Tag Archives: Bank of Canada

Roundup: Why Statute of Westminster Day matters

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday was Statute of Westminster Day, which most people don’t have a clue about in spite of it showing up on their calendars. It’s a hugely important day in Canadian history because it was a turning point in our sovereignty as it relates to our relationship with the UK—the creation of the Canadian Crown as a separate and distinct entity from the UK Crown. Canada and several other realms (Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Newfoundland, and South Africa) were all granted Separate Crowns because they decided that the Crown was indeed divisible (and in Canada, further divisible among the provinces), and that meant things like being able to control our own foreign policy.

Today is Statute of Westminster Day, which is the birthday of the Canadian Crown as a separate entity from the UK Crown. It’s an incredibly important day for Canadian sovereignty, but mostly gets passed over, or under-taught in schools. #MapleCrown

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-11T15:00:49.015Z

The problem, of course, is that we’re not taught this. We may be taught that that the Statute gave us more control over our foreign affairs (at least, I was in my social studies classes in Alberta), but it was couched more in terms of the aftermath of the First World War—the Canadian Crown was entirely absent from that discussion. And if you look at Parliamentary accounts on Twitter, for example, not one of them mentioned the Crown as the reason why we gained that autonomy and independence. It’s the whole gods damned reason why, and we don’t celebrate that at all. It’s a real problem as to why we don’t have a grasp of basic civics in this country, and something we need to rectify.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian troops overran or captured several Ukrainian positions near the strategic city of Pokrovsk. Ukrainians struck a Russian airfield near the Azov Sea with US-made missiles, and a Ukrainian drone hit police barracks in Chechnya.

Continue reading →

QP: Fantasizing about a “collapsing” economy

Posted on by
Reply

Wednesday, the final proto-PMQ of the year, and the prime minister was indeed present and ready to respond to all questions put to him, while his deputy was elsewhere. All of the other leaders were also present today, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and again cited the Globe and Mail story about the supposed tensions between Freeland and Trudeau over the size of the deficit, and demanded to know why he pushed her to break her promise on capping it. Justin Trudeau said that Poilievre was dramatizing things to distract from his voting against programmes that help people, and that he muzzles his MPs to prevent them from speaking out for their communities, or get his security clearance. Poilievre again demanded to know why Trudeau forced his finance minister to break her promise and Trudeau responded with a list of things Poilievre voted against. Poilievre switched to English and repeated his first question on the Globe story, and Trudeau once again called these little “dramas” a distraction from his record of voting against supports for Canadians or refusing to get his security clearance. Poilievre accused a Trudeau of bullying Freeland, said that he is too weak to control his own caucus, and then Poilievre proclaimed that he leads by inspiration and that Trudeau leads by intimidation. Trudeau said that Poilievre likes to claim things are broken because he keeps breaking them. Poilievre  mocked this, and then claimed that Freeland was going to be humiliated by reading a fiscal update authored by Mark Carney, and Trudeau accused Poilievre of using Canadians’ struggles for his own gain but that he won’t lift a finger to help them.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, complained about a committee study, and wondered what the PM would say to the thousands of Muslims who are happy to assimilate into Quebec. Trudeau praised diversity and rights. Blanchet then wondered if Trudeau was defending religious “indoctrination” at certain Quebec schools, to which Trudeau praised the Charter, and then said it was the responsibility of those schools to hire the best teachers they could.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, said that Trump was a bully and that Trudeau was too weak to stand up to him. Trudeau said that they were taking a measured approach, working with leaders across the country, and were not freaking out like the NDP were. Singh exclaimed that Trudeau’s job wasn’t safe either, and then repeated the same question/demand in French. Trudeau reminded him that they defeated Trump tariffs in the past.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The same government, not a new one

Posted on by

The final results of the BC election started rolling in as the absentee ballots were counted, and lo, it looks like the NDP managed to flip one seat in the final tally, making it a 47-44-2 tally NDP/Conservative/Greens. And while that’s all well and good, the way in which major media outlets described this was a gods damned tragedy, and I was about to lose my mind.

No, the NDP are not going to “form government,” because they are already the government. Only the legislature changes. No, the Lieutenant-Governor didn’t ask Eby to form government, her statement explicitly said “David Evy advised me that he is prepared to continue as premier.” Because she doesn’t sit around waiting to make a decision—she acts on advice, and he never resigned, so he is not forming anything. He will be shuffling his Cabinet, but it’s the same government that carries over to another legislature. That’s it, and it’s a really big problem when neither the national wire service of the national public broadcaster couldn’t actually read what she wrote, and instead wrote their copy based on a falsehood and changed her words to suit their wrong meaning.

Additionally, because I am going to get pedantic here, there is also no such thing as a “majority government” or a “minority government.” Government—meaning Cabinet—is government. What changes is whether they control a majority or minority of the legislature. The legislature is not government. What matters is whether the same government is able to maintain the confidence of the chamber, which is much easier to do when you have a majority of the seats. The fact that Eby has managed to secure a razor-thin majority of those seats means that he has essentially ensured that he can maintain that confidence (though the Speaker issue could remain tricky). But my gods, could our media outlets have a modicum of civic literacy? It’s not only embarrassing that they don’t, but it’s outright dangerous for democracy going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian air attacks killed four in Kyiv and four in Kharkiv, where they also shattered a historic building and celebrated landmark. Critical infrastructure was also damaged in two regions in the north of Ukraine, leading to more power outages.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Calling for the moderates to re-engage

Posted on by

Over in The Line, former provincial Progressive Conservative (and former federal Conservative) comms staffer Chisholm Pothier goes though Blaine Higgs’ downfall in New Brunswick, and in particular how his obsession with “parental rights” as a cover for oppressing trans youth was one of the main drivers of that collapse, particularly because the Liberals in that province were talking about the things people were worried about, like housing and healthcare. He eschewed the usual partisan nonsense and congratulated Suan Holt on a deserved win. But that wasn’t the important part.

The most important takeaway from the piece, however, is that Pothier calls on Tories in New Brunswick to get memberships and get engaged with the party if they want to take it back from what Higgs turned it into, which is a narrow little cult catering primarily to Christian nationalists. This is something I have written columns about in the past—that it’s extremely important for ordinary people and moderates within a party to take out a membership and get involved at the grassroots level, because if you don’t, the crazies absolutely will and they will take over your party. This is what happened with the UCP in Alberta—when Jason Kenney engineered the hostile takeover of the PC party there, and then its merger with the Wildrose to form the UCP, it was done very much by getting the swivel-eyed loons to engage with the process at the expense of the moderates, whom they didn’t want in the party. This was to be a small-c conservative party and not the amorphous centrist mass that the PC party in Alberta had become, constantly reshaping itself and its beliefs to follow those of each successive leader. And now, it’s a party of hardcore fanatics, who turned on Kenney, and whom Danielle Smith is terrified they will do the same to her, so she is becoming increasingly radical in how she is governing as a result.

I cannot stress enough that ordinary people need to be engaged with parties at the grassroots level, or things get really bad. A party that only consists of Kool-Aid drinkers, regardless of the party, becomes toxic pretty fast (especially if they start going on with the purity tests). While the PCs in New Brunswick have a chance to reclaim their party, which is probably too late in Alberta (and couldn’t happen at all with the sudden capitulation of BC United to the BC Conservatives). It also may not be possible for the federal Liberals, who did away with party memberships altogether in favour of sign-ups that will populate their voter database while all power centralized in the leader’s office. Pothier’s advice should carry for all parts of the country, not just New Brunswick—if you want to keep your party from falling prey to fanatics of any stripe, you need to get involved as a member to push back against them.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched two waves of drone attacks over Kyiv, and one of them struck an apartment building, killing one and injuring five. A missile attack struck residences and a medical facility in Dnipro, killing three. G7 leaders announced $50 billion in loans to Ukraine to be repaid with seized Russian assets.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No backbench rebellion…for now

Posted on by

As far as backbench revolts go, this one was a bit of a damp squib, or to put it another way, Wells’ First Rule has once again borne out in practice—For any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome. Purportedly, Trudeau addressed caucus and got emotional talking about the toll has taken on him, including his children constantly seeing the “Fuck Trudeau” flags and so on, but nevertheless there was a frank airing of grievances from some MPs, though nobody had a copy of that memorandum calling on him to step down that had names attached (oh, the bravery!). In the end, it looks like it was only 24 backbench MPs who had signed onto this (not that anyone could see the names), which is not 40, and makes it easier for them to be dismissed (though still, that number could very well grow). Nevertheless, there was a commitment for everyone to reflect more about what was said, and a few voices have said that they want Trudeau to give some indication by Monday if he plans to stick around or to call it a day (though I can’t imagine that he would want to make any such decision on their timetable).

While the message coming out of caucus was that they have never been stronger or more united, that sounds an awful lot like the “We’ve never been more united” speech just before or after someone crosses the floor. Others, like Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, said that the palace intrigue needs to stop and that the knives need to turn outward rather than inward—a reference that the real enemy is Pierre Poilievre, and not Trudeau, though again, nobody is saying that this matter is done with, particularly given that everyone needs to reflect on what happened.

This having been said, I think it’s fair to question the organizational abilities of those leading this backbench revolt, because a lot of what has come out in public has been pretty shambolic, as is the fact that there seems to be absolutely no plan for the day after if Trudeau did take their message and decide to start planning his exit. I think in part that’s because there has been no heir apparent, or nobody for anyone to rally around as a focal point for who could replace Trudeau, and that may have as much to do with the fact that a good many MPs were political operatives or even staffers who were around during the Chrétien-Martin wars, and remain traumatized by them, and the fact that Trudeau had very consciously focused on rooting out those camps when he took over the party. We’ll see what happens over the next week or two, but just because nothing happened today doesn’t mean that the tide isn’t shifting.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians have captured two villages in the Donetsk region in the east, and are currently storming four more settlements in the Donbas region, but those attacks are currently being repelled. The Americans have now corroborated that as many as 3000 North Korean troops are now in Russia, training for a possible deployment to Ukraine. Here is a look at how fire trucks in Nikopol now have anti-drone jammers mounted on them because Russians have been targeting them.

Continue reading →

QP: Free-wheeling, chaotic, and from an alternate reality

Posted on by

In the wake of that big caucus meeting where little seemed to happen, the prime minister was present for QP—his proto-PMQ day in fact, while his deputy left for Washington. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he needled about 24 Liberal backbenchers signing the document, the Bloc supporting them, and demanded an election. Trudeau got up, for much applause from his caucus, the Conservatives got up with what was supposed to be sarcastic applause but just looked like more applause, and after it died down, Trudeau insisted (in English) that they were totally united and they were focused on delivering for Canadians. Poilievre noted that the question was in French, claimed that backbenchers leaking to journalists from the washroom at caucus, and again demanded an election. Trudeau, in French, trotted out his lines about confident governments investing in people and not resorting to austerity. Poilievre, still in French, listed slogans, claimed immigration was “out of control,” and demanded an election. Trudeau noted Poilievre only offers cuts and empty slogans and not investments in people and the green future. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his slogans, his concern trolling over the 24 backbenchers, lied about the privilege issue, and demanded an election. Trudeau recited his line about while the opposition is focused on politics, he is focused on Canadians. Poilievre again mocked the dissident Liberals, and Trudeau hit back with the Conservatives’ hanging out with white nationalists and Poilievre’s lack of a security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the allegations at a particular school in Quebec, and Trudeau noted that’s a provincial issue but they would defend rights and freedoms for all Canadians. Blanchet wondered if Trudeau was saying “forced religious education” and corporal punishment was freedom of expression. Trudeau reiterated that this was a provincial matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, declared that he knew the prime minister was distracted, and demanded he take action on food prices. Trudeau noted that they have taken action, whether it is with competition reform or a school food programme, before he took a swipe at the NDP for backing away from the carbon rebates. Singh wondered if Trudeau has even been to a grocery store, and was shouted down before the Speaker intervened. When he started again, he read the same line again (proving it was a scripted applause line to be clipped) before switching to French worry about rents. Trudeau, in English, noted he had recently been to a grocery store with the Speaker in his riding, and then turned to French to praise their housing investments.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Implicated Conservatives and the lack of security clearance

Posted on by

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: Unserious about monetary policy

Posted on by

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 →

Roundup: Bringing in the spouses?

Posted on by

The fallout from Jagmeet Singh’s confrontation with members of the Asshole Brigade who are harassing people in front of Parliament Hill has taken a couple of strange twists. In his post about the incident, Singh said that “That’s the country that Pierre Poilievre wants,” which of course sent the Conservatives into the usual bit of performative victimhood. Among those was Michael Cooper, who was seen hanging out with some of those members of the Asshole Brigade, and he tweeted out that he didn’t know them, that they approached him at the restaurant he was eating in…but there is video that shows him meeting with them before the restaurant, so perhaps that’s a very judicious use of the truth.

The stranger part was that Anaida Poilievre wrote a long Twitter missive to rebut the accusation and to praise Poilievre’s good character, while taking shots at Singh and Justin Trudeau. There has been a long-held convention in Canadian politics that spouses stay out of things, and they get a semblance of anonymity as a result. The fact that she has been very active in Poilievre’s campaign is a sign that she could be much more active in a future where Poilievre becomes prime minister, and that’s a bit of a problem because we don’t have “First Ladies” in this county like the Americans do, because our “First Lady” is Queen Camila. If she plays an active role, does she then become a target for other parties? Does that open up attacks for their spouses? I worry about that given the coarsening of politics as it is, and the fact that far too many people are already targeting MPs’ homes as part of protests. We don’t need them to become fair game as things continue to race to the bottom.

https://x.com/AnaPoilievre/status/1836225640938508466

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian shelling in Zaporizhzhia killed one woman and injured two others, while another attack targeted energy facilities in the central city of Kropyvnytskyi. Ukrainian drones have struck a Russian military base north of Moscow, causing an “earthquake-sized” blast. President Zelenskyy will be addressing the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday.

Continue reading →

QP: Won’t somebody think about the GDP?

Posted on by

The first prototype-PMQ day of the fall sitting promised to be a caustic set of exchanges between the PM and the leader of the opposition, and it did not disappoint. Well, it’s always disappointing, but it went about as well as expected, though perhaps not quite as caustic as one might have assumed. Pierre Poilievre led off in French with a swipe at the Bloc for their plans not to topple the government, and listed a bunch of nonsense about what the federal government allegedly did—but it wasn’t really a question for the government. Justin Trudeau listed things they have done that the Conservatives would cut. Poilievre recited some slogans, and wondered again why the Bloc allowed it, which was again not a question for government, and the Speaker said nothing. Trudeau listed things that Poilievre voted against in his “thirst for power.” Poilievre switched to English to make the same swipe, but this time directed to the NDP, and wondered why they weren’t saying they would vote against the government, which again was not a question for government. Trudeau repeated that Poilievre voted against Canadians’ interests because he only cares about himself, and that he was in a bad mood because the economy was performing well. Poilievre recited a litany of slogans, and Trudeau said this was mere performance because he doesn’t care about Canadians and repeated the points about inflation coming down and that Poilievre can’t use his “justinflation” slogan anymore. Poilievre took this as an excuse to list the people using food banks or who are in tent encampments, and Trudeau said this empathy was false because he was using the vulnerable for his own gain.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he lamented the remarks of the special advisory to counter Islamophonia, and wanted the government’s definition of Islamophobia. Trudeau spoke about the rise of it and antisemitism, but did not provide a definition. Blanchet noted this and accused the government of polarising Canadians, and Trudeau pointed out that he is a proud Quebeckers and there are more Liberals from Quebec than in the Bloc, and that they need to combat intolerance. 

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and decried the increasing privatisation of healthcare and demanded the government put a stop to it. Trudeau said that the NDP can’t deliver the goods on progressive policies, as shown by their backing out of their agreement, because they didn’t like it when things got hard. Alistair MacGregor took over in English to worry about grocery prices, and accuse the government of “caving to CEOs.” Trudeau accused them of taking a page from the Conservative playbook in choosing slogans over hard work.

Continue reading →