Roundup: Forcing a partial denunciation

Posted on by

While Andrew Scheer was goading Justin Trudeau to carry on with his libel lawsuit against him, it seems that Trudeau did manage to get Andrew Scheer to do one thing that he has thus far avoided, which was an actual denunciation of white nationalism, and that he actually said those words rather than talking around them. He didn’t denounce Faith Goldy for appearing with him at that “convoy” rally, and he didn’t say anything about his cherry-picking of wilful blindness of the “Yellow Vest” contingent with their racist and whites supremacist messages at that rally, but it was a start. Baby steps. 

Part of the backdrop for this was an exchange between Senator Leo Housakos and Chrystia Freeland at a Senate committee hearing on Tuesday, where Housakos said he didn’t see any white suprematist threat (which he later said was poorly worded), and Freeland laying down the law on it. 

Amidst this drama, the head of CSIS was appearing at a different Senate committee, this time to talk about Bill C-59, the national security bill, and he did state that the intelligence service was becoming more and more preoccupied with the threat of white nationalists and far-right extremists, even though religious extremism was still one of their largest focuses. It’s something that is of concern and we can’t ignore the winking and nudges that absolutely takes place, or especially the blind eyes that get turned, but we do seem to be having a conversation about it, so that’s probably a good start.

Good reads: 

  • Justin Trudeau defended the budget provisions to stop asylum shopping, which refugee advocates say would only affect a fraction of irregularities claimants.
  • Trudeau and the Liberals have been making a big deal out of the fact that “tax guides” distributed by Conservative MPs omit the climate rebates. (Here’s why this matters).
  • Amidst the concerns around the state of the prime minister’s feminism, PCO figures show that there has been a marked increase in women being appointed, including at senior levels.
  • The Canadian Forces has updated its dress code for women members.
  • A new report makes the case for the RCMP to get out or provincial and municipal policing and focusing solely on federal matters. 
  • The Conservatives’ latest fundraising appeal primes donors to mistrust media sources in lieu of aggressive social media pushes.
  • The NDP passed a (useless) motion calling on the Senate to hasten the UNDRIP and JUST bills, never mind that the Senate has no procedural mechanisms to do so.
  • Jen Gerson has an interview with Rachel Notley as the Alberta election looms.
  • Evidence of fraudulent email addresses used by the electronic voting system of the UCP leadership campaign has emerged. (Say no to online voting! Seriously!)
  • Kady O’Malley’s Process Nerd column parses the debate over whether the garbage Reform Act’s provisions were violated or not if a caucus deferred voting on the opt-in.
  • Kevin Carmichael ponders the forces of creative destruction taking place in Alberta in an era where it’s conceivable there won’t be another oil boom to save their economy.
  • Chantal Hébert suggests that a Jason Kenney victory could make a pipeline unpalatable for Justin Trudeau based on the climate commitments that it was tied to.
  • Adnan Khan makes the point about Justin Trudeau’s belief in his own image means that he is trying to make the levers of democracy move for him, which would empower the hard-right. 
  • Andrew Coyne goes to bat for the garbage Reform Act and for Jane Philpott and Jody Wilson-Raybould to stay in the Liberal caucus (never mind that no one trusts them anymore).

Odds and ends:

My reporting on the Senate drama last week became the subject of a privilege debate in the Chamber over the leaked document. So I’m in Hansard now. Yay?

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Forcing a partial denunciation”

  1. “Andrew Coyne goes to bat for the garbage Reform Act…”

    Thanks for the link to your National Post article in yesterday’s comments, and for the explanation. I now understand better your disregard for the Reform bill.

    In a way, the situation seems similar to how parliamentarians have reduced their own morality to a series of rules adjudicated by an “Ethics” commissioner (see, for instance, a Maclean’s editorial on the topic this morning
    editorial).

Comments are closed.