Roundup: Implicated Conservatives and the lack of security clearance

Posted on by
1

It was quite the day at the Foreign Interference inquiry, as Justin Trudeau was on the stand and dropped this particular bombshell: “I have the names of a number of parliamentarians, former parliamentarians and-or candidates in the Conservative Party of Canada who are engaged (in) or at high risk of, or for whom there is clear intelligence around foreign interference.” He also indicated that where his own party is concerned, he has been dealing with any accusations internally, which includes ensuring that those implicated are not being given certain committee assignments or so on, which to be perfectly frank, is how one should be dealing with it (though he could have said at some point that he was aware of the report and has been dealing with it internally). The implication in all of this was that Pierre Poilievre, who refuses to get security-cleared, can’t do the same and it’s bewildering as to why.

Poilievre immediately fired back and accused Trudeau of lying under oath (quite something, especially considering that Poilievre is an avowed liar who lies all the time), and demanded that Trudeau release the names, which denies anyone implicated any due process. After all, some of this is intelligence and not evidence, and subjecting someone who was naïve in an interaction with a diplomat to a kangaroo court is hardly fair and could have particularly profound consequences, especially considering the escalating violence toward MPs, and that they will be tarred as “traitors” when in most cases, as the National Security Advisor said last week, many have simply engaged in bad behaviour or are unwitting because they don’t know better, but it hardly escalates to espionage or sabotage.

Part of the subplot around Poilievre’s refusal to get security clearance is the fact that his chief of staff is cleared and receives briefings—but is not considered “need-to-know” on this, because he’s not the party leader, and that’s a pretty big deal. It shouldn’t be up to the chief of staff to deal with implicated MPs, senators, or candidates, or to do something like rescind a nomination as a result of these allegations. In fact, two former CSIS directors even stated on television that they wouldn’t brief a chief of staff if the leader didn’t have clearance because the leader is the principal actor, and needs to be able to act on what the chief of staff tells him, which again, means needing to be briefed.

Another subplot around that security clearance issue was a delineation between someone who is a Privy Councillor, as Poilievre is, and security clearance, which frankly hasn’t been properly articulated before, and created confusion as a result, particularly because there were instances in the past where opposition leaders were sworn into Privy Council before being given classified briefings. This doesn’t, however, change the fact that Poilievre has chosen not to get a clearance, not that he can’t, which is the difference.

Meanwhile, the Beaverton managed to once again hit on the truth of the matter better than any legacy media outlet.

“Getting it would require him to lie slightly less than he does currently.”Bingo.Yet again, the Beaverton can get to the truth better than most legacy outlets can.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-16T23:44:40.382Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The latest drone strike by Russia saw 136 drones launched against Kyiv and other cities, and 68 of those were shot down, with 64 others unaccounted for, while at least two struck targets. Russians claimed they took two more villages—one in Donetsk, one in Luhansk—but Ukraine says that those attacks were repelled. Ukraine has asked the International Maritime Organization to send a monitoring mission to the ports in Odesa among increasing Russian attacks on grain storage and port infrastructure, which threatens global food security. A former Canadian soldier currently fighting in Ukraine has been injured, but wants to get back to the fight when he recovers. And we finally have details on President Zelenskyy’s “Victory Plan,” some of which hinges on an “unconditional” NATO invitation.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A $7 million ad buy to tell on themselves

Posted on by
Reply

Over the past several days, the Alberta government has been on a very strange campaign where they are in essence, telling on themselves by lying about the forthcoming federal emissions cap. How so, you ask? They keep insisting that this is a production cap on the energy sector, which is not what it is intended to be, particularly because the sector has been saying that they fully plan to be net-zero by 2050, and that these kinds of rules, while disliked by economists, would essentially force these companies to put their money where their mouths are. And, well, they have certainly been admitting that all of those promises to meet those targets through things like carbon capture have been pretty much all talk.

When Danielle Smith and her ministers tried to justify their ad campaign, well, things got even worse for them.

Meanwhile, the Alberta government bought the front pages of newspapers across the Postmedia chain at a cost of $7 million in order to decry this same policy, and in another telling lie, claim that it would increase grocery prices, because that’s the anxiety that they want to hit on in order to really stick it to the federal Liberals. But again, the problem here is that the driver of those higher grocery prices is climate change, and in particular, recurring droughts in food-producing regions, including in Canada, with a few flash floods or hurricanes along the way that also damage crops or livestock.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack on the southern city of Mykolaiv has killed one and injured at least sixteen. A drone attack was also launched against Kyiv. The town of Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region, and three surrounding settlements, were ordered evacuated. Russians claim to have taken the village of Levadne in the Zaporizhzhia region over the weekend.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The PBO’s update won’t stop the disinformation

Posted on by
Reply

The Parliamentary Budget Officer’s revised report on the distributional impacts of the carbon levy was released yesterday, and lo, it reconfirmed that indeed most households are better off with the rebates than what they pay—most especially the bottom 40 percent of households by income. It also showed a much, much smaller impact on the overall economic impact when broken out per household, which is a significant change from his initial report, and what the Conservatives in particular weaponized. They still are—Question Period was full of those same figures being mendaciously framed as costing individual households when it’s talking about the impacts on GDP when broken out into the abstract figure of per-household costs, which is not how the economy works, and yes, any climate action is going to have an impact on GDP, but inaction is also going to have an even larger impact. But lying liars are going to lie about what these numbers mean, because nobody will actually explain the difference to them.

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1844402178200670530

With that in mind, take a look at the varied headlines, and guess the outlets:

As you can gather, at least one of those headlines is incredibly misleading, and unsurprisingly, some were framing this in explicitly the same terms the Conservatives are.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1844551195257446581

As well, Yves Giroux went back on Power & Politics to talk about his updated report, and thankfully David Cochrane gave him the gears for it, because he continues to refuse to take responsibility for the state of confusion and disinformation that his previous report has left the country and the political discourse in. I was also struck by the fact that he kept saying that these are the government’s own numbers—so what exactly is his office doing if they’re not independently coming up with their own figures as is the whole gods damned point of why the office was created? It just keeps reiterated how Giroux is completely unsuited for this job, and needs to resign because he’s clearly making the case for why this office needs to be abolished.

Programming note: I am taking the full long weekend off, so have a good Thanksgiving, and I’ll see you on Wednesday.

Ukraine Dispatch

Overnight attacks by Russia and those into Thursday hit civilian and critical infrastructure in cities like Mykolaiv and Kherson. There is also fierce fighting in the strategic city of Toretsk as Russians increase pressure on the eastern front. Ukrainian forces hit an ammunition depot in a Russian airfield in the Adygeya region, about 450 km from the front line.

Continue reading →

QP: Misleading about the updated PBO report

Posted on by
1

The PM was still in Laos, and his deputy was off to Toronto, as was Pierre Poilievre, meaning only one of the mainline leaders were present today. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and worried about the rise in antisemitism and hate crimes, blamed Justin Trudeau’s so-called “divisive rhetoric,” and that it takes too long to list terrorist groups as such, giving the example of the Houthis. Arif Virani says that they denounced the actions of Samidoun in Vancouver, and that they are being reviewed for a designation. Scheer then raised the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s updated report on the carbon levy, grossly mischaracterised it, and cited numbers out of context before demanding an election. Steven Guilbeault quoted the report to point out that eighth out of ten households are net beneficiaries. Scheer insisted that Guilbeault was also misleading because he only focused on the direct costs and not the net economic impact. Guilbeault recited more passages that made his point that only the wealthiest are impacted. John Barlow took over to insist that the impacts were worse for farmers. Guilbeault cited grain reports that prove that droughts have reduced grain yields. Barlow cherry-picked another citation from the report and demanded an election. Guilbeault listed the indirect economic impact costs on things like farms, and that they had the support of different agricultural associations.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc and demanded that the Senate be abolished because they weren’t passing a Bloc bill on Supply Management (and good luck getting the constitutional amendment to make that happen). Lawrence MacAulay recited his support for Supply Management and impressed upon the Senate to pass it. DeBellefeuille demanded that the two senators be brought into line (which is not how this works), and Marie-Claude Bibeau reiterated support for the sector.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and complained about “greedy CEOs” and Thanksgiving dinners, to which François-Philippe Champagne said that they should thank the government for reforming competition, and gave props to Singh for his contributions. Singh switched to French to give the same again, and Champagne patted himself on the back for summoning the grocery CEOs to demand action.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Inappropriate behaviour but no traitors

Posted on by
Reply

Of the testimony at the Foreign Interference committee yesterday was the prime minister’s current National Security and Intelligence Advisor, who spoke about the allegations surrounding MPs in the NSICOP report. She stated that, having seen that intelligence and its updates since the report, she’s seen no indication of “traitors” in our Parliament. What she saw in the intelligence was inappropriate conduct and a lack of judgment in certain individuals, but no espionage, sabotage, or putting of Canadian security at risk.

This brings us back to the next steps in terms of any bad behaviour by MPs or lack of judgment, and what should be done about it, and once again, the answer is and always has been that the party leaders need to get involved. That means security clearances, and full briefings on the materials, so that they know what has been alleged, and that they can take corrective action in some fashion. (And before you say anything, yes Poilievre has a clearance as a former minister, but he has refused to be briefed under the specious reason that if he gets briefed, he’ll be “gagged,” which is nonsense and he knows it).

But as Philippe Lagassé points out, the chair of NSICOP also should have done more to be transparent than simply say what was in the report is enough, and leave it at that. Most people didn’t and won’t read the report, and media outlets taking those two or three sentences without context elsewhere in the document didn’t help either. Elizabeth May demonstrated that he could have gone further and said more without breaching any kind of confidentiality, but he chose not to for his own reasons, and so we’ve had months of suspicion for little reason.

#cdnpoli, all day every day.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-09T13:27:43.894Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile hit the port in Odesa, killing six, injuring eight, and damaging a Panamanian-flagged container ship. A further drone attack in the same region hit an apartment building, injuring another five. A Ukrainian drone strike has hit another Russian arms depot, which includes arms provided by North Korea.

Continue reading →

QP: Concern trolling your own filibuster

Posted on by
Reply

The PM was in Laos, his deputy elsewhere, and all of the other leaders were present because Wednesday. Pierre Poilievre, fresh out of his no-speaking-for-one-day punishment, began in French, and he claimed that he would have liked to use Parliament’s time to deal with pressing issues but they’re paralysed because the prime minister has refused to turn over documents. (Seriously?!) Karina Gould said this was all false, and read the RCP’s concerns with the production order, and they could send this to committee today. Poilievre listed selective facts to make this seem more scandalous than it is, and wondered if someone steals from you whether you call the cops or send the matter to committee. This time François-Philippe Champagne recited that Canadians are tired of these games and slogans, and that they have had enough of filibustering, and that they will always protect rights and freedoms. Poilievre switched to English to retread his first concern-trolling question, and Gould reiterated that this was not true and repeated the RCMP’s statement. Poilievre again listed the selected facts, and claimed the minister’s story was changing (false), and mocked the notion that this would cause Charter rights to come cashing down. Gould said this was a typical witch-hunt to go after things that have nothing to do with the events, such as personnel files of people not implicated by events, and repeated that this should go to committee. Poilievre scoffed at the notion that this was a witch hunt, and mischaracterised the relationship between the government and SDTC. Gould said that if the police request documents, they are turned over, but this is an abuse of authority.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the Bloc’s Supply Management in the Senate. Lawrence MacAulay recited that they support Supply Management, and they are encouraging the Other Place to pass it. Blanchet railed about the two senators allegedly holding up the bill, and Marie-Claude Bibeau recited the support for Supply Management before noting they appointed independent senators, which is a concept the Bloc should understand. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and was incredulous with the story that “corporate landlords” are using AI to jack up rents (which is not federal jurisdiction). Sean Fraser said it was too bad the NDP decided to walk away from the government’s attempt to do something about the situation. Singh then turned to the reports that government lawyers are claiming that there is no duty to provide First Nations with water. Patty Hajdu said that they Have been fixing the mess the Conservatives left, and urged the NDP to support their safe drinking water bill.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Committee as clown performance

Posted on by
1

Because we no longer really have a Parliament, but merely a content creation studio that occasionally passes legislation, we find ourselves in yet another series of events where the institution is being weaponized for social media content. It’s not just the privilege filibuster happening in the House of Commons, though that definitely is happening (the Conservatives are taking the opportunity to get the words “corruption” and “Liberal insiders” in all of their talking points so they can create clips from them, never mind that the word “Liberal” was nowhere to be found in the Auditor General’s report on SDTC). Today, Jagmeet Singh has decided he needs another stunt for his own socials.

Singh plans to attend the Natural Resources committee meeting after Question Period, so that he can “stand up to big oil and gas,” by which he means the CEO of Cenovus Energy and the vice president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, both of whom are appearing by video conference as part of the study on the Trans Mountain Expansion. To drive home the point, party leaders don’t appear at committees (Elizabeth May occasionally accepted, because hers is a party of two, and she occasionally wants to participate in a committee meeting). Singh, however, is going tomorrow for the sole purpose of putting on a dog-and-pony show for the cameras.

This isn’t Singh’s first time doing so, mind you. He did it with the grocery CEOs, where he comically brough in a huge stack of papers, claiming they were questions from Canadians to those CEOs, but he didn’t ask a single one, but merely soliloquized for the cameras in the NDP’s designated spots. It was a pure clown performance for the sake of clips, but the NDP fell all over themselves to insist how great it was, and now Singh wants to do this again. Why now? Well, probably because he slit his own throat and immolated what little credibility he had when he walked away from his agreement with the Liberals in bad faith, and played into Pierre Poilievre’s hands, and now he wants to redeem himself and play up his precious illusions about sticking it to corporations. You can bet this is going to be another clown show that he’ll pat himself on the back over, and absolutely everyone’s time will have been wasted.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian shelling killed one and injured five in the Kherson region, and guided bombs killed two and inured thirty in Kharkiv. Russian forces have reached the frontline city of Toretsk, and they are advancing to the centre of the town. Ukrainian forces are maintaining “sufficient pressure” on Russian troops in the Kursk region of Russia, as they hold captured territory for a third month.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1843704158240821371

Continue reading →

QP: Getting clips saying “corruption”

Posted on by
Reply

They PM was jetting off to Laos for an ASEAN summit, while his deputy was also away in Toronto, leaving the rest of the front bench to fend for themselves. Most of the other leaders were also absent, and the Speaker had ruled that Poilievre would not be allowed to speak for the day because he didn’t withdraw his remarks that Mélanie Joly was pandering to Hamas supporters. That meant Melissa Lantsman got to lead off, and she started off on the SDTC production order and the privilege debate, and rhetorically wondered what was in the documents and how bad it was. Arif Virani got up and wanted to note the events at the protest in Vancouver yesterday, led by Samidoun, which he unequivocally condemned. Lantsman said it was glad that they finally found the courage to condemn something, and returned to demand the documents again, and this time, Karina Gould read the Speaker’s ruling that the matter be sent to committee. Lantsman decried that the government was in contempt, and again demanded the document, alleging a cover-up. Gould reiterated that they were ready to move this to committee and that only the Conservatives are obstructing their own motion, because they don’t want committee testimony to show how this was an abuse of power. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French, and read a quote from a Montreal cop who decried people getting bail. Virani said that there was a provincial element to the administration of justice, and he should probably talk to François Legault. Paul-Hus scoffed at this, and again decried bail decision. Virani repeated his answer about provincial culpability. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and demanded the government force the Senate to pass their Supply Management bill. Marie-Claude Bibeau gave the usual lines that they support Supply Management and that they expect senators to pass it. Therrien tried again, and Bibeau said that Senators are independent, which is a concept the Bloc should understand. 

Peter Julian rose for the NDP in French, and decried landlords who use AI to raise rents. Sean Fraser said that they need to identify solutions rather than just pointing fingers. Bonita Zarrillo read the same in English, with the added focus of decrying her attempt to study this at committee, and Fraser said that he can’t tell his MPs on the committee what to do, and listed measures they are taking.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Unserious about monetary policy

Posted on by
Reply

Amidst party leaders making boneheaded tax promises in the three provincial elections going on right now (no, BC, you can’t forgo taxes on tips without trying to change federal tax authorities), economist Stephen Gordon has decided to revisit Pierre Poilievre’s promise to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada—something he doesn’t have the power to do—and looks at the supposed reasons why. Unsurprisingly, they don’t add up.

In other words, Poilievre is performatively trying to once again blame inflation on someone other than the global supply chain crunch, or the climate-related droughts that impacted food prices (to say nothing of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine), and has been pursuing bullshit attacks as a distraction. Those attacks included trying to bring the Bank under the purview of the Auditor General so that they could order her to do “performance audits” on their decisions during COVID (something she has no expertise in doing), because they are not serious people, and get all of their ideas about macroeconomics from crypto bros on YouTube. It’s really, really depressing that anyone thinks they are remotely qualified to govern.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian shelling killed one person and injured six in the eastern city of Sloviansk. A Russian missile also struck near a major Ukrainian airbase, while Russians fired missiles at two grain vessels on the Black Sea. Russian forces have also entered the outskirts of Toretsk, which is another frontline settlement. Ukrainian forces took credit for the strike on an oil depot in occupied Crimea, which has been fuelling Russia’s war effort, as well as sabotaging a Russian minesweeper in its Black Sea fleet.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1843234630754836742

Continue reading →

QP: Politicizing October 7th

Posted on by
2

A new week in Parliament, and the prime minister was absent, but his deputy was present, and most of the other leaders stayed away as well. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he rattled off slogans before raising the privilege issue, listing off the conflicts of interest at SDTC and demanding the government turn over documents. Karina Gould said that this wasn’t true, that the matter has been referred to the committee for study, and it was up to the Conservatives to send it there. Poilievre switched to English to rattle off his slogans again, and to once again demand the government turn over the SDTC documents. Gould repeated that everything was false, that the motion was to send the matter to committee, which the Conservative don’t want to do that because they would know that they are trying to violate Charter rights with this production order. Poilievre mocked the notion that people will lose Charter rights if police get evidence (erm, you know what illegal search and seizure is, right?) and demanded the documents. Gould reiterated that this was demonstrably false and that the motion was to go to the committee, and the Conservatives were blocking that. Poilievre then turned to the October 7th commemoration, denounced antisemitic chants, and demanded the government to the same. Mélanie Joly read the names of Canadians killed in the attack, and read some remarks about the hostages. Poilievre reiterated the point about the chants, and demanded a denunciation again. Arif Virani then got up to say that their solidarity is with Jews in Israel and Canada, and that they stand up against acts against hatred in this country.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and demanded the royal recommendation for their OAS bill. Steve MacKinnon noted that he met with seniors over the weekend, and listed the measures for seniors the Bloc voted against. Therrien dismissed the “procedural issues” at the heart of the matter (my dude, democracy IS procedure), and this time Lawrence MacAulay noted their support for Supply Management and that they encourage the Senate to move on that bill.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and in French, decried rising rents, as though that were a federal jurisdiction. Jean-Yves Duclos said that they were right to oppose the Conservatives, trotted out the six housing units myth, and denounced Poilievre calling social housing “Soviet.” Blake Desjarlais got up to decry that the government broke housing promises to Indigenous people. Duclos noted that they have been building tens of thousand of units for Indigenous people. 

Continue reading →