Tag Archives: Michelle Rempel

Roundup: Papering over party divisions

Posted on by

It’s day one-hundred-and-twenty-four of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and Severodonestk has fallen, mostly pounded into rubble the way that Mariupol was. Up next for Russian forces is across the river, to the city of Lysychansk, where they are now trying to once again encircle Ukrainian forces, while more civilians try to evacuate the area. Emboldened, Russians have also fired missiles again at Kyiv, killing at least one person. This is likely seen as a warning as NATO leaders are gathering early this week to reaffirm support for Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1541103194184601601

Closer to home, all does not sound well in the Conservative caucus. Last week, in her blog post announcing she wouldn’t be running to lead the UCP, Michelle Rempel Garner noted that:

…in both parties there have also been squabbles that have erupted in the pages of national media, public meltdowns, nearly missed physical fights, coups, smear jobs, leaked recordings and confidential emails, lack of consensus on critical issues, caucus turfings, people harassed to the point where they resign roles, and hours long meetings where members have been subjected to hours of public castigation. There have been heated exchanges to get basic concerns addressed, unjustified insularity in decision making, shunnings, exclusionary cliques and more.

So of course, over the weekend, Candice Bergen was asked about this, and while she refused to say anything about it to the Star, she denied this was the case to CTV, seeming to imply that Rempel Garner is either making it up, or is “experiencing things differently.” Bergen is also talking a big game about party unity, and is going to spend Canada Day in Halifax with Peter MacKay, for some inexplicable reason, as though this makes a point about party unity. (Remember, MacKay was never really a Red Tory, given that he voted in lockstep with Stephen Harper on everything, and couldn’t vote for socially progressive issues when other former Red Tories would). Bergen is also denying that she has any safety concerns, and seems to pin blame for the level of harassment that MPs are facing onto Justin Trudeau because he made people get vaccinated, and called out far-right extremists for what they are.

Also over the weekend, former Conservative Senate den mother leader Marjorie LeBreton emerged to voice her concerns about the direction the party is heading in, particularly around their support for the occupation, which erodes their credibility as a law-and-order party. She’s so incensed about Poilievre’s support for the occupation that she resigned from her position as a member of his riding association over it, and worries that the party may be “fracturing beyond repair.” None of this is painting a promising picture of a party that Bergen is insisting nothing is wrong in, but perhaps she is not the most credible source for what his happening behind closed doors, because it’s not in her interest to tell the truth about it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Reverberations north of the border

Posted on by

We’re now in day one-hundred-and-twenty-two of Russia’s invasion of Ukriane, and it looks like the battle for Severodonestk is ending as Ukrainian forces are withdrawing before they are completely encircled. That means Russians are now advancing on its twin city of Lysychansk, across the river, which will secure hold on the Luhansk province. More heavy American weaponry is arriving, but we’ll see if it’s enough to change the balance.

Closer to home, there was a lot of reaction in Canada to the US Supreme Court overturning the Roe v Wade decision, which essentially re-criminalises abortions in many states. Conservative leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis was quick to jump on it to encourage an “adult conversation” about it in Canada, which apparently involves abortion doctors being mind-readers and taking away these rights from women in other countries. (Other Conservative leadership candidates, including Pierre Poilievre, have reiterated that they are pro-choice). There are also a bunch of voices, some of whom are concern trolling, others of whom are genuinely clueless, who point out that Justin Trudeau hasn’t done anything to enshrine abortion rights in the constitution, which is a) dumb, and b) counter-productive as it actually plays into the hands of anti-abortionists who would use the opportunity to introduce limits. Yes, Trudeau has promised more about access, and he has tasked both ministers Duclos and Ien with consultations on adding regulations to the Canada Health Act around abortion access, but that’s not something that can happen overnight, as there is a process for regulation, and as we have long established, putting strings on healthcare funding for provinces is touchy business. But provinces are where the fight is in Canada, because they control access.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1540380879519875073

There was also a number of news programmes yesterday which ran interviews with anti-abortionists in a completely uncritical fashion, allowing them to frame the conversation in their usual bullshit terms, and getting only the most minor pushback to some of their claims of popular support for their cause. These kinds of uncritical interviews are key to how misinformation and disinformation is spread through the media, because they have no capacity to do anything other than both-sides the issue, which again, allows misinformation and disinformation to spread because it isn’t challenged. We are fully in the age of disinformation, and our media outlets have learned absolutely nothing about how to deal with it, and yesterday was case in point about that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Home for the summer

Posted on by

It is day one-hundred-and-twenty-one of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and still no news out of Severodonetsk, but there is additional bombardment of the area including air strikes. The big news, however, was that the EU has granted the request to make Ukraine a candidate for membership—itself a years-long process that will require great reforms, most especially Ukraine cracking down on its problem of government corruption—but more than anything, this is a symbolic victory. It signals that Ukraine is moving more to the west, and away from Russia, and that further undermines Putin’s aims.

Closer to home, both the House of Commons and the Senate have risen for the summer, the latter being a problem because it was supposed to sit next week and they rammed through a bunch of legislation with little or no debate or scrutiny in order to make it happen. Below is a speech by Senator Paula Simons about one of those bills being expedited, and why that’s a problem (and you’d better believe I have an angry column about this coming out over the weekend).

Meanwhile, Aaron Wherry had an interview with the Commons’ Speaker, Anthony Rota, and frankly I wonder if we’re living in the same reality. Rota seems to think that his method of gentle chiding of MPs gets results, and that they change their behaviours when he hints that he knows who’s being disruptive (but won’t actually name and shame them). Except he doesn’t get results, and they continue to openly flout the rules, because they know that he’ll belatedly make some gentle comment that won’t actually do anything to enforce the rules that they broke, so it keeps happening again and again. But he thinks this is a good way, because things aren’t as bad as they were in the pre-2015 days before the Liberals largely stopped applauding and being as vociferous in their heckles. He’s not doing his job, plain and simple.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Summoning the hockey executives

Posted on by

It’s day one-hundred-and-eighteen of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and word has it that the Russians are trying to overcome Severodonestk by Sunday, thereby taking the whole of the Luhansk region. While the Ukrainians are being pounded by artillery, they are allegedly inflicting heavy casualties on the Russians, but they need more Western arms, and they need them to arrive even faster if they have any hope of taking out the Russian artillery that is pounding them. Ukraine, meanwhile, is planning on taking a bunch of destroyed Russian tanks and armoured vehicles on a tour around Europe to keep attention on the conflict as it drags on.

Closer to home, the attention on the Hill yesterday was on the heritage committee, where Hockey Canada officials were summoned to explain the payout to settle a sexual assault claim, and whether federal funds were used to do so in contravention of their funding agreements. The minister has ordered a forensic audit of their finances to ensure that this didn’t happen, but we did see MPs on all sides go hard on this, as they should have. (Note that the Conservatives did try to use this issue as a means of procedural warfare in their filibuster of the online broadcasting bill, which was absolutely skeezy). Here is some comment from former athlete and whistle-blower Alheli Picazo, who has experience with the problem of tackling abuse in sport:

Continue reading →

Roundup: An apology for Zoom—but not for why you think

Posted on by

It’s now on or about day one-hundred-and-thirteen of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and it looks like Severodonetsk has not fallen, and lo, the promised humanitarian corridor did not happen. (This is my surprised face). Russians did shell a weapons depot near Lviv in the western part of the country, where Western munitions were allegedly stored. Meanwhile, civilians in areas where Russian forces were repelled are being faced with mines, which are killing and maiming people. Canada will be sending $9 million worth of barrel replacements for the howitzers we shipped to Ukraine earlier in the year, while Anita Anand is calling on the defence industry to be more responsive.

Closer to home, there was an interesting apology in the Senate on Tuesday, which was when Senator Rosa Galvez apologised for having attended a committee meeting over Zoom from out of the country. You see, the Senate adopted rules around their hybrid sittings where they must be at a designated office or residence, and that’s it. There is a sad history in the Senate of abuse going back decades were certain senators basically lived in Mexico and showed up for one day a year, and collected their base salary, and it was a scandal. Since then attendance records are made public and they essentially couldn’t get away with it any longer. (I remember after an earthquake, I went to the Hill just after it happened, and while senators were gathered on the lawn, they were keen to ensure that the person who recorded their attendance saw that yes indeed, they were present even though they were out of the Chamber at the moment it happened and the building was evacuated, because they take it seriously). Regardless, this senator says she was caught up in wanting to do her committee work while she was at the Summit of the Americas, which is commendable in a way, but also shows some of the dangers of this reliance on hybrid sittings in that it creates a new obligation of presenteeism.

Meanwhile, over in the West Block, voting was suspended for a few minutes yesterday afternoon because there was a problem with the voting app that MPs use, and once again, this is a problem with how hybrid sittings are operating. I’ve already written about how this creates a new standard of perfect attendance which is a problem for all involved, but we’re already seeing a greater move for MPs and ministers who are in town not sticking around in the Chamber, but taking off and voting by app, and this is going to have profound consequences the longer it goes on. Votes were one of the few times when ministers could reliably be found in the Chamber, and backbenchers and opposition members could buttonhole them about pressing issues. If they take off as soon as votes are about to start because they think it’s easier to press a button (and have their faces recognised), then we’re straying dangerously far from one of the core symbolic elements of our parliamentary democracy. This should be killed with fire, along with the hybrid sittings, as soon as possible.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Questions on the inquiry terms

Posted on by

It is now on or about day sixty-two of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and there were missile strikes throughout the country as Russian forces targeted Ukraine’s rail infrastructure, with a particular eye toward disrupting the ability to move weapons coming in from allied countries in the west toward their positions in the eastern part of the country. (This is the kind of operational security that is at stake when our government won’t give specifics about their weapons shipments). As well, the American officials who just visited Kyiv have said that more weapons are on the way, and that they are hoping to resume activity in their embassies within the country within the next few weeks, and hopefully in Kyiv itself, which would be a major symbolic move (and yes, Canada is making its own considerations for resuming activities, depending on the security situation).

Closer to home, the government waited until the very last moment to launch the public inquiry into the use of the Emergencies Act, as the Act stipulates. Justice Paul Rouleau of the Ontario Court of Appeal will head the inquiry, and has 300 days to table his final report in Parliament. While I have a column that delves further into this, I did want to put a few comments here, from national security experts Jessica Davis and Leah West, about particular observations they have about the terms of reference for this inquiry:

Continue reading →

Roundup: Reaction to Russia’s further invasion of Ukraine

Posted on by

Russian forces have been advancing in Ukraine, but not without opposition. Shelling continues against several Ukrainian cities and into Kyiv itself, as people are taking shelter in the metro. Closer to home, prime minister Justin Trudeau announced another round of tougher sanctions against Russian oligarchs and other key leaders, and there is talk that yet more sanctions are on the way, but it also sounds like there is some difficulty in getting all of our allies on-side, and the thing about these kinds of sanctions is that everyone needs to do them so that there aren’t loopholes that Russia can slip through. (Trudeau also announced measures to help Canadians in Ukraine get safe passage to neighbouring countries, as well as expeditated immigration processing for Ukrainians).

But one of the biggest measures—cutting Russia out of the SWIFT global financial transaction system—has not yet been implemented because Europeans are balking (though Canada has reportedly been pushing for this, along with the UK). Canada is somewhat fortunate because we are less exposed to Russian trade and money than other allies, but it’s that exposure which will make sanctions harder on Western allies the tougher they are on Russia—and that’s something that a lot of the talking heads can’t seem to get their heads around. If you look at what European countries are trying to get carve-outs for, it’s because they don’t want to lose the Russian money in their economies. And that’s a tough pill to swallow, especially as all of our economies are still recovering from the pandemic recession.

https://twitter.com/LillyResearch/status/1496964138962386945

https://twitter.com/MatinaStevis/status/1496758467943866374

Where this will hurt us especially is higher world oil prices, as cutting Russia out of the market will further restrict supply at a time where energy shortages in certain countries have turned to oil to fill that gap, creating demand and limiting supply. That will mean higher gasoline prices in Canada, and while these higher prices will be good for the Alberta economy (oh, look—one more boom for them to piss away), it’s going to be felt in the inflation data, which will have more people lighting their hair on fire, demanding Something Must Be Done, but they won’t come out and spell out that they mean wage and price controls, or a new NEP. Jason Kenney, unable to read the room, is trying to make this about a new pitch for Alberta’s so-called Ethical Oil™, and we have federal Conservatives demanding a fast-tracked LNG infrastructure to export to Europe, but seriously, that’s a multi-year and multi-billion-dollar investment that is going to be short-lived the fast were decarbonise our economies.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Will the RCMP’s pledge be enough?

Posted on by

The question as to whether or not there was progress on dismantling the protest blockades is a rather fraught one, as the news that the RCMP in BC had announced their plans to withdraw their forces from the pipeline site with the proviso that the company be allowed access, which doesn’t sound like it sits well with those hereditary chiefs, because they insist that their eviction notice for Coastal GasLink stands. However, if removing the RCMP from Wet’suwet’en territory is the condition for the sympathetic protests blockades to come down, then we’ll see if that has the promised effect – we may not find out until the four hereditary chiefs who have travelled to Mohawk territory in Ontario have their meeting. In the meantime, Justin Trudeau had a teleconference with the premiers, who expressed frustration but had no consensus on how they would solve the impasse – though François Legault is threatening to send the police after the blockade near Montreal (though we’ll see if the police there respond to political direction, because that would be a violation of police independence). Oh, and while a lot of people are claiming that CN is blaming previously announced layoffs on the current blockade situation, the Teamsters has come out to say that these current (temporary) layoffs are different from those previously announced, so there goes another talking point.

Meanwhile, there has been increased reporting about those Wet’suwet’en voices who are both in favour of the pipeline, as well as those who are don’t appreciate the protesters invoking them, given that they say the dispute is none of their business. As part of that, here is a lengthy thread that tries to get a better sense of the house and clan structure of the Wet’suwet’en, along with trying to get some clarity as to the status of hereditary chiefs, while this thread explains a bit more of their decision-making structure, and what may be an issue at present with some of the politics with the anti-pipeline factions. It’s complex, and resists easy narratives.

I would add that what I wrote yesterday still stands – that the company still needs to act here, because the reporting on the timeline of the decision-making and consultation seems to indicate that they cut the corners around consultation with the hereditary chiefs, and until they pull back and go through that process, then some of these problems won’t get resolved, and the current situation will drag on until things get really uncomfortable, and people start demanding drastic action, which will only hurt the cause for everyone.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A public dust-up

Posted on by

Late last week, as news came out that the Canadian government had been instrumental in getting a number of Syrian “White Helmets” and their families out of that country and that a number of them would be resettled in Canada, there was a bit of a public scrap between Conservatives as the party’s foreign affairs critic gave a position on the situation that Rempel hadn’t been consulted on, despite the fact that she’s the immigration and refugee critic. Her musing publicly as to whether the boys made the decision without her is one of those signs that perhaps not everyone is singing from the same song sheet in Andrew Scheer’s Conservative party – which isn’t necessarily a bad thing – but not consulting the relevant critics before freelancing an opinion to the media is a bit of a faux pas. Whether it was sexism (per Rempel’s insinuation) or just arrogance on the part of O’Toole, remains to be determined, but it was certainly illuminating for observers.

On the subject of Rempel, the Hill Times has an extensive profile of her, which is a good read that I’d encourage everyone to do. It’s a pretty fair piece, and I would suggest to people that her persona over social media is not representative of who she is as an MP. Which isn’t to say that her social media persona isn’t a problem – it very much is, particularly when she sends her followers on the attack against someone who she has a disagreement with. But that aside, she’s the kind of MP who takes the time to do her actual job of things like reading the Estimates and the Public Accounts, and who can follow debate and ask questions that aren’t scripted (and indeed, she tends to eschew talking points whenever possible). We need more MPs who take the job as seriously as she does.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Fundraising fears

Posted on by

It’s been a curious thing the last few days, watching in QP as the Conservatives are tearing their hair out over this Bill Morneau fundraiser in Halifax and raising the spectre of the wealthy contributing to politics, and calling Bill Morneau a millionaire like it’s a bad thing. As though suddenly the Conservative Party of Canada has become overrun by socialists or something. Really, it’s just their cheap populism run amok, trying to cast themselves as champions of ordinary Canadians (never mind that their policies disproportionately aided wealthier Canadians during their decade in power), and if they really were the champions of the working class, you would think the rest of their policies to date would be different (such as around labour unions or the Canada Pension Plan, or anything like that), but no. And if you think this is really a question about ethics or conflicts of interest, well, no, the Ethics Commissioner herself has stated that this fundraiser was above board, but hey, if they wanted to tighten the rules around fundraising, she’s been asking them to do that for years and after a decade in power, they wouldn’t do that either. So here we are, with a desperate attempt to frame perfectly above-board fundraising as “cash for access” and somehow comparable to the situation in Ontario, which it’s not. Meanwhile, Howard Anglin had a perfectly apropos tweet storm on this, so I’ll let him finish off here.

Continue reading →