Tag Archives: Charter

Roundup: Lower-tier leadership candidates

Posted on by

It is now on or about day fifty-five of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and it looks like the fighting in the eastern part of the country, around the Donbas region, has intensified as has been signalled for a couple of weeks now. At the same time, more missile attacks have hit western cities in the country like Lviv, which has mostly been out of the fighting, so that is keeping everyone on edge, particularly given that Lviv is hosting a lot of the people who have fled from other parts of the country.

Other news from Ukraine over the long weekend:

  • Thus far, the invasion has damaged about 30 percent of the country’s infrastructure, at a cost of about $100 billion.
  • There were further attacks on Kyiv over the weekend, possibly in retaliation for the sinking of the Moskva
  • Ukrainian fighters in Mariupol are defying Russia’s surrender-or-die orders
  • Here is a look at the situation LGBTQ+ Ukrainians find themselves in during the war.

Closer to home, Power & Politics interviewed Conservative leadership candidate Roman Baber yesterday, and it was…painful. He is not a serious person. At all. He kept speaking in facile talking points about “restoring democracy,” as though we didn’t just have free and fair elections, based on his nonsense reading of public health restrictions and what happened during the Ottawa occupation, with a dose of facile catch-phrases about “cancel culture.” And, bless her, Vassy Kapelos did gently try to push back against some of what he said, but wow. I would be very surprised if he manages to get his $300,000 in fundraising and all of his signatures to become a verified contestant because he offers nothing original, and even if this about trying to rebuild his profile after being booted from the caucus provincially, it’s a very difficult way to go about it, with not much in the way of reward.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Chalk up another Conservative disinformation campaign

Posted on by

We’re now on or about day fifty-one of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and has been confirmed that Russia’s Black Sea flagship, the Moskva, has sunk, which is a huge loss for Russia (particularly as Turkey is blockading the entrance to the Black Sea to military vessels, so there will be no replacement for it anytime soon), and it will no longer be able to support Russian ground forces, or to shell cities from afar. In the meantime, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy continues to show that he is a master communicator for his country and his cause.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1514681561412780035

Closer to home, yet another pernicious bit of disinformation has started circulating, courtesy of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation, who read the Emissions Reduction Plan (which was prepared by an arm’s-length advisory panel), found a reference to a proposal to add a surtax to certain kinds of gas-guzzling vehicles, and then wrote an op-ed in the Toronto Sun that declared this was the government’s plan. Jason Kenney picked up on this and decried it, as has the Conservative Party writ-large and several of its leadership contenders. Of course, there are no actual plans for such a tax, but why does the truth matter? This was the tactic they’ve been using on the supposed plans for a capital gains tax on primary residents, which doesn’t exist and never will exist (even if it’s actually decent public policy). This also compounds with the selective quotes they’ve been using from the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s recent report on carbon pricing, which has been torqued into more disinformation.

There’s so much disinformation and lies floating about, as though there weren’t enough actual things that you could absolutely excoriate this government for, and yet they resort to fiction. Utterly boggling.

Programming Note: I will be taking a long weekend off from the blog, because I am exhausted after the past few weeks. See you Tuesday!

Continue reading →

Roundup: Uploading their environmental liabilities

Posted on by

For his Friday presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau was again laden with a myriad of announcements that he needed to unburden himself of. First it was the announcement that 125 medically-trained personnel from the Canadian Forces would be headed to Quebec to assist with their situation in long-term care facilities, with more assistance to come from the Canadian Red Cross and the banks of volunteers assembled by Health Canada and within the province itself. From there, it was that the government would spend $1.72 billion to remediate orphan wells in Alberta, BC and Saskatchewan, and more money for oil companies – particularly in Newfoundland and Labrador – to deal with their methane emissions. And then, it was money to help artists, athletes, and entrepreneurs. And finally, it was remarking that it was the anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. And if you’ve caught your breath, during the Q&A, there was discussion about Parliament meeting in person one a week (the Conservatives want four times a week), that Finance Canada is looking at some kind of financial aid for provinces who can’t get access to cheap credit.

During the ministerial briefing afterward, there it was made clearer that there was going to be more money for regional development agencies so that they can help out local companies when they have difficulty getting commercial loans to bridge them through this period. Navdeep Bains said that they are still looking into technological solutions for contact tracing (and the Privacy Commissioner has issued guidelines if that is the case). Oh, and Canada Day is going to be virtual (which saves them from having to deal with not having access to Parliament Hill anyway because of construction).

But back to the energy sector. I find myself annoyed that the federal government has opted to go the route of paying billions of dollars to remediate these orphan wells because it means the sector – and the province itself, who set the deficient regulations that allowed the situation to spiral out of control – have successfully managed to upload those environmental liabilities to federal taxpayers. And I get that Trudeau has a political incentive to both be seen to be helping Alberta, and to patting himself on the back that this is an environmental measure, but it’s deeply frustrating because it’s only a little over a year ago when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that companies, and in particular trustees in bankruptcy, can’t just offload these liabilities to the government to salvage the assets. (This, as the sector says that the measures aren’t good enough because it’s not targeted to their liquidity issues, and their boosters keep calling for a freeze to carbon pricing and environmental regulations, because of course they are.)

The province has made a lot of money by punting its environmental liabilities to the future. They didn’t properly ensure that these wells had securitized their remediation, because making companies pay upfront would hurt investment. And in the oilsands, they just trusted that the tailings ponds would act like regular mining tailings, and when they didn’t, they kept expanding and hoping that someone in the future would figure the problem out, and now they’ve got a giant problem on their hands, but hey, they needed to ensure the money flowed fast and immediately, which they then didn’t properly tax or charge sufficient royalties on, and now that the bill has come due, they’ve successfully ducked it and made sure the federal government pay it for them – all while shouting that they’ve paid for everyone else all this time so now we owe them (not true, and not how equalization works). Add to that, you have people like Elizabeth May saying that she opposed oil and gas subsidies but supports this kind of orphan well remediation in spite of the fact that it’s a giant subsidy, I can barely even. I’m an Albertan – I get that the sector is hurting, and yes, it’s hurt my own family, but I also get that it’s now a structural problem and that the boom days are never coming back because nobody has a time machine and can go back to stop the development of shale oil. Demanding the federal government bail them out – particularly after the province chose to put themselves in their current fiscal situation by refusing to properly tax their own wealthy and ensure a reasonable consumption tax because they instead chose to spend their oil resource revenues – just feels a bit rich.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Shelters and masks

Posted on by

Because it was a Saturday presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau appeared in jeans and without a tie, belying the more casual nature of the day at a time when days blend into one another. He had a couple of messages – that the government had invested another $40 million in shelters for women facing domestic violence (a particular consideration at a time when people are forced to stay home), and another $10 million for Indigenous women facing violence. He also pointed to $157 million in funds for the homeless, and that the communities where these funds were needed have been identified so funds were now flowing. On the subject of masks and medical devices, Trudeau stated that millions of more masks were expected in the next 48 hours (from the time of said announcement), and that the government had leased a warehouse in China to help coordinate the acquisition of these masks and supplies while they charter flights to carry them to Canada. Trudeau also noted that he would be speaking to his American counterpart in the coming days about the issue of masks and so on.

For her own presser, Dr. Theresa Tam reiterated yet again that these models that reporters keep demanding are not crystal balls, that they are not real numbers, that they aren’t predictions, and that they are highly sensitive to what is happening right now. But that hasn’t stopped the framing by reporters that these are hard data, and that they are indicative of anything in particular. And while here is an attempt to nuance the models Ontario released on Friday, but it’s one print article when TV reporters and headlines are framing it as disaster porn (and getting self-righteous about it).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Anger over vilified legislation? Shocking!

Posted on by

Over on the Financial Post’s op-ed pages, Senator Richard Neufeld worries about all of the angry Canadians the Senate’s energy committee is hearing from over Bill C-69. I have no doubt that they are hearing from angry people, because there has been a massive disinformation campaign around this bill from the start. The Conservatives and their provincial counterparts in Alberta have dubbed it the “no more pipelines” bill, even though it’s nothing of the sort. Neufeld worries that the bill means that we can never have any more major projects in this country, which is absurd on the face of it, but hey, there are narratives to uphold.

I’ve talked to a lot of environmental lawyers about this bill, and the potential amendments that it could merit. It is certainly not a bill without flaws, and the government seems to have acknowledged that (and apparently there is some kind of gamesmanship being played right now, where the government has a list of amendments they want to introduce at the Senate committee via one of their proxies but they won’t release them ahead of time for some reason). This having been said, there seems to be no acknowledgment of a few realities – that the current system that the Harper government put into place isn’t working and has only wound up with litigation; that we simply can’t bully through projects past Indigenous communities anymore, because Section 35 rights mean something; and that the bill sought to eliminate a lot of heavy lifting by putting more consultation on the front end so that projects could be better scoped, and that it would mean not needing to produce boxes of documents that nobody ever reads in order to check boxes off of lists as part of the assessment process. This is not a bad thing.

But like I said, there are problems with the bill, and Neufeld lists a few of them in passing while trading in more of the myths and disinformation around it. But so long as that disinformation campaign goes unchallenged – and this includes by ministers who can only speak in talking points and can’t communicate their way out of a wet paper bag because they’re too assured of their own virtues that they don’t feel the need to dismantle a campaign of lies – then the anger will carry on, and when this bill passes in some amended form (and it’s likely it will), then it will simply become another propaganda tool, which should be concerning to everyone – including those who are weaponizing it, because it will blow up in their faces.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Harper unhappy with NAFTA talks

Posted on by

Stephen Harper has apparently written an angry memo to his clients about the governmetn’s handling of the NAFTA negotiations, accusing them of bungling them by not evaluating American demands seriously (err, you have seen how many of their demands are literal impossibilities, right?) and of ignoring a softwood deal (which officials say was never on the table), and of aligning themselves too much with Mexico when they were the targets of America’s ire. Canadian officials are none too pleased, and consider it a gift to the Trump administration.

Alex Panetta, the Canadian Press reporter who broke the story, has more commentary below.

Paul Wells offered a few thoughts of his own on the news.

https://twitter.com/inklesspw/status/924052193673543680

https://twitter.com/InklessPW/status/924052610776055808

Incidentally, the PM has also vocally disagreed with former Conservative minister James Moore’s assertion that trade talks with China are hurting our talks with the Americans.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Say no to a Charter Rights Officer

Posted on by

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is leading a push for the creation of an independent Charter Rights Officer for Parliament, and that sound you hear is my head hitting my desk over and over again. Because no. We don’t need yet another officer of parliament. We really, really don’t.

What we need is for MPs – particularly the opposition – to stand up and actually do their jobs, rather than fobbing off their homework onto yet another officer, who is accountable to nobody, whose reports they can then wield like some kind of a cudgel while not actually fulfilling their own responsibilities as parliamentarians (which, I will remind you once again, is to hold the government to account). The proliferation of officers of parliament has so diminished the capacity of the opposition to do their gods damned jobs in this country that it’s embarrassing, and since the inception of the Parliamentary Budget Office, it’s only become so much more egregious because now they can ignore the Estimates cycle entirely (despite controlling the public purse being the inherent definition of what MPs are supposed to do, and how they hold governments to account).

Oh, but it’s hard! Oh, but why not cede this to subject matter experts like lawyers and judges? Oh, why don’t we just start pre-referring all bills to the Supreme Court of Canada while we’re at it and turn the dialogue between the Court and Parliament into a game of “Mother May I?” Honestly, would it kill MPs to actually debate policy, which Charter compliance is a big part of? Parliament has responsibilities to fulfil. Why don’t we actually make them do their jobs rather than finding yet another excuse for them to avoid doing it?

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/780387082682458112

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/780387432789401600

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/780396554620469249

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/780400062300090368

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stop demanding deployment votes

Posted on by

While Harjit Sajjan is off in London at a meeting of defence ministers, his critics are back in Ottawa grousing about the shift of focus from peacemaking to peacekeeping – never mind that Sajjan has already said that any upcoming mission is unlikely to be “peacekeeping” in the traditional sense as opposed to what he’s terming “peace operations.” That aside, the other emerging bit of drama is the fact that Sajjan is indicating that the government is unlikely to put such a deployment to a vote in the House of Commons – which is of course the way that things should work, but the Conservatives under Stephen Harper started saying they were going to hold votes starting with the Afghanistan mission extension under the guise of being “more democratic” when their whole point was to publicly divide the Liberals, and hey, that happened. (Remember when Harper crossed the floor to shake Michael Ignatieff’s hand after that vote? Because that wasn’t about trying to put a skewer in the brewing leadership contest, no sir). But beyond the reasons why the practice started, it’s antithetical to the whole point of parliament, which is to hold the government to account. When you put decisions like this to a vote – even if it’s non-binding and worded as “supporting a decision,” it gives the illusion that you’re giving parliament a role in the decision, when that’s not their job. When they are implicated in the decision making, they are not able to effectively hold the government to account because they can turn around and say “the House voted on this,” and shrug it off – and yes, the Conservatives did this on a number of occasions as well. So yes, have debates. Have committees scrutinize the missions as they happen, but don’t insist on votes, even if it’s for symbolic reasons, because that poisons the well.

https://twitter.com/pmlagasse/status/773921571438157824

https://twitter.com/pmlagasse/status/773921858794102784

https://twitter.com/pmlagasse/status/773923808633839616

On a related note, at the meeting of defence ministers, some of the shortages facing peacekeeping operations in Africa were noted, and one of them is the need for more female peacekeepers on the ground.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Alberta on the edge

Posted on by

It’s election day in Alberta. Will the desire for change lead to an even more right-wing “libertarian” government of inexperienced rookies? Or will institutional inertia and one party state-ism that has otherwise defined the province carry the day? I guess we’ll have to stay tuned to find out.

Today’s Senate “nominee elections” in Alberta are likely to split along party lines – as in, PC and Wildrose, who have both pledged to sit as federal Conservatives in the Senate. Which is just one reason why this whole exercise is so problematic – there is no sense in provincial parties running candidates when those candidates will sit in different federal caucuses once they arrive in Ottawa down the road – assuming of course that they do make it to Ottawa. In fact, it makes the vote that much more disingenuous.

Vic Toews admits that Omar Khadr is a Canadian and he’s coming back, so he’s now in damage control mode – he won’t be a danger to Canadians, and at least if he serves his sentence here we can better monitor him and his activities upon release than if he’d served his entire sentence in the States and suddenly showed up on our borders.

There are thousands of buildings owned by the federal government that are crumbling, some of them in states of total system failure.

Despite the ongoing battles between the chief of Attawapiskat and the federal government, it seems that not everyone in her community are pleased with her leadership. Not only that, some members of the community are also tired of NDP MP Charlie Angus using them to score political points.

Susan Delacourt looks at a grand national project like the Charter 30 years later, and fears that such a feat couldn’t be accomplished in today’s political landscape.

What’s that? The Conservatives are dismissing more expert testimony with those court challenges to overturn the election results in seven ridings? You don’t say! Meanwhile, in the battle to overturn the results in Etobicoke Centre, the Elections Canada factum says that mere clerical errors shouldn’t be enough to invalidate an election result.

Liberal Party brass were meeting in Ottawa this weekend to determine the rules for their (eventual) leadership contest, which they’ll have more firm rules on by June.

Here’s a look at Ruth Ellen “Vegas” Brosseau, one year after her election.

Here’s a timeline of the history of the Kingston Penitentiary.

And here’s a little bit about the Queen, as Saturday was her 86th birthday (not that we’ll celebrate it here in Canada until Victoria Day).

Roundup: Communications in the New Order

Posted on by

It’s a tale of a media request gone horribly, horribly wrong – in the tragicomic depths of communications groups in the bureaucracy comes this incident where the Ottawa Citizen asked a simple question, and the tangled email chain that resulted. The request was late, the information he requested was pared down to nothingness, and one can tell that even the comms officers were frustrated when the information got edited down to nothing by the senior officials. It is an awful incident, especially when compared to the fact that it took the same reporter 15 minutes to get answers from NASA. While some people will point to this and say “Look! Culture of secrecy!” I’m not entirely convinced. Rather, it seems this is more indicative of the culture of fear and intimidation that the Harper government has instituted as they have centralised communications and messaging to such a degree that not only has the process been so bogged down by doubt that nobody wants to say anything lest they get slapped down, but even if they did provide an answer, the overseers in PMO are just as likely to not approve said message, and pass along a weak “approved” version, several hours later.  Such is life in the New Order, unfortunately.

Here are the statements in the House from Jean Chrétien and others at the 20th anniversary of the Charter. Also not to be missed are Thomas Mulcair’s statements two years ago about the Charter and the “imposition” on Quebec – sentiments he echoed today in his party’s own release. The Conservatives, meanwhile, sent out a press release co-signed by the ministers of heritage and justice, in which they talked about John Diefenbaker’s Bill of Rights. Kady O’Malley rounds up the various statements and plaudits here. Here’s a look at laws that the Charter impacted, and how the courts dealt with them before and after the Charter’s inception. And here’s a look at how Harper used to decry the Charter as giving the Courts the power to make “arbitrary” decisions – even though that’s exactly what the Supreme Court smacked his government down over with the Insite decision.

Despite Elections Canada moving to investigate Conservative Headquarters in connection to the Guelph robo-calls, the party still insists they’re not under investigation (which is technically true, if you’re going by the “isolated incident” defence).

Bev Oda defends cuts to foreign aid saying it’s more about accountability than the amount of dollars spent.

There was a massive corruption sweep in Quebec yesterday. The meaning of the arrest of Tony Accurso is discussed here.

And here’s a look at the Communications Security Establishment – the agency that is tasked with intercepting terrorist communications and cyber-security in Canada. They’re growing up as their own independent agency after being hived off from DND, but there remain concerns about just how much oversight they’re subject to.

Up today: “Tom”/Thomas Mulcair moves into Stornoway.