Tag Archives: Immigration

Roundup: Axing the other tax, just because

Posted on by
1

Because he is unable to pivot, or have any kind of plan B, Pierre Poilievre went to a steel plant yesterday to announce that he will not only repeal the full legislation that implemented the carbon levy, but he’ll also repeal the industrial carbon price under the bullshit magical thinking of “technology, not taxes.” The problem? Most provinces have their own industrial pricing schemes, and the federal backstop only applies to a couple of provinces, and mostly it set a price floor so that provinces can’t undercut one another. None of this is actually news, thought, as he’s been saying it for months, but most legacy media treated this as new and novel. Industry doesn’t like his plan—they prefer the industrial pricing system because it provides stability. But Poilievre needs a tax to axe, so he’s going all-in on making this a carbon price election after all, because he’s that incapable.

 

The problem with “technology not taxes” is that the price signals sent by carbon pricing are what incentivise companies to invest in the technology to reduce emissions. They won’t do it out of the goodness of their hearts. They need to feel the squeeze before they’ll invest to make the changes, and that won’t happen if they are given free licence to just pollute without consequence. You would think that a conservative party would understand market dynamics, but no. They don’t have an intellectual grounding any longer, they’re just rage-baiters looking to “own the Libs” by any means necessary. Oh, and the EU is going to start putting in carbon border adjustments, so if we’re pivoting our trade to those markets, well, our not having a price will find us being punished by their markets, so maybe this is a really dumb idea after all.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s military shot down 90 out of 170 drones overnight Monday, with damage and injuries reported in Odesa. Russians also claim that they are moving ahead in Zaporizhzhia region, saying they are pushing through Ukrainian lines. Ukraine has attacked energy facilities in Russia’s Astrakhan region, sparking a fire.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An ambush in the White House

Posted on by

It was an ambush. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the White House, ostensibly to sign some kind of agreement around access to critical minerals in exchange for some kind of military support or security guarantees was a set-up for Trump and JD Vance to try and humiliate Zelenskyy in front of the cameras, with one of the reporters from Russian state outlet TASS in the room (who was removed at one point by the Secret Service, but it was obvious that someone in the White House arranged for him to be there). The whole video is sickening to watch.

While Trump and Vance started broadcasting this for their followers as a supposed sign of strength, and their lackeys and apologists broadcast Russian propaganda to justify it, word also started leaking out that Trump is planning on cutting off military aid to Ukraine for Zelenskyy’s supposed intransigence and lack of desire for peace, which is of course mendacious and part of the set-up.

In the wake of this, world leaders started tweeting their support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and this was probably the death knell of NATO as we know it. The one leader who has been silent is Keir Starmer, but he is also hosting a summit in London today about Ukraine and European security, which Justin Trudeau will also be attending.

Here are some hot takes from Tom Nichols and David Frum, while Philippe Lagassé has some additional thoughts on the situation.

Closer to home, in an interview with the Spectator, Trump took credit for Chrystia Freeland’s supposed “firing” (she was not fired), and said that Poilievre’s problem is that “he’s not a MAGA guy.” Which is true—Poilievre doesn’t have much of a coherent ideology, but he’s not MAGA. What he is, however, is someone who will say anything that he feels he needs to in order to attract the MAGA crowd to his banner, no matter how ridiculous it is, and he has no morals, ethics, or scruples about it. Poilievre jumped on this to declare that he’s “Canada First,” and later did tweet support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and immediately got roasted in the comments by his MAGA supporters for it. Funny what happens when you play with fire.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1895631503469449464

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones struck a medical facility, among other targets, in Kharkiv. The framework for a mineral agreement that Ukraine was supposed to sign with the Americans, before the ambush, contained a number of gaps around security or dispute resolution, before it turned out to be a sham.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Starmer sputters instead of speaking up

Posted on by

UK prime minister Keir Starmer visited the White House yesterday, and a couple of bizarre scenes erupted. One was that he presented an invitation from King Charles for Trump to make a second state visit to the UK, which way too many people took as a personal invitation rather than one at the behest of the government—because the King does not act unilaterally, and does not make state visit invitations on his own. Later, when Starmer was asked about the annexation threats, Stamer didn’t stand up for Canada, but sputtered about there being no divisions before Trump cut him off with a sharp “That’s enough.” And worse, when Starmer was asked by a journalist if the King had anything to say about the annexation threats, Starmer said that he can’t say what the King’s opinions are and that he’ll let them be known in his own way.

*seethes*

On the one hand, Starmer is sucking up to Trump to avoid being tariffed, which probably won’t work, but I get his self-interest here, but it’s nevertheless a sign of the shifting global order and a sense of who our allies really are. (Thus far, only Germany has expressly said that they have Canada’s back). On the other hand, the fact that reporters are trying to drag the King into this is wildly inappropriate, and I’m not sure whether that’s because American journalists cannot grasp what a constitutional monarchy is (seriously, it makes their brains melt), but the fact that so many people in this country who should know how constitutional monarchy works because we are one, are rising to take the bait and are raging about how the King is supposedly “betraying” us is really disheartening because it’s a reflection of just how poor our civics education is, and how ignorant our own media are about how the very basic rules of our system of government operate.

The King does not freelance, he does not say things without advice, and his governments do not drag him into their fights because the first rule of constitutional monarchy is that you DO NOT involve the King. Starmer should have given a better answer in both cases, and Canadians following along shouldn’t take the bait.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians launched air attacks on energy sites in the Kharkiv region. Ukraine’s top army commander visited sites on the front lines in eastern Donetsk region.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1895048627690656241

Continue reading →

Roundup: Freeland’s smaller Cabinet promise

Posted on by

Chrystia Freeland released another policy statement/promise yesterday which says that she will cut the size of Cabinet and the PMO in half—both to make Cabinet more efficient, and to give ministers more control over their files, rather than PMO dictating everything for them. While on the one hand, every incoming prime minister has promised to cut the size of Cabinet and then it starts to grow over time, I also suspect this is a bit of a screw you to Katie Telford, who runs Trudeau’s PMO, and who selects the chief of staff for all ministers with her own loyalists, and who has been a bottleneck for so much of this government’s business as it flows through her office. Caucus has been calling on Trudeau to get rid of Telford for a while now, correctly identifying her as the source of some of their problems (including the fact that she is in the caucus room taking notes, which was never the case under previous leaders), and Freeland appears to be heeding those concerns as endorsements pile up (mostly for Carney).

I do think it’s a fairly bold plan, and it reminds me of Trudeau’s initial attempt to have a “government by Cabinet” in the early days, but all ministers are not created equal, and gradually PMO started to exert more control for many of those ministers who were having trouble managing their files. It also looks like Freeland would be reverting to an older model of having the hard cap of twenty ministers, while additional responsibilities would be filled by ministers of state, which is also essentially how the UK operates, where there is a hard cap on Cabinet, but there are numerous junior ministers. Trudeau did away with this and made everyone a full minister as part of the gender parity promise, given that it would be likely that there would be an imbalance between how many women were in senior versus junior portfolios, and by making everyone a full minister, they also got a full minister’s salary. It seems clear in Freeland’s promise that she feels this was bloating Cabinet, particularly as Trudeau made it the practice that all appointments and Orders in Council needed to be presented to the full Cabinet, which took up a lot of time and focus. Does that mean that a lot will change if junior positions are restored? I guess it will depend on her leadership style if she’s successful, but it is an interesting signal nevertheless.

I will also note that Freeland has been consistently putting out these kinds of statements, unlike Carney. Meanwhile, Ruby Dhalla is turning out to be a clown show of braggadocious claims that the online right is amplifying.

Ukraine Dispatch

The Russians claim to have taken control of Novoielyzavetivka in the Donetsk region, near Pokrovsk. An overnight Ukrainian drone attack hit an oil pumping station and a missile storage facility, while a drone attack has hit Russia’s fourth-largest oil refinery in Kstovo. Ukraine’s corruption watchdog has opened an investigation into the defence minister over a procurement dispute.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1884525942229364847

Continue reading →

Roundup: Foreign interference commission final report released

Posted on by

Justice Marie-Josée Hogue released the final report of the Foreign Interference public inquiry yesterday, and there really weren’t too many surprises involved. While there have been attempts at foreign interference, it hasn’t affected the outcomes of any elections, and that our institutions have held up rather well—though not perfectly. Government has been too slow to respond in many cases, and we don’t have enough transparency around national security issues, nor is there a culture of national security in government to make these issues a priority. There has been progress, but we’re not there yet. In many respects, this report proves that David Johnston’s report was right, and we’ve spent a year-and-a-half duplicating efforts because opposition party leaders decided it was more fun to smear Johnston than take him seriously.

One of the most significant aspects was a repudiation of the NSICOP report that claimed there were parliamentarians that were somehow compromised, and Hogue went through how the intelligence didn’t actually say that, and how NSICOP’s characterisation torqued what had been alleged—and frankly, much of the news reporting torqued further because they didn’t bother to read the context in that report. Hogue also noted that much of the reporting that drove this moral panic and the subsequent inquiry was wrong, though she didn’t necessarily blame the journalists because they only had so much to go on. (Nevertheless, this should be a warning about just how absolutely credulous some of those reporters have been on this file since the beginning, and why they failed to adequately question the motives of those doing the leaking).

A couple of other notables—Hogue noted that transnational repression is probably a bigger threat, but her mandate didn’t give her the latitude to explore that, so that remains a big flag for this or the next government to address. Even more to the point, she flagged disinformation as the most existential threat to our democracy, and called for a dedicated federal watchdog to monitor and intercept foreign meddling that uses social media platforms and “AI” tools like deep-fakes. She also recommended developing digital and media literacy among Canadians, which feels a bit like a “perfect world” wish, or at least something that we may be able to impart onto the next generation but I worry that the current one may be lost in that regard.

For more, here’s a thread from Stephanie Carvin who went through the report:

In the wake of this, Pierre Poilievre has let it be known that he’s not going to take that CSIS threat reduction briefing after all, because he can’t talk about what it says, so he is once again relying on the false notion that this, or any other security clearance, is somehow going to “gag” him. It won’t, but it would mean he has to be responsible with his commentary, which he does not want to do. He wants to be bombastic, and to lie at every opportunity, and so he will keep refusing a clearance or briefings, because he only cares about “owning the Libs,” not national security or the good of the country.

Ukraine Dispatch

Overnight Russian air attacks wounded eight and damaged residential buildings around Ukraine on Monday night. Ukrainian drones are targeting power and oil facilities in the west and northwestern regions of Russia.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford’s false “mandate” demands

Posted on by

Ontario premier Doug Ford confirmed that yes, he will be calling an early election on Wednesday, and spouted a bunch of bullshit about needing a “strong mandate” to deal with Trump, which is fiction. He went so far as to call for the “largest mandate in Ontario history,” which veers dangerously close into one-party-state delusions. And incredibly, Ford said “So you better pray that we get elected, because I’m going to protect everyone’s job, including the media’s job,” which no he won’t, and then said, “Imagine Bonnie Crombie or Marit Stiles sitting across from President Trump negotiating a deal. It would be an absolute disaster. And God help us if that ever happens.” Premiers do not engage in international negotiations. Ever. That is explicitly outside of their jurisdiction. Ford is not going to negotiate with Trump, even if he thinks that “businessman to businessman” they can work something out.

This is pure distraction. Ford has been planning on an early election for months, and now he has Trump as a fig-leaf of an excuse. He wanted to go to an election before the federal election because he doesn’t want Pierre Poilievre to taint his chances in 2026, when the next election is supposed to be held, and he’s afraid of this nonsense “theory” that Ontarians like to have different parties in power federally and provincially. And by running against Trump, he figures he can distract everyone from his corruption (RCMP investigation ongoing) and absolute mismanagement of the healthcare system to the point of its collapse, his dismantling of the post-secondary education system, and the size of the deficits he’s been running after all of his lamentations about Kathleen Wynne’s record when he has done worse by absolutely every metric. But Trump? Well, that’s a real distraction, and his playacting the “Captain Canada” role has been helping him build that, even though he hasn’t actually filled any federal vacuum in leadership (there is a conscious decision not to react to every Trump utterance), and it’s already had the Baby Spice effect on people’s brains.

Meanwhile, his constant claims that he needs a “mandate” is a fraught political concept that doesn’t actually mean anything in a Westminster system. He has a majority legislature. His opposition parties are largely ineffective or in disarray (and he has invoked the Notwithstanding Clause to neuter third-party groups from campaiging against him). Those opposition leaders said they will support anything he needs to do to counter the effect of any Trump tariffs. His claims that he needs a “mandate” to do this is an import that doesn’t actually mean anything. He was elected to govern for four years—he doesn’t need to call an election every time a crisis comes up to say that he needs a “mandate” to deal with it. Nothing would get done if he did. This is naked self-interest, and it needs to be exposed as such, but the Queen’s Park media won’t, and I suspect that Uncle Doug will sail to another election victory, both because he continues to beguile the population, and the opposition parties continue to be useless. It’s absolutely embarrassing.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched a drone barrage against residential buildings in Kyiv overnight Friday, killing three. Russians claim they are about to overtake the town of Velyka Novosilka in the Donetsk region. Ukraine launched an overnight drone attack against one of Russia’s largest oil refineries in the Ryazan region, causing an explosion and damage. Reuters got access to the drone unit that is launching these long-range attacks into Russia to damage their war capabilities.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Day one depravity

Posted on by

Yesterday was inauguration day in the US, and it was pretty much as horrible as you can imagine, with the pardoning of insurrectionists, and the executive order that made a full-on assault on the rights of trans people (which is always the first target of authoritarian regimes, followed by the rest of the queer communities). Oh, and Elon Musk threw a Nazi salute. So yeah, it was pretty much everything you thought it would be.

What didn’t happen on day one was the tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Instead, word came out early in the morning that Trump wouldn’t sign them on day one, and he would instead order an investigation into trade imbalances, and so on. So that was a reprieve, or a stay of execution, right? Danielle Smith certainly thought so, and started taking credit for it. Her followers and media apologists quickly amplified that self-praise. And then, after a few hours, Trump said that yes, the tariffs would be coming as of February 1st. Oops.

That was day one, and we can only imagine what worse predations are to come. There will be a number of demands for retaliation, but the government is keeping their powder dry for the moment, as is probably best. This may yet come to nothing, because Trump believes he’s an ace negotiator and these are his usual tactics to extract some kind of “win” from us, because that’s who he is. It may yet come to naught, but it could still be a kneecapping of our economy. It’s still too early to say, but nobody should be doing victory laps right now—especially those who tried to obey in advance.

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lg7y2jnygs2t

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s state investigation bureau has detained two generals and a colonel accused of negligence in failing to adequately defend the Kharkiv region last year.

Continue reading →

Roundup: First ministers meet about the Trump threats

Posted on by

Justin Trudeau will be meeting with (most of) the premiers today, to talk about the border plans in advance of Trump’s inauguration. Some premiers will be virtual, however, such as PEI premier Dennis King, who is currently on a bus trip to the northeastern states with a number of officials from the province. And it has already been noted that there are separate media availabilities after the meeting is over—the federal government in one location, the premiers moving to a hotel to have theirs.

In advance of the meeting, we’re hearing more pledges for “border officers” from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Quebec, and Doug Ford was once again chirping about the supposed absence of federal leadership until he had a meeting with Dominic LeBlanc yesterday at Queen’s Park, after which he suddenly changed his tune. At that point, he praised the federal plan as “phenomenal,” which pretty much goes to show that the federal government has been working on it, and that in not responding and lighting their hair on fire with every Trump utterance that they are keeping their powder dry.

I get why Trudeau and the government have been keeping their heads down, but they have also created a problem for themselves. They should probably have been sending stronger signals to the provinces that they are working on said plan and to shut up in public rather than undermine the country’s position, but it’s not like they’ll all listen—particularly those premiers who are keen to suck up to Trump. Nevertheless, if this PMO’s persistent problem is their inability to communicate, they appear to be making no effort to change that on their way out the door. Cripes.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian air defences shot down 58 out of 80 drones in an overnight attack on Tuesday, while Russian forces claim to have taken control of two more settlements in the Donetsk region. Ukraine launched a major missile and drone attack into Russian territory, destroying a storage facility holding guided bombs and struck a chemical plant making ammunition. Ukrainian soldiers are also being forced to deal with suicide attacks by North Korean troops.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1879180179613872494

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trudeau’s slow exit

Posted on by

And Monday morning, the inevitable happened. Prime minister Justin Trudeau summoned the media outside of Rideau Cottage, and first announced that he had been granted a prorogation until March 24th, and then stated that he had told his children and the president of the Liberal Party that he intends to resign as leader and prime minister once a successor has been chosen in a robust national competition. While he was tinged with sadness, there were still some elements that rankled—he blamed the decision on “internal divisions” in the party rather than a self-aware recognition that he was dragging them down, and that his time had come (or had come months ago and he refused to listen). When asked about Chrystia Freeland, he implied that her version of events was not what happened and that he offered her a chance to work on the most important file but she turned him down (and no, a portfolio with no department, staff, or levers of power, is not a promotion). When asked about his biggest regret, he said that it was that he couldn’t implement ranked ballots (which he never actually tried to do during the whole bloody Electoral Reform Committee process).

Response from other parties was quick. Jagmeet Singh was first out the door with a statement devoid of class or graciousness, and Pierre Poilievre soon followed on with the same. In a video message shortly thereafter, Singh said that he plans to vote non-confidence no matter who the leader is, but well, his mind changes with the cycles of the moon and the phases of the tide. Poilievre also delivered an absolutely psychotic video message about how the “dark days” are nearly over, and near sweet Rhea, mother of Zeus, that is absolutely divorced from reality.

The party now has to come to decisions about the length of the contest, the rules, and how they plan to deal with the potential for any foreign interference that comes with such an open system that doesn’t even have paid memberships (which, I will reiterate, was always a stupid move, and the Alberta Liberal Party, which instigated this kind of scheme, is now pretty much extinct). Those rules will help determine the shape of the race, and who may throw their hat into the ring, to take what could very well be a poisoned chalice.

Here is a high-level look over Trudeau’s political career. The Star has assembled a list of possible candidates for the job, but that’s going to start changing rapidly. There are concerns about what this will do with the response to Trump tariffs.

In reaction, Emmett Macfarlane sees no issues with the prorogation call (which is not unexpected). Susan Delacourt looks back over Trudeau’s political career and the air of inscrutability he has cultivated around himself. Althia Raj wonders about where the party goes next after Trudeau, and if they have enough runway to make a difference. Paul Wells lays out the four main challenges that Trudeau’s announcement has unleashed.

In case you missed it:

My weekend column on Poilievre and the lessons he seems to be eager to take from the “tech broligarchy” that is flexing its muscles around Trump.

My column on how Poilievre’s plan for a “massive crackdown on crime” is predicated on repealing laws that don’t do what he claims.

My weekend column on why there’s no such thing as an “interim” prime minister, and how the Liberals need to consider their next steps in replacing Trudeau.

My Loonie Politics Quick Take points out that the Conservatives’ plan to use the Public Accounts committee to call for non-confidence is a non-starter.

My year-end column on the four main political lessons that we’ve learned (or in some cases, refused to learn) over 2024.

My weekend column on the considerations around prorogation, now vs 2008, and what’s changed and what hasn’t since them.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian forces claim to have taken the stronghold of Kurakhove, but Ukraine says they are still fighting. The fighting appears to have intensified in the Kursk region of Russia with a possible new Ukrainian offensive, and they are saying that Russia and North Korea has suffered 38,000 casualties, with nearly 15,000 of those dead.

Continue reading →

Roundup: On the policing of Trudeau’s feminism

Posted on by

One of the sub-plots around the lead-up to Chrystia Freeland’s resignation was the continued policing of feminism by the Conservatives, because it’s in their interests to dismiss Justin Trudeau as a “fake feminist.” The CBC has a whole write-up about how gender was never mentioned in the letter but is being used as an attack line. I’m inclined to agree with University of Calgary’s Melanee Thomas, cited in the piece, who notes that the only real gendered element was the “frustration” that qualified women can experience when men in power dismiss their advice.

I have to say, though, that the piece lacks some of the specific comments that the Conservatives made, and chose some of the tamer quotes rather than the unhinged ones, where Freeland was belittled as someone who apparently had no agency in order to attack Trudeau, which seems like a really interesting way to defend her, but also not really defend her. My absolute favourite was Leslyn Lewis standing up to declare that she wasn’t a token, with the obvious implication that Freeland was, which again, is hard to square with defending her honour (but not really) by insisting that she had no qualifications and was only there as a quota. It was pretty grotesque, and also a little delusional, because if there is anyone who is more likely to be a token, it’s Lewis, who is a crazy conspiracy theorist who shouldn’t hold a portfolio and yet does, and sits in Poilievre’s camera shot for quite obvious reasons.

One of the most common refrains from the Conservatives as they have tried to denigrate Trudeau’s feminism, as performative as it might be, is that they keep insisting that women and minorities in their caucus all earned their places, but any in the Liberal ranks were all token diversity picks, which is incredibly dismissive, and just perpetuates the very notions that straight white men are the only ones who can really be considered “qualified” without question. It makes it really, really hard to take the feminism-policing from those who continue to push that kind of a narrative, whether they think that’s what they’re doing or not.

Ukraine Dispatch

South Korean intelligence suggests that at least 100 North Korean troops in the Kursk region have been killed so far, another 1000 have bene injured in combat, and that they are struggling with drone warfare. Here is a look at why Russia is so eager to take Pokrovsk. A combined Ukrainian missile and drone strike damaged an oil refinery in the Rostov region. Russia alleges that Ukraine has used white phosphorus in attacks, which Ukraine denies and says Russia is the one who used it.

Continue reading →