Saturday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your weekend reading.

- George Monbiot examines how politics in the UK and the U.S. are dominated by unaccountable corporate money. And Stephen Maher and B.J. Siekierski report that both the Libs and Cons are fully on board - as Rona Ambrose managed to take (however justified) umbrage at Justin Trudeau's vacation on a private island while she herself was being entertained on a billionaire's yacht.

- Alex Hemingway points out the similarities between the corporate infrastructure giveaways being planned by Trudeau and Donald Trump alike. And Paul Krugman discusses the particular menace raised by Trump in dealing with the world:

(T)his administration doesn’t seem prepared on any front. Mr. Trump’s confrontational phone calls, in particular, don’t sound like the working out of an economic or even political strategy — cunning schemers don’t waste time boasting about their election victories and whining about media reports on crowd sizes.

No, what we’re hearing sounds like a man who is out of his depth and out of control, who can’t even pretend to master his feelings of personal insecurity. His first two weeks in office have been utter chaos, and things just keep getting worse — perhaps because he responds to each debacle with a desperate attempt to change the subject that only leads to a fresh debacle.

America and the world can’t take much more of this. Think about it: If you had an employee behaving this way, you’d immediately remove him from any position of responsibility and strongly suggest that he seek counseling.

- Graham Readfeam exposes how the coal industry has turned its inaccurate talking points into the basis for far too many policy choices.

- The CP reports on yet another Tundra Energy oil spill in Saskatchewan - which should remind us how little claims about corporate responsibility have to do with reality.

- Finally, Deborah Aarts highlights the approach millenials take to the workplace - and notes that a reasonable expectation that they not be subjected to abuse is being read as being "coddled" by the higher-ups wanting to be able to exploit them.

Juxtaposition

Con Environment Minister Rona Ambrose not so long ago, warning of the desperate need for legislation to allow the federal government to deal effectively with greenhouse gas emissions:

When Canada's Clean Air Act passes, we will have the power to:

- set fuel efficiency standards in the auto sector
- establish national air quality objectives based on health and be accountable for reaching them
- be accountable to Parliament by reporting on annual progress
- be accountable to Canadians through an annual report on air quality
- be able to regulate products that create emissions such as woodstoves and gas-powered lawnmowers
- be able to blend fuels so we can offer Canadians cleaner fuels like ethanol and biodiesel and give our farmers opportunity to participate in the renewable fuels industry
- be able to regulate indoor air for radon, which is the leading cause of lung cancer among non smokers.
- be able to issue mandatory reporting notices on products that cause pollution and require companies to report on their human health and environmental impacts
- be able to issue interim emergency orders to shut down polluters if we believe immediate action is needed
- it will expand the inspection powers of our enforcement officers
- companies will no longer be able to voluntarily report to government, they will have to have independent verification and evaluation of their pollution information
- we will introduce new energy efficiency requirements and labeling requirements for 20 new consumer products such as washing machines and dishwashers and electronic products like televisions and DVD players.
...
Our health has suffered long enough and our environment has suffered long enough. We need Canada's Clean Air Act to make real progress for my generation and the generations that come after me.

And again:

Canada's Clean Air Act is an essential tool in this government's commitment to achieving concrete results on air quality and climate change in the short, medium, and long-term.

This legislation will give us the means to put in place new enforceable regulated requirements to reduce emissions and take coordinated action to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gases. It sets out important amendments to the Fuels Division of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Which brings us to...Con Environment Minister Peter Kent today, declaring that it's ridiculous to suggest that legislation is needed to allow the federal government to deal effectively with greenhouse gas emissions:

As an aside, just weeks into this job let me say how especially frustrating I find the constant, critical refrain that this Government has no environmental plan.

Not only do we have one, we are one of the very few countries that does.

What many people don’t realize is that Environment Canada already has the legal tools it needs to execute our plan. It requires no new legislation.

From order, chaos

Plenty of others have commented on Rona Ambrose's order requiring the union representing Ottawa transit workers to vote on an offer to capitulate. But while one expects the Cons to decide on the result most damaging to workers regardless of the merits, it's worth noting that the Ambrose's order looks to have been a complete and avoidable failure even on her own assumptions as to how the dispute should play out:

Federal Labour Minister Rona Ambrose took an unprecedented step Wednesday and intervened in the city’s labour dispute with its striking transit union when she ordered a membership vote on the city’s last contract offer no later than Jan. 9.

Ms. Ambrose made the order Wednesday at about 3:30 p.m. after the city requested that she do so...

In a statement, Ms. Ambrose said “the fastest way to resolve this matter is for the parties to get back to the table and reach an agreement,” but Mayor Larry O’Brien quashed that idea shortly after the minister made the order.

“I think now that the vote is on the table, there will be no bargaining,” he said...

Union officials said they didn’t take the city last two offers to a vote because the offers contained the same scheduling and route assignment demands by the city that were rejected by 98 per cent of their membership in vote a week before the strike began on Dec. 10.

From the turn of events described, it would seem that Ambrose didn't bother going back to the city and even discussing whether it would be willing to talk to the union after she acceded to its request, or considering whether to set any conditions on a vote which might encourage talks in the meantime.

Instead, Ambrose apparently gave O'Brien the order he asked for without looking into how it would affect potential talks between the parties. Which led to O'Brien being able to summarily dismiss her public suggestion - and ensured that the city will have no motivation to work toward her supposedly preferred outcome (at least until after a vote takes place and rejects the offer).

Of course, it's difficult to tell whether Ambrose merely took a misleadingly soft public line while delivering the most employer-friendly result possible, or whether she was genuinely clueless about the likelihood that an order made without some conditions or assurances from the city would serve as an obstacle to further negotiations. But it surely can't be a good sign when the only explanations for a ministerial action are dishonesty or incompetence - which makes it a serious problem that the Cons are still leaving little room for any other conclusion.

On contested titles

The race for the title of Most Embarrassing Con Cabinet Minister has been a hard-fought one from the beginning. Early favourites Rona Ambrose and Vic Toews were moved to lower-profile portfolios, leaving Gordon O'Connor as the current leader.

But there's a new dark horse in the race. Last week, Michael Fortier decided to make a government polling investigation as partisan and untrustworthy as possible by appointing Daniel Paille to the task. And today, word comes out that Fortier is alleged to have rigged a contracting process in order to award a $400 million deal to a former client:

An Ottawa IT contractor is calling for an inquiry into the preliminary award of a $400-million contract to Montreal-based CGI Group Inc., a former client of Public Works Minister Michael Fortier from his days as an investment banker.

TPG Technology Consulting Ltd. of Ottawa will file a request today with the federal Public Sector Integrity Office to investigate whether Mr. Fortier was in a conflict of interest.

Mr. Fortier was an investment banker with Credit Suisse First Boston from 1999 to 2004, during which time he headed the firm's Montreal office.

In March 2004, Credit Suisse was one of the underwriters for a share offering by CGI that raised more than $330 million, and Mr. Fortier was listed in regulatory filings as the primary contact for Credit Suisse...

TPG has been providing IT services to a variety of federal departments and agencies through an eight-year contract with Public Works worth roughly $200 million, said Mr. Powell.

In May, the department issued a request for proposals for similar "engineering and technical services."

But when TPG attempted to bid, the company was told by government officials that it would need references for work the size of the new contract, estimated to be worth more than $400 million over seven years.

"We could not respond to it, even though we're doing the work today. That looked a little strange. We wrote to the minister on that," said Mr. Powell.

Government bureaucrats also told the company that the technical evaluation of the bids was "very close," and TPG's bid was easily the cheapest, said Mr. Powell. But the company alleges that Public Works changed the process by asking that the scores be re-evaluated.

While the claim isn't yet proven, the conflict of interest at least appears to be fairly obvious. And the prospect that the minister generally responsible for government services might be inflating costs paid out of the Canadian public purse should be ready fodder for both discontent among any principled Cons who haven't yet jumped ship, and attacks from the opposition parties.

Toss in Fortier's consistent incompetence on his department's planned selloff of government buildings, and there's no lack of readily-visible problems with Fortier's tenure. And that's without his having faced the scrutiny of the House of Commons - which means both that the may be plenty already waiting to surface, and that Fortier hasn't yet had a full opportunity to make a fool of himself through words as well as actions.

Of course, the overriding embarrassment has to lie with the Prime Minister responsible for handing over the power which these ministers have handled so poorly. But it never hurts to point out that Harper's most-trusted few have in fact shown themselves entirely undeserving of Canadian confidence - and hopefully a bit more focus on that group will help to make sure their race to the bottom comes to a merciful end.