Tag Archives: Jagmeet Singh

Roundup: A trip to Kyiv

Posted on by

For the two-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Justin Trudeau took an unannounced trip to Kyiv, along with Chrystia Freeland and Bill Blair, and were accompanied by Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, and Belgian prime minister Alexander De Croo, all to show solidarity and make new commitments. Included in that was Trudeau signing a security assurance package with president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which has been in the works for several weeks now and comes on the heels of similar assurance agreements with France and Germany. Trudeau also took a couple of shots at Putin, calling him a “weakling,” who killed Alexei Navalny in order to crush his opposition.

Freeland and Bill Blair visited an Operation Unifier training facility in Poland, and found that there is a real shortage of battlefield medicine equipment on the front lines.

There were a few events in Canada to mark the same anniversary, one of which was attended by Pierre Poilievre, who stated over social media that the Conservatives stand with Ukraine, despite his not doing a very good job of demonstrating it over the past few months.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian attack overnight on Sunday destroyed a train station, shops and homes in Kostiantynivka near the front lines. Russians claim they have been moving to more advantageous positions around Avdiivka and Donetsk. Ukraine says they struck a major Russian steel factory during the anniversary of the invasion.

President Zelenskyy gave the official figure of Ukrainian soldiers killed in the fighting at 31,000 thus far, which is the first time it’s been stated in over a year. He also warned that Russia is likely to attempt a new offensive before May. Ukraine’s defence minister says that delays in promised western aid is costing lives (but has anyone been pressuring defence manufacturers to ramp up their production?). The defence minister and army chief visited command posts near the front lines on Sunday.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1761450921609904450

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: The dumb impulse to make hay of Jenni Byrne

Posted on by

Over the course of the week, Liberals feel that they found some kind of a clever wedge against the Conservatives in the “revelation” that Pierre Poilievre’s advisor Jenni Byrne’s firm is registered in Ontario to lobby the provincial government on behalf of Loblaws. Byrne herself has not lobbied, and the firm’s work has only done work around trying to get beer and wine into those stores, but those facts haven’t deterred the Liberals. Instead, it’s come up in Question Period and prime minister Justin Trudeau brought it up unbidden at a press conference because he wants the media to talk about it. This while their MPs start tweeting stupid things like “Conservatives have a vested interest in keeping food prices high.”

This is just sad, and it’s a sign that the party is flailing. There is no smoking gun here, and trying to insinuate that there is looks desperate. If anything, it certainly makes it look like the Liberals are going to start stooping to the kinds of dishonest lines that the Conservatives like to trot out in order to try and score points, which you would think the Liberals generally feel they are above, and if they too start going full-bore on fundamentally dishonest talking points to try and get ahead in the polls, then we’re going to be in serious trouble as a country if every party abandons any semblance of honest discourse. It also fundamentally undermines the actual message that the major cause of food price inflation is climate change, which you do not want to do. In other words, knock it off and grow up.

There is the added danger that this starts a contagion around other lobbyists and strategists that the parties rely on. Ottawa is a pretty small pool, and if you go after one party’s operatives who have lobbied, then it becomes fair game, and this escalates into a pretty scorched earth. Bringing up Byrne was a cute quip once in QP, and it should have been left at that. Trying to keep banging on this drum is going to have all kinds of collateral damage that nobody wants.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Knowledgeable Sources™ say that Ukraine has briefed the White House about plans to fire the country’s top military commander, while the defence minister has suspended a senior official in order to investigate suspected corruption. Russia continues to refuse to turn over any of the alleged bodies of alleged POWs from the plane they say Ukraine downed (because it totally isn’t a psy-op).

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1753430572150792628

Continue reading →

Roundup: A singular call for a leadership review

Posted on by

As the Liberals’ caucus retreat got underway in Ottawa (immediately after the Cabinet retreat), things got off to another rocky start as Liberal backbencher Ken McDonald told Radio-Canada that he thinks there should be a leadership review in the party ahead of the next election, and lo, the media leapt all over that story, and the rest of caucus spent the day insisting that no, they’re happy with Trudeau (though one anonymous Liberal praised McDonald’s bravery in bringing this up). The problem with this proposal? The party’s constitution has no mechanism for this.

The new constitution, which was adopted after the Liberals formed government, only has one avenue for a leadership review, which is that one is to be held if they lose an election. And fair enough—that’s really the only time they could hold one, because it essentially means running an entire leadership contest but with only the leader canvassing sign-ups and votes (because they no longer have paid memberships), and his or her opponents trying to organise a no vote. There is no way a sitting prime minister has the time or capacity to do this while running the country, and it’s one more reason why the way we run leadership contests is made to obscure accountability. It also guarantees that bellyachers like McDonald can’t get their wish because frankly there is no capacity for this to happen while they are governing.

This all points to reasons why we need get back to the system of caucus appointing and disposing of leaders. It restores accountability because the leaders are once again afraid of their own members, and must be more responsive to their concerns rather than doing things like threatening to withhold the signature from their nomination papers if they don’t toe the line. It also precludes these mini-leadership contests as a “leadership review” (where past examples such as Jeremy Corbyn and Greg Selinger were not great examples of the membership being able to get rid of problematic leaders). It would make for one quick vote and being able to put the matter to bed rather than this interminable grousing that we’re seeing now, and an immediate replacement of a leader rather than a months-long leadership race that includes egomaniacs who have never won a seat, let alone have any idea how politics works. But people who don’t know how the system works insists that this is somehow “anti-democratic” (which is bullshit), and so this bastardised status quo continues to make our system worse.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukraine shot down 11 out of 14 Russian drones targeting the southern part of the country in the early hours of Thursday morning. A Russian military plane crashed, and they claimed it contained 65 prisoners of war headed for a swap and that Ukrainian forces downed the plane, but couldn’t produce proof; Ukraine didn’t confirm or deny this, but made it clear that if Russia was transporting POWs this way without notice it was unacceptable.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Debunking Singh’s dunks

Posted on by

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s political comms lately have been a little bit…cringey. Not like that TikTok in the shower staring blankly cringey, but saying ridiculous things that he should have thought about for thirty seconds before posting cringey. Like this housing development in Edmonton, that he’s denouncing as “luxury condos.” Except they’re not, that whole concept is dated, any market housing that increases supply helps push down prices, and oh yeah, it’s a Métis-led development that is geared largely for affordable housing, and most of them are to be pegged at below-market. Yikes.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1748311506620428422

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1748313113206636842

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1748314188756251009

As if that wasn’t bad enough, he’s pretending that Poilievre will cancel rent control, which, erm, doesn’t exist federally, and then goes on a conspiracy theory about being beholden to developers who contributed to his campaign, in the low thousands of dollars, because remember, this is Canada and we have campaign contribution limits. If you think you’re buying a politician for $1200/year, you’re out to lunch.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1749125638961652148

Of course, this is what happens when as a party, you crib all of your ideas from the “justice Democrats” in Washington, and ignore that we’re two separate countries with different laws, demographics, and circumstances. Unfortunately, this keeps happening, and it makes our politics in this country dumber as a result.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia had to suspend operations at a Baltic Sea fuel terminal after what appeared to be a Ukrainian drone strike caused a major fire. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is concerned by Trump’s rhetoric of unilateral action and claiming he could end the conflict in 24 hours, and wants Trump to visit Ukraine so he can see the situation for himself.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Legal fictions around the carbon levy refusal

Posted on by

While we all emerge from our holiday slumber, the big story domestically remains that Saskatchewan is planning to move ahead with their plans to stop collecting the carbon levy on heat, and hoping that they won’t suffer any repercussions for it. This includes trying to put forward some legal fictions like trying to register the Government of Saskatchewan that’s the seller of natural gas and electricity rather than Crown corporations like SaskEnergy, which the federal government would be well within their rights to reject outright because it’s a fig leaf attempting to protect those Crown corps for breaking federal law. And to add to that, the provincial minister has been spinning the falsehood that the federal “pause” on heating oil won’t reduce the rebate, and that the rebates in his province should be secure if they stop collecting the levy, which is also false–the rebates will be reduced because that money comes from collecting the carbon price—it’s not a federal entitlement programme out of general revenue.

Here’s University of Alberta’s Andrew Leach with more:

In case you missed it:

  • My Xtra story on the Ontario court decision that ruled that calling queer people and drag queens “groomers” is a slur and is not protected speech.
  • My weekend column on an NDP private member’s bill initiative on a Middle East peace plan that looks like a Kickstarter, but is promising things it cannot deliver.
  • My column on the complete lack of serious responses in any of the Conservatives’ year-ender interviews (and the ongoing attempts to justify their Ukraine votes).
  • My year-ender column traces how the shift and fragmentation of social media turned the our politics into an even more toxic snake pit than ever.
  • My latest column on Poilievre’s “debt bomb” disinformation documentary and why it’s just hysteria to rile up the Boomers and Gen-Xers.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take on the way the housing issue is going to dominate the political scene for the foreseeable part of 2024.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Kyiv and Kharkiv have come under heavy bombardment in the past several days, in particular striking apartment buildings. There have been Ukrainian drone strikes in the Russian province of Belgorod.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Scheer throws stones at Fergus from his glass house

Posted on by

The saga around Speaker Fergus’ fate is starting to become farcical, as Andrew Scheer brought up more “proof” that Fergus has been engaged in partisan activities, because he went to a party event…for a Quebec Liberal MNA, which, again, is not the same party or the same league. (Honestly, there are a bunch of former Quebec Liberal MNAs currently sitting in the Conservative caucus, much like there are a bunch of former BC Liberal MLAs in the Conservative caucus.). Scheer’s urge to keep finding this “proof” and tattling is becoming ridiculous.

But then, a twist—CBC found out that Andrew Scheer was fined by the House of Commons for filming a partisan video in support of a by-election nomination candidate in his Hill office, which isn’t allowed, and then had that successful candidate pay for the fine out of his campaign expenses, which may run afoul of Elections Canada rules (but those returns haven’t been audited yet because the by-election is too recent). The NDP have also been finding instances of where Scheer attended party fundraisers when he was the Speaker, but Pierre Poilievre’s spokesperson insists this was totally different, while also falsely saying that the provincial party event was a “fellow Liberal’s fundraiser.” But the fact that Scheer is not only a liar but a hypocrite (to say nothing of being a braying doofus) is no surprise to absolutely anyone.

And because the stupid twists don’t stop, we also learned that Fergus had a conversation with former MP Glen Pearson, who went on to write an op-ed in Fergus’ defence shortly after he took the role (before the drama happened) about the decorum in the Chamber. I’m starting to get very tired of this particular back-and-forth, and hope this doesn’t carry into the New Year.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians launched 42 drones and six missiles at southern Ukraine overnight Wednesday, which killed one person. Ukraine and Molodova got the green-light to start fast-tracking their bid to join the European Union, but Hungary remains an obstacle as they held up new aid funding for Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1735378672029167827

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, Kovrig wasn’t a spy

Posted on by

The Globe and Mail kicked off the weekend with an “explosive” report that says that Michael Spavor is trying to sue Michael Kovrig for getting him imprisoned in China because Kovrig was passing along information as part of the Global Security Reporting Program, which *gasp!* gets information that is sometimes of interest to CSIS! The problem, of course, is that this is largely nonsense. Kovrig, who was on leave from Global Affairs at the time, was not a spy. The GSRP is not espionage. It’s diplomats talking to persons of interest out in the open, and their diplomatic reports get read by a lot of people, including CSIS, because that’s what CSIS does—they read reports, and fit them into bigger pictures.

While there is some debate about the GSPR and what role it contributes to intelligence, I would have to once again remind people that we really should take much of the reporting from the Globe with a grain of salt, and a dose of perspective sauce, because they torque absolutely every story that has anything to do with China, because it’s what they do, and they do it without any particular self-reflection. No matter how many times that Robert Fife and Steve Chase were confronted with the facts that in their reporting on intelligence leaks about foreign interference, that they were being fed very selective pieces of information, they absolutely refused to consider the possibility that they were likely being played by their source, who wanted certain narratives put out there for their own reasons. Fife and Chase have been absolutely allergic to any of that self-examination. And it should colour how we read any of their other reporting (which is how media literacy works). So yeah, they took some innuendo and a few facts and spun a big story that got the overall picture wrong, yet again. Let’s keep some perspective.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1725916218987548927

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1725916989477048663

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian drones targeted Kyiv, as well as the capitals of the Cherkasy and Poltava regions over the weekend, while intense fighting continued near Avdiivka, as well as Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region. Ukrainian forces say they are pushing back Russians now that they are on the east bank of the Dnipro river. Here is the tale of an orphaned Ukrainian teenager taken to Russia last year, who has now been reunited with family back home.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The “red line” of pharmacare

Posted on by

It was the big NDP biennial policy convention this weekend, and amongst litany of policy resolutions that the party was in violent agreement with (waaaaaaay more in lockstep with one another than either the Liberals or Conservatives tend to be at their own policy conventions), the one that everyone kept talking about was the emergency resolution that delegates unanimously adopted was to make pharmacare a red line with their deal with the Liberals. The problem, of course, is that the real problem for the government is that they need nine more premiers to sign onto pharmacare if they want it to actually happen, and the NDP seem oblivious to this fact, and think that they can create an opt-in system which a) won’t work without provincial buy-in from the start, and b) wouldn’t achieve the necessary savings unless every province has actually signed on so that you get the proper economy of scale happening. (All of this is laid out in the column I wrote a week ago). So while it’s all well and good to posture over this “red line” and threaten to go to an election over it, I still have yet to see Jagmeet Singh publicly harangue David Eby about signing onto the programme, like he refused to do with John Horgan before Eby, particularly when Horgan was being obstructionist on healthcare reforms.

Meanwhile, Singh used his speech at the convention to acknowledge the restlessness of the base and to talk about how difficult it is to work with the Liberals, which is kind of funny because the “difficulty” is mostly just pushing on an open door and complaining that things aren’t happening fast enough, because the NDP seem to have little idea about process, or the finite capacity that exists in government to get everything they want done in an unrealistic timeline, like with dental care. They’ve done absolutely none of the heavy lifting, so I find it somewhat risible that they’re complaining about how hard it is.

In her analysis of said convention, Althia Raj hears five reasons from NDP grassroots members as to why they’re sticking with Singh in spite of his disappointing electoral results. Raj also notes the fairly low score that Singh got in the leadership review votes, and has her thoughts on his speech to the membership.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian drone attacks killed six people in attacks on Kherson and the surrounding region, as Russians forces have started pushing forward at the front lines once again. Part of that drive continues to be at Avdiivka, where they pounded it for a fifth straight day, killing two more civilians.

Continue reading →

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

Posted on by

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch:

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

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

Continue reading →