SunTV has been caught staging a fake citizenship oath-retaking ceremony using mostly bureaucrats from Citizenship and Immigration as their oath-takers. Seriously. Because they’re totally not the official media arm of The Party. For his part, Jason Kenney said it was “poorly handled” and then sent a departmental communications staffer to SunTV to apologize. Because apparently ministerial accountability is dead.

Now, this all being said, one has to wonder why the bureaucrats went along with this in the first place – though, to be fair, they did try to get SunTV to simply film one of 13 other prearranged ceremonies, but no. The bureaucrats could have held firm instead of bending over backward to accommodate the official media arm of The Party, but they bent over anyway, and when it blew up, they took the blame. But I look at these bureaucrats who are working under ministerial direction to help SunTV, and yesterday’s story about the senior managers at Statistics Canada quashing internal dissent, and I am taken back to the very same point I made yesterday – have these civil servants forgotten that they swore their oath to the Queen? They serve the Crown and not the government of the day. It is their job to provide impartial advice – not to try to make the minister and prime minister look good. And this goes back to the issue of our lack of civic literacy – people confuse and conflate bureaucrats and civil servants with elected officials all the time, because they don’t understand the separation of roles. It seems that some civil servants need to be reminded of that, too.

After a trip to heritage committee yesterday, the anti-flag-ban bill has had its draconian penalty clauses that threaten jail time struck, and it’s now a bill that will simply “encourage” people to fly the flag more, according to its proper protocol. Seriously. But at least the moronic bill has been declawed, right? Baby steps.

Despite having apologized for his rope comments, Senator Pierre-Hugues Boisvenu is now saying that he’s getting great response to said suggestions that prisoners be given the option of suicide. So is he unapologizing?

Over at the NDP leadership race, it looks like Brian Topp is attracting some hefty donations from Bay St lawyers. Meanwhile, some of the polite sheen looks to be coming off, as Topp’s campaign workers were trying to convince Saganash supporters that Saganash can’t speak good enough French to be leader – despite Saganash being from northern Quebec and quadrilingual. Nastiness ensues.

And Conservative Senator Nancy Greene Raine wants the integrity of Canadian maple syrup protected from knockoffs, in case you were concerned about them.

In place of Nycole Turmel, it was NDP House Leader Joe Comartin who was up first in question period today, asking about raising the age of eligibility for the GIS to 67. Harper answered – which isn’t always the norm when the leader opposite doesn’t ask the question – or rather didn’t so much answer as repeat the talking points on no cuts at present but ensuring the system is viable in the future. Peter Julian brought up the F-35s versus pensions equivalency (Finley: Same talking points), and Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe mentioned that she is part of that future generation that is concerned about seniors today, not that Finley’s answer changed any. Bob Rae brought up the issue of pension reform and the budget; Harper once again responded with his talking points. For his final question, Rae brought up comments that Vic Toews made at the Senate committee on legal and constitutional affairs yesterday about how it is the provinces’ faults, for closing down mental institutions, that we have so many people in prison with mental-health problems. Toews got up and insisted that no, what he said was that it was a complex issue and he would prefer that people with mental health issues end up in proper institutions for care and not prisons.

Round two kicked off with Don Davies bringing up the whole SunTV fake citizenship ceremony issue; Jason Kenney accused him of misleading the public and described it as a “small logistical issue.” That got a huge laugh from the opposition benches. Guy Caron asked about the resignation of Statistics Canada’s chief economist (Paradis: We want to thank him for his years of service); Jean Crowder asked about wait times at Service Canada (Finley: We’re committed to timely delivery!); and Megan Leslie actually got Joe Oliver to admit that he believes that humans cause global warming – before he returned to his “jobs, jobs, jobs!” mantra, as though he were Jean Chrétien circa 1992. Judy Sgro asked about the OAS issue (Finley: Rote talking point); Brison brought in the dimension of rural Canadians, and those who had to retire early for health reasons but found their savings destroyed in the 2008 collapse (Finley: Don’t attack the intelligence of rural Canadians!); and Justin Trudeau asked about EI delays (Finley: Timely service!). Françoise Boivin then asked about the death penalty and abortion debates, and got into a shouting match with Rob Nicholson around the report on the ombudsman for victims of crime's report.

Round three started off with Dany Morin and Randall Garrison again asking about airline regulations affecting trans people, and while the Conservative backbenches weren’t snickering and laughing at it today, Lebel’s answer about 9/11 and safety did not change. Other questions included asbestos, the aforementioned fake citizenship ceremony, the closure of Maritime rescue centres, response times for a lost teenager along the Labrador coast, halibut quotas, fisheries management, Quebec ice wine regulations, and pipeline hearings.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to James Bezan for his chocolate-brown suit with a pink shirt and purple tie, and to Rosane Doré Lefebvre for her tailored grey jacket and skirt with a white shirt and the blue-patterned scarf that was just on this side of acceptable as far as scarves go. Style citations go out to both Matthew Dubé and Raymond Côté for the fluorescent shirt/black suit combination (green for Dubé, blue for Côté), and to Patricia Davidson for a fairly awful two-toned blue smock over her black top.

The joke going around the Twitter Machine last night was that at the pace things are going, the Harper government won’t have to lay off a lot of civil servants because so many of them will resign in protest. And such was the case yesterday with the resignation of the chief economist at Statistics Canada, who tendered his resignation in large part because internal dissent within the department is being quashed by senior managers, especially around the 2011 census and the National Household Survey that replaced the long-form. But here’s the thing – half the point of having a non-partisan, permanent civil service is the ability to speak truth to power, to tell ministers that hey, we have all the research that proves that your political directives aren’t going to work. We’ll still implement them, but we have all this data that shows that you’re barking up the wrong tree, and so on. There is a dire need in politics not to have yes-men surrounding you, because you already get that among political staffers, whose most marketable job skills seem to be their undying loyalty. If the civil service is now clamping down on internal dissent, be it to curry favour with a minister or to try to avoid the brunt of the oncoming axe, it sends a very bad signal for the future of where the institution is headed in this country. Those senior managers should perhaps be reminded that they swore their oath to the Queen and that they serve the Crown – not the prime minister or the minister – and for very good reason.

As you have probably heard by now, at a press conference yesterday morning, Conservative Senator Pierre-Hughes Boisvenu suggested that we can solve prison overcrowding by putting some rope in every cell and letting nature take its course. Also, that we should look at reinstituting capital punishment “in a limited way,” just for those offenders who “can’t be rehabilitated.” He did later apologize and retract the comments, for what it’s worth. But can we also ask why social conservatives are in favour of capital punishment but will fight tooth and nail against doctor-assisted suicide or euthanasia for terminally ill patients who want to check out while they still have some quality of life? Also, given Boisvenu’s status as a “victims of crime advocate” following the murder of his daughter, I think that statements like these show precisely why we insist on justice being blind in our legal system.

Oh, and for all you who say that this somehow proves why the Senate should be abolished – as Nycole Turmel did – how is one senator saying something ridiculous any more justification than all of the boneheaded things that MPs say on a continual basis? Does that mean we should abolish the House, too? Just saying.

Remember a couple of years ago how the Conservatives worked with all other parties to fix a really bad refugee reform bill to turn it into a pretty decent piece of legislation? Well, they’re putting out signals that they’re going to try to undo some of those cooperative fixes now that they have their majority mandate.

The committee for procedures and house affairs has quietly sidelined a motion that would make all sessions on future business take place behind closed doors only. Score one for actual transparency (for now anyway).

Research shows that raising the eligibility to age 67 for OAS would disproportionately affect women and that it would force more seniors onto the provincial welfare rolls – just as the opposition (and primarily the Liberals with these specific arguments) has been saying in the Commons. And so much for the promise not to download costs onto the provinces.

The means by which the government is giving money to International Planned Parenthood Federation projects – through CIDA initiatives rather than funds set aside for the Muskoka Initiative – has certain pro-life MPs grumbling, even if the IPPF projects aren’t abortion-related.

And it looks like Brian Topp is leading NDP leadership hopefuls in terms of fundraising by a fairly significant margin.

Wednesday being caucus day, it tends to produce the best and most engaged question period of the week. And yet the energy wasn’t really crackling. The only things that seemed to have more enthusiasm were partisan members’ statements in advance of QP proper. And so, Nycole Turmel kicked things off by demanding an accounting for Senator Boisvenu’s musings that prisoners should be given ropes in their cells as a means of controlling prison populations; Turmel said that it’s a crime to encourage suicide. Harper replied that Boisvenu had withdrawn his remarks and that they were focused on helping the victims – like Boisvenu’s family (his daughter was murdered). For her last supplemental, Turmel turned to the OAS question, not that Harper would acknowledge that he’s boosting the qualifying age from 65 to 67. Peter Julian picked up the OAS issue as well, and Finley gave him pretty much the same answer Harper did. Rae also took up the OAS issue, reminding Harper that it’s meant for low-income seniors and about costs to provinces and municipalities. Harper went back to his lines about protecting seniors today and in the future.

Round two saw Charlie Angus return to the issue of Attawapiskat and concerns about money being held up by the third-party manager (John Duncan: You’ve just fabricated that whole story); Alexandre Boulerice asked about cuts to services (Finley: We’re trying to provide entitled benefits as quickly as possible); Randall Garrison and Dany Morin brought up the regulations on security screening at airports blocking trans travellers (Lebel: The rules are important and are applied equally to all travellers; you ask us to strengthen regulations and now want us to be less strict); Françoise Boivin and Libby Davies asked about maternal and child funding and the abortion issue (Oda: Look at all the good we’re doing!); Robert Aubin asked about the auditor general’s language issue (Moore: We’re committed to second language training!). Gerry Byrne asked about the demographic crunch (Finley: You keep voting against measures to help); Scott Simms asked why the government would turn over salary data for the CBC but not the PMO (Tony: We have both the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act!); and Kirsty Duncan asked about a response to a petition on “climate change” when the subject was ozone monitoring (Kent: We do know the difference between them and better than you did). Rathika Sitsabaiesan and Matthew Dubé asked about cutting tuitions (Finley: We’re totally helping students, and tuition is provincial jurisdiction!); and Jinny Sims asked about CIDA funds going toward corporate social responsibility (Oda: This government is about using development funds to make a difference!).

Round three saw questions on F-35 design flaws; those training contracts for Blackwater/Xe Services (MacKay: It was the best possible training and the most cost-effective); on the Tamil refugees abandoned in Togo; the trans air regulations issue (this time from Justin Trudeau; Lebel replied with bafflegab about 9/11 and air safety); US steel; forestry in Quebec; a critical Coast Guard science vessel being laid up in drydock; a community trying to buy its wharf back from the government; veterans services under threat; and how the OAS age hike will hurt Quebec’s finances.

I have to say that I was a bit disappointed to hear all the tittering from the government benches on the trans questions and really disappointed in the quality of the minister’s answer. I fully expected an answer blaming the bureaucrats, but what we got instead was a justification of the status quo full of bafflegab. Unbelievable.

Sartorially speaking, snaps go out to Anne Minh-Thu Quach for her trim black dress with purple sleeves, and to Jonathan Genest-Jourdain for his grey suit with a purple checked shirt and dark tie. Style citations go out to Eve Adams for her collection of dull, boxy primary-coloured jackets that she has a habit of sporting (today being a bland forest green), and to LaVar Payne for his tan suit, shirt and tie.
 

As the rhetoric on the OAS and pension debates really ramps up, what with the (truncated) debate on the pooled registered pension plans and the continued reaction to Harper’s speech in Davos, it helps to get some perspective. You can get some political perspective (and Bob Rae delivered one of his trademarked barnburner speeches in the Commons on Monday, and make what you will of the content, it’s nice to see someone demonstrate that there is some oratory skill left in Canadian politics), and you can get some journalistic perspective. On that note, Paul Wells has put together a really comprehensive piece about the OAS issue and some of the political calculation that has been going on with it. Suffice to say, this is still early days for this debate, and I’m sure it will reach the fevered pitch of hysteria quite shortly.

RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson was before the public safety committee yesterday, where he said he wasn’t muzzled by the minister (he just didn’t want to meet with Senator Kenny), he will defend his independence, and that the Force’s discipline process is cumbersome and requires overhaul as they look into the harassment complaint investigations.

Vic Toews denies that he withheld tabling a potentially embarrassing (or at the very least, politically inconvenient) report on the efficacy of the long-gun registry – you know, like he did a year ago when he did the same thing.

On the topic of the registry, it seems the government’s witnesses during the debate on the bill to scrap it were also members of its firearms advisory committee and didn’t bother to tell anyone. Because this is the most open and transparent government in the history of ever!

The Canadian Forces spent $2.4 million on training at a facility owned by Blackwater (now called Xe Services).

And Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin says that the judicial system needs to learn to deal with the new reality of social media, with Facebook and Twitter, when it comes to reports coming out of the courtroom, and what it means for fairness and accuracy around what gets said about those proceedings.