Tag Archives: Border

Roundup: Carney and the premiers

Posted on by
Reply

Mark Carney held a First Ministers’ meeting yesterday at the Canadian War Museum, which we’re given to understand was a bit of deliberate symbolism for the current moment, and most of the premiers arrived in person, save Danielle Smith, Scott Moe, and Andrew Furey (who is on a trade mission to Japan, and not in a fit of pique). The meeting ran long, and came out with a number of promises that the cynic in me feels are incredibly optimistic in terms of timelines and ambition. Not that we shouldn’t be ambitious, but oftentimes things are slow for a reason.

In particular, Carney is looking for complete internal free trade by July 1st (barring a few Quebec-specific carve-outs, which one assumes are mostly related to linguistic requirements). He’s also promising to temporary lift the waiting period for EI, to allow businesses to defer corporate income tax and GST/HST filings, creating a new Large Enterprise Economic and National Security Facility for financing, doubling the Indigenous Loan Guarantee programme, increasing funding for regional development agencies, and removing mobility restrictions for federally-regulated workers. The promise around “one window” approvals for major project assessments confuses me somewhat because we already have joint review panels—the whole point being that the federal and provincial assessment processes work together, hence “joint,” so there isn’t duplication. This has been the practice for environmental assessments for decades now, so I’m not quite sure what he’s talking about. Carney was also talking about expediting projects like high-speed rail, but looking at their timeline, I have questions about how much they can realistically speed things without creating new problems. But hey, there’s great enthusiasm in the moment for doing Big Things, so we’ll see if they can actually get off the ground.

In response to questions, Carney clapped back at Trump’s suggestion that he’s the one who changed Canada’s political landscape (not untrue, but not for the reasons he is suggesting),  and gave a line about how Canadians will choose their own leaders. He clarified that yes, he intends to keep the emissions cap (and made the point that it’s an emissions cap and not a production cap), but wants to spur investments in emissions reductions (but really, the carbon price and cap should actually do that on their own). He also did not rule out future investments in pipelines but says he wants to clear the way for private sector investment.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia continues to hammer civilian targets in Odesa and Zaporizhzhia, but then gets all precious about a major pumping station that blew up as Ukrainians have been withdrawing from Kursk region, even though Ukraine says that Russia blew it up themselves as a provocation.

https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1902662502334259284

Continue reading →

Roundup: No reporters on the plane

Posted on by

The Conservatives have declared that there will be no media contingent on their campaign plane or busses, while still mouthing words like claiming they’ll be the “most transparent” campaign out there. (Full letter here). They won’t be, of course, because not allowing journalists on the plane/bus means that they can’t see unscripted moments (from their limited vantage point), but stage-management is much of what this is really about—giving that added bit of message control that the Conservatives are very desperate to maintain.

The claim they are advancing is that they’ll give two- or three-days’ advance notice of stops so that local media can be there, or that national media can fly (last minute, driving up costs), and that people can use “technology” to connect to the campaign, but that generally means relying on the party’s infrastructure and feeds, which allows for greater chances of manipulation (especially if they delay their feed). And before you say it, yes, media do pay for seats on that plane/busses. Thousands of dollars. For comparison’s sake, the Liberals’ proposed fees for the campaign were $1,500 per day; $6,600 per week; or $33,500 for the full campaign. Those fees cover travel, food, access to filing rooms, and Wi-Fi (but not hotels). So let me reiterate—this isn’t about costs, it’s about control. And because the Conservatives claim that they will balance local and national coverage at events, we’ve seen what this means in recent press conferences, where they refused questions from English-language national media, and only took questions from local ethnocultural outlets, and so-called “independent” faux-news outlets like Rebel “News” or Juno.

Ukraine Dispatch

Putin claimed he was willing to engage in a thirty-day ceasefire on energy infrastructure only (which doesn’t mean much given that this is the time of year Russia would be letting up on attacking those targets—they prefer to do so in the winter to freeze out the Ukrainians), and lo, continued to bomb other civilian targets. Some “ceasefire.” Ukraine then stopped an attempted Russian incursion into the Sumy region, because of course.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Delusions about Canadian defence industry capabilities

Posted on by

On Sunday, following NDP leader Jagmeet Singh’s trip to Nunavut, he released an Arctic sovereignty and defence policyin a bit of pre-election posturing. The actual Arctic sovereignty stuff was reasonably fine, which mostly involves better investments in Northern and Inuit communities, but the defence part? Hoo boy. To start off, it was poorly worded in talking about “repatriating” the F-35 contract to “build the jets” in Canada, but it wasn’t immediately clear if he thought they could build the F-35s in Canada (nope), or if it meant restarting the entire process for selecting a new fighter, which again, isn’t really possible at this stage as the CF-18s are at the absolute end of their lifespan, and we can’t just turn procurements off on a dime.

As Philippe Lagassé explains, yes, we need to pivot away from American platforms, but that needs to be done in a managed and methodical way that is going to take years, and the NDP need to realise this (and so, frankly, to the Liberals given the kinds of crazy things all of the leadership contenders were saying during their debates). But seriously, guys, you can’t just claim we’ll meet all of our military obligations with Canadian industries alone. That’s not even wishful thinking—it’s full-on delusion. You may think that Bombardier’s vapourware promises sound great, because Canadian jobs, but when they can’t deliver? Those are some pretty hefty consequences to face.

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3lkjgfvradc2r

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3lkji3fx3ps2r

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3lkjijakxuc2r

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3lkjivko5i22r

Carbon levy gaslighting

In amidst a bunch of “trutherism” about the document that Mark Carney signed on Friday to zero out the consumer carbon levy (for which they published an extra edition of the Canada Gazette to enact), the Conservative continue to insist that Carney is just going to raise it back up after an election, which seems to be admitting that he’s going to win, which is kind of funny.

Meanwhile, the Liberals are doing themselves no favours by spending the weekend praising Carney for “getting it done” in ending their own signature environmental policy. And Liberal MPs were all over social media patting themselves on the back for “listening to Canadians,” and making up outright Orwellian excuses for defeating their own gods damned policy. And then their supporters were in my replies offering up straight-up revisionist history about the carbon price and trying to blame it on Stephen Harper, I shit you not. I really, really not appreciate being gaslit about your stupid political moves, especially when they refuse to own why it became so divisive, particularly when they refused to properly explain or defend their own policies.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones hit a high-rise building in Chernihiv. Contrary to the Russian propaganda that Trump has been reading, Ukrainian troops in Kursk region are not encircled, even though the Russians are pushing forward to move Ukrainian troops from the region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney chosen, now the transition begins

Posted on by

The Liberal leadership race has concluded, with Mark Carney winning by 85.9 percent on the first ballot, winning in every riding including those held by Chrystia Freeland and Karina Gould. The results were announced after Justin Trudeau’s farewell speech, and a barnburner from Jean Chrétien, and then Carney delivered an utterly bland speech, which has become par for the course. (Another Carney bio is here).

With Carney now having won the contest, now the transition begins, which won’t happen overnight, and he won’t be sworn in as PM at Rideau Hall for a few days, while this gets sorted. That won’t stop the constant drone of the concern trolling that he’ll be PM without facing an election (because apparently nobody knows basic civics in a Westminster parliamentary system), and because they want to argue in bad faith about what this means. If you need some convincing, here is a look back at previous prime ministers who didn’t have a seat in the House of Commons when they took office (though two examples were senators at the time).

In reaction, Susan Delacourt points out that Carney also has the job ahead of reinventing the Liberal Party for the next generation, as has tended to be the case for most leaders. Paul Wells muses about Carney’s brand of change, and the what it says about his competition with Poilievre to lead the country in the upcoming federal election, whenever it kicks off. Colin Horgan looks back to Carney’s past performances, particularly when he got outflanked by Poilievre at a committee appearance. As well, Trudeau’s official photographer for the past 15 years, Adam Scotti, reflects on the journey.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched another heavy aerial attack on Saturday that pounded Dobropillya in the Donetsk region, killing at least 22 people. There were another 14 killed and at least 37 wounded in Kharkiv the same night. Russian forces have also recaptured three settlements in the Kursk region, trying to drive Ukrainians out. Ukrainian drones made a long-range strike against an industrial facility overnight Saturday.

Continue reading →

Roundup: First day retaliation

Posted on by

[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.

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.

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: Starmer sputters instead of speaking up

Posted on by

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.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1895048627690656241

Continue reading →

Roundup: A mixed bag from the English debate

Posted on by

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!

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.

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).

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

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.

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.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A trio of interim leaders

Posted on by

Rob Lantz was sworn-in as the new premier of PEI yesterday, but he’s officially an interim party leader because outgoing premier Dennis King didn’t bother to hang around long enough for a successor to be chosen (as Justin Trudeau has), which frankly just adds to the mystery surrounding why he resigned in a hurry. Usually that only happens when there’s a scandal of some variety. But what I didn’t realise was that the other two parties who have seats in the legislature also only have interim leaders, and that it’s been two years since the last provincial election, and no party has a permanent leader.

Here’s former PEI journalist Teresa Wright with more.

While I will push back on the “only chosen by 18 members” comment, because we should actually let the caucus choose the leader, it is nevertheless a problem that there are no permanent leaders in that legislature after two years. It’s malpractice, frankly, and a sign about how broken leadership politics have become in this country. I’ve seen it happen over multiple parties federally, particularly where they feel that they need between nine months and two years to find a new permanent leader so that they can generate ideas or “excitement” in the race, which again, is not how this is supposed to happen. The leader should not be the one bringing policy to the table—that should be the responsibility of the grassroots membership. And leaders should be within the caucus and not some outsider who thinks they can sail into the position without ever having run for office in the past. *coughs*

This tactic of waiting until closer to the election to pick a new leader smacks of opportunism and just having leaders to be election figureheads rather than doing the actual work that MPs/MLAs should be doing the rest of the legislative session. This is Very Bad for democracy. Legislative work needs to be done. Constituency work needs to be done. Leaders are supposed to have other responsibilities within parties than just leading an election. PEI used to be known for having a pretty robust civic culture, so this is not only disappointing, but a bad sign for the state of democracy in this country.

Ukraine Dispatch

An overnight drone attack killed a rail worker outside of Kyiv, while falling debris damaged buildings inside the city. Russians claim to have taken three more villages in east Ukraine. American negotiators are threatening to cut Ukraine off from Starlink services unless they sign the document that demands fifty percent of their resource wealth in exchange for no protection or security guarantees.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre selects his echo chamber

Posted on by

Yesterday, Pierre Poilievre held a media availability in the GTA, and if you ignore some of his more vacuous commentary, like claiming that he needs to cut government spending to bring down inflation when deficits never fuelled inflation in the first place, and the fact that inflation has already been tamed and is currently sitting below the 2 percent target, well, you get the drift. Nevertheless, what was particularly interesting was the fact that media who attended the event were told that they weren’t getting questions, and that only five pre-determined outlets would get questions—two far-right outlets, two ethno-cultural media outlets, and Radio-Canada.

This is clearly a strategy of speaking to an echo chamber who won’t push back on the kinds of horseshit he was peddling (like the inflation comments). It’s also noteworthy that in his interview with True North/Juno Media last week, Poilievre went on a tangent about how they should be allowed in the Parliamentary Press Gallery, and he claimed that Gallery-members are “government-approved,” when the government has zero say in who gets Gallery accreditation—the Gallery is self-governing, and we have determined that True North, Rebel, and other far-right outlets are not actually practicing journalism, but propaganda. (The Gallery has also determined that left-wing outlet PressProgress also doesn’t merit membership because it is run by the partisan Broadbent Institute). Nevertheless, Poilievre’s spokesperson went ahead and spun it as though Poilievre was oh-so available to the media while Mark Carney was not.

This is, of course, mendacious. Poilievre has been self-selective of his media availabilities, and has refused most legacy media outlets, particularly those who are inclined to push back against any of his complete and utter bunkum. And yes, we have seen similar tactics coming from Trump, who has been offering not only space for far-right outlets, but has kicked out established media outlets from their desks in the Pentagon to give them to the chuds who will mindlessly repeat his propaganda. Conservatives in this country have been moving in this direction for a while now, and for Poilievre to be so blatant about it is very telling.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched 161 drones and a dozen missiles at Ukraine overnight Wednesday, targeting gas infrastructure in Kharkiv, and the power supply in Odesa. The media availability from Zelenskyy’s meeting with the new US envoy was changed to a photo op, and a chill has definitely set in.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1892538057057878088

Continue reading →