Tag Archives: Canadian History

Roundup: Danielle Smith’s Nice History of Canada

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith took the opportunity to shoot a video on Parliament Hill when she was in town earlier this week, and it’s a doozy. It’s so bad. Some of it is outright revisionist history—Danielle Smith’s Nice History of Canada, where the Indigenous People and settlers got together to “tame an unforgiving frontier.” No, seriously. She actually said that. And there was so much nonsense about the energy industry and market. We know that the people she listens to engage in outright residential school denialism, but this is just galling.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 353:

Kyiv and Kharkiv were among the cities hit by a renewed Russian attack on critical infrastructure, particularly on the country’s power supply. Zaporizhzhia has faced a relentless barrage, as have the front lines in the east, where they are continuing their concerted push toward Bakhmut. Meanwhile, here is a look at the “drone hunters” trying to bring down those Iranian-made drones as best they can.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An important Parliamentary anniversary

Posted on by

Yesterday was the anniversary of the great fire that destroyed the original Centre Block, which also meant that it was the day when they use the wooden mace, which was the temporary replacement for the one that was lost during the fire. The Library survived because it was separated from the main building, and the iron doors were closed that kept the fire at bay. While the cause of the fire was never conclusively determined, and there were a lot of worries about German spies (because this was during the First World War), it was most likely caused by faulty wiring catching fire.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 346:

European Union officials were in Kyiv to show support for Ukraine, and talked about upholding sanctions in order to degrade Russia’s war machine. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy also said that they plan to hold onto “Fortress” Bakhmut as long as possible, as Russian forces try to encircle it. Russian missiles struck Toretsk in eastern Ukraine, killing at least six civilians.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Not recognizing one of our most important events

Posted on by

Yesterday was Statute of Westminster Day, but you wouldn’t actually know it given how little attention it receives. My Apple calendar does mark the occasion, but how many people understand its significance? And they should, because it was probably the most significant development in our country’s constitutional history—arguably more significant than confederation itself, or of patriation in 1982. Why? Because the Statute of Westminster in 1931 was the creation of the Crown of Canada, as a separate and distinct entity from the Crown of the United Kingdom.

https://twitter.com/Canadian_Crown/status/1601987723476275202

This matters because it gave us control of our own foreign policy, and domestically, it centred the Governor General as taking advice only from the Canadian prime minister, no longer reporting to the UK’s foreign office like they used to do. There are fewer developments that are more important in how we have been able to operate independently as a sovereign country with our own sovereign at the head. So how did the various political parties mark the occasion, particularly in a year where the Crown of Canada has been in focus because of the transition to the new King?

Only the Conservatives put out a statement, and it didn’t even mention the Crown of Canada. So, that’s where we are. One of our most important constitutional developments as a country, left by the wayside. It’s a sad indictment of our history and civics knowledge that this happens year after year.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 292:

Odessa is mostly in the dark after Russian attacks, and it could take a month to restore their power grid. As the battle in the eastern part of the country grinds on, the city of Bakhmut is essentially destroyed. And a month after being liberated, Kherson is still in the process of clearing the booby-traps Russian forces laid for civilians in the area.

https://twitter.com/strategywoman/status/1602012251543982080

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bored with the discourse?

Posted on by

Over the weekend, I was forwarded this particular diatribe from the Globe and Mail’s generally awful television columnist, John Doyle, about how boring Canadian political shows are. And he’s right about that—they’re generally pretty terrible (even if their hosts are wonderful people), but Doyle largely misdiagnoses why.

“This boredom-with-the-government narrative is very much the story that pundits like to peddle in Canada and part of a broad-brush assumption that only furthers the dangerous idea that Canadian politics are tedious and unworthy of engaged attention,” Doyle asserts, not incorrectly, but this needs a bit more delving into where the issues are. Doyle is again not incorrect when he points out that the repetition of the same small group of talking heads across different shows is a sign that “Ottawa is a small place with a small set of people jawing on about the same topic, often using the same phrases, over and over,” but it’s getting closer to one of the problems.

“What’s missing from these political conversations on TV is the sense that Canada is socially, politically and economically dynamic,” Doyle says. “What we see is a media power structure that is entrenched and sometimes literally bored by the discourse.”

This is part of it, and while he talks about how he doesn’t want us to devolve into American-style political coverage of partisan shouting matches (which was de rigeur when Evan Solomon was hosting Power & Politics because he believed it was what led to “good TV”) and that he wants Canadian TV to make better use of the medium, part of the problem is the shrinking media environment. These shows are made on a shoestring budget with a very small group of producers, and have to fill a defined news hole every day, and in order to do that, they have established rolodexes of reliable commentators who they know will drop everything to show up on TV, even if they have little of use to say (actual experts not always being reliably available which is why they are harder to book), and talking heads to fill that airtime. To add to that, there is pressure to diversify who those talking heads are, so they wind up using the same few across all channels because they’re all trying to tick the same boxes with the limited number of bodies available.

For the rest of the airtime that isn’t devoted to the talking head panels, much of that is devoted to things like MP panels, in an age of iron-clad message discipline, so you don’t get actual insight or debate, you get recited talking points and hosts simply both-sidesing everything rather than calling bullshit on any of it. Not every host—some are better than others (particularly some that are filling in for main hosts), but when the main tactic is to play Devil’s advocate and simply recite the other party’s talking points and getting them to respond, it doesn’t make for illuminating television, and it lets the politicians get away with murder, because they’re not being challenged. I only wish we had Rosemary Barton back doing the accountability interviews on a daily basis, because she was good at it and did call the MPs on their bullshit because she knew how. But this isn’t because the media power structure being bored with the discourse—it’s because it’s under-resourced and afraid to challenge that discourse, which is a very different problem than what Doyle imagines it to be.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 257:

More Russian strikes over the weekend continued to attack electrical generation in Kyiv and other regions in Ukraine, causing more blackouts as winter approaches. In all, some 35 towns and villages in nine regions were hit, while Russians continue to dig in at Kherson in the south in advance of a Ukrainian counter-offensive, while the front line in Donetsk is now at the outskirts of Bakhmut. The good news is that the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has been re-connected to the power grid, so it doesn’t have to rely on emergency diesel generators to cool the reactors (which are currently all shut down).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cozying up to separatists for the wrong reasons

Posted on by

The state of the UCP leadership contest in Albert continues to plumb new depths as many of the candidates are attending an event put on by a separatist group and Rebel “News”, without any particular compunction about doing so. Indeed, they are cosying up to these separatists openly, because they suffer from this completely insane misapprehension that threats of separatism gave Quebec all kinds of things from the federal government when that’s not true at all. In fact, the first referendum in Quebec quickly hollowed out its business sector—Montreal used to be the financial capital of the country, but the threat of separation had all of those head offices depart for Toronto, and the province’s economy suffered for decades as a result. Alberta will be little different if they start using the threat of separation to try and extract concession from Ottawa. As for the fact that this kind of event is selling access, that’s fairly par for the course in Alberta. The old one-party state system was rife with this kind of corruption, where business leaders got their way by donating to the party, or meeting the minister at the Petroleum Club for drinks, and the like. Access was absolutely for sale, and these UCP candidates are carrying on that corrupt tradition.

Meanwhile, when it comes to reminders that Stephen Harper sang the praises of the World Economic Forum when he was prime minister, I’m suspect any cognitive dissonance among the likes of Brian Jean in Alberta or Pierre Poilievre federally will be shrugged off, though it was pointed out to me that there is little indication that the conspiracy wing of the Conservative Party cares what Stephen Harper thinks, and I suspect that is true.

https://twitter.com/davidakin/status/1558184731187056640

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 171:

The focus remains on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, and shelling in the area, which both sides blame each other for. While Russia controls the plant, Ukrainian engineers continue to operate it, and Ukrainian forces are moving to counterattack in the region, while in the Donetsk region, there was more shelling of the eastern town of Kramotorsk.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Summoning the hockey executives

Posted on by

It’s day one-hundred-and-eighteen of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and word has it that the Russians are trying to overcome Severodonestk by Sunday, thereby taking the whole of the Luhansk region. While the Ukrainians are being pounded by artillery, they are allegedly inflicting heavy casualties on the Russians, but they need more Western arms, and they need them to arrive even faster if they have any hope of taking out the Russian artillery that is pounding them. Ukraine, meanwhile, is planning on taking a bunch of destroyed Russian tanks and armoured vehicles on a tour around Europe to keep attention on the conflict as it drags on.

Closer to home, the attention on the Hill yesterday was on the heritage committee, where Hockey Canada officials were summoned to explain the payout to settle a sexual assault claim, and whether federal funds were used to do so in contravention of their funding agreements. The minister has ordered a forensic audit of their finances to ensure that this didn’t happen, but we did see MPs on all sides go hard on this, as they should have. (Note that the Conservatives did try to use this issue as a means of procedural warfare in their filibuster of the online broadcasting bill, which was absolutely skeezy). Here is some comment from former athlete and whistle-blower Alheli Picazo, who has experience with the problem of tackling abuse in sport:

Continue reading →

Roundup: Limited federal options on Bill 21

Posted on by

So, the fight over Bill 21 in Quebec is gaining some traction now that there have been real-world consequences, and a bunch of MPs (mostly Conservatives) who previously said nothing about it—and who previously supported odious things like “barbaric cultural practices tip lines” and “Canadian values tests”—are now speaking up and recanting previous positions. Which is good, but while everyone is hoping for some kind of federal response or action on the legislation, I’m not sure there is an actual avenue. Consider this from constitutional law professor Carissima Mathen:

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/1469013986142298114

This is essentially what Justin Trudeau has been saying—he’s opposed to it, but this isn’t the time for the federal government to step in. That time will be when the fight reaches the Supreme Court of Canada, because then they have a legitimate avenue to be an intervenor in the case. Until then, they can say they oppose it—and they have much more so than other parties—but they’re also not making wild symbolic actions that won’t mean anything. And while both Erin O’Toole and Jagmeet Singh say they are personally opposed (and Singh has a legitimate dog in this fight), Singh has been somewhat blank on actions a federal government could take, while O’Toole made it clear he wouldn’t interfere in any way because a) provincial jurisdiction, and b) he’s spent his entire leadership trying to suck up to François Legault and out-Bloc the Bloc, for all of the good it did him in the election. And there are demographic considerations that play into the political calculations as well:

Meanwhile, Chantal Hébert, lays out the political calculations and options for Trudeau and O’Toole when it comes to challenging Bill 21. Paul Wells adds a boatload of more context to the situation both federally and in Quebec, and gives some sharper thoughts as to why the federal government has vanishingly few levers but nevertheless has options.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Theatre of the absurd, housing motion edition

Posted on by

The closer the House of Commons gets to rising for the winter break, the more absurd theatre we see. Yesterday was case in point, with the Conservatives’ second and final Supply Day of the calendar year. The topic was housing, but their motion was a complete dog’s breakfast of nonsense, contradiction and outright unconstitutional demands. Because of course it was.

The point was made that the inclusion of the outright lie about capital gains taxes was a ploy for the Conservatives to say that the Liberals were not ruling it out when this motion as inevitably defeated (as indeed it was). But Liberal Mark Gerretsen though he was being crafty and tried to move a motion after QP to head off those talking points, trying to call for unanimous consent to reaffirm that they wouldn’t tax capital gains. But the motion didn’t pass, so Gerretsen tried to spin that too, and it’s just utterly stupid that I can’t even.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Freeland has a KGB file

Posted on by

I think it goes a little unappreciated at times as to just what a force of nature Chrystia Freeland can be. This weekend, we learned about her KGB file – wherein she was code-named “Frida” – from the time she was a university student on an exchange programme in Soviet Ukraine. She was ostensibly there to learn the language, but she was already fluent (she spoke it at home growing up, and still speaks it at home with her children), and instead spent much of her time organising local dissidents, and acting as a fixer for foreign journalists (which set up her later career). And along the way, she knew how to evade Soviet surveillance and send letters through the Canadian embassy in Moscow where the diplomatic pouches couldn’t be searched. The KGB was apparently not only worried about her, but impressed by her talents and felt she could have made a great spy.

Having read this, I was reminded of a debate that took place in the House of Commons in the waning days of the Harper government, when then-parliamentary secretary James Bezan was trying to minimise Freeland’s connection with Ukraine, and tried to make it sound as though Freeland was inventing it. (Remember that the Conservatives very much try to play up their connections with the Ukrainian diaspora community across the prairies, because they have votes there). Never mind that Freeland’s mother helped write Ukraine’s first post-Soviet constitution, but we have learned more about Freeland’s own activities in organising movements that helped bring down the Soviet presence in that country.

The fact that our deputy prime minister has this history is pretty interesting stuff, and all the more interesting as she is very likely to be the next prime minister of this country. Add to that, the fact that she is currently a persona non grata in Russia and the subject of sanctions by that country makes it all the more fascinating that she could soon be in charge of this country.

Continue reading →

Roundup: What open nominations?

Posted on by

Do you remember when the Liberals considered themselves the party of open nominations? And how they were always going to uphold the democratic right of riding associations to run fair, open and transparent processes to select the candidates that would appear on the ballot for them? Because apparently the party has put this particular bit of democracy, openness and transparency down the memory hole as they continue to acclaim candidates from across the country. In two of these cases, the acclamations came a mere day after the incumbents announced that they weren’t running again, and in one of those ridings – Kanata-Carleton – there was the making of a contested nomination as rumours swirled that Karen McCrimmon wasn’t going to run again, and the riding association was frustrated that they couldn’t get any kind of answer from the party on how and when to run said contested nomination.

Now, the party is going to defend its honour by pointing out that their rules state that they can declare a state of “electoral urgency” to bypass the nomination process, but this is more of the Liberals’ penchant of letting the ends justify the means. They created the rules that were easily gamed, and frankly, the “electoral urgency” clause is a load of bullshit because they were using it in 2019 in the months before the election when they knew they had four years to have this process ongoing because there was a fixed election date under a majority parliament, so there were no surprises. Yes, the pandemic has made nomination races tougher because of public health restrictions, and the party has come under fire for using a verification system that includes facial recognition technology (which BC’s privacy commissioner is investigating, per that province’s laws), but again, these were things that the party should have been cognisant of and dealing with rather than simply wringing their hands and pulling the “electoral urgency” alarm to fast-track their hand-picked candidates, thwarting local democracy, and accountability.

Open nominations are one of the most important and fundamental building blocks of our democratic system. When parties flout those rules, it hurts the entire system – especially as it cements even more power in the leaders’ offices. That the Liberals are so blatantly ignoring their own supposed values in this crucial stage of the democratic process is a sign that the way the party rewrote their constitution to fit the Trudeau era is a very real problem that they are going to have to do a lot of soul-searching to address, especially when that age comes to its inevitable end.

Continue reading →