Tag Archives: Immigration

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).

Two cents: The Chair of NSICOP should have been far more willing to explain what message the committee's report was meant to convey last summer.NSICOP reports have exaggerated things in the past. Hopefully, the next chair takes a more measured approach.

— Philippe Lagassé (@plagasse.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T17:55:57.033Z

Hogue's call for greater transparency in the national security space is key, too. That should be a key priority for whichever party is in government after the next election.

— Philippe Lagassé (@plagasse.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T18:02:26.554Z

Probably a good thing that the pressure to 'name names' wasn't followed through on, eh? We could have outright destroyed innocent people with potentially empty innuendo.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-28T17:38:06.873Z

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:

For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, here is the summary

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2025-01-29T00:25:45.506Z

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.

Because he's a self-interested venomous partisan who wants maximum freedom to be act like a weasel. I'm not sure why some Liberal partisans decided there was anything more nefarious than that at play.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-28T19:12:35.197Z

exactly so.Phil and I found in our work that the average MP would rather speak ignorantly than know more and then have to be somewhat responsible.PP is the extreme version of this–rather be a bomb thrower than have any responsibility.

— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T19:23:04.269Z

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.

I think the pardons are the worst thing thus far because they signal that political violence on behalf of Trump is to be rewarded.But the anti-trans stuff might be worse because it is directly targeting a vulnerable minority.So many choices for the worst. It will be a daily thing.

— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman.bsky.social) 2025-01-21T01:25:06.197Z

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.

How did these age?

— Greg MacEachern (@gregmaceachern.bsky.social) 2025-01-21T01:25:33.384Z

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

Yes. Yes it is.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-20T18:35:12.136Z

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).

holy shit, did I do this??

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-01-06T17:19:31.856Z

All those Conservatives introducing Pierre Poilievre as "Canada's next Prime Minister" turned out to be wrong, if only on a technicality.

— Jason Markusoff (@markusoff.bsky.social) 2025-01-06T16:18:11.576Z

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.

Jagmeet Singh first out of the gate with a statement that lacks any semblance of class. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-06T16:32:04.683Z

And next up is Poilievre to also offer a classless statement. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-06T16:50:12.984Z

Like an absolute psychotic, Pierre Poilievre's opening remark is about the potential end of "a dark chapter in our history."

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-06T16:59:17.610Z

And then it's a litany about how terrible crime is in Canada.FACT CHECK: Crime in Canada actually remains near historic lows.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-06T17:00:07.538Z

"Everything is out of control" Poilievre says.It's very depressing people fall for this fantasy shit. So many valid criticisms could be made about this listless government, and Poilievre is relying on 1980s-style Republican fear-mongering about crime and taxes.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-06T17:02:03.861Z

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.

Happy to see two of my stories in the top ten!

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-31T20:05:37.785Z

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 →

QP: Out not with a bang, but with a conspiracy theory

Posted on by

For the final QP of 2024, the PM was elsewhere, licking his wounds and “reflecting” on the damage his actions caused him and his party, and he no longer has a deputy as a result. Pierre Poilievre was off in Mississauga, though a couple of the other leaders were present, because why not? That left Andrew Scheer to lead off in English, and he decried what happened yesterday and lamented the “gut-punch” of the deficit number, and demanded a “strong leader” with a new mandate to head off tariffs. Dominic LeBlanc thanked Scheer for his “heartfelt congratulations on my new role,” and wanted to tell him how proud they were of the statement because it speaks to growth, to supporting Canadians, and a declining debt-to-GDP ratio. Scheer congratulated him on being the fourth finance minister in 24 hours (building a narrative around things that did not happen yesterday), and moaned that more is spent on interest on the debt than healthcare. LeBlanc said that Canadians expect the government be focused on their wellbeing and the border issues, and that he had great conversations on the topic yesterday, which the economic statement supported. Scheer mocked that the government was so proud of the statement that they tabled it and ran away, and again listed economic issues that he blamed the government for, and LeBlanc again praised the investments the government made, and that it was the opposition trying to run the House into chaos. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French, kept up the Mark Carney conspiracies, and demanded an election. LeBlanc praised the economic statement, and how it plans for growth and responsible use of taxpayer money—somewhat ironic given the GST “holiday” issue. Paul-Hus read portions of Freeland’s letter, and LeBlanc responded with the debt-to-GDP ratio and that this was the time to support Canadians “responsibly.”

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, decried the deficit in the fiscal update, and demanded an election saying the government doesn’t have confidence. LeBlanc said that they just tested the confidence of the House and got it. Blanchet retorted that they don’t enjoy the confidence of the House, they enjoy the weakness of the NDP, and again demanded an election. LeBlanc raised the dinner he had at Mar-a-Lago and the conversations since.

Jagmeet Singh lambasted the government being focused on their own interests and not Canadians, and demanded the prime minister’s resignation. Karina Gould reminded him that they tested confidence last week, and they are focused on Canadians and the relationship with the U.S. Singh tried again in French, and got the same answer from Gould.

Continue reading →

QP: Policing feminism as a gross concern troll

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister or his deputy were present today, and neither were most of the other leaders either. Andrew Scheer led off today, and he raised today’s Globe and Mail story that says Trudeau has made more outreaches to Mark Carney to get involved in politics, which Scheer interpreted as a plot to replace Freeland with Carney, and that he is somehow orchestrating the larger deficit spending. Arif Virani took this, for some reason, and he praised the work Freeland has been doing for Canadians, which yesterday’s Bank of Canada rate cut apparently reflected, and then praised their GST “holiday.” Scheer claimed the rate cut was because the economy is performing so poorly—which is not what the governor said in his remarks—and again claimed that Carney was pulling all the strings before replacing Freeland, concern trolling for Freeland’s future. Virani quoted Tiff Macklem’s remarks about inflation being tamed. Scheer disputed this, and quoted other Liberal MPs who wanted more fiscal discipline and demanded they get a “free vote,” to which Virani cited IMF economic growth projections and our status as having the lowest debt and deficit in the G7. Dominique Vien took over in French, and she too concern trolled about Freeland’s future and called Trudeau a “fake feminist,” this time François-Philippe Champagne deployed his “take no lessons” line before praising the Bank of Canada lowering rates, and the upcoming GST “holiday.” Vien repeated the claim that Trudeau was about to replace Freeland with Carney, and called him a hypocrite for his speech at Equal Voice about being a proud feminist. Diane Lebouthillier responded by wondering how a woman from Quebec could attack a woman like Freeland who brought in child care, and the Speaker called for order, she dismissed the men heckling because women are the ones who handle men head on.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc, and worried about the Senate voting on their Supply Management bill, and wondered if the government contacted each of their appointments to tell them how to vote. Marie-Claude Bibeau reminded her that senators are independent. DeBellefeuille wanted each party leader to tell senators to support the bill in its original form, and Bibeau repeated her same point.

DeBellefeuille wonders if the government contacted each of their senate appointees to tell them how to vote on the Supply Management bill. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-12T19:30:46.447Z

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP and demanded the government improve access to healthcare in Quebec, which is a provincial responsibility. Mark Holland praised the investments they have made with the provinces. Brian Masse demanded the government consult with workers before a Trump plan, and demanded a “Buy Canada” plan (which is utterly boneheaded in a trade-dependent economy). Mary Ng said that all voices matter in this issue.

Continue reading →

QP: Fantasizing about a “collapsing” economy

Posted on by

Wednesday, the final proto-PMQ of the year, and the prime minister was indeed present and ready to respond to all questions put to him, while his deputy was elsewhere. All of the other leaders were also present today, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and again cited the Globe and Mail story about the supposed tensions between Freeland and Trudeau over the size of the deficit, and demanded to know why he pushed her to break her promise on capping it. Justin Trudeau said that Poilievre was dramatizing things to distract from his voting against programmes that help people, and that he muzzles his MPs to prevent them from speaking out for their communities, or get his security clearance. Poilievre again demanded to know why Trudeau forced his finance minister to break her promise and Trudeau responded with a list of things Poilievre voted against. Poilievre switched to English and repeated his first question on the Globe story, and Trudeau once again called these little “dramas” a distraction from his record of voting against supports for Canadians or refusing to get his security clearance. Poilievre accused a Trudeau of bullying Freeland, said that he is too weak to control his own caucus, and then Poilievre proclaimed that he leads by inspiration and that Trudeau leads by intimidation. Trudeau said that Poilievre likes to claim things are broken because he keeps breaking them. Poilievre  mocked this, and then claimed that Freeland was going to be humiliated by reading a fiscal update authored by Mark Carney, and Trudeau accused Poilievre of using Canadians’ struggles for his own gain but that he won’t lift a finger to help them.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, complained about a committee study, and wondered what the PM would say to the thousands of Muslims who are happy to assimilate into Quebec. Trudeau praised diversity and rights. Blanchet then wondered if Trudeau was defending religious “indoctrination” at certain Quebec schools, to which Trudeau praised the Charter, and then said it was the responsibility of those schools to hire the best teachers they could.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, said that Trump was a bully and that Trudeau was too weak to stand up to him. Trudeau said that they were taking a measured approach, working with leaders across the country, and were not freaking out like the NDP were. Singh exclaimed that Trudeau’s job wasn’t safe either, and then repeated the same question/demand in French. Trudeau reminded him that they defeated Trump tariffs in the past.

Continue reading →

QP: Using Crombie and Joly as cudgels

Posted on by

The prime minister was present and ready to take all questions, while his deputy found better things to do. All of the other leaders were present today, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, as is his usual wont, and claimed the PM was weak, lost control of the border, his spending, and his own party, and used Bonnie Crombie’s words as proof (even though it’s not the same party). Justin Trudeau said that his caucus was unified about the GST “holiday,” and claimed Conservatives wanted to vote for it and that Poilievre gagged them. Poilievre repeated the “lost control” slogan to apply it to food insecurity, and wanted assurances from the Economic Statement next week. Trudeau said it would come in due course, and that the government was helping people while Poilievre was jostling for his own political interests. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question while adding in the claim that Mélanie Joly launched her leadership campaign in the New York Times. Trudeau said that the Liberals are allowed to have different opinions while Poilievre just muzzles his MPs. Poilievre went on about the Joly story, and said Trudeau needs to get the hint that his party doesn’t want him any more. Trudeau gave a paean about Canadians pulling together when they face threats but Poilievre can’t help himself. Poilievre said that Trudeau was giving Canadian jobs to Trump, and listed “taxes” as proof, while Trudeau said that Canadians see through Poilievre’s shallow games, and that he wants them to struggle because he thinks it helps his prospects.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and demanded the federal government respect the unanimous motion in the Quebec National Assembly to get rid of the religious exemption for hate crimes, and Trudeau hit back that if they cared about it, they would do something about the Conservative filibuster so that said bill could come up for debate. Blanchet repeated the demand, and Trudeau again repeated his point about the Bloc not helping to end the filibuster.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and demanded permanent GST exemptions for “daily essentials,” and Trudeau patted himself on their GST “holiday.” Singh recited his new line about the Conservatives being “boot-lickers for billionaires” and the Speaker had to interject before Singh repeated his demand in French. Trudeau repeated his same self-congratulatory response.

Continue reading →