Tag Archives: Ethics

Roundup: Why Statute of Westminster Day matters

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday was Statute of Westminster Day, which most people don’t have a clue about in spite of it showing up on their calendars. It’s a hugely important day in Canadian history because it was a turning point in our sovereignty as it relates to our relationship with the UK—the creation of the Canadian Crown as a separate and distinct entity from the UK Crown. Canada and several other realms (Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, Newfoundland, and South Africa) were all granted Separate Crowns because they decided that the Crown was indeed divisible (and in Canada, further divisible among the provinces), and that meant things like being able to control our own foreign policy.

Today is Statute of Westminster Day, which is the birthday of the Canadian Crown as a separate entity from the UK Crown. It’s an incredibly important day for Canadian sovereignty, but mostly gets passed over, or under-taught in schools. #MapleCrown

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-11T15:00:49.015Z

The problem, of course, is that we’re not taught this. We may be taught that that the Statute gave us more control over our foreign affairs (at least, I was in my social studies classes in Alberta), but it was couched more in terms of the aftermath of the First World War—the Canadian Crown was entirely absent from that discussion. And if you look at Parliamentary accounts on Twitter, for example, not one of them mentioned the Crown as the reason why we gained that autonomy and independence. It’s the whole gods damned reason why, and we don’t celebrate that at all. It’s a real problem as to why we don’t have a grasp of basic civics in this country, and something we need to rectify.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian troops overran or captured several Ukrainian positions near the strategic city of Pokrovsk. Ukrainians struck a Russian airfield near the Azov Sea with US-made missiles, and a Ukrainian drone hit police barracks in Chechnya.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Fiscal update when?

Posted on by

This year’s Fall Economic Statement is very late—it’s extremely unusual for it to happen in December—but these are not normal times, and the ongoing privilege filibuster hasn’t helped matters any. The government’s attempts to get shame either the Bloc or the NDP into finally voting with the government to pull the plug on it have all been in vain, because they all want to do their part to embarrass the government as much as possible. This being said, I’m not sure what the holdup is with the Public Accounts either, though they have insisted that they’re with the Auditor General and will be released soon. In any case, the government has refused to explain exactly why these releases are so late, because we’re back to the tiresome “If you’re explaining, you’re losing” schtick, so as usual, this government never explains.

Pierre Poilievre decided that he would pretend to be magnanimous and “offer” the government two hours from the Conservatives’ allotted day on Monday to present the update, but Chrystia Freeland rejected it out of hand, calling the offer absurd, and saying “This proposal from the Conservatives is like an arsonist who set the fire in the first place, saying, ‘don’t worry about it, I’ll come with a fire truck for a couple of hours, but tomorrow I’ll be back again with matches’.” Procedurally, I don’t see how the Conservatives could offer up time to government business on an allotted day, but also procedurally, Freeland could use the daily Statements by Ministers slot during routine proceedings to deliver the update (though that may be somewhat more awkward for the associated media lockup because those statements tend to be earlier than budget or fiscal update speeches are traditionally delivered, in part because of any data from those lock-ups moving markets (which is why they are traditionally delivered after 4 PM). They could technically also deliver it outside of the Chamber (Paul Martin once read it at committee, and the Conservatives liked to deliver it off Parliament Hill entirely), but we don’t want to encourage a return to the practice of announcing things outside of Parliament (and the UK Speaker uses very strong language about this sort of thing).

If I had to guess, I would suspect that it’ll be delivered next Wednesday or Thursday, once the Supply votes are out of the way, which makes it extremely convenient for Freeland and every other minister to spread out across the country to deliver the “good news” about the programmes in the budget, whereas Poilievre would want to use the timing of the update to claim that he “forced” the government to “come clean about the numbers,” or some such bullshit like that. None of this is great, but we’re dealing with an exhausted government and a dysfunctional parliament, so nothing is as it should be right now.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine is giving soldiers who deserted or went AWOL a second chance, particularly given the shortages they’re facing on the Eastern front, and lo, some six thousand soldiers have rejoined. News leaking out of the Trump camp indicate that his plan to end the war involve major land concessions, NATO membership being off the table, and cutting military aid, unless Putin refuses, in which case they would provide more. (Land concessions are not really his goal, guys).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Terrible capital gains narratives

Posted on by

The communications around the capital gains changes have been atrocious. Chrystia Freeland is painting an apocalyptic picture of what will happen to Canadian society if we don’t make these changes, and the talk about fairness, where workers pay more taxes than those who can earn it on investment income is missing the key component of the discussion which is around the unequal treatment of different types of income that allows people to engage in tax arbitrage—picking and choosing which revenue models will net them the least taxation, which is a real problem for fairness that is not being discussed at all.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801021913738698941

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801022109172256818

In amidst this comes Calgary economist Jack Mintz, whose sole entire schtick is to cut taxes to solve every problem under the sun. And of course, Pierre Poilievre was quoting him in Question Period, calling him the greatest economy in the country, which is pretty risible. It didn’t help that Poilievre made the basic mistake of believing that the tax rate is going up rather than the inclusion rate (the point at which it kicks in on the profit you’ve made), but he has doomsday scenarios to unleash into the world to make his case that this is a Very Bad Thing, when it’s nothing at all like he seemed to believe.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801086926696415384

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801088499522937017

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1801096926227497107

Everyone has handled this whole situation poorly, media included, and this has been al lost opportunity to try and have a proper conversation about these kinds of tax measures and changes.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missile attacks have left much of Kyiv without power and water. Russian missiles also struck an administrative building and an apartment block in Kryvyi Rih in the south, and killed nine and injured 29. The American government says they are aware of credible reports that abducted Ukrainian children are being put up on adoption websites.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1800901662820704467

Continue reading →

QP: Trying to be clever about the list of names

Posted on by

The prime minister was on his way back from Normandy, while his deputy was off making announcements in Toronto, and all of the other leaders were also absent. Andrew Scheer led off with the NSICOP report, worried about Jennifer O’Connell’s outburst at committee, and demanded the names be released. Dominic LeBlanc suggested that his leader get classified briefings. Scheer asked if any implicated parliamentarians are in Cabinet (which is stupid because there is actual vetting of ministers), and LeBlanc gave Scheer credit for trying to do indirectly what he cannot do directly. Scheer tried a second time, and LeBlanc patted himself on the back for the actions the government has taken around foreign interference when the previous government didn’t. Luc Berthold took over in French, and tried to demand the names again, and got the same answer. Berthold then pivoted to a story about a woman who got chased on the streets in Montreal, and blamed this on bail and supervised injection sites. Ya’ara Saks said the safe consumption sites in the province are run by the province.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he too raised the NSICOP report, taking some swipes at Chrystia Freeland for her non-response yesterday. LeBlanc reiterated that the government his points that they have been taking action on foreign interference. Therrien made another complaint about Freeland, and got the same response. 

Heather McPherson rose for the NDP to worry about CBSA pensions per current labour negotiations. Anita Anand recited that they are committed to negotiation and that it’s a process of give-and-take. Alexandre Boulerice raised the UN’s request to raise taxes on oil companies and the government refusing. Pascale St-Onge said that she too believes Canada needs to do more to reduce emissions, and praised the elimination of subsiding and their climate resilience fund.

Continue reading →

QP: Look at the interest rate decision, not at the NSICOP report!

Posted on by

While Wednesdays are normal the day the prime minister is present and answers everything, he was instead off to France to take part in D-Day commemorations, and while his deputy was not scheduled to be here, she was after all. With Trudeau gone, one of the other leaders didn’t bother to show up. Pierre Poilievre was present, and started off in French, and he wondered about the NSICOP report about which MPs were implicated, and repeated the same in English in the same time period. Dominic LeBlanc said that no government would release security information in public, and said that if the leader opposite got his security clearance, he could read the confidential information for himself rather that casting aspersions on the floor of the House of Commons. Poilievre stuck to English to raise the AG report on SDTC, and demanded the information be turned over to the RCMP. Chrystia Freeland said that it was no surprise that Poilievre didn’t want to talk about the economic thanks to the good news that rates decreased. Poilievre returned to French to worry about daycares in Montreal where people need police escorts, and demanded changes to the Criminal Code. Freeland, however, reiterated her same response in French. Poilievre switched back to English to demand the release of the report that the Parliamentary Budget Officer claimed he was being gagged about. Freeland ignored this entirely in order to praise the Oilers winning their conference as part of a “good week for Canada.” Poilievre read the letter sent to the PBO asking him not to disclose the report in question, and Freeland said that it was Poilievre under a gag order, who couldn’t say anything nice about Canada. (Seriously?! Honest to Hermes, this is ridiculous).

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he demanded action on the NSICOP revelations of MPs as witting accomplices of foreign governments. LeBlanc praised Therrien’s cooperation on the foreign interference file. Therrien reiterated his demand, and Freeland rose to praise the economic good news of the interest rate decision. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he too demanded action on those revelation, noting that he has requested a classified briefing but railed that the prime minister has done nothing for months. LeBlanc said he was pleased to hear that he had requested the briefing before patting himself on the back for the action on combatting foreign interference so far. Singh repeated his question in French, and Freeland again got up to praise the economic good news.

Continue reading →

QP: The “refusing to rule out” ploy

Posted on by

On a bright and sunny Tuesday in the nation’s capital, both the prime minister and his deputy were present for QP, as were most of the other leaders (some of whom stated they would be here but were not). Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he worried that the city of Montreal has requested the “legalization of hard drugs” in their communities, and wanted an admission that what happened in BC was a “deadly mistake,” lest the prime minister repeat the same problem. Trudeau reminded him that they are working with BC on modifying their project, and that they are working only with provinces, and no other requests have been made. Poilievre switched to a English to ask if the prime minster supports decriminalisation for using drugs in parks, hospitals or public transit, and Trudeau repeated his answer. Poilievre pointed out that Trudeau refused to answer his question, and suspected it means he wants to impose the same “radical” policy elsewhere. Trudeau said that nobody supports that, but that Poilievre was trying to use tragedies to score political points, and took a jab at Poilievre for willing to suspend Charter rights if he feels it suits him. Poilievre accused the prime minister of secretly planning to impose “legalisation” on Toronto, and Trudeau reminded him that they will only with with provinces, not the municipalities directly. Poilievre said that Trudeau was not ruling out future extensions, which was obviously ridiculous, before he accused the prime minister of killing more people in the meantime. Trudeau said that they only took three days to approve BC’s completed request, and that the opposition was only scoring cheap points.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and accused the government of threatening French, to which Trudeau gave a paean about defending the French language and language minorities around the country, while the Bloc was just picking fights. Blanchet raised comments by an MP about “extremists,” and Trudeau said that they stand for protecting French across the country. 

Peter Julian rose for the NDP in French, and took swipes at Conservatives for not supporting pharmacare legislation, and exhorted the government to support them in passing it (which is dumb, because it’s the government who needs their support as it’s government legislation). Trudeau thanked the NDP for their support, and said that the Conservatives were against it because their anti-choice members opposed contraception. Leah Gazan took the question in English, with more of an emphasis on birth control instead of diabetes, and Trudeau repeated his same response. 

Continue reading →

QP: Scoring more points on opioid victims

Posted on by

The prime minister was in town today but not in QP, though his deputy was. Most of the other leaders were also away, leaving Andrew Scheer to lead off, where he asked for the date at which the prime minister would like make it illegal to smoke crack in a hospital room. Chrystia Freeland said that BC approached the federal government with a pilot project, the government shares their concerns, and they are working then to adapt the programme, but MPs shouldn’t score political points off of this tragedy. Scheer tried a second time, and Freeland gave a paean to working together to solve these problems, and that relayed that she spoke to premier Eby about their cooperation in working on this, while opioid addiction is a tragedy. Scheer then cherry-picked data on BC’s opioid fatalities, and ignored the increasing rates in Alberta and BC. Freeland again said that she has been in touch with the premier on the issue and they are working collaboratively, and not fundraising off of the pain and death of desperate people. Luc Berthold took over in French, and worried about crack use “exploding” in Montreal, and demanded a preemptive no to any similar projects in Montreal. Freeland slowly annunciated that abC has a pilot project and now has concerns that they will be working together to address, and that these tragedies require putting partisanship aside. Bethold tried to implicate the Bloc in any decriminalisation in Quebec, and Freeland repeated this is a tragedy, and said that what is really extremist and radical are white supremacist policies, and wanted Conservatives to denounce them.

Luc Therrien led for the Bloc, and raised a newspaper story about a “rapprochement” between CBC and Radio-Canada and demanded they never be merged. Freeland insisted that they will always support the French broadcaster. Therrien demanded that each half be made fully independent—which would never work because Radio-Canada requires CBC’s infrastructure. Freeland repeated that they will always support French in Canada.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and started shouting about the government’s environmental record, to which Freeland insisted that this government has done more for the environment than any previous government in Canadian history, but they are doing more. Don Davies took credit for the capital gains changes, and wondered why the Liberals are maintaining Conservatives’ “corporate giveaways.” Freeland noted it was great that the NDP supports tax fairness, and that nurses and carpenters should pay the same taxes as CEOs, and noted Conservative silence on this fairness.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Blaming Trudeau for rent hikes

Posted on by

The Conservatives put out a press release yesterday decrying just how much rent has increased across the country. The problem? Landlord-tenant legislation is a provincial issue, and most of the premiers have resisted rent controls or price caps, mostly for ideological reasons. If indeed rent controls stifle new construction, well, removing them hasn’t spurred it either.

If this is about the market, the federal government hasn’t been in the business of building rental housing since the eighties, and I have seen zero indication that Poilievre would want to get back into that particular line of work. Worse, his release falsely calls the CMHC “Trudeau’s own,” which is a gross mischaracterisation of an arm’s-length Crown corporation that the federal government doesn’t dictate operations to. (This is a rhetorical device Poilievre has been employing a lot, which nobody ever calls him out on either, and that’s a problem). In fact, the government’s decision to remove the GST on purpose-built rentals has given more indications that this will spur development more than any other action so far, but of course, those will take time, which Poilievre is also dismissing with his shtick about people not being able to live in photo-ops.

There has also been the line that this goes back to government spending allegedly raising inflation (false), and that that has raised interest rates, which is what is driving up rental prices, but again, that’s not actually Trudeau’s doing given the global issues with inflation and raising rates to tame it. But Poilievre and his minions would prefer to lie about everything in order to make people angry, because that’s the goal. Facts don’t matter, and that’s a problem for everyone.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Recent Russian air strikes have been focused on Ukraine’s military-industrial complex, however the threat to attacks on energy infrastructure remains high. Ukraine is taking credit for destroying a Russian surveillance plane and an airborne command post. Ukraine’s ground forces commander confirms they are now engaged in “active defence,” but doesn’t rule out further counter-offensive operations. Switzerland has agreed to host a global peace summit at the request of president Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, you can’t challenge a censure motion in court

Posted on by

Ontario MPP Sarah Jama has written to Doug Ford to ask him to retract his motion in the legislature to censure her and prevent her from speaking until she offers an apology for the comments she made at the start of the Israel-Hamas conflict. In it, Jama says that if Ford doesn’t, she’ll take the matter to the courts. The problem? The courts won’t touch any kind of legislative censure motion because it falls under the issue of parliamentary privilege and the separation of powers.

We have to remember that Parliament and the legislatures are self-governing, as they should be. That’s what keeps them independent of the powers of the King—and yes, the courts to count as the powers of the King, as the King is the fount of justice, and justice is carried out in his name. (That’s also why we have a doctrine by which the King can do no wrong, but rather, can merely act on bad advice, and the minister who offered that is responsible for it). Part of that self-governing power is the legislature’s ability to discipline its members, which is important because you don’t want an external authority able to do that, because it can create a great deal of interference in the workings of your legislature.

This being said, the fact that she was censured at all is a problem, and as I wrote in a column a couple of weeks ago, is part of a broader pattern that his happening that is extremely concerning (and is almost always hypocritically done by parties who claim to be all about free speech, but reveal themselves to only be pro-speech they like). And it should be up to voters to discipline parties that are abusing these powers to punish those they disagree with, but that also means keeping up the pressure on them so that they know that they are going to be punished for it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukraine says that in spite of that Liberian-flagged ship getting hit by a Russian missile, their alternative Black Sea corridor is working. Really! President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is also hoping for a conference next month on a joint weapon production agreement with the US and defence contractors.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1722903820684947654

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre’s facile budget demands

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre called a Sunday morning press conference, which is a particularly Conservative tactic that tries to set the agenda for the week, in which he made his demands around the upcoming budget. We all know that it’s pretty much set in stone by this point and is on its way to the printers, but that never stops parties from making performative demands right up until the end. To that end, Poilievre had three main demands:

  1. Bring home powerful paycheques with lower taxes, so hard work pays off again.
  2. Bring home lower prices, by ending inflationary carbon tax hikes & deficit spending that drive up inflation & interest rates.
  3. Bring homes people can afford by removing government gatekeepers to free up land and speed up building permits.

First of all, the thing he refuses to acknowledge or understand is that tax cuts fuel inflation. If he’s worried about the increasing cost of living, tax cuts won’t actually do anything meaningful, and are more likely to just add fuel to that fire. (Meanwhile, taxes aren’t going up for anyone except profitable corporations and on luxury goods). When it comes to housing prices, carbon prices are not inflationary (the Bank of Canada has cited that their effect on inflation is negligible), and deficit spending has absolutely nothing to do with either inflation or interest rates. This is a facile narrative that Poilievre keeps insisting, preferring an austerity budget that will only make the vulnerable even more precarious without government supports, but this economic message still resonates for a particular generation. Meanwhile, none of this will affect housing prices, because that is driven by a lack of supply, which is because municipalities refuse to zone for density, and because provincial governments won’t use their powers to force the issue. And that leads us to the third point, which is that the federal government has no ability to “remove gatekeepers” at the provincial or municipal level. They can’t do anything about building permits, and I am dubious that there is enough federal land that is suitable for housing developments in major cities around the country that is underutilized. I may be wrong, but this has been a perennial promise by governments for years and nothing has really moved, which leads me to believe there’s not a lot to be had.

It’s not at all surprising that Poilievre is sticking to facile and wrong budgetary narratives, but it would be great if he could actually be called out on it rather than both-sides at best, which is barely even happening. This is important stuff and we’re just shrugging it off, and focusing on more bullshit polls about people believing the Conservatives are still the better economic managers in spite of decades of proof to the contrary.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces have believed to have suffered more than 1100 dead in a week of battles near Bakhmut, with another 1500 wounded so badly as to be removed from the fighting. The Institute for the Study of War believes Russia’s planned advance has stalled in Bakhmut, and that the assault will be more difficult to sustain without more significant losses.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1634849209840173057

Continue reading →