Tag Archives: General Jonathan Vance

Roundup: Manning says to ride that tiger

Posted on by

It is now approximately day seventy-three of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and United Nations efforts to evacuate civilians from under the steel plant in Mariupol continue apace. Tales from the survivors who have been rescued and have made it to safety are pretty harrowing about life in the tunnels under the plant. Ukrainian forces are preparing a counteroffensive to push Russian forces away from Kharkiv and Izyum in the Donbas region. Amnesty International has been collecting evidence of Russian war crimes around the Kyiv region, including in Bucha. Meanwhile, it sounds like the Canadian “Norman Brigade” of fighters in Ukraine is being poorly led and under-equipped, and gosh, who could have seen this happening?

Closer to home, the conference formerly known as the Manning Conference is happening this weekend, and we’ve already seen the nastiness of the unofficial leadership debate that took place, and now we have Preston Manning himself insisting that their party can capture the “energy” and “enthusiasm” of the extremists, grifters, conspiracy theorists and grievance tourists who made up the occupation in Ottawa, and that they can be “properly managed.”

No. Just no.

Manning has long held that you can ride the tiger of a populist mob and gain from it. Never mind that absolutely everyone who has tried has wound up being mauled by it, but golly, Manning still insists that you can do it. Gods know that Jason Kenney is certainly trying in Alberta, and has been trying to do what Manning has famously suggested about “tapping a relief well” and trying to direct that anger toward something that they can try and be productive with, but that’s not really working either, and all of those face-eating leopards that Kenney invited into the house, because he thought he could turn them on his perceived enemies, have realized that his face is right there and they want to eat it. You don’t try and work the mob up because you think you can use it to your advantage, and Manning keeps making this mistake over again, and encouraging his followers to do the same. What it’s doing is encouraging more extremism instead, and you can be damn sure that there will be repercussions for that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Higher inflation than expected

Posted on by

It is now day fifty-seven (or so) of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and hope is waning for the remaining defenders of Mariupol, and the civilians still sheltering there. As the fighting intensifies in the eastern part of the country, there are also concerns that it will devolve into a war of attrition, which Russia has historically been more able to withstand. We have also learned more about what happened when Russian troops occupied Chernobyl, where staff were working at gunpoint, and sleeping three hours a night in order to safeguard the site and ensure that Russians didn’t tamper with any of the equipment there.

Closer to home, the inflation numbers were released yesterday, and they were much higher than expected, as conflict inflation brought on by the aforementioned invasion of Ukraine is hitting. And of course, most media outlets were useless in explaining the causes of it, while the parties were equally useless in their own reactions. The government keeps focusing on their talking points about things like child care and dental care, and the fact that they indexed benefits, rather than actually explaining the drivers. The Conservatives are railing about “printing money” (which, to be clear, nobody is actually doing) and insisting that the government should declare a GST holiday, which would a) do nothing for grocery prices as most groceries are GST-exempt; and b) would have a stimulative effect and just fuel even more inflation, especially as people would be likely to use said GST holiday to buy big-ticket items. And the NDP, predictably, chalk this up to greed and want higher wealth taxes, which again, do very little about the drivers of inflation.

And then there’s the Bank of Canada, who will be forced to respond with higher rate hikes, but the question becomes whether they’ll keep the increases more gradual—another 50 basis points at the next meeting in June—of if they’ll go even higher as a way of demonstrating that they are really taking this seriously and that the system of inflation control that they’ve been responsible for since the 1990s will prevail. It doesn’t directly address the drives, but it could be that the signals are more important than the actual policy at this point, because the bigger worry is the expectation that inflation will continue, which will turn it into a self-fulfilling prophecy—something they are very, very keen to avoid.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Not the first real test

Posted on by

We’re around day forty of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and Ukrainian forces have retaken more territory, but that has come with some awful discoveries. In Bucha, outside of Kyiv, they have found mass graves and the bodies of civilians who were simply executed by Russian soldiers. At least 410 bodies have been found, traumatising witnesses, as they must now work with investigators who will put together the case for war crimes tribunals. In the meantime, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says Russian obsession with capturing Mariupol has given them needed time in other parts of the country, where forces have had time to build up defences, and now reclaim areas where Russians have been though. Nevertheless, the human toll is staggering, and the atrocities are only now being uncovered, which may further spur more aid from Western countries given how graphic the scale of these atrocities are.

Closer to home, it’s budget week, so expect a veritable slough of thinkpieces about how this week is the “first big test” of the NDP-Liberal supply and confidence agreement, and its sub-variations of environmental policy, or defence spending. But that’s actually a little absurd, because this budget was always going to pass (it’s been too close to an election, and nobody is in shape to let the government fall), and frankly, the budget was already baked in and probably on its way to the printers when the confidence agreement was signed, so it’s not like Chrystia Freeland was going back to the drawing board to redraft the whole thing in light of the agreement. That was never a serious question (and frankly, most of the agreement is just about doing things the Liberals had already promised anyway).

The real test will be next year’s budget, when everyone has had a year to simmer, the Conservatives will have a new leader, and the NDP will have received the pushback from their own base. We’ll be out of the too-close-to-the-last-election safe zone, and the NDP will have a decision to make whether they think this still serves their purposes (because this agreement is only good as long as the either the NDP or the Liberals think they can still get something out of it). This budget was always a gimme—it’s the next one that things will start to get interesting.

Continue reading →

QP: Category is—fisheries questions!

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau was present for the first time in over a week, but in spite of this, only one other leader was actually present. Observing today was a delegation of Ukrainian parliamentarians, though that did not guarantee good behaviour. Luc Berthold led off once again, and in French, he accused the government of stoking inflation by raising the carbon price (erm, except it’s not captured by the consumer price index), and then went on a tangent about the NDP wanting to raise taxes in the upcoming budget. Trudeau stood up to offer some bromides about delivering on promises for Canadians including their emissions reductions plan, reconciliation, and national child care. Berthold repeated the question and demanded a reduction in taxes in the upcoming budget, and Trudeau reminded him that the cost of inaction on climate change is far more than the investments they are making, and that the price on carbon was the right way to move forward. Berthold then policed Trudeau’s feminism by raising the military ombudsman’s warnings about General Jonathan Vance. Trudeau recited that they need to transform the culture in the Canadian Forces, and lamented that it is taking too long, but it’s happening. Kerry-Lynne Findlay took over in English, and lambasted the government for not taking action against General Vance of the minister who enabled him, and Trudeau repeated that nobody should be in a toxic work environment, particularly those who serve the country. Findlay gave a somewhat spun version of what happened with the military ombudsman, and Trudeau repeated his assurances, before stating that he didn’t agree with their characterisation of events, and that they were trying to score points.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he repeated the Bloc’s demand for an immediate airlift for refugees. Trudeau assured him they were working as quickly and safely as possible, with no limits on who could arrive. Blanchet pivoted to worries that some were being excluded when it comes to research, and Trudeau read some talking points about valuing science and providing resources to a scientific and research ecosystem. 

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP in person, and he accused the government of caving to the energy sector at the expense of the environment, to which Trudeau read some good news talking points about their emissions reduction plan. Charlie Angus took over in English to repeat the question with additional bombast and theatrics, and Trudeau read his English talking points with a bit more enthusiasm.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Insufficient consequences for an abuse of power

Posted on by

We are now on or about day thirty-six of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the promise that they were pulling back from Kyiv and other places to give peace talks room to breathe were, well, not true. But nobody actually believed Russia in the first place, so nobody is exactly shocked here. Maclean’s features photos from Ukraine from Canadian photographer Philip Cheung on the ground there.

Closer to home, former Chief of Defence Staff Jonathan Vance pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice charges, and admitted to all the various things that he flatly denied previously. But the galling part in all of this is that got off on a conditional sentence that included community service, rather than face a criminal record. And even more appalling was the fact that his lawyer was trying to argue that Vance was going to suffer enough because his reputation had been stained enough that he wasn’t going to be able to cash in on the promises of future defence spending, whether that’s with some kind of government relations gig, or consultancy.

The bigger picture in all of this is not just that there is a highly sexualized culture in the military that this is a mere hint of, it’s that there is an abuse of power crisis within the military that the lack of meaningful consequences here simply emboldens. This obstruction of justice charge, and the admission of it all, is a demonstration of the abuse of power that Vance was trying to wield, and got caught doing. That he gets to avoid the serious consequences of this abuse, and that the notion that he can’t cash in is punishment enough, is a sign that this is a rot that runs deep and we need to be serious about this problem and acknowledging that it exists before we can get to work on tackling it as part of the culture change that the Canadian Forces desperately needs to undergo.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bracing for election night

Posted on by

With voting day just days away, we’re starting to see a few “reminder” stories about how our system works, so that we can have some reasonable expectations about what the outcomes might look like on Monday, and why it will mean things like the current government staying in place and having the first chance to test the confidence of the new Chamber once it’s been summoned. There is an interview with Emmett Macfarlane here about how any decision will unfold on Monday night and why Trudeau will remain prime minister until he chooses to resign, which is good. There is also a piece from the Canadian Press which maps out different scenarios about how the evening may play out and what these scenarios might mean.

The problem, of course, is that television news in this country is abysmal, and we’ll spend the night listening to inane banter that pretends that there is no sitting government (exacerbated by the fact that they are currently observing a convention that refers to the prime minister as the “Liberal leader” in order to have an exaggerated sense of “fairness” around his incumbent status), and they will throw around terms like “prime minister-elect” even though we don’t elect prime minister (it’s an appointed position) and the fact that if it is the incumbent – which it’s likely to be – he’s already the prime minister and won’t require an “-elect” or “-designate” title to go along with it. We’ll also no doubt hear talk about him getting a “mandate” even though that kind of thing is utterly incompatible with our system of government. And no matter how much people like me will call it out over social media, nobody will care, and they will continue to completely misinform people about our basic civics without any care in the world, because that’s the state of media in this country right now.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sitting on money, waiting for ICU to collapse

Posted on by

In case it had escaped you that the incompetent murderclowns who run Ontario are incompetent, we learned yesterday that Doug Ford and his merry band of murderclowns sat on the entire $2.7 billion additional health transfer from the federal government that was supposed to go toward the COVID response, and, well, didn’t. This was during the second and third waves, which didn’t need to happen, and they were explicitly warned that reopening would mean disaster, and they did it anyway. They had money to help them improve testing, tracing, and doing things like improving ventilation in schools, and they didn’t. They sat on it to pad their bottom line.

Is there a lesson here? Yes – don’t give provinces more money without strings attached. You would think that this should be obvious, given that before Jim Flaherty unilaterally changed the transfer escalator from six percent to a minimum of three or GDP growth, we know that provinces were not spending that health transfer only on health – the growth in health spending was far below the growth in the health transfer. For them to demand yet more money with no strings attached – particularly for outcomes – while we have examples like Ford here, who are using the money to reduce their deficit in spite of all the lives that could have been saved it was actually deployed meaningfully, there should be no argument. If they want the money, they need to have metrics and outcomes to ensure that it’s being spent on what it’s supposed to be.

Meanwhile in Alberta, the COVID situation has been allowed to deteriorate so badly that ICUs could be overrun in ten days, forcing doctors to triage who gets ventilators and who will be allowed to die. With this in mind, Jason Kenney finally relented and started re-imposing public health restrictions, but in a byzantine and complex manner, and has said they will allow vaccine certificates or a “restriction exemption program,” because they can’t actually call it a vaccine passport or certificate. Kenney also both apologised for the situation and then did not apologise for lifting the restrictions when he did, so that clarifies things. I’m curious to see if this ricochets through the federal campaign – some Conservatives seem to think it will. In either case, Jason Kenney, his health minister and chief medical officer of health all should be resigning for letting this foreseeable tragedy happen on their watch, but we all know that they won’t, because what does accountability matter any longer?

Continue reading →

Roundup: O’Toole wants intervenor status

Posted on by

Yesterday morning, Erin O’Toole declared that he would seek intervenor status at the Federal Court in the dispute between the House of Commons and the Public Health Agency of Canada over the disclosure of classified documents. Apparently, he believes that he has a “distinct perspective” on the underlying issues raised by the case, which is…a bit novel considering that his press release was a partisan document that was not about legal arguments but rather about political calculus.

As a reminder, the process was triggered because under the Canada Evidence Act – which Parliament passed – says that when requests for secret or confidential documents are made to a government entity like PHAC, they must notify the Attorney General, and that triggered a process by which said Attorney General sought clarity from the Federal Court – does the Canada Evidence Act and its limitations supersede or otherwise restrict Parliament’s privileges in demanding documents and the production of papers as they see fit, given that they are ostensibly the highest court in the land. Plenty of people have tried to make this a partisan issue – O’Toole most especially among them – rather than a process where everyone is following the law, and the law conflicts with Parliamentary privilege.

I half-suspect that in this case, the Federal Court may not grant O’Toole standing, given that he has pretty much stated that this is going to be an attempt at electoral grandstanding inside of a court room, which the Court would be hesitant to do. Beyond that, his statement in the press release doesn’t actually make sense – the request to present the documents will die when Parliament is dissolved, and the special committee that demanded the documents ceases to exist. Beyond that, if he forms government, he won’t need to release the documents because he’d be able to read them in secret, thus eliminating the possibility that releasing them might compromise our Five Eyes obligations, or inadvertently compromise a foreign intelligence source (though I am not convinced this is a national security or intelligence issue, but rather more likely one of an RCMP investigation into policy breaches). Not to mention, the documents were released, both in a redacted form to the committee, and in an unredacted form to NSICOP, and the Conservatives want someone else to do the redacting who doesn’t have national security experience. I have a hard time discerning just what “distinct perspective” he has other than scoring points, given that the Speaker will be exercising his role in protecting the privileges of the Commons, and he doesn’t need O’Toole’s help for that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney out, no need to panic

Posted on by

To the dismay of the bulk of the pundit class, Mark Carney says he has other climate-related commitments and won’t be running for a seat in the next election. In response, Pierre Poilievre tweeted that Carney is afraid of running because Trudeau will cause a financial meltdown, and Carney will try to blame it on Freeland. It’s just so stupid, and yet this is the state of public discourse in this country.

To be clear, there is no financial meltdown going to happen. Yes, there are challenges that need to be addressed, but let’s be real here.

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1417623876880588800

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1417625158450225153

Continue reading →

Roundup: Kenney announces his next big distraction

Posted on by

By now you’ve heard that Jason Kenney has announced the referendum questions that Alberta will be voting on in October as part of Kenney’s mass distraction plans. It’s unheard of to have multiple referendum questions – in this case, daylight savings and removing equalisation from the Constitution – on top of an unconstitutional sideshow of Senate “nominee elections,” and yet Kenney is putting these all together with the upcoming municipal elections. This has the bonus for Kenney of muddying the waters of those elections, where more progressive candidates tend to do better, particularly in the cities, and he gets to claim that he saves money by holding them at the same time, but this is a lie. Municipal elections are run by the municipalities themselves, while these referenda and bogus “nominee elections” are held by Elections Alberta, and just because they happen at the same time and can co-locate spaces doesn’t change the fact that it going to cost more.

The thing is, the referendum on equalization won’t actually do anything because even if they sent a message to the rest of Canada and brought everyone to the table to negotiate, the only thing that’s in the Constitution is the principle of equalization – the formula itself is federal legislation, because the programme is paid out of federal general revenues. But Kenney is content to keep lying to the public and pretending that Alberta signs a cheque every year that Quebec cashes and pays for its child care system with (which it doesn’t – they pay for that out of their own taxes, and they reap the direct economic benefits from it as well). As well, the myth that Quebec killed Energy East is being invoked (Quebec had nothing to do with it – the proponent couldn’t fill both Energy East and Keystone XL with their contracts, so Energy East was abandoned as Keystone XL looked like the more likely to reach completion – not to mention that it wouldn’t have actually served the Eastern Canadian market), which is again about stoking a faux sense of grievance. The fact that Kenney is stoking this anti-Quebec sentiment because he thinks it’ll win him points (and hopefully distract the angry mob that is gathering outside his own door) is not lost on Quebeckers when it comes to Kenney’s good friend, Erin O’Toole, looking for votes in the federal election.

But as economist Trevor Tombe keeps saying, Alberta doesn’t need equalization in the same way that Bill Gates doesn’t need social assistance – Alberta is still making way more money than any other province, even with their harder times economically. The province’s deficit is not a result of equalization or money supposedly being siphoned east (again, equalization comes out of federal taxes) – it’s a result of a province that refuses to implement sales taxes or other stable revenue generation, and expecting everyone else to subsidize that choice (while also cutting corporate taxes under the illusion that it would create jobs, but didn’t). This is just Kenney handwaving and shouting “look over there!” because he knows he’s in trouble, and he needs to keep everyone focused on a different enemy. He shouldn’t be rewarded by people falling for it.

Continue reading →