Phoenix, we have a problem: feds bring in pay experts to deal with ongoing public service pay fiasco

news Conservatives news PubliC aCCounts

news senate

news Phoenix Pay system

news marijuana

Senate committee defeats motion to stop Duffy salary seizure, could go before full Senate

PBO identifies limited taxation potential from legal pot despite past reports predicting billions

By ABBAs RAnA

PARLIAMENT HILL—Daniel Fournier, a well-known Montreal businessman, Rhodes scholar, former CFL football player, and president of an international real estate investment company with assets worth $55-billion, is considering running for the Conservative Party’s leadership, sources told The Hill Times.

Mr. Fournier, 62, chair and chief executive officer of Ivanhoé Cambridge, a real estate subsidiary of Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec, is mull-ing over entering the crowded field of Conservative Party leadership candidates in the coming weeks.

A graduate of Princeton and Oxford, Mr. Fournier, who was not available for an in-terview last week, also played professional football for the Ottawa Rough Riders.

By LAuRA RyckewAeRt

Federal government expenses totalled $296.4-billion in 2015-16, according to the recently published 2016 public accounts, with Finance Canada topping the govern-ment ministries at $90.2-billion.

But another roughly $9.8-billion in approved spending lapsed last fiscal year after being left on the table, something the Parliamentary Budget Office will likely soon be examining. That’s based on $12.1-bil-lion in budgeted money not spent. A small percentage of that can be carried over, while most—$9.8-billion—must be put toward debt reduction, as per rules of the Treasury Board.

By ABBAs RAnA

The Senate’s powerful Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration Committee last week defeated Ind. Sen. John Wallace’s mo-tion to reverse the committee’s decision to garnish Ind. Sen. Mike Duffy’s salary to recover $16,955 in overpaid expenses.

By RAcheL AieLLo

With Public Services and Procurement blowing past its deadline to resolve the disastrous Phoenix pay system backlog issues, sources say some departments have hired back or brought in department-spe-cific compensation staff to internally deal with payroll problems.

After pledging to clear up the backlog of public service employee pay issues by Oct. 31, about 22,000 cases are left to tackle, and The Hill Times has learned some departments may have gotten tired of waiting and have brought in their own pay help to move along their employees’ files.

By DeRek ABmA

The Parliamentary Budget Office has identified a mere hundreds of millions of dollars in potential tax revenue from the legalization of recreational marijuana, far less than the billions that had been pre-dicted in previous reports.

The PBO said in a report last week that combined provincial and federal sales tax-es on legalized pot would amount to some-where between $356-million and $959-mil-lion in 2018, the first expected year for legalized pot, of which about 60 per cent would go to provincial governments and 40 per cent to the federal government.

“The potential for revenue is very, very low,” Mostafa Askari, the assistant parliamen-tary budget officer, said during a press brief-ing held after the report’s release on Nov. 1.

Continued on page 17

Continued on page 20

Continued on page 5 Continued on page 18 Continued on page 7

Montreal businessman Fournier, who manages assets of $55-billion for his company, considering run at Tory leadership

Federal public service unions protested against the disastrous Phoenix public service pay system outside the Prime Minister’s Office on Oct. 31 in Ottawa. The Hill Times Photo by Andrew Meade

Feds spent $296.4-billion last year, left more than $12-billion unspent, election cited as possible reason

twenty-eighth yeAR, nO. 1384 Canada’s PolitiCs and Government newsPaPer mOndAy, nOvembeR 7, 2016 $5.00

CBC is Biggest Challenge as other media Cuts Continue p. 4warren kinsella p. 11

Trump’s all air war, Clinton’s all ground game

hill life & people p. 26

Government Conference Centre in pics

david Crane p. 13

Canadian Infrastructure Bank

gerry niCholls p. 9

In defence of private political fundraisers

susan riley p. 10

Trudeau’s Senate experiment a slow revolution

laura ryCkewaert p. 23

Scheer campaign getting hand from MP supporters

Publ

icat

ions

Mai

l Agr

eem

ent #

4006

8926

Publ

icat

ions

Mai

l Agr

eem

ent #

4006

8926

Phoenix was projected to save the feds $67.2-million a year. Now the government’s expected to pay $50-million just to fix the problem-plagued new government pay system, and 22,000 cases are still unresolved, down from 82,000. There’s speculation the feds could now let departments pull out of Phoenix.

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 20162feature buzz

They’ve been having this thing for more than two decades but, like last year,

there should be whole bunch of new things to talk about at this year’s edition.

The 22nd annual State of the Relationship Summit & Award event, put on by the Cana-dian American Business Council, is happen-ing at the Château Laurier on Nov. 16.

Last year, Justin Trudeau and his Liberal government were the new element in Cana-da-U.S. relations. And, of course, Mr. Trudeau went on to have his heartwarming “bro-mance” with U.S. President Barack Obama, who will not be around much longer.

This year, the topic is likely to turn to what incoming U.S. president Hillary Clin-ton or Donald Trump means for Can-Am relations, depending on which one comes out ahead in the Nov. 8 election.

Ben Mulroney is hosting this event, and appearances are anticipated from former U.S. ambassador to Canada Gordon Gif-fin and former vermont governor Howard Dean—both of whom have been involved with the Clinton campaign—as well as Mark McKinnon, a host and co-creator of the Showtime television series The Circus: Inside the Greatest Political Show on Earth, which gave viewers a behind-the-scenes look at the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.

For more information on this event, con-tact virginia Beckett at vbeckett@cabc.co.

Trump presidency not all bad for stock market: Canaccord

Investment company Canaccord Genu-ity issued a report last week, based on the opinions of market analysts in Canada, the United States, and United Kingdom, show-ing that some parts of the stock market might actually benefit if Donald Trump wins this week’s U.S. election.

For example, it said prospects for the defence and aerospace sectors would improve under Mr. Trump, given that he would likely to spend more on military that Hillary Clinton.

It also said Mr. Trump would have a positive effect on energy stocks, given his favourable stance on pipelines, including the proposed Keystone XL from Canada.

Stocks related to alternative energy sources would do better under Ms. Clinton,

said Canaccord, given Mr. Trump’s skepti-cism toward climate-change science.

Stocks in support services companies that benefit from ObamaCare would be hurt by a Trump presidency, though those with operations related to border protec-tion, immigration detention, and defence contracting would benefit, it said.

Stocks of companies that invest in prisons would do well under a Trump presi-dency, the report said. The opposite would happen with a victory from Ms. Clinton, it said, as she has said she would end con-tracts for private prisons.

Health stocks, particularly those of pharmaceutical companies, would suffer under a Clinton presidency, the analysis said, given expectations she would frame this industry in a negative light.

Precious-metal producers’ stocks could suffer if Mr. Trump wins, it said, given his threats to get out of trade agreements such as NAFTA, and this might also negatively affect the Canadian dollar.

Government’s Workplace 2.0 program not going well, says official

The ongoing process of creating more collaborative workplaces for federal gov-ernment employees that also take up less space is “a disaster,” a federal official said during a recent public event.

Kevin Radford, an assistant deputy min-ister with Public Services and Procurement Canada, made these remarks about what’s known as Workplace 2.0 at the Ottawa Real Estate Forum on Oct. 19, according to a report in the Ottawa Business Journal.

Workplace 2.0 is a program that his been in effect since 2011. Its results have been seen in data showing the average federal employee was taking up an average of 18.4 square metres (198 square feet) in 2012-13, down from 21.6 square metres in 2006.

The problem, according to Mr. Radford, is that government is not keeping up technologi-cally with the office-space design changes.

“How can we be going to various build-ings and changing the furniture around and not ensuring that modern technology [such as] basic, secure access to WiFi is available?” he reportedly said. “There has been no integration of the workplace strat-egy with technology.”

The government has also been spread-ing out government operations to parts of Ottawa beyond the downtown core. Mr. Radford reportedly told this forum that he would like to go even further. To reduce commuting time, his idea would be to have multiple small office hubs around the na-tional capital region, and allow employees to choose locations to work at on a day-by-day basis by booking time at these hubs.

New book from Dallaire focuses on PTSD

Roméo Dallaire, the former Senator and lieutenant-general who led United Nations

forces in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide, has a new book out that details his struggles with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The book is called Waiting for First Light: My Ongoing Battle with PTSD. It was released Oct. 25 by publisher Penguin Random House.

Promotional material for the book said it “is a no-holds-barred self-portrait of a top political and military figure whose nights are invaded by despair, but who at first light faces the day with the renewed desire to make a difference in the world.”

It talks about how his exposure to the genocide traumatized him, and details how he received a medical dismissal from the Canadian Forces in 2000 due to PTSD, which was “a blow that almost killed him.”

But it goes on to describe how he rose back up to become an inspiration to people.

Mr. Dallaire was appointed to the Sen-ate in 2005 by then-Liberal prime minister Paul Martin. He left the Senate in 2014.

Ontario Liberal staffer returns to H&K

Hill & Knowlton Strategies announced last week that it has welcomed Omar Khan back into its ranks.

The government-relations and commu-nications company said Mr. Khan has been appointed vice-president of public affairs and will work out its Toronto office. He was previously an assistant consultant for H&K before more than a decade of working for the Liberal Ontario government.

He was most recently chief of staff for Ontario Health Minister Eric Hoskins. Mr. Khan was also chief of staff to Mr. Hoskins when he was Economic Development minister, and held various other positions at Queen’s Park since 2005.

“Omar’s addition represents yet another example of our ability to provide insights to clients in Queen’s Park and on Parlia-ment Hill from advisers who have worked hand-in-hand with the very people directly involved in government decision-making today” H&K CEO Goldy Hyder said in a press release.

Environics celebrates eight years of carbon-neutrality

Environics Communication said last week that has now been carbon-neutral for eight years.

The communications and government-relations company, which has offices in Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa, and Washing-ton, D.C., said it achieved this by buying 407 verified carbon units over the last year. This essentially means that the company puts money into programs, such as forest-management projects, that reduce carbon from the atmosphere, offsetting what its own operations emit. Each unit equals the reduction of a tonne of carbon emissions.

Environics said in recent years its carbon credits have focused on the Darkwoods For-est Carbon Project in British Columbia.

“Environics is voluntarily paying a price on carbon because it’s the right thing to do,” Environics CEO Bruce MacLellan said in a press release. “Our team has a deep respect for the environment, and we want to set the right example as an agency counselling cli-ents on reputation, trust, and branding.”

Forum for young Canadians celebrates 40 years

A special event was held on Parliament Hill on Oct. 21 to celebrate the 40th anniver-sary of the Forum for young Canadians.

The organization provides high school and CGEP students across the country the chance to learn about federal politics with weeklong stays in Ottawa that include contact with some of the top officials in the federal government, including MPs, Sena-tors, and sometimes even the prime minister.

The group said more than 20,000 people have participated in the program since it began in 1976, including MPs such as the Liberal Member for Edmonton Centre, Alta., Randy Boissonnault. It said many Hill staff-ers, public servants, and business leaders have also participated in the program.

Over the next year, the program’s ses-sions will take place on the week of Feb. 20, March 5, and March 19.

dabma@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

Lots to talk about: Canada-U.S. relations event set for Nov. 16

heARD hiLLONTHE

By Derek ABmA

CORRECTION AND CLARIFICATION, THE HILL TIMES: OCT. 13

Re: “Big gap between Liberal rhetoric and action on veterans’ issues,” (The Hill Times, Oct. 31, p. 13, by Sean Bruyea). The column incorrectly stated that veterans Affairs Minister Kent Hehr’s mandate letter listed 23 or so priority promises. In fact, the minister’s letter outlined 15 priorities and, of those pri-orities, the minister has accomplished five to date. The column also indicated that individuals appointed to advisory groups or invited to stakeholder sum-mits have little or no connection to veterans or their issues. In fact, the most recent summit had representatives of more than 30 veterans organizations, with veterans themselves making up 75 per cent of attendees, and the other 25 per cent made up of health and civil professionals, active members of the CAF, and veterans’ families. The full list of members for the ministerial advisory groups can be found here http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/about-us/advisory-groups, which include a number of veterans and those that advocate for veterans, says veterans Affairs.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, left, seemed to get along well with U.S. President Barack Obama. Who’s he going to have to make friends with now? The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

Roméo Dallaire, former Senator and lieutenant-general, has a new book about PTSD. The Hill Times photograph by Cynthia Münster

Omar Khan is working for H&K again. Photograph courtesy of Omar Khan’s LinkedIn

Liberal MP Randy Boissonnault, an alumnus of the Forum of Young Canadian, at an event on Oct. 21 celebrating the group’s 40th anniversary. Photograph courtesy of the Forum of Young Canadians

Date: 6-10-2016 2:46 PM

ALL CONTENT WITHIN THIS FILE IS FOR OUTPUT ONLY BY END PRINTER/VENDOR. CHANGES, SHARING AND/OR DISTRIBUTING CONTENT IN WHOLE OR IN PART ARE STRICTLY PROHIBITED. LICENSING RIGHTS AND APPROVALS MUST BE REQUESTED AND APPROVED TO/BY FCB CHICAGO.

Job Number: 10586522 Client/Brand: Boeing/BDS

Colors: Magenta, Yellow, Black

Images: Boeing_white_60mm.eps

Fonts: Helvetica Neue (55 Roman, 75 Bold; Type 1)

PA: Steve HutchingsRET: NoneAB: Kathleen CandelariaVendor: NoneOutput%: None

File Name: 10586522_BDS_Canada_Partnership_10x13_r2.indd

APPROVALS

QC: Justin O’Brien

PR: Pat Owens

PP: Kim Nosalik

TM: Deanna Loperena/Alyssa Gabriele

GCD: Eugene Varnado

AD: Lauren Loehr

CW: Jeff Hampton

AE: Danielle Wilburn/Alex Furth

Publications: The Hill TimesNotes: None

Gutter: NoneFolds: NoneNoneMedia/Color Sp: Newspaper/4 COLORCountry: NoneLanguage: English

Bleed: None Trim: 10.375” x 13.5”Safety: NoneScale: 1=1 Actual Size: 10.375x13.5

Discover more at boeing.ca

CANADA COMMITTED

The Canada-Boeing partnership is built upon commitment, transparency and collaboration. It’s

a partnership that brings over $1 billion annually to Canada’s economy. An economy that would

be bolstered by the acquisition of the F/A-18 Super Hornet, building on Boeing’s proven Industrial

and Technological Benefits initiatives for the CF-18 Hornet, C-17 Globemaster and CH-47 Chinook.

Together, we will continue to enhance Canada’s global presence.

T:10.375”

T:13.5”

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 20164news hill media

By LAuRA RyckewAeRt

As Hill news outlets continue to make cuts and struggle to find

the right formula to succeed in the digital world, questions are being raised about the CBC’s impact on Canada’s media landscape.

“The biggest challenge is the CBC,” iPolitics publisher James Baxter told The Hill Times when asked about challenges faced by his independent, online publica-tion. “The government is fooling itself if it thinks that the CBC, as it’s configured, is not going to ultimately run every other major and minor outlet out of business.”

Mr. Baxter said the CBC faces “the same criteria as a commer-cial media manager” and is competing “tooth-and-nail” for ad revenue and for “eyeballs,” but with a billion-dollar “head start.”

There’s a growing interest in commentary coverage, generally, said Mr. Baxter, but “with a pocket full of public money,” the CBC is in a position to poach some of the country’s most popular com-mentators. While it “won’t happen overnight,” he said, “all they have to do is give 10 cents more a word or five cents more a word and they’ll take whoever they want.”

Mr. Baxter said he wants the federal government to tell the CBC to “get out” of doing “text-only” digi-

tal news content and focus more on “under-served markets” in Canada, outside major cities like Toronto, vancouver, and Montreal where he said the market is being gobbled up by the public broadcaster.

That doesn’t mean ditching its digital platform entirely, said Mr. Baxter, who thinks all the CBC’s on-line content should originate from radio or broadcast pieces.

“As long as the government is just tossing out money to the CBC, no shrewd investor is going to want to go head-to-head with the CBC. you can’t compete,” he said.

CBC/Radio-Canada received a $75-million budget boost from the new Liberal government this year, with $150-million annual injections each year after that until 2020-21, totalling $675-million in additional funding overall. For 2016-2017, the CBC received $1.04-billion in federal funding.

Previously, under the former Conservative government, the CBC had its funding slashed by $115-million over three years, beginning in 2012. At the time, it raised concerns among many that it was headed for extinction, with more than 1,000 jobs chopped and program cuts resulting.

In 2014, the CBC launched its Strategy 2020, which in part highlighted a “digital transition strategy” to become a “multi-platform broadcaster” and have greater presence in, and emphasis on, digital and mobile services. Its stated goal was to have 18 million Canadians using its digital services each month by 2020. This digital shift has seen traditional broadcast reporters filing stories online.

More recently, at the end of September, the CBC internally announced plans to launch a new opinion page on its website later this month, which will “feature a mix of regular freelance columns

and commentary on news and current affairs,” as described in a memo to staff, with former National Post columnist Robyn Urback announced as its new producer of opinion and columns. The CBC will pay 55 cents per word for opinion columns.

As traditional print circulation revenues plummet, news outlets have increasingly been looking to digital ad revenues and subscrip-tions in an effort to make up for losses, and many are struggling to find the right formula.

With the CBC expanding its digi-tal services into areas that haven’t been covered in the past, like its new digital service centres in Hamilton and most recently in London, Ont., it’s a “good question to ask” what impact it’s having on private media in those markets, said Chris Waddell, an associate professor at Carleton University’s school of journalism and a former CBC-Tv Parliament Hill bureau chief.

“If somebody wants to come up with a new idea or a new me-dia venture and they need to raise private money to do it … how difficult is it going to be for them to raise money from investors if the investors know that whatever startup they’re doing is going to be competing against the CBC?” said Prof. Waddell.

The “broader question” of “whether there should still be advertising on CBC television and on its websites” should be up for consideration, he said, pointing to the BBC as a comparison.

Currently, the CBC has a mixed-funding model. It re-ceives both government funding and revenue from ad sales and subscription fees to specialty services. By comparison, the BBC is funded via a licence fee paid by every household in the U.K. and the broadcaster is not allowed to

carry ads or sponsorships on its services within the U.K.

Mr. Baxter said while digital ad revenue has “stabilized” for iPolitics, which like other special-ity publications (including The Hill Times) has an advantage in terms of attracting targeted niche advertising, there’s “certainly downward pressure on pricing.”

“The advertising market has collapsed under all of us, so that has forced us to reinvent several times. I think every publisher is in the same boat,” he said.

However, he said with a smaller company it’s easier to be “nimble” and try to find the right formula for the future. For ex-ample, he said iPolitics has been expanding into events, putting more focus on opinion, and will soon be moving into podcasting and video for online.

Testifying before the House of Commons’ Heritage Committee last spring, as part of its ongoing study of media and local commu-nities, CBC News general man-ager and editor-in-chief Jennifer McGuire said the argument that the “CBC somehow is cannibal-izing the business case out there is not necessarily a valid one,” as she said “only about one per cent of CBC’s revenue is digital.”

She also noted that local news coverage is “at the forefront of the digital shift” being undertaken.

On Oct. 25, CBC president and CEO Hubert Lacroix, execu-tive vice-president for English services Heather Conway, and executive vice-president for French services Louis Lalande appeared before the House Heri-tage Committee to speak to the CBC’s reinvestment plans and faced questions from MPs over the impact the CBC was having on private media in Canada in competing for ads and content.

In an online statement from Ms. Conway a few days later on Oct. 28, responding to recent criticism over the CBC’s digital presence and opinion page plans, she said the CBC has been offer-ing opinion and analysis content “on its website for years.”

With large news outlets merg-ing content, CBC/Radio-Canada’s presence is “more important than ever,” reads the statement, and limiting what it can do “only means fewer services for Cana-dians,” and “won’t help private companies be more profitable.”

“The mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada is to inform, enlighten, and entertain. That’s precisely what opinion does,” reads the statement. “Limiting access to the digital public space is not in the public interest. CBC/Radio-Canada does not exist to serve the interests of private businesses. It exists to serve the people who use and pay for it—all Canadians. They want us to be where they are.”

Prof. Waddell said the govern-ment needs to indicate what it wants the CBC “to be and do.”

Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly (Ahuntsic-Cartierville, Que.) has been consulting on the federal gov-ernment’s “cultural policy toolkit,” including considering possible amendments to the CBC’s mandate and the Broadcasting Act (1991). As part of this, the government has compared arrangements at the CBC with those of the BBC, includ-ing funding models.

Those consultations will wrap up later this fall, with possible changes being considered in early 2017, including evaluating

any recommendations from the Heritage Committee, which is expected to present a final report on media and local communities in the new year, with an interim report expected later this month.

The media landscape in Canada has been in a state of particular flux in recent years.

“People are very uncertain about what the future is and what they should be doing and so people are trying different things,” said Prof. Waddell. “Media adver-tising is disappearing and when advertising disappears, news organizations shrink.”

After about a year on the Hill, both BuzzFeed Canada and Vice Canada packed up their parlia-mentary bureaus earlier this year—with both former Hill BuzzFeed reporters now in Washington, D.C. and vice’s Justin Ling splitting time between Ottawa and Toronto.

Last week, Quebecor Media announced it will be cutting 220 jobs, including 125 at TvA, and will no longer publish two of its French-language magazines.

After merging newsrooms and shedding 800 full-time jobs over the past year, on Oct. 20, Postme-dia News, which has been work-ing to try to increase its digital ad revenue, announced it would be further cutting salary costs by 20 per cent, with voluntary buyouts on offer until Nov. 8 and possible cuts to follow. It remains unclear how many jobs, or what kind, will be cut—or where. Ottawa papers are also set to cut back on local coverage.

In early September, The Globe and Mail announced it’s looking to cut 40 jobs through voluntary buyouts by mid-November in an ef-fort to find the “right-sizing” for the business, according to publisher Philip Crawley. In 2013, The Globe shed 60 jobs via voluntary buyouts.

Also in September, Rogers Media announced it would be selling off some publications and would eliminate some print editions to shift toward more digital content. That includes trimming down English Chatelaine to six print editions per year from 12, and only producing one print version of Maclean’s a month instead of every week, with digital content posted weekly.

While the announced changes took publications by surprise and may seem “dramatic,” Maclean’s parliamentary bureau chief John Geddes said the magazine has been producing digital content for years, including a daily mobile edition during the last election, and was formerly a monthly print magazine.

“There will be an evolution there, but it’s not a revolution for us,” he said.

Maclean’s Hill bureau team has generally been two or three people for the last 15 years, said Mr. Ged-des, and the only sign of change at this point is one of growth. Howev-er, it remains unclear whether that will mean a new full-time colum-nist following Paul Wells’ departure for The Toronto Star, as Evan Solomon and Scott Gilmore now provide freelance columns.

Overall, Mr. Geddes said he’s seen media coverage “ebb and flow” over his almost two decades on the Hill. While there are fewer beat re-porters and less routine daily cover-age, he said new outlets on the Hill, like Bloomberg, are providing more economic coverage, and the quality of writing and coverage of debate around issues is “very high.”

lryckewaert@hilltimes.com The Hill Times

‘The biggest challenge is the CBC,’ as other media cuts continue, questions raised over impact of Mother Corp The possibility of change to the CBC’s mandate is being considered as part of government’s ongoing ‘cultural toolkit’ consultations.

iPolitics editor James Baxter, Vice’s Justin Ling, CBC News Hill bureau chief Rob Russo, and Maclean’s magazine’s John Geddes. The CBC’s free content gives it an unfair advantage and is hurting other news outlets, say some Parliament Hill journalists. The Hill Times photographs by Jake Wright and courtesy of James Baxter

5THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

news senate

However, Sen. Wallace, a member of the Senate Internal Economy committee and the Independent representing Rothesay, N.B., said he’s considering taking this motion before the 105-member Senate Chamber.

In an interview with The Hill Times, Sen. Wallace said he was not surprised his motion that called on the Senate Internal Economy Committee to rescind the deci-sion to seize Ind. Sen. Duffy’s (Cavendish, P.E.I.) salary to recover ineligible expenses, was defeated on Nov. 3. It went down by a vote of 13-1.

He said he knew what he was up against but wanted to bring a few points on the public record regarding the powers and functioning of the Senate’s Internal Economy Committee. Sen. Wallace said the first point was that the full committee should have made the decision related to garnishing Sen. Duffy’s salary seizure and not just the three-member steering com-mittee consisting of two Conservative and one Liberal Senators.

Also, he said the committee did not follow proper procedure before directing the Senate Administration to garnish Sen. Duffy’s salary.

Sen. Wallace said he’s going to reflect on the possibility of raising this issue be-fore the entire Senate and make a decision in the coming days.

“That whole topic is one that should, at some point in the very near future, be dealt with in the Senate Chamber,” said Sen. Wal-lace. “What would be the best vehicle to do that? Would it be a repeat of the issues and the circumstances that I brought before Internal [Economy Committee], or perhaps those issues in a broader sense can be brought before Senate Chamber in a differ-ent form. I’m reflecting on that.”

In the Senate Internal Economy Com-mittee, there are nine Conservative, four Liberal, and two Independent Senators. But in the Senate overall, Independent Senators now outnumber Conservative and Liberal Senators, separately. With the re-cent appointment of 21 new Senators, there are now 44 Independent, 40 Conservative and 21 Liberal Senators. Sen. Wallace said with a “different composition and broader audience” in the Red Chamber, his motion may yield a different result, or at least he would be able to make his case before all the members of the Senate.

At issue is the Internal Economy steering committee’s decision to direct the Sen-ate administration to seize $16,955 from Sen. Duffy’s salary to recover in overpaid expense claims. The steering committee gave this order after the Senate’s chief financial

officer Pascale Legault informed the Senate Internal Economy Committee that, in her view, $16,955 was overpaid to Sen. Duffy in ineligible expenses between November 2011 and September 2012. The questioned expenses included a $10,000 payment to a personal trainer, $3,142 in travel expenses, a $2,500 payment to a speechwriter, $300 for makeup work, $505 for a mobile data plan for a temporary worker in the office, $500 to a volunteer intern in the office, and $8 for personal photos.

On the direction of the Internal Econo-my Committee, Ms. Legault briefed all Sen-ate caucus leaders and individual Senators in May about her findings regarding the expenses that Sen. Duffy was reimbursed for. In early June, Nicole Proulx, the clerk of the Senate’s Internal Economy Commit-tee, sent out a letter to Sen. Duffy demand-ing that $16,955 be paid back or that he provide more documentation to justify his expense claims or that he take his case to the Senate arbitration process overseen by former Supreme Court judge Ian Binnie.

In response, Sen. Duffy’s lawyer Donald Bayne wrote a 15-page letter describing the Senate’s actions “a collateral attack” on Ontario Judge Charles vaillancourt’s 308-page ruling on April 21 that exonerated his client on all 31 charges of fraud, breach of trust, and bribery. Mr. Bayne argued that all seven questioned expenses pointed out by the Senate administration were examined by the judge in detail and determined that those expenses were appropriate based on the Senate rules in place at the time.

“The details and significance of Justice vaillancourt’s decision, the prejudicial inequality of the treatment being ac-corded to Sen. Duffy and the severity of the unjust suspension and remuneration denial should lead all right-thinking Sena-tors, and Canadians, to the conclusion that

this post-judgment, post-penalty attempt to pursue the same expense matters is a further compounding of injustice upon injustice, and should be stopped,” said Mr. Bayne in his response.

After Sen. Duffy’s decision not to pro-vide any more documentation and refusal to take his case to Mr. Binnie, the Senate now has started to seize 20 per cent of the net portion of the Senator’s salary until the full $16,955 are recovered.

Sen. Wallace first raised this issue in the Oct. 6 meeting of the Internal Economy Committee and expressed his dissatisfac-tion with the process that was followed. He also questioned the steering commit-tee’s authority to order the seizure of Sen. Duffy’s salary.

To explain the process to Sen. Wallace, Conservative Sen. Leo Housakos (Welling-ton, Que.), chairman of the Internal Economy Committee, directed the Senate clerk to provide more information and documenta-tion the steering committee used to reach the decision regarding the salary seizure.

Still, Sen. Wallace was still not satisfied and wrote an eight-page letter to the Sen-ate leadership on Oct. 26, asking that the Internal Economy Committee “step up and do the right thing.” He called on the com-mittee to “immediately revoke and rescind the decision” to garnish Sen. Duffy’s salary and return the already-seized money.

Conservative Sen. David Wells (New-foundland and Labrador), who’s a member of the Senate Internal Economy Commit-

tee’s steering committee, said it’s Sen. Wal-lace’s right to take this issue to the Senate Chamber. He opposed and voted against Sen. Wallace’s motion in the committee and said he would do the same in the Red Chamber.

“If Sen. Wallace wants to bring a motion to the Senate floor, we would welcome that and we would have all Senators make a decision on how they see his motion,” said Sen. Wells.

“Any Senator can bring a motion to the floor if they think they have a cause to do so. If they can make the case, and if in this case, if Sen. Duffy wants to make the case for the motion and his expenses, then we’d welcome that motion and we’d welcome further that debate.”

Sen. Wells declined to predict how the 105-member Chamber would vote on such a motion.

“I would never presuppose how my colleagues in the Senate might vote,” Sen. Wells said.

Sen. Housakos in an email said he has no objection if Sen. Wallace wants to take this issue before all the members of the Upper Chamber.

“If Sen. Wallace is dissatisfied with the unanimous decision of his colleagues this morning, Internal Economy encour-ages him to take the matter to the Senate,” wrote Sen. Housakos in an email The Hill Times on Nov. 3.

arana@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

Senate committee defeats motion to stop Duffy salary seizure, could go before full Senate Ind. Sen. John Wallace, who challenged the garnishing of Sen. Mike Duffy’s salary, is considering whether to take this matter to the full Red Chamber.

V

Who are Canada’s most innovative researchers?

V

2015 Mitacs Award winner Pamela Ovadje, University of Windsor

Gold Sponsor Event Supporter

Media Partner

Join us on November 14, 2016, for the Mitacs Awards. We will honour program alumni making exceptional contributions to research and commercialization.

mitacs.ca/2016awards

Silver Sponsors

TM

Continued from page 1

Ind. Sen. Mike Duffy, pictured in this file photo. The Hill Times photograph by Cynthia Münster

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 20166news Conservative leadershiP

By DeRek ABmA

Businessman and television personality Kevin O’Leary is

still considering a run at the federal Conservative leadership, and says the odds have improved lately of him or whoever becomes leader beating Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the 2019 election, despite the Liberals’ current polling numbers.

“There’s some big cracks coming into the Liberal mandate,” he said in an interview last week, citing the heckling Mr. Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) recently received at a youth event and government decisions he feels will weaken the Canadian economy in the coming years.

Mr. O’Leary had told The Hill Times in the summer that he would make a decision on running for the leadership by late October. Last week, he said he’s now giving himself until the end of December due to recent changes within the Conservative leadership race and the Canadian political scene in general.

“Since we last talked, there’s been many, many more declared and undeclared candidates com-ing into the Conservative race,” he said. “And I think the reason this is occurring is because, when we last talked, most candidates, and the market itself, felt that the chance of really competing in 2019 against Trudeau and be-ing successful was a really low probability—I would say maybe a 20 per cent probability that you could actually win.”

Late last week, there were 12 registered candidates for the Con-servative leadership. They were MPs Maxime Bernier (Beauce, Que.), Kellie Leitch (Simcoe-Grey, Ont.), Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.), Erin O’Toole (Durham, Ont.), Michael Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills, Ont.), Deepak Obhrai (Calgary For-est Lawn, Alta.), Steven Blaney (Bellechasse-Les Etchemins-Lé-vis, Que.), Brad Trost (Saskatoon-University, Sask.), and Lisa Raitt (Milton, Ont.). Former cabinet minister Chris Alexander was

also there, as were former MP Andrew Saxton and Winnipeg doctor Dan Lindsay.

Ms. Raitt announced her candidacy last week. Speaking about her potential as a candidate before her announcement, Mr. O’Leary said: “She’s a very inter-esting candidate. She’d be one of the ones I’d like to meet with and hear a little bit more about her platform.”

Others who have declared their interest in running but who have not registered include former MP Pierre Lemieux and Toronto communica-tions consultant Adrienne Snow.

Now, Mr. O’Leary said, there’s “excitement” within the Conser-vative Party about some of the issues facing the Liberals, and he now puts the chances of the Con-servatives beating them in 2019 at 50 per cent.

He cited the heckling Mr. Trudeau (Papineau, Que.) recently received at the young Workers’ Summit put on by the Canadian Labour Congress as example of how even millennials—a major source of support for the Liberals in the last election—are losing their faith in the current government.

“I’m pretty close to [millenni-als],” he said. “That’s a pretty large base of people I reach in social media. I would say they’re more than pissed off. They want things now and they don’t see any hope and they’re feeling pretty jilted.”

He called the recent heckling of Mr. Trudeau by the young labour union-friendly audience as “a remarkable change in tonality, and I find that very exciting to play off of.”

Mr. O’Leary said Conserva-tives overall are starting to feel better about their chances in the next election, and as a result there are more registered and declared candidates for the Tory leadership than he expected.

“I’m pushing my agenda until the end of December because I want to assess the opportunities,” he said. “We’ve got a lot of new people.”

Mr. O’Leary has said he will refrain from running for the leadership if there is another candidate in this race he feels he can support.

“If I’m not going to do it myself, I want to back a winner. Not a winner for the party,” he clarified. “If I’m going to spend this energy, time, and money, I want to beat Trudeau.”

Mr. O’Leary cited Mr. Bernier as someone he agrees with on most issues and someone who appears to have a strong organi-zation in place.

“If I go into the race, it’s going to be very hard to differentiate

our policies,” he said, adding he could still run against Mr. Bernier, even without apparent differ-ences, if he feels he would stand a better chance at winning a general election.

He added that Mr. Scheer is someone “who clearly has the interest of the party because he kind of fits as a really good alternative to Trudeau. He’s a good-looking, tall guy, social con-servative. … And then O’Toole’s very interesting. … Those three [Mr. Bernier, Mr. Scheer, and Mr. O’Toole], I think, look good.”

Many of the other candidates, Mr. O’Leary said, “are just testing the waters, trying to figure out if this is worth doing.”

Mr. O’Leary said he’s more likely to run than he was a few months ago. He said fundraising is a problem for many candidates, given that there is such a large field and no clear front-runner. This is particularly true since former cabinet minister Peter MacKay confirmed he isn’t running. As well, MP Tony Clement (Parry Sound-Muskoka, Ont.) recently withdrew from the race, citing fundraising issues. Mr. O’Leary said others are likely to follow.

“I feel the field will be culled toward the back end of December, so my thinking is to hold off as long as I can [in making a deci-sion on the leadership],” he said. “I look at the field and I think to myself, ‘How many of these people are going to make the cut, are going to be able to raise the 100-whatever they need?’ ”

Conservative leadership candidates have to come up with $100,000 to run for the leadership, which includes $25,0000 upon registration, $50,000 as a com-pliance deposit by Dec. 31, and another $25,000 for access to the party members list by Feb. 24.

Mr. O’Leary said, unlike oth-ers, he doesn’t have to get in the race early to generate name rec-ognition. Also, he said fundraising will not be an issue for him.

Mr. O’Leary is on the ABC televi-sion series Shark Tank, in which a panel of prominent businesspeople judge and potentially invest in busi-ness ideas presented by contestants. He was previously part of a similar CBC show called Dragons’ Den. Mr. O’Leary has also been a regular commentator about stock mar-ket and economic issues on news programs, and is involved in various businesses including as chairman of O’Shares Investments, a financial-services firm with offices in Boston and Montreal. He’s known for starting SoftKey Software Products

Inc., which took over The Learning Co. (TLC) before it was bought by toy giant Mattel Inc. in the 1990s for about $4-billion.

Mr. O’Leary said whether he’s Conservative leader or support-ing someone else as leader during the next election campaign, there are several issues he will publicly trace back to specific individuals within the Liberal government.

First of all, with forecasts indicat-ing sluggish economic growth for the next few years, he said he’ll be linking this matter directly to the prime minister, particularly with the recently announced carbon tax.

“If you can’t get a job or you can’t get any wage inflation, you can’t get a raise, there’s only man for that; that’s Justin Trudeau,” he said. “All these policies he’s putting in place and his enforc-ing of carbon taxation into these economies individually is just job killing. It’s scaring away capital. It’s the wrong way to imple-ment growth. All of that is [Mr. Trudeau’s] personal ownership.”

He also said Finance Minister Bill Morneau (Toronto Centre, Ont.) can be held for accountable for declines people might see in the value of their homes between now and 2019, citing recent measures taken to discourage foreign speculators in the housing market, and more stringent rules for people to qualify for government-insured mortgages.

“The No. 1 asset of Canadians is their home; it’s their No. 1 debt as well,” Mr. O’Leary said. “And Morneau is doing things to that market that I think are incredibly politically risky. … If your home goes down in value, and you can measure that between now and 2019, there’s only one man responsible; it’s Morneau.”

Mr. O’Leary said he will also be targeting Mr. Trudeau’s principal secretary, Gerald Butts, because of his past work with former Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty. This included advising him on deficit spending, Mr. O’Leary said, adding that a link can be drawn if the fed-eral fiscal situation is bleak at the time of the next election.

“He’s the honey badger of spend-ing,” Mr. O’Leary said of Mr. Butts. “He’s the guy that just doesn’t give a damn. … McGuinty and Butts had a horrendous mandate. They had so many failures in government budgeting; at least $100-billion of waste. Now I think the same thing is happening [federally].”

Lorne Bozinoff, president of Forum Research, said polling has shown Mr. O’Leary would be a front-runner if he entered the Conservative leadership race. He recalled a May survey done that put the businessman in the lead with Conservative voters when polled against a group of potential candidates that included people such as Mr. MacKay and Jason Kenney before they ruled our running. This poll showed Mr. O’Leary’s support was 27 per cent among Conservative voters

“I would assume he would probably still do well because there’s been no one really high-profile who’s shaken up the race since then,” Mr. Bozinoff said.

Mr. Bozinoff, however, discount-ed Mr. O’Leary’s theory that recent events have significantly lessened Mr. Trudeau’s chances at re-election.

“I think that’s a stretch,” he said. “The prime minister still enjoys phenomenal approval rat-ings. … Usually, Canadians give governments a second chance. Let’s just say the approval rat-

ing goes down over three years because of these tough deci-sions and whatever; there’s still a feeling often out there that the government of the day deserves a second chance. … Third term, all bets are off.”

Mr. Bozinoff acknowledged that part of Mr. Trudeau’s popu-larity is related to the fact that neither the Conservatives nor the NDP have leaders right now who will carry their parties into the next election.

But he said there’s no evidence Mr. Trudeau’s popularity would be drastically dented if Mr. O’Leary became Conservative leader.

“There is no prominent person waiting in the wings in either leadership race right now,” Mr. Bozinoff said. “There’s no one that’s really grabbed the public’s imagination. … [Mr. O’Leary] was No. 1 among the Tories [but] it was still a pretty scattered race. No one was really dominating it.”

Public opinion polls, meanwhile, are still showing the Liberals are strong. Last week’s Nanos Party Power Index, for example, which is a composite of questions, ballot preference, and impressions of the leader, had the Liberals with 65 out of a possible of 100 points, the Conservatives at 46.6 points, the NDP at 43.9, and the Greens at 33.6 points. The Nanos Accessible voters poll showed more than six in 10 Canadians said they would consider voting Liberal (61.2 per cent), while 43 per cent would consider voting Conservative, 38.2 per cent would consider voting NDP, and 28.6 per cent would consider voting Green.

dabma@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

‘There’s some big cracks coming into Liberal mandate,’ Conservatives’ electoral chances in 2019 have improved in recent months, says O’Leary Kevin O’Leary is giving himself more time to decide whether to run for the Conservative leadership, given what he feels is a changing political landscape.

PreferenCes

Conservative voters’ toP ChoiCe for Party leaders (may 2016)

Kevin O’Leary 27%Peter MacKay 23%Rona Ambrose 16%Jason Kenney 6%Maxime Bernier 6%Kellie Leitch 3%Lisa Raitt 2%Someone else 17%(Sample size: 420)Source: Forum Research

Kevin O’Leary has given himself another two months to decide whether to run for the Conservative leadership or support another candidate. Photograph courtesy of Kevin O’Leary

7THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

news Pbo & marijuana

That compares to as much as $5-billion in taxes that CIBC World Markets estimated earlier this year could come from the legal marijuana market, and a policy paper form the federal Liberal Party’s B.C. wing in 2013 that cited $4-billion as the likely annual intake in government rev-enues from a legalized marijuana market.

A Liberal Party official, re-sponding to a request for com-ment on monetary figures cited in this report, said little beyond addressing the background behind this issue. Party spokes-woman Marjolaine Provost said in an email that the Liberals “made a clear commitment in the last election to legalize, regulate, and restrict access to marijuana, working to keep profits out of the hands of organized crime, and marijuana out of the hands of children.

“The document you are referencing was produced by a committee of grassroots Liberals in British Columbia, following Liberal delegates’ vote to support the legalization and regulation of marijuana in early 2012.”

She directed further questions to the Prime Minister’s Office, which in turn directed questions to the office of Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould (vancou-ver-Granville, B.C.).

valérie Gervais, a spokes-woman for Ms. Wilson-Raybould, did not address the fiscal expec-tations of legalized marijuana, but said in an email that the government-appointed task force on marijuana legalization would “provide us with the best advice on what a regulated regime for legal access to cannabis could look like.”

A report from this task force is expected by the end of this month.

Paul Duchesne, spokesman for the Department of Finance, said in an email: “Until that [report] is complete, it would be premature to comment on potential econom-ic and revenue implications for cannabis legalization.”

CIBC chief economist Avery Shenfeld said in an email that his projection and PBO’s are “not comparable.” For one thing, he said his estimate for as much as $5-billion in tax revenues

included personal and corporate income taxes that could be gener-ated from the new legalized pot industry, which the PBO report did not consider.

Mr. Shenfeld said not includ-ing income and corporate taxes could make a big difference in how much tax money in calcu-lated. For example, he noted how this year’s federal budget had expectations for $188-billion in corporate and income taxes, plus another $22-billion in employ-ment insurance premiums. That compares to sales and excise taxes combined of $50-billion.

“So non-sales tax revenues at the federal level are about four times the sales tax,” he said.

In a followup interview, Mr. Askari said the impact of corpo-rate and personal income taxes was not included in the PBO analysis partly because there are so many questions as to whether such taxes would be new money or revenue that would otherwise come from another part of the economy.

“How do you decide whether the investments and the new producers that will engage in this is are actually additions to the economy or they’re just replacing other investments that they were going to do?” he said.

He said the scope of the PBO’s report is very clear and there shouldn’t be any confusion among parliamentarians because of differences between its num-bers on the potential for taxation

and that from other reports.He added that government

officials have told him that tax revenue is not a prime reason for marijuana legalization.

Ian Lee, an associate business professor at Carleton University, said he found the PBO report “the most rigorous I have seen yet concerning size of the market after legalization,” citing its use of data from Statistics Canada. He accused the Liberals of mak-ing “gross exaggerations” on the financial impact of legalizing pot.

“The market is much smaller than advocates think,” said Mr. Lee, who ran unsuccessfully as a federal Progressive Conserva-tive candidate in 1993 in Ottawa Centre, Ont.

The PBO’s numbers also did not consider the potential of excise taxes on government revenue. Excise taxes are ap-plied on products such as alcohol and cigarettes. But the report said applying just the provincial and federal sales taxes to legal marijuana would put its price at about the same level of what illegal marijuana went for in 2015-16. To apply additional taxes would result in legal marijuana being more expensive that what’s on the black market, increasing the likelihood users would prefer illegal sources, it said.

The report said the govern-ment faces a dilemma because if it raises legal prices too high with taxes, it would help maintain the illicit market, which directly

contradicts one of the goals of marijuana legalization. However, it added that if prices are too low, it could hurt another goal of le-galization, which is to discourage use among young people.

The PBO said the average price of marijuana on the black market ranged between $8.32 and $9.36 a gram in 2015-16. It said le-gal marijuana is expected to have a pre-tax price of between $6.67 and $8.33 a gram when it first be-comes legal, based on an analysis of medical marijuana sold.

It warned that the legal price for legal marijuana might actually be higher than predicted if there is a supply shortage, as happened in Washington state when it legal-ized recreational marijuana in 2014. The PBO added that the il-legal marijuana market will likely see some downward pressure on prices after legalization.

The report showed that a 15 per cent excise tax on marijuana would put the retail price at a mid-point of around $10 a gram compared to an illegal price of less than $9.

The PBO said if excise taxes are applied to marijuana, and structured similarly to excise taxes on cigarettes, the split would be about two-thirds of this revenue going to the provinces and the rest going to the federal government.

It presented figures show-ing the legal marijuana market could maintain about 98 per cent of the market share with a price

of about $10 a gram if the illegal market was similar. However, it said if the price for illegal pot was $9 a gram, the legal market at $10 would see a market share of about 65 per cent, and as little as 42 per cent if the illegal rate was $7.

The PBO report said there will be potential for governments to generate more revenue from marijuana sales after a few years of legalization. One reason is that marijuana producers are likely to find efficiencies in their processes that result in lower prices, giving the government more room to apply taxes without raising the consumer costs. As well, as time goes on, more Canadians are expected to buy from legal mari-juana sources.

The report did not, however, provide specific projections for the potential of government rev-enue in the years beyond 2018.

Mr. Askari said in the press briefing that, based on projected increases in marijuana consump-tion between 2018 and 2021, federal and provincial sales taxes generated on marijuana sales would likely rise between 10 and 12 per cent. That would put the gross figure at just less than $1.1-billion at the high end.

The PBO projected that about 4.6 million people in Canada 15 or older would use marijuana at least once in 2018, consuming about 655 tonnes of cannabis. It said 98 per cent of that consump-tion would come from people who use marijuana at least once a week, who comprise 41 per cent of all users.

The overall figures would increase to about 5.2 million users and 734 tonnes by 2021, the PBO said.

The report predicted Ca-nadians would spend between $4.2-billion and $6.2-billion on marijuana in 2018. That compares to $21.3-billion for alcohol sales in 2014-15, or $9-billion for beer alone.

The report indicated that more than 36 per cent of the people expected to use marijuana in 2018 would be between the ages of 15 and 24. It remains to be seen what the legal age for marijuana use will be, and whether it will differ between provinces, as with alcohol.

The City of Ottawa’s public health agency told the federal task force on marijuana legaliza-tion that the minimum age should be 25, citing research that shows the damaging effect marijuana has on brain development in young people. The Canadian Medical Association has recom-mended that 21 be the legal age for marijuana consumption.

The PBO report said a legal marijuana regime in Canada would create new expenses for government. Mr. Askari said in the media briefing that enforc-ing things such as the legal age for consumption and preventing driving under the influence are some of the factors that would lead to this. He said he can’t pre-dict whether this would be more or less than the money saved on costs for policing and court proceedings related to marijuana possession.

Ms. Gervais, from the Justice minister’s office, did not address expectations for such costs and savings in her email response.

dabma@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

PBO identifies limited taxation potential from legal pot despite past reports predicting billions While not providing specific numbers beyond 2018, the budget watchdog said that, as the legalized marijuana market matures, government revenue potential will grow.

Continued from page 1

Excuse me while I light my spliff: People smoking marijuana on Parliament Hill on April 20, 2014. The PBO has pro-jected less than $1-billion in potential sales taxes for the federal and provincial governments from legal marijuana in its first year. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 20168

editorial transParenCy letters to the editor

It was something former parliamentary budget officer Kevin Page fought long

and hard for while he headed up the Par-liamentary Budget Office under prime min-ister Stephen Harper’s years in power and there it finally was last week in Finance Minister’s Bill Morneau’s economic update.

It said the government promises to strengthen the role of the PBO by re-moving the office from the Library of Parliament’s jurisdiction and making the head of it an officer of Parliament. It will also boost its annual budget and give it access to more documents. This is all good news for the independence and strength of the office and a make-good on the Liberals’ campaign promise.

But this is also good news for Parliament, MPs, and for government since the non-par-tisan office charged with depoliticizing analy-sis of the government’s budgets and spending estimates will have more power, indepen-dence, and strength to do its job properly. A stronger and more independent PBO will hopefully allow MPs to make better informed voting decisions on the government’s spend-ing estimates. It will also hopefully influ-ence better government spending.

“Like other officers of Parliament, the appointment will be based on merit and approved by Parliament,” the fiscal update stated. The PBO will also be responsible for assessing the cost of all the major party platforms in the next election to “ensure Canadians have a credible non-partisan way to assess a party’s fiscal plans,” which could be problematic for political parties, but good for voters.

“It’s a big day for the parliamentary budget officer,” Mr. Page told The Canadian

Press. “We’re going to have an independent office … an officer of Parliament.”

The government also promises to make Statistics Canada more independent and to increase transparency, just weeks after chief statistician Wayne Smith quit over lack of control over information technology.

“These proposed amendments will entrench into law the authority of the chief statistician of Canada to make decisions on statistical methodology and the production and release of official statistics, and will ensure transparency around decision-mak-ing,” stated last week’s fiscal update.

Finally, the government promises to open up the Commons Board of Internal Economy, which is something The Hill Times has been advocating for since 1989. The powerful management board, headed by the House Speaker, holds all its meetings behind closed doors and releases very condensed minutes of its meetings, sometimes many months later. All members swear an oath of secrecy, but it’s not a cabinet committee and it should never have been allowed to be so secretive for so long. It approves all House budgets, and bylaws, handles House human resources problems, Hill security issues, adjudicates internal disputes, sets MPs’ office budgets and governs MPs’ expenses. It will now be “open by default.”

“In all but exceptional cases involv-ing sensitive or personal information, business of the board of internal economy will be made public,” the update said.

This is 30 years overdue, but also welcome.All three of these government

moves are good for transparency, ac-countability, and independence. This is good news for Parliament.

Re: “Do or die time for electoral reform,” (The Hill Times, Oct. 31, p.

16). Readers shouldn’t be fooled by the Broadbent Institute’s spin of testimony received by the Special Committee on Electoral Reform (ERRE); their count is simply incorrect, and the evidence that Canadians want a referendum on any proposal for a new voting system is strong and persistent.

I attended most of ERRE’s meetings, and to supplement my memory of the “open mic” sessions, I have gone back through the transcripts. Of the close to 600 “open mic” participants, only 221 addressed whether to hold a referendum. Of those, 94 supported one before changing the system, 26 sup-ported one after at least one election, and 101 were opposed entirely.

Participants at our ERRE hearings were an earnest, but wildly unrepresenta-tive sample of Canadians, in which we saw a profound and obvious self-selection problem. Many participants used rela-

tively homogeneous talking points and 74 identified themselves as active members of a small number of special interest groups with long-standing, known posi-tions on this matter: 22 were Green Party officials or former candidates; 16 were members of Fair vote Canada (or Fair voting BC); 13 were Leadnow activ-ists; nine were Unifor representatives; six were from the Canadian Labour Con-gress; four from CUPE, and four others from local Labour federations.

Leadnow claimed in an email to its supporters that “hundreds of [its] mem-bers attended the committee stops held across Canada.” Helpfully, some of them wore identifying purple T-shirts.

Ultimately, small, unrepresentative, and self-selected samples of Canadians cannot adequately substitute for the millions of Canadians who would vote in a national referendum on changing the voting system.

Conservative MP Scott ReidLanark-Frontenac-Kingston, Ont.

Regarding the appointment of How-ard Dean, former federal court judge

and former head of the Ontario Securities Commission to the Senate, in the spirit of democratic reform, does this mean that the government is finally going to address the market regulatory oversight’s less-than-stellar performance? Or was this the reason

for not rocking the boat on a growing list of turning a blind eye and not rocking the boat? The latest was the 14-year failure to pick up on CIBC’s over charging on fees and then levying a fine only after the CIBC reported the non-compliance to the OSC on its own.

Bev KennedyOakville, Ont.

Six years ago, the Liberals voted with the NDP in favour of greenhouse gas emis-

sions reduction targets of 25 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 and 80 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050, as specified in the Climate Change Accountability Act passed by the House of Commons, but killed by the Conservative majority in the Senate.

Six years later, because of the time that has been lost with insufficient action, the global need for rapid emission reduc-tion is significantly greater. According to a number of studies, the cumulative effect of all of the targets currently submitted to the UNFCCC, if fully implemented, would only limit warming to 2.7°C and could go as high as 3.4°C by 2100.

yet, the Liberals have recently ac-knowledged that they are going to stick with the Conservatives’ weak target of just 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

This target includes the land sector, forestry, and possible use of interna-tional emissions credits, and, according

to Climate Tracker’s assessment, “After accounting for forestry we estimate this is a reduction of 21 per cent below 2005 levels of industrial GHG emissions … equivalent to a reduction of two per cent below 1990 industrial GHG emissions levels.” This is a huge decrease from the short-term target that the Liberals were in favour of in 2010.

Canada emits about 1.6 per cent of the world’s GHG emissions, yet it is among the top 10 absolute emitters and, of these countries, Canada has the highest emis-sions per capita.

By not setting more a more ambitious target, it appears that the Liberals are not only abandoning their commitment to avoiding 1.5°C of warming, but are also not taking adequate responsibility for Canada’s share of global GHG contribu-tions. Nor are they demonstrating the leadership necessary to promote stronger reduction targets on a global basis.

Michelle MechSalt Spring Island, B.C.

Kudos to Liberals on PBO, Statistics Canada, and Commons

Board of Internal Economy

Millions of Canadians would vote in national referendum on changing voting

system: Conservative MP Reid

Will government address market regulatory oversight?

Global need for rapid GHGs reduction significantly greater

Publishers Anne Marie Creskey, Jim Creskey, Ross Dickson

General Manager, CFO Andrew Morrow

Editor Kate MalloyDeputy Editor Derek AbmaManaging Editor Kristen ShaneDeputy Editor Peter Mazereeuw

Assistant Deputy Editor Abbas RanaOnline Editor, Power & Influence Editor Ally Foster

EDitoRiAlsEnIOr rEPOrtErs tim Naumetz and laura RyckewaertrEPOrtEr, POWEr & InFLUEnCE AssIstAnt EDItOr Rachel AiellonEWs rEPOrtErs Chelsea Nash, Marco VigliottiPhOtOGrAPhErs Sam Garcia, Andrew Meade, Cynthia Münster, and Jake Wright POWEr & InFLUEnCE AssIstAnt EDItOr Christina leadlayEDItOrIAL CArtOOnIst Michael De AdderCOntrIbUtInG WrItErs Denis Calnan, Christo-pher Guly, leslie MacKinnon, Cynthia MünsterCOLUMnIsts Keith Brooks, Karl Bélanger, Andrew Cardo-zo, John Chenier, David Coletto, Sheila Copps, David Crane, Jim Creskey, Darryl t. Davies, Murray Dobbin, Gwynne Dyer,

Michael Geist, Greg Elmer, Riccardo Filippone, Alice Funke, Dennis Gruending, Cory Hann, Chantal Hébert, Joe Jordan, Warren Kinsella, Camille labchuk, Gillian McEachern, Arthur Milnes, Dan Palmer, Nancy Peckford, Angelo Persichilli, Kate Purchase, tim Powers, Jeremy Richler, Susan Riley, Ken Rubin, Sarah Schmidt, Rick Smith, Evan Sotiropoulos, Mathieu St-Amand, Scott taylor, ian Wayne, Paul Wells, Nelson Wise-man, les Whittington and Armine Yalnizyan

ADVERtiSiNGvICE PrEsIDEnt MArkEtInG AnD MULtIMEDIA sALEs Steve MacDonaldDIrECtOrs OF bUsInEss DEvELOPMEnt Craig Caldbick, Martin Reaume, Samim Massoom, Ulle Baum, François Moreau

ADvErtIsInG MArkEtInG DIrECtOr Chris PeixotoCLAssIFIED sALEs COOrDInAtOr Sarah Wells-Smith

PRoDUCtioNPrODUCtIOn MAnAGEr Benoit DeneaultsEnIOr GrAPhIC, OnLInE DEsIGnEr Joey SabourinGrAPhIC DEsIGnEr Melanie BrownWEb DEsIGnEr Jean-Francois lavoie

ADMiNiStRAtioNFInAnCE/ADMInIstrAtIOn tracey WaleCIrCULAtIOn sALEs MAnAGEr Chris Rivoire

PUbLIshED EvEry MOnDAy AnD WEDnEsDAy by hILL tIMEs PUbLIshInG InC.69 Sparks Street, ottawa, ontario K1P 5A5(613) 232-5952 Fax (613) 232-9055Canadian Publications Mail Agreement No. 40068926 www.hilltimes.com

CMCAAUDITED

Please send letters to the editor to the above street address or e-mail to news@hilltimes.com. Deadline is Wednesday at noon, Ottawa time, for the Monday edition and Friday at noon for the Wednesday edition. Please include your full name, address and daytime phone number. The Hill Times reserves the right to edit letters. Letters do not reflect the views of The Hill Times. Thank you.

2012 Better Newspaper Winner

DELIvEry InqUIrIEscirculation@hilltimes.com613-688-8822

Publications Mail Agreement No. 40068926ReTuRN uNDeLiveRAbLe CANADiAN ADDResses TO: CiRCuLATiON DePT. 69 sparks street, Ottawa, ON K1P 5A5

9THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

CoPPs’ Corner Private fundraisers

OTTAWA—Odious is how one Globe and Mail columnist

characterized the job of private event fundraising. Lawrence Mar-tin actually ascribed the descrip-tor to me, based on an interview I gave last week to CTv parliamen-tary bureau chief Bob Fife.

Fife asked me what I thought of the current political contro-versy surrounding the private fundraising activities of govern-ment ministers.

I tried to offer a balanced answer to the question that dogs all politicians.

Nobody likes to fundraise. It is the toughest, most unsavoury part of the job. But if a modern party wants to run a modern operation, it requires money.

And the notion that private fundraisers with a $500 ticket price can actually buy a minister is absurd.

The amount involved is simply too small and in many fundrais-ers, you may have different do-nors with opposing perspectives in attendance. So if they each pay $500 to attend, they literally cancel each other out.

I remember years ago attend-ing a fundraiser which included broadcasters and cable company owners. The CTv and Global presidents were there, as were the heads of Rogers and Bell. They were each paying their requi-site ticket price and many were making opposing arguments on current issues.

How, then, could a private fundraiser involving different per-spectives, provide an opportunity to buy a decision? It didn’t.

In the end, when I had to amend broadcasting laws, I weighed all the evidence, listened to all the perspectives, and cer-

tainly did not take any donations into consideration.

What I tried to communi-cate last week in the interview with CTv was that any change proposing a limitation on private fundraising had to involve a de facto public subsidy.

When the Jean Chrétien Liberal government banned corporate and union donations and drastically reduced the maximum amount of allowable political donations from $25,000 to around $1,200, the legislative package included public subsidies for political parties.

After an election, a fixed sum was set aside for each political party, based on the number of votes it received. That method permitted small parties, like the Green Party, with broad-based public support, to build up their coffers in between elections.

Prime minister Stephen Harp-er won his first election vowing to eliminate the public subsidies, and he did. He also increased the allowable donor amounts and pro-rated an annual increase.

In the olden days, a $25,000 donation certainly guaranteed ac-cess at the highest levels. In these days, the small amounts of money involved do not.

Just last week, the Liberal Party nationally sent around a

review of this year’s fundraising activities to date.

In each quarter, the federal party has received donations from more than 35,000 citizens with an average contribution of $91.

The donor base is broad, a far cry from when the party survived on $25,000 gifts from wealthy corporations.

In a utopic world, it would be ideal to restrict efforts to a single major annual dinner in every province. That assumes that, for example, in Ontario, everyone can travel to Toronto.

Fundraisers held in private set-tings, a home, a banquet hall or an office tower, can be a cost-ef-fective supplement. Big banquets come with big price tags.

Without the capacity to raise money, parties would not be able to work on recruitment, training and preparation of candidates, party organization, policy and election planning.

It is naïve to assume that a ban on private event fundraising would even work.

Money has to come from some-where. Either the change would have to be accompanied by a parallel in-crease in public funds, or the money trail would simply go underground.

Running a modern political operation is expensive. Like all

national organizations, parties have office, salaries and support staff in every province Effective political parties have regional fieldworkers, operating with a budget for salary and extensive travel expenses.

The current system requires extensive record-keeping for all donations and expenses. The law also requires lobbyists to report every communication they have with an elected official, from the prime minister on down.

Thankfully, our elections are also guided by a stringent spend-ing limit on advertising. Canadi-ans would never witness the kind of egregious negative messaging costing millions of dollars that characterized the last week of the American election.

The current system is not perfect. But before we change it, lets have a deeper look at the consequence of handcuffing po-litical parties in their fundraising activities.

Private fundraising events are certainly the least desirable part of a minister’s job.

In the absence of public fund-ing they are a necessary evil.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister.

The Hill Times

OAKvILLE, ONT.—Political fundraising in this country

has a really bad reputation.How bad?Well, even Prime Minister

Justin Trudeau—the popular, dewy-eyed idealist with a charm-ing “Sunny Ways” attitude and an adorable “I-do-politics-differently” mantra—is not above cynical sus-picion when it comes to political money-grubbing.

Indeed, Trudeau is currently coming under fire from watch-dog groups and from the media and from opposition MPs for his party’s so-called “pay-for-access” fundraising tactic, whereby citizens who donate up to $1,500 to the Liberals can, as a reward, meet a cabinet minister in person.

And while Trudeau is defend-ing himself the best he can, it’s still hurting his image.

The federal Ethics Commis-sioner Mary Dawson, for exam-ple, called the Liberal fundraisers “unsavoury.”

This negative reaction to the Liberal fundraising ploy—which keep in mind is totally legal—is not surprising since our soci-

ety has come to the collective conclusion that politicians can’t be trusted to act ethically when it comes to money.

Or to be more accurate, we believe politicians can’t be trusted when it comes to money they’ve received from private citizens in the form of voluntary donations.

The general view seems to be that freely donated money is potentially toxic because it can be used to bribe, to cajole, or to otherwise corrupt our elected representatives.

Thus, over the years we’ve put in place a complex system of rules, restrictions, and laws all specifically designed to erect a regulatory barrier between politi-cians and their donors.

And woe be to any politician who breaches that barrier, as he or she will be led to jail in chains, humiliated in the national media, and perhaps even thrown into the slammer.

Just ask former Conserva-tive cabinet minister Dean Del Mastro.

Of course, all the rules put in place to restrict political contri-butions don’t make fundraising impossible, but they do make it much more difficult, which means party fundraisers have to be extra inventive when it comes to gar-nering donations.

This explains the Liberal Party’s “pay-for-access” scheme and it also explains why parties are doing more grassroots-style fundraising.

Since it’s illegal for donors to contribute more than $1,500 per year to a federal party, fundrais-ers cannot rely on a relatively few deep-pocketed contributors and must instead cast a wider

net, seeking to haul in a bunch of smaller donations from a large group of people.

For bait, they often use direct mail fundraising letters, which like most forms of persuasive communication, use simple and emotional messaging.

In fact, a typical direct mail pitch from a political party usually has this sort of flavour: “Dear Donor, our opponents are the worst thing to happen to the world since the Bubonic Plague. So send us $10.”

As journalist Susan Delacourt recently put it, fundraising “requires people to see the world through stark, black-and-white distinctions between friends and enemies.”

Unfortunately, this approach to fundraising also offends this coun-try’s self-appointed guardians of civic virtue, who argue it demeans our democratic discourse.

At any rate, all the outrage about fundraising practices and habits will likely result in yet more burdensome restrictions being placed on donations, and this trend will likely continue until at last we reach the day when voluntary contributions to political parties are totally banned.

When that happens, political parties will become totally reliant on government subsidies.

In other words, political par-ties will still rake in the cash, but their fundraisers will be the Canada Revenue Agency.

And when those guys ask for a donation, you simply can’t refuse.

I wonder if that will make po-litical fundraising more popular?

Gerry Nicholls is a communi-cations consultant.

www.gerrynicholls.comThe Hill Times

Private fundraising events are a necessary evil

If Trudeau can’t be trusted with donation dollars, who can?

The current system is not perfect. But before we change it, lets have a deeper look at the consequence of handcuffing political parties in their fundraising activities.

All the outrage about fundraising practices and habits will likely result in yet more burdensome restrictions being placed on donations and this trend will likely continue until at last we reach the day when voluntary contributions to political parties are totally banned.

Post-Partisan Pundit fundraising

GERRy NICHOLLS

SHEILa COPPS

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, pictured in this file photo on the Hill. All the rules put in place to restrict political contributions don’t make fundraising impossible, but they do make it much more difficult, which means party fundraisers have to be extra inventive when it comes to garnering donations. This explains the Liberal Party’s ‘pay-for-access’ scheme and it also explains why parties are doing more grassroots-style fundraising, writes Gerry Nicholls. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201610imPolitiC senate reforms

GATINEAU, QUE.—Prime Min-ister Justin Trudeau has done

what no one thought possible: turned the Senate of Canada into a potentially useful, and suddenly intriguing, institution. And he did it without any heavy lifting, or extravagant drama—only a few judicious tweaks.

As of today, 44 of the 105 mem-bers of the Upper Chamber are Independents—in name, at least—giving them a plurality of votes. Unsurprisingly, the bad-tempered crustaceans in the Conservative Senate caucus are dismissive. Con-servative Sen. Leo Housakos ac-cused Trudeau of a “con job,” while Conservative Sen. Bob Runciman labelled the new appointees “in-the-closet Liberals,” an “elite group” with nothing to show for them-selves, but years of public service. And Runciman should know: he served 29 years as an Ontario MPP before being elevated to the the Upper House, himself.

Conservative Sen. Claude Carignan, a 51-year-old law professor, and lawyer, echoed complaints about these “elite” newcomers, as if he had been a welder, or a pastry chef, before being elevated from a life of humble toil by Stephen Harper.

Conservative Sen. Linda Frum, a former journalist who has never run for elected office, fretted that Trudeau’s move hands a lot of power to individuals who “have never faced the electorate.”

Nor do these veterans have any urge to help the newcomers adapt by providing them the research funding and guaranteed seats on Senate committees that Conserva-tive and Liberal caucus Senators enjoy. Each Senate Liberal, for instance, has $50,000 for research; the Independents are only allotted $7,000. As to being excluded from

committees, Carignan grumped that “normally, it is the tradition to come up with [committee assign-ments] during the Throne Speech. It has always been like that.”

More than anything, this spiteful attitude underlines how urgently the Senate needs to be reformed—if not entirely purged of its traditional members. Sadly, that cannot happen until all the toadies, bagmen (and women), unprin-cipled opportunists, and grifters appointed by Stephen Harper, and his Liberal predecessors, are gone. And, barring infamous behaviour—and, as the Mike Duffy precedent reminds us, mere grotesque self-interest is not enough—they are there until they are 75.

But the old guard—the 40 Sen-ators appointed by Harper and another 21 named by previous Liberal prime ministers—are now outnumbered by the newcomers, many of them singularly accom-plished, and sufficiently experi-enced, to be unlikely yes-men (or women). And while they may tilt in a broadly “liberal” direction (if you can judge based on their pre-vious occupations), that doesn’t mean they will rubber-stamp ev-ery piece of legislation the Liberal cabinet sends their way.

On the contrary, lifelong advo-cates for imprisoned women like Sen. Kim Pate, or environmental champions like Peru-born Sen. Rosa Galvez, or, the formidable indigenous judge and advocate, Murray Sinclair, could make life difficult for a prime minister who prides himself on his progressive agenda. The new Senators, in short, are more likely to be pushing the government rather than being pushed around by the PMO.

Ultimately, of course, the elected Chamber must prevail in a democracy. But, meanwhile, Senate proceedings will make for interesting viewing, and, in an ideal world, for more open and thorough debate. If talking points, handed down from on high, don’t disappear entirely (old habits die hard in the Senate) they should at least be less prevalent.

As for the Senate Liberal caucus—no longer part of the full caucus, since Trudeau ejected them months ago—they need to stop moping and start thinking for themselves. Some already do; some never will. But the more quickly old-school Senators em-brace, perhaps even join, the Inde-pendents, the more the remaining holdouts (mostly Conservative) will resemble hairy mammoths, trundling toward extinction.

There are other reforms Trudeau could enact without con-stitutional uproar—notably, ending the archaic insistence that senators

own property worth $4,000 in the province they represent (although eliminating this provision within Quebec would also require provin-cial legislation).

Eminent former senators, Mi-chael Kirby and Hugh Segal, have also suggested re-organizing the Senate into four regional, instead of partisan, caucuses to reflect the original notion of the Senate as a bulwark against a centralizing federal government. That idea—be-sides irritating the premiers, who like to think of themselves as the voice of the regions—could cause incoherence, given that all Alber-tans, for example, don’t think the same way, nor do they share identi-cal views with Manitobans.

Better, perhaps, shifting alli-ances among Senators depending on the issue. That would set up a dynamic that should encourage persuasion and fact-based argu-ment rather than decisions made from party, or regional, loyalty.

If the Upper Chamber doesn’t turn into a Tower or Babel, Trudeau will have done the country a great

service. To be fair, Stephen Harper tried to limit terms in the Upper Chamber and encourage provinces to elect Senators-in-waiting, but both ideas were rejected by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. Brian Mulroney also tried to nudge the country towards an elected Senate but any hope of more pro-found change died with the Meech Lake accord.

Now, Trudeau’s incremental changes may have as revolution-ary an effect as anything tried before. It is an approach he may use elsewhere—notably with electoral reform.

He has promised, famously, to get rid of the first-past-the-post elections before the end of his first term. To that end, a hard-working commit-tee of MPs has been hearing from ordinary Canadians but nothing like consensus has emerged—although some report a preference for propor-tional representation (as opposed to first-past-the-post, ranked ballots, or other options.)

On an issue as central to our de-mocracy, Trudeau cannot proceed

by fiat—and consensus appears out of reach because Conserva-tives are insisting on an expensive, and probably futile, referendum. Instead, Trudeau may decide on smaller reforms: online voting (which could increase participa-tion), mandatory voting (which cer-tainly would), and re-introducing a public subsidy for political parties based on how many votes they get.

Unlike proportional representa-tion, this would not help smaller parties win more seats, but it would at least mean that a vote for, say, the Green Party in a no-hope rid-ing, is not a wasted vote—not if parties received $2 for every vote, money that would be used to build and organize for the future.

Small steps, inch-by-inch progress, takes more time and patience than revolution—but it may eventually produce a more functional, fair, and modern de-mocracy. We’ll be watching.

Susan Riley is a veteran political columnist who writes regularly for The Hill Times.

The Hill Times

Trudeau’s experiment in Senate a step-by-step revolution Small steps, inch-by-inch progress, takes more time and patience than revolution—but it may eventually produce a more functional, fair, and modern democracy. We’ll be watching.

SUSaN RILEy

Something’s going on in the Senate: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, top, has done what no one thought possible: turned the Senate of Canada into a potentially useful, and suddenly intriguing, institution, writes Susan Riley. Ind. PC Sen. Elaine McCoy, with new Ind. Sen. André Pratte, and Senate Government Representative Peter Harder, pictured last March; Conservative Senators Claude Carignan and Leo Housakos, above left and centre, criticized Mr. Trudeau’s recent appointments; and Ind. Sen. Murray Sinclair, above right, appointed to the Senate last March. The Hill Times photographs by Jake Wright

11THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

the war room u.s. eleCtion

TORONTO—One day to go. What did Trump and Clinton

do right, what did they do wrong?First things first: Donald

Trump will lose, when the final ballot is counted, but he has changed politics. Everyone—me included—said he couldn’t win the GOP nomination, and he did. Everyone said a racist, sexist, dirty old man couldn’t be a viable national candidate. But he was.

Trump—that bilious, bigoted billionaire—has turned the politi-cal conventional wisdom upside down, like it or not and you can probably expect to see other can-didates aping him in the future.

That’s not good, but it’s a fact.That’s Trump’s biggest

achievement, in the end: he was the most successful “outsider” can-didate in the recorded history of politics. He made all of his myriad opponents—in the Republican Party, in the media establishment, in the U.S. political consulting business—look like fools. Despite their experience, despite their money, despite history, Trump prevailed when no one thought he ever would.

That represents his biggest achievement: winning when ev-eryone thought he would lose. But he made one critical error, too.

Trump comes from Tv. Tv made him and Tv will break him. He did the thing that Tv people so often do: he equated ratings with popularity, but they’re not ever the same thing.

Donald Trump—with his rac-ism, and sexism and his “locker room talk”—was basically a hu-man car crash: everyone tuned in to watch him, sure. But they tuned in to see him crash in a ditch, not to see him win the race. That was his big mistake: thinking eyeballs equals votes. He was a human Gong Show.

Ratings are not the same thing as popularity. Getting noticed is

not getting respect. In an election campaign, which is essentially a weeks-long popularity contest, you always want to be the one who is liked (ask Justin Trudeau).

While many Americans cer-tainly disliked Hillary Clinton, they ended up disliking Donald Trump more. What won him the primaries is the same thing that lost him the general election.

That’s Trump. What about Hill-ary, who (full disclosure) my wife Lisa and I worked for in three states?

Well, her campaign made us sign a comprehensive confiden-tiality agreement, so I’ve got no secrets to share. I will only point to what you are now seeing, with your own eyes, on this historic day: Trump was all air war. Clin-ton was all ground game.

What does that mean? It means this: Trump was terrific at Twitter, and at being noticed. He was a consummate genius at get-ting the media to pay attention to him, even when the media hated him. But you can’t win a general election with Twitter and crazy talk, folks. you just can’t.

Hillary won because, unlike Trump, she (a) didn’t take unnec-essary risks, (b) she worked her ass off, and (c) she had the best on-the-ground organization. you know: knocking on doors (which we did in New Hampshire). Stuff-ing envelopes to thank donors (which we did in New york). Help-ing out down-ticket Democrats (which we did in Maine).

Polls transfix the news media. It is their crack cocaine. But polls only measure public opinion—they don’t measure the aforementioned on-the-ground political organiza-tion. Lisa and I saw it with our own

eyes, many months ago: Hillary had the most formidable get-out-the-vote organization in the history of the world. She was always going to win because of that.

That’s what she did right. But what did she do wrong?

Before she ran, I said to my former boss Jean Chrétien—who knows the Clintons well—that I thought Benghazi, Whitewater, and all that sort of scandal stuff could hurt her. Chrétien, always the smartest political mind around, disagreed.

He suggested the problem would be the stuff that happened outside politics: the money Bill and Hillary got for speeches, the money that poured into the Clinton Foundation. How right he was! HRC was almost beaten by Bernie Sanders—and knocked around so many times by the press—because she was paid lots of money for speeches to Wall

Street bankers, and because her foundation seemed to be trading donations for access. Big mistake.

People feel public service should be about service, not ava-rice. Trump’s campaign zeroed in on that theme in the campaign’s dying days with a huge ad buy. But it was too late. Hillary will still win, because her opponent makes Gordon Gekko look like Ghandi.

That’s what the two presi-dential candidates did right, and what they did wrong. In the end, however, Donald Trump simply made more mistakes than Hillary Clinton.

In politics, as in life, that still matters.

Warren Kinsella is a Toronto-based lawyer, author, and com-mentator. He has been a special assistant to former prime minis-ter Jean Chrétien.

The Hill Times

Trump was all air war, Clinton was all ground game Donald Trump was the most successful ‘outsider’ candidate in the recorded history of politics.

One of the great Canadian nov-els of the 20th century was

Two Solitudes by Hugh MacLen-nan. It is the story of the troubles between Canada’s two European founding nations—the French and the English (both had been preceded by the First Nations thousands of years earlier). The phrase “two solitudes” has entered Canadian English as a synop-sis of the relations between the English and the French. Different languages, different backgrounds, different cultures, different ways of seeing the world.

I couldn’t help but think of this as I sat in a meeting room last Fri-day in the offices of the Canadian chapter of the Internet Society in Ottawa. I had been invited to a discussion on the intersections of rights and freedoms and the con-troversial C-51, the anti-terrorism bill that significantly increases some of the powers and capabili-ties of Canada’s security and law enforcement agencies.

I was the only person with any experience in those latter orga-nizations (CSIS and CSE). The others in attendance were privacy

advocates and lawyers. It was of no surprise to me that these par-ticipants, after paying what I saw as “lip service” to the necessity that our spies and cops have the tools to stop threats like terrorism, were uniformly critical of any more capabilities. I found myself time and time again disagreeing with their comments and realized how woefully ignorant they were of what CSIS and the RCMP do and

how they do it, as well as why.And yet I could not be overly

critical of their lack of knowl-edge. The fact is that the CSISs and the RCMPs of this world do a terrible job of explaining to aver-age citizens why they need the accesses they do. In the absence of understanding, comes a lack of trust and a lack of trust leads to further lack of understanding. There has to be a better way.

I’ve said it before and I’ll repeat it here: Canadians deserve more from the agencies tasked with protecting them. We need to know what the threats are and what if anything we can do about them. We need to better compre-hend what those agencies are up against and what is lacking in their toolkit.

Aside from any discussion on sources or methods, in addition of course to ongoing sensitive in-vestigations, CSIS and the RCMP can and should be more open with what is out there. Regular papers and briefings, general enough not to be a hindrance to their tasks, should be made available. Regard-ing the “slippery slope” argument (i.e. if CSIS opens the door a crack more and more requests will be made of it), there is a simple answer. CSIS and the RCMP can make it crystal clear that they will provide us a glimpse of what they know and no more.

The questions and challenges are valid and ones about which more dialogue is a good thing. We need to stop talking past one another and start talking to one another. The current threat scenario is serious and requires a more adult conversation. It would be great to have all the players in that conversation.

Phil Gurski is president and CEO of Borealis Threat and Risk Consulting.

The Hill Times

Current threat scenario is serious, requires a more adult conversation CSIS and the RCMP do a terrible job of explaining to average citizens why they need the accesses they do. In the absence of understanding, comes a lack of trust and a lack of trust leads to further lack of understanding. There has to be a better way.

oPinion terrorism

WaRREN KINSELLa

PHIL GURSKI

Police officers, pictured in Ottawa on Oct. 22, 2014, the day of the shootings on the Hill and at the National War Memorial. The Hill Times photograph by Chris Plecash

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Mr. Trump made all of his myriad opponents—in the Republican Party, in the media establishment, in the U.S. political consulting busi-ness—look like fools. Despite their experience, despite their money, de-spite history, Trump prevailed when no one thought he ever would, writes Warren Kinsella. Photographs courtesy of Wikimedia

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201612oPinion veterans

The October 2016 Maclean’s magazine cover story was

titled “Trudeau’s Unfinished Busi-ness.” In the article, the author opines that, after one year in office, the government has not ful-filled many of its campaign prom-ises. This may statistically be true, but before launching such criti-cisms, one must remember that it is a four-year mandate. There is still plenty of time. The truth often lies behind bald statistics.

On the veterans file, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and veterans Affairs Minister Kent

Hehr have done much and should be recognized for these advance-ments and evolutions. Procedures have changed towards veteran engagement and meaningful dialogue has opened up and has transformed the way that vet-erans and stakeholders interact with the minister and his minis-try. Although there have been no statistical “results,” the effect has been tremendous and beneficial.

In his one year in office, Trudeau has reformed the way the government interacts with veter-ans, including with families and stakeholders. This has not been an easy task, particularly because under the Harper government, veterans were frustrated and constantly battling a bureaucracy whose mindset seemed rigid and economically focused. It takes time to change a culture, but un-der Trudeau the blinders appear to have at least been removed.

Trudeau, through Hehr, cre-ated six ministerial advisory groups which inform the minis-ter on specific issues of policy, service excellence, mental health, families, care and support, and commemoration. In doing so, veterans are being encouraged to reconsider their approach in how they communicate with the minister of veterans Affairs.

By repackaging the issues into more digestible parts, the minister has successfully enabled

more meaningful dialogue with veterans and stakeholders to understand concerns more clearly from the veterans’ community.

On the mental health file, the advisory group is tasked with specifically addressing gaps and weaknesses in support services re-lated to mental health. The minister and prime minister appear willing and dedicated to address these concerns, listen to stakeholders, and make changes to better ad-dress the needs of our veterans.

This government has also introduced a novel approach to military families care and sup-port. This has rightly brought the needs of husbands, wives, and children to the fore, as often the effects of military service can also be felt at home. The advisory com-mittees are specifically tasked to investigate and advise on military family-focused services in areas of social, mental, medical, emo-tional, and educational needs.

On average, veterans Affairs hosts two stakeholder meet-ings per year. Traditionally, the individuals invited to such meet-ings were a small, vocal group of veterans.

Contrast this with the current open-door policy of the present Liberal government. The latest stakeholder meeting was held in October 2016 in Ottawa, and hosted more than 140 partici-pants in a large hotel conference

room—almost a 600 per cent increase in participation since 2014. By all measures, it was a tremendous success. This meeting was by far the broadest and most successful consultation of veter-ans and stakeholders, perhaps ever. There was open and fresh dialogue between stakeholders and the government, which was facilitated by technology and in-novation including the collection of real-time polls and statistics to drive the dialogue.

Having such broad consul-tations with all stakeholders and families demonstrate the Trudeau government’s commit-ment to openness, transparency, and inclusiveness, and it should be recognized. It was perhaps the first time that diverse voices

were heard, which will inevita-bly achieve the best results in terms of services and benefits for veterans.

Though it is easy to criticize, not all change is possible in the short term. On the veterans file, at least, there has been a shift in the right direction, and the voices of broad stakeholders are finally being heard, which is in line with honouring the obliga-tion owed to our vets. The train appears to be back on the track, though we are still approaching the station.

Joshua Juneau is a lawyer with Michel Drapeau Law Office. Jerry Kovacs is an experienced advocate for Canadian Forces Veterans in Ottawa.

The Hill Times

veterans’ file on track, it’s a four-year mandate In his one year in office, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has reformed the way the government interacts with veterans, including with families and stakeholders.

OTTAWA—Honouring Canada’s fallen in war has been increas-

ingly widespread. Honouring the living with dignity has often been a struggle, especially for govern-ment. Paying injured veterans one-time lump sums for pain and suffering is neither dignified nor honoured remembrance.

As World War I British poet Laurence Binyon writes, those who “shall grow not old, as we that are left to grow old” have giv-en the greatest of sacrifices. yet, survivors living with a disabling injury often endure daily, lifelong sacrifice and suffering.

It is difficult to exaggerate the horrors and hardships of World War

I. More than 10 per cent or 66,000 of the 650,000 Canadians who served during the war gave their lives. World War I is also seen as the genesis of honouring disabling injuries with lifelong compensation as enshrined in the 1919 Pension Act.

One century later, 172,000 Ca-nadians with World War I service were identified as wounded. These veterans would face much delay and inconvenience. Even by 1940, Canada had awarded disability pensions to a mere 80,000 of the wounded, a number that would dwindle thereafter. Countless oth-ers were struck from government books with paltry one-time lump sums or denied benefits altogether.

World War II would tell a dif-ferent story. Parliamentarians, veterans, and Canadians were keenly aware of the injustices and hopelessness encountered by First World War veterans.

Of the 1.1 million who served during World War II, more than 47,000 Canadians and New-foundlanders gave their lives. For the wounded, the lifelong tax-free foundations of the disability pension remained unchanged for another 60 years though pensions became easier to access. Although 55,000 of those who served were identified as wounded, by 1959 Canada would award lifelong disability pensions to more than 103,000 World War II veterans.

Whereas only half of those wounded in World War I received

disability pensions, twice as many veterans officially identified as wounded in World War II received the lifelong pensions. But why the increase in pensioned veterans well after World War II ended? Many injuries may not manifest themselves for years if not de-cades later. World War II veterans are still applying for post-trau-matic stress disorder, a disabling condition that can dramatically worsen later in life.

Perhaps the best modern example of delayed disabling in-juries can be found with Gulf War veterans. National Defence states in a 1997 backgrounder that of the 4,500 who served in the re-gion “no one reported any serious casualties at the time” of the war. Nevertheless, as of Nov. 1, 2016, 26 years later, 3,888, or 86 per cent, are compensated for lifelong disabling injuries. Of those, 2,482, or 55 per cent, suffer an injury directly related to the war.

These are casualty statistics representing enormous loss and anguish. They also demand lifelong compensation for lifelong pain and suffering.

For the 40,000 Canadians who served in Afghanistan, less than a decade after the conflict, more than 20 per cent or 8,339 suffer a disabling condition related to the war. Unlike previous wars, most of the Afghanistan and to a lesser extent Gulf War veterans have already received their pain and

suffering compensation in the form of one-time lump sums. Sadly, they will face much adversity for the next 20, 30 or 50 years long after the lump sum is spent.

Canada did something very right for almost 200 years: we recognized that lifelong sacrifice and hardship requires lifelong dignity and compensation. In 2005, bureaucrats manipulated Parlia-mentarians and veterans to replace lifelong tax-free pensions with one-time lump sums. Replacing a two-century-old commitment to lifelong pensions for those who are wounded with one-time lump sum payments is a betrayal of meaning-

ful and tangible remembrance.Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

and the Liberals promised a return to lifelong pensions as their prior-ity commitment to veterans. Will remembrance be limited to two minutes of silence and 365 days of platitudes? Or will remembrance mean lifelong dignity for our liv-ing casualties and their survivors?

Sean Bruyea, vice-president of Canadians for Accountability, has a graduate degree in pub-lic ethics, is a retired Air Force intelligence officer and frequent commentator on government, military, and veterans’ issues.

The Hill Times

Remembering the living, not just the dead Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the Liberals promised a return to lifelong pensions as their priority commitment to veterans. This should happen.

oPinion veterans

JOSHUa JUNEaU aND JERRy KOvaCS

SEaN BRUyEa Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, pictured Nov. 11, 2015, at the National War Memorial in Ottawa. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

Veterans Affairs Minister Kent Hehr, pictured at last year’s Remembrance Day ceremony in Ottawa. Though it is easy to criticize, not all change is possible in the short term. On the veterans file, at least, there has been a shift in the right direction, and the voices of broad stakeholders are finally being heard, which is in line with honouring the obligation owed to our vets, write Joshua Juneau and Jerry Kovacs. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

13THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

Canada & the 21st Century Canadian infrastruCture bank

TORONTO—We have the Export Development Corp.,

the Business Development Bank of Canada and PPP Canada, as well as the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board. Now we are going to get the Canadian Infra-structure Bank (CIB).

In his fall economic statement, Finance Minister Bill Morneau announced that the new infrastruc-ture bank will be established with $15-billion of federal funding that had originally been earmarked for direct federal grants for infra-structure projects, with potential federal funding of $35-billion. The goal is to leverage up to $140-bil-lion to $185-billion of additional infrastructure funding from Cana-dian and foreign pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and other institutional investors.

This is not a new idea. Be-fore last year’s federal election, the Liberals were pointing to a British initiative to tap into pen-sion and other funds to finance infrastructure even though the British plan had proven to be a huge disappointment. It was part of the Liberal platform, though only vaguely described, and it was recommended just recently by Morneau’s Advisory Council on Economic Growth. The Commons Finance Committee has already started hearing from witnesses on the pros and cons of the proposed bank and how it might work.

The focus will be on larger projects of more than $100-mil-lion that can generate a revenue stream, such as a power grid, wastewater treatment plant, port, urban transit system, commuter rail system, toll bridge or high-way, or high-speed broadband network. Interestingly, missing from the list of potential projects is any reference to airports. The Liberals have hired a foreign

investment bank to study the potential sale of Canada’s major airports to Canadian or foreign investors, which if the idea went ahead, could generate additional funding for the CIB.

Pension funds and other institutional investors are only interested in large revenue-gen-erating projects, as Mark Machin, president of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board told the Commons Finance Committee last week, warning that there are few such projects available in Canada [desk—actually this week but last week when column actually appears]. Machin also stressed that institutional inves-tors are more interested in buying projects that are already built and generating revenue, rather than

investing in the construction of new projects.

Aside from the question of whether Canada can generate the large-scale projects that might attract institutional investors, the CIB proposal raises a number of questions that Canadians will need to consider.

One is whether they agree with Morneau’s to place greater reliance on user financing of infrastructure rather than the use of direct government grants. If there is to be more emphasis on projects that can generate rev-enue, then this means there will be more emphasis on financing infrastructure from the revenue generated from users, as opposed to the current system of direct public funding of projects.

Another question is whether this is the most cost-effective way to finance infrastructure. If interest rates are near zero for 10-year government bonds, for example, while institutional investors will expect a return of seven to nine per cent on their investments, is this the best way to finance projects?

Then there is the question of whether Canadians want greater private rather than public owner-ship of key infrastructure, since implicit in Morneau’s plan is the sale of existing public facilities, perhaps, for example, our major airports, to private interests. Do we want to start auctioning off public infrastructure?

Weighed against concerns will be the alleged benefits—much speedier and innovative ways of getting projects built, much less reliance on the taxpayer to get projects built with private funds providing up to 80 per cent of the cost of big projects, and develop-ment of a new institution that will become a centre of expertise on the design, financing and manage-ment of major revenue-generating infrastructure projects as well as a source of advice to government on key infrastructure issues.

We will have to wait until next year’s budget to see the details of the government’s plan, though the paramount issue will be, on bal-ance, whether this new institution is primarily designed to protect the public interest or whether it will be weighted too heavily in favour of private interests. It can be a difficult balancing act, but the public interest must come first. Fortunately, the current Commons Finance Committee hearings provide the opportunity to investigate these issues and report back on them.

David Crane can be reached at crane@interlog.com.

Now we’re getting the Canadian Infrastructure Bank We will have to wait until next year’s budget to see the details of the government’s plan, though the paramount issue will be, on balance, whether this new institution is primarily designed to protect the public interest or whether it will be weighted too heavily in favour of private interests.

TORONTO—The World Wildlife Fund predicts the mass extinc-

tion of numerous animal species unless humankind mends its ways. That’s the bad news.

Ontario’s environment commis-sioner has highlighted the moose as one such species under threat. But she has suggested a few mod-est ways to slow that trend.

That’s the not-quite-so-bad news.The World Wildlife Fund’s

apocalyptic Living Planet report briefly dominated the media when it was released on Thursday. It notes that vertebrates are under pressure around the world. It estimates that the overall popula-tion of such animals has declined by 58 per cent since the 1970s and predicts that, unless serious reme-dial action is taken, this propor-tion will reach 67 per cent by the end of the decade.

It warns of what it calls “mass extinction”—on a scale not seen in millennia. But these disappearing species are not just limited to exotic animals such as elephants and hippopotami.

As Ontario environmental com-missioner Dianne Saxe noted in her annual report on Oct. 26, the phenomenon of mass extinction also affects animals in this province.

Of these, none is more iconic than the moose. Even for those who have never seen one, the mas-sive animal represents Ontario.

Moose have been so com-mon that, in some parts of the

province, road signs warn drivers against hitting them.

But as Saxe warns, they are not that common anymore. The moose population has declined by 20 per cent over the past decade to just 92,300 animals.

To put that into perspective, there are more licensed moose hunters in Ontario (98,000) than there are moose.

In almost half of the prov-ince’s moose areas, the number of calves reaching breeding age is insufficient to keep the popula-tion stable.

While the reasons for this decline are varied, most are man-made. Log-ging and road building in the north cut into areas where moose can live.

Warming temperatures associ-ated with climate change increase the number of diseases and para-sites that affect moose.

Hunters kill them.In 2014, 3,621 adult moose and

1,429 calves were legally shot and killed by licensed hunters.

Aboriginal hunters, who do not need licences, shot and killed an unspecified number on top of this.

In other words, at least five per

cent of Ontario’s remaining moose population was wiped out in one year.

Saxe acknowledges that hunt-ing is just one cause of the moose crisis. But she notes, correctly, that it is one area over which the Ontario government has control.

In her report, she balks at calling for more restrictions on the moose hunt, opting instead for the more politically palatable solution of better reporting.

Similarly, she does not rec-ommend the government takes action to protect moose habitat from, say, logging companies. Instead, she suggests that it study the problem.

But the logic of her report is clear. If Ontario’s Liberal govern-ment wants to arrest the decline of Ontario’s moose population, it must at the very least do two things.

First, it must suspend the an-nual hunts. Second, it must take measures to protect moose habitat.

The other iconic species in danger of disappearing from Ontario are amphibians such as frogs, toads and salamanders.

Again, mankind is the reason.

Saxe points to the disappearance of wetlands as the primary reason. She notes that the government has so far taken no action on a habitat protection plan recommended seven years ago by a previous envi-ronmental commissioner.

And she points out that the government actively subsidizes the destruction of wetlands through a provincial act that gives farmers grants to drain sodden property.

Saxe recommends the govern-ment ban the construction of roads and other infrastructure in wetlands.

And she notes that while Ontario has an endangered species act on its books, it tends to ignore its require-ments. She recommends that it remedy that casual behaviour.

All of these are reasonable and modest suggestions. They may not on their own prevent what the World Wildlife Fund calls the sixth mass extinction event (the fifth included the destruction of the dinosaurs).

But we could possibly save the moose and a toad or two. Thomas Walkom is a columnist for The Toronto Star. This column was released on Oct. 31.

The Hill Times

Mighty Ontario moose need our help to survive The World Wildlife Fund predicts the mass extinction of numerous animal species unless humankind mends its ways. That’s the bad news.

oPinion moose & extinCtion

DavID CRaNE

THOMaS WaLKOM

In his fall economic statement, Finance Minister Bill Morneau, pictured in this file photo, announced that the new infrastructure bank will be established with $15-billion of federal funding that had originally been earmarked for direct federal grants for infrastructure projects, with potential federal funding of $35-billion. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201614oPinion new normal

POWELL RIvER, B.C.—It’s amazing what we gradually accept as normal—

even admirable—in how we treat each other in Canada. Practices that were once seen as a repugnant surrender to govern-ment indifference, like food banks, are now virtually celebrated as a high point of citizen engagement and promoted as such by our public broadcaster once a year. And other practices, like hospitals and se-niors’ care homes that once had their own kitchens and cooking staff, are seemingly a thing of the past, a “luxury” that we have no hope of ever getting back.

As Bruce Cockburn’s song suggests, the trouble with normal is it always gets worse.

The latter example demands of us that we somehow accept the notion that the food we eat is unrelated to our health or our healing. And I don’t mean just the cal-culation of the technical nutritional value of the meals—but their taste, their presen-tation, the choice amongst menu items, in other words the sense that you have some power to choose what you eat. Before you guffaw, remember this was the old nor-mal, and still is in a few hospitals and care homes across the country.

But the “rethermalized” slop that passes for food prepared by giant multination-als like the French multinational Sedexo ($6-billion in yearly revenue, 10,000 Ca-nadian employees) should be against the law. I experienced this unfood some years back when I was hospitalized in Powell River. I should point out that in every other aspect the care was exemplary but my partner diligently brought me real food at mealtimes. I decided, however, that I would try the hospital soup. I had to be told that it was pea soup as it simply did not taste like food. Less than a minute after the first spoonful, I vomited it up.

I was reminded of my disgusting ex-perience when I read a front page story in our local paper, The Powell River Peak, headlined “Powell River seniors take stand on meals.” It was a grim account of what the elderly put up with in two seniors’ residences operating under the vancouver Coastal Health Authority (vCHA) with food services also provided by Sodexo. Of course the appalling quality of the food was not really news. According to Elaine Steiger, secretary of the residents’ council at the Evergreen home: “For the last couple of years, most of our meetings have been taken up with the topic of food. Usually it’s the quality, but lately it’s been shortages.”

Steiger told The Peak that for the past few months there had been many instances of actual shortages, bad enough that she felt the food shortages “… border on elder abuse. … One day six residents went with-out a dinner and were given Boost.”

According to The Peak, the situation at the Willingdon Creek seniors’ facility was scarcely better. Complaints about “food shortages, meals of poor quality, meals not served on time and small portion sizes” are common place. “Joy and Richard Hibberd … said the food is barely edible at times and not enough fresh food is served. ‘We haven’t been getting fresh fruit. We see a third of a banana maybe once in three weeks.’” Fruit juice is actually watered down flavour crystals.

And how did the vancouver Coastal Health Authority respond to this corporate irresponsibility? Gavin Wilson, the vCHA’s public affairs director, acknowledged the Boost incident. He said that patients were given Boost because there was not enough

of the residents’ first choice of meal but in-dicated there were adequate portions of the second choice of meal. He also said that Sodexo assured the vCHA that is taking steps to improve food quality and increase production to ensure there are enough first choice meals for everyone. But it turns out he knew about food shortages last June when complaints first arose. “In the fol-lowing weeks we expressed our concerns [to Sodexo] based on feedback we were receiving that there were shortages of first-choice menu items.” That’s it? He expressed “concerns”? Not: “This is totally unaccept-able and if it happens again we will cancel Sodexo’s contract.” This is the board that is supposed to ensure patient health.

While we do not know the terms of the current contractual arrangement with So-dexo, we do know that Sodexo took care of any severe public criticism when it signed the 10-year, $330-million contract back in 2004. According to Colleen Kimmett in a three part Tyee series written in 2012, the contract “… stipulated that vCHA and Sodexo would coordinate their messaging around patient food services and agree on ‘standardized and uniform responses to questions from the media.’” So Wilson and the vCHA become contracted PR hacks for a giant French multinational.

But the vCHA’s protection of Sedexo goes beyond mealy-mouthed responses to the corporation’s outrageous behaviour. Back in 2012 when Kimmett prepared her investigative piece, she reported that it was virtually impossible to find out what is in the food they prepare, where it comes from (although Sodexo did say 21.6 per cent of the food came from British Columbia suppliers) or to compare it—and its actual cost—to real food that is a prepared on site in other facilities.

According to Kimmett, “Both parties cited contractual confidentiality for what they couldn’t share about what’s being provided to the sick, injured and elderly in vancouver’s hospitals.” It’s proprietary information, the vCHA could demand that information but its PR flak Wilson told Kimmett: “While this documentation

is indeed a requirement in our agreement with Sodexo, it is one that we ourselves have waived.”

According to Kimmett’s piece, Wilson indicated that its contract with Sodexo at the time did not even require Sodexo provide purchasing information. In other words the vCHA, appointed by the provin-cial Liberal government, voluntarily ties its own hands when it comes to enforcing any real accountability by its corporate partner. This kind of secrecy is hardly new but its voluntary enforcement in an area as criti-cal as health is particularly offensive—a body appointed to ensure health outcomes of citizens chooses loyalty to a foreign corporation over caring for patients.

How is it possible that we have arrived at this insane situation? Of course the sim-ple answer is that right-wing governments take care of their friends through priva-tization. But the rationale is found in the ideology of neoliberalism—in this case, in the words of political scientist Janice Gross Stein, the culprit is the “cult of efficiency.” The role of ideology is to give meaning to power—in other words to provide a persua-sive rationale for doing something that is prima facie just profoundly wrong.

Stein writes in her book of the same name: “In our avowedly secular age, the paramount sin is now inefficiency. Dishon-esty, unfairness, and injustice—the sins of times past—pale in comparison with the cardinal transgression of inefficiency.” She goes on to argue that “Efficiency, or cost-ef-fectiveness, has become an end itself.” It is a “value” lifted from the private sector’s profit imperative and applied to the provision of virtually all public services, precisely where it should play a secondary role.

There are signs that this pernicious neoliberal edifice—tax cuts for the rich, privatization, cuts to services, deregula-tion, “free trade,” and austerity—is being challenged worldwide and even by its traditional defenders. But it won’t die on its own. What better ionic struggle to kill it off that demanding real food for seniors and hospital patients.

The Hill Times

as Bruce Cockburn sang, the trouble with normal is it always gets worse There are signs that this pernicious neoliberal edifice is being challenged worldwide and even by its traditional defenders. But it won’t die on its own. What better ionic struggle to kill it off than demanding real food for seniors and hospital patients.

MURRay DOBBIN

REGISTER NOW: www.af.ca/ottawa | 613-234-9470

INTENSIVE • PART-TIMEWORKSHOPS • SLE PREPARATION

ONLINE COURSES

WANT TO LEARN

FRENCH?

SINCE 1905

PART-TIME • INTENSIVE • ONLINEGENERAL & PROFESSIONAL FRENCH

• SLE PREPARATION

British Columbia Premier Christy Clark, pictured in this file photo in Ottawa. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

15THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

“Canada voted against a recent UN resolution to create a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons. It passed, but what do you think of this decision?”

The Spin DocTorS By Laura Ryckewaert

KaTE PURCHaSE Liberal strategist

RICCaRDO FILIPPONE

NDP strategist

MaTHIEU R. ST-aMaND

Bloc Québécois strategist

DaN PaLMER

Green strategist

CORy HaNN

Conservative strategist

“The Government of Canada shares the objective of a

world free from nuclear weap-ons. To get there, we need real, tangible, and workable steps toward disarmament that include both nuclear and non-nuclear countries.

“That is why, last week, Cana-da marshalled 177 nations in sup-port of a universally recognized step toward a nuclear disarma-ment: an agreement to create a ban on fissile material—a critical component of nuclear weapons.

“This Canada-led effort is a significant event that is not sim-ply symbolic. It will set the condi-tions towards an eventual treaty to ban fissile material, which is a real, concrete measure. The agreement also has the support of both nuclear and non-nuclear na-tions. That’s critical if our shared goal is to be actually realized.

“The Government of Canada will continue to take tangible steps toward disarmament, and will work tirelessly, as we did last week, to rally countries to that end. Canadians can be proud that their government is leading the charge.”

“We’ll wait to see if the Liberals continue on

this way while at the UN. When Conservatives went to the UN, we weren’t afraid to take principled stands and explain to our allies why it was important to take such a stand. The norm for many years under Liberal governments was to go along to get along at the UN. We changed that. It was no longer good enough to please ev-ery dictator with a vote at the UN, and we needed to stand-up for our closest allies, even if it meant going against the grain.

“No greater example of that can be found than on anti-Israel motions brought forward by those at the UN that see the Jewish state as an enemy that must be destroyed rather than the shining light of democracy in the Middle East that it actually is. We stood against such singling out.

“The Liberals casting a no vote to this resolution is inter-esting, but for a government so resolutely focused on getting a seat on a ‘security council’ that provides Russia veto, and for a government so willing to spend major league tax dollars to get it, I imagine that seat just got more expensive for us all.”

“It’s such a disappointing and inexplicable about-face by

the Liberals. What’s more, this is now the second time that the Lib-erals have voted against nuclear disarmament.

“However, when they were in opposition they supported a ban on nuclear weapons. As far back as 2010 Liberals spoke in favour of a ban in Parliament and even reaffirmed their position at their recent party convention. It is difficult to explain how Mr. Trudeau can claim that ‘Canada is back’ while, under his leadership, Canada has taken a position on the wrong side of the internation-al community and on the wrong side of history.

“New Democrats have asked the Liberal government to explain this decision numerous times and all they’ve offered is empty plati-tudes about finding ‘real work-able and effective solution.’ Well, this was a UN motion supported by 123 countries. Clearly, the ma-jority of nations think the motion was workable and would have been an effective start to moving towards a nuclear weapons free world.

“Pierre Trudeau was a strong advocate for nuclear disarma-ment on the world stage. He once said ‘Politicians act as if peace is too complicated for them.’ It is really unfortunate that his son hasn’t followed in his footsteps.

“Canada has once again found itself on the wrong

side of history. The Bloc Québé-cois has always been for nuclear disarmament. It’s hard to believe there are still countries that do not want to reduce the number of nuclear weapons in the world. These weapons of mass destruc-tion no longer have a place in our society and can only end up in the wrong hands.

“The Liberals paint a pretty picture, but their record is thin on the international stage. While Canada got off to a good start in Paris as an effective facilitator in the COP21 negotiations, the government has since approved a new pipeline that will increase greenhouse gases and has left the door open to the Energy East project. Foreign Affairs Minister Dion continues to defend arms sales to Saudi Arabia, and the ne-gotiations for the release of Raïf Badawi have stalled. Not to men-tion the softwood lumber dispute, which is still unresolved despite costly trips to Washington.

“Justin Trudeau’s troops can hide behind a progressive and modern image, but their actions show that they are still the same old Chrétien-Martin Liberals.”

“The modernization and prolif-eration of nuclear weapons

is a risky path to potential self-destruction of the planet. These are not new concerns. yet last summer, Canada voted against a UN working group to address the need for a 2017 negotiation of a treaty with the goal of eliminating nuclear weapons.

“In a pattern of two steps forward and one step back for Canada at the UN, Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion improved our record in committing to sign on to the Op-tional Protocol Against Torture, but disappointed many Canadians and those in the nuclear disarmament community in voting with nuclear weapons states against this special round of negotiations to ban nuclear weapons. It is critically important that Canada stand unequivocally with those in the international com-munity who want to ensure we have a world without nuclear weapons, regardless of whether or not these measures have buy-in from the larg-est nuclear powers.

“Other countries that voted against a process towards a nuclear weapon prohibition treaty included Denmark, Belgium, Australia, and Germany. Many voted this way with the excuse that nuclear powers weren’t on board with the proposed negotiations. But Canadians are tired of cynical politics as usual.

They want principled and inspired action from their govern-ment—symbolic or otherwise. Canada should be ashamed of its vote at the UN on this critical issue.”

Softwood lumber. Marijuana legalization. Dairy and poultry exports.

though Canada and the United States do $2.4-billion per day in trade, there’s no shortage of areas of contention.

While the relationship has been strained over recent years, the bromance that’s blossomed in the last year between Prime Minister Justin trudeau and U.S. President Barack obama is set to change come 2017 when a new president will be sworn into office.

Coming on the heels of the Nov. 8 election day in the U.S., this briefing will sort out what the outcome means for this pivotal relationship in terms of trade agreements like the trans-Pacific Partnership and NAFtA, and the economic and political relationship.

For more information or to reserve your government relations and public affairs advertising space, contact The Hill Times

display advertising department at 613-688-8841.

bE A PArt OF It.canada-U.S.PARtNERSHiPPUbLICAtIOn DAtE: NoV. 16, 2016 ADvErtIsInG DEADLInE: NoV. 11, 2016

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201616inside PolitiCs ii trudeau agenda

TORONTO—A reader wrote after my last column on the

Belgians and the Canada-EU trade deal. “Hi Paul: Just a note to express disappointment.”

yeah, well, get in line.“vern in Alberta,” the email’s au-

thor, wished I would speculate “just what the Canadian populace would think” if they knew “non-voting mul-tinational corporations” are trying to get “the right to sue governments if they perceive a loss of profit due to government actions.”

vern concludes: “Please write this up if your leaders permit.” I guess we’re about to find out. I didn’t even ask my leaders. I just started typing. We’re all Thelma

and Louise up in here today.vern was describing the con-

troversy over so-called “Investor-State Dispute Settlement” provi-sions in CETA, and indeed in a number of modern international trade treaties.

These provisions do indeed provide for ways a company from here, if it sets up shop over there, to seek legal redress if the Gov-ernment of Over There changes its laws in a way that hurts our company’s competitive situation.

Sauce for the gander: they give the same rights to companies from over there that want to do business here.

I don’t need to speculate how people would react to all this. Many obviously don’t like it.

Already four years ago, 50 municipalities across Canada had passed resolutions asking to be exempted from CETA. Similar investor-state provisions have provoked widespread backlash against TTIP, the proposed trade deal between the United States and the EU. (It’s not a perfect comparison: TTIP is almost cer-tainly doomed anyway, because the Americans aren’t offering trade benefits to match the gains they seek in Europe.)

But outrage at these investor-state provisions is easy to understand.

Foreign multinational comes to town, sues our elected govern-ment because it doesn’t like the rules. What’s to like?

My answer is that the invest-ment is what’s to like. That’s why the latest generation of trade

agreements seeks to promote investment and competition in services, not just trade in goods.

Think about it, for a moment, from a company’s perspective. Not a faceless Darth vaderesque bil-lionaire multinational corporation, but the kind of widget company your cousin might own. Making its first foray into a foreign market. Worried that, if it manages to compete fair and square, widget companies over there will lobby their governments to change the rules. your cousin will wish he had recourse. These trade deals are designed to provide it.

But even as I make the argu-ment I know I’m asking people to show goodwill to corporations, often large ones, and to people in government who seem eager to smooth their path. And who has a surplus of goodwill toward big corporations and their friends in high places?

I could point out that CETA’s investor-state provisions have been substantially improved since Chrystia Freeland became Canada’s trade minister, to in-crease transparency and impar-tiality. I could quote Pascal Lamy, former World Trade Organization head, who told the French maga-zine L’Express: “When you read CETA’s text and compare it to other bilateral treaties that didn’t cause problems, it’s by far - by very far, really - the most protec-tive of states’ right to regulate.”

I could do all that, but the fact is that big corporations gener-ate a lot of mistrust these days.

And why wouldn’t they, after Wall Street collapsed at the end of 2008 and most of the compa-nies responsible were able to get relief from the Bush and Obama governments?

CETA isn’t out of the woods. The deal among Belgian institu-tions that was the fruit of Free-land’s walkout from Brussels provides many opportunities to walk away from the treaty later.

It may simply be that there is an upper limit on the economic integration international treaties can provide, and that public sus-picion of corporate power helps set that ceiling.

This could mean trouble for Justin Trudeau’s government on another front. Next week Finance Minister Bill Morneau will an-

nounce plans to attract private investment in federal infrastructure projects. The goal is to multiply each federal dollar by four or five, using money from, mostly, pension funds.

But Robert-Falcon Ouellette—a Liberal MP from Winnipeg—has been derisive of the scheme, call-ing it “a massive transfer of public funds toward the private funds in order for them to make money—a subsidy towards business.”

The notion that private and public interests might coincide is in low repute these days. Much of Trudeau’s agenda depends on aligning the two. It is not guaran-teed to work.

Paul Wells is a national affairs writer for The Toronto Star. This column was released on Oct. 29.

The Hill Times

Public’s goodwill already traded awayThe notion that private and public interests might coincide is in low repute these days. Much of Justin Trudeau’s agenda depends on aligning the two. It is not guaranteed to work.

TORONTO—Elections are the art of making a mountain

out of a molehill. This is true in Canada and in every democratic country.

Some are saying that elections are not about policies, but about character. No doubt that char-acter is important, but making mistakes with a smile on your face doesn’t change the damage imposed on people.

I see many criticisms lately against the Liberal government for its approach toward immigra-tion, foreign policy, some social issues, and its economic plan. They say that Trudeau’s govern-ment hasn’t really changed the policies implemented by the Harper government.

They have approved CETA, the Canada-EU free trade agreement negotiated by the Conservative government. They are pursuing the same TPP agreement negotiated by their predecessor. New immigra-tion levels are basically the same as before with a small cosmetic in-

crease in the numbers, particularly with refugees. Furthermore, people are still going to be deported, Canadian citizenship revoked to all those that lied during the applica-tion (well, almost all), our army is still involved in the fight against terrorism even if in a different capacity, and there have been some cosmetic changes in the handling some government business.

For example, there’s the ap-pointment system for federal positions. Take the Senate. Before it was up to the prime minister. Now it is the same. In fact, it is the prime minister that appoints the members of the committee for the selection of the names to be presented to the prime minister, who makes the final choice.

If Justin Trudeau has not ap-pointed Liberals supporters, it is not because of the system but be-cause he has made the choice not to do so. Every prime minister, as we know, has “an option, sir,” as Brian Mulroney pointed out in 1984 to then-prime minister John Turner in a televised debate.

There is no government that can legislate honesty. What makes the difference is the honesty of the people handling things.

People and media act surprised that the Liberal government hasn’t changed the policies of the Con-servatives. But they shouldn’t. We had an entire campaign judging the character of the leaders, not their policies. The be blunt, Stephen

Harper was given the boot because he was not able to smile, not be-cause of his policies.

I do not blame just the opposition for the tone of the last campaign. Most of the wounds that eventually killed the Conservative government were self-inflicted. Their communica-tion skills seemed like something from the Seinfeld show, coordinated by George Costanza.

Conversely, the Liberal gov-ernment changed the tone of the relationship with the media and the people. They have reopened the third floor of the Centre Block to the media for scrums after meetings, allowing journalists to write more stories and freeing up ministers to talk.

I agree with all of the above. However, beyond these cosmetic changes, I don’t see much differ-ence in the substance. The big change might be next year when they will present the new budget, but it will hardly be a surprise. During the campaign, the Liber-als made no commitments to the debt reduction, media made no effort to ask specific questions to Trudeau, and they ignored Mr. Harper’s predictions about the outcome of bigger-than-ex-pected deficits.

The same goes with immigra-tion. The Liberal government has been criticized for not increas-ing, as required by some groups, the number of new immigrants allowed into Canada. But the

Liberals, and the new minister of Immigration, have never made a commitment about numbers. The only commitment was to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada before the end of last year, something that they did, even if they missed the deadline.

The fact of the matter is that in Canada, as in most democratic countries, there are effectively only two political parties, the one in government and the one waiting to be in government, conventionally called “opposition.” They still pre-tend to have different ideologies, and they probably do. But they are only used during the electoral cam-paigns, like posters or front lawn signs. As soon as the campaign is over, they are recalled and stored for the next four years.

We changed government be-cause of character, not because of policies. Mr. Harper didn’t know how to smile and many people around him considered com-munication skills a liability. Mr. Trudeau knows how and when to smile, and he is doing just fine. Keep on smiling.

Angelo Persichilli is a freelance journalist and a former citizenship judge for the Greater Toronto Area. He was also a director of commu-nications to former prime minister Stephen Harper and is the former political editor of Corriere Ca-nadese, Canada’s Italian-language newspaper in Toronto.

The Hill Times

Trudeau’s election was more about personality than policy Stephen Harper was given the boot because he was not able to smile, not because of his policies.

oPinion justin trudeau vs. stePhen harPer

PaUL WELLS

aNGELO PERSICHILLI

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, pictured at a youth labour forum on Tuesday, Oct. 25 in Ottawa with CLC President Hassan Yussuff. The Hill Times photograph by Andrew Meade

17THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

news Conservative leadershiP

One source familiar with behind-the-scenes consultations, put the odds of Mr. Fournier, who is from the Progressive Conser-vative wing of the Conservative Party, seeking the party’s top job at 70 per cent. The source described it as a tough decision for the Montreal businessman, considering his engagement in the ongoing “heavy duty” interna-tional business deals.

As to why Mr. Fournier is tak-ing so long to make a final deci-sion, the source said he’s looking at his potential candidacy from personal and political angles and it’s not an easy business decision.

“It’s a bigger commitment, it’s a bigger risk,” said the source. “He’s a very different kind of candidate. It’s more old school, old-style politics where people are success-ful in business or law and they’ve always had a niche for public policy or to give back and run in politics. That’s what people did years ago. They only got into poli-tics when they were accomplished and had been leaders in other walks of life and then they got into politics. This is what we’re dealing with here. He’s not a 37-year-old Member of Parliament.”

Because of Mr. Fournier’s busi-ness connections in major urban centres and longtime behind-the-scenes involvement in the Conservative Party, the source said, one of Mr. Fournier’s key strengths will be to raise funds, which so far is proving to be a tough job for the 16 candidates who have either entered the race or are considering running. The source said if Mr. Fournier threw his hat in the ring, he would have a “top notch” national campaign team in place to hit the ground running on day one.

“It’s almost a national team of friends—Calgary, Toronto, vancou-ver, Montreal and Halifax—encour-aging him to run,” the source said.

But Sébastien Théberge, a spokesman for Ivanhoé Cambridge in an email to The Hill Times, said Mr. Fournier will not run.

“Mr. Fournier does not intend to be a candidate,” wrote Mr. Thé-berge, vice-president public affairs

and media relations, in the email.“He considers his role at Ivanhoé

Cambridge to be a privilege and a great responsibility. He wants to continue working on Ivanhoé Cam-bridge’s global growth. This requires all of his energy, focus, and attention, seven days a week.”

But Conservative sources con-firmed to The Hill Times last week that Mr. Fournier is considering running for the leadership.

No stranger to politics, Mr. Fournier ran unsuccessfully as the Conservative candidate in the 2006 federal election in the Mon-treal area riding of Outremont. He came in fourth place behind the Liberal, Bloc Québécois, and New Democratic Party candi-dates. But Mr. Fournier is said to be interested in public service. Back in 2006, he talked about the direction of the party with a number of Conservatives, includ-ing Peter Laugheed, John Tory, Preston Manning, Tony Clem-ent, Pat Binns, and Jim Dinning, according to his Wikipedia page. A social liberal, Mr. Fournier initially joined the Liberal Party, but later joined the Conservative Party for its fiscal policies.

The riding of Outremont has historically been a strong Liberal riding since its creation in mid-1930s. Until the 2007 byelection which was triggered by the resig-nation of former Liberal MP Jean Lapierre, the riding had always elected Liberal candidates. The only exception until that time was the 1988 general election when Progressive Conservative candi-date Jean-Pierre Hogue won the riding. Since the 2007 byelection, the riding has been represented by the NDP leader Thomas Mulcair.

Around 16 Conservatives are known to be interested in seeking the party leadership or have official-ly entered the contest. Of those, 10 are registered candidates includ-ing Conservative MPs Michael Chong (Wellington-Halton Hills, Ont.), Kellie Leitch (Simcoe-Grey, Ont.), Maxime Bernier (Beauce, Que.), Deepak Obhrai (Calgary Forest Lawn, Ont.), Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.), Steven Blaney (Bellechasse -Les Etche-mins -Lévis, Que.), Brad Trost (Saskatoon-University, Sask.), Erin O’Toole (Durham, Ont.) and Lisa Raitt (Milton, Ont.). Former Conser-vative MP Chris Alexander is also a registered candidate. Six potential candidates, as of deadline last week, had declared their intention to run but had not officially entered the race, including former Conserva-tive MP Pierre Lemieux, Manitoba physician Dan Lindsay, former Conservative MP Andrew Saxton, vancouver venture capitalist Rick Peterson and Toronto communica-tions consultant Adrienne Snow.

Businessman and Tv personal-ity Kevin O’Leary has also pub-licly mused about the possibility of seeking the Conservative Party leadership but as of last week had not registered with the party, however, he told The Hill Times in this week’s issue that he will decide by the end of the year.

The Conservative Party has organized five leadership debates between November and April 2017 with the first English debate to take place in Saskatoon on Nov. 9. The second will be a bilingual debate and will be held in Moncton, N.B., on Dec. 6. Dates and locations of the remaining three debates were not known by deadline.

The spending limit for the Conservative Party contest that started on March 8 is $5-mil-lion. Considering the fundraising numbers so far, it appears highly unlikely any of the candidates already in the race will be able to raise $5-million.

According to Elections Canada, Kellie Leitch is leading the pack in raising funds for the leadership in the first two quar-ters since the start of the race. By Sept. 30, she had raised a total of $450,421, followed by Mr. Bernier who had raised $427,508. Mr. Chong raised $208,913 and Mr. Obhrai raised $1,100.

Elections Canada did not have any fundraising numbers for Mr. Scheer, Mr. Trost, Mr. O’Toole, Mr. Blaney, Mr. Saxton and Mr. Alex-ander, who either officially entered the race after Sept. 30, or were not approved by the party as official candidates by the end of September.

For the May 27, 2017, Conser-vative Party leadership contest, each candidate is required to pay $100,000 to the party—$50,000 for registration and a $50,000 compliance deposit. Candidates can register with the party until Feb. 24 if they want to take part in the leadership election. For the contest, each electoral district as-sociation has 100 points and the voting will take place using the preferential ballot system.

The Conservative source told The Hill Times that Mr. Fournier knew prior to deciding to run in the 2006 election that he wouldn’t win in the strong Liberal riding, but wanted to give the then-newly merged Conservative Party credi-bility by running. The 2006 federal election was the second after the Progressive Conservative and Ca-nadian Alliance Parties merged in late 2003. In the 2004 federal elec-tion, the Conservative Party won 99 seats nationally, but did not win any of the 75 seats in Quebec. In the 2006 election, Conserva-tives won a minority government with 124 seats nationally includ-ing 10 in Quebec.

When the Conservatives, under Stephen Harper, formed government in 2006, Mr. Fournier was offered a Senate position as the first step to include him in Cabinet. But he declined the offer and Mr. Harper appointed Michael Fortier to the Senate and also to his Cabinet.

Keith Beardsley, former deputy chief of staff in Mr. Harper’s PMO, told The Hill Times last week that one key obstacle to Mr. Fournier’s potential candidacy would be the lack of name recog-nition. He said most of the other candidates, especially incumbent MPs, are well-known politi-cal figures to the Conservative Party base that is going to select the next party leader. Also, Mr. Beardsley pointed out that if the Montreal businessman decided to run, he would be a late entrant in the race compared to early entrants such as Mr. Bernier, Mr. Chong and Ms. Leitch who have already laid down the organiza-tional foundation of their cam-paigns and have already signed up thousands of new members.

“A lot of this is going to be name recognition,” said Mr. Beardsley. “People know Andrew Scheer, they know Lisa Raitt, Erin O’Toole. They know those names because they’ve seen them, they’ve seen them perform. When you’re an outsider, you’re coming in [at a] big disadvantage.”

Mr. Beardsley said should Mr. Fournier enter the race, leader-ship candidates will most likely attack him for being one of the “elites” because of his business background and studying in high-profile universities.

“They’re going to say he’s one of the elites. I could see their talk points coming up right now,” said Mr. Beardsley.

Conservative MPs said they’re not concerned about Mr. Fourni-er’s potential candidacy.

“Anyone who wishes to run, I encourage to run,” said Conserva-tive MP Tom Lukiwski (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre-Lanigan, Sask.) who is supporting Mr. Scheer. “I like to hear different perspectives, I like to hear different viewpoints. It’s healthy for the party,”

Conservative MP Alex Nuttall (Barrie-Springwater-Oro-Medonte, Ont.), membership chairman of Mr. Bernier’s campaign, also expressed similar views regarding Mr. Fournier’s potential candidacy. He said no matter who enters or exits the race, Mr. Ber-nier’s message will remain the same.

“Maxime’s message been very clear from the beginning, which is, ‘We believe Canadians deserve more opportunities and we’re going to continue talking about that across the country,’ ” said Mr. Nuttall.

Last month, several Conserva-tive MPs told The Hill Times that, considering the crowded field of candidates, no one is likely to win on the first ballot and that one of the toughest challenges of the campaign is raising funds.

Last week, Conservative MP Peter Kent (Thornhill, Ont.), who is supporting Mr. Chong, said he expects some candidates to drop out of the race in the coming weeks because of failing to connect with the Conservative Party members on policy issues and also for failing to raise enough funds to keep the leadership campaign going.

“[The number of candidates] will whittle down quite quickly,” said Mr. Kent. “Once the debates begin, once the policy positions are taken, we’re going to see some very clear and dif-ferent policy positions taken. And as they’re taken, the profile of those indi-viduals will either rise or diminish.”

The Hill Times

Montreal businessman Fournier, who manages assets of $55-billion for his company, considering run at Tory leadership Daniel Fournier will have an advantage over other leadership candidates in raising funds because of his business connections, say Conservatives.

Continued from page 1

Daniel Fournier, pictured at the Canadian Club on Sept. 21, 2015, is said to be mulling over running for the Conservative leadership, although his office said he is not running. Photograph courtesy of Muntchak, Wikipedia

Conservatives, pictured top left and left to right: Kellie Leitch, Maxime Bernier, Michael Chong, Deepak Obhrai, Andrew Scheer, Brad Trost, Pierre Lemieux, Steve Blaney, Lisa Raitt, Erin O’Toole, Kevin O’Leary, Andrew Saxton and Chris Alexander are running for the Conservative Party leadership. Dan Lindsay, and Rick Peterson, not pictured, are also said to be interested.

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201618news Phoenix Pay system

Late last week, one union source, who agreed to speak on the condition of anonymity, told The Hill Times there was specula-tion that the Treasury Board Sec-retariat was “about to give each of the departments the ability to process their own pay again.”

As of deadline this had not been announced and Treasury Board Pres-ident Scott Brison’s (Kings-Hants, N.S.) office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“Probably there was mount-ing frustration not just going to the Treasury Board on the union’s behalf but I expect the departments were probably voicing their dis-pleasure in their unique way that they can to the Treasury Board,” the source said of why the department could be considering this.

The source said if true, the unions would be “overjoyed,” but also “stunned” by the possibility.

“Maybe they’ve come to the realization that this program that they had worked out… was as deeply flawed as we’ve been say-ing all along,” the source said.

PIPSC and PSAC could not confirm the speculation.

Meanwhile, earlier last week and in effort to fix the problem, according to a departmental source not authorized to speak on the record, the Department of National Defence has hired 12 pay advisers,

with six permanent positions, and six contract workers.

Chris Aylward, national execu-tive vice-president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), said that department “has a bulk of the concerns.”

In the lead-up to Phoenix’s launch, the government laid off “over half of the compensation advisers,” Public Services and Procurement Minister Judy Foote (Bonavista-Bu-rin-Trinity, N.L.) told reporters in the House of Commons foyer on Oct. 31.

Ms. Foote said those job cuts, made by the previous Conservative government, contributed to the pay system issues. The Phoenix system was projected to save the govern-ment $67.2-million a year. However, the government is already expect-ing to pay $50-million to resolve the fallout of the problem-plagued system, and says that total is ex-pected to increase once the cost for compensation is included.

“If the decision had been made not to go for savings initially, the $70-million annually, and if in fact the human resources person-nel had been left there until the vision was actually achieved, I think we’d be seeing a different situation today,” Ms. Foote said.

These new staffers do not have direct access to the Phoenix pay system and are acting as go-be-tweens for departmental staff and the staff in the Miramichi, N.B. pay centre who are handling the backlog of pay cases.

These hired experts are considered internal are being hired at the departments’ expens-es, sources indicated.

Having them aboard has no-ticeably expedited cases, one per-son said, because they are able to clearly understand the nuance of the department’s work environ-ments and funnel that to the pay staff handling the cases.

Debi Daviau, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC), said she’s also heard of “a number” of departments, including Health Canada and the Treasury Board, bringing back pay experts formerly working within the departments that were part of the layoffs going into Phoenix. They are helping to handle what can be nuanced, complicated cases that employees might have previously had to call into the pay centre and speak with multiple advi-sors to resolve. She said not having experts on specific departmental

requirements all along might have compounded the backlog.

She said it’s likely the senior leadership in these departments, like the deputy ministers, would have made the calls to bring in additional help.

To deal with the cases, that reached 82,000 by the summer, the department hired about 200 additional pay centre employees at temporary pay centres in Gatineau, Que., Montreal, Winnipeg, and Shawinigan, Que. The govern-ment was hoping many of these hires would be past departmental pay advisers. It is not clear if they are working on department-specif-ic cases based on past experience.

Mr. Aylward said he’s heard additional staff have been added in pay centres in Halifax and vancouver as well.

While Phoenix covers some 300,000 employees, there are still a number of factions in the public service that are not using Phoenix, which continue to use their own pay advisers and individual pay systems, including the Canadian Forces and the Canada Border Service Agency.

Ms. Daviau argued that if departments under Phoenix are go-ing back to the old model of having their own internal experts help the pay process through, it throws into question whether the new central-

ized model is the way to continue going. She said the government needs to “rethink” the structure.

During last week’s briefing on the state of the pay problems, Pub-lic Services deputy minister Marie Lemay told reporters that until the pay backlog—82 per cent of which predates Phoenix—is cleared, that’ll be the focus of a “dedicated team of compensation advisers” at the headquarters in Miramichi.

For now, the department says it will keep on all the additional pay advisers it’s hired until “steady state” is reached, and according to Ms. Lemay: “If we see that we need more compensation advisers, we said that we would have to keep some.”

Ms. Foote said she’s not ruling out adding more permanent pay positions and that the plan the de-partment is currently working on, which is expected in a few weeks, will lay out the department’s intention going forward.

As well, Ms. Lemay said she had communicated to departments that “it was very important” all managers responsible for inputting employee pay information into Phoenix com-plete the online training, but neither she nor the minister could say how many managers had done it.

“We’re going to make sure that everybody that needs sufficient training will get it. So we’re going to

work hard at that. ... But again, the first priority for us is to deal with the backlog of cases,” said Ms. Foote.

Compounding the frustra-tion public servants are feeling over the prolonging of these pay problems, especially as tax sea-son approaches, unions are also worried that the issue could be much bigger than the department is letting on, as the department is still unable to say how many new cases have come in since July.

Ms. Daviau said the number of cases seems lower than what she would expect, based on knowing that just one-third of the formal cases PIPSC is tracking have been resolved.

“It seems unclear to me that they actually have a good handle on the numbers. Either they’re playing a little bit of hide-and-seek with the numbers, or maybe things are just changing so quickly they’re having trouble tracking them, I don’t know, but the numbers seem awry.”

Auditor General Michael Fergu-son, meanwhile, last week noted the Phoenix pay system’s “unacceptable” delays and errors and said he will be conducting a major investigation into the project, which is expected to be released in 2018, The Ottawa Citizen reported.

raiello@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

Phoenix, we have a problem: feds bring in pay experts to deal with ongoing public service pay fiasco Phoenix was pro-jected to save the feds $67.2-million a year. Now the gov-ernment’s expected to pay $50-mil-lion just to fix the problem-plagued new government pay system, and 22,000 cases are still unresolved, down from 82,000. There’s speculation the feds could now let de-partments pull out of Phoenix.

Continued from page 1

Trouble in Ottawa: Public service unions protested outside the Prime Minister’s Office on Oct. 31, top, holding a sign that said, ‘Haunted by Phoenix,’ and in French, ‘Hantés par Phénix’; PSAC president Robyn Benson and PSAC’s Larry Rousseau, middle left photo; PIPSC’s Debi Daviau, middle right photo; PSAC’s national executive vice-president Chris Aylward, above left; public service union protesters; and PCAC’s Larry Rousseau, above right. The Hill Times Photo by Andrew Meade

Dr. Grenville Goodwin Optometrist

171 Sparks Street613-235-6550DR4EYES.CA

DR4EYES@LIVE.CAMon-Fri: 9-5:30

OVER 100 YEARS OF SERVICE

Directly across from the CBC on the beautiful Sparks Street Mall

EST. 1896

Designer Eyeglasses — Contact Lenses — On-Site Lab Digital measurements

Comprehensive Eye Exams & Photography - Retinal & CornealSparks Street Optometry

20-1620 Scott Street Ottawa, Ontario K1Y 4S7

613.728.1511 info@hollandcrossdental.com

hollandcrossdental.com

CARING DENTISTSOne Exacting Standard of Treatment

HOLLAND CROSS DENTAL CENTRE

Untitled-1 1 15-05-25 9:34 PM

Josh EykingSales Representative

RE/MAX Hallmark Realty Group

josh@eykingofhomes.comeykingofhomes.com

O. 613-236-5959

F. 613-369-5989

C. 613-889-3457610 Bronson Avenue

Ottawa, ON K1S 4E6

Josh of Eykingofhomes will help make the

most of your Selling/Buying experience.

#1 Individual Sales Representative at REMAX Hallmark

Realty Group 2015

Specializing in the Capital Region for all your Real Estate needs.

Josh EykingSALES REPRESENTATIVERE/MAX HALLMARK REALTY GROUP

josh@eykingofhomes.comeykingofhomes.com

C. 613-889-3457O. 613-236-5959610 BRONSON AVENUEOTTAWA, ON. K1S 4E6

Have space for an offi ce Christmas Party? Have original, unique items that should be on everyone’s Christmas List? Advertise your message on the HT Professionals page. Special rates available November and December.

Mortgage Rates so low, we’ll

have you dancing

With 35 different lenders we’ll get you the best

mortgage possible

With 35 different lenders we’ll get you the best

mortgage possible

Mortgage Rates so low, we’ll

have you dancing

Contact us:Phone: 613-228-3888Toll Free: 1-877-459-4414Fax: 613-228-2555 (Ottawa)

info@capitalmortgages.com

PERMANENT RESIDENCY

IMMIGRATION APPEALS

BUSINESS IMMIGRATION

REFUGEE CLAIMS

FIGHTING REMOVALS

www.4segallaw.com - 613-567-4529 - info@4segallaw.com

Mullowney’s Law | Ottawa Law Firm | Ottawa Lawyersmullowney.com — (613) 670-5736

Practice areas include:• Contract Disputes• Estate Litigation• Malpractice• Insurance Recovery• Damage To Property• Real Estate Litigation• Defamation• Libel & Slander

1-855-695-9250 • 613-695-9250 • WWW.WILSONTEAM.CA

WELCOME TO

THE WILSON TEAM THE TOP 1% IN CANADAWe are The Wilson Team of Mortgage Professionals serving the needs of homeowners in Ottawa and surrounding areas. As part of Invis – one of Canada’s largest mortgage brokerage firms, we can assist with purchases for resale and hew home builders, self employed, renewals, refinances and home equity, investment properties, debt consolidation, rent-to-own, variable rate vs fixed rate, cash back, new to Canada and the list of products continues.

Wealth management and fi nancial planning for private clients

An evidence-based approach to investing using broad-market, geographically diversifi ed securities

Polaris Wealth is an independent discretionary wealth management and fi nancial planning fi rm offering fee-based investment management and fi nancial planning services.

We manage client portfolios on a discretionary platform using exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and investment products provided by Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA) Canada.

We are passionate about delivering quality service.We are a large fi rm with a small fi rm feel.

Adding value to both you and your business is integral to everything we do

No business is alike. We’ll get to know your business, your business goals and we’ll do everything we can to make them a reality.

Everyone wants to pay less tax, and so do we. We ensure you don’t pay more tax than you need to

We help you to improve efficiency, save time, save money. We help you build your wealth and plan strategically for future.

DO YOU WANT PEACE OF MIND? GETTING IT RIGHT FIRST TIME. EVERY TIME.We are not just accountants, we are problem solvers.

ABASCUSCA.CA • 613-244-5103

A Showcase for Ottawa’s Professional Services * Please contact Anne-Marie 613-288-1143 * amdesouza@hilltimes.com? Have original, unique items that should be on

? Advertise your message on the HT Professionals page.

Contact: Chris Peixoto, Advertising Marketing Directorcpeixoto@hilltimes.com 613-688-8822

A Showcase for Ottawa’s Professional Services * Please contact Chris * cpeixoto@hilltimes.com * 613-688-8822

MALEN FRAMING

1430 Prince of Wales Drive 613-224-0515www.malenframing.com

Ottawa’s Premier Framer

38 years of framing experienceat your service

Art makes a great present

“The lapse that we have seen this year is much larger than the government had expected and we had expected. … Part of it could be explained by the fact that this was an election year and sort of an unusual year for the depart-ment in terms of how they’re go-ing to approach their programs,” said assistant parliamentary budget officer Mostafa Askari.

He said other possible reasons could be programs being slow to start or issues with hiring, among other things.

Although the lapse helps pay down the debt, Mr. Askari said it’s a negative in the sense that “there were programs that needed this money and there were objectives that the government had for those programs to achieve.”

He said it’s something the PBO will likely examine in its next report on spending.

Ms. Askari said some level of lapse is always expected, as de-partments can’t surpass approved budgets. Previously, the govern-ment had projected a $6-billion lapse for 2015-16.

In 2012-13, the government reached a lapse high of $11.3-bil-lion, but of that, $1.2-billion was intentionally frozen as part of austerity measures and left on the table. Because of that, an $11.2-billion lapse in 2010-11 is considered the highest.

As reported by The National Post, NDP MP Charlie Angus (Tim-mins-James Bay, Ont.) has criticized the roughly $900-million left un-spent by Indigenous and Northern

Affairs Canada, given the urgent need for things like new schools and drinking water systems.

At $294.6-billion overall, total federal expenses increased by $16-billion over the 2014-15 fiscal year, or 5.7 per cent—of which $270.8-billion were program expenses and about $25.6-billion were public debt charges.

Within this overall figure, total transfer payments reached $183.6-billion, a 5.1 per cent increase.

Excluding transfer payments, other program expenses for federal government ministries totalled $78.9-billion, a 10.2 per cent in-crease over 2014-15, while Crown corporations totalled $8.4-billion (a 10.1 per cent increase).

On Oct. 25, the 2016 public accounts were published, detail-ing the federal government’s expenses, revenues, and other financial transactions from April 1, 2015, to March 31, 2016, the first seven months of which were under the previous Conservative government, with the last five un-der the Liberals.

The accumulated deficit (the difference between the govern-ment’s total assets and total liabilities) at the end of 2015-16 was almost $616-billion, up about $3.7-billion from the year before. There was a budgetary deficit of almost $1-billion for the 2015-16 fiscal year, compared to a $1.9-billion surplus in the year prior. Net debt for the federal government was $693.8-billion as of March 31, 2016, up $6.8-bil-lion from 2014-15. Canada’s net debt-to-GDP ratio was 26.7 per cent, the lowest among the G7 countries, according to the Inter-national Monetary Fund (IMF).

Public debt charges in 2015-16 decreased by $1-billion, or 3.8 per cent, thanks to a lower average effective interest rate on interest-bearing debt. However, interest-bearing debt increased from 45.6 per cent to 47 per cent of GDP, or $931.7-billion, in 2015-16. Of that, $688.2-billion was unmatured debt, with foreign holdings mak-ing up roughly $198.8-billion of

unmatured debt—a $25.9-billion increase over last year.

While revenues increased by $13.1-billion, or 4.6 per cent, over last year—largely thanks to a growth in income tax and other tax revenues—program expenses also increased by $17-billion, or 6.7 per cent, due to things such as bigger transfer payments to provinces.

In terms of overall expenses, the top five highest ministries, in order, were: Finance at $90.2-billion; Families, Children and Social De-velopment at $81.7-billion; National Defence at $28.7-billion; National Revenue at $22.2-billion; and Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness at roughly $11-billion.

The bottom five ministries, in order, were: the office of the Gover-nor General’s Secretary at $21-mil-lion; Parliament at $571-million; Privy Council at $671-million; veterans Affairs at $929-million; and Transport at $1.47-billion.

Meanwhile, Agriculture and Agri-Food totalled roughly $2-billion; Canadian Heritage

sat at $1.5-billion; Environment and Climate Change at $1.6-bil-lion; Fisheries and Oceans at $1.6-billion; Global Affairs at $6.2-billion; Health at $6.3-bil-lion; Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship at $2.2-billion; Indigenous and Northern Affairs at $9.2-billion; Infrastructure and Communities at $3.1-billion; Innovation, Science and Eco-nomic Development at $4-billion; Justice at $1.6-billion; Natural Resources at $1.5-billion; Public Services and Procurement at $4.3-billion; and the Treasury Board at $4.2-billion.

Ministry expenses were higher than projected in the 2015 federal budget, by $5.14-billion, largely due to higher “pension and other future benefit costs, reflecting financial support for veterans announced in Budget 2016,” as explained in the Public Accounts.

More minutely, it cost roughly $45.9-million in 2015-16 to run the offices of federal government ministers, including the Prime Minister’s Office.

Foreign aid totalled $4.1-bil-lion, or 11.8 per cent of the $34.8-billion in “other transfer payments” in 2015-16.

Environmental liabilities in-creased by $1-billion in 2015-16 to reach $13.3-billion, with roughly half related to remediation liabili-ties for contaminated sites and $272-million related to unexplod-ed explosive ordinance affected sites, among other things.

Remediation liabilities for 6,739 contaminated sites were estimated to cost about $6.3-billion—while at another 1,200 sites, no liabilities for remediation were “recognized.”

Among the different sites with estimated liabilities, the top three increases in site numbers were: marine facilities and aquatic sites, at 3,294 in 2016 up from 819; “other” sources, such as those related to use of pesticides, PCBs, and other contaminants, at 900 sites up from 216; and fuel related practices, like accidental spills, at 1,203 up from 645.

20 THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

news government sPending

public accounts

Feds spent $296.4-billion last year, left more than $12-billion unspent, election cited as possible reason The PBO says it will likely examine last year’s lapse because it means there may be objectives the government had not met.

Continued from page 1

Treasury Board President Scott Brison pictured in this file photo with Transport Minister Marc Garneau. The Treasury Board tabled the 2015-16 public accounts, which detail all federal finances, late last month. The Hill Times Photograph by Jake Wright

Continued on page 21

21THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

news government sPending

public accounts

Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s economic statement on Tuesday promised action on

the government’s commitment to ensure the independence of Statistics Canada. Companion documents to the statement provided some insight into the government’s specific intentions. While we will need to see the final legislation, to be sure, it is interesting, nonetheless, to measure these intentions against international recom-mendations and stakeholder expectations.

The first stated intention is to modify the legislation to give the chief statistician—rather than, as at present, the minister—authority over “decisions on statistical methodology and the production and release of official statistics.” This leaves the minister with authority over what statistics are produced, continuing the present practice of providing this authority to the minister who then delegates it to the chief statistician. This proposal is in line with guidelines from the United Nations and the OECD, and with the best practices of other developed countries. The document is silent on what happens when the minister and the chief statistician disagree on either the “how” or the “what” of official statistics. We’ll have to wait for the legislation to see how this is handled. Still, a thumb’s up for this intention.

The second stated intention is that the “appointment of the chief statistician will be to fixed five-year terms based on merit, with the chief statistician only removable for cause, not at the pleasure of the government.” The fixed term and appointment “on good behaviour” provide the chief statistician with greater job security allowing him or her to deal confidently with any attempt to intrude on Statistics Canada independence or to im-pose measures that would damage the statis-tical system. This is in line with international best practice. Again thumb’s up.

The stated intention with regard to appointment based on “merit” needs to be fleshed out more. Ideally, merit should require demonstrated expertise in official statistics and management of large organiza-tions and should be assessed by a process involving major stakeholders in the national statistical system. The direction being taken

is appropriate, but the details are insufficient to conclude whether international best prac-tice is being met or surpassed.

The final stated intention is to create a “Ca-nadian Statistics Advisory Council to reinforce independence, relevance and transparency in the national statistical system.” There clearly needs to be greater accountability of Statistics Canada before Canadians and Parliament in counter-balance to the agency’s greater independence. We need to know more about to whom the council reports and its role. In itself it is also not sufficient. As a balance to its greater independence, Statistics Canada must be required to operate with a high degree of transparence in all things.

What’s missing from the government’s intentions?

First, and rather surprisingly, is the absence any stated intention to protect the census of population from an intervention like that of the previous government in 2011. Under the current Statistics Act, even after the above changes, nothing would prevent a future gov-ernment from either truncating a future census to a simple head count, or compelling Statistics Canada to conduct the census on a voluntary basis. Since this was the reason for the current government becoming interested in the issue of Statistics Canada’s independence, it would be an inexplicable omission if omitted from the ultimate legislation.

Second, while the first stated intention purports to give the chief statistician author-ity over “statistical methodology, production and release of official statistics,” the docu-ment fails to explain how this can be recon-ciled with the effective veto in the hands of Shared Services Canada over any method-ological, production or dissemination deci-sions that require modification to informatics infrastructure. This intrusion on the indepen-dence of Statistics Canada was the reason for my resignation as chief statistician.

Finally, Statistics Canada and stakeholders in the national statistical system have argued that, given the Statistics Act will need to be amended, the government should take the op-portunity to modernize the legislation, increas-ing access to the agency’s information holdings and infrastructure to support broader and deeper public policy, historical and genealogi-cal research, as well as making the legislation clearer and more communicative about its intent. Given the heavy traffic on the govern-ment’s legislative agenda, it these issues are not dealt with at the same time as independence, it is likely they never will be in this Parliament. If the government proposes to deal with modern-ization in a second round of amendments, it will be important that there be a corresponding commitment to a specific timeframe.

Overall, the government’s stated intentions regarding the Statistics Act would seem to be a substantial improvement over the existing situation and would bring Canada in line with international recommendations and best prac-tices. With a little more vision and effort around the themes of independence and modernization, the government could provide Statistics Canada with a world-leading legislative framework to support what is already recognized as world-leading national statistical office.

Wayne R. Smith is the former chief stat-istician of Canada.

The Hill Times

Government’s proposals on the independence of Statistics Canada, are they enough? With a little more vision and effort around the themes of independence and modernization, the government could provide Statistics Canada with a world-leading legislative framework to support what is already recognized as world-leading national statistical office.

WayNE R. SMITH

2016 PubliC aCCounts

ministerial offiCe exPenditures, 2015-2016

With the new Liberal government sworn-in on Nov. 4, 2015, the first seven months of the 2016 Public Accounts fall under the Conservatives, with the last five months under the Liberals.

In all, it cost $45.9-million to run the offices of government ministers in 2015-16, including more than $7-million for the Prime Minister’s Office. Looking at the Liberal government, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s (Papineau,

Que.) office spent the most at $2.5-million, followed by Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s (Toronto Centre, Ont.) office at $727,844, while Science Minister Kirsty Duncan’s (Etobicoke North, Ont.) office spent the least at $148,545.

Below is a breakdown of ministerial office spending, divided by department and by minister. For the Prime Minister’s Office expenses, only some of the cost categories have been listed, along with the total.

Prime minister’s Office: $7,161,974 Personnel transport & comms Professional Utilities, materials total & special services & suppliesLiberal PM $2,264,504 $199,113 $35,655 $30,819 $2,532,184Justin Trudeau Conservative PM $4,088,684 $251,066 $236,526 $46,356 $4,629,790Stephen Harper

Agriculture: $1,328,635Liberal Minister Lawrence MacAulay, $188,707Conservative minister Gerry Ritz, $1,119,174Conservative minister of state Maxime Bernier, $40,754

canadian Heritage: $1,788,434Liberal Minister Mélanie Joly, $419,699Conservative minister Shelly Glover, $946,275Liberal Minister of Sport and Persons with DisabilitiesCarla Qualtrough, $156,364Conservative minister of state for Sport Bal Gosal, $266,096

status of Women: $402,228Liberal Minister Patty Hajdu, $200,123Conservative minister Kellie Leitch, $202,105

environment & climate change: $1,715,729Liberal Minister Catherine McKenna, $643,526Conservative minister Leona Aglukkaq, $1,072,203

families, children and social: $2,793,003Liberal Families Minister Jean-Yves Duclos, $332,167Conservative employment and social development minister Pierre Poilievre, $920,360Liberal Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and LabourMaryAnn Mihychuk, $284,827Conservative labour minister Kellie Leitch, $537,973Liberal Minister of Sports and Disabilities Carla Qualtrough, $59,571Conservative minister of state for Seniors Alice Wong, $318,074Conservative minister of state for social development Candice Bergen, $340,031

finance: $2,323,433Liberal Finance Minister Bill Morneau, $727,844Conservative finance minister Joe Oliver, $1,264,598Conservative minister of state for finance Kevin Sorenson, $330,991

fisheries, Oceans and canadian coast Guard: $1,165,681Liberal fisheries minister Hunter Tootoo, $284,503Conservative fisheries minister Gail Shea, $881,178

Global Affairs: $3,923,564Liberal Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion, $509,200Conservative foreign affairs minister Rob Nicholson, $1,125,263Liberal Minister for International Development & La FrancophonieMarie-Claude Bibeau, $181,530Conservative minister for international development & La Francophonie Christian Paradis, $623,865Liberal Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland, $222,156Conservative trade minister Ed Fast, $927,668Conservative minister of state for foreign affairs Lynne Yelich, $333,879

Health: $1,327,646Liberal Health Minister Jane Philpott, $368,767Conservative health minister Rona Ambrose, $958,876

immigration, refugees & citizenship: $1,670,994Liberal Immigration Minister John McCallum, $468,864Conservative citizenship and immigration minister Chris Alexander, $904,344Conservative minister of state for multiculturalism Tim Uppal, $297,786

indigenous & northern Affairs: $1,208,700Liberal Indigenous Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett, $326,214Conservative aboriginal affairs minister Bernard Valcourt, $882,486

infrastructure & communities: $1,125,818Liberal Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi, $484,333

Conservative infrastructure minister Denis Lebel, $641,485Innovation, Science & Economic Development: $4,384,928Liberal Innovation, Science & Economic Development Minister Navdeep Bains (combing all economic development agencies), $304,400Conservative industry minister James Moore, $1,061,523Liberal Science Minister Kirsty Duncan, $148,545Conservative minister for federal economic development initiative forNorthern Ontario Greg Rickford, $44,409Liberal Small Business and Tourism Minister Bardish Chagger, $237,342Conservative minister of state for science and technology Ed Holder $390,235Conservative minister of state for small business and tourism Maxime Bernier, $274,522Conservative minister of state for ACOA Rob Moore $678,268Conservative minister for the northern economic development agency Leona Aglukkaq, $104,593Conservative minister for economic development agency of Canada for theregions of Quebec Denis Lebel, $523,496Conservative minister of state for federal economic development agency for southern Ontario Gary Goodyear, $257,338Conservative minister of state for western economic diversification MichelleRempel, $360,257

Justice: $1,868,192Liberal Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, $447,264Conservative justice minister Peter MacKay, $1,420,928

national Defence: $2,081,005Liberal Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, $428,801Conservative defence minister Jason Kenney, $1,308,637Liberal Associate Defence Minister Kent Hehr, $2,416Conservative associate defence minister Julian Fantino $341,151

national revenue: $926,609Liberal National Revenue Minister Diane Lebouthillier, $241,007Conservative national revenue minister Kerry-Lynne Findlay, $685,602

natural resources: $1,186,063Liberal Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr, $263,140Conservative natural resources minister Greg Rickford, $922,923

Privy council (excluding the PmO): $1,533,146Liberal Government House Leader Dominic LeBlanc, $250,178Conservative government house leader Peter Van Loan $556,128Liberal Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef, $196,639Conservative democratic reform minister Pierre Poilievre, $18,788Conservative intergovernmental affairs minister Denis Lebel, $425,956Conservative minister of state and government whip John Duncan, $85,457

Public safety & emergency Preparedness: $1,382,263Liberal Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, $361,069Conservative public safety minister Steven Blaney, $1,021,194Public Services and Procurement: $1,365,917Liberal Public Services Minister Judy Foote, $355,690Conservative public works minister Diane Finley, $1,010,227

transport: $989,929Liberal Transport Minister Marc Garneau, $310,813Conservative transport minister Lisa Raitt, $679,116

treasury Board: $1,073,127Liberal Treasury Board President Scott Brison, $263,109Conservative treasury board president Tony Clement, $679,116

Veterans Affairs: $1,143,765Liberal Veterans Affairs Minister Kent Hehr, $292,565Conservative veteran affairs minister Erin O’Toole, $851,200—Compiled by Laura Ryckewaert

Indigenous Affairs and Northern Development Canada paid out the most for environmental liabilities, at $3.8-bil-lion, with Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. the highest among Crown corporations at roughly $1.1-billion.

Among the payment of claims against the Crown, which totalled $771.3-million overall, the department of Indigenous Affairs and Northern Development paid out the most at $551.5-million. That includes $221.6-million to various law firms for settlement of abuse claims (with names withheld), $255.5-million to Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. related to com-

pensation for the implantation of the Nuna-vut Land Claims Agreement, and $64.5-mil-lion to the Listuguj Mi’gmaq Government related to compensation for historical land transactions.

Also of interest among the claims was $15.3-million awarded to the Exxon Mobil Corp. and $3.7-million to the Murphy Oil Corp. by Natural Resources Canada pursu-ant to a dispute under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), as well as $75-million paid by Transport Canada for a compensation fund related to Lac-Mégan-tic, among others.

lryckewaert@hilltimes.com The Hill Times

Continued from page 20

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201622news legislation bill C-22

By RAcheL AieLLo

The government’s bill propos-ing the establishment of a new National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians needs to be amended to give its members more access to information and lessen the prime minister’s ability to interfere, Par-liamentarians heard last week.

The proposed committee under Bill C-22 is mandated to review activities carried out by any department that relates to na-tional security or intelligence and report annually on its reviews and findings. Unlike other par-liamentary committees, this one would report directly to the prime minister, members would require a security clearance, and all meet-ings would be held in private.

In addition, the chair—who the PMO announced in January to be Liberal MP David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Ont.)—would re-ceive a $42,000 “additional annual allowance” and the up to eight

members will be paid an extra $11,900, which is the going rate for chairs of House of Commons committees.

As it’s drafted, the new com-mittee would have less teeth than other federal security expert bodies, have a narrower scope of access to information, and the prime minister would be able to veto studies or redact the com-mittee’s reports at his discretion if there’s something judged to be potentially jeopardizing na-tional security.

During the first two days dedicated to Bill C-22 at the House Public Safety and National Secu-rity Committee, members heard from Public Safety and National Security Minister Ralph Goodale (Regina-Wascana, Sask.), Gov-ernment House Leader Bardish Chagger (Waterloo, Ont.); their top advisers; as the heads of Canada’s security agencies, the RCMP, CSIS, CBSA, and CSE; and top experts and past watchdogs.

Questions that came up the most were on sections of the bill dealing with the committee’s access to in-formation, what they’d be automati-cally denied, and the powers of the prime minister to override the com-mittee’s work, specifically sections eight, 14, and 16.

“It is this triple-lock [sections eight, 14, 16] on parliamentary reviews that I fear could well make the committee of Parliamentar-ians stumble. … C-22 opts for a model that treats Parliamentarians as less trustworthy than the often former politicians who sit on SIRC [the Security Intelligence Review Committee] or the judges who hear security cases, ” Craig Forcese, a

University of Ottawa law professor, told the committee on Nov. 3.

“Unless the committee can access information, allowing it to follow trails, it will give the ap-pearance of accountability with-out the substance. On this point unfortunately, if it’s enacted in its present form, the proposed C-22 committee would not be as robust a reviewer as are the existing expert bodies,” Mr. Forcese said.

On the powers of the prime minister to redact reports in Sec-tion 21, a number of witnesses suggested it be put into the law that he or she would have to explain in-camera to the committee, or to a Federal Court dispute settlement if the committee finds the reason for seeking to redact the committee’s reports unfounded.

Liberal MP Rob Oliphant (Don valley West, Ont.), who chairs the House Public Safety Committee, revealed during a meeting Nov. 1 that the prime minister, in being allowed redact a report, could also seek advice from other top advisers, including the heads of Canada’s security agencies, on what could be ruled worthy of exclusion on the basis of national security. Mr. Oliphant said he’d like to have more clarity on this.

“It has nothing to do with this current prime minister … but when we name a person and we’re talking top-level security clearance, I’d like to know how far that ex-tends. I’d like to know is that Privy Council officers? Is that political staff? Is that policy staff? Who is exactly included when we refer to the prime minister because we’re dealing with very confidential in-formation,” he said in an interview.

Mr. Oliphant told witnesses asking for amendments on Thurs-day not to underestimate the committee’s ability improve the legislation. “I think there’s prob-ably some massaging that’s going to get done,” Mr. Oliphant told The Hill Times.

Overall, from the experts heard so far, Bill C-22 is a wel-come change and brings Canada into the company of countries in-cluding Australia and the United Kingdom that have similar bod-ies already.

However, as national security expert and past CBSA advisory board member Wesley Wark told the committee on Nov. 3: “Bill C-22 has to find what I would call a ‘sweet spot’ between com-mittee access to secrets and the protection of secrets. Finding this ‘sweet spot’ is the challenge before you.”

Mr. Wark went on to say he “would be more encouraged to see a genuine all-party consensus on revised legislation. I think that would be a big achievement.”

Former SIRC chair Ron Atkey recommended that legislators make sure that amendments happen on this round of the bill, and not in five years when it’s proposed to be reviewed, after an election and a new mandate. “Nothing will happen, and in my view that would be a mistake,” Mr. Atkey said.

However, opposition MPs aren’t sure yet if they’ll be able to get behind the bill. A big point of contention for the Conserva-tives has been the predetermina-tion of the committee’s chair, Mr. McGuinty.

“For this committee to be meaningful and a true commit-tee of Parliamentarians, it can’t have a situation where the prime minister appoints all the mem-bers, including the chairman. … If you’re going to go through the whole work of setting up this new committee, it should be as the Liberal campaign document promised, a meaningful com-mittee,” Conservative MP Tony Clement (Parry Sound-Muskoka, Ont.) said in an interview ahead of Thursday’s meeting.

“We think the pendulum is way too far on the side of the prime min-ister and his discretion … and this is a committee about oversight.”

Mr. Clement said the amount of control is excessive, and he will be putting forward amendments to change that. If the bill isn’t modi-fied, he said he’ll be advising his caucus to vote against Bill C-22.

The NDP say they will priori-tize pushing amendments on the access-to-information portions of the bill. “Canadians expect this committee to have the teeth it needs to do the job. I just don’t un-derstand why they’d put so many locks on the information so the committee is hobbled,” NDP House Leader Murray Rankin (victoria, B.C.) told The Hill Times after the Nov. 3 committee meeting.

Mr. Rankin said he hasn’t made up his mind on whether he’d sup-port the bill again at third reading if it remains in its current form.

Before the Nov. 1 committee meeting, Mr. Goodale said he’s open to amendments but strongly defended the bill’s current provisions around the prime minister selecting the chair, and allowing the execu-tive branch to veto work or block committee access or reporting on certain things, under the argument of protecting national security.

“We’re prepared to look seri-ously at all amendments and give them a fair consideration. … What we want to have here is a commit-tee with a broad mandate and nar-row limitations,” said Mr. Goodale.

Mr. Atkey also said the bill is “not at all” a fix for Bill C-51, the past controversial Conservative anti-terrorism legislation.

“Will this bill fix all the prob-lems of Bill C-51 and compan-ion legislation that concerned many Canadians over the last 18 months? Not at all. This bill is a first good step but should not be an excuse for government inac-tion on fixing Bill C-51 during the remainder of this Parliament,” he told the committee.

However, Ms. Chagger still couldn’t say when “adjustments” to Bill C-51 will be made.

“There are many opinions that Canadians have. … I get to advance legislation when it comes to me, when it’s ready to go,” she told The Hill Times outside of the committee room last Tuesday fol-lowing her testimony.

The committee will have three more meetings with witnesses be-fore members are due to submit their amendments by the end of day Nov. 23. The committee will then conduct its clause-by-clause on Bill C-22 on Nov. 29.

“What I’ve heard is the govern-ment would like to have this bill done. ... We want to get this done so we can go back to our study of the broader national security framework. We have a lot of work to do, so let’s get this bill done,” Mr. Oliphant said.

raiello@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

MPs question PM’s power over upcoming National Security Committee Liberal MP Rob Oliphant, who chairs the House Public Safety Committee, says he wants more information on the prime minister’s authority over the new National Security Committee.

Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale and Government House Leader Bardish Chagger testified before the House Public Safety Committee on Nov. 1 on the government’s Bill C-22, to create a National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. The Hill Times Photo by Jake Wright

23THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

PolitiCal staffers

When Conservative MP an-drew Scheer threw his hat

into the increasingly packed Con-servative leadership race on Sept. 28, he was flanked by 17 Conser-vative MPs and three Senators. His campaign manager Hamish Marshall says they’ve been an im-portant source of help and active supporters of campaign efforts ever since.

“A lot of the support we’re getting is from the MPs who are supporting him, so people like [Alberta Conservative MP] Shan-non Stubbs in northern Alberta,” Mr. Marshall told Hill Climbers last week, adding that Alberta Conservative MP John Barlow is doing the same in southern Alberta, with Conservative MP Garnett Genuis “doing lots of organization” for the campaign in Edmonton, Alta.

“The MPs we’ve got on board are helping a lot, we’re really relying on them [and] they’re helping in many different ways … [that includes] events in the riding, introducing Andrew to do-nors, organizing things not just in their ridings, but in the surround-ing ridings, because a good MP is a good organizer and knows a lot of Conservative activists all over their provinces,” he said.

Mr. Scheer, who has repre-sented Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask., since he was first elected in 2004 and was Speaker of the House of Commons in the last Parliament, stepped down from his role as Conservative House leader to join the busy field.

So far one candidate, Conserva-tive MP Tony Clement, bowed out of the race on Oct. 12, but just last week, yet another Conservative MP, Lisa Raitt, joined the field. In all, 12 Conservatives are in the race to become leader, with six of them officially registered, according to Elections Canada’s website.

Along with Ms. Stubbs, Mr. Barlow and Mr. Genuis, the other

Conservative MPs who declared they’re backing Mr. Scheer, all from Western Canada, are: B.C. MP Mark Strahl, B.C. MP Mark Warawa, B.C. MP Bob Zimmer, Alberta MP Matt Jeneroux, Alberta MP Kevin Sorenson, Alberta MP Ziad aboultaif, Alberta MP Kelly McCauley, Alberta MP arnold viersen, Alberta MP Jim Eglinski, Saskatchewan MP Gerry Ritz, Saskatchewan MP Tom Lukiwski, Saskatchewan MP Cathay Wa-gantall, Saskatchewan MP Kelly Block, and Manitoba MP Ted Falk. Conservative Alberta MP Chris Warkentin has also publicly sup-ported Mr. Scheer’s run.

Conservative Saskatchewan Senators Denise Batters and David Tkachuk, along with New-foundland Conservative Senator David Wells, have also indicated their support. Saskatchewan Par-ty MLA Warren Steinely as been taking a “big lead” in organizing in Regina, said Mr. Marshall.

As well, three former Con-servative MPs have also come out in support of Mr. Scheer and are helping organize for the campaign in their respec-tive areas: former Calgary MP Devinder Short, former Brampton MP Kyle Seeback, and former Medicine Hat MP Lavar Payne.

“It’s obviously a crowded field but we’re feeling very good. The response Andrew’s getting from across the country, and the volun-teers that we’re seeing pouring in from across the country, and the donations we’ve seen pouring … all indicate to us that we’re doing very, very well and have a strong campaign,” said Mr. Marshall.

Though he declined to give names “at this point,” Mr. Marshall said the campaign has fundraisers lined up in different cities across the country. On Oct. 28, he said the campaign was able to raise $57,000 online within 24 hours.

While fundraising numbers for a number of Conservative leader-ship candidates came out with the third quarter party financial returns published by Elections Canada on Nov. 1, no data was available for Mr. Scheer as he announced after the reporting pe-riod, which falls between July and September. Within that period, Conservative MP and leader-ship contender Maxime Bernier came out on top, raising roughly $371,000 during the quarter.

Dean Klippenstine, a char-tered professional accountant and business adviser for agriculture at MNP in Regina, is Mr. Scheer’s financial agent.

As Mr. Scheer’s campaign manager, Mr. Marshall is also helping with media and other communications work, as well as serving as a polling analyst. He’s currently also president of the Torch Agency in Toronto and is a former chief research officer for Abingdon Research in vancouver, his hometown. Previously, he spent time as a research director for public affairs for Angus Reid Strategies in vancouver.

A longtime Conservative organizer, Mr. Marshall first got involved with the Canadian Alli-ance in university before coming to the Hill to work for then Cana-dian Alliance MP Joe Peschisoli-do. After Mr. Peschisolido crossed the floor to join the Liberals in 2002, Mr. Marshall went off to work on Jim Flaherty’s provincial Progressive Conservative leader-ship campaign in Ontario before returning to the Hill to work in then Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper’s OLO.

During the 2006 federal election, he helped oversee the campaign for the party’s tar-geted seats in British Columbia and after the election, became manager of strategic planning in Mr. Harper’s PMO during which time he said he got “very involved in polling.” In the 20008 federal election, he was the Conservative Party’s pollster and, later that year, was elected by the party members to represent British Columbia on the federal CPC’s national council.

Mr. Marshall has also worked on municipal and provincial con-servative campaigns across the country. He served as the Alberta Wildrose Party’s pollster in 2012 and 2015, and recently ran the successful “no” campaign during a 2015 plebiscite in vancouver over raising the provincial sales tax to fund new transit projects.

On Oct. 27, a former key Ontario organizer to Mr. Bernier’s leader-ship campaign, Georganne Burke, announced via Twitter that she was “very excited” to join Mr. Scheer’s team as outreach chair, referring to him as a “real conservative, a unifier.” Speaking with The National Post after her jump, she said Mr. Bernier’s campaign “wasn’t a right fit” for her, though noted that she still likes Mr. Bernier’s strong policy ideas and him as a person.

“I’m very much a ground organizer, that’s what I do, and I didn’t feel that was the direction the campaign was heading. It was more of an air war than a ground war,” she said. “So I’ve gone to a campaign where I know they take that seriously.”

Ms. Burke is senior vice-pres-ident for Ottawa of the Pathway Group and in the last Parliament was director of First Nations outreach to former northern Sas-katchewan Conservative MP Rob Clarke. She is a former senior special assistant to then minister of state for science and technol-ogy Gary Goodyear and later to Peter Kent when he was minister of state for foreign affairs.

She’s also previously worked for the Ontario Progressive Conservatives as manager of the leader’s tour from 2010 to 20011 and as a caucus community rela-tions manager from 2011 to 2012. She also has been a regional

organizer for the federal party in the Greater Toronto Area and later manager of community rela-tions, among other past roles.

In October, Mike MacDonell left the Conservative opposition leader’s office on the Hill to join Mr. Scheer’s campaign, acting as a sort of executive assistant to Mr. Scheer. He travels with him around Canada and is also helping to organize in Atlantic Canada.

Until recently, Mr. MacDonell had been a Question Period adviser to the Conservative caucus and to interim leader Rona ambrose in the OLO. Under the previous Con-servative government, Mr. Mac-Donell served as a special assistant for parliamentary affairs to then employment and social develop-ment minister Pierre Poilievre, and before that was assistant to the parliamentary secretary for em-ployment and social development, Scott armstrong.

A former student at St. Mary’s University in Halifax, where he served as vice-president of uni-versity affairs, Mr. MacDonell ran unsuccessfully as a candidate for councillor in Halifax regional mu-nicipality’s 2012 election. He also previously ran as the Progressive Conservative candidate in Nova Scotia’s 2013 provincial election in Dartmouth East.

Brett Bell, founder of Grass-roots Online in Mississauga, Ont., is handling digital operations and social media for Mr. Scheer’s campaign, including oversee-ing his campaign website. Mr. Bell is also currently vice presi-dent of engagement strategies at Hill+Knowlton Strategies in Toronto and is a regular contribu-tor to the bimonthly magazine, Campaigns & Elections, accord-ing to his LinkedIn Profile.

He’s also a former munici-pal affairs consultant at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP and a former division manager with The Saint Consulting Group.

Joan Baylis, a longtime cam-paign manager to Mr. Scheer and current constituency assistant to the MP in Regina, is also acting as a Western organizer for his leadership campaign covering British Columbia and the Prairies. She’s been an aide to Mr. Scheer

since he was first elected in 2004.As well, Mr. Scheer’s former

chief of staff as House Speaker, Kenzie Potter, who earlier this fall moved over to work as an aide in Mr. Scheer’s constituency office, is lending a hand to his leadership campaign.

Ms. Potter is a former com-mittee coordinator to then Conservative government whip Jay Hill, and became his director of parliamentary affairs when Mr. Hill was made Conservative House leader in 2008. She’s also previously served as director of parliamentary affairs and issues management to former Conserva-tive transport ministers Chuck Strahl and Denis Lebel.

While Mr. Scheer’s campaign has a small office in Regina that Mr. Marshall described as “mainly a mailbox,” the campaign team largely works on the ground in their respec-tive parts of the country.

“We’re in the full leadership swing,” said Mr. Marshall, suggest-ing to “stay tuned” for policy an-nouncements from the campaign.

Conservative leadership candi-dates will face off in their first debate in Saskatoon, Sask. this week on Nov. 9, with a second debate sched-uled for Dec. 6 in Moncton, N.B.

“Andrew’s an experienced Member of Parliament, a strong debater and does very well off-the-cuff, so we’re feeling that Andrew’s going to able to give a good performance a the debate and showcase the fact that he’s bilingual,” said Mr. Marshall.

Mr. Scheer was in Newfound-land and Labrador and New Brunswick a couple of weeks ago and was in Alberta and Saskatch-ewan, as well as briefly in Ottawa for House duties, last week, hit-ting up Toronto on the weekend. This week he will be in Montreal before returning to Saskatchewan for the first leader’s debate.

“Obviously as a Western MP his strength is in the Prairies and the Wes, although of course he’s bilingual and grew up in Ottawa, so he’s got a good base in Ontario, but the amazingly positive response in Atlantic Canada has been really gratifying,” said Mr. Marshall.

lryckewaert@hilltimes.com The Hill Times

‘We’re in full leadership swing,’ Scheer campaign getting hand from MP supporters, says Marshall Hamish Marshall is campaign manager to Conservative leadership contender Andrew Scheer.

hiLL cLimBeRsBy LAurA ryckewAert

Conservative leadership candidate and MP for Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask., Andrew Scheer, above, pictured earlier this year in Centre Block. On the right, top to bottom: Hamish Marshall, Georganne Burke, and Brett Bell. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright and photographs courtesy of LinkedIn

hill times classified0010 Residential Real estate

FOR SALE: WARM AND CHARMING RUST IC FURNISHED HOUSE/COTTAGE ON 1+ ACRE LOT. Laurentians, Val Morin, Quebec, near Far Hills & Val David. Wood floors and walls. Sleeps 8 com-fortably. Heart of downhill, cross country ski and snow shoe country. Proximity to Petit Train du Nord bike path, Nearby yoga retreat and horse riding. Public access to Lac Raymond. 15 mins St. Saveur, 40 mins Mt Tremblant, 45 mins Montreal, 2 hours Ottawa. New Price $289k. Turnkey. See https://duproprio.com/home-for-sale-val-morin-quebec-en-711479. Contact Jacques 613 608 6602.

64 GLEbE AvE. Exquis i te her i tage home for rent January 2017. Please call 613-668-2305 for more information. www.nesbittproperty.com.

ThE GLEbE

103-33 First Avenue, The Glebe, Executive walk out 2 bedroom + den backing on to Patterson Creek. $4,500/month. Judy Faulkner, Broker of Record, Faulkner Real Estate Ltd. 613-231-4663

0041 apaRtments foR Rent

FuRniShEd OnE bEdROOm dOwnTOwn OTTAwA

530 Laurier Ave West $1,295 includes utilities. Hardwood floors, freshly paint-ed, bright, modern, 24-hour security, pool. Parking extra. Non smokers. Scott 514-553-3400.

LuxuRy ApARTmEnT

700 Sussex, 2 bedroom 2 bath corner unit, facing George St underground parking. Inquiries please call Royal Lepage Performance. Emad Fadel 613-601-3623

0046 fuRnished homes

STEpS FROm bywARd mARKET.

3 bedroom / 2 bathroom townhouse. Quiet street. Attached garage, yard, a/c, gas. $2200/month. For showings, con-tact Jeff Gauthier at 613-862-1077

C0100 CommeRCial pRopeRty

dOwnTOwn/OFFiCE SpACE

FOR LEASE3,000 square feet, full floor, lots of parking, Kimberley McMahon, Broker, Plant Your Flag Realty, 613-601-1200, mcmahon1200@gmail.com.

0849 legal seRviCes

LOwER yOuR mOnThLy pAymEnTS And COnSOLidATE yOuR dEbT nOw!!!1st, 2nd, 3rd MORTGAGES Debt Consolidation Refinancing, Renovations Tax Arrears, No CMHC Fees $50K YOU PAY: $208.33 / MONTH (OAC) No Income, Bad Credit Power of Sale Stopped!!! BETTER OPTION MORTGAGE FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL TODAY TOLL-FREE: 1-800-282-1169 www.mort-gageontario.com (Licence # 10969)

AS SEEn On Tv Need a Mortgage? Bad Credit? Self-Employed? Debt Consolidation? Bankrupt? Rejected? Foreclosure? Power of Sale? CALL US NOW 24/7: 1-877-733-4424 Speak to a Licensed Agent NOW! MMAmortgages.com specializes in: Residential, Commercial, Rural, Agriculture, Land Mortgages, Business Loans. www.MMAmortgages.com (Licence # 12126)

1ST & 2nd mORTGAGESfrom 2.29% 5 year VRM and 2.44% 5 year FIXED. All Credit Types Considered. Let us help you SAVE thousands on the right mortgage! Purchasing, Re-financing, Debt Consolidation, Construction, Home Renovations...CALL 1-800-225-1777, www.homeguardfunding.ca (LIC #10409).

0849 legal seRviCes

mRAppROvZ.COmMORTGAGE APPROVAL 1st & 2nd MORTGAGES, Purchases, Refinances, Commercial Loans to $10 MILLION, Farm and Farmland Mortgages, Bruised Credit - No Problem! CALL TOLL-FREE 1-844-277-7689. Online Application @ www.MrApprovZ.com (Money Solutions Inc. LIC# 10731).

0041 apaRtments foR Rent$$ COnSOLidATE yOuR dEbT $$ hOmE

EQuiTy LOAnS FOR Any puRpOSE!!Bank turn downs, Tax or Mortgage arrears, Self Employed, Bad Credit, Bankruptcy. Creative Mortgage Specialists! No proof of income 1st, 2nd, and 3rd’s Up to 85% Borrow: Pay Monthly: $25,000-$105.40 $50,000-$237.11 $100,000-$474.21 LARGER AMOUNTS AND COMMERCIAL FUNDS AVAILABLE !!Decrease monthly pay-ments up to 75%!! Based on 3% APR. OAC 1-888-307-7799 ONTARIO-WIDE FINANCIAL 1801347inc FSCO Licence #12456 www.ontario-widefinancial.com !! LET US HELP !!

CREdiT 700.CA$750 loans - no more. No credit check - same day deposit Toll Free number 1-855-527-4368 Open 7 days from 8am to 8pm

dO yOu hAvE A diSAbiLiTy?Physical or mental. We can help you get up to $40,000 back from the Canadian Government. FOR DETAILS check out our website: disabilitygroupcanada.com or CALL us today Toll-Free 1-888-875-4787.

CAnAdA bEnEFiT GROupDo you or someone you know suffer from a dis-ability? Get up to $40,000 from the Canadian Government. Toll-free 1-888-511-2250 or www.canadabenefit.ca/free-assessment

0920 Business oppoRtunitySAwmiLLS FROm OnLy $4,397 -

mAKE mOnEy & SAvE mOnEywith your own bandmill - Cut lumber any dimension. In stock ready to ship. FREE Info & DVD: http://www.NorwoodSawmill.com/400OT 1-800-566-6899 Ext:400OT.

STEEL buiLdinG SALE ... ”bLOw OuT SALE On nOw!”

21X23 $4,998 25X25 $5,996 27x27 $6,992 32X35 $9,985 42X45 $14,868. One End wall included. Pioneer Steel 1-855-212-7036 www.pioneersteel.ca wAnTEd: OLd TubE AudiO EQuipmEnT.40 years or older. Amplifiers, Stereo, Recording and Theatre Sound Equipment. Hammond organs, any condition. Call Toll-Free 1-800-947-0393 / 519-853-2157.

0920 Business oppoRtunity

FiREARmS wAnTEd FOR dECEmbER 10Th, 2016 AuCTiOn.

Rifles, Shotguns, Handguns. As Estate Specialists WE manage sale of registered / unregistered firearms. Contact Paul, Switzer’s Auction: Toll-Free 1-800-694-2609, info@switzersauction.com or www.switzersauction.com. SELL yOuR AnTiQuES, COLLECTibLES,

JEwELLERy, COinS, wATChESMaple Leaf Appraisers & Auctioneers can evaluate and purchase your treasures. Call us to discuss your options. 1-800-535-9809. www.mlappraisers.com.

0929 employment

MEDICAL TRANSCRIPTION! In-demand career! Employers have work-at-home positions available. Get online training you need from an employer-trusted program. Visit: CareerStep.ca/MT or 1-855-768-3362 to start training for your work-at-home career today!

0990 announCements

nOminATE AmAZinGRecognize a young person between the ages of six-17 year with a 2016 Ontario Junior Citizen Award Deadline is Nov. 30. Call 416-923-7724 ext. 4439 for more information. REACh miLLiOnS OF CuSTOmERS in

OnTARiO wiTh OnE EASy CALL!Your Classified Ad or Display Ad would appear in weekly newspapers each week across Ontario in urban, suburban and rural areas. For more information Call Today 647-350-2558, Email: kmagill@rogers.com or visit: www.OntarioClassifiedAds.com.

1030 peRsonal

TiREd OF invESTinG in relationships that never seem to go anywhere? MISTY RIVER INTRODUCTIONS has people interested in finding partners for life. Ontario’s traditional matchmaker. CALL (416)77-6302, (705)734-1292, 613-257-3531, (519)658-4204, www.mistyriverintros.com.

JOin wwF-CAnAdA, niKOn And AdvEnTuRE CAnAdA

on an Arctic Safari next summer to Nunavut and Greenland aboard the 198-passenger Ocean Endeavour See icebergs, polar bears and whales in the Arctic! www.adventurecanada.com TOLL-FREE: 1-800-363-7566 14 Front St. S. Mississauga (TICO # 04001400).

The hill Times, monday, november 7, 201624

information and advertisement placement: tel. 613-232-5952, fax 613-232-9055

For more information or to reserve your government relations and public affairs advertising space, contact The Hill Times

display advertising department at 613-688-8825.

Be a part of it.

According to Agriculture & Agri-food Canada, the Canadian agriculture and agri-food industry in 2014 accounted for 6.6

per cent of Canada’s GDP and provided for one in eight jobs in Canada, employing more than 2.3 million people. Canada continues to be the fifth largest exporter of agriculture and agri-food products, accounting for 3.6 per cent of the world’s total ag exports, including more than half of these exports headed to U.S. markets. Canada’s imports of agricultural products increased to 2.9 per cent of the global total value of ag products and Canada now stands as the sixth largest importer.

The Hill Times will investigate the latest trade and bilateral agreements with Europe and where supply management fits into these negotiations. We’ll also look into programs to increase exports, in relation to Canada’s agricultural imports. As well, we’ll look at the increased rates of agricultural imports to Canada.

We’ll look at the potential takeover of Monsanto by Bayer and the effects on the industry as a whole.

The Hill Times will also investigate the industry’s greenhouse gas emissions, both a source of emissions and a sink, and how the industry is dealing with GHGs, which have remained stable over 1990-2013.

puBlication Date: Nov. 14, 2016aDvertising DeaDline: Nov. 9, 2016

AGriCUltUrE

HTwork.ca

Suite 1500 | 33 Bloor Street East | Toronto, ON M4W 3H1 | Canada O 416-214-0701 | F 416-214-0720 |

| fleishmanhillard.com

ACCOUNT DIRECTOR – FleishmanHillard Ottawa

About us:

FleishmanHillard is one of the leading Public Relations and Communications agencies in the world – and we take that leadership position seriously. We strive to blaze new trails and create award-winning work that makes others in the industry green with envy.

FleishmanHillard delivers on “The power of true”, reflecting the firm’s high values and unique ability to guide clients through a world demanding unprecedented authenticity and transparency.

Working at FH Ottawa will provide you with the guarantee that each and every day you will be stimulated, challenged, rewarded and energized beyond your expectations. Our impressive and long list of clients includes FORTUNE 500 corporations, renowned consumer brands, major government agencies and trade associations. When you join FleishmanHillard, you join a winning team! About the role:

FleishmanHillard’s Ottawa office is seeking a strategic communications practitioner with a passion for client relations and project management. The successful candidate will serve in a leadership capacity within our team managing highly reputable brands in a range of industry sectors. The role involves a wide range of activities including media relations, issues/crisis and corporate communications, government communications, people management and new business development. We are looking for a confident professional who is comfortable working with executives and thrives within a fast-paced and results-driven environment. The immediate need is for a twelve (12) month term.

Responsibilities:

Provide senior level counsel to clients on a wide range of communication needs, including

crisis and issues management, strategic communications, government relations, stakeholder management, social media, strategy development and media relations

Build strong relationships with clients and serve as the day-to-day client contact and account team manager on multiple client accounts

Develop and implement comprehensive programs and tactics, along with supporting materials

Staff projects effectively and manage client expectations

Identify, respond to and lead new business pitches

Manage budgets, billing and client reporting

About us:

About the role:

ACCOUNT DIRECTOR - FleishmanHillard Ottawa

FleishmanHillard is one of the leading Public Relations and Communications agencies in the world — and we take that leadership position seriously. We strive to blaze new trails and create award-winning work that makes others in the industry green with envy.

FleishmanHillard delivers on “The power of true”, reflecting the firm’s high values and unique ability to guide clients through a world demanding unprecedented authenticity and transparency.

Working at FH Ottawa will provide you with the guarantee that each and every day you will be stimulated, challenged, rewarded and energized beyond your expectations. Our impressive and long list of clients includes FORTUNE 500 corporations, renowned consumer brands, major government agencies and trade associations.

When you join FleishmanHillard, you join a winning team!

FleishmanHillard’s Ottawa office is seeking a strategic communications practitioner with a passion for client relations and project management.

The successful candidate will serve in a leadership capacity within our team managing highly reputable brands in a range of industry sectors.

The immediate need is for a twelve (12) month term.

To learn more about this opportunity, please click the hyperlink below:

fleishmanhillard.com/job/account-director-ottawa/

Suite 1500 | 33 Bloor Street East | Toronto, ON M4W 3H1 | Canada O 416-214-0701 | F 416-214-0720 |

| fleishmanhillard.com

ACCOUNT DIRECTOR – FleishmanHillard Ottawa

About us:

FleishmanHillard is one of the leading Public Relations and Communications agencies in the world – and we take that leadership position seriously. We strive to blaze new trails and create award-winning work that makes others in the industry green with envy.

FleishmanHillard delivers on “The power of true”, reflecting the firm’s high values and unique ability to guide clients through a world demanding unprecedented authenticity and transparency.

Working at FH Ottawa will provide you with the guarantee that each and every day you will be stimulated, challenged, rewarded and energized beyond your expectations. Our impressive and long list of clients includes FORTUNE 500 corporations, renowned consumer brands, major government agencies and trade associations. When you join FleishmanHillard, you join a winning team! About the role:

FleishmanHillard’s Ottawa office is seeking a strategic communications practitioner with a passion for client relations and project management. The successful candidate will serve in a leadership capacity within our team managing highly reputable brands in a range of industry sectors. The role involves a wide range of activities including media relations, issues/crisis and corporate communications, government communications, people management and new business development. We are looking for a confident professional who is comfortable working with executives and thrives within a fast-paced and results-driven environment. The immediate need is for a twelve (12) month term.

Responsibilities:

Provide senior level counsel to clients on a wide range of communication needs, including

crisis and issues management, strategic communications, government relations, stakeholder management, social media, strategy development and media relations

Build strong relationships with clients and serve as the day-to-day client contact and account team manager on multiple client accounts

Develop and implement comprehensive programs and tactics, along with supporting materials

Staff projects effectively and manage client expectations

Identify, respond to and lead new business pitches

Manage budgets, billing and client reporting

policy Briefing

25THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

feature Parties

Hill, national arts scene come out in

full force for Movie Nights across Canada launch

PARty centRALB y r A c h e L A i e L L o

As the early November drizzle dampened the skies outside, hundreds of guests,

including cabinet ministers and Canadian actors and celebrities, packed into the newly-renovated Southam Hall at Ottawa’s Nation-al Arts Centre last Tuesday evening to enjoy one last Hill Movie Night before it rolls up its red carpet and film spools and takes off across the country over the next year.

That’s right. The event, which has been part of the Hill social scene for a decade with 15 events under its belt, is growing up and moving away at least for a year. As part of the Canada 150 and the 2017 long list of nationwide celebrations, Telefilm, which is celebrating its 50th birthday next year, and in partnership with Cana-dian Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly, are taking the show on the road, hosting screenings and post-show receptions for different crowds nationwide.

The first will be in January in Toronto, followed by Winnipeg in April, Iqaluit in June, and then Halifax, Calgary, Québec City, and vancouver in September. Orga-nizers say to expect the films to come from the Toronto International Film Festival lineup from this year. It’s a tradition for the films to have Canadian connections, whether it’s actors, directors and produc-ers, or the shooting location.

In the case of last week’s film, it ticked off all of those boxes. Two Lovers and a Bear, stars Dane Dehaan and Regina-born Tatiana Maslany, was directed by Montreal-native and War Witch Oscar-nominated director Kim Nguyen, and was filmed in Iqaluit, Nunavut, and Timmins, Ont.

The film, screened at Cannes and TIFF, is unique, unpredictable, and quirky. It’s part love story and part psychological drama, punctuated by the humorous interjections of one talking polar bear, voiced by actor Gordon Pinsent, and follows the love story of Dehaan and Maslany and their efforts leave Iqaluit for southern Canada.

Hundreds of Hillites filled the theatre for the screening, which, if you can imagine that many staffers and suits in one room, it had an added ambiance thanks to the vibrating Blackberries and cellphone lights flipping up throughout the movie’s screening.

Canadian film stars including Two Lov-ers and a Bear director Mr. Nguyen; actor and director The Grand Seduction Don McKellar; and French-Canadian actress Karine vanasse, among many others, took to the red carpet where etalk’s Devon Soltendieck was doing interviews. New too, under the leadership of Bluesky Strat-egies’ Elizabeth-Gray Smith, were other areas optimized for social media content, which saw the event “explode” on social media, as she put it. you can check out the action for yourself under the hashtag #MovieNightsCA.

Ahead of the screening the audience was treated to a musical performance which highlighted the last 50 years of film, performed by Kim Richardson, Marc-andré Fortin, and Chloé Sainte-Marie, alongside the University of Ottawa School of Music.

In introducing the film, Mr. Nguyen made a backhanded pitch for renewable energy by walking the Ottawa crowd through a pitch for a “part two” of his film, based on trying to tame the beast of Arctic wind energy opposed to crude oil. It was well received and surely not the only inad-vertent lobbying happening, as is the norm, at these Hill soirées.

At the post-screening, guests flooded out into the hall which was sprinkled with decorated centerpieces and food tables offering up smoked meat and grilled cheese sandwiches, poutine, mini cup-cakes, among other bites.

Attendees included House Speaker Geoff Regan with House director of com-munications Heather Bradley, and House events-guru Anthony Carricato; Public Services and Procurement Minister Judy Foote; Status of Women Minister Patty Hajdu; Liberal MPs Karina Gould, Ron McKinnon, Nick Whalan, Sven Spenge-mann, Frank Baylis, yvonne Jones, and vance Badawey. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May; NDP MPs Pierre Nantel (a staple at these movie nights) and Erin Weir; and Independent MP Hunter Tootoo.

Others there were the NAC’s director of communications Rosemary Thomp-son; CPAC CEO Catherine Cano; Official Languages Commissioner Graham Fraser; broadcaster Catherine Clarke; CBC Tv host Lucy van Oldenbarneveld; Rogers Communications’ Heidi Bonnell; Naviga-tor’s andrew Balfour; and PMO director of research and advertising Dan arnold.

The Hill Times

The Hill Times photographs by Jake Wright

Actress Karine Vanasse and director and actor Don McKellar.

Kim Richardson, Marc-André Fortin, and Chloé Sainte-Marie.

Kim Nguyen, Vinay Virmani, Ellen Hamilton, Jonathan Bronfman, John Ralston, Ajay Virmani, Patrick Roy, Honourable Mélanie Joly, Roger Frappier, Johnny Issaluk and Kakki Peter.

Serge Sasseville of Quebecor and Jean-Claude Mahé of Telefilm Canada.

Liberal Whip Andrew Leslie with the NAC’s Jayne Watson.

Minister of Status of Women Patty Hajdu.

Immigration Minister John McCallum and actor Johnny Issaluk.

Public Services Minister Judy Foote.

Independent MP Hunter Tootoo.

Director of Two Lovers and a Bear Kim Nguyen and etalk’s Devon Soltendieck.

House Speaker Geoff Regan. Liberal MP Karina Gould.

Guests got to sit in the renovated NAC Southam Hall.

NDP MP Erin Weir.Hill band the 20th Century Boys.

John Ralston, Patrick Roy, Roger Frappier, Kim Nguyen, Mélanie Joly, Jonathan Bronfman, Carolle Brabant, and Vinay Virmani.

Canadian Heri-tage Minister Mélanie Joly and Telefilm Canada an-nounced on Tuesday, Nov. 1 that Movie Night on the Hill would become Movie Nights Across Canada in 2017 as part of Canada 150 celebrations.

Hundreds come out for Two Lovers and a Bear movie screening at NAC

THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 201626feature government ConferenCe Centre

Renovating the Government Conference Centre, in pictures

By LAuRA RyckewAeRt

Ottawa’s old train station, known as the Government Conference Centre, lo-

cated at 2 Rideau St., has been under con-struction since 2014 and is being renovated to serve as an interim home for the Senate. It will have a temporary Senate Chamber, Senate leadershipand Speaker’s offices, and administration offices. The Senate will move into the space in 2018 and will re-main in the building for roughly a decade

while the Centre Block is being renovated.Originally built in 1912, the old train station

was already in need of rehabilitation before be-ing finalized for the Senate’s use. The building is also originally connected to committee rooms and to the Château Laurier Hotel through an existing underground tunnel. Renovation work on the building, which is being overseen by PCL Constructors, is set to total $219-mil-lion, with the entire Senate relocation project expected to cost about $269-million. The media recently got a chance to tour the site.

A recent picture of the Government Conference Centre concourse with construction underway to build an interim Senate Chamber, left, combined with an artist’s rendering of the future plan, right. Photograph courtesy of PSPC Photograph courtesy of PSPC

An artist’s rendering of what the main hall of the GCC building will look like once work is complete, right, along with a shot of the same space prior to demolition from late 2014. Once complete, two committee rooms will flank either side of the hall, which is a quarter-scale replica of Penn Station, with lounge, eating and reading areas above. To the right lies the Senate Chamber, with the public entrance off of Rideau Street to the left. Photographs courtesy of PSPC

Here’s a view of the interim Senate Chamber from the visitors’ viewing gallery, above. It will serve as a temporary home for the Senate for at least 10 years while work on the Centre Block is underway. The Hill Times photograph by Laura Ryckewaert

A closeup of some of the heritage details in the concourse area of the Government Conference Centre at 2 Rideau St. The Hill Times photograph by Laura Ryckewaert

A look at some of the architec-tural details near the Rideau Street entrance lobby, which the public will use to access the building, on the north side. The Hill Times photograph by Laura Ryckewaert

A shot of the main hall of the GCC, look-ing towards the stairs lead-ing up to the Rideau Street entrance of the building taken during a media tour Oct. 21. The Hill Times photograph by Laura Ryckewaert

Another view of the GCC main hall from above space allocat-ed for one of three new com-mittee rooms in the building. A lounge and eating area is planned for above the eastern committee room, with a lounge and reading area above on the west. The Hill Times photograph by Laura Ryckewaert

Offices for Senate administration, including for the Senate Speaker and the Usher of the Black Rod, will go on the west side of the building, towards its northern end.The Hill Times photograph by Laura RyckewaertAn artist’s rendering of what the GCC will look like after renovations. Photograph courtesy of PSPC

A larger, broadcast-capable committee room will be built on the second-floor level, between the viewing galleries for the interim Senate Chamber and the lounge and eating space above the east committee room off of the main hall. The Hill Times photograph by Laura Ryckewaert

An illustration of the planned inside layout of the GCC. Photograph courtesy of PSPC

27THE HILL TIMES, MONDAy, NOvEMBER 7, 2016

feature events

MONDAY, NOV. 7House Not Sitting—The House is not sitting Nov.

7-Nov.11. It returns on Nov. 14 to sit for five weeks until it breaks for Christmas on Dec. 16, but it could break earlier.

Seminar on Canadian-Norwegian Defence Co-operation—‘Canadian-Norwegian security challenges in the High North: a driver for enhanced military and industrial co-operation.’ Mon., Nov. 7. Chateau Laurier, 1 Rideau St., Ottawa, Ont. Organized by: Innovation Norway in cooperation with the Norwegian Defence and Security Industries Association, and the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.

Crown Prince and the Crown Princess of Norway—Will be present at, ‘Norway and Canada in the Arctic: Research, Knowledge, and Partnership,’ and a preview of the exhibition ‘On Thin Ice,’ Mon., Nov. 7, 1:30 p.m., Canadian Museum of Nature, the Barrick Salon (3rd floor), 240 McLeod St., Ottawa, Ont. 613-566-4700. Guests are required to arrive by 1:30 p.m. RSVP deadline was Oct. 24 via the link www.etouches.com/arctic Dress: business formal. Invitation only.

TUESDAY, NOV. 8 Clinton vs. Trump: U.S. Election Night—Join the

Government Relations Institute of Canada and Equal Voice National Capital Region on Nov. 8 in the ByWard Market for a screen-viewing party. Real Sports Bar and Grill, 90 George St., Ottawa. Doors open at 6 p.m. and the first results are expected at 9 p.m. Event fee is $20. Tickets must be purchased in advance. Contact GRIC Secretariat. gric-irgc.ca/event-november-8-2016

U.S. Embassy and AmCham Canada to Host U.S. Elec-tion Event—The U.S. Embassy in Ottawa, in partnership with the American Chamber of Commerce in Canada (AmCham), will host a U.S. election event on Tues., Nov. 8, in the ballroom of the Château Laurier hotel. Doors open at 6:30 p.m. U.S. Ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman will officially welcome guests at 7 p.m. Guests will be able to watch election coverage from the major U.S. television networks, enjoy light refresh-ments, follow election-related social media feeds, and participate in discussions and election trivia. The event is by invitation only and will not be open to the public. For more information about the event please contact the U.S. Embassy Press Office at 613-688-5316 or email wootennb@state.gov.

WEDNESDAY, NOV. 9A Roundtable with General Tom Lawson—The former

chief of defence staff will speak. Nov. 9. KPMG, 150 Elgin St., suite 1800. 10:30 a.m.-1 p.m. Not for attri-bution and no media reporting. Register via cdainsti-tute.ca. $15-$50.

The Pearson Centre Hosts—“What Happened in the U.S. Election?” 12-1:30 p.m. Nov. 9, Rangoon Restaurant, 114 Gloucester St., Ottawa. Moderator: political reporter Stephen Maher; panellists: Sarah Goldfeder, former U.S. diplomat (principal, Earnscliffe Strategy Group); Krista Leben, Democratic Party organizer (parliamentary assistant, House of Commons); Colin Robertson, former Canadian consul general to Los Angeles (VP, Canadian Global Affairs Institute). Lunch tickets: thepearsoncentre.ca

Webinar: The Rules of Lobbying in Canada for Canadian Charities and Non-Profits—This webinar will discuss what all public-policy advocates in the charitable and non-profit sectors need to know about the rules of lobbying and political action in Canada. Presented by Sean Moore, founder and principal of Advocacy School. Offered by the Canadian Charity Law Association. 12-1 p.m. Nov. 9. Free, but space is limited. Register via attendee.gotowebinar.com/regis-ter/2577773502062555651.

First Conservative Leadership Debate—The first debate of the leadership campaign will be on Nov. 9 in

Saskatoon, Sask., and will be an English debate. Delta Bessborough. 7 p.m. Central time. Moderated by Kaveri Braid, principal with Earnscliffe Strategy Group, and former adviser to Premier Brad Wall and former CBC TV anchor. Debates will be streamed live online for all party members and all Canadians to see. All debates are open to Conservative Party members to attend. Buy tickets ($20/person) via conservative.ca/leadership/en/saskatoon. The Conservative Party leadership election will be on May 27, 2017.

First Conservative Leadership Debate—The first debate of the leadership campaign will be on Nov. 9 in Saskatoon, Sask., and will be an English debate. Delta Bessborough, 7 p.m. Central time. Moderated by Kaveri Braid, principal with Earnscliffe Strategy Group, and former adviser to Premier Brad Wall and former CBC TV anchor. Debates will be streamed live online for all party members and all Canadians to see. All debates are open to Conservative Party members to attend. Buy tickets ($20/person) via conservative.ca/leadership/en/saskatoon. The Conservative Party leadership election will be on May 27, 2017.

Veterans’ Week 2016—Between the Crosses, a Veterans Week concert program featuring Cara Gilbertson-Boese, soprano, and Joanne Moorcroft, piano, with special guests the Harmonia Choir of Ottawa, and Brig.Gen. (ret’d) John Fletcher. Adults, $20; seniors and students, $15. Tickets available at St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church, 154 Somerset St. W., Ottawa. All proceeds go to the Perley and Rideau Veterans’ Health Centre.

THURSDAY, NOV. 10Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi, to deliver a

keynote speech on Infrastructure and the Economy for Tomorrow series, hosted by the Pearson Centre and the Alberta Enterprise Group. 12 noon to 2:00 pm, Shaw Conference Centre, Calgary. Panel to follow: Iris Evans, former Alberta Finance Minister; Edmonton Mayor Don Iveson; Simon O’Byrne, Stantec; Jan Reimer, Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters. Tickets: www.alber-taenterprisegroup.com

FRIDAY, NOV. 11Remembrance Day—A ceremony to remember fallen

soldiers will take place at Ottawa’s National War Memo-rial from just after 10 a.m. to noon.

European Union Film Festival—The 2016 edition of this annual festival takes place each weekend from Nov. 11 to Dec. 4 at Carleton University’s River Build-ing Theatre. Details: cfi-icf.ca.

SUNDAY, NOV. 13Poilievre Hosts Conservative Leadership Candidates—

Carleton MP Pierre Poilievre will host candidates for the leadership of the Conservative Party for a debate and audience Q+A. The exchange will take place in Greely, Ont., a village in south Ottawa on Nov. 13 at 1 p.m. Orchardview Conference Centre, 6346 Deer-meadow Dr., Ottawa (Greely). Tickets are available at: carletonconservativeassociation.ca.

MONDAY, NOV. 14House is Sitting—The House returns to sit for five

weeks, Monday to Friday, until it breaks for Christmas on Dec. 16, but it could be earlier.

CCPPP National Conference on Public Private Partnerships—The Canadian Council for Public Private Partnerships will hold its annual conference, Innovating Our Future, at the Sheraton Centre Toronto Hotel Nov. 14-15. For more information: p3-2016.ca/Program.

Scaling Up Bio Conference—Delivering Canada’s low carbon, bio-based economy through sustainable innovation. Until Nov. 16, Fairmont Château Laurier, 1 Rideau St., Ottawa. scalingupconference.ca

Diplomatic Hospitality Group Winter Style and Fashion Event—The Canadian Federation of University Women’s Diplomatic Hospitality Group in Ottawa invites diplomats, their spouses/partners, and their families to this event. Mon., Nov. 14. 6:30-9 p.m. Shepherd’s, 145 Trainyards Dr. A nominal fee will be charged to help cover costs.

TUESDAY, NOV. 15Port of Vancouver and Port of Prince Rupert Joint

Reception—Port of Vancouver and Port of Prince Rupert invite you to join us on Tues., Nov. 15 to discuss the future of Canada’s trade through our West coast and how we contribute to our national economy. The recep-tion will be held in Ottawa at the Sir John A. Macdon-ald Building, 144 Wellington Street, Room 200, from 5:30-7:30 p.m. All Parliamentarians and departmental officials are invited. Trade and shipping industry repre-sentatives will also be in attendance. Please RSVP to public_affairs@portvancouver.com by Fri., Nov. 4.

WEDNESDAY, NOV. 16Liberal Caucus Meeting—The Liberals will meet in

Room 237-C Centre Block on Parliament Hill. For more information, please call Liberal Party media relations at media@liberal.ca or 613-627-2384.

Conservative Caucus Meeting—The Conservatives will meet for their national caucus meeting. For more informa-tion, contact Cory Hann, director of communications, Con-servative Party of Canada at coryhann@conservative.ca.

NDP Caucus Meeting—The NDP caucus will meet from 9:15 a.m.-11 a.m. in Room 112-N Centre Block, on Wednesday. Please call the NDP Media Centre at 613-222-2351 or ndpcom@parl.gc.ca.

Bloc Québécois Caucus Meeting—The Bloc Québé-cois caucus will meet from 9:30 a.m. in the Fran-cophonie room (263-S) in Centre Bock, on Wednesday. For more information, call press attaché Julie Groleau, 514-792-2529.

Religious Freedom and Communities: Seminar and Book Launch—Cardus will host a moderated panel discussion on religious freedom and the law to launch the just-published text, Religious Freedom and Com-munities, edited by Dwight Newman and published by LexisNexis Canada Inc. Cardus senior fellow and former religious freedom ambassador Andrew Bennett will moderate a discussion between two of the contribut-ing authors: University of Saskatchewan law professor Dwight Newman and University of Ottawa associate law professor Carissima Mathen. Nov. 16. 5:30-7:30 p.m. Cardus Ottawa, 45 Rideau St. Free. RSVP by Nov. 11 via eventbrite.ca/e/religious-freedom-and-communities-seminar-and-book-launch-tickets-28588551126.

Home Depot Canada Foundation Reception—The foundation invites Parliamentarians and political staff to their parliamentary reception in Ottawa on Nov. 16. The event will celebrate the results of the foundation’s three-year $10-million commitment to help end youth homelessness in Canada. Time: approx. 5:30 p.m. Location: TBC; more details will follow.

Mohamed Fahmy to Discuss His New Book—Wed., Nov. 16, 7:30 p.m., uOttawa Faculty of Law Moot Court Room, Room 147, Fauteux Hall (Faculty of Law Building), 57 Louis-Pasteur, University of Ottawa. Hosted by: University of Ottawa Faculty of Law and the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Format: Welcome by CHRC Chief Commissioner Marie-Claude Landry, introduction by Alex Neve (Sec.-Gen. of Amnesty Inter-national Canada-English Section), 60-minute lecture with book signing to follow. Free, but RSVP required.

THURSDAY, NOV. 17The Power of the Diaspora: Author Meets Reader—An

informal discussion on new books published by members of the Carleton University faculty of public affairs. This month featuring: David Carment, a professor with the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, on his book on migration, diasporas, and citizenship. Nov. 17. 5:30-7 p.m. Irene’s Pub (885 Bank St.), registration: carleton.ca/fpa.

Ukrainian Canadian Congress Gala Dinner—Celebrate 125 years of Ukrainian immigration to Canada, as well as the 75th anniversary of the UCC. Featuring a discus-sion moderated by journalist Paul Wells with Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, vice prime minister of Ukraine for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration, and Paul Grod, UCC national president. Nov. 17. $125 per ticket. 6:30-11 p.m. The Westin hotel, 11 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa. Tickets and information available from UCC National Office: 613-232-8822 or Nataliaromas@cym.org.

FRIDAY, NOV. 18Halifax International Security Forum—This annual

gathering of the international defence and security community will feature journalists, politicians, top bu-reaucrats, and diplomats. Until Nov. 20. Halifax, N.S. halifaxtheforum.org

SATURDAY, NOV. 19APEC Leaders’ Summit—Prime Minister Justin

Trudeau is expected to travel to Lima, Peru, to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation Economic Lead-ers’ Summit. Until Nov. 20.

MONDAY, NOV. 21 House Sitting—The House is sitting this week and

for the next four weeks until it breaks for Christmas on Dec. 16, but it could break earlier.

TUESDAY, NOV. 22Canadian Nurses Association Annual Hill Day Break-

fast—Breakfast reception. 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. in Centre Block. The event will give parliamentarians an overview of home-care services and programs across Canada and how to improve them. Representatives from the CNA board, representing 10 provincial and territorial nursing associations and regulatory colleges, specialty nursing groups, and nursing students, will be in attendance.

Canada Media Fund Showcase—Meet some of the creators and actors of your favourite Canadian televi-sion shows and digital media productions including Heartland Ranch, Yukon Gold, Mohawk Girls, and High-way Thru Hell. Reception guests will be able to have a hands-on experience with virtual reality, special effects, gaming, and more. Sir John A. Macdonald Building, 144 Wellington St., 5-8 p.m. RSVP@summa.ca

Fall Harvest Reception—The Canadian Produce Marketing Association and the Canadian Horticultural Council invite Parliamentarians and political staff to a

reception with representatives from the fresh fruit and vegetable industry at 3 Brewers (240 Sparks St.) from 5:30-7:30 p.m. on Tues., Nov. 22. Please RSVP to Lati-tia Scarr at lscarr@cpma.ca or 613-226-4187 ext 227.

The Tehran Test—Presented by the University of Ottawa’s Centre for International Policy Studies, OpenCanada.org, and the Baha’i Community of Canada, this event subtitled “How human rights cases in Iran are putting Canada’s foreign policy approach to the test,” will feature panellists: journalist Michael Petrou and human rights activist Maryam Nayeb Yazdi. 6-7:30 p.m. Nov. 22. Faculty of Social Sciences, 4004 120 University Private, University of Ottawa campus, Ot-tawa. cips-cepi.ca/event/the-tehran-test

Western University—Is holding a research and university showcase on Nov. 22 from 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. at the Chateau Laurier, hosted by president Amit Chakma, the Western leadership team, and researchers for an informative evening including viewing Western in 3D. London North Centre MP Peter Fragiskatos and the London region Members of Parliament. The evening is organized as a drop-in format starting at 4 p.m. with brief formal remarks scheduled for 5:30 p.m. RSVP adwyer@uwo.ca or 519-661-3104.

WEDNESDAY, NOV. 23 Liberal Caucus Meeting—The Liberals will meet in

Room 237-C Centre Block on Parliament Hill. For more information, please call Liberal Party media relations at media@liberal.ca or 613-627-2384.

Conservative Caucus Meeting—The Conservatives will meet for their national caucus meeting. For more informa-tion, contact Cory Hann, director of communications, Con-servative Party of Canada at coryhann@conservative.ca.

NDP Caucus Meeting—The NDP caucus will meet from 9:15 a.m.-11 a.m. in Room 112-N Centre Block, on Wednesday. Please call the NDP Media Centre at 613-222-2351 or ndpcom@parl.gc.ca.

Bloc Québécois Caucus Meeting—The Bloc Québé-cois caucus will meet from 9:30 a.m. in La Fran-cophonie Room (263-S) in Centre Bock, on Wednesday. For more information, call press attaché Julie Groleau, 514-792-2529.

A Roundtable with Commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force—The Conference of Defence Associations Institute presents a roundtable with Lieutenant-General Michael Hood, commander of the Royal Canadian Air Force. Nov. 23. KPMG, 150 Elgin St., suite 1800, 10:30 a.m.-1 p.m. Not for media attribution and no media reporting. $15-$50. Includes lunch/refresh-ments. Register via cdainstitute.ca.

Shaw Rocket Prize—The Shaw Rocket Fund will host its annual Shaw Rocket Prize event to award three prizes of $25,000 for the best in Canadian children’s program-ming on Nov. 23 from 6-9 p.m. at the Shaw Centre in downtown Ottawa. Ministers, MPs, media, and special guests will be in attendance to celebrate the best pre-school program, the best children’s (6-12) program and the best youth/family program, as chosen by an interna-tional and children’s jury. Invite only. More information: rocketfund.ca/initiatives/shaw-rocket-prize/.

MONDAY, NOV. 28Renewable Industries Forum—This forum is designed

to engage participants in discussions on transitioning Canada to a low-carbon economy, through furthering the role of renewable fuels and bio-based products. Until Nov. 29, The Westin Ottawa hotel, 11 Colonel By Dr. Register via ricanada.org/events/renewable-industries-forum.

TUESDAY, NOV. 2Consumer Technology Association (CTA) Tech Demo

and Reception—For the first time ever, the Consumer Technology Association will be bringing a taste of the CES® to Parliament Hill and will host a reception and tech demo to showcase the latest consumer technology products from our 160+ members across Canada. From drones, to virtual reality, to curved TVs. Tuesday, Nov. 29, 5:30 p.m. – 8 p.m., Chateau Laurier, Ballroom, RSVP: rsvp@ensightcanada.com

The Parliamentary Calendar is a free listing. Send in your political, cultural, diplomatic, or governmental event in a paragraph with all the relevant details under the subject line ‘Parliamentary Calendar’ to news@hilltimes.com by Wednesday at noon before the Monday paper or by Friday at noon for the Wednesday paper. We can’t guarantee inclu-sion of every event, but we will definitely do our best.

news@hilltimes.comThe Hill Times

GRIC, Equal voice, U.S. Embassy to host events U.S. election night in Ottawa

Parliamentary Calendar

U.S. Embassy and AmCham Canada to Host U.S. Election Event—The U.S. Embassy Ottawa, in partnership with the American Chamber of Commerce in Canada (AmCham), will host a U.S. election event on Tuesday, Nov. 8, in the ballroom of the Chateau Laurier Hotel. Doors open at 6:30 p.m. U.S. Ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman will officially welcome guests at 7 p.m. Guests will be able to watch election coverage from the major U.S. television networks, enjoy light refreshments, follow election-related social media feeds, and participate in discussions and election trivia. The event is invitation only and will not be open to the public. The Hill Times photograph by Jake Wright

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre

PHOTO EXHIBITION EXPOSITION DE PHOTOS

PICTURE OUR POLITICAL HISTORY REGARDS SUR NOTRE HISTOIRE POLITIQUE

Press photographers have long been documenting Canadian history. They capture events in a way that sets moments and people in our memory forever. As part of its 150th anniversary celebration, the Canadian

Parliamentary Press Gallery invites you to an exhibit of photos shot by some of the best press photographers, past and present: the Hill's image makers.

Peter Bregg (Canadian Press), 24 Déc. 1969

Les photographes de presse documentent l'histoire canadienne depuis ses débuts. Ils capturent les événements de manière à graver à jamais dans nos mémoires les moments et les visages. Dans le cadre des

célébrations de son 150e anniversaire, la Tribune de la presse parlementaire canadienne vous invite à une exposition de photos de quelques-uns de ses meilleurs photographes de presse, passés et présents: les

créateurs d'images de la colline.

STARTING/À PARTIR DU

11 NOV. 2016

LE MOULIN DE PROVENCE kd

30 METCALFE AT/ANGLE QUEEN

Free admission/Entrée libre