QP: Imagining a country

Another Monday back in the House, with a
few notable absences – Harper, Baird and Kent among them. Nycole Turmel used
her round of questions to ask about the government’s decision to pull out of
Kyoto, and it was James Moore’s turn to be backup PM, assuring
us that Kyoto didn’t work, so there was no point in sticking with it. Megan
Leslie followed up with more of the same, and Michelle Rempel filled in
for Kent. Rempel asked Leslie to imagine a country where 70 percent of its
energy came from non-carbon-emitting sources, that invested in clean technology
and had a strong regulatory framework on emissions, adding “Oh, wait – that’s
Canada!” Oh, snap! Rempel should also
be commended for her ability to think on her feet and deliver answers that aren’t

directly off fresh-from-the-PMO cue cards. Bob Rae, for his turn, began by
asking for changes to the Canada Elections Act to prevent future acts of
political dirt-baggery as was directed against Irwin Cotler (Van Loan: Cotler’s
here, so really there’s nothing to see) and returned to the question of the
necessity for a “guise” for MacKay’s helicopter trip (Moore: He was using it to
get back to work from his vacation, nothing to see here – except that the
government talking points have completely abandoned the pretense that this was
a prearranged search-and-rescue demonstration).

Round two kicked off with Charlie Angus
asking about the situation in Attawapiskat (Duncan: The third-party manager is
in place and we’re working with the government on Ontario); Peter Julian asked
about the income gap figures in the latest OECD report (Flaherty: Yay, Economic
Action Plan™!); Brain Masse and Sylvain Chicoine asked about the reputed
billion-dollar price tag for the “secretive” perimeter security agreement
(Obhrai: This is great for our trade relationship!); and David Christopherson
and Christine Moore returned to the question of MacKay and his helicopter ride
(MacKay: I used it to return to work!). Kirsty Duncan asked about China’s
criticism of Canada’s Kyoto position (Rempel: The Liberals had no Kyoto plan); Carolyn
Bennett asked about Chuck Strahl’s comments regarding Attawapiskat (Duncan: We’re working
with “willing partners,” which was a curious choice of words); and Denis
Coderre brought up Jamie Hubley and the more recent suicide of a teenaged girl
in Quebec and wanted to know what the government is planning to do about
a suicide prevention strategy (Hoeppner: Bullying is bad, and we’re funding
provincial programs to combat it, especially in Ontario). Hélène Laverdière
asked about Suncor’s operations in Syria (Obhrai: They’re using it for domestic
use, like keeping the lights on in Syrian homes), and Jasbir Sandhu and

 

Françoise Boivin asked about the latest allegations of sexual harassment in the
RCMP (Toews: It’s unacceptable and we’re working on it).

Round three saw questions on Transportation
Safety Board recommendations for terrain warning systems, GMO crops, why we sent only six observers to the Congo elections (Oda: That’s the maximum we were
allowed), the perimeter agreement, programs for the disabled when most are
predicated on employment status, cracks in the fuselage of the F-35 fighters,
environmental reviews of the Old Harry project, and seniors’ poverty.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Scott
Brison
for his tailored navy-blue suit with a light-blue shirt and red striped
tie, and to Joyce Murray for her black jacket and skirt, with a patterned red
top and knee-high brown boots. Style citations go out to Djaouida Sella for her
shapeless leopard-print top, and to Philip Toone for a greyish-brown suit with
a too-pale orange shirt and brown tie.

Keep Reading

Trans issues didn’t doom the Democrats

OPINION: The Republicans won ending on a giant anti-trans note, but Democrats ultimately failed to communicate on class

Xtra Explains: Trans girls and sports

Debunking some of the biggest myths around trans girls and fairness in sports

How ‘mature minor’ laws let trans kids make their own decisions

Canadian law lets some youth make medical or legal decisions for themselves, but how does it work?

To combat transphobia, we need to engage with the people who spread it

OPINION: opening up a dialogue with those we disagree with is key if we want to achieve widespread social change