Tag Archives: Arctic

Roundup: Filibustering their own motion

Posted on by

The current privilege fight has ground business in the House of Commons to a complete halt, thanks to the tactics of the Conservatives, and they are trying to use this as some form of blackmail on the government, particularly as the government has been unable to move the legislation around the capital gains changes. Andrew Scheer even tried to be cute during the Thursday Question yesterday and said that if the government can’t conduct its own business, then they should call an election. Because of course he did.

While I won’t relitigate why this is an abuse of privilege that sets a terrifying precedent, it has been called out by the Government House Leader that the Conservatives are filibustering themselves because the whole point of this is that it’s supposed to go to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee so that it can be decided upon what should happen, but that’s inconvenient for the Conservatives. They would rather put up every single MP to speak to this issue to run out the clock, and so that they can all recite prepared scripts that scream “Liberal corruption!” even though that’s not what the Auditor General found. (Yes, there were conflicts of interest, but the government was not implicated in this at all). Gould asserts that the Conservatives are trying to keep it away from committee because the moment that committee starts calling witnesses, legal experts will point out the abuse of the parliamentary privilege powers and that this is banana republic behaviour, and she’s not wrong, but the bigger issue here is that the plan  of the Conservatives is to make the House of Commons as completely non-functional as possible through abuse of this privilege debate (which again, should have been over in a couple of hours at most with the matter sent to committee) so that they can claim further justification for an election.

If the other opposition parties wised up and stopped playing along with the Conservatives in their desire to embarrass the government for their own partisan aims, Parliament could be functioning a lot more smoothly and things they want to get passed could, but none of them seem to care much about the long-term implications of their actions (like the banana republic precedents) because scoring points is too much fun. There also remains that the government could prorogue Parliament for a day or two in order to kill the privilege motion, but that could set them up for bigger headaches, particularly as they want certain bills out of the Sente and prorogation would reset the clocks on them. In any case, the dysfunction is intentional, and the Conservatives need to be called out on the lies they are spreading to justify this behaviour.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched a major drone attack over Ukraine, targeting 15 regions; casualties included two adults and a child after a drone struck a fuel truck in Chernihiv. Ukraine did hit Russian radar stations inside the country with long-range missiles, while Ukraine’s top commander has ordered defences bolstered in the east after the loss of Vuhledar. New NATO secretary general Mark Rutte visited Kyiv as his first trip in his new role.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1841746253052321929

Continue reading →

Roundup: Terrible capital gains narratives

Posted on by

The communications around the capital gains changes have been atrocious. Chrystia Freeland is painting an apocalyptic picture of what will happen to Canadian society if we don’t make these changes, and the talk about fairness, where workers pay more taxes than those who can earn it on investment income is missing the key component of the discussion which is around the unequal treatment of different types of income that allows people to engage in tax arbitrage—picking and choosing which revenue models will net them the least taxation, which is a real problem for fairness that is not being discussed at all.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801021913738698941

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801022109172256818

In amidst this comes Calgary economist Jack Mintz, whose sole entire schtick is to cut taxes to solve every problem under the sun. And of course, Pierre Poilievre was quoting him in Question Period, calling him the greatest economy in the country, which is pretty risible. It didn’t help that Poilievre made the basic mistake of believing that the tax rate is going up rather than the inclusion rate (the point at which it kicks in on the profit you’ve made), but he has doomsday scenarios to unleash into the world to make his case that this is a Very Bad Thing, when it’s nothing at all like he seemed to believe.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801086926696415384

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801088499522937017

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801096926227497107

Everyone has handled this whole situation poorly, media included, and this has been al lost opportunity to try and have a proper conversation about these kinds of tax measures and changes.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missile attacks have left much of Kyiv without power and water. Russian missiles also struck an administrative building and an apartment block in Kryvyi Rih in the south, and killed nine and injured 29. The American government says they are aware of credible reports that abducted Ukrainian children are being put up on adoption websites.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1800901662820704467

Continue reading →

Roundup: Premiers want unconditional money

Posted on by

The premiers are at it again. They’ve written yet another letter to Justin Trudeau to complain about the budget, and all of the ways that it infringes on their jurisdiction, and to call for a return to a “cooperative approach” that means just giving them “unconditional federal funding.” (It was also hilarious to watch certain premiers complain about federal spending as though they also weren’t running their own deficits, while simultaneously demanding more money from the federal government). And I get that they’re concerned that the costs of these new programmes will be downloaded onto them if a future federal government cuts their funding—it’s a legitimate concern. But at the same time, most of these programmes will have longer-term payoffs, whether it’s child care (which Quebec has proved will pay for itself), or pharmacare or dental care, which has the potential to reduce overall healthcare costs—costs the government is going to have to pay when they could have avoided doing so with proper investments.

Nevertheless, it’s not lost on me that we’ve spent years of people saying “nobody cares about jurisdiction,” and demanding the federal government do something—including some of the premiers—and when the federal government not only does something but attaches strings so that the money has to go to particular outcomes, those same premiers immediately go “No, not like that.” But once burned, twice shy—the federal government learned the hard way during the height of the pandemic when the billions they sent to the provinces largely went unspent but went toward their provincial deficits—so they’re going to very much demand strings attached to those dollars. So, of course the federal government is going to do what they can seeing as they’re shouldering the blame anyway, while the premiers continue to be precious about it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles destroyed grain storage facilities in Odesa, as well as the foodstuffs they contained that were bound for Asia and Africa. Ukrainian forces say they shot down a Russian strategic bomber, while Russia claims it crashed due to a malfunction. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the command post used by the troops defending Chasiv Yar in the east.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1781227417404600676

Continue reading →

QP: Sniping in advance of the eclipse

Posted on by

The first day back from the Easter break, and Eclipse Day, and neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, having spent the morning in Trenton making the defence policy update announcement. Most of the other leaders were present today, for what it’s worth. After the introduction of Jamil Jivani as the newest Conservative MP, Pierre Poilievre led off in French, reciting his slogans and accusing government of being “pyromaniacs” fuelling inflation. (That’s not what was driving inflation). Jonathan Wilkinson read a statement about investing in Canadians. Poilievre recited a bank report to claim the government was stoking inflation, and Wilkinson read more talking points about those investments. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his pyromaniac line, and Wilkinson again read lines about investing in Canadians. Poilievre went on about a “carbon tax election,” and recited more slogans. Sean Fraser got up to scoff about the lack of seriousness of Poilievre’s supposed plan. Poilievre insisted that his plan would lower prices for farms, food and homes, and Fraser responded by listed Poilievre’s record a “housing” minister (even though he really wasn’t).

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he railed that the government was trying to tell Quebeckers how to build housing, and listed all of their supposed failures along the way. Pablo Rodriguez was incredulous that the Bloc was against housing, child care, or school food. Therrien railed that federal government was holding Quebec hostage, and Rodriguez reminded that that they were not the Quebec government. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and railed about corporate handouts, and went on a tangent about Conservative corporate handouts and if the Liberals would carry them forward. Wilkinson read more of his talking points about investments and fairness. Singh repeated his question in French, and this time Fraser got up to talk about some of their housing announcements from last week.

Continue reading →

QP: Brandishing an RCMP letter

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present today, though both were back in town (if a bit jet-lagged from their travel over the weekend), while only a few other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and after reciting some slogans, he said that the RCMP had confirmed that they have opened an investigation into ArriveCan, and tried to tie in the Aga Khan and SNC Lavalin. Dominic LeBlanc said that they have been giving authorities all of the documents they request. Poilievre repeated the question in English, and LeBlanc repeated his same response in English. Poilievre then cited a Food Bank report, and demanded the carbon levy be lifted (which has nothing to do with food price inflation). François-Philippe Champagne deployed his usual “take no lessons” line before saying that Conservatives on the committee were defending the profit margins of food processors, and exhorted then to support Bill C-59. Poilievre tried again, and Champagne patted himself on the back for spearheading the largest reform of competition in history. Poilievre then cited the existence of a dumpster diving Facebook group and blamed it on the carbon price. Sean Fraser got up to list assistance programmes that Poilievre and the Conservatives have voted against.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he repeated yesterday’s question about federal government spending to give other provinces what Quebec already has, and wanted compensation to opt out of any national pharmacare. Mark Holland said that a bill would be coming soon, and exhorted them not to criticise a bill they haven’t seen. Therrien wanted compensation to Quebec and the ability to opt out of dental care, and Holland insisted this was just trying to pick fights rather than helping people who need it.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he complained that people in Quebec can’t get a family do form which should be a question for François Legault. Holland said that they were cooperating with provinces, and that it takes time. Don Davies gave a non-Quebec-centric version of the same question, and Holland went on a tear about how the Conservatives would cut while the current government is investing. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Online harms bill finally tabled

Posted on by

The long-awaited online harms bill was tabled yesterday, to much fanfare. The bill would create obligations for web giants to build in certain safety features, and creates a new Digital Safety Commission to oversee this, along with an ombudsman to help people navigate the process if they have been victimised and need content taken down. There are prescriptive processes that give companies 24 hours to remove certain content if flagged (most of it is child sexual exploitation or the sharing of intimate images), but there are very narrow criteria. There are also new Criminal Code provisions around making hate speech a standalone offence instead of an aggravating factor, and restores the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal’s ability to be an avenue for redress for hate speech for those who don’t want to go through the criminal route, albeit with a tighter definition and more ability to dismiss vexatious complaints than the previous system.

To that end, here are five things the bill does, a list of recent examples of online harms inflicted upon youth in recent years, while the mother of Amanda Todd is calling on Parliament to pass the bill swiftly so that other youth are protected.

As for opposition reaction, the Conservatives have point-blank called this censorship, which seems to be opening themselves up to charges that they don’t care about the safety of children and youth online. The Bloc say they’re going to read it over before supporting, while the NDP, seeing this on the Order Paper, tried to give one last attempt to sound tough about the government not introducing this sooner, so that they can launch another data-mining petition.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces downed nine out of 14 Russian drones and three guided missiles overnight on Monday. Ukrainian forces had to fall back from the village of Lastochkyne near Avdiivka, as Russian forces continue to press ahead while Ukrainian forces suffer from a lack of ammunition. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the Black Sea corridor, which is getting grain to countries in need, is in jeopardy without more US aid.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1762133928406626660

Continue reading →

QP: Constant questions to other opposition parties

Posted on by

The prime minister and his deputy were on their way back from the weekend trip to Kyiv and Poland, while most of the other leaders were away. Andrew Scheer led off in French, and he recited the list of Conservative slogans to point out that the Bloc voted in favour of funding ArriveCan. Jean-Yves Duclos stood up to thank the Auditor General for her work, and cite the most of her recommendations have been acted upon. Scheer pointed out that the Bloc voted for this eight times, which got a warning by the Speaker, to which Duclos told him that that he should ask the Bloc, but reiterated the canned line about the government doing what needed to be done in the pandemic. Scheer switched to English to recite his slogans, and gave the same accusations about voting for ArriveCan, but this time directed to the NDP, to which Duclos repeated that if the opposition has question of the NDP, they should ask him not the government. Scheer repeated the slogans, and breathily worried about the carbon price increasingly, and misleadingly tied it to food bank use. Anita Anand reminded that climate change is real, and that they want to take money out of people’s pockets. Scheer misquoted the PBO about the carbon price, and linked it to people dumpster diving. Anand noted that they didn’t refute that they don’t believe in climate change or that they want to take money from people’s pockets.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he took his own shot at the NDP, accusing the government of spending on things Quebec already has and are not their priorities. François-Philippe Champagne acknowledged that they do take inspiration from Quebec, and noted they didn’t want to talk about their investments in the province. Therrien demanded more federal money instead of programmes, to which Mark Holland accused them of trying to start fights instead of helping people.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded the government reform Nutrition North, claiming that the subsidies are not passed along to consumers. Dan Vandal insisted that they are working to ensure that the subsidy is fully passed along, and that progress has been made. Singh repeated the demand in French, and got the same response. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: One great backbencher

Posted on by

Following his unsuccessful run to lead the Ontario Liberal Party, Liberal backbencher Nathaniel Erskine-Smith has confirmed he’s not running in the next election, which is a very big shame. Erskine-Smith has been the kind of backbencher that we need a lot more of in this country, which is to say someone who’s not afraid to rock the boat a little, and to vote against his own party from time to time on matters of principle. That’s exceedingly rare in Canadian politics, and mostly happens only among the Liberals in recent parliaments—Conservatives have a desire to show they’re in lockstep, and the NDP will quietly punish MPs who don’t show continued “solidarity” (and you’d better believe they have an internal bullying culture).

This being said, I’m was not sure that Erskine-Smith would have made a great party leader provincially. While he brought great ideas to the campaign, my concern would be whether someone like that, who wasn’t afraid of rocking the boat from a backbench position, could maintain that energy sustainably in a leadership role, particularly because of the number of compromises that leadership in politics entails. It makes it harder to maintain the kinds of principled positions that he has been able to take, particularly on areas where sitting governments can find themselves getting uncomfortable.

Maybe I’m wrong. Perhaps he could have made it work in leadership and brought a fresh energy to provincial politics the way he’s managed to make a particularly necessary contribution federally. Regardless, I hope he has inspired other backbenchers to take more changes and go against the party line from time to time, because we desperately need it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces shot down 22 out of 33 Russian drones launched overnight Thursday, which hit residential neighbourhoods in the southern city of Kherson, and the nearby community of Beryslav. Ukrainian forces also claim to have hit targets in St. Petersburg, which travelled 1250 km to get there. Russian forces claim to have taken over a settlement called Vesele in Ukraine’s east. Meanwhile, six settlements are being rebuilt under the rubric that economies win wars, but they are only building essentials like housing and hospitals, and not libraries or museums.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Official silence around Lewis’ most recent nuttery

Posted on by

There has been some attention paid lately to the fact that Leslyn Lewis is promoting a House of Commons e-petition that calls on Canada to withdraw from the UN, in the name of our “sovereignty.” Which is ridiculous, because the UN doesn’t impact on anyone’s sovereignty (which is partially why it’s such an ineffective body), but not unexpected. Lewis has peddled many a conspiracy theory around the WHO, or the World Economic Forum (which is a particular conspiracy theory that leans heavily into antisemitism), and has not only not received any rebuke from her party, but they actively encourage some of these same conspiracy theories—particularly those around the World Economic Forum (and then turn around and wonder about the rise in antisemitism. Gosh).

This largely went unmentioned in legacy media for a few days (but hey, a lot of people are still on vacation), but I do find the absolute silence from the Conservatives to be interesting. Some of their former staffers have tried to offer a bit of polish to this, but you can’t actually polish this. (And no, she’s not even data-mining on this kind of petition because it’s through the House of Commons’ portal, not her own or a party website). The simple fact of it is that the Conservatives are more than willing to engage in this kind of nuttery because they think that these are accessible voters in the next election, because these have tended to be people who didn’t used to vote, but then Maxime Bernier offered them something to vote for, and they flocked to his banner, and now Poilievre wants them under his, so he’s willing to entertain this dangerous nonsense and to keep shifting the Overton window in order to try and win those votes, even though it’s almost certainly a fool’s errand because they can see how hollow he really is. Nevertheless, he won’t stop trying, and we can expect more of this kind of nuttery going forward, because that’s who they are these days.

Ukraine Dispatch:

While there has been little movement on the front lines, long-range attacks back-and-forth carry on, with the Russians having acquired ballistic missiles from North Korea, while Ukraine has launched drone attacks both against military targets in occupied Crimea and the around the Russia city of Belgorod. A Ukrainian parliamentary committee is debating changing the rules around mobilisation, and increasing sanctions for draft evasion.

Continue reading →

QP: The plan to phase-out heating oil

Posted on by

The prime minister and all other leaders were present, albeit temporarily. Before things got started, Speaker Fergus gave another exhortation to improve their decorum, following a disruption during Members’ Statements. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he talked about the so-called “second carbon tax” that doesn’t exist, and switched to English halfway through to call on the PM to denounce what Gudie Hutchings said on the weekend. Trudeau read a script in French to praise their programme to help people switch to heat pumps, including free pumps for low-income households. Poilievre was fully in English to denounce the so-called “two classes of Canadians” that this heating oil pause created, and demanded the whole price be cut. Trudeau insisted that this was a step toward getting everyone off heating oil and onto heat pumps. Poilievre insisted that this was an attack on national unity, to which Trudeau denounced this as disinformation, and pointed out that most people get more in a rebate than they pay in carbon prices. Poilievre then misquoted the PBO on the costs of the carbon price, and mischaracterised what Trudeau said about the heating oil pause, to which Trudeau tried to more emphatically insist that they wanted to get free heat pumps to low-income households in provinces where they have an agreement. Poilievre insisted that he wanted to get rid of the price for all people in all places, and wanted it paused until the next election so it could be put to the public. Trudeau insisted that the Conservatives have lost three elections in a row on denying climate change and that the Liberals would show them that once again.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he wanted a concession on reducing immigration targets, given that it was the subject of the Bloc’s Supply Day motion. Trudeau launched into a paean about how great and necessary immigration is for the country. Blanchet demanded support for their motion, and Trudeau talked about how they engage with stakeholder, and indicated their support for the motion (which is surprisingly considering that the motion is entirely concern trolling).

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded the government remove the GST on all home heating—a programme that is largely unworkable and disproportionately benefits the wealthy. Trudeau talked about how years ago they agreed to phase out coal, and now they are doing the same with heating oil. Singh repeated the question in French, and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →