Tim Powers, a Conservative pundit and lobbyist at Summa Strategies, said that while the government would “most certainly want to get onto other subjects,” it can also advance the F-35 story.
“They have an opportunity try and change the story on the F-35s if they advance their seven-point plan and even move beyond that. I don’t think it is overstating it to say this is a key point in the history of this government. How the next chapter is written could be crucial in determining its long-term fate,” Mr. Powers said.
“I won’t be surprised if they try to bring something else up that will take the limelight off them and particularly off the Defence Department. It’s really hard to forecast what they’re going to do, but they clearly will be trying to get it off the F-35s,” NDP House Leader Joe Comartin (Windsor-Tecumseh, Ont.) told The Hill Times last week. “They certainly haven’t been successful up to this point.”
The House resumes after a two-week break on April 23. Mr. Comartin and Liberal House Leader Marc Garneau (Westmount-Ville Marie, Que.) said that their parties will focus on the auditor general’s report showing that the total cost of the F-35 fighter jets the government was planning to buy to replace CF-18 planes is actually $25.1-billion rather than the $14.7-billion price the Conservatives and the Department of National Defence have maintained since last year.
“We have questions which we’ve been asking certainly about the F-35 and the fact that the government has lied to Canadians about a number of things,” Mr. Garneau said. “Lying about having an open competition. Lying about having had a contract when no contract existed and also lying about the price of the thing, so obviously for us, and the fact that the government is not accepting any accountability, this will continue to be an issue for us.”
In response to Auditor General Michael Ferguson’s report released on April 3, Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) said that the government accepts the recommendations in the report and is acting on them.
“The government has not acquired the aircraft. The government has not signed a contract. The government has frozen the funds for acquisition. The government will examine the process,” he said in Question Period. “The government has said it will set up a separate and distinct secretariat, and we will make sure there are independent verification processes. That is how the government will proceed.”
Last week, Defence Minister Peter MacKay (Central Nova, N.S.) said Mr. Ferguson’s calculation was not the normal procedure for costing.
“If you went out and bought yourself a new mini-van and you wanted to drive it off the lot and it was going to cost you $20,000, you wouldn’t calculate the gas, the washer fluid and the oil and give yourself a salary to drive it for the next 15 or 20 years,” Mr. Mackay said. “That’s part of a new calculation now.”
The Conservatives are trying to simplify the scandal to “just two different forms of accounting or ways of reporting,” but it won’t stand up, Mr. Comartin said. “It’s obvious that the government’s going to want to try and change the channel on the scandal over F-35s.”
Government House Leader Peter Van Loan (York Simcoe, Ont.) said before the Easter break that the House will debate second reading of Bill C-31, the Immigration Reform Bill, and report stage and third reading of Bill C-26, the Citizen’s Arrest and Self-Defence Bill when the House returns.
Meanwhile, another lobbyist, who did not want to be named, said last week that the F-35 issue would be Mr. MacKay’s “undoing” and could cause a Cabinet shuffle.
“I don’t think that PMO will go to grave lengths to defend him, so I think you will see a shuffle. I don’t think they’ll necessarily move him out of Cabinet, but he might end up with CRA or some kind of post that essentially says go away and don’t bother us,” the lobbyist said, noting that it could happen over the summer unless the pressure adds up. “There may just be too much heat to withstand and they may have to make the move, but this is bad. … This one’s tough. They’ve backed themselves into a corner here. The criticisms and some of the press, I don’t know how you recover. I don’t know how MacKay recovers.”
Lobbyist and Conservative pundit Geoff Norquay, a principal at Earnscliffe Strategy Group, said this notion was “nonsense.”
“Never have so many needless words been expended about conflicting accounting systems over which not one penny has yet to be expended. It is as simple as that,” Mr. Norquay told The Hill Times. “Given the realities of this procurement, the claim that the government has misled anyone is a metaphysical argument based on a hypothetical.”
The lobbyist said it will also be interesting to see if and how the opposition is effective in pushing this scandal, when the Conservatives have weathered several others since 2006 and all the way to a majority government. “Which ones have legs, which ones don’t?” the lobbyist said. “I see moving MacKay out of Defence as a way of releasing the pressure of it all.”
Mr. Comartin said the House will have to deal with the point of privilege Liberal interim leader Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.) raised before the House recessed. In his argument, Mr. Rae said that the government’s response to the AG’s report breaches MPs’ privilege because it is inconsistent with DND’s and Public Works’ departmental response in the actual report.
The report states that the two departments did not agree with two of Mr. Ferguson’s conclusions about their actions, while ministers have said they do agree with the AG’s findings. Mr. Rae said the government misled Parliament over its position.
In response to the point of privilege, Mr. Van Loan said it is possible for the government and bureaucrats to disagree.
“It is absolutely understandable that officials in the affected departments would want to defend and explain their actions. That is what has been reported by the auditor general in his report. In the sections that said that the officials in those two departments, not the government, took issue, I can understand the actual inclination for them to want to do it.
“However, the position of the government is not the position taken by the officials in those departments,” Mr. Van Loan said, noting there was no breach.
“The position of the government, as reported in the House by us, is a position that is taken by the governor-in-council. It is a position that is taken by Cabinet. We have had the opportunity and the benefit of reading the auditor general’s report, taking into account all the facts related in it, the information that has been provided, including the efforts by members of the department to explain their actions,” he said. “The fact is, having considered all those findings and having considered those recommendations, Cabinet, the Governor-in-Council, agrees with the auditor general.”
Mr. Comartin said he hasn’t yet spoken to the point of privilege and will do so when the House returns.
Shortly after, House Speaker Andrew Scheer (Regina-Qu’Appelle, Sask.) will rule on the matter.
Meanwhile, the lobbyist said the government’s recent announcement of $5.2-billion of budget cuts and more than 19,000 public service layoffs will also be “fodder for the opposition” when the House returns. “Anytime you cut people, you equate that with a cut in service level. But on that one, I think the majority of Canadians are not necessarily opposed to cuts in the civil service, so I think the government can continue on its course and take the abuse in Question Period, but I don’t think it’s going to stick,” the lobbyist said.
Mr. Comartin said that’s an important issue for the NDP. “On a daily basis, we’re seeing more and more the types of cuts that are coming both the programs and to staff and so I think you’ll see a focus on that for the immediate period when we’re back,” he said.
Mr. Garneau said the House will also most likely deal with an expected budget implementation bill. The Liberals will also focus on Old Age Security, he said.
Original Article
Source: hill times
Author: BEA VONGDOUANGCHANH
No comments:
Post a Comment