Tag Archives: Danielle Smith

Roundup: Election 2025, Day One

Posted on by
1

Around noon on Sunday, prime minister Mark Carney visited Rideau Hall and advised the Governor General to dissolve Parliament for an election. She agreed, signed the proclamation, and the 45th general election was underway. The election will be held on April 28th, making it a short five-week campaign.

Mark Carney spoke afterward, and immediately promised a “Middle Class™ tax cut,” because clearly what’s needed in a time of economic uncertainty, and when we need to ramp up our defence spending and response to the economic predations of Trump, is a tax cut that will disproportionately benefit top income earners. Carney then headed to St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, for his first campaign stop.

Pierre Poilievre got his message out early, and he took a couple of mild jabs at Trump, before doubling down on his usual nonsense about “open border” creating crime (which is completely false), and insisted that his campaign offers hope and change, and insisted that they will “restore” the promise of the country. He then headed off to Toronto for a “Canada First™” rally.

Jagmeet Singh accused the Liberals of letting the country “rot from the inside,” and that he’s about people and not billionaires. (All tens of them in Canada?) From his initial Ottawa launch, he then headed to Montreal for his first stop.

And the Green co-leaders Elizabeth May and Jonathan Pedneault called for unity during the election in order to stand up to Trump and the global oligarchs that are seeking to destroy democracy.

In the background of all of this was an interview that Danielle Smith gave to Breitbart News in the US, where she claims that she told members of the Trump administration to hold off on tariffs in order to help get Poilievre elected, because he would be more in sync with them. This is pretty shocking, if she is indeed telling the truth and not just giving some kind of boast to make herself look good for the Breitbart crowd. Poilievre insists that Trump wants Carney to win because he’ll be a pushover, and I mean, come on. Carney gave his usual points about needing respect from Trump before they’ll talk. Nevertheless, the fact that we have premiers freelancing foreign policy like this is a Very Bad Thing and they need to be reined in.

 

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched 147 drones at several cities across Ukraine overnight Sunday, and killed at least seven. On Saturday, Russian shelling killed three in Pokrovsk. The blaze at Russia’s Krasnodar oil depot has been burning for over five days now.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1903740311689363767

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney and the premiers

Posted on by
Reply

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch

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

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pre-approved invitations to litigation

Posted on by
1

Pierre Poilievre was in Jonquière, Quebec, yesterday, promising that if elected, he would create “pre-approved, shovel-ready zones” across the country for all kinds of major projects that would only need a checklist to be approved. Just like that! Why, nothing could possibly go wrong with such a proposal, right?

In no way has this been thought through, and as Leach points out, this is the kind of approach that lost the Harper government the Northern Gateway approval. Just like there hasn’t been any thought about his Churchill proposal. And look, he’s making stuff up wholesale about Ring of Fire mines, blaming the Trudeau government for decisions taken in the Harper era. Because of course he is.

Meanwhile, Mark Carney had a meeting with Danielle Smith today, and she comically presented him with a list of “demands” with the threat of a national unity crisis if he didn’t kowtow to her. Because that’s “cooperative federalism”! But seriously, it was a separatist manifesto, divorced from reality, because this is Smith we’re talking about, and she depends on her imaginary grievances to maintain power, more within her own party than the province as a whole.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones hit civilian targets in Odesa, as well as in Kropyvnytskyi, where ten people were injured including children. Ukraine’s drone strike on Russia’s strategic bomber airfield in Engels caused a massive explosion as ammunition was ignited. Russia says Ukraine has violated the “ceasefire” with a hit on an oil depot. Zelenskyy is calling for European help in buying more artillery shells. And US intelligence confirms that Ukrainian forces in Kursk are not encircled, proving that Trump is taking his cues from Russian propaganda.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1902834475806990623

Continue reading →

Roundup: Unrealistic Ring of Fire promises

Posted on by
Reply

Pierre Poilievre was in Sudbury to pronounce that if he forms government, he’ll set a deadline of six months to approve any federal permits for mining in the “Ring of Fire” region in Northern Ontario, and put $1 billion toward connecting roads in the region to the highway network (to be paid for by cuts elsewhere). Absent from his pronouncement? Any representatives of the First Nations in the region, for whom consultation and cooperation is necessary (and yes, most of the First Nations in the region were not thrilled when they heard this). Poilievre says that there aren’t shovels in the ground because the Liberals have a “keep it in the ground” mentality, which is hard to square with the fact that they have been moving ahead on plenty of other critical mineral projects that are better connected to existing infrastructure, the pipeline they bought to get oil to tidewater, and the fact that oil and gas production are at record highs. So much keeping it in the ground! He also didn’t learn a single gods damned lesson from the Harper years, where trying to slash the review process for big projects only meant that they wound up in litigation.

Meanwhile, a group of energy sector CEOs are demanding that, because of the trade war, the federal government use “emergency powers” to approve more resource (mostly oil and gas) projects, which seems hard to square with the fact that a) there isn’t much in the way of emergency powers that could be deployed, let alone that could affect provincially-regulated projects; b) that they are vague on the market for these products if they’re not going the US, particularly as there is little in the way of cross-country pipeline infrastructure or the fact that the East Coast isn’t going to want to pay a premium for western Canadian oil; or c) the changing energy market means that they seem to be advocating to build a bunch of assets that would be stranded before too long. As this is going on, Danielle Smith is trying to pass yet more unconstitutional/useless legislation to prevent the federal government from acquiring oil companies’ data for their planned emissions cap, because yes, everything is that stupid.

On a related note, you have farmers and Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe urging capitulation to China in order for them to lift their canola tariffs, which were placed in retaliation for the EV tariffs (which in turn were done at the Americans’ behest under Biden in order to protect the EV industry they were trying to build from Chinese dumping). Well, China just executed four Canadian dual-nationals on drug-related charges, in spite of pleas by the Canadian government for clemency. It’s a message that they’re not looking to seek our favour in spite of the fact that Trump has turned against us (and his other allies). Caving to China on this canola issue is not going to work out well in the long term, because they know this is a pressure point that they can exploit. They have exploited it in the past, and it’s why they’re doing so again, and if we cave again, they’ll just move the goal posts and make more demands of Canada that will be harder and harder to resist.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims that Ukraine is trying to sabotage the moratorium on striking each other’s’ energy facilities after a drone strike on an oil depot. Ukraine also attacked an airfield near a Russian strategic bomber base in southern Russia. Russia and Ukraine each swapped 175 prisoners, one of the largest exchanges to date.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney’s transition races out of the gate

Posted on by
1

The day after the leadership race concluded, the transition began. Mark Carney had meetings with Justin Trudeau, and met with the caucus, albeit fairly briefly, as things got underway. We learned that he’s chosen MP Marco Mendicino as his chief of staff, which sounds like it’s on an interim basis (because Mendicino apparently has designs on running for mayor of Toronto), but so long as it means Katie Telford is out of the job, that’s what matters. Carney promised the transition would be swift, and it sounds like he wants a pared-down PMO. We also learned that Carney has already put his assets, minus personal real estate, into a blind trust and submitted all of his disclosures to the Ethics Commissioner, well ahead of schedule, which blunts the Conservatives’ attacks on his wealth. (To be clear, the rules state he has four months to disclose after being sworn-in, and he’s now disclosed even before being sworn-in). The one thing I found surprising was that Carney has reached out to Jean Charest to offer him some kind of senior role, including possibly a ministerial portfolio, and that Charest declined, with talk from the reporters saying that he may also be reaching out to Christy Clark.

As for Trudeau, he held his final Cabinet meeting, and was photographed carrying his chair out of the House of Commons (as the rules allow MPs to buy their chair when they leave politics).

On the trade war front, Doug Ford went ahead with the 25 percent “surcharge” on electricity exports (but it’s not a tariff, because that would be a federal trade power), and insists he’s looking into turning off the electricity if things get worse (which may actually be impossible given the interconnection of the grids). In response, Trump’s commerce secretary continued to threaten further tariffs on steel and aluminium, dairy, lumber, and “reciprocal” tariffs where they misunderstand that the GST is on all goods and not just imported ones. BC premier David Eby wants the federal government to drop their tariff fight with China, citing farmers and BC industry being hit on both sides (but seriously, do you think China is a good-faith actor here?).

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia has launched airstrikes overnight in Kyiv, while their troops are attempting to break through in the northeastern Sumy region, across the border from Kursk. In Kursk, Russian forces continue to advance, but Ukraine’s top general insists they are not at risk of being encircled. Ukraine claims that they have hit oil refineries in two Russian regions.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1899104651527524818

Continue reading →

Roundup: Offering a limited reprieve

Posted on by

Because the trade war is many ways a weird power dynamic, yesterday was all about offers of reprieves. After a lengthy phone call between Justin Trudeau and Trump, there came word of a “reprieve” on tariffs for the auto sector—for a month—but at the behest of the Big Three auto companies rather than any of Trudeau’s efforts, and while there hasn’t been official word, Senior Government Sources™ are saying that Trudeau is not budging on the retaliatory measures. And why would he? The one-month reprieve came with the message from both JD Vance and Trump’s press secretary that they want those manufacturers to locate all of their factories in the US to avoid tariffs, but the “official” reason for the tariffs remains fentanyl, because Trump needs the legal fiction of a “national emergency” to use executive powers to levy tariffs rather than Congress (but he controls that, so the logic only extends so far). Oh, and now Trump is talking about agricultural carveouts, because they’re stupid and don’t realise the consequences of their actions until it’s too late.

In provincial reactions, both Danielle Smith and Scott Moe said they were pulling American liquor from their provincial liquor control boards, a day after everyone else. Smith had to put on a big show that included one of her Alberta Sheriffs holding a big rifle to show that she was super serious about them patrolling the border (not that they can legally do much more than taxi that person to an authorised federal border agent or RCMP officer). Both Smith and Moe also insisted that they didn’t want export taxes on either oil or potash, which again, is a boneheaded move of signalling to Trump that they don’t want to play their strongest cards ever (because they’re both super geniuses). Of course, it’s not their call because those powers are federal, but it’s still a sign of how unserious either of them is in the face of an existential threat. Meanwhile, Yukon premier Raj Pillai is “considering” limiting ties with Elon Musk’s businesses, like Starlink (which seems like something they should be doing more than just considering).

There was also word that there was more progress on interprovincial trade barriers and incremental progress toward credentials recognition—with some exceptions for Quebec because of linguistic requirements (but I still have questions about how they plan to get self-regulating bodies like the colleges of physicians and surgeons to play ball).

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile hit a hotel in Kryvyi Rih, killing three and injuring at least twenty-nine others. The Americans are cutting off the flow of intelligence to Ukraine, because they’re now on Putin’s side. A Ukrainian commander says that NATO forces are not ready for modern drone warfare. Here is an examination of the state of the war, and that it would take Russia 118 years to fully conquer Ukraine at their present rate of advancement.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An ambush in the White House

Posted on by

It was an ambush. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the White House, ostensibly to sign some kind of agreement around access to critical minerals in exchange for some kind of military support or security guarantees was a set-up for Trump and JD Vance to try and humiliate Zelenskyy in front of the cameras, with one of the reporters from Russian state outlet TASS in the room (who was removed at one point by the Secret Service, but it was obvious that someone in the White House arranged for him to be there). The whole video is sickening to watch.

While Trump and Vance started broadcasting this for their followers as a supposed sign of strength, and their lackeys and apologists broadcast Russian propaganda to justify it, word also started leaking out that Trump is planning on cutting off military aid to Ukraine for Zelenskyy’s supposed intransigence and lack of desire for peace, which is of course mendacious and part of the set-up.

In the wake of this, world leaders started tweeting their support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and this was probably the death knell of NATO as we know it. The one leader who has been silent is Keir Starmer, but he is also hosting a summit in London today about Ukraine and European security, which Justin Trudeau will also be attending.

Here are some hot takes from Tom Nichols and David Frum, while Philippe Lagassé has some additional thoughts on the situation.

Closer to home, in an interview with the Spectator, Trump took credit for Chrystia Freeland’s supposed “firing” (she was not fired), and said that Poilievre’s problem is that “he’s not a MAGA guy.” Which is true—Poilievre doesn’t have much of a coherent ideology, but he’s not MAGA. What he is, however, is someone who will say anything that he feels he needs to in order to attract the MAGA crowd to his banner, no matter how ridiculous it is, and he has no morals, ethics, or scruples about it. Poilievre jumped on this to declare that he’s “Canada First,” and later did tweet support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and immediately got roasted in the comments by his MAGA supporters for it. Funny what happens when you play with fire.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1895631503469449464

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones struck a medical facility, among other targets, in Kharkiv. The framework for a mineral agreement that Ukraine was supposed to sign with the Americans, before the ambush, contained a number of gaps around security or dispute resolution, before it turned out to be a sham.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Gould takes the French debate

Posted on by

It was the French debate for the Liberal leadership last night, and it was a fairly smoothly run affair, with an aggressive moderator, and very few instances of candidates talking over one another. While you can read a recap here, and the Canadian Press liveblog, I watched it in French to get a sense of how well the candidates were actually performing. The biggest blunder of the evening was Mark Carney slipping up and saying that he agrees with Hamas, which the Conservatives pounced on in bad faith, and Freeland quickly caught his error and corrected him, but it certainly coloured the online reaction.

Meanwhile, my thoughts:

  • Karina Gould was the best performer of the night. Her French was the strongest, and she was articulate in her positions, she had something of substance to say in most of the responses, and in her closing remarks, made the very salient point that they won’t win by being Conservative Lite™.
  • Chrystia Freeland’s French was very deliberate and didactic in tone, but that’s not much different from her speaking style in English. She had a bit of a mixed bag in terms of policy discussions, and could identify things the government has done or is doing, because she was there for the discussions and implementation.
  • Mark Carney had the shakiest French, but as he has throughout his entire leadership campaign, he mostly stuck to platitudes and clichés, and gave very few answers or specifics, even when pressed to do so by the moderator. It was not a shining moment for him.
  • Frank Baylis’s French was fine, being as he’s from Montreal, but he pretty much made himself irrelevant the whole evening, by constantly reminding everyone that he’s a businessman, as though that gave him any special abilities or insights, particularly when dealing with Trump, and he had some absolutely bizarre ideas associated with fiscal discipline.

The English debate is tonight, so we’ll see how different the candidates are with the language they are more comfortable in.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s overnight air attacks injured one woman in the outskirts of Kyiv, and Poland scrambled their aircraft because the attacks were targeting western Ukraine, close to their borders. G7 foreign ministers, led by Canada, are still working on a joint statement about the anniversary of the war, because the American position has now shifted into Russia’s favour. At the United Nations, the US voted against Ukraine’s resolution to condemn Russia for their invasion, and joined the ranks of Russia, Belarus, and North Korea.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Caretaker doesn’t apply

Posted on by

Sometimes, the pundit class in this country boggles me. Case in point—the National Post’s John Ivison wrote yesterday that the announcement about moving ahead with high-speed rail was “ignoring the caretaker convention,” (and because this is Ivison, the words “in this country” are used loosely as he is currently filing from Costa Rica). I get that Ivison wants to dump on Trudeau for making a big, flashy announcement as he’s on his way out the door, but the thing is, the caretaker convention doesn’t apply. The only time that the convention does apply is when Parliament is dissolved for an election (and Philippe Lagassé can explain this all to you here).

Part of the problem is that legacy media in this country does not know how to deal with the current political situation, where Trudeau has signalled his intention to resign, but remains in power until his successor is chosen. This is perfectly legitimate in a Westminster system like ours, especially as Trudeau won a series of confidence votes before Parliament rose for the winter break, and before his advice to the Governor General to prorogue. Since then, virtually every single pundit and editorial writer has been wringing their hands, writing things like “lame-duck,” or “leaderless,” or “vacuum,” when none of this is actually true, and it breaks their brains that the government is capable of operating and responding to Trump and his predations without Parliament currently sitting, as though Parliament would have anything in particular to do in this current situation other than take-note debates or unanimous consent motions. Trudeau is personally able to exercise the full suite of his powers as prime minister right up until the moment he does officially resign and turn the keys over to his successor. This is neither illegitimate nor illegal, and the long-time observers of our political scene should know that.

What is particularly galling is that long-time Ottawa columnists don’t understand these very basics. Ivison used to be the Post’s Ottawa bureau chief, for fuck’s sake. He should have a basic understanding of the difference between prorogation and dissolution, and when the caretaker convention should apply. He’s been writing about Canadian politics since the birth of the Post, and was writing about UK politics before that. This is basic civics. And it’s not just him, even though he is today’s object lesson. We have a real problem when the people we are supposed to turn to for help in putting the news into context can’t be arsed to get the basic facts right, so long as they get to grind their ideological axes.

Ukraine Dispatch

Tens of thousands of people in Odesa remain without power after successive Russian attacks, while Russia claims to have taken back a “huge” chunk of Kursk region in Russia. The EU has been coming up with a plan to manufacture and send more arms to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Baylis brings back boneheaded ideas

Posted on by

Yesterday, no-hope Liberal leadership candidate Frank Baylis offered his ideas about how to make politics better, and…*sighs, pinches bridge of nose* It’s so bad, you guys. Back when he was an MP, Baylis had proposed a motion to change the Standing Orders to do a bunch of dumb things that he felt would improve things for MPs, but then didn’t show up for the debate on his own motion, so it died on the Order Paper, fortunately. But I see that he’s back at it again.

I cannot stress enough how stupid of an idea term limits are in a system like ours, because you actually need to have institutional memory in politics, and you can’t build that up in ten-year increments. You just can’t. That’s one of the reasons why the Senate tends to be more valuable in that capacity (which has been curtailed thanks to Trudeau kicking Liberal senators from his own caucus and only appointing independents), but you need experienced MPs in your caucus. Term limits make that impossible, especially for ten years. Canada already has a problem with a higher-than-normal rate of turnover for MPs as compared to other similar democracies, and making the churn worse doesn’t help. Baylis kept justifying this by saying “I’m a professional engineer” when questioned about this on Power & Politics, which doesn’t actually give him any special insight.

His idea of letting the Speaker choose who gets to speak and not party leaders is partially sound, but only in particular circumstances. I get that he wants to eliminate speaking lists, which I do agree with, particularly for Question Period, but it’s not as much of a problem as the rules around speaking times, and how we structure debates. Of course, he then screws up that decent idea with the boneheaded notion of petitions to trigger debates. Parliament is not supposed to be about empty take-note debates. Debates should have a purpose—speaking to motions or legislation that actually do something, rather than speaking for speaking’s sake. That’s all that this idea does.

Finally, Baylis wants a second chamber like they have in Westminster and Canberra, but again, this is ill-thought-out. We already don’t have enough MPs to fully staff all committees (particularly without having parliamentary secretaries as voting members), and to keep debate going in the Chamber, and now you want to add a second chamber? He says this would “speed up decision-making and end legislative gridlock,” but it absolutely wouldn’t because that’s not what those chambers do in the UK or Australia. They are largely used for non-votable debates, and giving speeches or statements. That kind of thing may be of more use in the UK where there are 650 MPs who can’t make members’ statements with much frequency, but it doesn’t affect the pace of legislation at all. It’s so stupid that he didn’t even bother to read up on his own gods damned proposals, but hey, he’s a “businessman” and an “engineer,” so why bother to actually learn how politics works? Honestly.

Meanwhile, speaking of his other no-hope candidate…

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians claim to have repelled an offensive in the Kursk region. Ukraine received some more F-16 fighters from the Netherlands, and Mirage jets from France. Eight Ukrainian children who had been seized from their families were returned home.

Continue reading →