Tag Archives: Federalism

QP: Constant questions to other opposition parties

Posted on by

The prime minister and his deputy were on their way back from the weekend trip to Kyiv and Poland, while most of the other leaders were away. Andrew Scheer led off in French, and he recited the list of Conservative slogans to point out that the Bloc voted in favour of funding ArriveCan. Jean-Yves Duclos stood up to thank the Auditor General for her work, and cite the most of her recommendations have been acted upon. Scheer pointed out that the Bloc voted for this eight times, which got a warning by the Speaker, to which Duclos told him that that he should ask the Bloc, but reiterated the canned line about the government doing what needed to be done in the pandemic. Scheer switched to English to recite his slogans, and gave the same accusations about voting for ArriveCan, but this time directed to the NDP, to which Duclos repeated that if the opposition has question of the NDP, they should ask him not the government. Scheer repeated the slogans, and breathily worried about the carbon price increasingly, and misleadingly tied it to food bank use. Anita Anand reminded that climate change is real, and that they want to take money out of people’s pockets. Scheer misquoted the PBO about the carbon price, and linked it to people dumpster diving. Anand noted that they didn’t refute that they don’t believe in climate change or that they want to take money from people’s pockets.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he took his own shot at the NDP, accusing the government of spending on things Quebec already has and are not their priorities. François-Philippe Champagne acknowledged that they do take inspiration from Quebec, and noted they didn’t want to talk about their investments in the province. Therrien demanded more federal money instead of programmes, to which Mark Holland accused them of trying to start fights instead of helping people.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded the government reform Nutrition North, claiming that the subsidies are not passed along to consumers. Dan Vandal insisted that they are working to ensure that the subsidy is fully passed along, and that progress has been made. Singh repeated the demand in French, and got the same response. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Asbestos and rodent-free!

Posted on by

We are due for another round of sighs and hand-wringing as 24 Sussex has been declared asbestos and rodent free (which were mostly mice, not rats as previously reported), and the old wiring and plumbing are also gone, so now the decision needs to be made on what to do with it—and while yes, it is ostensibly the call of the National Capital Commission, they require money from the government to make any plans come to fruition, so this does wind up being on the government’s plate.

At this point, with the abatement work completed, it seems like maybe this would be a good time to just go ahead and do the renovations, including reinforcing the roof to protect against drone attacks (because yes, this is now a serious consideration) because this is still a worthwhile property and I think there is some symbolic weight and value of being across from Rideau Hall, and the image of the prime minister having to cross the road to meet with the Governor General is a good one to have, rather than the current “running across the back garden” image, which doesn’t convey the same weight or gravitas. And Rideau Cottage isn’t suited for a lot of purposes, like entertaining, working dinners, and the kitchen is too small for the prime minister’s chef to work in, which is why they used 24 Sussex still until recently, and currently use an unnamed nearby facility and deliver the meals from there. Plus, it too would require more security upgrades. I’m also not terribly keen on purpose-building a new residence in the site of a current parking lot, as has been a proposal.

My one request remains that if they do the work to restore 24 Sussex as a working residence, that they restore the original façade because it had a lot more character and is more in keeping with the neo-Gothic elements of the Centre Block (and the stripped-down 1950s appearance it currently holds is indicative of the architectural sins of that era). But let’s just get it done, while Trudeau is in the declining years of his government, when he can’t be accused of doing it to feather his own nest but that it can be justified in doing the work for the nation, like it should have been all along.

Ukraine Dispatch:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited troops in Robotyne, which is on the front lines in the south east, and the site of intense fighting. Over the weekend, two Ukrainian drones are purported to have struck the largest Russian oil refinery in the country’s south.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trying to escape child care obligations

Posted on by

Some Alberta daycare operators are starting “rolling closures” to protest the new funding regime that goes along with the $10/day early learning and child care programme, saying that they’re not getting enough to make ends meet. This is 100 percent a provincial problem—they signed onto the agreement with the federal government, knowing what the funding agreement was and that they had obligations for provincial funding, and that included increasing the wages of the people who work in the sector (because there’s no excuse for it being so low, particularly as there is a gendered element to it).

So what’s Danielle Smith’s response? Aside from denigrating the operators doing these rolling closures, she is trying to blame the federal government, claiming that their spending caused inflation to rise, which is what is making these operators face problems. Which is, of course, bullshit. Federal spending has nothing to do with the rise in inflation (as the Bank of Canada has stated many times over), and even more to the point, this child care programme has been disinflationary (at least for the early years, before the base-year effect kicks in, meaning it’ll be a one-time drop in inflation). Nevertheless, because she’s blaming the federal government, she wants to shake them down for more money, because that’s what provinces do every single time. Thus far, federal ministers are holding firm and pointing out that provinces knew what they signed onto, but legacy media, of course, is once again trying to make this a federal problem.

And this keeps happening. We never hold provinces of the premiers to account for anything. Another good example is social housing—as former minister Sheila Copps pointed out, back in the eighties, the provinces insisted that the federal government get out of housing because it was provincial jurisdiction, and just give them the money, and they knew best how to spend it. And happens every single time, they spend the federal money on other things, and then blame the federal government once things reach a crisis because of their under-spending. Same with healthcare. Because we are allergic to holding premiers to account in this country, and that’s a very real problem.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia is refusing to turn over any of the purported POW bodies from that downed plane, because it totally isn’t a psy-op. The head of Ukrainian military intelligence says that he expects the Russian offensive on the eastern front to fizzle out by early spring, by which point they should be exhausted. Lviv in western Ukraine has become the first city to remove all of its Soviet-era monuments.

Continue reading →

QP: Memory-holing past indifference

Posted on by

The prime minister was elsewhere, meeting with the president of the Slovak Republic, who is currently on a state visit to Canada, but his deputy was present for a second day in a row (which is a rarity these days). Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and mocked the prime minister saying that all spending has been absolutely necessary, but noted that a large percentage of consultants hired for ArriveCan resulted in no work done, and demanded the money be recovered. Chrystia Freeland said that Canadians understand that when Conservatives talk about spending, they want to cut things like dental care and child care. Poilievre said that the ArriveCan app was an example of “corruption,” and then railed that the Bloc did an “about face” on their support for Bill C-234, and demanded the government pass it in its original form. Freeland insisted that while she can’t speak for the Bloc, the nation of Quebec understands the need to combat climate change. Poilievre switched to English to repeat that number of ArriveCan contracts were not fulfilled and demanded the money be recouped. Freeland insisted that the Conservatives only want to cut services. Poilievre then pivoted to Trudeau’s vacations, and demanded to know if he paid the “full carbon tax” on each ton of emissions. Freeland asked if he knows how much the heating of Stornoway costs, and that the government was helping people with climate rebates. Poilievre insisted that he pays for his own vacations, and demanded that the government undo the amendments to Bill C-234 and pass it. Freeland pointed out that Poielivre also doesn’t pay rent on Stornoway, and that he wants to take away the climate rebates people rely on.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and decried Quebec’s settlement capacity for immigrants and refugees, and railed that this was impacting housing. Sean Fraser praised the agreement that they came to with Quebec to build more houses. Therrien railed that immigration levels were still going up, and demanded the targets be lowered. Marc Miller pointed out that they already have an agreement with Quebec to manage its immigration levels.

Jagmeet Singh blamed the Liberals for the housing crisis in Toronto, and demanded they capitulate to Olivia Chow’s blackmail. Freeland praised Toronto, and said they were having “constructive conversations” with the city and the provinces, and that they have given more than any previous government. Singh switched to French to decry that the government has called for another investigation into grocery chains rather than taking action. François-Philippe Champagne said that the best solution is for more competition, and that he has asked the Commissioner to use his new powers for this.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Chow chooses blackmail

Posted on by

Toronto mayor Olivia Chow woke up and chose violence, as the kids say, when it comes to her budget proposals for Toronto. While the 10.5 percent property tax increase is long-overdue for a city whose property taxes remain well below the national average after years of austerity governments who have allowed the city to crumble so they can keep from increasing said property taxes (and this is not unique to Toronto either), she is also calling for an additional measure—federal blackmail. The proposal is called a “federal impacts levy,” or an additional six percent increase ostensibly to cover the costs of providing services for asylum seekers, and is basically holding the federal government at knifepoint, saying pay up or all your safe seats in this city are going to be in jeopardy.

The asylum seeker issue is rife with other levels of government falsely claiming that this is solely a federal responsibility, so they should foot the whole cost. It’s not actually true—the federal government is responsible for refugees once their claims have been approved, but before that point, they generally fall under the social services provided by provinces and municipalities, and the federal government will reimburse a portion of those costs. Of course, premiers like to wash their hands of this because of course they do (and there is a constant rhetorical battle happening in Question Period where the Bloc keep demanding that the federal government owes Quebec some $450 million for the provision of services, again falsely claiming sole federal responsibility), which leaves cities often bearing the burden, and Toronto and Montreal most especially as they get the lion’s share of asylum claimants. There remain questions around Toronto, if they have followed the proper channels to request federal funds for this (I believe there is a need for a certain provincial action to accompany it which may not have been undertaken), but again, they have been given millions of dollars this year for assistance with this.

My bigger concern is the Pandora’s Box that this kind of federal blackmail opens up. While some pundits will declare it to be genius, and on a strategic level, it is a clever way to back the federal government into a corner, but at the same time, this invites other cities or provinces to start adopting this kind of tactic, and even more to the point, it once again leaves the province—whose constitutional responsibility the city is—off the hook for their own underfunding and downloading of services to try and make their own bottom lines look good. We already have provinces who think they can just declare themselves exempt from federal laws, and others who are openly breaking those laws (or at least threatening to under the cover of legal fictions), while the pundit class says it’s the prime minister’s fault, that he made them break the law and behave this way. Chow is now pushing this envelope even further, and I worry about the long-term consequences for this country so that she can solve her short-term problem of being an adult around her city’s fiscal crisis.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Two Russian missiles struck a hotel in Kharkiv, injuring eleven people, many of them journalists. Ukrainian forces have been shifting toward building fortifications and a more defensive posture in recent months. Speaking in Vilnius, Lithuania, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that they have shown that Russia can be stopped, but that Ukraine still needs more air defence systems and ammunition. Zelenskyy added that there are “clear signs” of a slowdown in Russia’s defence industry as he called on allied nations to tighten sanctions.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1745019147065721141

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1745348642100109636

Continue reading →

Roundup: Exploring a national emergency response agency

Posted on by

Something that caught my eye over the weekend was an interview that Harjit Sajjan had with The Canadian Press over the weekend about building up some kind of national emergency response agency, so that we don’t have to constantly rely on the military for each event as we have been. It would likely be a network of local and regional agencies, but have some kind of federal coordinating role, but we do have some models domestically to draw on, such as the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre. The issue there is that it’s only geared toward one kind of event, whereas floods and hurricanes or tornadoes require different responses.

To that end, Sajjan is looking at different models and how different countries manage their agencies, so he’s not immediately jumping on an American FEMA model, but if there is one particular note of caution to sound it’s that we can’t rely on the premiers not ballsing this up or making ridiculous demands because none of them want to spend money on this kind of thing if they think they can get away with forcing the federal government to spend instead, while at the same time not willing to cede any jurisdictional sovereignty so that the federal government can actually do anything other than just give them money that they totally promise will be spent on this and not on tax cuts (really, we promise this time, for reals!)

There’s a reason we’ve come to rely on the military for this kind of work, which is that provinces don’t want to spend the money, and the federal government has so far refused to make provinces reimburse the Forces for doing the work (because they would be massacred in the headlines if they did), and provinces know that. It doesn’t help that the NDP think that this is really the only kind of thing that the military should be doing either. But something has to give, and let’s hope the federal government, of whichever stripe is in power if this gets off the ground, doesn’t simply roll over for the premiers’ usual nonsense on this.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians launched a massive drone attack on early Sunday aimed at the southern and western Ukraine, while Ukraine launched a drone attack against a Russian airbase in Russia’s Rostov province. As Russia presses to try and capture Avdiivka, Associated Press has seen drone footage in the area that shows at least 150 bodies in Russian uniforms littering the treeline.

Continue reading →

Roundup: End of the parliamentary year 2023

Posted on by

With a flurry of more nonsense motions, another apology from Speaker Greg Fergus, and a few more hours of sterile speechifying, followed by a royal assent ceremony, Parliament—both chambers—has gone home for the holidays.

This has been one of the most toxic, rancorous sittings I’ve lived through in my fifteen years on the Hill full-time, and I’ve watched it devolve in realtime to something where the clip-gathering was more selective to it being every single interaction on camera, and because they want to boost the engagement on those clips, they torque things and are now outright lying about absolutely everything, and now the place is a toxic swamp. The incident with Anthony Rota’s ouster just made everything worse, because the partisan rancour around that dialled up to eleven, and there was an actual attempt by the Conservatives to let Rota to escape responsibility by trying to falsely pin the blame on Trudeau and making false insinuations about the PMO essentially running the Speaker’s office, which is both wrong and dangerous. And it just gets progressively worse, the more that Greg Fergus keeps doing things that get pounced upon (no matter that provincial parties are not federal ones, particularly in Quebec).

And because the Andrew Scheer vs Greg Fergus fight keeps getting dumber, the NDP want to summon Scheer to the ethics committee over the use of his office for a partisan video. Meanwhile, people keep digging up more instances of Scheer going to fundraisers when he was Speaker, and lo, they were fundraisers for his own party, not events for provincial parties, which are the accusations being levelled against Fergus. Which do we think is the actual partisan activity here?

Ukraine Dispatch:

There is a strange story out of Keretsky in western Ukraine, where a village council member showed up at a meeting and detonated three grenades, injuring 26 including the person responsible, whose motive is unclear. Ukraine has signed “dozens” of contracts for joint production or technology exchanges with Western defence firms. As the EU struggles to get aid to Ukraine in spite of Hungary blocking it, here’s a look at what Ukraine needs to do in order to continue on its course for membership.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Overselling “soft populism”

Posted on by

It was quite the weekend for uncritical media for Pierre Poilievre, after he had a bad couple of weeks of being called out for a series of egregious lies that could no longer be spun or both-sidesed. Nevertheless, the National Post was there to gush about his so-called “soft populism” that was full of comments of people insisting he was really within the mainstream and which studiously ignored his attempting to normalize far-right actors in order to capture the PPC vote, or his shifting the Overton-window to make their particular pronouncements acceptable discourse when they remain radical. Nobody wants to talk about his attempts to take MAGA Republican populism and just use the “good parts only” in the hopes that he can ignore the bad stuff that comes with it, but that’s not how real life works, and these are things we should be discussing.

Meanwhile, Poilievre released a fifteen minute “documentary” on housing over the weekend that the usual pundit suspects gushed over, not because it contained anything true, because it didn’t—it’s the exact same pseudo-intellectual “economics” that he got from crypto-bros on YouTube, but it’s done with higher production values and data-visualization crimes, conspiracy claims, internally inconsistent arguments, and the inability to distinguish between correlation and causation, but hey—it looked slick, so that’s what everyone is going to glom onto. And while I get that it’s the weekend, the Post wrote-up a recap with absolutely no critical pushback to any of its claims, while the CBC couched it in poll numbers and some government talking points, again, with no actual pushback to any of Poilievre’s misleading claims.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians have been shelling Kherson, and killed at least two people over the weekend. Russian advances appear to be easing off on Avdiivka, while their claims of having captured Maryinka remain unsubstantiated. Former president Petro Poroshenko was denied permission to leave the country (because of martial law) when it was found out that he was planning to meet with Hungarian prime minister and Putin apologist Viktor Orbán. Ukrainian officials are investigating claims that Russians shot surrendering soldiers, which is a war crime.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1731338721583079724

Continue reading →

Roundup: Clawing back disability benefits

Posted on by

Because the provinces continue to be the absolute worst level of government in the country, we see from the briefing binder of Ontario’s social services minister that the province is looking at ways to “mitigate costs” by clawing back provincial disability support payments once the federal Canadian Disability Benefit gets underway. As you might have guessed, this is entirely the outcome that the federal government has been trying to avoid, and why Carla Qualtrough spent months trying to negotiate with provinces in the lead-up to the framework legislation being passed.

This happened a lot during the height of the pandemic, when certain provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan clawed back any kind of social supports when people accessed CERB, because of course they did. It’s kind of perverse the way that provinces are in the business of literally legislating poverty for vulnerable groups like people with disabilities who generally cannot work (which I should point out is not the same as the programme in the US, where “disability” tends to have a different connotation than in Canada). There is a kind of meanness to it that goes beyond the judgmental protestant work ethic that this seems to stem from.

We’ll see what kinds of safeguards the federal government tries to build into the system as the regulations for these payments—which they point out are intended as an income supplement and not a replacement programme—are rolled out (eventually). But because of the division of powers, there may not be any legislative or regulatory mechanism they could use to protect these payments from clawbacks, and it may rely on negotiations and signed agreements, which is probably easier said than done (particularly as many of these premiers are the absolute worst).

Ukraine Dispatch:

Five people were wounded as part of the largest attack on Kyiv since the start of the war, timed for the commemoration of the Holodomor. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told an international food security conference that Ukraine needs more air defences in order to protect its grain exports, as Russia has been targeting them in recent months.

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1728719618317910451

Continue reading →

Roundup: The premiers want their cut

Posted on by

I have to say that it’s extremely precious to see the premiers getting bent out of shape because the federal government has started taking action on the housing crisis by dealing directly with municipalities and using the Housing Accelerator Fund to incentivise them to get rid of restrictive zoning practices that limit housing development. They’re claiming that the federal government is encroaching on their jurisdiction, but these very same premiers have abdicated this responsibility for decades now. They have the ability to eliminate these zoning restrictions with provincial jurisdiction, and they have time and again refused to. So, the federal government stepped in, and now they’re getting huffy about it. And to their credit, the federal ministers are pushing back on this, as well they should (especially because once again, they’re being blamed for the provinces’ failure to act on this crisis).

One of the excuses is that Quebec had a deal for money that flows to the province and not municipalities, because the province has legislation that forbids the federal government from cutting such deals. Okay, but what’s the motivation here? Are they sore because they’re not being invited to the photo ops when these deals are signed? Or are they sore because they can’t take a cut of those funds and use them for their own purposes, you know, like they have done with health transfers for decades now, or how they took funds meant for pandemic supports and simply applied them to their bottom lines so that they could run surpluses while letting their health care systems collapse around them? Because neither is a good look.

Even more to the point, the provinces keep insisting that Ottawa should be the one to pay for things cities need, like transit, or social housing, or major infrastructure, because they don’t want to have to spend the money. They keep crying poor and saying Ottawa has all of the money, but that’s also bullshit because the provinces have the same ability to raise revenues as the federal government does, but they choose not to because they don’t want to be the bad guy by raising taxes, even though it’s all the same taxpayer in the end. But this is how federalism has degenerated in this country, and it’s time people start holding the premiers to account for their failures (for a change).

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say that they repelled more pushes along the various front lines and in particular around Avdiivka. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling for unity as he dismisses the notion of wartime elections, and when he has been publicly disagreeing with his top general about the current phase of the war.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1721960135759741409

Continue reading →