Roundup: Offering a limited reprieve

Posted on by
Reply

Because the trade war is many ways a weird power dynamic, yesterday was all about offers of reprieves. After a lengthy phone call between Justin Trudeau and Trump, there came word of a “reprieve” on tariffs for the auto sector—for a month—but at the behest of the Big Three auto companies rather than any of Trudeau’s efforts, and while there hasn’t been official word, Senior Government Sources™ are saying that Trudeau is not budging on the retaliatory measures. And why would he? The one-month reprieve came with the message from both JD Vance and Trump’s press secretary that they want those manufacturers to locate all of their factories in the US to avoid tariffs, but the “official” reason for the tariffs remains fentanyl, because Trump needs the legal fiction of a “national emergency” to use executive powers to levy tariffs rather than Congress (but he controls that, so the logic only extends so far). Oh, and now Trump is talking about agricultural carveouts, because they’re stupid and don’t realise the consequences of their actions until it’s too late.

Trump Weighs Agriculture Carveouts From Canada, Mexico Tariffswww.bloomberg.com/news/article…

— Brian Platt (@brianplatt.bsky.social) 2025-03-05T22:58:52.676Z

In provincial reactions, both Danielle Smith and Scott Moe said they were pulling American liquor from their provincial liquor control boards, a day after everyone else. Smith had to put on a big show that included one of her Alberta Sheriffs holding a big rifle to show that she was super serious about them patrolling the border (not that they can legally do much more than taxi that person to an authorised federal border agent or RCMP officer). Both Smith and Moe also insisted that they didn’t want export taxes on either oil or potash, which again, is a boneheaded move of signalling to Trump that they don’t want to play their strongest cards ever (because they’re both super geniuses). Of course, it’s not their call because those powers are federal, but it’s still a sign of how unserious either of them is in the face of an existential threat. Meanwhile, Yukon premier Raj Pillai is “considering” limiting ties with Elon Musk’s businesses, like Starlink (which seems like something they should be doing more than just considering).

There was also word that there was more progress on interprovincial trade barriers and incremental progress toward credentials recognition—with some exceptions for Quebec because of linguistic requirements (but I still have questions about how they plan to get self-regulating bodies like the colleges of physicians and surgeons to play ball).

Progress reported on internal trade barriers, but I am still unclear on credential recognition when professional bodies are self-regulated (like doctors). #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-06T01:13:30.326Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile hit a hotel in Kryvyi Rih, killing three and injuring at least twenty-nine others. The Americans are cutting off the flow of intelligence to Ukraine, because they’re now on Putin’s side. A Ukrainian commander says that NATO forces are not ready for modern drone warfare. Here is an examination of the state of the war, and that it would take Russia 118 years to fully conquer Ukraine at their present rate of advancement.

If the US had continued to support Ukraine, we may have been months away from the end of the war. The Russians would not have been able to continue to fight for much longer. They were making almost no progress, taking huge casualties.

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-03-05T15:19:16.697Z

Continue reading →

Roundup: First day retaliation

Posted on by
Reply

[Clone Wars newsreel voice] Trade war! The American president has unleashed 25 percent tariffs across the board against allies Canada and Mexico, in violation of existing trade agreements. Retaliatory tariffs have been levied in response, and Canadian leaders are expressing their shock and dismay at what is clearly a plan to weaken our economy for annexation. But the retaliation is also coming with threats of further escalation…

It was indeed unprecedented in our lifetimes for a Canadian prime minister to stand up and blatantly call out an American president for the outright threat of annexation, and for his cozying up to Putin. Trudeau busted the notion that this was ever about the border or fentanyl, and promised further non-tariff measures to come.

On counter-tariffs. Yes they hurt one's own country more than the other country.But that's not the right way to think about it. The point is to inflict pain on the other country to make them stop their tariffs, even if self-painful.I don't like broad counter-tariffs, but use 'em where painful.

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T16:41:41.923Z

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3ljkwaokc3c2w

Provincial premiers each lined up to offer their own retaliation, much of which came in the form of removing American booze from liquor store shelves, but Doug Ford threatened export taxes on energy, and Danielle Smith (who is in a state of shock for being “betrayed” by Trump) said she wouldn’t do that…but they don’t have the power to levy them or not, because that power is federal. I’m sure they think that these performances make them look serious and tough, but would it kill a single premier to learn what their actual constitutional powers actually are before they start talking in front of the cameras? (And for everyone who is once again a newfound fan of Ford because of said performance, give your heads a shake).

Federally, Jagmeet Singh called for Parliament to be summoned for an emergency session, but offered no guarantees about how long he would let it last before he decided to vote non-confidence, and the real kicker there is that implementation for any measures they want voted on takes time, which is a concept the NDP have never been able to actually grasp. As for Pierre Poilievre, his own speech largely consisted of him insisting that he’s not MAGA, blaming the Liberals for getting us to this point, and repeating his same slogans and policy demands that he’s always made, and insisted that any funds from counter-tariffs go to tax cuts, which is Trump’s whole plan for tariffs. It’s the exact same plan, but he’s totally “not MAGA,” and is proving it in a very weird way. Oh, and no, building more pipelines and refineries isn’t going to solve any problems, guys.

Consider this a reminder especially for the NDP, who seem to think that once a bill is passed, implementation happens instantly.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T19:09:05.571Z

There is little distance given that he expressly said he intends to use tariff revenue to fuel tax cuts in Canada. He is nothing more than mini-Trump.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T18:57:36.457Z

Tax cuts do little to aid those who are already and will lose their jobs. Tax cuts were what PP offered as a solution to the pandemic. Look back to March 2020 when he offered that as the solution to the pandemic. Like it or not, we don't need tax cuts, we need employment support programs.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T19:01:41.462Z

And then, toward the end of the day, Trump’s commerce secretary says that they might come to some kind of compromiseon the tariffs later today. Maybe, and it “won’t be a pause.” Because they all think they’re playing 3D chess here.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian drones hit an industrial target in the Russian city of Syrzan. Reuters has a look at the effect of the halt on US’ military aid for Ukraine, and the aid that other allies have provided (to date).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Begun, the trade war has

Posted on by
Reply

The inevitable has happened—Trump’s tariffs are now in effect, after Trump told reporters in his daily ramblings that there was nothing Canada or Mexico could do to forestall them. It was obvious they were going to happen—Trump and his economic advisors have decided that they love tariffs, and that it’s going to solve their revenue problems for the big tax cuts they plan to give billionaires. It won’t—tariffs are paid by the importers, who pass it along to consumers, but Trump refuses to believe that, so it’s the American people who are coming in for a world of hurt, especially as the stock market started to plunge once the markets started to realise that Trump was being serious.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T06:17:07.867Z

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T06:18:16.623Z

Here at home, Justin Trudeau announced that the first tranche of retaliatory measures would start immediately, with more to come after consultation. Of course, the last line in his statement should have been the first—that it’s the Americans who have broken the agreement that Trump himself signed, which speaks volumes about the Americans can no longer be trusted to uphold their own agreements. Oh, and Trump is still planning on increasing duties on lumber coming from Canada, so keep an eye out for that as well. As the trade war ramps up, here is a look at what to expect, and how provinces are also expected to respond with their own measures.

Trudeau's statement on the coming tariffs and counter-tariffs. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T01:59:14.433Z

Here is the plan, from Feb 2nd:www.canada.ca/en/departmen…Tariffs on $30B of goods now; another $125B in a few weeks.Here's the detailed list of products covered by the initial action tomorrow:www.canada.ca/en/departmen…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T02:10:25.520Z

I'm ok with some countertariffs; we need to use all tools. But tariffs on peanut butter and OJ aren't enough.We need to see aggressive non-tariff actions.No one in America seems to want to take the fight to Trump. But we can and we should and we will. Elbows up!

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-03-04T03:16:59.941Z

True to form, Pierre Poilievre decided that blaming the government for the imposition of tariffs was the way to go, with a bunch of mendacious fabrications about what they have and have not been doing, with the have-not mostly being to implement his plans with alacrity, as though he’s a super genius who has it all figured out, when, well, we know that’s not exactly true.

Of course, we were also treated to a Doug Ford performance, as he got all theatrically angry on American television and threatened to cut off electricity across the border, and that he would do it with a smile. Of course, Ford (who is claiming he got a “stronger mandate” in last week’s election in spite of losing seats) is all talk. His bluff is going to be called, and no electricity will actually be cut off, because it’s not going to be that easy to do in spite of what he thinks, and you can bet he’ll come up with some kind of excuse about why he was all bluster.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian drone attack injured four and damaged energy infrastructure in Odesa. Ukraine is also investigating negligence surrounding a Russian missile strike on a military graining ground over the weekend. As expected, the Americans have “paused” their aid to Ukraine, as last week’s ambush was a set-up in order to give a justification for their plans to do so.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Implicating the King, and trying to cause a crisis

Posted on by
Reply

Following the sickening ambush at the White House on Friday, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy flew to London for a conference on security in Europe now that it’s clear that the United States is no longer an ally, and prime minister Justin Trudeau also flew to London to attend. In advance of the conference, Zelenskyy met with King Charles at his Sandringham residence (which touched off some grousing online in Canada—more on that in a minute). At the conference,  UK prime minister Keir Starmer seemed to try to play up that the US was still a “reliable ally,” but I’m not sure anyone else in Europe (except maybe Hungary) actually believes that, nor should they. Following the conference, Trudeau was adamant about supporting Zelenskyy, and also had a one-on-one with Starmer, where no doubt the topic of Starmer throwing Canada under the bus came up for discussion, even though the readout of the conversation was very, very diplomatic in the choice of words.

President Zelenskyy has begun his meeting with King Charles III. The meeting is taking place at Sandringham Estate in Norfolk, following the London summit. The topics of their discussion have not been publicly disclosed.

— WarTranslated (Dmitri) (@wartranslated.bsky.social) 2025-03-02T18:06:16.102Z

Some pretty diplomatic language in this readout of Trudeau's meeting with Starmer.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-02T22:56:46.924Z

Meanwhile, back in Canada, CTV seemed to be doing their absolute utmost to create a constitutional crisis because they contacted Buckingham Palace to see if the King would say something about the “51st State” threats, and surprising nobody who has a clue about constitutional monarchy, they would not comment. BECAUSE OF COURSE THEY CAN’T WITHOUT THE ADVICE OF THE GOVERNMENT. But that didn’t stop absolutely everyone from deciding that they were suddenly an expert on constitutional monarchy and what is and is not permissible for a monarch to say without the advice of the government, and the absolute worst part was that CTV took the opportunity to start both-sidesing those reactions, because who needs fact-based journalism when you’re trying to stir up controversy in order to get clicks for the attention economy?

Could a single Canadian journalist learn how constitutional monarchy fucking works?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-01T21:35:05.483Z

By "those days are over," do you mean having an apolitical head of state, or do you mean a monarchy that accedes to the will of Parliament as they have since 1688?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-02T04:05:14.317Z

What's funny about this controversy over King Charles not commenting on Trump re: Canada is that it appears it is largely anti-monarchists who literally want the King to go rogue and act without political direction from the duly elected government of the day.

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇨🇦 (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-03-02T04:11:50.491Z

Before he became King, everyone was worried that Charles would be spouting opinions all the time. There was no shortage of plays, novels and TV series whose plots revolved around him acceding to the throne and needing to abdicate for being too opinionated.Honest to Zeus, people…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-03-02T04:25:39.959Z

This should be basic civics—something people learn about in grade five, and then again in grade seven or eight, and again in high school. But nobody has a clue how this is supposed to work, most especially the people who should know, including former ministers of the Crown. This in turns leads to a whole lot of people insisting that an apolitical monarchy isn’t good for anything, and people who were already small-r republicans are using this as an excuse to agitate for an end to the monarchy, and good fucking luck to them, considering it would require a) a coherent plan to replace it, and b) the unanimous consent of the Commons, the Senate, and all ten provinces in order to rewrite the entire constitution, because that’s not something you can just search-and-replace.

Trudeau is having a meeting with the King this morning before he leaves London, and it’s possible that he will advise the King to make some kind of statement, particularly now that sentiment has been stirred up because people who should now better have implicated the King when it was Starmer who threw us under the bus in his own moral cowardice, but it never should have come to this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Late Sunday, a Russian drone hit an apartment building in Kharkiv, injuring at least eight. Meanwhile, Zelenskyy says he can salvage his relationship with Trump, though I’m not sure Trump actually wants that because he’s not a good-faith actor in this, and he is looking for any excuse to abandon Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An ambush in the White House

Posted on by
Reply

It was an ambush. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the White House, ostensibly to sign some kind of agreement around access to critical minerals in exchange for some kind of military support or security guarantees was a set-up for Trump and JD Vance to try and humiliate Zelenskyy in front of the cameras, with one of the reporters from Russian state outlet TASS in the room (who was removed at one point by the Secret Service, but it was obvious that someone in the White House arranged for him to be there). The whole video is sickening to watch.

Vance blew up that meeting on purpose

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T20:00:00.112Z

I've just looked again at the Starmer meeting – Vance tried to blow that up too. But Trump didn't take the bait.

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T20:38:07.909Z

While Trump and Vance started broadcasting this for their followers as a supposed sign of strength, and their lackeys and apologists broadcast Russian propaganda to justify it, word also started leaking out that Trump is planning on cutting off military aid to Ukraine for Zelenskyy’s supposed intransigence and lack of desire for peace, which is of course mendacious and part of the set-up.

This was the plan all along

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-03-01T04:52:42.168Z

In the wake of this, world leaders started tweeting their support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and this was probably the death knell of NATO as we know it. The one leader who has been silent is Keir Starmer, but he is also hosting a summit in London today about Ukraine and European security, which Justin Trudeau will also be attending.

I have to wonder what words are going to be had between Trudeau and Starmer…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T23:49:23.352Z

I wonder if this was planned at the Munich Security Conference?

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T23:57:08.362Z

Here are some hot takes from Tom Nichols and David Frum, while Philippe Lagassé has some additional thoughts on the situation.

Closer to home, in an interview with the Spectator, Trump took credit for Chrystia Freeland’s supposed “firing” (she was not fired), and said that Poilievre’s problem is that “he’s not a MAGA guy.” Which is true—Poilievre doesn’t have much of a coherent ideology, but he’s not MAGA. What he is, however, is someone who will say anything that he feels he needs to in order to attract the MAGA crowd to his banner, no matter how ridiculous it is, and he has no morals, ethics, or scruples about it. Poilievre jumped on this to declare that he’s “Canada First,” and later did tweet support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and immediately got roasted in the comments by his MAGA supporters for it. Funny what happens when you play with fire.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones struck a medical facility, among other targets, in Kharkiv. The framework for a mineral agreement that Ukraine was supposed to sign with the Americans, before the ambush, contained a number of gaps around security or dispute resolution, before it turned out to be a sham.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Starmer sputters instead of speaking up

Posted on by
Reply

UK prime minister Keir Starmer visited the White House yesterday, and a couple of bizarre scenes erupted. One was that he presented an invitation from King Charles for Trump to make a second state visit to the UK, which way too many people took as a personal invitation rather than one at the behest of the government—because the King does not act unilaterally, and does not make state visit invitations on his own. Later, when Starmer was asked about the annexation threats, Stamer didn’t stand up for Canada, but sputtered about there being no divisions before Trump cut him off with a sharp “That’s enough.” And worse, when Starmer was asked by a journalist if the King had anything to say about the annexation threats, Starmer said that he can’t say what the King’s opinions are and that he’ll let them be known in his own way.

*seethes*

On the one hand, Starmer is sucking up to Trump to avoid being tariffed, which probably won’t work, but I get his self-interest here, but it’s nevertheless a sign of the shifting global order and a sense of who our allies really are. (Thus far, only Germany has expressly said that they have Canada’s back). On the other hand, the fact that reporters are trying to drag the King into this is wildly inappropriate, and I’m not sure whether that’s because American journalists cannot grasp what a constitutional monarchy is (seriously, it makes their brains melt), but the fact that so many people in this country who should know how constitutional monarchy works because we are one, are rising to take the bait and are raging about how the King is supposedly “betraying” us is really disheartening because it’s a reflection of just how poor our civics education is, and how ignorant our own media are about how the very basic rules of our system of government operate.

The King does not freelance, he does not say things without advice, and his governments do not drag him into their fights because the first rule of constitutional monarchy is that you DO NOT involve the King. Starmer should have given a better answer in both cases, and Canadians following along shouldn’t take the bait.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians launched air attacks on energy sites in the Kharkiv region. Ukraine’s top army commander visited sites on the front lines in eastern Donetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Clutched pearls over a paper move

Posted on by
Reply

Because everything is stupid, the Conservatives spent the whole day screaming, both at a media availability and over social media, that Mark Carney “lied” about his involvement with Brookfield Asset Management relocating their headquarters to New York, and tried to tie this to Trump inviting companies to relocate to the US. This is something that the Conservatives have been howling about for months, but they claim that there is “proof” now that Carney “lied” because his timeline of events doesn’t match up. And maybe he was wrong, but this has pretty much been a non-story from the start, because this was largely a paper move to their pre-existing New York office in order to get access to the New York Stock Exchange, while their parent company remains headquartered in Toronto. It’s not an actual scandal, but the Conservatives have been ginning up faux-outrage over Carney for two years now, and this is just the latest example.

But I can’t get over the fact that every single Conservative has been lining up to declare that Carney “lied,” when pretty much every single member of that party has been lying about everything under the sun for years now, because they know they can get away with it. The fact that someone like Andrew Scheer isn’t bursting into flames over the abused irony of him of all people trying to call Carney a liar is just too much. It’s not just projection—it’s a complete lack of self-awareness that they lie so much about everything (especially things they don’t actually need to lie about!) that they don’t even realise that they’re doing it anymore, and then they start running for their fainting couches over this absolute non-issue. Unbelievable.

The Conservatives have also taken to calling Carney “sneaky,” and claiming that he’s hiding the truth about his assets, and whether this business activities were benefitting from his advising the government. But as this fact-check explains, he is under no obligation to comply with conflict-of-interest laws because he is not yet a public office holder, but if he does win the contest and becomes prime minister, lo, he will be subject to the disclosures. Again, this is just more faux outraged being ginned up, and making the Conservatives look like they are desperate.

Ukraine Dispatch

The overnight attack on the Kyiv region overnight Tuesday killed two and damaged energy facilities. Russia claims that it retook two settlements in the Kursk region, as more North Korean troops arrive. Ukraine’s drones have hit Russia’s Tuapse oil refinery. Ukraine’s prime minister says a preliminary agreement has been reached with the Americans on an economic deal that includes access to rare earth minerals.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A mixed bag from the English debate

Posted on by
2

The Liberals’ English-language debate was held last night, and it was a much more lively affair, given that they weren’t speaking in very slow and deliberate French to get their points across. The first few minutes were a complete English-dub replay of Monday’s debate, with the exact same opening statements and first responses to the same question, so it took them a while to actually get to something new, but the longer it went on, the more annoyed I started to get at some of the absolute inanities that were on display. (Here are liveblogs from the Star and The Canadian Press, while I was live-tweeting Bluesky here).

One of the early topics was Canada’s place in the world, and after the initial chest-thumping about Trump, they got into things like NATO targets. Chrystia Freeland was probably the most clear-eyed here, talking about building a new democratic world order with allies that included the UK and France because they have nuclear capabilities (which was a sign of how serious this is), because America is no longer the “leader of the free world.” But when discussing spending to hit NATO targets, everyone was quick to say that they didn’t want those dollars going to American companies, but nobody seemed to have much of an idea of just what the Canadian defence industry was capable of producing for our needs, or the fact that we need to look to other allies because our defence industry is not large and can’t produce a lot of things we need quickly (lest we start buying into vapourware that companies like Bombardier will promise but have no guaranteed ability to deliver on). Oh, and Karina Gould deserves a time-out for pitching a “procurement czar.” No! Stop with this American bullshit!

Freeland has a very clear-eyed statement about building a new democratic world order now that the US is no longer the "leader of the free world." Baylis wants to get allies to bankruptcy Boeing as an example. (Good luck with what that's going to do to our military procurement).

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T01:29:48.917Z

Boy, there is a lot of wishful thinking about the state of the Canadian defence industry, and what capabilities that Canadian industry can produce. (We may have to look to other allies' industries, guys. Be frank and forthright about it.)

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T01:34:57.570Z

And now we're into another round of AI platitudes. And Baylis wants to recreate a research and development programme that already exists and has had challenges turning R&D into procurement. Like, it already exists. That's not the problem.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T01:40:12.215Z

The cost-of-living segment was…unenlightening, and had some of the worst pitches. Chrystia Freeland wants to cut red tape (how? You’ve had nine years!), and Karina Gould wants to modernise social services (provincial jurisdiction) and bring in a basic income (not going to work—there is research to prove it). There was a question on how to improve productivity that nobody could give an actual answer to except to wave their hands and say “AI,” as though it’s a magic incantation.

Moving onto the cost of living theme.You'll never guess, but Carney wants to "build our economy."

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T01:45:12.030Z

Baylis repeats his utter nonsense about fiscal discipline raising the value of the dollar (WHICH DOESN'T MAKE ANY GODS DAMNED SENSE!)And did he mention that he was a businessman? Because he's a businessman.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T01:47:14.001Z

Ireland, where a significant fraction of the paper economy is just US tech companies moving money in and out as a tax dodge? That Ireland?

— Nick P (@npilon.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T02:14:58.888Z

The topic that broke my brain completely was asking them how they could work with provinces to increase the number of doctors. Only Gould gave something resembling a coherent answer here. And again, when the topic changed to the carbon levy, everyone on the stage but Gould was utterly incoherent about how they would replace it (Gould would keep the levy but freeze it).

We've been convening the medical colleges for decades. How do you change that?!Baylis wants to redesign the system for chronic care (again, how is this federal?!) Freeland has an anecdote about a nurse practitioner! But doesn't say anything the *federal* government can do.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T02:25:28.637Z

Gould, correctly, says provinces don't have enough accountability for federal transfers, and points to how childcare agreements have specific guideposts. (The last round of federal transfers to have more strings and required action plans by provinces).

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T02:28:35.715Z

These answers on the carbon levy are *completely* incoherent (except for Gould, who is keeping but freezing it). Gould does admit that they didn't do a good job of talking about it, which no one else could muster the self-awareness to do.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T02:37:41.651Z

Baylis keeps saying "we'll build two pipelines."Who will? The federal government? Or do you think some proponent will swoop in with little economic case for it?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-26T02:43:50.642Z

The final question was asking how they would differentiate themselves from Trudeau, and at first Freeland ignored the question, Gould talked around it before bringing up the fact that the party needs to get back to the grassroots, Baylis said he was going to be “focused on the economy” while Carney said he would be “laser-focused on the economy,” before adding that he’s very hands-on, and has heard from the supporters in caucus that Trudeau didn’t build many relationships with MPs, which he would do. The moderator circled back to Freeland, who talked about the campaign being a “personal liberation,” and that her style of leadership isn’t to be a “one-man band,” which is a pretty big repudiation of Trudeau’s leadership style (though I would say it’s more like a two-man band, because it’s more of a joint Trudeau-Katie Telford effort).

Overall, it was a mixed bag, and I couldn’t really determine someone I felt was a winner. Chrystia Freeland had some of the strongest responses, but some of the weakest delivery and framing of responses, and was very invested in playing nice in order to get second-place votes (because this is a ranked ballot). Gould was strong on many responses, but completely out to lunch on others, which tainted her credibility. Mark Carney kept repeating that he wants to “build the economy.” Over and over and again. Constantly. He still resorted largely to platitudes, and didn’t seem to have a good grasp of a lot of files because they have been out of his bailiwick, and his attempt at attacking Poilievre got cringey in place (Poilievre worships Trump? Really?) And then there was Frank Baylis, who kept reminding us that he’s a businessman. Over and over again, but his constant bizarre refrains about strengthening the dollar (at the expense of our exports?) and the whole thing about Ireland were just completely out to lunch, to say nothing about the fantasy economics of his pipeline plans.

Maybe I’m being too harsh of a critic, but nobody came out ahead.

Ukraine Dispatch

Another overnight attack on the Kyiv region has killed one person, injured four, and set several houses on fire. There also appears to be some progress on a critical minerals deal between the US and Ukraine, but we’ll see if it actually happens.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1894322734047310319

Continue reading →

Roundup: Gould takes the French debate

Posted on by
1

It was the French debate for the Liberal leadership last night, and it was a fairly smoothly run affair, with an aggressive moderator, and very few instances of candidates talking over one another. While you can read a recap here, and the Canadian Press liveblog, I watched it in French to get a sense of how well the candidates were actually performing. The biggest blunder of the evening was Mark Carney slipping up and saying that he agrees with Hamas, which the Conservatives pounced on in bad faith, and Freeland quickly caught his error and corrected him, but it certainly coloured the online reaction.

Meanwhile, my thoughts:

  • Karina Gould was the best performer of the night. Her French was the strongest, and she was articulate in her positions, she had something of substance to say in most of the responses, and in her closing remarks, made the very salient point that they won’t win by being Conservative Lite™.
  • Chrystia Freeland’s French was very deliberate and didactic in tone, but that’s not much different from her speaking style in English. She had a bit of a mixed bag in terms of policy discussions, and could identify things the government has done or is doing, because she was there for the discussions and implementation.
  • Mark Carney had the shakiest French, but as he has throughout his entire leadership campaign, he mostly stuck to platitudes and clichés, and gave very few answers or specifics, even when pressed to do so by the moderator. It was not a shining moment for him.
  • Frank Baylis’s French was fine, being as he’s from Montreal, but he pretty much made himself irrelevant the whole evening, by constantly reminding everyone that he’s a businessman, as though that gave him any special abilities or insights, particularly when dealing with Trump, and he had some absolutely bizarre ideas associated with fiscal discipline.

Baylis: Did I mention that I was a businessman?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-25T01:47:54.201Z

Baylis: Fiscal discipline will make the value of our dollar rise so things will cost less.What voodoo is this? The value of our dollar has very little to do with fiscal discipline, especially when we have the lowest debt and deficit in the G7.This is not a plan for cost of living.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-25T02:03:10.685Z

Carney keeps falling back on platitudes. The moderator is pushing him for specifics regarding immigration, but he refuses.Freeland's plan to tie immigration levels to housing is a recipe for no immigration, and is Poilievre's plan. Gould wants hard conversations with provinces.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-25T02:09:00.128Z

Apparently there is no problem in this country the AI won't help solve.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-25T02:21:07.216Z

Ah, the west-east pipeline question, should Quebec refuse.Carney doesn't really answer the question, and mischaracterizes what Energy East was.Freeland praises energy resilience, but doesn't answer.Gould says we need a conversation respecting provinces and Indigenous people.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-25T02:46:23.642Z

The English debate is tonight, so we’ll see how different the candidates are with the language they are more comfortable in.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s overnight air attacks injured one woman in the outskirts of Kyiv, and Poland scrambled their aircraft because the attacks were targeting western Ukraine, close to their borders. G7 foreign ministers, led by Canada, are still working on a joint statement about the anniversary of the war, because the American position has now shifted into Russia’s favour. At the United Nations, the US voted against Ukraine’s resolution to condemn Russia for their invasion, and joined the ranks of Russia, Belarus, and North Korea.

The Beaverton isn't playing around.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-24T15:48:52.301Z

Continue reading →

Roundup: Don’t complain to the minister

Posted on by
3

There was a whole lot of online anger over the weekend directed at CBC Radio’s Cross Country Checkup, as the topic was the whole American annexation talk, and they decided to co-broadcast this with an NPR in the US, and treated the whole thing like a though experiment when it’s our sovereignty we’re discussing. It’s not a cute thought experiment, and it’s not

https://twitter.com/HNHughson/status/1893684327973539938

While I did not personally listen, I have been informed that the topic was framed around the notion that this would be some sort of democratic process, which is not the threat, and then they invited Kevin O’Leary on to give his take, and not only didn’t bother to actually push back or fact-check anything he said, but Ian Hanomansing invited people do to their own fact-checking online after the show. Are you fucking kidding me? That’s supposed to be your job as journalists. But seriously. Kevin O’Leary. You know he has nothing of value to offer but bluster. This was a deliberate choice by producers to crank up the “controversy,” which was both irresponsible and a dereliction of duty. Just an absolute gods damned catastrophe. It’s not that we shouldn’t be talking about the threat of annexation or that Trump promises to wage economic warfare on us to turn us into a vassal state—it’s that we need to frame these discussions in a clear-eyed way, not whatever this bullshit that Hanomansing and company were doing.

The whole attempt was a sticky mixture of aggressive both-sidesing, trying to be controversial to make people angry for the engagement, and the arrogance of the host/producers that they could get away with it.That they brought in Kevin O'Leary was a *choice.*

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-24T01:56:56.438Z

To make matters worse, a bunch of people have decided to complain to the minister about this.

No. Absolutely not.

CBC may be a public broadcaster, but it is run arm’s-length from government, because it’s not a state broadcaster (regardless of what Conservative chuds like to claim). The minister has no say and should have no say in this. If you want to complain, talk to the CBC ombudsman, or the head of CBC news, but you DO NOT complain to the minister about it. That’s about as wrong as writing to the King to complain, and will get you the same form-letter response.

https://bsky.app/profile/senatorpaulasimons.bsky.social/post/3livb5f6oj22e

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched guided bomb attacks overnight Friday, killing one woman in Kostiantynivka, and then launched their largest drone attack yet overnight Saturday, with 267 drones fired, along with missiles. At least one person died as a result of a strike in Kryvyi Rih in that attack. North Korea is providing as much as half of Russia’s ammunition against Ukraine by this point. The US tried to force Ukraine to withdraw their UN resolution condemning Russia on the third anniversary of the invasion, in favour of an American resolution that soft-pedals the whole thing. (Ukraine would not). Zelenskyy said that he would be willing to step down if it meant a proper peace deal that includes NATO membership, and rejected Trump’s demands for $500 billion in “payback.”

Please share this fact sheet on Ukraine with anyone who needs itunderstandingwar.org/backgrounder…

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-02-23T07:47:10.900Z

Continue reading →