Tag Archives: Environment

QP: The Bloc have demands—or else!

Posted on by

The prime minister was off at the UN in New York, leaving his deputy to attend QP in his stead, and only some of the other leaders were present as a result. Speaker Greg Fergus started off with a warning about behaviour and questions that relate to the administration of government, and said that he would have more to say on it later, but he hoped for better from MPs. Andrew Scheer led off by rattling off a list of slogans, before concern trolling about tent cities and food banks, and claimed that the government’s solution was for people to pay more taxes, which is juvenile in the extreme. Chrystia Freeland praised the fact that inflation is coming down, and interest rates along with it, which makes the Conservatives mad because they can’t use it as a wedge. Scheer insisted that it was cold comfort that prices weren’t coming down (which is generally how inflation works), and took a swipe at the NDP before demanding an election. Freeland noted that the Conservatives have a hidden austerity agenda, and wondered aloud what exactly they planned to cut. Scheer then raised the capital gains tax changes, and claimed this would affect housing (extremely unlikely), and Freeland took the opportunity to praise their mortgage rule changes from last week. Luc Berthold took over in French to decry students using food banks, and demanded the carbon levy be cut. Jean-Yves Duclos called this nonsense, and called out the belief that school food programmes are “bureaucratic.” Berthold took a swipe at the Bloc, and demanded an end to the government. Duclos kept on the points about the depiction of the school food programme.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and demanded an enrichment to OAS, or face an election. Steve MacKinnon pointed out the Bloc’s record  voting against returning the retirement age to 65 and enriching the GIS, as well as dental care. Therrien thundered that the government could afford this instead of funding oil companies, and made his threat again. MacKinnon reiterate that they have never cut help for seniors, only ever increased it even when the Bloc voted against it.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and complained that Loblaws wants to charge people $100 for a doctor’s appointment, which is provincial jurisdiction and he should take that up with Doug Ford. Mark Holland called him out for caving to a bully. Singh repeated the accusation in French, and Holland kept on his tear about the NDP caving not only on the agreement, but also on the carbon levy.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Hoping it won’t be that bad (but it will be)

Posted on by

Because we’re in the middle of re-litigating the carbon levy yet again ahead of the Conservatives’ planned confidence vote, some familiar patterns are emerging, some of which are from the Elder Pundits who are, yet again, playing the “It won’t be that bad!” card, when in fact, yes it will be. Case in point was John Ivison reaching out to Ken Boessenkool, former Conservative advisor, to talk about the industrial carbon price, and Boessenkool (whose post-political career involves a lot of validating the Elder Pundits’ belief that it won’t be that bad) told him that the majority of those prices are provincially regulated, so they should remain intact. Which is not an assumption I would make because we have several provinces who believe that they can reach their reduction targets without any price (which is stupid), and they want to keep attracting investment, particularly in oil and gas, so they are likely to either greatly reduce their industrial price, or kill it altogether. This will in turn trigger a race to the bottom among other provinces, so the prices become useless. This is the whole reason why a federal benchmark and backstop were created—so that provinces couldn’t do that, and why the Supreme Court validated this as a legitimate exercise of federal powers. (Incidentally, Jenni Byrne disavowed Boessenkool after that piece went to print, which pretty much validates my point).

Meanwhile, other Elder Pundits are trying to write about the alternatives the Conservatives will use instead of the carbon levy, but even there, as they assert that while the levy is the best mechanism but there are others (because remember, they want to keep insisting it won’t be that bad), but that is a misread of what the Conservatives are actually promising, which is to tear up everything the Liberals have done, and rely on magic (in part because they don’t want to do anything, excuse themselves from doing anything by insisting that we’re only two percent of emission so what we do doesn’t matter, and any action they do take will only be “aspirational.”) For what it’s worth, the NDP also believe in the magic that they can only price carbon for corporations and it won’t be passed along to consumers, or that consumers won’t have to change any behaviour because corporations are evil. And it’s really, really depressing because the actions are having a difference, we have bent our emissions curve downward, and this is going to just upend everything for the sake of authoritarian populism, while the gods damned Elder Pundits tut-tut that the carbon levy must be bad because it’s unpopular, never mind that their refusal to understand of communicate it, or to refute the lies about it, have contributed to this situation. Good job, everyone. Enjoy your summers of wildfire smoke, and your melting icecaps.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians struck an apartment building in Kharkiv, wounding 21 civilians, as Ukraine destroyed 71 out of 80 attack drones overnight. There were also air strikes on Zaporizhzhia that injured 13 civilians. President Zelenskyy is hoping for faster action from the Americans, ahead of his visit to the White House, given that Ukrainian drone strikes have hit Russian arms depots, destroying thousands of tonnes of weaponry.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Speaker Fergus on the spot in new privilege battle

Posted on by

The brewing privilege battle over the Sustainable Development Technologies Canada documents is largely going under-reported, save for the National Post, but it’s going to be an interesting showdown with the Speaker about the refusal to turn over these documents. The government’s argument is that the stated purpose for demanding these documents is not for Parliamentary business, such as committee study, but because they intend to be turned over to the RCMP, which is in and of itself a problem because it does violate the separation of powers and really, really looks like politicians trying to direct the police (who have said that they don’t want the documents, because it would violate the Charter rights of any accused). I think this is a sound argument, and one that is necessary because of the ongoing abuses of privilege that the past couple of parliaments have engaged in.

Yes, Parliament has unfettered authority to send for the production of papers, but there have to be limits on this privilege, or it can be abused, and I think that this case demonstrates the limits. The complicating factor is that limits are especially difficult to maintain in a minority parliament situation because all of the opposition parties tend to be all be interested in embarrassing the government at any turn (and this is not unique to this government, but any government). It’s partly why NSICOP was fine during a majority Parliament but became the subject of political manoeuvring during the minority years—because opposition parties will try to use their leverage to embarrass a government or score points when they think they can.

I don’t envy Speaker Fergus in having to make this decision, but this kind of exercise is clearly beyond the pale. It’s not up to MPs to get information on behalf of the RCMP, and that crosses so many red lines that it should be blinding. He’s going to be criticized whatever he makes, but hopefully for the sake of precedent, he makes the right choice and rein in some of this foolishness, because once MPs feel empowered enough to do this to one organisation—SDTC in this case—they’re going to start going after anyone they disagree with ideologically on an increasing base going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians targeted a geriatric centre in Sumy, as well as the power grid, which a UN body believes is probably against international humanitarian law. Russia says they are ramping up their drone production tenfold (but that may just be all talk, given the sanctions and the availability of components).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1836807096391676132

Continue reading →

QP: Not Question Period, but Catty Bitch Period

Posted on by

The prime minister was away, off at Rideau Hall to swear-in the replacement minister for Pablo Rodriguez, and while his deputy was supposed to be present today she was not. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he raised the concerns by the “premier of the Quebec Nation” about asylum seekers and “temporary immigrants,” and who said he wants the Bloc to not support the government next week. This wasn’t a question for the government, but Jean-Yves Duclos got up to answer it anyway, and he first thanked the new cohort of pages in the Chamber, and then said that Poilievre’s statements were laughable. The Speaker then stood up to remind MPs that it’s important that questions have to do with the administrative responsibility of the government. Poilievre got back up to decry this the Bloc were going against not only Legault but also the Parti Québécois position. The Speaker warned again that this was not a matter for government, but Pascale St-Onge got up regardless—which she shouldn’t have—and spoke about how Quebeckers did not appreciate when Legault endorsed the Conservatives. Poilievre got up again and decried the loss of the Quebec lieutenant, and asked something of Pablo Rodriguez, who is no longer in government, so the Speaker moved to the next question. Poilievre switched to English to decry the NDP and their “taping up” their agreement, but again it wasn’t a question for government, to the Speaker moved on. Poilievre made a second swipe at the NDP, calling Jagmeet Singh a “fake, a phoney, and a fraud,” which still wasn’t a question, but Singh got up, and moved into the aisle (which you couldn’t see on CPAC), saying something inaudible to Poilievre, and there was much noise for a couple of minutes. When it died down, the Speaker said that the questions were supposed to be for government for the sake of accountability, that questions should be pointed and tough, and the answers clear, but this required working within the rules.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, who declared that their priority was seniors, and demanded they rise OAS and GIS for seniors under 75. Karina Gould thanked him for asking a real question. Therrien again demanded the increase, and Steve MacKinnon reminded him that they voted against lowering the retirement age, enriching the GIS, and dental care.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and with a hoarse voice, raised the Canadian Medical Association’s worries about privatisation in the healthcare system and a shortages of personnel, which is provincial jurisdiction, but blamed the federal government anyway. Mark Holland praised their work with the provinces, and took a dig at the NDP for capitulating to the Conservatives acting like Mean Girls. Singh got back up and in French, and demanded assistance of the Aging Well At Home programme in Quebec. Holland got back up and again called them out for caving to the Conservatives.

Continue reading →

QP: Won’t somebody think about the GDP?

Posted on by

The first prototype-PMQ day of the fall sitting promised to be a caustic set of exchanges between the PM and the leader of the opposition, and it did not disappoint. Well, it’s always disappointing, but it went about as well as expected, though perhaps not quite as caustic as one might have assumed. Pierre Poilievre led off in French with a swipe at the Bloc for their plans not to topple the government, and listed a bunch of nonsense about what the federal government allegedly did—but it wasn’t really a question for the government. Justin Trudeau listed things they have done that the Conservatives would cut. Poilievre recited some slogans, and wondered again why the Bloc allowed it, which was again not a question for government, and the Speaker said nothing. Trudeau listed things that Poilievre voted against in his “thirst for power.” Poilievre switched to English to make the same swipe, but this time directed to the NDP, and wondered why they weren’t saying they would vote against the government, which again was not a question for government. Trudeau repeated that Poilievre voted against Canadians’ interests because he only cares about himself, and that he was in a bad mood because the economy was performing well. Poilievre recited a litany of slogans, and Trudeau said this was mere performance because he doesn’t care about Canadians and repeated the points about inflation coming down and that Poilievre can’t use his “justinflation” slogan anymore. Poilievre took this as an excuse to list the people using food banks or who are in tent encampments, and Trudeau said this empathy was false because he was using the vulnerable for his own gain.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he lamented the remarks of the special advisory to counter Islamophonia, and wanted the government’s definition of Islamophobia. Trudeau spoke about the rise of it and antisemitism, but did not provide a definition. Blanchet noted this and accused the government of polarising Canadians, and Trudeau pointed out that he is a proud Quebeckers and there are more Liberals from Quebec than in the Bloc, and that they need to combat intolerance. 

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and decried the increasing privatisation of healthcare and demanded the government put a stop to it. Trudeau said that the NDP can’t deliver the goods on progressive policies, as shown by their backing out of their agreement, because they didn’t like it when things got hard. Alistair MacGregor took over in English to worry about grocery prices, and accuse the government of “caving to CEOs.” Trudeau accused them of taking a page from the Conservative playbook in choosing slogans over hard work.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Two percent ahead of schedule

Posted on by

The big news yesterday was that according to August data, headline inflation returned to the Bank of Canada’s target of 2.0 percent, well ahead of schedule. It’ll bounce around for a while as the economy continues to rebalance, but it’s a sign that the Bank has essentially stuck the soft-landing. And before you repeat the Andrew Scheer line of “People are going to food banks, you call that a soft landing?” the answer is that the alternative was a recession, so yeah, this definitely beats that.

Things are still uneven, and yes, housing costs continue to drive much of the current inflation, and gasoline prices are a big reason why it fell as much as it did in August, so those will bounce around some more. Food is still running a little bit above headline, but nowhere near what it was before because supply chains have evened out, prices have stabilized from supply shocks (driven by climate change and the invasion of Ukraine), but seasonal price changes are also having an impact. (More from Trevor Tombe in this thread).

https://twitter.com/trevortombe/status/1836026950281744434

Meanwhile, I have seen zero discussion about how everything that Pierre Poilievre has claimed was causing inflation—deficit spending, the carbon levy, and so on—has all been proven false, to say nothing about the comparison between us and the US in terms of deficits and economic performance. Oh, but then they may have to actually point out that he’s lying, and they don’t want to do that. Not to mention, this is Canadian journalism, and we don’t like to actually talk to economists to understand what’s going on, we only need them to assist in both-sidesing bullshit talking points from the parties that paint a picture of doom (because there is “no such thing as a good-news economic story”). Is it any wonder Canadians have such a distorted view of the economy?

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians have once again targeted energy faculties in Sumy region, while shelling in Zaporizhzhia, has killed two people. Russians claim that they have captured the town of Ukrainsk in the eastern Donbas region.

Continue reading →

QP: Did you hear the good news about inflation?

Posted on by

The prime minister had initially indicated that the would be present, but when the time came, he was not. His deputy was present for a second day in a row, in the wake of the by-election losses, but also in the wake of the news that the inflation headline figure has returned to target, and which I fully expected the Liberals to be insufferable about. All of the other leaders were present, unlike yesterday, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, raised the by-election losses, falsely called the federal government as having been responsible for the largest expansion of government in history, and wondered how the Bloc could support them—which really wasn’t a question for government. Chrystia Freeland got up to praise the inflation numbers, as expected. Poilievre dismissed this as cold comfort for people, and again asked why the Bloc supports them (which is not a question for government), and Freeland again praised the inflation numbers while calling Poilievre economically incompetent. Poilievre switched to English to again raise the by-election losses and recited his slogans. Freeland repeated her good news talking points in English. Poilievre again called this cold comfort, called Freeland incompetent, and raised the fictitious “second carbon tax” as taking a huge hit on the economy. Freeland insisted that the inflation news was good news for Canadians and bad news for the Conservatives. Poilievre repeated his fiction of the “second carbon tax,” which is not a Thing, and demanded an election. Freeland recited good news talking points about housing, repeating the announcement she made yesterday on mortgage amortization.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and first addressed to Poilievre that they got fourth place in LaSalle—Émard, before demanding support for their bill on expanding pensions for seniors under age 75. Freeland recited talking points about supports they have added for seniors, particularly those most vulnerable. Blanched again demanded a royal recommendation for the Bloc bill, and Freeland would not indicate support for that bill.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP and declared the Liberals “done,” then demanded price caps on certain groceries. Freeland hoped that they would set partisanship aside in order to congratulate Canadians for getting inflation back under control, before noting they have increased taxes on corporations. Singh switched to French to repeat his same declaration before demanding and end to “real estate giants” ripping people off. Freeland scoffed at the notion that the Liberals are teaming up with the Conservatives (earned Conservatives applause) and then slammed the Conservatives. 

Continue reading →

QP: Slogans after the summer

Posted on by

The first day back from summer break, and nearly all of the leaders were present and ready to perform for the cameras. After the newest Conservative MP was introduced to take his seat, Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he noted how many times the Bloc has voted in favour of the government, before reciting some slogans. Justin Trudeau said that if he had spent any time talking to Canadians over the summer, he would have seen a desire for solutions, not things in his own interests. Poilievre claimed that they had overseen the biggest expansion of the federal government in history (not even remotely true), and recited his slogans again. Trudeau praised the investments into Telesat and mocked the Conservatives trying to call up Elon Musk. Poilievre switched to English to recite come slogans that obliquely called for an election, and Trudeau repeated the line that Poilievre is only out for his own interests. Poilievre blamed the carbon price for child hunger, and demanded an election. Trudeau reminded him is that climate change costs money, and that Poilievre’s do-nothing plan would be even more expensive. Poilievre said that the carbon price hasn’t stopped any fires or floods, and took a swipe at Mark Carney before again calling for an election. Trudeau repeated that Poilievre’s do-nothing plan would help nobody and endanger the future.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and raised the by-election in Montreal, and raised the “discrimination” that seniors over 75 get higher pension cheques. Trudeau noted that people over 75 have higher expenses and more depleted savings, and called out the Bloc for voting against dental care. Blanchet said that dental care encroaches upon provincial jurisdiction, and said that he misled people when he said that Anglophones in the province were getting poorer services. Trudeau said that the provincial government itself said that they were not clear but had not provided a clarification. 

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and in French, named the two ridings with the by-elections, before reciting talking points about corporate landlords. Trudeau needled him for hiding once the Conservatives pressured them, while the government is doing the hard work of progressive policies. Julian switched to English to name the two ridings and accused the government of making people pay for healthcare. Trudeau needled them even more forcefully about how they turned tail when hard things got hard.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An economic “nuclear winter”

Posted on by

The stupid season is about to begin as MPs return to Parliament today, and lo, Pierre Poilievre primed his caucus in a meeting yesterday with a speech that decried the carbon levy as creating a “nuclear winter” for the economy. It’s absolute horseshit, because the carbon levy is not the cause of inflation or the cost-of-living challenges we’ve faced (and in fact, climate change is a major contributor to it), but this is Poilievre, and truth doesn’t matter.

I will also add that it was incredibly disappointing that in writing up the story, The Canadian Press simply both-sidesed Poilievre’s nonsense with the talking points of the two other parties, instead of phoning up an economist who could say “That’s horseshit, you should stop listening to that man.” (Yes, it was a Sunday, but a service like CP should have enough contacts that someone would answer their phones who is NOT Ian Lee). But leaving Poilievre’s comments to stand like that, completely unchallenged, is irresponsible.

Meanwhile, as the Liberals try yet another round of trying to convince the public of the merits of the carbon levy and that the rebates exist, there have been a few suggestions of what they should have done from the start, but Jennifer Robson’s are among the most salient/best to implement.

https://twitter.com/JenniferRobson8/status/1835333573366210734

Ukraine Dispatch

A married couple were killed in a Russian strike on the suburbs of Odesa, while at least 42 were injured in an air strike on an apartment building in Kharkiv. There was another prisoner exchange over the weekend, swapping 103 POWs from each side.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Looking for a magical, cost-free climate solution

Posted on by

In the wake of the NDP’s insistence that they will have a different environmental plan than the current carbon levy, they and their defenders are getting trolled pretty hard by economists, chief among them Andrew Leach, because he knows exactly what these systems entail. And the NDP’s solution involves mostly magical thinking, that somehow, they can come up with a “corporations will have to pay” scheme that won’t pass along costs to consumers, which won’t exist, whereas the current system ensures everyone pays a price (something like 41 percent of emissions are from households), and that those who are most exposed get compensation for the burden (the rebates), which encourage further reductions to maximise the compensation. And that shouldn’t be that hard, but the government has consistently been shite about communicating these facts, because they can’t communicate their way out of a we paper bag.

Ukraine Dispatch

A municipal building in Kyiv was hit by fragments of a Russian drone overnight, while two were killed in Russian shelling in the Sumy region. There was an exchange for 49 POWs. President Zelenskyy says that the incursion into Kursk has blunted an ongoing Russian advance in the country’s east. In case it isn’t obvious, here’s an explainer on why Ukraine needs permission to fire Western weapons deep into Russian territory. Intelligence suggests that Russia is now producing long-range kamikaze drones with Chinese engines and parts. Thus far, 8,060 Iranian-developed drones have been launched over the course of the war.

Continue reading →