Tag Archives: Foreign Affairs

Roundup: Losing faith in the justice system because of provincial choices

Posted on by

The CBC has a story out about how a retired corporal from the military has lost faith in the justice system because court delays stayed the trial of her alleged attacker, and you can bet that pretty much everyone is going to take absolutely the wrong lessons from this, most especially legacy media.

The administration of justice—courts, Crown prosecutors, support staff—are all firmly within provincial jurisdiction. And for decades, provinces have been under-funding their systems while whinging that the federal government isn’t doing things like making bail harder to get (which is, frankly, unconstitutional). There is a story out of Toronto on the very same day about how staffing shortages—because of the province—have caused closures in courtrooms which led to a different sexual assault trial being tossed because they can’t get a trial within a reasonable time for the rights of the accused. And in the case of the corporal, it was because the Crown prosecutors (again, provincial responsibility) couldn’t get their shit together to push the case forward. And no, this has nothing to do with the federal government not filling judicial vacancies fast enough (which I have condemned this government for). These are all problems that are squarely within the provinces’ responsibilities.

And you can bet that people are going to try to both-sides this military issue because the provinces have been whinging that the military turning over cases to the civilian system is leaving them under-resources, even though it’s a handful of cases and the provinces have consistently made the policy choice over decades to under-fund their system. Trying to shift the blame to the federal government or whine that they’re not getting enough money is a well-worn pattern that we shouldn’t let them get away with. Unfortunately, that’s not in legacy media’s playbook, and you can bet that we’ll get more rounds of angry accusations that the federal government “let this happen” when clearly the failure was provincial the whole time.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say they have reclaimed even more territory in the east and south parts of the country, as well as off-shore drilling platforms near occupied Crimea. Ukrainian forces have also been collecting Russian bodies along the “road of death” that they retook in June, so that they can exchange them for their own comrades, living and dead. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling on his country to remain focused on the war, with warnings that a “wartime budget” is coming, meaning this could go on for longer than many have hoped.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1701223223440928994

Continue reading →

Roundup: $3 million in cheap outrage

Posted on by

The National Post continues their cheap outrage series on the Governor General’s travel expenses, and are aghast that it totalled $3 million over the course of a full year, with the usual chiming in of the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation that this was so awful because there are struggling people in this country. (Note that the CTF exists only to push this narrative in the media, and because they always answer the phone when reporters call them, they have become “reliable sources” for these kinds of shitty reactions, and it feeds this grubby little ecosystem).

Aside from this being some of the absolutely laziest reporting out there, the headline and the framing of the story obscures the fact that the Governor General travels where the government sends her, because that’s how Responsible Government works. She does what the government advises, because that’s the system. No, she does not represent the monarchy in Canada, she represents the Canadian monarchy both at home and abroad, because certain kinds of international diplomacy demand these kinds of visits. (It’s why the UK government is sending King Charles III to France in September—he doesn’t determine that, the government does). Blaming Mary May Simon for the travel the government sends her on is unfair, blaming her for the costs in unfair because she doesn’t make any of the decisions—the military does when it comes to the plane, the catering, and so on (and previous cheap outrage reporting is forcing them to scale back what few amenities there were, which were not out of line with any business class travel). But it’s her name on it and the insinuation that she is living it the high life on the taxpayer’s dime.

It’s also for this reason that I find it pretty rich that the reporter was getting huffy over Twitter that the spokesperson at Rideau Hall pushed back on him, saying that these stories disparage the GG and are harmful to her diplomatic efforts. We already have transparency around the spending—all of the reporting came from public documents. But the framing has fed into a lot of racist narratives about her (and believe me, I see a lot of it in my reply column on Twitter), and there seems little awareness of that, particularly because there is a self-righteousness around of shitty reporting. Diplomacy costs money. Democracy costs money. And doing away with the post of GG won’t save money—any replacement will cost us more, and risks doing away with a necessary constitutional fire extinguisher. But hey, hairshirt parsimony and outrage sells, never mind that it corrodes our democratic institutions.

Ukraine Dispatch:

It was Independence Day in Ukraine, the second since Russia’s invasion began, and full of poignant reminders of what the country is fighting for. Of course, Russia did attack, hitting Dnipro and Kherson. Ukrainian forces launched a “special operation” that landed troops in occupied Crimea, but did not state what the goals they achieved were. Russia claims they destroyed 42 drones launched over occupied Crimea. Meanwhile, Norway has opted to become the third NATO country to send F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine, while more Ukrainian pilots and technicians will under F-16 training in the US.

Continue reading →

Roundup: May inflation shows it’s cooling faster

Posted on by

Statistics Canada released the May inflation numbers yesterday, and they were well down from the month previous, the headline number now down to 3.4 percent, which is in line what the Bank of Canada is predicting about it returning to about three percent by the end of the year. Part of this is because year-over-year gasoline prices fell, meaning that there is a base-year effect in play, but food inflation remains high (in large part because of climate change affecting food-growing regions and the difficulty in getting Ukrainian grain to market continues to keep those prices high), and mortgage interest rates are one of the factors fuelling this. Unfortunately, you have certain economists like Jim Stanford who think that this is the Bank causing this inflation, when in fact if they hadn’t raised rates when they did, higher inflation would still be ripping through the economy. (Seriously, stop listening to Jim Stanford).

Additionally, these numbers continue to prove that Pierre Poilievre’s narratives about inflation are specious at best, but are pretty much bullshit he is squeezing into whatever the headline seems to be. Last month, when there was a 0.1% uptick in inflation, Poilievre blamed it on the news of the budget deficit, and that this was proof that the deficit was “pouring gasoline on the inflationary fire.” That was wrong, and the Bank of Canada said that the trend was that inflation was still decreasing (and that the government’s fiscal policy was not having an effect on that decelerating inflation). And lo, inflation is still decelerating, in spite of the budget deficit. It’s like Poilievre has no idea what he’s talking about.

Meanwhile, economist Stephen Gordon has a few thoughts the numbers.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Two Russian missiles hit the eastern Ukrainian city of Kramatorsk, killing four and destroying a cafe that was fairly well known. Meanwhile, a UN human rights report shows that Russian forces carried out widespread and systematic torture of civilians they detained before executing them, but also found that Russians troops detained by Ukrainians also alleged torture and mistreatment.

https://twitter.com/united24media/status/1673784944798191617

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1673769121450696724

Continue reading →

Roundup: The “filibuster” that wasn’t

Posted on by

A particular level of self-aggrandisement seems to be taking hold in the Leader of His Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, as he describes things that are not reflective of reality. Yesterday morning, he summoned the media to a speech he delivered to caucus—something that is not uncommon for the last caucus meeting before the summer break, but we are still two weeks away from that. There, he promised that he was going to rise in the House of Commons at 7 PM and begin a filibuster of the budget bill, and that he wouldn’t stop until the government backed down and acceded to his demands.

Except it was all bullshit.

There wasn’t going to be a filibuster. The House had already passed a programming motion, thanks to the NDP, that laid out just how many hours left of debate there were before the final debate, and Poilievre couldn’t just talk and talk past he expiry of that clock. It was already set in stone. So, after another attempted abuse of remote voting as a procedural tactic (which the Deputy Speaker lost all patience with), Poilievre got up to give his five hours of allotted time. But again, this isn’t actually a filibuster because the leader of the opposition gets unlimited speaking time to certain items on the Order Paper, and this was one of them. He wasn’t filibustering anything. He was showboating.

While Conservatives flooded social media with effusive praise about how he was standing up for defenceless Canadians against the predations of the government, and they kept praising how long he was speaking, he wasn’t actually accomplishing anything other than playing to his own backbenches. It’s not like anyone other than a few shut-ins and reporters who drew the short straw were watching. He didn’t stop the budget bill, because it was already the subject of a programming motion. He just talked for the sake of it, and was even finished before midnight hit, when the time would have expired automatically. There was nothing heroic about this action, and it accomplished exactly nothing at all.

https://twitter.com/a_picazo/status/1666653154694266880

Ukraine Dispatch:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling for international assistance in dealing with the destruction of the Kakhovka dam, as they continue to evacuate people from floods, and local authorities rush things like drinking water to the affected area. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces have gained more ground around Bakhmut, but insist that this is not part of any ongoing spring offensive.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1666417873776959489

Continue reading →

Roundup: Inviting anti-vaxx organisers onto the Hill

Posted on by

It’s day one-hundred-and-twenty of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and no news out of Severodonetsk is presumed to be good news. That said, Russian forces have captured three other villages in the region, near the city of Lysychansk, which is across the river from Severokonetsk, so there is still movement in the region. There is optimism in the country, however, that their bid to join the EU will pass to the next stage during a summit this week. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, meanwhile, addressed University of Toronto students, and called on them to pressure governments to provide more aid to Ukraine.

Closer to home, a group of Conservative MPs, including leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis, hosted a trio of anti-vaxxer extremists and occupation organisers ahead of their planned Canada Day protests, and they did it within one of the Parliamentary office buildings just off of the Hill. Included in the group were a former Reservist being charged for a video promoting the occupation while in uniform, a former Trump advisor, and a former spokesperson for the occupation. And in case it’s not clear, they’re no longer talking about vaccine mandates, which have pretty much ended everywhere, but about regime change, and Conservatives are condoning it, if not outright encouraging it by saying “you have allies.” That’s not good. It’s especially not good when they’re talking about civil war in their discourse. Oh, and Candice Bergen’s office was aware this was going on, and did nothing to shut it down. It’s just unbelievable how clueless they are around this issue, when there is real potential for these violent online narratives to manifest into a real-world attack.

https://twitter.com/davidakin/status/1539718763465031680

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1539663123485179904

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1539693666830278660

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1539695139613945856

Continue reading →

QP: Reminder that it’s a novel virus

Posted on by

It was Thursday, and neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, which generally means a less exciting day. Erin O’Toole led off, script on mini-lectern, and poked out inconsistencies in the story around the Global Public Health Information Network, to which Patty Hajdu related early actions by the government and Dr. Theresa Tam, as well as citing that she would say more about the GPHIN soon. O’Toole tried to call out inconsistencies in early pandemic advice, to which Hajdu reminded him that it’s a novel virus that we are still learning about. O’Toole called the decision around GPHIN politically motivated, to which Hajdu said that when she was alerted to the changes, she ordered and external investigation, and she would have more to say about that soon. In French, O’Toole accused the government of losing control of the pandemic, and Hajdu listed federal actions. O’Toole then concern trolled about testing, to which Hajdu listed the rollout of new rapid tests. For the Bloc, Stéphane Bergeron trolled the prime minister about his call with the president of France, to which François-Philippe Champagne pointed out what was wrong about the premise of the question, and reminded him that Canada defends freedom of expression around the world. Bergeron asked when there was going to hold a debate on acceptable limits to freedom of expression, to which Champagne rebutted his assertions. Jagmeet Singh was up next to lead off for the NDP, and in French, he worried about the record profits of web giants, to which Steven Guilbeault reminded him at they are now treating web giants the same as traditional players in the creative market. Singh switched to English to rail about the Westons making profits in the pandemic, for which Sean Fraser said that they were supporting front-line workers, and that they raised taxes on the top one percent, which the NDP voted against. 

Continue reading →

QP: New Chamber, same talking points

Posted on by

On the first day in the new Chamber, everyone was trying to find their way through the new building, yours truly included. After introducing the newest Conservative by-election winner, Andrew Scheer led off, decrying the government’s foreign policy as a “disaster,” listing a number of dubious points to bolster his case. Trudeau stood up, assured Scheer that he would get to his question in a moment, but wanted to take a moment to applaud the work of the men and women who did the hard work of getting the West Block up and running. Scheer repeated his question in French, and read that the government was hard at work to get those two Canadians released and for clemency for the third, while they stood up for the rule of law. Scheer read a wooden question about Trudeau apparently not being good with money, and Trudeau rotely recited his talking points about lowering taxes for the middle class. Scheer read the same question again in English, and got the same response, with an added Stephen Harper swipe included. Scheer insisted that the richest were paying less in taxes than before (not really true), and raised the spectre that the government planned to raise the carbon tax six times more than they stated — also false. Trudeau noted that people are now getting the Canada Child Benefit, and that Scheer didn’t talk about it probably because he wanted to cut it. Guy Caron was up next for the NDP, and he demanded that the budget include investments in housing. Trudeau responded that their housing strategy was benefiting a million Canadians. Caron demanded more actions like cutting taxes on housing investments, to which Trudeau reiterated that their strategy was making progress. Peter Julian repeated the same question in English, and got much the same response from Trudeau, and when he brought up the big city mayors, Trudeau noted he met with them earlier in the day and that they thanked him for the investments.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The data for the debunking

Posted on by

I love a good takedown of some tired talking points, and lo, we have another doozy. You know how Andrew Scheer’s whole schtick and electoral campaign strategy is that carbon pricing makes life unaffordable for people because it drives up costs? This is the narrative he’s pinning his fortunes on, and lo, we find more data that it’s simply not true. Data from Alberta, which implemented its carbon tax two years ago, found that the inflation levels weren’t any different from other provinces, meaning that carbon taxes didn’t drive up prices. Mind you, having data won’t stop Scheer’s carousel of lies, because lying to people to make them angry is what he thinks is going to win him the election (and it might), but it’s still a lie, and we have yet more proof that it’s a lie.

Of course, that doesn’t mean that the other side isn’t being sloppy with its own messaging. Rachel Notley is trying to go after Jason Kenney talking about tolls, but she undermines her own arguments for a carbon tax because it’s the logic works the same way. But that’s the attempt at populist messaging for you. Unfortunately.

Meanwhile the Yukon has come up with their carbon pricing system, which involves a certain level of rebates, with higher levels to those in remote areas – something that is of particular concern for those living in any of the Territories.

Continue reading →

Roundup: All about the New NAFTA

Posted on by

So, now that we have some more information about just what is in this renewed NAFTA agreement (no, I’m not going to call it by Trump’s preferred new title because it’s ridiculous), we can get some better analysis of what was agreed to. Here’s a good overview, along with some more analysis on the issues of BC wines, online shopping, intellectual property, Indigenous issues (though not the whole chapter they hoped for, and the gender chapter was also absent), and an oil and gas bottleneck issue whose resolution could now save our industry as much as $60 million. There is, naturally, compensation for those Supply Management-sector farmers who’ve had more access into the market granted (though that access is pretty gradual and will likely be implemented in a fairly protectionist manner, if CETA is anything to go by). There is, however, some particular consternation over a clause that gives the US some leverage over any trade we may do with a “non-market” country (read: China), though that could wind up being not a big deal after all and just some enhanced information sharing; and there is also the creation of a macro-economic committee that could mean the Bank of Canada may have to do more consultation with the US Federal Reserve on monetary policy (though I have yet to find more details about this change). But those steel and aluminium tariffs that Trump imposed for “national security” reasons remain, as they were always unrelated to NAFTA, and their removal will remain an ongoing process.

With the news of the deal also comes the behind-the-scenes tales of how it all went down, and we have three different versions, from Maclean’s John Geddes, the National Post’s Tom Blackwell, and CBC’s Katie Simpson.

https://twitter.com/InklessPW/status/1046750795461357568

Meanwhile, Andrew Coyne posits that the damage in this agreement is slight but there was no hope for a broader trade agreement given that there were protectionists on both sides of the table. Likewise, Kevin Carmichael notes that the deal limited the potential harm that was looming, but didn’t really break any new ground. Andrew MacDougall says that the deal gives Trump the win he needed before the midterms, while it will also make it hard for Andrew Scheer to stick anything on Trudeau around the deal. Chantal Hébert agrees that if Trudeau loses the next election that it won’t be because of this trade deal. Paul Wells, meanwhile, takes note of how the Conservatives are playing this, trying to lead observers by the hand to show them that Trudeau “failed” in these talks, while glossing over all of the actual context around why these negotiations happened in the first place.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Harder’s charm offensive

Posted on by

There’s a charm offensive in the works, led by the Government Leader in the Senate – err, “government representative,” Senator Peter Harder, and his staff, to try and showcase how they’re transforming the Senate. In a profile piece of the “Government Representative Office” for the Hill Times, the three members of the office gave lovely little explanations of their duties, and how they’re doing things differently, like Senator Mitchell talking about how he doesn’t have a caucus to whip, so he’s focused on counting votes for upcoming bills, and arranging briefings and such. Bless.

What didn’t get answered in the piece is just why Harder needs his $1.5 million budget, since he isn’t managing a caucus, he isn’t doing his job of negotiating with other caucus groups for the passage of bills, he isn’t doing any heavy lifting in terms of sponsoring bills on behalf of the government, and as we saw during one of his melodramatic moments in the spring, doesn’t appear to be counting votes either. So why he needs that big of a budget, and that many staff, remains a mystery that has gone unsolved. Harder also remained evasive as to just how often he meets with Cabinet, which continues to be problematic because he’s supposed to be the link between the Chamber and the Cabinet, where Senators can find accountability for the actions of the government (which is why he’s supposed to be a full-blown Cabinet minister and not just a member of Privy Council). They did say that he wasn’t at the recent Cabinet retreat, which raises yet more questions, especially when it comes to how he plans to get their priorities through the Chamber as the Order Paper in the Senate is full, and he’s been in no mood to negotiate timelines (which I know for a fact that other caucus groups are willing to do).

Part of the problem with this charm offensive is that it’s preying on the lack of knowledge that members of the media have with how the Senate works, so they don’t know how things have and have not changed – and for the most part, the only thing that has changed are the fact that Harder and company insist on renaming everything and not doing the jobs they’re supposed to be doing, shifting that burden to the other players in Senate leadership. My other worry is that this is the first stage in the push to start making changes like the demand for a business committee, which would have a hugely detrimental effect on the Chamber and its operations. And I would caution any journalists reading to beware of what Harder plans to propose, and how he plans to charm other journalists into writing feel-good stories about his planned rule changes without understanding how they will damage the Senate.

Continue reading →