Tag Archives: CBSA

Roundup: Refusing to aid so-called “illegal refugees”

Posted on by

MPs from the Liberals, NDP and even the Bloc are condemning the actions of Conservative MP Richard Martel as he refused to assist asylum seekers in his riding who face possible deportation to El Salvador, where they are threatened by gang violence. More than that, Martel called them “illegal refugees,” which is not a Thing, but is certainly drawing from American and far-right rhetoric.

What I find most interesting in this, however, are the people who think that Pierre Poilievre should intervene if he wants to show that he’s sincere about his outreach to newcomer communities, and should send the message to “treat all refugees equally.” But this ignores that Poilievre has been following the Jason Kenney “curry-in-a-hurry” method of ethnocultural outreach, which was predicated on using these communities in wedging others, whether it was going to socially conservative communities and saying things like “You hate the gays? Us too! You should vote for us!” Even more to the point, Kenney constantly turned different newcomer communities against one another, creating an artificial division between the “good” economic immigrants who “went through the queue,” versus the asylum seekers whom he termed “queue-jumpers,” never mind that there is no queue for asylum seekers or refugees, but that it is a separate process entirely (and no, refugees are not economic migrants. Refugee resettlement is a humanitarian project, and people need to get that through their heads). Getting one group of immigrants to resent asylum seekers was what Kenney was constantly trying to do.

Mind you, he wasn’t all that successful—his efforts never really netted much of a result when you looked at the election data, but the myth of his so-called success has been cemented in the imaginations of conservatives (and a not-inconsiderable portion of the media), so of course Poilievre is going to take inspiration from it. So I don’t expect he’ll take too much exception to the “illegal refugee” line, because it’s right out of the Jason Kenney playbook.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 301:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the front lines in Bakhmut and met with soldiers there. Zelenskyy is expected to head to Washington today, his first trip since the invasion began, to address Congress as it debates further aid for Ukraine. Meanwhile, Kyiv and other cities in Ukraine are removing signs of Russian influence form public spaces now that the Russian-speaking lobby in the country has largely evaporated.

https://twitter.com/maria_avdv/status/1605101789677867009

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, LNG sales aren’t being blocked

Posted on by

It seems that Pierre Poilievre, and by extension other members of his caucus like Michael Chong, are trying to sell another false narrative to the Canadian people, and this time, they are claiming that the prime minister is “blocking” LNG sales to Germany. This is patently false, but that’s not surprising considering that this is coming from Poilievre, and he is without any sense of shame when it comes to outright lying at all times. His “proof” is a National Post article with a framing device claiming that Canada “snubbed” Germany on LNG, so they are signing a deal with Qatar.

The federal government has not blocked any LNG projects. We did not “snub” Germany either because they know full well we don’t have the export infrastructure, and by the time we could build it, it would be too late for Europe, hence why they came looking for hydrogen and got it. It wasn’t the government blocking any LNG terminals from being built—it was the market. There is very little supply along the East Coast to try and tap into for supply for export (indeed, there is one import terminal in New Brunswick), so unless you’re piping it all the way from Alberta or the United States, at an increased cost, there has been little sense in constructing it (and no, fracking is not going to happen in New Brunswick). There are terminals being constructed on the West Coast, where there is supply, but they are still being built, because it took a long time for them to secure the export contracts to make construction viable. If Trudeau was really “blocking the sale” then why would these projects still be allowed to proceed? It makes no sense.

There is also the consideration that Canadian LNG is more expensive than that coming from Qatar, which is a large part of why it has been unattractive to the European market (especially when it was coming pretty cheaply from Russia). It’s why most of the proposals aren’t getting off the ground–these projects won’t make their money back for thirty or forty years, by which time we will be deep in decarbonizing and reaching Net Zero targets. Even if we could somehow build an export terminal and a pipeline to supply it, the market for the product is likely to rapidly decrease, which means we’d be stranding those assets and have billions of dollars in these terminals going nowhere. The market doesn’t want to invest for a reason, and it’s not the Canadian government.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 283:

In a rare admission, a top aide to president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that between 10,000 to 13,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed since Russia’s invasion began in February. (The Russian losses have been much higher). The International Atomic Energy Agency says a deal aimed at safeguarding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant is almost completed. Here is a look at how school children in Kyiv are faring between Russian bombardments and blackouts. Meanwhile, here’s a look at a Canadian-funded work doing de-mining work in Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A scolding from Xi Jinping

Posted on by

Much of the conversation yesterday was about a piece of video was captured at the G20 meeting in Bali, where on the sidelines, we saw Xi Jinping scolding Trudeau for “leaking” their conversation to the press, except there was no “leak.” It was a bog-standard readout like is sent out after any conversation with a foreign leader, with its vague wording and fairly inscrutable pabulum. And Trudeau told him as much about Canada believing in “free and open and frank dialogue.” Xi, however, put on a show of scolding, which some have said was more about saving face than anything. Nevertheless, this became something of a Rorschach test, based on your feelings about Trudeau—if you like him, he’s standing firm in the face of Xi, but if you don’t, he’s either looking chastened, or weak, or that Xi is taking Trudeau down a peg. It’s both fascinating and crashingly dull that these same narratives keep getting trotted out time and again.

https://twitter.com/Dennismolin11/status/1592905231427592193

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1593073811481853952

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 267:

Russian attacks in the east of Ukraine intensified as they were reinforced with troops fleeing from Kherson, as Ukrainian cities were working to restore power after the missile attacks earlier in the week. It also looks more likely that the missiles that struck Poland were Ukrainian anti-missile missiles, which still leaves Russia culpable, given that they fired some 100 cruise missiles at civilian targets in the first place. Meanwhile, two Canadian companies that produce electrical transmission towers are looking to assist Ukraine by offering their emergency replacement pylons to local companies.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1592980519997751297

Continue reading →

QP: Is it federal hostage-taking, or provincial?

Posted on by

As Trudeau was at the G20 summit in Bali, his deputy was present for QP once again. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, as he usually does, and he decried the crisis of families trying to pay for home heating, citing that Acadians on the East Coast and Franco-Ontarians in Northern Ontario use diesel (because he wanted to address francophones not in Quebec as Quebec has a cap-and-trade system), which are being impacted by the so-called “triple, triple, triple” carbon price (which isn’t not until 2030). Chrystia Freeland insisted that her economic plan was responsible and caring at the same time, such as doubling the GST credit and the rental support for low-income people. Poilievre switched to English to denounce that Freeland boasted about not needing a car because she lives in downtown Toronto, and denounced the supposed tripling of the carbon price. Freeland responded that she has probably driven more pick-up trucks than Poilievre has, and began laying into his advice about investing in crypto, and demanded he apologies to Canadians. Poilievre decried $3/litre diesel, and what that will cost people who need it for heating, and demanded the carbon price be cancelled. Freeland insisted that the Conservatives only want to eviscerate EI, pensions, making polluting free, and to claw back climate incentive cheques, or depriving low-income people of rental supports or dental care. Poilievre retorted “false, false, false, false,” and then misquoted the PBO’s report on carbon prices, and repeated his demand to cancel the price. Freeland took the opportunity to read a script about what the Conservatives are “blocking” in the budget implementation bill. Poilievre insisted that they have a majority with the NDP, so they can do what they like, then blamed them for rising house prices before repeating his “triple” ear worm. Freeland slowly recited that they have a plan that is compassionate and fiscally responsible, citing items like ending interest on student loans and the changes to the Canada Worker Benefit.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and accused the government of encouraging the anglicisation of Quebec through their official languages bill. Freeland said that while she is an anglophone, the government considers French a priority, supporting them to keep speaking French on an English continent. Therrien railed that companies like Air Canada and VIA Rail continue to flout their obligations and are trying to avoid Quebec’s language laws, and Freeland insisted that they do understand how hard it is to protect the French language but they support doing so.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and in French, he raised the crisis in emergency rooms, and accuse the federal government of inaction, as though it was their jurisdiction to do so. Freeland insisted that she was sure that every member in the Chamber understand how precious children are, and insisted that they are a priority, and that as for healthcare, they have are increasing transfers by eight percent. Singh repeated the question in English and got the same answer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Counting votes is not a measure of the Senate’s health

Posted on by

The National Post did an analysis of the “new, independent” Senate to see just what has changed since the prime minister Justin Trudeau began his bid to reform the Upper Chamber through the appointment process, and lo, the analysis misses the whole gods damned point. You don’t judge the effectiveness of the Senate by counting votes. It has never operated in such a way, and (quantitative) political scientists and journalists can’t get that through their heads. The Senate is not going to vote down government legislation unless it’s a dire circumstance, and usually they will only insist on an amendment once before they will let a bill pass. How many times they vote against the government is not a measure of independence either, because the objective of most senators is to let a bill get to committee where the real work happens, and they will try to amend any flaws (and even then, we’ve had a problem of this particular government needing to sponsor amendments to fix their flaws that they bullied through the Commons, until the more recent and destructive trend of telling them to pass it anyway and that they would fix the flaw in a future piece of legislation).

There are plenty of other measures by which we could talk about why the “new” Senate isn’t working from the fact that they can barely organise a picnic anymore because most of the Independent senators can’t stick to agreements on procedural matters, or the fact that the pandemic has gutted their ability to be useful aside from adding a few speeches to the record because legislation is being bullied through without time for scrutiny, or the fact that they no longer have the interpretation capacity to run many of their committees like they used to thanks to hybrid sittings burning out the interpreters. Those are all very real problems that are hurting the Senate, but it requires journalists (and academics) who know the place and what is going on, and what questions to ask, and those are almost non-existent. But hey, we counted votes, so that means something, right? Nope.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 265:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the recently liberated city of Kherson to declare it the beginning of the end of Russia’s invasion, but also notes that the city is laced with boobytraps and mines, and that they have a significant challenge ahead in repairing critical infrastructure so that people can get electricity and water.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Contradictions and poor intelligence practices

Posted on by

There has been a number of competing threads in the ongoing Emergencies Act public inquiry, and a lot of police testimony that is contradictory, and contradicting their own documentary evidence. For example, one senior Ottawa police officer is claiming that they had the tow trucks all lined up and ready to go without the invocation of the Act—erm, except the documents don’t show that at all, and that they needed the Act to secure those services. There has also been a lot of alarming signs about the quality of police intelligence about the make-up of the occupation (which many leaders subsequently ignored anyway). The OPP did see an increasing risk of violence the longer it dragged on, particularly by those in the occupation who felt they were “at war” with the federal government, along with growing anti-police sentiment (presumably because police weren’t doing their bidding to arrest members of the government). The Commission has agreed to hear CSIS’ evidence behind closed doors.

Here’s former CSIS analyst Jessica Davis on the quality of that intelligence, and yikes:

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 245:

Both Russian and NATO forces carried out annual nuclear exercises, while Russia carries on its false narrative that Ukrainians plan to detonate a “dirty bomb” on their own soil in order to blame Russia—information operations entirely. While this was happening, Russian forces targeted 40 towns in Ukraine, killing at least two more people.

Continue reading →

QP: The increasing hyperbole meets the wall of pabulum

Posted on by

The translation system was haywire in the Chamber, which made for a very awkward and very late start to the day. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he started off with the falsehood that  government spending caused inflation (he didn’t), and railed about increasing interest rates as a result. Justin Trudeau got up and said that he would respond in a second but wanted to mark that this is the 40th day since the murder of Mahsa Amini in Iran, and that he stood with the Iranian-Canadian community. Poilievre switched to English to say that people are now paying $7000 more on mortgage payments and wondered who was going to pay it. Trudeau said that the government made the decision to support people in the pandemic, and are now supporting them with the GST rebate, dental care and rental supports. Poilievre trotted out his misquote of Mark Carney and wanted to know how many people would lose their homes because of higher interest rates, and Trudeau pointed out that inflation is a world-wide problem, which is why they have supported Canadians. Poilievre chanted that the cost of government is increasing the cost of living (not true), trotted out falsehoods about ArriveCan and cited a problem with the disclosure from CBSA. Trudeau said that the appropriate ministers are looking into this discrepancy before patting himself on the back for pandemic supports. Poilievre accused the prime minister of personally handing out ArriveCan contracts and then complained about the cost of the hotel in London for the Queen’s funeral delegation. Trudeau reminded him they had a large delegation that went to the funeral and that they stayed in the same hotel and it was expected for us to have a strong presence as a Realm country.

Yves-François Blanchet worried that seniors between 65 and 75 were being discriminated against because they didn’t get the OAS top-up. Trudeau said it’s great that seniors are living longer but those older seniors can run out of savings, so the government was there in a proportionate way for those with the most needs. Blanchet made a dig about King Charles before demanding more healthcare transfers without strings attached. Trudeau said that the law states equitable treatment and the federal government was happy to talk to provinces about getting Canadians the services they need.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he railed about interest rates and demanded action from the government. Trudeau reminded him they are supporting those who need it most. In English, Singh noted that the prime minster’s own former economic advisor was concerned about the increasing interest rates and wanted help for families, and Trudeau repeated his response.

Continue reading →

QP: Demanding support for their carbon price motion

Posted on by

Even though both the prime minister and his deputy were in town—the PM being in the building—neither were present for QP, and neither were any of the other leaders as well. That left if up to Melissa Lantsman to lead off, and with a script in front of her, she launched into the party’s talking points about inflation (which weren’t true), and then worried about increasing heating costs because of carbon prices, except they don’t go up until April, and the fact that there is no single type of home heating across the country. Nevertheless, she quoted the Liberal premier of Newfoundland and Labrador in opposition to carbon prices, and demanded the government vote in favour of their Supply Day motion to remove the carbon price on home heating. Randy Boissonnault took the question, and used the opportunity to recite his government’s talking points about supporting their bill on the kludge they call dental care, and for rental supports. Lantsman went another round of the same accusations, and Boissonnault recited the government’s record on lowering taxes, which the Conservatives voted against. Lantsman made a third attempt, to which Darren Fisher got up to denounce the Conservatives’ former policy of increasing the age of OAS eligibility for seniors to 67 as proof that the Liberals care more about seniors than the Conservatives. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to raise Chrystia Freeland’s new plan to tighten fiscal policy, insisting this was a surprise to the prime minister, that this was an admission that they created inflation (it’s not and they didn’t), and demanded that the carbon price not be “tripled” (that happens over seven years). Boissonnault said the Conservatives are only interested in cutting supports for things like seniors and housing. Paul-Hus insisted that the Conservatives want to cut the carbon tax and demanded the government stop raising taxes (erm, the only actual taxes going up are to corporations and on luxury goods). Boissonnault insisted that he respects his counterpart, but the Conservatives only cut jobs.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and said that the government could simply have enriched the Canada Child Benefit rather than creating their dental care plan, and recited the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s report that this benefit “discriminates” against Quebeckers because they won’t get as much money—because they have existing provincial benefits. Jean-Yves Duclos stated this fact—that they already have dental coverage and the federal benefit will enrich it. Therrien repeated his question and called it “majority insurance” rather than “dental insurance,” and Duclos pointed out how much his government has reduced child poverty.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and in French, he read a statement from a doctor who lost a patient, and demanded the federal government do something about the crisis in healthcare. Duclos admitted there is a crisis, but he said they are providing additional funding to provinces to reduce delays, for workers, and for long-term care. Lindsay Mathyssen read her own condemnation of the state of healthcare in English, to which Duclos reiterated his comments, noting that the Canada Health Act has conditions, and that he was work with premiers.

Continue reading →

QP: The King of Canada shouldn’t be a difficult concept

Posted on by

Both the prime minister and his deputy were away, but every other leader was present, for better or ill today. Pierre Poilievre led off in French as he usually does, and said that the government added $100 billion to the national debt before COVID, and $500 billion before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and that he added more to the national debt than any prime minister in history, which is pretty selective about the circumstances of what happened during that time period, like, oh, a global pandemic. He blamed inflation on this spending, which is not true, then raised the reports that Chrystia Freeland has given orders to reign in spending, and wondered how they can trust the people who caused inflation to fix it, which again, completely misrepresents the facts. Rachel Bendayan reminded him that Canada has the lowest debt and deficit of all G7 countries, and that they have a budget that will cut spending by $9 billion, while maintaining the strongest growth in the G7 while the Conservatives play petty political games, and praised the government for bringing Moderna to Montreal, which was an odd non sequitur. Poilievre repeated the question in English, with a bit of added self-congratulation, before Mark Holland asked what supports the Conservatives would have not offered to Canadians during the pandemic, and called out their amplifying anxieties before demanding they support dental care and rental supports. Poilievre said they would have cut ArriveCan or WE Charity, and not given money to profitable companies, before he recited some nonsense about inflation. Holland disputed that inflation is a problem only facing Canada, which is not true, before again demanding support for affordability measures. Poilievre insisted that countries who printed money all have high inflation, but countries like Switzerland who didn’t don’t have the same issue, which is a pretty selective reading of the facts. Holland noted that we are dealing with unprecedented times, which demands maturity and serious answers, and offered a sanctimonious request for the opposition to let their affordability measures go to a vote. Poilievre was incredulous, saying that only 0.3% of Canada’s trade is with Russia and Ukraine combined, so that they couldn’t possibly be contributing to inflation—which is possibly the dumbest gods damned leaps in logic I have ever heard. Holland accused the Conservatives of not supporting people who need it.

Yves-François Blanchet got up to claim that there is a debate about pledging allegiance to the “King of England,” worried that the federal government would interfere with Quebec’s secularism law, and then demanded to know who the head of state is in Canada. David Lametti noted that the oath of allegiance is part of the constitution and that courts have said that this is not an oath to the person, but the institutions. He did not, however, say that the King of Canada is our sovereign. Blanchet again demanded to know who the head of state is, and Pablo Rodriguez got up to rip that the Bloc don’t care about the issues of the day, but only about their pensions.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and in French, demanded that the government support their plan to help people, to which Rachel Bendayan recited the measures the government has taken and pleaded for support for the other measures. Singh switched to English to decry a possible Rogers-Shaw merger, and demanded that the government oppose it. Andy Fillmore read a statement about ensuring that consumers are protected.

Continue reading →

Roundup: City officials detail police incompetence

Posted on by

The day at the Emergencies Act inquiry was spent with city officials, and in particular the city’s top bureaucrat and the mayor’s chief of staff. There was a lot of discussion about police believing it would be over in a few days in spite of the occupiers saying they intended to occupy the streets, and booking hotels for at least 30 days, but the police kept treating this like a non-issue until it was too late. They also insisted that the Ontario government rebuffed their calls for more police resources. At a press event in Ottawa that morning, Doug Ford professed that he supported the use of the Emergencies Act, but the testimony on display was that he was nowhere to be found in managing the crisis, having dropped out of tripartite calls, and his solicitor general shrugged and said that she can’t direct police. Out of desperation, those city officials turned to the offer from Ford’s former chief of staff, Dean French, to try and negotiate with the occupiers about moving trucks away from residential streets, and packing more of them on the Hill. Well, the Parliamentary Protective Service was outraged by that deal, particularly after they had done bomb assessments with regard to those trucks. The most hilarious revelation of the day was that city officials wanted the occupiers to park their trucks outside of downtown and to take the LRT into the city centre to protest. Laughable, and unfortunately not satire. Literally unbelievable.

Meanwhile, the CBC has a profile of Justice Rouleau, leading the commission. In pundit reaction, Matt Gurney notes that the Ontario government is not being summoned to the Emergencies Act public inquiry, in spite of their complete dereliction of duty. Susan Delacourt makes a similar observation, and in particular how Doug Ford is now presenting himself as being in lockstep with Trudeau on the invocation. Paul Wells gives his take on the day’s testimony, and what he reads into the responses.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 236:

The Russians continue to launch suicide drones on Kyiv, some of which seem to be targeting the city’s heating infrastructure. Because those drones are Iranian in origin, there is pressure on Israel, who has expertise on tackling the Iranian drone programme, to join the US and EU in providing military technology to Ukraine to fight those attacks.

Continue reading →