Tag Archives: Foreign Aid

Roundup: Trying to falsely blame CTV

Posted on by

At his media availability yesterday, Pierre Poilievre was asked if it was responsible for him to declare the explosion on the Rainbow Bridge in Niagara Falls to be “terrorism” before anything was confirmed. And what did Poilievre do? True to form, he attacked the Canadian Press reporter asking the question (including lying about the substance of the corrections that a recent CP story made to a story about comments he had made), then lied about why he said “terrorism.” Poilievre claimed this was from CTV reports, and tried to get the CP reporter to try and denounce CTV. The problem was that CTV didn’t publish anything before Poilievre began his questions in QP. And what we do know is that Fox News was definitively calling it terrorism, as were several disinformation merchants who pose as journalists over Twitter. But rather than admit that these were his sources, Poilievre lied, continued to lie, and then post the video of him attacking the CP reporter to his followers, because right-wing populism has a huge hard-on/wide-on for putting people in their place (particularly if they’re vulnerable minorities or someone they suffer no repercussions for attacking, like media).

And then things got stupid online, as Poilievre’s fans and apologists kept trying to “prove” that CTV was still the source, really, relying on screenshots that came from a different time zone. And at least two MPs shared these screenshots before they were called out and deleted them.

I will say that between these lies, and the ones he has been telling about the Canada-Ukraine trade deal legislation, it seems to finally shaking up some legacy media outlets to actually start calling him out on them. Somewhat. Some outlets are still egregiously both-sidesing the lies, as they always do, but you had Power & Politics host David Cochrane finally interjecting in places saying “That wasn’t true,” or walking through the timeline of lies in the case of yesterday’s attempt to blame CTV. It’s not nearly enough, but it is a start, but we’ll see how long it can actually last.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A daytime cluster bomb attack in a suburb of Kherson in the south killed three people. Ukraine’s farmers are hoping that the Black Sea trade corridor will help them get exports to market so that they can survive.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1727681997076644088

Continue reading →

Roundup: Picking a fight over the CPP

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau decided to get into a new federal-provincial scrap yesterday by releasing an open letter to Alberta premier Danielle Smith on the issue of her proposal to withdrew from the Canada Pension Plan and create their own provincial one. Trudeau said that he would fight for the stability of pensions in the country, and that his Cabinet would ensure that people are aware of the risks of Smith’s plan—which is wise enough considering that the whole thing is premised on fantasy math that everyone knows is not ever going to fly, and that Smith’s whole pitch is premised on that fantasy math (and that without it, the whole thing falls flat). But this is also the same federal government that is unable to have a frank conversation about absolutely anything, so it’s hard to imagine that they would start now, on this particular file, and would instead just trot out a bunch of feel-good pabulum about the current system, which is not going to help absolutely anyone, and it certainly won’t counter Smith’s lies and fantasy math, but this government can’t help themselves.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1714644819807809638

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1714645765002510598

Smith naturally responded saying that Trudeau’s comments were unhelpful and if he wanted to be constructive, he should have shown up with a number of what the actual withdrawal figure would be. And it’s true that Trudeau’s letter had no figures in it at all, whether that’s because he relied on the platitudes about the stability of the existing system, or because he’s waiting to have a watertight analysis from his departments, and that’s going to need more time. The cynic in me says it’s the former, but it may be the latter, because there may be a serious effort happening to come to a realistic figure—which of course would raise the question of why Trudeau would release his letter today and not wait until that was in hand? In any case, Smith wants this fight with Ottawa, and the whole premise of this fight and the fantasy math is to use it as a cudgel to threaten the rest of Canada so that she can demand they back off on environmental legislation and regulation (which, again, she has been consistently lying about and the government hasn’t come up with a half-decent counter to). Given the state of play, I’m not confident this will wind up in anything but a giant clusterfuck.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1714691053083582798

Ukraine Dispatch:

The death toll rose after a Russian missile strike on an apartment building in Zaporizhzhia, while Ukrainian forces have been making some progress around Robotyne in the south. Near Kharkiv, a farm worker was killed when his tractor hit a mine.

Continue reading →

QP: Concerns about the situation in Israel

Posted on by

While the prime minister was in down, he was not in QP today, though his deputy was for a change. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and in a somber tone, asked for an update on those Canadians looking to get out of Israel and Gaza, as well as those in Lebanon looking to get out. Chrystia Freeland noted that this was the first time they were in the Chamber since the Hamas attacks, and she declared that Canada is supporting Israel and demands the release of hostages and unequivocally condemned Hamas’ attacks. Poilievre switched to English to decry the Hamas attacks, and demanded that the government criminaise the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Freeland repeated her previous statement in English instead of answering the demand. Poilievre pivoted and raised the PBO’s recent projection about the deficit and that it was higher than projected, and demanded to know how this would affect inflation and interest rates. Freeland said that a fiscal update would be coming in due course, and that they should pay attention to the independent ratings agencies who keep affirming our Aaa rating. Poilievre cited former finance minister John Manley’s concerns, and insisted this was the government ruining our fiscal position. Freeland repeated the point about ratings agencies and that our deficit and debt-to-GDP ratio is the lowest in the G7. Poilievre raised the plight of a shipyard worker he met who worries about his mortgages, and blamed the deficit. Freeland scoffed that talk is cheap, and said that if the Conservatives cared about the housing crisis, they would support their bill.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried that we weren’t included in the Quint statement on the situation in Isreal—ignoring that the Quint is about nuclear powers, which we are not. Freeland spoke about being at an IMF finance meeting in Morocco last week and that they all put out a statement in support of Israel. Blanchet kept insisting that Canada was not being included, and Freeland spoke about Israel not being a partisan issue but a Canadian issue.

Heather McPherson rose for the NDP, and she also raised concerns about the hostages in Gaza, including several Canadians. Freeland praised the clarity on condemnation for the terror attacks, and that that the government calls for the release of those hostages. McPherson accused the government of not standing up for innocent Palestinians and demanded the government call for a ceasefire. Freeland raised that the government supports Israel’s right to defend itself and they have sent $10 million in humanitarian aid to “trusted partners.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: An unearned victory lap amidst the Court’s repudiation

Posted on by

Yesterday morning, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the federal Impact Assessment Act is partly unconstitutional, and that the federal government was over-broad in the criteria they used to trigger a federal environmental assessment. Ironically, while Jason Kenney and the federal Conservatives liked to call the legislation the “No More Pipelines Bill,” the section that governs pipelines was found to be entirely constitutional, so it was fairly laughable as they started crowing over social media about their supposed victory. It might have helped if they had actually read it and not just the headlines.

The more important part of the decision, however, was the fact that while it did find part of the federal legislation ultra vires Parliament, it also explicitly repudiated the arguments that the Alberta government and the Alberta Court of Appeal were making, in claiming that the province somehow has interjurisdictional immunity for so-called “provincial” projects. That’s not true, and the Court said so, which means that when Danielle Smith and Pierre Poilievre were claiming that the Supreme Court “affirmed” that provinces have the exclusive right to develop their own resources, that’s wrong. It’s not what the Court said, and in fact they said the opposite of that. Alberta’s “victory” was a pretty hollow one because the Court affirmed the federal role in environmental assessments and that they can assess whatever they want once their ability to make said assessment is triggered—the only real issue was the criteria for the trigger, which needs to be narrowed. The federal government has pledged to do just that, and because this was a reference opinion by the Court and not a decision on legislation, it has not been struck down. In fact, because there don’t seem to be any projects under assessment that would be affected by the decision, it seems to show that the law is carrying on just fine, and that the amendment will be a fairly surgical tweak (and yes, I spoke to several legal experts to that effect yesterday).

Meanwhile, the reporting on the decision largely ignored this repudiation of the provincial argument. The Canadian Press, the National Post, and the Star all missed that point entirely in their reporting. Only the CBC caught it—in the main story it was given a brief mention amidst the egregious both-sidesing, but Jason Markusoff’s more nuanced analysis piece did get a little more into it, but again, it did not really point out that Kenney’s crowing over social media was for naught, and that Smith’s victory lap was not really deserved. (Smith later went on Power & Politics and lied about what projects that the Act supposedly impacted, such as the Teck Frontier mine—that project was assessed under the Harper-era regime, and was shelved because the price of oil couldn’t justify the project’s viability). It would be nice if we had more journalists actually talking to more experts than just one while they both-sides the ministers and Smith, because they would find that they missed a pretty significant part of the decision. (My own story that does precisely this analysis was delayed in publication, so it should be up on Monday).

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces pounded Avdiivka in the Donbas region for a fourth day in a row as they try to make gains in that area. Ukrainian authorities say that Russians have destroyed 300,000 tons of grain since they started attacking Ukrainian port cities in July (because they’re trying to weaponise hunger).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1712871747672744431

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Speaker election shapes up

Posted on by

With the end of the sitting day last night, Anthony Rota was no longer the Speaker, and Bloc MP Louis Plamondon, the Dean of the House, became Speaker in his place, albeit temporarily. The too-clever-by-half motion that the House passed on Tuesday reads that he was “deemed elected” and is the Speaker to be “styled the Interim Speaker,” which means they’re trying to get around the Constitution for two days in order to run the election on Tuesday instead of today. As is joked, this means that Plamondon is entitled to a portrait (and a Scotch), but it remains mystifying why they couldn’t just swallow the two lost sitting days if they wanted to leave this until Tuesday (Monday is not a sitting day).

There are currently four declared candidates for the position—the Deputy Speaker, Chris d’Entrement, and the two Assistant Deputy Speakers, Alexandra Mendès and Carol Hughes, along with a surprise fourth entrant, Liberal MP Greg Fergus. d’Entrement has been somewhat acquitting himself in QP over the past couple of days, and seems to have been most vocal in the media, with some outlets ignoring Mendès completely, which they shouldn’t, considering that she came very close to defeating Rota last time. Fergus could be the spoiler this time for Mendès changes when it comes to getting enough votes from fellow Liberals, but it is a ranked ballot, so that could make things more interesting as the math works out. I also have it on good authority that Mendès would be interested in having a Speaker’s Port in addition to a Speaker’s Scotch (as she is Portuguese), and I would very much love to see that happen (as I am a port drinker and not a scotch drinker). I’ve also heard from colleagues to do drink scotch that Rota’s choice was a poor one, so his replacement ushers in hopefully a better one.

Meanwhile, the former Chief of Protocol was interviewed on Power & Politics last night, and unequivocally showed that everything Pierre Poilievre has been insisting over the past three days about the government vetting everyone in the building for a diplomatic event has been false. The government doesn’t vet the guests of the Speaker or MPs—only guests of the government, as it should be, because Parliament and the Speaker are independent of government.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian officials say they destroyed 34 out of 44 drones launched by Russia overnight, whose main target was Odesa, and there have been no casualties. Meanwhile, they have also seen several hundred Wagner fighters returning to the fight in eastern Ukraine, but they don’t expect them to have much impact.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1707162952929866144

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1707153181002588185

Continue reading →

Roundup: Reaction to Monday’s assassination revelations

Posted on by

In response to Monday’s explosive allegations that agents of the Indian government may have had assassinated a Sikh separatist leader in Canada, the Indian government calls the allegations “absurd” and has expelled a Canadian diplomat in retaliation for the expulsion of one of their diplomats. On his way into Cabinet, Justin Trudeau said that he wasn’t trying to escalate with India but wanted cooperation on the investigation, and said that he did consult with allies before making his speech on Monday.

In terms of international support, the UK offered a fairly tepid statement of support, while the US’ initial lukewarm statement was upgraded to a much more supportive statement later in the day. This is, of course, going to put strain on trade talks, at least in the near term.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1704216214283624787

There was reaction on the Hill from the World Sikh Organization and the National Council of Canadian Muslims, who said the allegations are not surprising, particularly given the actions of the Modi government to minorities in India. It also sounds like Hardeep Nijjar had been meeting with CSIS on a weekly basis up until his assassination, because of the threats against him, leading to questions about whether our security agencies did enough to protect him (but should probably be asking if they have the capacity to protect threatened community members more). Here is some reaction from Sikh and south Asian MPs and ministers.

Very curiously, Pierre Poilievre came out in the morning to change his tone from his speech on Monday, and is now demanding evidence from the prime minister about the allegations. Even more curious is the fact that there was a take-note debate on the subject in the House of Commons last night, and no Conservative participated, which is very, very unusual. I do have to wonder if this is the influence of new MP Shuvaloy Majumdar, who has been accused of having an anti-Sikh bias in his Indian foreign policy commentary in the past, and whom Conservatives lean heavily on for their foreign policy advice. (Then again, it might just be Poilievre fully engaging in dickish tendencies and not wanting to look like he’s letting Trudeau get any points for this, which is equally a possibility).

For some additional perspective, former CSIS director Richard Fadden and former national security advisor Vincent Rigby talk about what we know, why it’s not a surprise that India has been interfering in Canada, and the reason why it’s difficult to provide necessary protection to some of the people under threat.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia’s drone attack on Lviv early Tuesday morning hit a warehouse containing humanitarian supplies, and killed one person. There were more deaths in Kherson due to Russian shelling. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was at the UN General Assembly to call on Russia to end the war so that the world can address more urgent issues like the climate crisis. Back home, there are more corruption allegations surrounding people close to Zelenskyy.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Long on speeches and imported culture wars

Posted on by

The Conservative convention this weekend was long on speeches—Poilievre’s speech very much needing an editor as it went on for well over an hour—and was full of praise for the so-called convoy occupiers (from Poilievre’s wife as well as the wife of the “anti-woke general”). Said “anti-woke general” proved himself to be so fragile that he thinks that things like racial equality and gender equality are “destroying” Canada. There was also the Brexiteer from the House of Lords who also showered Poilievre with praise, so some real talent on display there.

Policy resolutions were not focused on things like housing or affordability, but instead prioritised things like vaccines, and culture war bullshit that extended to two separate resolutions attacking trans people (which the party could have used mechanisms to de-prioritise but didn’t, meaning they wanted them to come up for a vote). The Canadian Press has compiled five take-aways from the convention.

https://twitter.com/dalybeauty/status/1700974631468052754

In pundit reaction, Althia Raj looks at how the Conservatives used their convention to woo Quebeckers, and how they are going after the Bloc along the way. Aaron Wherry notes that claims of “common sense” are easier said than done, particularly as Poilievre painted an idyllic 1950s picture of the future he wants. Shannon Proudfoot hones in on the feeling of “enough” that permeated the convention, and the swinging of the pendulum, but also cautioned about who limiting that can be.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces staged early-morning drone attacks against Kyiv on Sunday. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the counter-offensive has made more advances along the southern front, as well as near Bakhmut in the east.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The temporary, temporary House of Commons

Posted on by

Something that caught my eye over the long weekend was a look at the “just in case” temporary, temporary House of Commons Chamber that has been assembled inside the Parliamentary ballroom in the Sir John A Macdonald Building. It seems that while maintenance is happening in the actual temporary Chamber in the West Block, and the threat of a possible recall over the BC ports issue, they decided to do some contingency planning and assemble this contingency Commons. This being said, I wouldn’t expect all MPs to attend it—a good many of them would avail themselves of the hybrid sitting rules (because they have so many things happening in their ridings *jazz hands* that they couldn’t possibly attend), with the exception of the Conservatives, because they would attend in person to prove a point. My biggest complaint is that the configuration shown in the CBC piece would have two lecterns at the end of the Chamber, rather than be arranged as despatch boxes like they do in Westminster, which would certainly be how I would have preferred it.

Meanwhile, new Government House Leader Karina Gould is taking on the perennial promise to make Question Period better, which…isn’t really her call. And, frankly, the one thing that the government could do to make it a serious exercise would be to ban talking points, pat lines and happy-clappy pabulum in favour of making ministers answer questions properly…but they won’t do that, because PMO would never allow it because it goes against the whole ethos of message control that has rotted politics but they insist on following.

So, with the greatest of respect, all of the platitudes in the world about making Question Period something Canadians can be “proud” of is empty rhetoric unless the government is committed to doing the hard work and communicating like human beings, which they absolutely won’t do. And so, our Parliament will continue to slide into a place of irredeemable unseriousness, because that’s apparently the way they like it by adhering to that ethos.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Following missiles strikes on the city of Pokrovsk, Ukrainian authorities are accusing Russians of deliberately targeting emergency workers by drawing them to the scene of a missile strike, and then targeting that scene with a second strike a short while later. Russians launched a massive air attack, largely on western Ukraine, on Sunday, purported in retaliation for a Ukrainian drone strike against a Russian tanker delivering fuel to its forces. Meanwhile, Ukrainian authorities say they prevented a Russian hack on their armed forces’ combat information system. Ukraine’s commander-in-chief says that they are putting in place the conditions to advance on the battlefield.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Agreement on terms of reference?

Posted on by

There were talks between Dominic LeBlanc and members of the opposition parties yesterday over the potential public inquiry into foreign interference, and the Conservatives spent the evening crowing to the media that they came to an agreement around the terms of reference for such a possible inquiry (but this was not confirmed by anyone else). It will be interesting to see what they are, because there was certainly no unified position on how far back they want this to go, and how many countries this might include, because that’s going to have a very material impact on the timeline and the kinds of things that this will consider.

There remains the subject of just who is going to head this particular endeavour, because as I have stated before, you’re looking for a current or former judge who is a) bilingual, b) has never donated to any political party every, c) was not appointed to the bench by the current government, and of course d) is willing to subject themselves to character assassination, because it’s pretty much inevitable, no matter how much this whole exercise is supposed to find unanimity between the parties, because several of them operate in bad faith and this will be amply demonstrated.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainians are ending rescue operations in Lviv after the attack there two days ago, where the death toll has reached ten. Ukrainian forces also say they are making progress in continuing to move on Bakhmut, gaining more territory. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Türkiye to meet with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who said that Ukraine deserves NATO membership and pledged to try and extend the Black Sea grain deal. Meanwhile, the US sending cluster munitions to Ukraine puts Canada in a tough spot because we have been leading the international effort to ban them (and landmines) since 2010. And here’s the story of a Ukrainian trans woman fighting both Russians and misogyny and anti-LGBTQ+ hate within her own ranks.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1677287692676091904

Continue reading →

Roundup: Coronation details at last

Posted on by

At long last, the federal government finally announced the delegation that is heading to the coronation in London, and much of it is unsurprising given that, for example, Indigenous leaders are already there along with Mary May Simon. News is that astronaut Jeremy Hanson will be Canada’s flag-bearer at the ceremony, and that there will be coronation medals created, which they didn’t do for the sesquicentennial or the Platinum Jubilee.

Meanwhile, the Globe and Mail has another particularly problematic story headline, wherein they cite the Governor General saying that King Charles “has work to do to cultivate ties with Canada.” The problem is that the story doesn’t actually say that—in the story, Mary May Simon says that because Charles isn’t as beloved as his mother, he “needs to develop his relationship further with Canada.” Which is true, but therein lies a couple of challenges. For one, he has plenty of ties to Canada that the headline incorrectly cites, and through his charity work over decades, he’s had exposure to a wide swath of the country that will be less accessible to him now that he’s King. In fact, not that he’s the King and not just a working member of the royal family, future trips to Canada will be much more circumscribed by what the government allows, because these kinds of visits are all at the behest and stage-managed by the government of the day. Charles has wanted to do more trips to Canada, trying to do one every two years, but the current government has been less interested in that, so he hasn’t been here as much as he would have liked. And that reluctance is going to play out in the future.

In other coronation-related stories:

  • Following midnight rehearsals, RCMP participating in the coronation say they’re good to go on the big day.
  • Here’s some of the history of the items being used during the ceremony.
  • There’s still no word about what our government is planning to do about the King on banknotes and coins, while other Realms go in different directions.
  • Australian constitutional scholar Anne Twomey offers some history and context on the coronation as it applies to realms like Australia and Canada.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces shelled Kherson, killing twenty-one civilians, and injuring over forty-eight. Russians claim they “foiled” an “assassination attempt” on Putin with an alleged drone attack on the Kremlin, which Ukraine denies launching. Experts also conclude that the Russian claim doesn’t make any sense.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1653824270626070540?s=61&t=4Hh5vgfw5YMHmDbMU3ctNg

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1653709872771260419?s=61&t=4Hh5vgfw5YMHmDbMU3ctNg

Continue reading →