Tag Archives: Healthcare

QP: Not Question Period, but Catty Bitch Period

Posted on by

The prime minister was away, off at Rideau Hall to swear-in the replacement minister for Pablo Rodriguez, and while his deputy was supposed to be present today she was not. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he raised the concerns by the “premier of the Quebec Nation” about asylum seekers and “temporary immigrants,” and who said he wants the Bloc to not support the government next week. This wasn’t a question for the government, but Jean-Yves Duclos got up to answer it anyway, and he first thanked the new cohort of pages in the Chamber, and then said that Poilievre’s statements were laughable. The Speaker then stood up to remind MPs that it’s important that questions have to do with the administrative responsibility of the government. Poilievre got back up to decry this the Bloc were going against not only Legault but also the Parti Québécois position. The Speaker warned again that this was not a matter for government, but Pascale St-Onge got up regardless—which she shouldn’t have—and spoke about how Quebeckers did not appreciate when Legault endorsed the Conservatives. Poilievre got up again and decried the loss of the Quebec lieutenant, and asked something of Pablo Rodriguez, who is no longer in government, so the Speaker moved to the next question. Poilievre switched to English to decry the NDP and their “taping up” their agreement, but again it wasn’t a question for government, to the Speaker moved on. Poilievre made a second swipe at the NDP, calling Jagmeet Singh a “fake, a phoney, and a fraud,” which still wasn’t a question, but Singh got up, and moved into the aisle (which you couldn’t see on CPAC), saying something inaudible to Poilievre, and there was much noise for a couple of minutes. When it died down, the Speaker said that the questions were supposed to be for government for the sake of accountability, that questions should be pointed and tough, and the answers clear, but this required working within the rules.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, who declared that their priority was seniors, and demanded they rise OAS and GIS for seniors under 75. Karina Gould thanked him for asking a real question. Therrien again demanded the increase, and Steve MacKinnon reminded him that they voted against lowering the retirement age, enriching the GIS, and dental care.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and with a hoarse voice, raised the Canadian Medical Association’s worries about privatisation in the healthcare system and a shortages of personnel, which is provincial jurisdiction, but blamed the federal government anyway. Mark Holland praised their work with the provinces, and took a dig at the NDP for capitulating to the Conservatives acting like Mean Girls. Singh got back up and in French, and demanded assistance of the Aging Well At Home programme in Quebec. Holland got back up and again called them out for caving to the Conservatives.

Continue reading →

QP: Won’t somebody think about the GDP?

Posted on by

The first prototype-PMQ day of the fall sitting promised to be a caustic set of exchanges between the PM and the leader of the opposition, and it did not disappoint. Well, it’s always disappointing, but it went about as well as expected, though perhaps not quite as caustic as one might have assumed. Pierre Poilievre led off in French with a swipe at the Bloc for their plans not to topple the government, and listed a bunch of nonsense about what the federal government allegedly did—but it wasn’t really a question for the government. Justin Trudeau listed things they have done that the Conservatives would cut. Poilievre recited some slogans, and wondered again why the Bloc allowed it, which was again not a question for government, and the Speaker said nothing. Trudeau listed things that Poilievre voted against in his “thirst for power.” Poilievre switched to English to make the same swipe, but this time directed to the NDP, and wondered why they weren’t saying they would vote against the government, which again was not a question for government. Trudeau repeated that Poilievre voted against Canadians’ interests because he only cares about himself, and that he was in a bad mood because the economy was performing well. Poilievre recited a litany of slogans, and Trudeau said this was mere performance because he doesn’t care about Canadians and repeated the points about inflation coming down and that Poilievre can’t use his “justinflation” slogan anymore. Poilievre took this as an excuse to list the people using food banks or who are in tent encampments, and Trudeau said this empathy was false because he was using the vulnerable for his own gain.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he lamented the remarks of the special advisory to counter Islamophonia, and wanted the government’s definition of Islamophobia. Trudeau spoke about the rise of it and antisemitism, but did not provide a definition. Blanchet noted this and accused the government of polarising Canadians, and Trudeau pointed out that he is a proud Quebeckers and there are more Liberals from Quebec than in the Bloc, and that they need to combat intolerance. 

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and decried the increasing privatisation of healthcare and demanded the government put a stop to it. Trudeau said that the NDP can’t deliver the goods on progressive policies, as shown by their backing out of their agreement, because they didn’t like it when things got hard. Alistair MacGregor took over in English to worry about grocery prices, and accuse the government of “caving to CEOs.” Trudeau accused them of taking a page from the Conservative playbook in choosing slogans over hard work.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sutcliffe gets a federal no

Posted on by

With a bit of an apology to non-Ottawa residents, but our mayor, Mark Sutcliffe, is trying to blackmail the federal and provincial governments for more money, and insists that the city’s budget shortfall isn’t his fault. That’s a lie, and his low-tax austerity plan has bitten him in the ass, and he wants someone else to bail him out, but man, has he made some choices. There is plenty about the budget hole that is his fault, not the least of which is pandering to rural and suburban voters at the expense of downtown meaning that their property taxes stay low while downtown’s are high (under the rubric that multi-unit buildings put more strain on the system, rather than the cost of extending the system to ever-more-distant suburbs and exurbs). In fact, during the last city election, his main rival warned him that his plan had a massive budget hole in it and lo, they were proved right. Funny that.

Well, the federal government isn’t having any of it, and for good reason, not the least of which is that they are not in the mood to set the precedent that bailing out one city because of their poor choices, which will lead to every other city demanding the same, and no, the whole issue of payments for federal properties in lieu of property taxes are not justification. So, Sutcliffe is pretty much out of luck, because I’m pretty sure that Doug Ford is going to give him much the same response. Of course, this is likely just a PR move so that he can justify the tax increases that he should have instituted two years ago, but making the federal government your punching bag to justify doing your own job is pretty sad.

Ukraine Dispatch

In spite of Ukraine downing all 27 drones Russia launched overnight Thursday, Russians bombed a shopping mall in Kostiantynivka in the Donestsk region, killing at least 14 people. The UN says that July was the deadliest month for Ukrainian civilians since 2022. Russia has declared a federal emergency as a result of the Ukrainian incursion in Kursk. Ukrainian forces also raided Russian forces on the Kinburn Spit in the Black Sea, and hit an airfield with their drone attack on the Lipetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another failed attempt to oust the Speaker

Posted on by

Because everything is so stupid right now, the first day of the final stretch started with yet another call for Speaker Greg Fergus to resign for a “very partisan” invitation to an upcoming event in his riding, and of course, the Conservatives tied this to Poilievre’s ejection from the House of Commons two weeks ago because he challenged the Speaker’s authority in refusing to withdraw unparliamentary language when invited to, falsely insisting that he gave the prime minister a pass on similar language. Because playing the victim is part of their playbook, and they have to insist that the system is against them.

A short while later, the Liberal Party came forward to take the blame for this, and insisted that the wrong text had been put on the website that was “auto-populated” with “standard-language” (decrying Poilievre), and that this was being organised by the riding association, not Fergus’ office. A short while after that, the party’s national director issued a public apology to Fergus and take full responsibility.

This didn’t placate the Conservatives or the Bloc, while the NDP were satisfied with the explanation and apology, so they’re not going to vote out Fergus (while they busily pat themselves on the back for being the “adults in the room”). Nevertheless, I will note that as media outlets rushed to tabulate all of the controversies Fergus has allegedly been involved in the past six months, they conflated a bunch of the bullshit ones with them, such as the remarks he made in Washington DC about the time he’d spent as a young Liberal with a retiring Democrat, which is hard to actually qualify as a partisan speech. Nevertheless, it got included, unfairly, because legacy media outlets are incapable of exercising judgment and will simply include the bullshit allegations with the real ones (the video he recorded in his robes and office) as a form of both-sidesing. While Fergus hasn’t been a great Speaker (albeit, better than his predecessor was), the constant attacks for bullshit reasons are starting to look suspicious.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces shot down 28 of 29 drones overnight Monday, with the remaining drone hitting private residences in Kharkiv. Ukrainian forces are finally getting new artillery shells on the front lines in order to repel the Russian advance near Kharkiv. Ukrainian drones attacked more Russian oil refineries, and purportedly sank a Russian missile cruiser stationed near occupied Crimea.

Continue reading →

QP: The provocation and the restraint

Posted on by

After all of yesterday’s drama, it was a real question as to what was going to go down today, with the prime minister present, and there to respond to (but not necessarily answer) all questions. His deputy was absent, but all other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, worrying about the public health director suggesting decriminalisation in Montreal and Quebec, and demanded the government deny the request. Justin Trudeau said that they should take a moment to reflect on what happened yesterday, and said that the government takes the tragedy in BC seriously and they work with science and compassion, and will work with BC on adjusting their pilot project. Poilievre demanded to know if he would reject a request from Quebec, and Trudeau said that they worked with BC when they made the proposal, and he has received no other proposals. Poilievre switched to English, dropped the Montreal angle and demanded he reverse course on BC’s decriminalisation. Trudeau repeated that they will work with BC to adjust their pilot project. Poilievre insisted that Trudeau still hasn’t answered the question, and went into six British Columbians dying every day, and Trudeau repeated that BC approached them with the pilot project, and they worked with them to develop the project, and they looking into the modifications of the project they have asked for. Poilievre very slowly demanded that he reverse decriminalisation, and Trudeau again said they were working with BC.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, needled the Bloc for declaring they will support the budget, before going on about Amira Elghawaby making comments about the challenge to Quebec’s Law 21. Trudeau said that they build bridges by funding infrastructure and by helping communities come together. Blanchet railed about Elghawaby and halal mortgages, somehow, and insisted that some communities were getting other privileges. Trudeau said that in a pluralistic democracy, it’s important to talk to communities in order to meet their concerns.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he raised the Loblaws boycott, and the fact the grocery task force has done no work. Trudeau says that they are concerned with Loblaws not signing onto the grocery code of conduct, and they have given the Competition Bureau new powers. Singh repeated the question in French, and got much the same answer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, a foreign power can’t install a prime minister

Posted on by

One of the unfortunate things about certain people I follow on the Twitter Machine constantly retweeting sludge is that sometimes I see something that is so outrageous that it sets me off. This, from former Global journalist Sam Cooper, is just such an egregious thing.

Setting aside the torqued use of Michael Chong’s testimony, this has all of the credibility of those racist emails that used to circulate, usually at the hands of someone’s relatives, where people worried that the changing Canadian demographics could mean that we might *gasp!* have a Muslim prime minister! As is unsurprising in racist emails like those, the internal logic was deeply flawed and the understanding of our system was non-existent, and was likely repurposed from American racist content worrying about a Muslim president, but that aside, this worry from Cooper is about the same quality.

To wit: If a party held a leadership contest while during a prime minister’s term, the fear expressed here is that, somehow, a foreign government would be able to swamp party memberships (either sales or sign-ups, depending on the party) and install a preferred candidate, who would then become prime minister without an election (which, I should not need to remind anyone, is perfectly legitimate in a parliamentary system). The hole in this logic is that pretty much every party has a weighted point system as part of these elections, so that highly populated regions of the country don’t swamp the more sparely-populated ones. In order for a foreign government to therefore take over a leadership contest, they would need a critical mass of voters in the majority of ridings in the country, particularly ones like small rural ridings in Quebec or Atlantic Canada. That’s simply not a possibility for any foreign government to engineer. The fact that Cooper doesn’t have a clue how these things work should be (another) warning sign about his judgment. Cripes.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian drone attacks on Kharkiv struck residential buildings and cut power supplies. A Ukrainian uncrewed aerial vehicle (larger than a drone) was used to strike deep inside Russian territory, striking an industrial site.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1775913487300002262

Continue reading →

Roundup: A dubious Federal Court decision, but right about judicial appointments

Posted on by

The Federal Court ruled yesterday that the federal government must start filling judicial vacancies faster because, which is true, but the judgment itself is something of a mess. It’s hard to see how the Court has jurisdiction here, and the judge seems to have invented a bunch of justification and has handwaved around constitutional conventions, and in the end, declared that the government must fill most of those vacancies “in a reasonable period of time,” which is vague and of little value other than the declaration. Emmett Macfarlane has promised a post on this soon, and Leonid Sirota has a thread here taking issue with the reasoning (though not the underlying issue of not making sufficient appointments—everyone is agreed on that point).

I have been writing on this government’s problems with appointments since probably their second year in office, possibly even sooner than that. While you can look up the myriad of columns I have written, the short version is this: The government wants to make diverse appointments (which is good! This is a good thing!) but they insisted on a system of self-nominations rather than going out and nominating people. We know that women, people of colour, and LGBTQ+ people routinely don’t apply for positions like this because society has drilled into them the message that only straight, old white men get positions like this. Even the Liberal Party itself gets this in their candidate selection process, where they set up systems to be persistent in getting women and diverse people to seek nominations. And even with that, the federal government has utterly dropped that ball and thinks that they can simply say “We’re accepting diverse applications!” and expecting those applications to flood in. They seem to act like the Sesame Street sketch where Ernie simply goes “Here, fishy, fishy, fishy!” and the fish leap into the boat. That’s not how this works, and when they don’t get enough applications, it slows down the process tremendously. And after seven years, they have absolutely refused to learn this lesson. Refused! It’s some kind of giant ideological blinder that they cannot get their collective heads around, no matter how many times the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court warns them, or the Auditor General sounds the alarm about vacancies on port authorities or the boards of Crown corporations, or even their process for appointing senators. They absolutely refuse to learn the lessons of their failures.

It does bear mentioning that there has been an uptick in the pace of appointments in the past few months, and filling vacancies for provincial chief justices and associate chief justices has also picked up speed (and yes, I have been keeping an eye out for this). That said, making federal judicial appointments faster won’t solve the problems with our justice system because a lot more of them involve provinces not properly resourcing provincial courts or superior courts, where you have a lot of cases where there are no court rooms or court staff available, and that causes as many if not more problems. The issue of federal appointments, however, is low-hanging fruit so it’s taking a lot more attention than it should, and once again, premiers are being allowed to skate because of it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians have struck a hospital and apartments in Selydove in eastern Ukraine, killing three people. Here’s a look at how Ukrainians are decoding Russian battle communications to save lives on the front lines. Russia is pulling old tanks out of storage and refurbishing them after having lost more than 3000 in the fighting in Ukraine over the past two years. Ukraine’s military intelligence is now saying that Russia has been buying Starlink terminals by way of “Arab countries.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: MPP pay freezes serve no one

Posted on by

There was a piece in the Star yesterday about how MPPs in Ontario have had their salaries frozen since 2008, with no plans to lift it anytime soon. This is the kind of thing that populist rhetoric engenders, and it’s terrible for the state of our politics. While nobody is in politics to get rich, particularly in Canada, we are pretty miserly about what we want to pay our elected officials, and every time there is some kind of economic downturn, we immediately demand that they either freeze or cut their salaries to “set an example” (which is ridiculous because I have yet to see any senior executives in the private sector freeze or cut their pay in response to bad economic times—they get further bonuses, especially if they manage to reduce payroll during said tough times).

It cannot be understated that we underpay our elected officials, particularly at the provincial and federal levels, for jobs that are fairly 24/7 in most instances—especially in the era of social media where they are expected to perform at all hours of the day and night, and where they can’t go to the store without being expected to be “on” and engaging with their constituents. And in a lot of cases, people take a pay cut to become an elected official, particularly if they are doctors or lawyers. We say we want to attract the best, but the longer this kind of thing goes on, the more it will only attract those who are already wealthy and can live with the pay cut. Oh, and Ontario killed their pensions for MPPs decades ago, so on top of being underpaid, they don’t get a pension out of it either, which just makes it all the worse proposition for someone.

Nevertheless, we already have the astroturfers at the so-called “Canadian Taxpayers Federation” griping that Toronto City Council and the mayor are getting a modest pay rise this year, and because legacy media laps up everything they put out, this feeds the hairshirt parsimony and cheap outrage that makes us look as petty and parochial as our worst instincts tend to be. (Tall poppy syndrome is absolutely one of our national neuroses). This isn’t good for democracy, but nobody wants to make that case, which is why we’re in the situation we’re in.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles hit an apartment building and a medical centre in Kharkiv early Wednesday; Russia claims it was precision-targeting a building housing “foreign fighters” that included French mercenaries. Ukrainian forces also downed19 out of 20 drones targeting Odesa. The fighting has intensified near Bakhmut, as Russian forces are making more offensive assaults.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1747574419994648962

Continue reading →

Roundup: The “watered down” oil and gas emissions cap

Posted on by

The federal government unveiled their oil and gas emissions cap while at COP28, and the predictable reactions happened—the Greens, Bloc and NDP decried it as being too weak and watered down (never mind that there are recent court decisions that the government has to consider when it comes to just how far they can go); Danielle Smith and Scott Moe were performatively angry, even though it pretty much aligns with Alberta’s existing targets; and the oil and gas lobby decried how much money this was going to lose them. Economists point out that this undermines the carbon pricing system even further.

The cap is only on the pollution, not the production, because that would be provincial jurisdiction, so theoretically these companies could continue to increase production if they better control and capture emissions. (Also, refinery emissions are not in these because that’s part of the clean fuel standard). There is also a cap-and-trade system attached to this emissions cap, so that if a facility goes over their targets, they can buy offsets from a company below their cap, as well as pay into a decarbonisation fund.

Now we wait for the inevitable court challenges, and those dragging their feet to comply because they hope that the polls stay true and that Poilievre will form government in two years and they can ignore all of this then, as though climate change isn’t still the biggest threat to our lives, well, ever.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians struck the Danube River port infrastructure once again, killing a driver and damaging grain infrastructure. Ukrainians are starting to use rail to bypass the blockade by Polish trucks at their border. And the Ukrainian government has come to an agreement with two American firms to jointly manufacture 155 mm shells in Ukraine, but it could be two or three years before that production can come on line.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cancelling an invitation that was never issued

Posted on by

Danielle Smith is at it again, claiming that accepted “on behalf of the Government of Alberta” an invitation to appear at the federal environment committee next week, and that she was sent a letter “rejecting my attendance.” The problem? It’s yet another load of horseshit from Smith, because she was never invited to the committee. Two of her ministers were invited, and she thought that she could just show up and put on a dog and pony show, but that’s not how committees work. You can’t just invite yourself to appear. The witnesses are agreed to by all parties beforehand and a motion is passed to send the invitations. Even if she’s premier, Smith can’t just attend in place of the invited ministers—again, that’s not how committees work.

https://twitter.com/emmalgraney/status/1712598055885910272

https://twitter.com/EmmaLGraney/status/1712599648609972476

https://twitter.com/EmmaLGraney/status/1712601220232446093

https://twitter.com/EmmaLGraney/status/1712602741120684351

In any case, the meetings were cancelled because it was really about hearing from Suncor’s CEO, and they declined, so the committee abandoned that line of testimony, but in any case, Smith is lying again, and trying to spin this into some kind of federal-provincial flamewar, and people shouldn’t treat her with any level of credulity.

Oh, but wait—The Canadian Press did just that, and the headline on the wire overnight repeats the bullshit that her appearance was cancelled, which again, is not true because she wasn’t invited, and in the meagre text of the piece, it both-sides the whole thing, because of course it does. This is utterly irresponsible of CP, who should know better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

There has been fierce fighting around Avdiivka, as Russians have been moving troops and equipment there to try and make a push to show that they’re still capable of making gains in the country as they lose territory elsewhere in the counter-offensive.

Continue reading →