Roundup: Wondering who the real winner of the confidence agreement is

Posted on by

We are now on day twenty-eight, four weeks into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and it looks like Russia’s attempts at occupying Mariupol continue to be thwarted, though the city is being reduced to rubble. As well, Ukrainian forces retook a strategic suburb of Kyiv, so that is as good of news as can be hoped for in the situation. Remember how Russia thought it was a matter of marching?

Back in Canada, the supply and confidence agreement between the Liberals and NDP was made official, and boy were there a bunch of reactions. Some of them were expected, like the Conservatives abusing the term “coalition” (it’s not a coalition) and claiming it’s a “power grab” rather than a legitimate exercise of cooperation in a hung parliament as happens not infrequently in Westminster systems. Oh, and she said that this ultimately benefits Putin. No, really—she said that. Even more problematic were certain CBC reporters pushing this bizarre notion that Canadians “elected a minority government” and that this agreement somehow violates it, which no, is not how things work. We don’t elect governments, and there is not majority/minority option on the ballot, and it’s been just as much a recurring narrative in the past two parliaments that a hung parliament means that “Canadians want us to work together” (which is just as silly a notion, frankly), but honestly, I expect better from the CBC than to push this kind of nonsense, and it’s embarrassing for them as the national broadcaster to be pushing this nonsense.

https://twitter.com/SusanDelacourt/status/1506273770176188427

In the meantime, there is a bunch of pearl-clutching that this agreement somehow means that we won’t be increasing defence-spending, even though the NDP has no veto on budgets, and the fact that we can’t even spend the current allocation so it’s way too soon to worry about this. The early indications of the outlined dental care plan could help millions—but it’s light on details and the actual mechanism that will be used given that this is an area of provincial jurisdiction (but some good perspective threads from economist Kevin Milligan here and here). The consensus seems to be that the Liberal are the real winners here and not the NDP, but others argue that the Conservatives could be the real winners because it will give the next leader time to rebuild the party and establish themselves given that the next election will be more than three years away (maybe). And then there is the question about whether this agreement gives Trudeau the runway to accomplish a few more things before turning it over to his successor, though he says otherwise when asked (which of course he will, because saying he won’t run again makes him lame duck instantly). It does make for a different dynamic for the next couple of years in any case, so we’ll see how it shapes up.

Good reads:

  • Justin Trudeau is back in Brussels for NATO and G7 meetings.
  • The CP Rail labour dispute ended almost as soon as it began, as a deal was reached in the wee hours of Tuesday morning to head to binding arbitration.
  • Public health experts are weighing in on the BA.2 Omicron variant, and how it could be blunted by our high vaccination rate, but that could also mean uneven spread.
  • Public Services and Procurement won’t give an updated timeline on the selection of new fighter jets, saying that any statement now would jeopardise the process.
  • Speaker Anthony Rota is recovering after scheduled coronary bypass surgery.
  • Alberta MLA Thomas Deng, who resigned from the NDP, explains he was testing the vulnerabilities of the vaccine certificate system, which was alarming lax in security.
  • Heather Scoffield notes that Canada can benefit from Russia’s being cut off from the global market, as we export many of the same things and can replace theirs.
  • Paul Wells gives his assessment of the confidence agreement and how the Liberals and NDP each benefit from it.
  • Susan Delacourt remarks on why the agreement shows you can’t count Trudeau out, and why it changes the dynamic for the Conservative leadership race.
  • Colby Cosh offers praise for the work of Vaccine Hunters over the course of the pandemic, and their somewhat anarchic nature in getting the job done.
  • My column looks at the early field of Conservative leadership candidates and just how many of them are infected with the brain worms of right-wing populism.

Odds and ends:

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

3 thoughts on “Roundup: Wondering who the real winner of the confidence agreement is”

  1. Or maybe he’s being honest when he says he wants to run again. I mean he was, quite literally, born to do this, so what else would he do? Even Wells hedged for that possibility, and he of course is the one who also said that if everyone in Ottawa “knows” something, they’re probably wrong. Pundits getting back to their fantasizing about #CarneyWatch, and “girlboss Twitter” wishcasting Freeland into the job, are going to be disappointed when he’s PM until close to his 60s. As are the tired At Issue panel on CBC: Chantal Hébert who will go home crying into her Jean Charest cuddle pillow, Andrew Coyne who will go home and hit a heavy bag with PET’s face on it, and Althia Raj who… just “agrees with everything Andrew just said.” And Pierre Poilievre, the favourite pigeon of the CPC diehards (like Rex Murphy), who is going to be turned into fried chicken nuggets in October 2025… *after* PMJT breaks the record for Daddy Harper’s length of tenure.

  2. I always enjoy reading your roundups and I respect your knowledge greatly but please, if you can, use the Ukrainian name for Kyiv. I know it seems like a small thing and this probably appears nitpicky but there is an important reason for it. Not just because on a map of Ukraine it says Kyiv but because Kiev is the Russian spelling and a reminder that they do not believe that Ukraine should exist independently.

    I really don’t mean this to be insulting or to seem petty and I’m sorry it appears that way. I’m only asking because as a Ukrainian Canadian I feel sad whenever I see Kiev still written and so I cannot resist correcting it.

    Thank you again for your writing and all of your excellent knowledge on politics.

    • Sorry about that! Normally I do use the proper spelling, but this was a slip-up that I’m going to chalk up to exhaustion. It’s been corrected. Thanks.

Comments are closed.