over WE Charity’s operations, including its cancelled deal to run a federal program for student volunteers.

The heated exchange saw the Kielburgers accuse political parties of trying to score points at the expense of children around the world — even as they faced pointed questions from members of the House of Commons ethics committee about their own activities.

Marc Kielburger set the tone by forcefully defending the various WE operations set up over the years — a mix of philanthropic and for-profit entities that he suggested were established in response to outdated restrictions on how Canadian charities can operate.

Friday July 31, 2020

“Let us be clear — this hearing is a trial and a public one at that,” Marc Kielburger said during his opening statement to the committee. “Without recognizing our right to present our own evidence, this committee is trying WE Charity in the court of public opinion and forcing testimony.”

He blasted NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus in particular for having asked the RCMP and the Canada Revenue Agency to look into the organization’s operations, and then publicly posting those requests on social media.

He also took aim at the Conservatives and the Liberal government, which he accused of hiding “behind a children’s charity by letting it take the fall for their political decisions — and the opposition allowed them.”

Throughout the meeting, MPs questioned how the Liberal government and WE agreed to put the charity in charge of a multimillion-dollar program designed to cover the education costs of students who volunteer during the COVID-19 pandemic. They also asked questions about the state of WE today.

The brothers were asked to add up the fees they’ve paid to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and members of his family to speak at different WE events over the years, and to respond to allegations that WE engaged in questionable lobbying and fundraising activities

Ethics commissioner Mario Dion is now investigating Trudeau and Morneau for a potential conflict of interest. Both have apologized for not having recused themselves from cabinet discussions of the WE contract.

“We didn’t advise the prime minister and Mr. Morneau not to recuse themselves,” Marc Kielburger said, arguing that WE was not responsible for political choices.

“We never prorogued Parliament. We were not involved in the decision to filibuster this committee last fall. This is a political scandal for the government, not for WE Charity.”

Liberal MP Francesco Sorbara in turn accused the Kielburgers of not taking responsibility for their own actions. “You want to throw blame on everyone else and not take responsibility for things that have happened within your control,” he said. (Continued: CBC)

Sketch of three rich kids with a lot of rich adult defenders

 

Wednesday September 23, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday September 23, 2020

Trudeau, Payette may be headed for awkward encounter over throne speech, observers say

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Gov. Gen. Julie Payette are headed for what could be an uncomfortable public moment on Wednesday, when Payette delivers the speech from the throne while her office is under a cloud of controversy due to harassment claims.

December 5, 2019

The Governor General is always the centre of attention when a throne speech is presented — but never before like this.

Earlier this month, the Privy Council Office confirmed it had hired a private company to conduct a probe into claims of a toxic work environment and verbal harassment at Rideau Hall. The probe was triggered by a CBC News story detailing reports of mistreatment.

CBC News has spoken to more than 20 sources, including current public servants and former Rideau Hall employees, who say that Payette has created a toxic workplace by yelling at, belittling and publicly humiliating staff. Payette’s second-in-command and longtime friend, Assunta Di Lorenzo, also faces claims of bullying employees.

Political scientists and constitutional experts say they expect to see Trudeau and Payette going through the motions of the throne speech ceremony while trying to downplay any suggestions of underlying tension between the PMO and Rideau Hall.

August 8, 2020

“It’s an awkward situation,” said Michael Jackson, president of the Institute for the Study of the Crown in Canada at Massey College in Toronto. “One has never seen as prolonged a criticism of a vice-regal person as in this particular case.”

Jackson said he plans to watch Payette’s delivery of the speech very closely to see if she adds any comments of her own. While the speech itself is written by the Prime Minister’s Office and outlines the government’s policy vision, governors general are the ones who actually read the speech publicly in the Senate chamber — and can also add a preamble about their own activities.

On occasion, past governors general have injected short passages into throne speeches touching on events of national importance, such as upcoming royal visits or anniversaries, Jackson said. The Privy Council Office, which receives a Governor General’s introductory text to be included in the speech, confirmed it “typically includes a few paragraphs.” 

But in a departure from the norm, Payette added 11 to 12 paragraphs to the speech in 2019 — including a reference to the shared “space-time continuum.”

July 14, 2017

“We share the same planet,” Payette said during the 2019 speech. “We know that we are inextricably bound to the same space-time continuum and on board the same planetary spaceship.”

“I thought it was surprising for the Governor General to put her own imprint on what is a speech by and for the government of the day. These kinds of almost platitudes and digressions confused many people,” Jackson said.

Philippe Lagassé of Ottawa’s Carleton University researches the roles of Parliament and the Crown in Westminster states like Canada. He said Payette feels strongly about protecting her privacy and how she’s portrayed in the media — and he wouldn’t be surprised if she makes some reference to the controversy swirling around her office in Wednesday’s speech.

“I think it will be interesting to see if Her Excellency makes a point of addressing the criticisms in some direct or indirect way,” he said. (CBC) 

 

Tuesday April 21, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday April 21, 2020

Politicians putting partisan interests ahead of safety

Across Canada, and around the world, people are learning how to do things remotely. Things they never would have dreamed they would need to learn. Some very unlikely things — including publishing newspapers and websites. 

Coronavirus cartoons

Churches are meeting remotely. Executives at all levels are doing it. Students of all ages. Doctors, counsellors, financial advisers, planners, scientists and civil servants. Musicians are performing from their basements and home recording studios.

It can be frustrating, and there are a range of indirect problems that can result from working in isolation. But we do it, because it’s what is best from a public health perspective. And that is what the vast majority of us agree is most important right now.

But Canadian Parliamentarians cannot meet remotely, apparently. At least, Andrew Scheer and his Conservatives aren’t supporting virtual parliamentary sessions. Instead, they want a reduced number of MPs to meet in Parliament face to face. 

January 23, 2020

The governing Liberals, the NDP and the Bloc Québécois all agree that virtual parliament is doable. The lone holdouts are the Conservatives. A vote was scheduled for late yesterday afternoon that will see an unhappy compromise — MPs will meet together once a week, on Wednesdays, for in-person sittings. There will also be two virtual sessions per week that will include two-hour-and-15-minutes for questioning cabinet ministers, and another session for debating new legislation. 

The Conservatives are expected to vote against even this compromise. Instead, they want three in-person sittings per week. Scheer’s defence is that since construction work on the Centre Block can continue, so can face-to-face parliament sittings. “If they can safely renovate the building that houses our parliament then surely we can do our duty to uphold the bedrock of our democracy.”

But why can’t virtual sittings work? Scheer doesn’t have a good answer for that. His best attempt seems to be that virtual sittings aren’t possible immediately and MPs “cannot wait for the weeks and weeks that it may take the House of Commons administration” to provide necessary technology. 

But that excuse doesn’t wash either, since House Speaker Anthony Rota has written in a public letter that virtual sittings should be available by May 6.

October 31, 2019

Given Scheer doesn’t have a sensible answer, the real reason for his resistance to something all other parties can agree on is undoubtedly partisan. Scheer doesn’t want to give up the partisan bear pit that is traditional Parliament, especially Question Period. Doing so takes away his partisan soapbox, and means less face-time on TV.

It would be bad enough if this was just about MPs risking their health and spreading COVID-19. But it’s not just about them. Some support staff — pages, laundry and cafeteria staff for example — won’t need to be recalled. But others, such as broadcast technicians, clerks and interpreters will have to come to work in the West Block. When the House met on Saturday, April 11, 40 additional employees were required so that 32 MPs could do their work at the emergency sitting.

So let’s be entirely clear. Scheer is putting his own partisan interests ahead of public health. Even though the vast majority of Canadians are working hard to live by the distancing recommendations from public health leadership, Scheer is insisting on up to 100 people meeting, and at least in some cases, not being able to practice physical distancing.

There is still a chance that Scheer might relent on this terrible position, perhaps recognizing how the optics make he and his Conservative party look awful. That would be a wise reversal. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial) 

 

Thursday January 23, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 23, 2020

What we know about the Liberal plan for Parliament after the cabinet retreat

For two and a half days, the Liberal cabinet huddled at the Fairmont Hotel in Winnipeg, focusing on their objectives amid the context of their new reality: a minority government that will need opposition support to get anything done.

October 23, 2019

But from the prime minister’s closing news conference Tuesday and the ministers who spoke publicly when the retreat wrapped up, we still don’t have a full sense of the legislation the Liberals will table this winter — and they certainly made enough promises during the election campaign to keep Parliament busy.

We know the first order of business when the House resumes next week: to ratify the new NAFTA trade deal, CUSMA.

“Passing the new NAFTA in Parliament is our priority,” said Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Whether it will pass, however, is another question. The Bloc Quebecois won’t support the new deal without more supports for aluminum workers, and neither the NDP nor the Conservatives are clear on their support, with both parties having said they want to review it closely.

Trudeau also spoke generally of other commitments, such as pharmacare, protecting the environment and stricter gun control measures, but offered no specifics on what may come forward as legislation or when.

“We’re stepping up to the plate. Just take our pledge to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and to preserve more of Canada’s land and oceans,” said Trudeau.

“We’re taking real action to protect our environment.”

October 11, 2019

The prime minister, however, didn’t say what that action is, nor did he give any clues as to how his government would reach net zero emissions by 2050, amid criticism that Canada is not on track to meet its current targets for 2030.

On implementing a national pharmacare plan, another campaign promise short on details, the health minister couldn’t commit to any legislation this winter.

Here, the Liberals could face opposition not just from other federal parties, but from provinces and territories, as well, with health care a provincial responsibility.

The headlines of the Liberal plan for the winter sessions may be clear — NAFTA, pharmacare, gun control, climate action — but how and when they plan to move on most of them remains a mystery. (Global News) 

 

 
 

Wednesday September 11, 2019

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday September 11, 2019

Why is it so hard for Independent candidates to get elected to Canada’s House of Commons?

May 28, 2019

Canada has not had a strong Independent movement since Confederation when there were several Independent politicians in government. They were called “loose fish” and operated separately of political structures, explains John English, director of the Bill Graham Centre for Contemporary International history at Trinity College.

When the party system began to take hold at the turn of the century under Canada’s first prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, these “loose fish” declined in numbers. The party structure became the main source of funding for candidates and also provided patronage appointments to important positions such as the railway or the post office.

November 9, 2018

Independents made a brief resurgence in the Second World War. When Prime Minister Mackenzie King broke his promise of conscription, Quebec Liberals declared themselves Independent (but still affiliated with the Liberal party for the most part).

By the 1960s, Independents became especially rare in Canadians politics, limited only to “those candidates who got kicked out of their party or decided their interest didn’t align with party values or the party leader,” English said.

The debate over the strength and influence of central party power in politics isn’t new, either. Collenette says this discussion has been occurring within parties for years, but “the question now is larger because its not contained in the party anymore.”

Promising the moon

The main reason Canada doesn’t have more Independent politicians is because “they don’t win,” Thomas said. Before campaign finance legislation changes were created in 1974, local electoral campaign officers would identify supporters and then get supporter to learn the name of the candidate. Now, voters are more likely to recognize party labels than individual names.

David Moscrop, political scientist and author of “Too Dumb for Democracy,” agrees that central party authority needs to be loosened but worries about the tradeoffs. First, it’ll require a lot of cooperation from parties, civil service, staffers, leadership and media. (“I don’t think that is going to happen,” Moscrop says.) Then you have to balance loosening party control while maintaining party cohesion. (“How do you do that?” he asks.) (National Observer)