Tag Archives: Mexico

Roundup: Ignoring the abuse and the banana republic tactics

Posted on by

While on the one hand, it’s nice that legacy media is once again paying attention to the fact that there is an ongoing filibuster in the House of Commons that has largely paralyzed any work for six weeks now, but it would be great if they could actually make a gods damned effort at it. Pretty much every story, and the CBC’s turn was yesterday, just types of the quotes from Karina Gould and Andrew Scheer blaming one another for the filibuster. The current fascination to this story, however, is that the Supplementary Estimates votes are coming up, and every gods damned Hill reporter is dying to use the phrase “American-style government shutdown” to go along with it that they continue to gloss over the actual issues at hand.

There is a legitimate issue about the abuse of the parliamentary privilege to demand documents, because the power is only in relation to Parliament summoning those documents for their own purposes, not to turn them over to a third party. The Speaker and the clerks who advise him should never have allowed this to be considered a matter of privilege because the powers are being abused, but this is too much of a “process story” for them, so they don’t like that angle. There is also the even more pressing issue that these powers are being abused in a manner befitting a banana republic, where the powers of the state are being weaponized against those that the legislature doesn’t like, and that should be absolutely alarming to anyone paying attention.

This kind of abuse sets precedents, and if it’s allowed to happen now, it’ll be allowed to happen the next time someone wants to abuses these powers. The most that media outlets can muster up is “The RCMP says they don’t want these documents, so why are you so insistent?” but never “Why do you think it’s appropriate to behave like this is a banana republic where you are using the state to go after your perceived enemies?” We are in a particular moment in western democracies where autocrats are threatening to take over, and Viktor Orbán in Hungary has provided them a template to dismantle the guardrails of the state to delegitimize opposition and stay in power as long as possible. This is creeping into Canada, and legacy media in this country needs to be alive to the issue and call out these kinds of tactics and behaviours, rather than just both-sidesing it and using words like “polarized” or “divisive,” because that just plays into their hands.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine fired eight US-supplied longer-range missiles into Russia, two of them being intercepted, the rest hitting an ammunition supply location. President Zelenskyy addressed Ukraine’s parliament with a speech to mark the 1,000th day of the invasion.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1858871441032155385

Continue reading →

Roundup: Refusing to defend his own bill

Posted on by

Because this parliament has descended to the absolute depths of performative uselessness, Conservative MP Arnold Viersen is refusing to testify to his own private member’s bill, and his Conservative colleagues on the justice committee are filibustering to keep the clock running out on the bill rather than extend the time to hear from witnesses, in the hopes of reporting back without amendments. And why is Viersen avoiding testifying? Because the Liberal and NDP members are likely to ask him about his pro-life views and activities—for clips for their own socials.

The bill, which would mandate certification of age and consent for those who appear in porn, got all-party support before going to committee, but I suspect that this bill is completely unenforceable (as we are net importers of porn), and is likely to suffer from some of the same problems from the other age verification bill, which is unworkable and an absolute privacy nightmare. And it would be great if the committee could actually hear from experts who could say so, but they are unlikely to at this stage. (Conservative filibusters also limited witness testimony on the age verification bill, which meant they could not hear from experts who would tell them it’s unworkable and a privacy nightmare).

Nevertheless, I think that because of these kinds of shenanigans, if an MP refuses to testify about their own bill, the committee should vote it down, and it should be killed as a consequence for wasting everyone’s time. I’d even be happy putting that in the Standing Orders. We also need to change it so that if a PMB needs a royal recommendation, it doesn’t even get debated rather than the current practice of letting it go as far as the final vote, because again, that wastes everyone’s time, and time is a precious commodity in Parliament, and plenty of MPs could have used that time for their own PMBs who won’t get the change.

Speaking of committees, the Conservatives want an “immediate” recall of the public safety committee, rather than waiting for its regularly-scheduled meeting next week, to discuss the arrests of two teens who planned to bomb a pro-Israel rally on Parliament Hill. But in spite of the seriousness of the topic, we all know what this is really about—getting clips for their social media of them talking about how “divisive” Trudeau is, and that he personally caused this kind of radicalisation. It’s as predictable as it is stupid, but this is where our Parliament is right now.

This is a serious issue, but recalling the committee “immediately” is about nothing more than gathering clips for social media, and probably ones that try to blame Justin Trudeau’s “divisiveness” for this. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-13T19:11:02.519Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces shot down two cruise missiles, two ballistic missiles and thirty-seven drones headed for Kyiv, where it looks like renewed attacks are being made on power systems ahead of winter. Ukraine’s General Staff also says that they repelled four attacks on the city of Kupiansk in the northeast. Here’s a look at Ukrainians trying to support those on the front lines while they collectively wait to see what Trump 2.0 brings.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The PBO immolates what little credibility he had left

Posted on by

It looks like the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Yves Giroux, decided to extend his “winning” streak and cover himself in glory at the Commons’ finance committee yesterday, and once again immolated what credibility he has left. Defending his report, claiming he had access to a confidential report from Environment Canada that he was “gagged” from releasing (which the Conservatives jumped on and launched a thousand shitposts about, because committees are now only about content generation), lamented that the government doesn’t publish more climate modelling of their own, and how he hates how his reports are politicised, even though he’s been at this job for years and knows full well that PBO reports are always politicised, because that’s why MPs like them—so that they can both wield those reports as a cudgel, while hiding behind the shield of the PBO’s non-partisan “credibility” to keep the government from attacking it.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1797780078203671008

https://twitter.com/prairiecentrist/status/1797691621708054916

While this Tony Keller column lays out four major problems with the original carbon price report that the PBO produced—which again, Giroux continues to not really apologise for—energy economist Andrew Leach has some additional comments, driving home both how shallow the analysis is, and the fact that it’s not replicable because the PBO studiously refuses to explain his methodology, relying on “trust us, that’s our job.” But as we saw on P&P and again at finance committee, he complained that the government should be doing this kind of modelling work when it’s literally his one statutorily legislated job to do.

And to be helpful, Jennifer Robson provides some unsolicited advice on how the PBO could make his methodologies more transparent, if he actually wanted to do that (which I doubt, because so many of his reports rely on his pulling a novel methodology out of his ass, according to the many economists I’ve interviewed in the past). But that’s also part of the point about why he has no credibility left, and why he should start drafting that resignation letter.

https://twitter.com/lindsaytedds/status/1797817128483254759

Ukraine Dispatch:

A civilian was killed in a Russian strike on a recreation facility in Kharkiv. Here’s a look at what to expect from Ukraine’s peace summit to be held in Switzerland next week.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Brian Mulroney passes away

Posted on by

News came down last evening that former prime minister Brian Mulroney had passed away after some health challenges.

The Star has a pretty good obituary here, as well as some of the reactions to his passing, and the CBC has a series of photos over the course of his life.

https://twitter.com/yfblanchet/status/1763346642294411713

Bloc MP Louis Plamondon, who was first elected as a PC MP in 1984 along with Mulroney, reflects on Mulroney.

In reaction, Susan Delacourt notes that it’s hard to imagine a Canada without the larger-than-life Mulroney given his lasting legacy, and also reflects on the political lessons that she learned in covering him during his time in office. Ian Brodie praises Mulroney for his strategic sense in global affairs at a time of great upheaval.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces are pushing hard against the front lines in the east and southeastern parts of Ukraine, which Ukraine has repelled, and they do keep shooting down Russian warplanes, downing another three on Thursday alone. Ukraine is using more domestically-manufactured military equipment, as they strive to move more toward self-sufficiency and away from faltering Western aid.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Winnipeg Lab documents revealed at last

Posted on by

We finally got a look at the Winnipeg Lab documents yesterday, and the reason why those two research scientists were fired, and it’s certainly far more innocuous than the lurid tales that certain Conservative MPs have been telling over the years. The short version is that the scientists in question, likely out of sheer naïveté and belief in the goodness of science, were far too trusting of Chinese counterparts, and didn’t like to follow rules and protocols when they didn’t feel like it, and eventually, lied to CSIS security screeners about their activities. This doesn’t appear to be some kind of major espionage, but a pair of scientists were entirely too precious, and were used to having their own way, and became security risks as a result, hence their termination.

It shouldn’t have taken this long to see the documents, but this was a whole dog-and-pony show for the Conservatives, who demanded—bizarrely­—that the Commons’ law clerk do the redactions for the documents rather than trained public servants, never mind that the clerk has no national security training and doesn’t know what to look for in terms of potential security issues. Even though the government turned the documents over to NSICOP in an unredacted form, the Conservatives went and boycotted the committee for theatrical reasons alone, and eventually, the government came up with an ad hoc process that involved MPs from all parties and retired judges to go through the documents, and it took years longer than it should have if they just let NSICOP do its work in the first place. There was no reason for them to object and to do this song and dance, and make false accusations about what was being hidden, and yet they carried on like this for years for absolutely no reason.

Predictably, Pierre Poilievre is trying to make this an issue about Justin Trudeau “allowing” this potential security breach, except that these scientists did most of their work in the Harper era, and the Public Health Agency of Canada is an arm’s-length agency, which the government cannot micro-manage. Kind of like CBSA. There has been zero contrition from Michael Chong about the fact that he has been spinning outright fictions and conspiracy theories about these documents for the past four years, but he sold out his integrity years ago, so none of this is surprising. And now that these documents have been released, I will point out that reporter Dylan Robertson was getting these stories and had the context of their firing correct when he was reporting on this for the Winnipeg Free Press years ago. That reporting all stands up with the release of these documents, and he deserves major props for it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians bombed the Kharkiv region, killing four people including a six-year-old girl and a priest. Here’s a look at the new chief of military intelligence for Ukraine, who has hinted that the country’s previous counter-offensive plans wound up in Russian hands before it had begun. Ukraine’s finance minister says they need about $3 billion in foreign aid per month in order to maintain macroeconomic stability through the year.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A choice of passive voice

Posted on by

The reported death of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny triggered reactions around the globe, and especially at the security conference underway in Munich, where Navalny’s wife spoke shortly after the news. Reaction from Canadian figures was pretty swift. Justin Trudeau was on CBC radio and was quite blunt: “It’s something that has the entire world being reminded of exactly what a monster Putin is.”

And then there was Pierre Poilievre, who passive-voiced the whole thing.

Between this and his votes regarding the Ukraine trade agreement, it’s not unreasonable to conclude that he is winking and nodding to a certain online audience. And while certain pundits have been “We think the initial vote was a mistake and he can’t take the L so he doubles down,” I suspect it’s more like “Sure, some Ukrainian diaspora communities are going to be pissed off, but what are they going to do? Vote Liberal? Hahaha.” They have hitched their wagon to the far-right PPC-voting crowd because they think that’ll get them the votes they need to win, and this is a crowd, that is mainlining Russian disinformation online, and believe that Volodymyr Zelenskyy is a money-launderer buying yachts, that Putin is just trying to shut down “biolabs,” and throw in some antisemitic conspiracy theories about “globalists,” and it’s all stuff that Poilievre is willing to wink and nod to. Passive-voicing this statement was a choice.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1758543572578484364

Continue reading →

QP: Calling out Poilievre’s chief advisor

Posted on by

The prime minister and his deputy were both in Toronto and surroundings, while most of the other leaders were also absent. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and worried about the number of Mexicans claiming asylum with a low acceptance rate, and demanded the government do something about it. Marc Miller said that there were diplomatic discussions happening, and he wouldn’t pre-empt those with a statement in the House. Poilievre then pivoted to auto thefts, and blamed the federal government for the rise. Dominic LeBlanc said that while Poilievre likes to invent blame, they are working with provincial partners and there is a summit next week on the subject. Poilievre repeated the accusation in English, and LeBlanc repeated that they did strengthen bail conditions to close the “loophole” he was concerned about. Poilievre again insisted that this was all about “catch-and-release” bail, and this time, Arif Virani said that the Conservatives are voting against measures to combat organised crime. Poilievre then went on a misleading tear about the Bank of Canada, and Anita Anand gave a canned line about the lowest debt in the G7 and the programmes they rolled out to help Canadians.

Christine Normdin led for the Bloc, and she cited a CMHC report about housing in Quebec because the population is growing too fast, and blamed the government for letting in too many immigrants. Marc Miller found it curious that they say they didn’t want to blame immigrants but still were anyway. Normandin repeated her same question, and Miller said that they can’t treat asylum seekers like cattle and just ship them around at whim.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he blamed the government for high grocery prices because he alleges they are too close to grocery giants. Sean Fraser listed measures the government has taken to increase competition in the marketplace. Don Davies asked about the Manulife deal with Loblaws, which is not federal jurisdiction. Mark Holland patted himself on the back for helping to achieve savings with prescriptions through things like bulk purchasing.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Just what farm emissions are subject to the carbon levy?

Posted on by

While Pierre Poilievre continues to insist that the federal carbon levy is driving up food prices, he provides no proof of that other than his “common sense” reckon that the levy increases the price of everything.

It doesn’t really, but Poilievre likes to make you think it does. So, University of Alberta’s Andrew Leach has crunched the numbers, and lo, the carbon levy is exempt on very nearly all farm emissions, and contributes but a fraction to other expenses, like transportation. Of course, Poilievre is lying to make you angry, but it’s nice to have some receipts to know just exactly what the lies are.

Ukraine Dispatch:

The fallout of that Russian plane downing that allegedly carried Ukrainian POWs continues to reverberate, as Russia claims they gave Ukraine a 15-minute warning about said plane, which Ukraine denies; as well, Ukraine’s human rights commissioner says that he believes this is an information op because the list of supposed POWs provided included several names on it that had previously been swapped. Several Ukrainian state organisations are reporting that they are experiencing cyber-attacks. Russia is also claiming that Ukrainian drones are responsible for an attack on an oil refinery in Russia’s south.

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: Keeping up the blame-shifting

Posted on by

Another day, another reminder that the premiers are engaging in blame-shifting around rising crime rates, while they pretend that this is all the fault of the federal government allegedly making changes to the bail system a couple of years ago. It’s wrong—the uptick started before that bill passed, and that bill merely codified Supreme Court of Canada rulings while actually increasing conditions and added a reverse onus for domestic violence accusations.

The federal justice minister, who has committed to some targeted changes to bail laws, keeps pointing out that this is a more complex issue, much of it revolving around mental health. And guess whose job that is? The provinces! Not only have they been under-funding it, but they largely didn’t use the last mental health transfer, negotiated by Jane Philpott, on mental health, which is why Carolyn Bennett has seen the promised mental health transfer be part of the bilateral agreements with provinces on increased health spending that will have more strings attached. To add to that, provinces are also under-funding their justice systems, and you have provinces like Manitoba where the Crown prosecutors are grieving with their employers because they’re short-staffed, over-worked and under-paid. That’s not the federal government’s fault.

But premiers don’t like to be reminded that this is their failure. They’re eager to try and cast the blame elsewhere and count on credulous media to both-sides their claims so that they won’t actually be called out on their bullshit, and the federal Conservatives are happy to amplify their blame-shifting because it gives them an issue to fundraise on. We have problems in our system, but we also have solutions, but those responsible for implementing them would rather pretend it’s not their problem. We shouldn’t let them get away with it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles are again being fired at Ukrainian cities early in the morning, and Ukrainian air defences around Kyiv appear to be holding. Over in Bakhmut, Russian forces are claiming four more blocks of territory, but Ukraine still controls the key supply route into the city. Two Ukrainian drones destroyed the fuel depot at Sevastopol in occupied Crimea, giving another sign the counter-offensive is near. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that he carries a pistol with him, and was prepared to fight to the death if Russian forces had taken his headquarters.

Continue reading →