THE GAME WITHIN THE GAME — One MP's procedural tool is another MP's obstruction. It's silly season in Ottawa (more on that later), when the government tries to govern while the Official Opposition aims to produce as many headaches as possible using the standing orders that rule the House of Commons. Enter debate on Bill C-47, CHRYSTIA FREELAND's budget implementation legislation. It's the first of two annual omnibus bills packed with measures, including the so-called "grocery rebate" — aka the temporary doubling of the GST rebate common in Liberal talking points. Conservatives are desperate to block the bill. We don't know with certainty they'd throw an actual kitchen sink into the House aisle if the rules allowed it, but their procedural tools meant to run out the clock on debate are about as blunt. — These are our demands: PIERRE POILIEVRE said his Conservatives would end the obstruction on two conditions: "a plan to balance the budget to lower interest rates and inflation, and no new carbon tax hikes." — No chance: Liberals have at least the NDP's votes, thanks to a confidence and supply deal that keeps surviving another day, and they'll likely cut off debate as soon as rules allow. For now, they wait impatiently across the aisle. — Time left on the clock: 14 days max till the summer break, and that's if MPs don't get so sick of each other that they agree to rise early. — Tools of the trade: Points of order, points of privilege, concurrence motions, debate requests — whatever it takes. Conservative MP MICHELLE REMPEL GARNER consumed almost 10 minutes of House time with a point of order in which she complained the government blew its deadline on responding substantively to a written question she placed on the order paper. The government has 45 days to provide a reasonable answer to such questions, though ministers regularly claim they don't have the resources to answer detailed questions before that time runs out. Rempel Garner's point, in short: not my problem; do better. Fellow Conservatives DAMIEN KUREK, JOHN BRASSARD, DAN MAZIER and DOUG SHIPLEY all ate up House time with similar points of order. KERRY-LYNNE FINDLAY sought clarification on a speaker's ruling about House voting procedures. MICHAEL BARRETT took issue, in as many words as possible, with the government's inability to appoint a permanent ethics commissioner to replace MARIO DION. ANDREW SCHEER argued strenuously for five minutes that the word "phony" is perfectly parliamentary. GARNETT GENUIS moved a motion to concur in a public accounts committee report dating to last October in which Conservatives voiced opposition to the federal carbon tax. Tick tock, tick tock. — The truly mundane: Conservatives gave notice of more than 900 amendments to C-47, hundreds of which were ruled in order. They mostly called for the deletion of various clauses in the bill. None of the amendments will pass, but the speaker had to read the text of every proposed amendment into Hansard. That task gobbled up hours and hours. Then they started debating them, in clusters determined by the speaker. Tick tock, tick tock. — Counterattack: Liberals can only twiddle their thumbs as many of the games play out. But they have an ace up their sleeve: time allocation. Government House Leader MARK HOLLAND gave notice Monday that his side would limit debate on both C-47 and C-35, a bill that would enshrine funding for federal-provincial child care deals. But even that measure comes at a cost. The bells that summon MPs to vote ring for 30 minutes, and votes themselves take time. Precious, precious time. — We know how this ends. The budget bill will become law. But Conservatives will make life difficult for the government, which is about all the power they can muster this month. Know someone who could use Ottawa Playbook? Direct them to this link . Five days a week, zero dollars. WELCOME TO DAY 14 OF “SILLY SEASON” — That count is according to when former Liberal MP SCOTT SIMMS thinks it started this year: the day of DAVID JOHNSTON’s May 23 press conference to release his findings on foreign interference, which opposition MPs slammed over an appearance of bias. A former opposition politician himself, Simms tells Playbook the genesis of any silly season is when a big issue appears that the opposition can glom onto for an end-of-season burst of partisan intensity. “The thrust of silly season is about the narratives,” Simms said. TIM POWERS of Summa Strategies said the annual stretch is a spate of one-upmanship for MPs from all parties, an attitude of “I can outshine your budget bill with my filibuster” that usually hits once the late-night sittings start in Parliament with just a couple weeks left on the clock. The term (originally British) has been thrown around in Parliament at least as far back as 1938. Few people bother to define it, which Playbook considers a missed opportunity. –– Sillies defined: Simms says it’s “a cesspool of antics and skullduggery.” He adds that it’s, “quite possibly the most unabashed, unapologetic way of seeking attention.” –– The usual pattern: Powers says the goal for the opposition is to slow down the government while the government tries to ram through as much as it can. “Behave like sugared-up kids at recess, run around, get a rap on the knuckles from the teacher — or not! And then just go home.” The sillies are a last gasp to frame issues before the barbecue circuit, when it’s crucial for MPs to brag to constituents about their work, and it provides a chance to bring in more money. It has only intensified during the past two decades, Simms said, as Question Period and other House proceedings increasingly turn into fodder for sharing on social media. Quality of debate wanes. Marathon votes and other procedural tactics are the norm. And it all takes a toll on staff. –– Quotable quotes: “It's kind of like your players in a hockey game willfully wanting overtime,” Simms said. “If you want to see Parliament in its glory … don't watch it during silly season.” Powers: “If you can find a Canadian who actually gives a – and I'll use the word purposely – a s—t about these parliamentary games, then give that person or people a medal.” –– Survival tips: Simms suggests it’s a good time to “start writing your memoirs” or “spend time doing something you like.” Powers advises keeping a level head since it’s easy to make mistakes when the adrenaline is running high. Seek out those with a good sense of humor — someone like former MPs RODGER CUZNER, SCOTT BRISON or JAMES RAJOTTE, or Conservative MP JAMES BEZAN – someone who can inject levity into the situation. “We miss not having as many of them around. It seems if there's a casualty of silly season these days, it's the lack of humor. If you can't laugh at this nonsense, then you really shouldn't be in politics.” What’s your advice for surviving the season? Send it our way so that we can share.
| 
