Roundup: The capacity to spend

One of the constant refrains since the Trump election is that Canada needs to get serious about increasing out defence spending faster, or he’ll be mean to us in NATO, or something like that. While I would note that he’ll be mean to us regardless because that’s who he is, and that he’s never understood how NATO actually works, so whether or not our spending is above 2 percent of GDP or not is almost a moot question. But the biggest consideration is actually whether we actually have the capacity to spend more.

The thing is, defence spending has gone up significantly, but the military lapses some of that spending on a yearly basis because they just can’t get that spending out of the door, for various reasons, including the fact that they simply don’t have the personnel to do everything that needs to be done, and you can’t just hire someone off the street in most of these cases—military personnel is just that, and they take time to train and rise up through the ranks appropriately. Add in the recruitment and retention crisis (thanks to sexual misconduct and abuse of power in the General Officer and Flag Officer ranks), and it makes it even harder.

Nevertheless, here’s Philippe Lagassé with some thoughts on building the capacity to spend more.

Ukraine Dispatch

It appears that Russia has fired cruise missiles against Kyiv for the first time in two months, not just drones. The US confirms that North Korean troops are now fighting alongside Russian forces.

Continue reading

QP: Swagger around the Trump election

In the wake of the U.S. election results, the prime minister was present today to answer all questions, while his deputy was away. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and claimed that Trudeau had previously caved to Trump on softwood lumber and claimed he would do so again. Justin Trudeau dismissed this and noted how they successfully renegotiated NAFTA, and stood up to other tariffs. Poilievre’s tried this again in English, and Trudeau repeated his same points with the added note that Poilievre wouldn’t get his security clearance. Poilievre went on about what is “dumb” and claimed the carbon levy was driving jobs and investment in the U.S., and Trudeau said that they were going to grow the economy together, and said that that government takes defence and security seriously, and pointed to the defence cuts under the Conservatives and his refusal to get His clearance. Poilievre patted himself on the back for the Conservatives “crushing the Taliban and ISIS,” claimed Trudeau couldn’t shoot down a Chinese weather balloon. Trudeau accused Poilievre of talking down the Canadian Forces, and called him out for not committing to their two percent NATO timeline. Poilievre returned to French to claim that Trudeau has destroyed the economy, and Trudeau listed ways in which they have stood up for Canadian workers and took defence seriously, before one more swipe at the security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the crush of Americans heading for the border to avoid Trump. Trudeau noted that they have been making preparations before some economic back-patting. Blanchet felt that was too vague, and Trudeau again offered some bland assurances that they are protecting the border, and the steps taken to better distribute refugees around the country.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and worried about the American tariffs would raise prices in Canada. (Huh? How?) Trudeau listed the workers they stood up for workers the last time and will do so again. Singh said was “cold comfort” before repeating the question in French, and Trudeau, related his same back-patting.

Continue reading

QP: Low-energy economic bafflegab

On a rainy Monday, the prime minister was in town but not at QP, while his deputy was in his stead. Some of the other leaders were present today, but not Pierre Poilievre, unusually. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off to read some utter nonsense about “economic vandalism” and a “per capita” recession, and demanded a cancellation of “tax hikes.” Patty Hajdu got up to first speak to the passing of Senator Murray Sinclair. Scheer said they joined in sending condolences, before returning to his claims of economic vandalism and railed about the proposed emissions cap, and demanded it be scrapped. Jonathan Wilkinson said that they are moving to address climate change, and that low-carbon sources will be more valuable. Scheer read some statistics without context to claim the government was creating jobs in the U.S., to which Steven Guilbeault responded that Scheer should actually read the regulations, and not that production was still projected to increase. Luc Berthold took over in French to read the same non-sequitur economic stats, and Chrystia Freeland shot back with countering statistics about how much better the situation in Canada was compared to the U.S. Berthold insisted that the wealth gap is growing between countries, and Freeland quoted an American economist who suggested companies leave New York for Toronto.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he railed that the Senate needed to pass the Supply Management bill, lest there be economic doom. Lawrence MacAulay reminded him that he as been a farmer under the system his entier career, and that the government supports it. Therrien railed further about the Senators holding up the bill, two which Marie-Claude Bibeau reminded him that Senator are independent and that only a Liberal government would protect it.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP to point to doctors in Quebec offering private options, and demanded the government do something. Mark Holland recited the paean about public healthcare and suggested that they work together to pressure provinces. Singh repeated the same in French, and got much the same paean en français.

Continue reading

Roundup: A Pollyanna about Tuesday’s outcome

I have not said much about the American election because not my circus, not my monkeys, and I really can’t get worked up about a contest I have no say in, however, comments made by the US ambassador to Canada this weekend have utterly boggled my mind. “I firmly believe that regardless of the outcome of the election, the United States is going to remain the most durable democracy in the world,” David Cohen said, and went on about how democracy will “easily” survive whatever the outcome of that election.

No. America has been teetering on the brink of autocracy for a while now, and while I get that his job is to be blandly reassuring as the ambassador, this just smacks of being a giant Pollyanna. And for Canada, where so much of what happens in the US leaks over the border and affects our politics here, those autocratic impulses are not far behind either. We already have provincial governments using tactics lifted directly from the authoritarian playbook, as is Pierre Poilievre, and he’s not shy about it either. And if America stops defending other democracies around the world under an autocratic regime, things are going to get very difficult indeed as these democracies are under threat from Russia and other autocratic actors who want to break them in order to show their own populations that democracy doesn’t work, so better to suck it up and live with the corruption of their autocratic states. And then there is Trump’s vision of NATO as a protection racket, that he fully intends to upend, and already Viktor Orbán is salivating at the thought of a Trump victory handing Ukraine to Russia, destroying a democracy the way he has been doing in Hungary.

There will be consequences, and I don’t think it helps anyone for Cohen to shrug it off like that.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian guided bomb hit a supermarket in Kharkiv, injuring at least five. Ukrainian forces destroyed 66 out of 92 Russian drones sent into the country overnight Saturday, and fortunately, no casualties were reported. Russians have also taken control of the village of Vyshneve in the Donetsk region, while Ukrainian forces hold back one of the most powerful offensives since the start of the invasion.

Continue reading

Roundup: The PBO’s new NATO numbers

The PBO is at it again, and he released a report yesterday on his particular calculations about how Canada could get to our stated NATO goals of 2 percent of GDP by 2032-33, and that we would need to double defence spending to get there, and what that looks like if the government remains committed to its deficit and debt-to-GDP ratio targets. Fair enough, but there are a number of capital commitments in the works that include new submarines, and one has a pretty good bet that these costs will only increase as time goes by, for what it’s worth.

While this is all well and good, there was some particular language in the report that should raise some eyebrows, because Yves Giroux is talking about how other economic forecasts are “erroneous” and he is insisting therefore that his aren’t, which is…a choice. In his previous report on defence spending, Giroux went on a whole tangent about how the OECD figures used as the baseline weren’t correct and his numbers were, but NATO uses those OECD figures for their purposes, not the PBO’s. For the sake of an apples-to-apples comparison, you would think that he would use the same denominator as NATO does, but of course not. Giroux has a particular sense of hubris around his figures, and we all know what happened when he got them wrong with his first report on the carbon levy and then he tried to prevaricate and rationalize them away, and insisted there wouldn’t be any real changes when lo, there were some pretty significant ones.

While we’re on the topic, the 2 percent figure remains a bad one because the denominator—Canada’s GDP is much larger than many NATO members’, making that figure incredibly hard to reach, particularly as the economy grows, and the fact that any country could exceed that target if their economy crashed. Not saying we don’t need to spend more, because we do (and I would not expect the Conservatives to meet the target either as they pledge to cut significantly should they form government next), but we also need to keep some perspective.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces shot down 33 out of 62 drones plus one missile overnight, which killed at least four in various regions of the country, while Russia claims they downed 25 Ukrainian drones, as North Korea’s foreign minister travelled to Moscow. Last evening, a guided bombs struck a high rise in Kharkiv, killing a child. Russians claim to have taken the village of Kruhliakivka in the Kharkiv region.

Continue reading

Roundup: Calling for the moderates to re-engage

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

QP: Concern trolling about caucus matters

The prime minister was present today for the first time in more than a week, as was his deputy, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led of in French, and he needled the fact that as many of forty Liberal backbenchers are pushing back against him, and concern trolled about their freedom of expression. Speaker Fergus noted that this wasn’t under the administrative responsibilities of the government, but Justin Trudeau got up to speak anyway, and gave a paean about the things they are delivering for Canadians. Poilievre tried to bring the Bloc in on this, but kept it as a question about caucus, but Trudeau again got up to pat himself on the back for pharmacare. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his concern trolling about caucus, and got another warning from Fergus. Trudeau again got up in spite of this and said that Poilievre only wants to score political points and not talk about what the government is delivering for Canadians. Poilievre claimed that these backbenchers were talking to Conservatives to ask this in QP—obvious bullshit—and Trudeau didn’t get up this time. Poilievre listed a lot of non sequitur statistics to demand an election, and Trudeau told that Poilievre’s only solution for tough times is cuts to programmes and services people rely on.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he demanded support for their two bills, on OAS and Supply Management. Trudeau said that they will always protect Supply Management, before listing all the times the Bloc voted against help for seniors. Blanchet called this a “manipulation of the facts,” and demanded support for those bills in order to break the deadlock in Parliament. Trudeau listed ways in which they have been there for seniors.

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP, listed the false statistic of people being $200 away from insolvency (which has been debunked numerous times), and demanded action on forcing corporations to control food prices. Trudeau noted ways they have acted, and threw in a jab at the Conservatives. Lori Idlout got up to note the failure of the agreement on First Nations child and family welfare last week, and demanded immediate action on this. Trudeau noted that they are looking at ways to move forward.

Continue reading

Roundup: A promise to waste millions of dollars

There are a lot of stupid, performative things being said right now, particularly in those three provincial elections, but one of the dumbest yesterday was courtesy of incumbent New Brunswick premier Blaine Higgs, who promised that if re-elected, he will mount a new legal challenge of the federal carbon levy. And to make that worse, several Conservative MPs picked that up and declared during Question Period that the challenge was already underway (it’s not), as though it were a devastating argument for their demands to “axe the tax” or to call an election.

Higgs’ promise is premised entirely on bullshit. There is no basis for him to mount a new challenge because nothing about the programme has changed since the Supreme Court of Canada already ruled that it’s constitutional and within the powers of the federal government, particularly because of the existential challenge that climate change poses to Canadians. The fact that the price is increasing or that we have been though a bout of higher inflation—which has already stabilised and returned to target, and for which the carbon levy did not actually cause any of said inflation because that’s not how inflation works—don’t change any of the legal bases or arguments around the levy. And because the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled, any lower court that Higgs tries to mount a new challenge in is going to tell him to go pound sand.

Higgs is essentially promising to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, because you know that when the courts tell him to go pound sand, they’ll also tell him to reimburse the legal costs of the federal government because they wasted everyone’s time and money in bringing such a frivolous suit in the first place. But there is a political calculus, particularly on the right, where they are prepared to waste millions of dollars in doomed legal challenges because they think that it’s good electoral calculus to show that you’re fighting. Federally, Conservatives have made this argument a number of times when the government didn’t pursue doomed appeals and just made changes, and no doubt Higgs figures that this will work the same way for him. But then again, I guess they’re not bothered by the cognitive dissonance of “we need to balance the budget” and “we need to waste millions of dollars on a doomed legal crusade,” because that might require introspection or self-awareness, both of which are in incredibly short supply in politics these days.

Pretty much all of #cdnpoli. It's really hard to be optimistic about any of it right now.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-01T14:21:44.377Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Six civilians were killed and more wounded when Russian artillery struck a bus stop in Kherson. Russian troops have also reached the centre of Vuhledar, a Ukrainian bastion in the strategic high ground of the Donbas region, which is significant because of where it borders and the supply routes it controls. Ukraine is also investigating an apparent shooting of sixteen POWS by Russian troops.

Continue reading

QP: Fighting to claim who loves seniors most

The first day back after an extended weekend, and the prime minister was in town but absent, while his deputy was there. Most of the other leaders were also away, and this was the Bloc’s Supply Day and the Conservatives were about to have the vote of their latest non-confidence motion, so that was going to set the stage for what was to come. Before things got underway the Bloc’s newest MP got introduced to the Chamber to take his seat. Speaker Fergus then gave another admonishment for MPs to behave, as though that was going to do anything.

Once things got started, Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and rattled off some slogans that claimed to be in the defence of seniors. Chrystia Freeland said that seniors remember that Stephen Harper went off to Davos to raise the age of retirement, and that they government introduced child care for the benefit of their grandchildren. Poilievre then took a swipe at the Bloc before demanding an election. Jean-Yves Duclos pointed out that Poilievre picked fights with municipalities. Poilievre switched to English to spin a tall tale about Mark Carney, calling him a walking conflict of interest. Freeland said that they are glad to get advice from former central bankers like Carney and Stephen Poloz, while the Conservatives get their advice from Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson. Poilievre then raised Blaine Higgs’ doomed promise to try and challenge the carbon levy in the courts again (who will promptly tell him to pound sand), and demanded an election. Freeland pointed out their announcement from this morning about the small business carbon levy. Poilievre then switched topics again, this time other Israel’s right to defend itself. Mélanie Joly says that they condemn Iran’s attacks, which will only further escalate the region, that she contacted her Israeli counterpart this morning and other regional counterparts, and that the war needs to stop.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and listed seniors groups on the Hill before demanding support for their OAS changes. Steve MacKinnon listed all of the measures for seniors that they voted against, saying their hypocrisy was shocking. Therrien made the demand again, pointing out it’s International Seniors Day, and MacKinnon prevaricated by wishing seniors well on this day, before returning to the his points about what the Bloc voted against.

Lori Idlout appeared by video to demand more funding for First Nations, particularly things like fire services. Patty Hajdu says they have invested $136 million for First Nations self-determined fire safety priorities. Leah Gazan demanded better healthcare access for First Nations. Hajdu says that there were $2 billion in the recent transfers earmarked for Indigenous self-determined priorities.

Continue reading

QP: It wasn’t about sex!

The prime minister was on his way to Montreal with Emanuel Macron, and his deputy was elsewhere, while the Conservatives were mid-Supply Day, moving yet another confidence motion that was doomed to fail (not that it matters because the whole point is to get clips for social media). Before things got started, Speaker Fergus said that per his ruling earlier, he offered the leader of the opposition an opportunity to withdraw words he spoke last week, and because he didn’t get such an offer to do so, he would remove three questions from him in the opening round. Poilievre got up and in French, read off their non-confidence motion, and asked the government to support it. Jean-Yves Duclos responded by chiding Poilievre for not even reading the first chapter of an Economics 101 textbook about the independence of the central bank. Poilievre read the slogan-filled motion again in English, and Karina Gould said the simple answer as to who was opposed to the motion was Canadians.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and wondered how the government could be opposed to increased support for seniors. Steve MacKinnon said that it was funny that the Bloc opposed all other measures to help seniors, including dental care. Therrien said that if the government didn’t want to fall, they should support that bill, and Duclos got back up to point out the supports the government has provided and wondered if they really wanted to support the Conservatives. 

Alexandre Boulerice read a letter purportedly to be from a constituent about the housing crisis, to which Duclos reminded him of how damaging Poilievre’s would be. Blake Desjarlais railed about the delay in providing promised Indigenous housing, and Patty Hajdu pointed to the millions of dollars that have flowed to communities.

Continue reading