Carney Liberals BLOCKED from appointing a loyalist as PBO!
Episode Stats
Words per Minute
177.75777
Summary
In this episode, I talk about the new Parliamentary Budget Officer, Jason Jocks, and why he should not be the next PBO. I also read an article from the CBC and a video from an anti-oil and gas candidate.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Hey guys, Wyatt Claypool here. Rather shockingly, something actually good happened in Parliament a
00:00:06.620
couple days ago. The Conservatives ended up getting a win by having other opposition parties
00:00:11.980
back them on forcing Mark Carney's Liberals to interview new prospects for the Parliamentary
00:00:18.160
Budget Officer in front of a committee. This is in response to Carney's Liberals trying to very
00:00:24.980
quickly replace the interim PBO, Jason Jocks, with a Liberal Loyalist. Now, he is just the interim,
00:00:32.860
and I know some people have pointed out, oh, it's no big deal, they're trying to replace Jason Jocks,
00:00:37.000
he's the interim, he's meant to be replaced. The interim is supposed to have a term of six months.
00:00:43.020
It gives you a long period of time to find the new permanent Parliamentary Budget Officer,
00:00:48.900
but after just two months, because he was appointed in mid-September, they are already trying to get
00:00:54.400
rid of him because they don't like that he tells the truth. He is very sharp in his criticisms of
00:01:00.520
the Liberal government spending and how much debt servicing costs are starting to be of our yearly
00:01:06.340
budget. You could say, well, that sounds partisan. He shouldn't be criticizing. Actually, he should.
00:01:11.580
It's a watchdog position. The person who is the PBO is meant to look at the balance sheet of the
00:01:17.940
government and say, hey guys, this keeps getting worse every single year, and like Jason Jocks said,
00:01:22.780
this is becoming unsustainable. He also called their spending shocking and stupefying, which
00:01:28.940
just makes me like him more, but the Liberals clearly didn't like it. But now we have all the
00:01:34.100
other parties basically saying, it doesn't matter if you like it or you don't like it, you're going
00:01:38.960
to have to interview your new prospects for the PBO in front of us so we can weed out if this person
00:01:45.160
is actually going to hold you accountable or not. So presumably, a Conservative can ask the questions
00:01:51.340
to the PBO. What do you think about the current budget? Do you think this level of spending is
00:01:55.520
appropriate? How bad is this accumulation of debt for our next 10 years? Is this going to be something
00:02:02.640
that's going to hold back our economic growth in the future? That's something that we should be able
00:02:07.360
to ask because if they can't answer that with an objective, correct answer that yes, the amount of
00:02:12.920
debt is actually getting quite bad, then they should not be the PBO. This is not a position for
00:02:17.800
somebody to give Mark Carney a back massage. But before we get into the article I wanted to
00:02:22.740
read, I just want to remind you guys, hey, if you like the show, make sure to leave a like on the
00:02:26.680
video, subscribe if you are not yet a subscriber, and then of course, leave a comment on what you
00:02:32.000
think. Later on, I actually want to also get into a video from one of the federal NDP leadership
00:02:38.200
candidates because somebody I know dunked on them extremely hard for their anti-oil and gas
00:02:44.180
position. But here, let's get into this article from the CBC, and it says, House committee asks to
00:02:51.000
interview shortlist of budget watchdog candidates. Interim PBO has questioned sustainability of
00:02:56.700
government finances. So the article opens up saying a committee of MPs is asking the government
00:03:02.880
for a shortlist of candidates as it seeks to find a new permanent parliamentary budget officer.
00:03:07.900
After the interim fiscal watchdog raised concerns about Canada's finances. A motion adopted at the
00:03:14.000
House Government Operations Committee on Thursday is also requesting that a subcommittee be allowed
00:03:18.620
to interview the potential candidates behind closed doors and make recommendations to the
00:03:22.860
government who should be selected for the permanent position. Quote, I believe there needs to be a PBO
00:03:28.000
appointed to a full-time position who is vetted by parliamentarians, said Conservative MP Kelly Block,
00:03:33.960
who moved the motion. The motion was adopted with Conservatives and Block members voting in favour
00:03:38.280
while the Liberals voted against. That's my mistake. Yeah, there actually isn't any NDP on
00:03:43.240
the committees because they aren't an official party. So it's Liberals, Conservatives and Block,
00:03:48.440
but because the Liberals are only a minority government, that means that the Conservatives
00:03:53.080
and the Block Quebecois can actually overrule them in many of these committees. Reading on,
00:03:58.400
it says, the PBO is a nonpartisan office of parliament providing independent economic and
00:04:02.800
fiscal analysis to the Senate and the House of Commons. As it stands, the PBO is appointed by the
00:04:07.660
government after conducting consultations with the leaders of recognized parties and groups in both
00:04:12.240
Houses of Parliament, according to the Parliament of Canada Act. The appointment must also be
00:04:16.740
approved by both chambers. Block said the interview process she proposed should be considered part of
00:04:22.360
the consultation process outlined in the Act. Thursday's motion adopted in the wake of the
00:04:26.940
government appointing Jason Jacques to the PBO role on an interim basis earlier this fall.
00:04:32.440
In one of its first committee appearances in September, Jacques criticized the government spending
00:04:37.520
a stupefying, shocking, and unsustainable. Last week, in the wake of the Liberal government releasing
00:04:42.180
its budget, Jacques released a new report that slightly contrasted his earlier remarks. He said
00:04:49.240
that while the government is unlikely to meet its deficit targets, the federal finances are
00:04:53.060
sustainable over the long term. No, no, he actually did not say that. And this is where the CBC is
00:05:00.220
being the CBC. In his own report, he said that the fiscal anchors that the Liberals have put in place
00:05:08.160
in order to meet their targets only have a 7.5% chance of actually holding. Yes, he's saying that,
00:05:15.600
yes, we're not going to collapse in the short run here. But overall, the debt accumulation is still
00:05:21.780
extremely bad. His whole point about it being unsustainable is that the idea that the Liberal
00:05:29.120
plans are very unlikely to actually hold. Yes, the Liberals will always have some sort of a chart
00:05:35.020
showing the debt going down. And Jason Jacques can confirm if you actually stick to that, if you stick
00:05:40.920
from going at from a $78 billion deficit to 65 to 60 to 55 to 40, yeah, technically it becomes
00:05:48.220
sustainable. He also said that the chances that the fiscal anchors hold to the point where you can
00:05:54.940
have that gradual reduction in deficits over time is wrong. He also called out the Liberals for greatly
00:06:01.860
miscategorizing a lot of the spending in its budget. $94 billion in the budget was miscategorized
00:06:10.060
in a way that he made it very clear it's pretty hard to have done that by accident. They basically made
00:06:16.020
it so that a bunch of operating spending was categorized as infrastructure spending. It
00:06:21.680
very clearly was, at least from his perspective, operating operation spending, because the Liberals
00:06:27.660
were trying to market the idea that the deficit is just because we have so much in infrastructure
00:06:31.840
and we're investing in the economy. And Jason Jacques pointed out a lot of that is just standard
00:06:38.400
operating expenses that may have a slight vague tie to infrastructure, but these are not
00:06:43.960
new infrastructure investments overall. Overall, I think the infrastructure investments in the budget
00:06:49.820
were like $215 billion, but then you had to remove $94 billion, and it's not nearly as much
00:06:55.020
as the Liberals would make it out to be. And in fact, even if you took out all the infrastructure
00:07:00.880
spending, the new infrastructure spending, they would still be in a deficit with just the operating
00:07:06.060
spending alone. That's the problem. This government is so spendthrift, despite what Carney says,
00:07:12.840
that even if it wasn't, if you took all the investments out, we are still spending too much.
00:07:18.700
Yes, the investments are still spending, and I find that so obnoxious, but even if I was to follow
00:07:22.980
the logic of Carney, no, he's not spending less and investing more. He's spending more and investing
00:07:28.660
more. He's just spending more. That's all that is happening here.
00:07:31.940
And it said, going forward, it says, during Thursday's committee meeting, Conservative MP Tamara Jensen
00:07:38.900
asked Jax about the wording in the job posting and suggested the government wants someone who might
00:07:43.760
be less keen to criticize its fiscal position. Quote, it kind of sounds like they just want to make sure
00:07:50.120
somebody's going to keep things on the down low, unquote Jensen said. Jax disagreed with her assessment.
00:07:57.680
He said his interpretation of the wording applies to meetings he would have with all parliamentarians,
00:08:03.100
but most of the meetings are in private with their staff, and none of that information is
00:08:06.880
divulged with other parliamentarians. And that's important, and you need to someone who can be
00:08:11.240
discreet, not share that information. Although I can really, it's pretty obvious that Jax would,
00:08:17.120
of course, say that because he's not going to be the type of guy to just go out and just start
00:08:22.980
slamming them on like, oh, yes, they're very corrupt. Oh, yes, they have too many closed door meetings.
00:08:27.180
He's just focused on the numbers, which I like about him. But again, I think that he also will
00:08:33.600
have to, he's going to have to smooth things out because I actually heard that he might go for the
00:08:37.300
permanent position, which I would fully support him taking because the PBO should be as honest as
00:08:42.460
humanly possible. It should be someone who all they care about is getting the numbers right.
00:08:47.180
But now let's jump into this little video that NDP leadership candidate Avi Lewis posted
00:08:53.860
just yesterday or just this morning. And he says, my position is clear. I am unequivocally opposed to
00:09:01.400
any new fossil fuel development, including LNG. Industry and government have spent years selling
00:09:06.980
the lie that natural gas is a bridge to the future. The bridge is burning. We must have the courage to
00:09:12.700
say this to every government of any stripe. If you're building a new pipeline or fossil fuel
00:09:17.980
infrastructure, this shall not pass. Is he making a Lord of the Rings reference? But regardless,
00:09:24.980
this man is delusional, except he's in the top three people likely to become the new liberal leader.
00:09:32.840
At the very least, he's going to have a kingmaking role between either if Rob Hashton becomes the
00:09:39.400
leader or if Heather McPherson, because it's pretty much Heather McPherson, Rob Ashton, and Avi Lewis.
00:09:45.840
Now, if you're a conservative, you probably want Heather McPherson to win. She's not as crazy as Avi
00:09:51.540
Lewis on stuff like this, at the same time that she's not like so... Rob Ashton's still basically
00:09:58.880
a communist. But Rob Ashton uses a lot of more working class language. He comes across more
00:10:03.960
working class. And I could actually see that ripping some votes in the Windsor type areas back over to the
00:10:09.400
NDP from the conservatives. Heather McPherson doesn't bring any of the people who started voting
00:10:14.700
conservative in this last election who used to vote NDP. But she will rip back liberals who voted for
00:10:20.620
the Liberal Party this last election, but previously were voting for the NDP. But let's take a look at
00:10:27.440
When it comes to the question of LNG, I want to be really clear. I'm a British Columbian NDPer,
00:10:32.580
and I am very grateful for our NDP government in this province. But when it comes to LNG,
00:10:37.460
so many of us are heartbroken, we are utterly mystified, and we are frankly enraged at the fact
00:10:44.000
that our NDP government is going full bore on this fossil fuel. The Xila Sims project,
00:10:49.100
re-announced by Carney this week, should not proceed, in my view. Absolutely not. It's U.S. owned and
00:10:55.200
operated. The backers of it are Trumpian billionaire bad guys. And like,
00:11:00.640
they're bad guys, everyone. They're bad guys. Like, what a childish way of talking about politics.
00:11:07.480
Oh my guys, these are Trumpian American bad guys. They want to put oil in our economy. This is evil.
00:11:16.580
Like, I'm actually fine with the projects for the most part that Carney's announcing. The only problem
00:11:22.500
with them is he's just re-announcing old projects that were already approved. Like, many of these
00:11:26.560
projects, it wasn't just that they were already underway, and they really didn't need the fast
00:11:30.960
tracking. They literally are already on their way to being built. They do not need any fast
00:11:36.400
tracking. Carney is just re-announcing old projects that are behind schedule, pretending like,
00:11:41.140
oh, if they get complete in the next six months, it's because of me. Like, it literally would have
00:11:45.180
happened anyways. Other than like, all the stupid green energy projects that he's dumping taxpayer money
00:11:50.540
into, I'm fine with the LNG expansions and whatnot. But imagine being so out of touch as an NDP
00:11:55.560
candidate. You're having to criticize your own BC NDP government, which is already delusionally
00:12:02.060
left-wing, because they are not so left-wing that they just started cutting all oil and gas projects.
00:12:08.160
The smug face of a man right here who has never actually had to produce anything. He makes money
00:12:16.200
from being unproductive. There are so many people who work in government, work in non-profits,
00:12:20.900
activist groups, who somehow have a full-time job of just being a professional, useless person
00:12:26.620
who acts as a consultant. I don't even know what Avi Lewis's background is. I am just so confident
00:12:32.480
the man has never actually produced something of worth for society.
00:12:36.800
Many of these years, I'm totally opposed to it. You know that companies and governments have for a
00:12:41.500
long time peddled the PR spin that natural gas is a bridge to a clean energy future. The bridge
00:12:47.340
is burning. It is no kind of bridge. Methane is the most potent greenhouse gas in the 20 years,
00:12:53.740
the next 20 years, when we must make this societal shift. It leaks at the fracking site. It leaks at
00:12:59.200
the liquefaction site. It leaks when they're putting it on the tankers. Very little. It just doesn't.
00:13:05.840
He's just wrong. Apparently, Ohio and Pennsylvania should be on fire right now, according to Avi Lewis.
00:13:12.560
He's just a delusional granola weirdo who just thinks that government should be run for and by
00:13:18.600
hippies who, like, sell, like, jam at farmers markets. We must choose a different path. This
00:13:23.460
is no bridge to the future. And we can't just oppose conservative or liberal projects like this.
00:13:29.520
We need to have the bravery to say to any government of any stripe that is building new pipelines and new
00:13:35.160
fossil fuel infrastructure, this shall not pass. This is why I do not want this guy to become the NDP
00:13:41.980
leader. One, I actually don't mind all the parties becoming more rational over time. But, like, he's so
00:13:48.320
nutty, I don't think anyone would act. I think he would actually kill the NDP entirely. Let's go on. Now,
00:13:54.560
I need to go over to the response from Peter McCaffrey here, which is absolutely hilarious. And he says,
00:14:00.880
all the things in this shot that require oil and gas in their manufacturing process. And he's showing
00:14:06.960
the lamp, the whatever, the dehumidifier, rehumidifier there, or the humidifier. He has the
00:14:12.160
television. He has the thing sitting on the counter, his shirt, his glasses, the little lapel mic he's
00:14:19.340
wearing, the painting in the background, all of the plastic shelling for the light switches, the blankets
00:14:26.980
and whatnot. These people are hypocrites. They think that food comes from the grocery store.
00:14:33.600
And these people want to be in charge of government. They don't know how anything works.
00:14:39.180
They simply just believe that we can have the entire economy run on rainbows and happy thoughts,
00:14:45.580
and that we, like, literally, these guys come from the show Captain Planet. They think that oil and gas
00:14:51.260
is bad, must be stopped at all costs, and that somehow we're just going to make the entire economy
00:14:56.460
run on granola and love. It's ridiculous. Anyways, well, that should be it for me today in this video,
00:15:02.700
guys. Thank you for watching. Like, share, and subscribe. Do all that fantastic stuff for me,