Tag Archives: Pierre Poilievre

Roundup: Reheating old rage-bait

Posted on by

If the rage-bait works, then why not try again? This is apparently the thinking of the Conservatives, who are once again falsely claiming that the federal government has “banned prayer” by military chaplains at Remembrance Day ceremonies, after claiming this last year and it’s no more true now than it was then. Nevertheless, this is exactly the sort of thing that gets their base all hot and bothered, and who will open their wallets over it.

There has been a policy decision made by the Chaplain General, independent of government, that encourages more inclusive language by chaplains in order to respect the greater diversity within the Forces, but again, not a prayer ban, and not ordered by the government. But for Andrew Scheer to claim that it’s the government that’s lying about it and not him, serial liar who lies about everything under the sun, and to then try and clap back at Marc Miller was…something. I can’t even.

Ukraine Dispatch

Overnight attacks by Russian drones killed one civilian and injured more than thirty in Odesa, with other attacks on the Kyiv region. Military bloggers say that Russian forces are closing in on Kurakhove and Pokrovsk in the east. Ukrainian drones hit an oil refinery in Saratov in Russia, but damage was said to be insignificant.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Emissions cap unveiled

Posted on by

At long last, the federal government unveiled their long-awaited oil and gas emissions cap draft regulations, mandating that they reduce emissions by 35 percent by 2032, with the expectation that much of these reductions are going to come in the form of reducing methane emissions—much of which is already underway—and that production is still expected to rise by 16 percent over those eight years. (Five things to know about the proposal here). For an industry that insists that it’s going to be “Net Zero” by 2050, this would seem like an achievable milestone to get there along the way, but apparently not.

Danielle Smith had a meltdown and started threatening legal action, but can’t exactly articulate on what basis that would be. Certain newspaper columnists posited that she could somehow invoke the Notwithstanding Clause, which doesn’t apply to this sort of situation in any way, shape or form (and should be disqualifying for someone writing in a newspaper with a six-figure salary).

Industry insists this is going to kill them, but they’ve been promising reductions for decades and have taken plenty of government money to help them fulfil those promises that they are now insisting are impossible. So…at what point do we start calling them on their own bullshit? If their plan is to hope that there will be magical technology by 2050 that will painlessly reduce their emission for them, well, that’s their problem. They made these promises, and it’s time they show how they’re going to live up to them.

Ukraine Dispatch

There was another Russian air attack made against Kyiv overnight, but it’s too early to tell how much damage was caused. South Korea’s defence ministry now estimates more than 10,000 North Korean troops are in Russia, but the Pentagon cannot confirm if they are currently fighting in the Kursk region.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1853389611604615191

Continue reading →

Roundup: Toxifying a committee

Posted on by

The ongoing denigration of this Parliament continues, as the toxic swamp that committees have devolved into has claimed another victim. Liberal MP Anita Vandenbeld, who has a resumé full of doing work with women and civil society engagement in other countries, removed herself from the Status of Women committee after relentless harassment from Conservative members of the committee, in particular Michelle Ferreri, plus the actions of the Chair, Shelby Kramp-Neuman, in facilitating it, all of it stemming from the set-up that the Conservatives engineered over that so-called “emergency meeting” in the summer where the Chair abused her authority to summon witnesses with no agreement for a study that had not been agreed to, which was being used to try and embarrass the government.

The Status of Women committee used to be one of the most functional and non-partisan committees in the House of Commons, but Poilievre and the Conservatives couldn’t have that. They insisted on replacing the previous committee chair for Kramp-Neuman, who has been doing their bidding, and have made it toxic and dysfunctional, like everything else in this current parliament, because that is part of their overall plan. They need to break everything in order to blame the government, justify an election and to tell people who don’t follow politics and don’t understand what’s going on here that they need to come to power so that they can fix things, when really, the plan is that once they are in power, they will start dismantling the guardrails of the state. None of this is subtle, or novel, and it’s been done in plenty of other countries where their democracies have been dismantled by far-right parties, and it’s happening here while our media stands idly by because both-sides and “We don’t care about process stories,” while the Elder Pundits keep tut-tutting and insisting that it won’t be that bad. We’re getting into some seriously dangerous territory, and nobody wants to sound the alarm.

Big #cdnpoli energy.We are headed in a very bad direction.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-29T14:16:59.724Z

Speaking of committees, the public safety committee heard from top national security officials, who were there to talk about the foreign interference including violence and homicide commissioned by the Indian government, and they made some pretty important revelations, but MPs didn’t really want to hear it, because once again, they were too busy grinding partisan axes. The Conservatives only asked about the embargoed briefing to the Washington Post, which has been falsely termed a “leak,” when it was confirmed that they were contacted by writers from the Post to confirm certain details from their reporting, which they agreed to under the embargo, in part because it was seen as a credible newspaper that could counter the coming disinformation from Indian sources (and we know that certain newspapers in Canada had swallowed Indian disinformation whole on previous occasions). And the Liberals? They were too busy gathering clips of these officials explaining why Pierre Poilievre should get his security clearance. Honest to Zeus, this shouldn’t be this difficult, especially for such a sensitive topic, but nope. MPs have once again beclowned themselves.

Ukraine Dispatch

At least nine people were injured and several apartments set on fire by a drone attack on Kyiv. Russians claim they have seized control of Selydove and are moving to encircle the town of Kurakhove in the east. Also facing imminent Russian threat is Pokrovsk, where the coal mines that fuel the steel mills are still operating as Russians close in.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1851276298242466109

Continue reading →

Roundup: So he is hiding something?

Posted on by

Over the past couple of days, Justin Trudeau and Karina Gould have been intimating that Pierre Poilievre has “something to hide” by not seeking his security clearance. It’s a stupid talking point, it trivialises the seriousness of the issue, and it descends to the same childish accusations that the Conservatives are lobbing at the government over the refusal to turn over certain unredacted documents related to SDTC as part of a banana republic production order (as the subject of the current privilege filibuster). It’s not cute, and it doesn’t make them look like the adults in the room.

And then along comes Michael Chong, who gave this cockamamie story to the Globe and Mail that because security clearances can involve invasive questions like sexual partners or past drug use, and that Trudeau is “so desperate” that he would use that information to publicly undermine Poilievre. But, and former CSIS director Ward Elcock made the point in the same piece, CSIS would never turn that information over to the PM, no matter the political pressure, so not only is Chong just making up conspiracy bullshit (as he has been wont to do increasingly of late), he is actually adding fuel fire by making it look like Poilievre does indeed have something to hide. Like, my dude, did you even think about your stupid conspiracy for five whole seconds before you blurted it out to Bob Fife? Honestly.

Remember when Michael Chong was a man of principle and didn't just constantly make up shitty conspiracy theories to suck up to his leader? #cdnpoli www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/art…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-24T17:20:23.744Z

We all know that the reasons Poilievre won’t get the clearance is because it would require him to lie slightly less than he does currently. Poilievre even tacitly admitted this when he declared in QP “This prime minister will not gag me!” (Phrasing!) But by trying to take this “hiding something” schtick across the board is just tiresome when everyone should be striving to be grown-ups about this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians launched a thermobaric ammunition attack on Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region, while Ukrainian forces shot down 40 out of 50 drones overnight. Russian forces have been making a fast advance into the town of Selydove, which they have been trying to take control of. Ukrainian intelligence suggests that North Korean troops are already in the Kursk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Senators won’t be pushed around

Posted on by

The Bloc Québécois are trying to sweeten their demand for their two private members’ bills to pass before October 29th, saying they will help end the current filibuster in the House of Commons if the government does. Couple of small problems there—one is that the Senate can’t speed passage of any private members’ bills, no matter how much MPs or even the government strongly encourages them to; and the second is that the government isn’t going to give a royal recommendation to their OAS bill, because they absolutely don’t want to set a precedent there.

Nevertheless, Mary Ng wrote a letter to Senator Peter Boehm, who chairs the committee studying the Supply Management bill, urging him to speed it along, and it was co-signed by a few MPs from different parties, no doubt to try and demonstrate that they all care about this. Boehm, rightly, responded by telling them to go pound sand. The committee estimates it’ll get to clause-by-clause of the bill in the first week of November, because that’s how long it’ll take, end of story. And let me reiterate once again—there is no mechanism in the Senate to fast-track private members’ bills, and that’s for very good reason. In fact, during the Harper years, they tried to rewrite the Senate rules to allow for it to happen—in part because they were moving some odious legislation through as private members’ bills instead of government bills for various reasons (including the fact that PMBs get very little study and are automatically time-allocated so they can’t really be filibustered), and enough senators pushed back on that attempt that it didn’t happen. Again, for good reason.

As for the Bloc’s frankly boneheaded suggestion that the prime minister needs to get on the phone to order senators “that he appointed” around undermines the entire institutional independence of the Upper Chamber. They are appointed in such a way as to make them largely immune to this kind of political pressure for very good reason, and this is proving that very point. By that logic, should the prime minister be phoning up judges that they appointed in order to pressure them to deciding cases in a particular way? How about the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? This extended tantrum they’re throwing is embarrassing for them, particularly when it began as a ham-fisted attempt at blackmail that it turns out they weren’t very good at.

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people, including a child, were killed in a Russian drone strike in Sumy. The UN estimates that the Ukrainian population has declined by ten million since the start of the invasion, a combination of people being displaced and war deaths. Ukraine has been targeting alcohol plants in Russia over the past several days. With news that North Korea is sending troops to fight with Russians, South Korea is now considering sending weapons to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another vice-regal safeguard?

Posted on by

As the security clearance discourse carries on, we remain confronted by the false notions that Pierre Poilievre is unable to receive a clearance, rather than the fact that he is unwilling, using the false claim that it’s somehow a “trap” to keep him from criticising the government. It’s not, there’s plenty of opportunity for him to criticise the government while being fully briefed, but as is the tradition with Canadian politicians, they have long preferred not to know because then they would have to be responsible in their commentary rather than bombastic, or as the Beaverton aptly put it, he would have to lie just slightly less than he already does.

Nevertheless, this turns to the question of what would happen if someone were to become prime minister, or at least win an election, where there are genuine security concerns about them? Well, Philippe Lagassé has an answer for that, and it lies in the reserve powers of the Governor General.

He makes a crucial point that it would be beyond the pale for CSIS and the RCMP to somehow have the veto over the appointment of a prime minister, but the discretion of the Governor General could conceivably be the constitutional fire extinguisher in such a case. It’s extremely unlikely to ever happen, but nevertheless, it’s a good thought exercise to consider given the times we live in.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck a residential district in Odesa on Friday, but there were no casualties. Residents in Kupiansk are fleeing ahead of a Russian advance in the area. Both Russia and Ukraine swapped 95 prisoners each in a deal brokered by the UAE. South Korean intelligence is corroborating Ukrainian intelligence’s claim that North Korea is now sending troops to right for Russia. Here’s a look at how far-right influencers openly used Russian money to make “documentary” hit-jobs on Ukraine and president Zelenskyy.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1847257217424113736

Continue reading →

Roundup: Implicated Conservatives and the lack of security clearance

Posted on by

It was quite the day at the Foreign Interference inquiry, as Justin Trudeau was on the stand and dropped this particular bombshell: “I have the names of a number of parliamentarians, former parliamentarians and-or candidates in the Conservative Party of Canada who are engaged (in) or at high risk of, or for whom there is clear intelligence around foreign interference.” He also indicated that where his own party is concerned, he has been dealing with any accusations internally, which includes ensuring that those implicated are not being given certain committee assignments or so on, which to be perfectly frank, is how one should be dealing with it (though he could have said at some point that he was aware of the report and has been dealing with it internally). The implication in all of this was that Pierre Poilievre, who refuses to get security-cleared, can’t do the same and it’s bewildering as to why.

Poilievre immediately fired back and accused Trudeau of lying under oath (quite something, especially considering that Poilievre is an avowed liar who lies all the time), and demanded that Trudeau release the names, which denies anyone implicated any due process. After all, some of this is intelligence and not evidence, and subjecting someone who was naïve in an interaction with a diplomat to a kangaroo court is hardly fair and could have particularly profound consequences, especially considering the escalating violence toward MPs, and that they will be tarred as “traitors” when in most cases, as the National Security Advisor said last week, many have simply engaged in bad behaviour or are unwitting because they don’t know better, but it hardly escalates to espionage or sabotage.

Part of the subplot around Poilievre’s refusal to get security clearance is the fact that his chief of staff is cleared and receives briefings—but is not considered “need-to-know” on this, because he’s not the party leader, and that’s a pretty big deal. It shouldn’t be up to the chief of staff to deal with implicated MPs, senators, or candidates, or to do something like rescind a nomination as a result of these allegations. In fact, two former CSIS directors even stated on television that they wouldn’t brief a chief of staff if the leader didn’t have clearance because the leader is the principal actor, and needs to be able to act on what the chief of staff tells him, which again, means needing to be briefed.

Another subplot around that security clearance issue was a delineation between someone who is a Privy Councillor, as Poilievre is, and security clearance, which frankly hasn’t been properly articulated before, and created confusion as a result, particularly because there were instances in the past where opposition leaders were sworn into Privy Council before being given classified briefings. This doesn’t, however, change the fact that Poilievre has chosen not to get a clearance, not that he can’t, which is the difference.

Meanwhile, the Beaverton managed to once again hit on the truth of the matter better than any legacy media outlet.

“Getting it would require him to lie slightly less than he does currently.”Bingo.Yet again, the Beaverton can get to the truth better than most legacy outlets can.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-16T23:44:40.382Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The latest drone strike by Russia saw 136 drones launched against Kyiv and other cities, and 68 of those were shot down, with 64 others unaccounted for, while at least two struck targets. Russians claimed they took two more villages—one in Donetsk, one in Luhansk—but Ukraine says that those attacks were repelled. Ukraine has asked the International Maritime Organization to send a monitoring mission to the ports in Odesa among increasing Russian attacks on grain storage and port infrastructure, which threatens global food security. A former Canadian soldier currently fighting in Ukraine has been injured, but wants to get back to the fight when he recovers. And we finally have details on President Zelenskyy’s “Victory Plan,” some of which hinges on an “unconditional” NATO invitation.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The PBO’s update won’t stop the disinformation

Posted on by

The Parliamentary Budget Officer’s revised report on the distributional impacts of the carbon levy was released yesterday, and lo, it reconfirmed that indeed most households are better off with the rebates than what they pay—most especially the bottom 40 percent of households by income. It also showed a much, much smaller impact on the overall economic impact when broken out per household, which is a significant change from his initial report, and what the Conservatives in particular weaponized. They still are—Question Period was full of those same figures being mendaciously framed as costing individual households when it’s talking about the impacts on GDP when broken out into the abstract figure of per-household costs, which is not how the economy works, and yes, any climate action is going to have an impact on GDP, but inaction is also going to have an even larger impact. But lying liars are going to lie about what these numbers mean, because nobody will actually explain the difference to them.

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1844402178200670530

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1844402188518605295

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1844402192742269299

With that in mind, take a look at the varied headlines, and guess the outlets:

As you can gather, at least one of those headlines is incredibly misleading, and unsurprisingly, some were framing this in explicitly the same terms the Conservatives are.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1844551195257446581

As well, Yves Giroux went back on Power & Politics to talk about his updated report, and thankfully David Cochrane gave him the gears for it, because he continues to refuse to take responsibility for the state of confusion and disinformation that his previous report has left the country and the political discourse in. I was also struck by the fact that he kept saying that these are the government’s own numbers—so what exactly is his office doing if they’re not independently coming up with their own figures as is the whole gods damned point of why the office was created? It just keeps reiterated how Giroux is completely unsuited for this job, and needs to resign because he’s clearly making the case for why this office needs to be abolished.

Programming note: I am taking the full long weekend off, so have a good Thanksgiving, and I’ll see you on Wednesday.

Ukraine Dispatch

Overnight attacks by Russia and those into Thursday hit civilian and critical infrastructure in cities like Mykolaiv and Kherson. There is also fierce fighting in the strategic city of Toretsk as Russians increase pressure on the eastern front. Ukrainian forces hit an ammunition depot in a Russian airfield in the Adygeya region, about 450 km from the front line.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Unserious about monetary policy

Posted on by

Amidst party leaders making boneheaded tax promises in the three provincial elections going on right now (no, BC, you can’t forgo taxes on tips without trying to change federal tax authorities), economist Stephen Gordon has decided to revisit Pierre Poilievre’s promise to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada—something he doesn’t have the power to do—and looks at the supposed reasons why. Unsurprisingly, they don’t add up.

In other words, Poilievre is performatively trying to once again blame inflation on someone other than the global supply chain crunch, or the climate-related droughts that impacted food prices (to say nothing of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine), and has been pursuing bullshit attacks as a distraction. Those attacks included trying to bring the Bank under the purview of the Auditor General so that they could order her to do “performance audits” on their decisions during COVID (something she has no expertise in doing), because they are not serious people, and get all of their ideas about macroeconomics from crypto bros on YouTube. It’s really, really depressing that anyone thinks they are remotely qualified to govern.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian shelling killed one person and injured six in the eastern city of Sloviansk. A Russian missile also struck near a major Ukrainian airbase, while Russians fired missiles at two grain vessels on the Black Sea. Russian forces have also entered the outskirts of Toretsk, which is another frontline settlement. Ukrainian forces took credit for the strike on an oil depot in occupied Crimea, which has been fuelling Russia’s war effort, as well as sabotaging a Russian minesweeper in its Black Sea fleet.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1843234630754836742

Continue reading →

Roundup: A double standard on barring speeches

Posted on by

There was a story in the Star yesterday that I hadn’t actually noticed happening, which is that Liberal MP Yvan Baker has been barred from speaking in the House of Commons until he apologises for saying that the “Putin wing” had taken over the Conservative Party on March 20th. Baker says he has no intention of apologising for what he considers to be the truth, and the Speaker, as usual, makes little tut-tut noises about what Baker said, never mind that there is a giant double-standard at play.

If Fergus is concerned about MPs alleging that their colleagues “stand four-square behind dictators,” it’s funny that the consequences only seem to apply to Baker. After all, Conservatives on a frequent basis have said that Trudeau is in the pocket of dictators, and that he allowed foreign interference on their behalf because it benefitted his party. (There is absolutely no public evidence of this). And most egregious was that Conservative MP Rachael Thomas has said on the floor of the Commons that Justin Trudeau is a “dictator,” and she faced absolutely no censure for saying it, which makes it really hard to see why Baker is being singled out for being hyperbolic—the point was about which elements of the party’s base that Poilievre is pandering to as opposed to saying that Poilievre is under Putin’s sway—when nobody else is. (I will note that Conservative MP Mark Strahl was barred from speaking for several weeks because he refused to withdraw the remarks that someone was lying, which is a big no-no under the rules of Parliament—rules which are now being absolutely abused—but he did eventually do so).

What is perhaps the most galling in all of his was the statement that Andrew Scheer gave to the Star, in which he says “Liberals should not whine and complain because they were caught spreading disinformation and lies to divide Canadians and cover for their own total failures on Ukraine.” Erm, serial liar and promoter of conspiracy theories Andrew Scheer is lecturing Liberals on the subject, when he faces zero consequences for lying in the House of Commons on a daily basis. We already knew he had absolutely no sense of shame, but it definitely extends to a complete lack of self-awareness as well. Just utterly ridiculous.

Ukraine Dispatch

It was another bloody weekend in Ukraine which saw waves of drone attacks targeting Kyiv last night, the pounding of Zaporizhzhia with guided bombs earlier, the death of a top judge after an attack on Kharkiv, and an attack on a hospital in Sumy that killed ten. President Zelenskyy says that the front lines are “very, very difficult” as autumn descends on the conflict.

Continue reading →