Tag Archives: Privilege

Roundup: A cynical grift vs actual xenophobic bigotry

Posted on by

Because apparently there isn’t enough stupidity right now in Canadian politics, Conservative MP Jamil Jivani has launched a petition about “protecting Christians from bigotry” in Canada. But it’s not a Parliamentary e-petition, given that the site leads to his own domain, so really, this is just yet another data-harvesting and fundraising exercise, and it’s the absolutely most cynical grift at that. Conservatives have long-ago learned that by appealing to the victimhood complex of self-professed Christians, that crowd will open up their wallets like there’s no tomorrow. And best of all, Jivani has roped in the support of his old Yale roommate, JD Vance, to shill for this as well (because that’ll get the MAGA crowd to open up their own wallets as well). I can’t tell you just how absolutely cynical this all is, and people are absolutely going to fall for it.

Meanwhile, François Legault is talking about new legislation, possibly invoking the Notwithstanding Clause, to ban prayer in public, but this is specifically meant to be targeting Muslims, and he’s not even being coy about it, or trying to couch it in some kind of universal secularist message. He’s literally saying he wants to send a “very clear message to Islamists,” which is absolutely outrageous. It’s also a fairly transparent play to xenophobia and scapegoating as he’s tanking in the polls and thinks that this will help him get ahead. This is the actual bigotry happening in this country, not whatever bullshit Jivani is trying to grift off of.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks on Zaporizhzhia and Kryvyi Riv have killed at least 12 and wounded over 40. Ukrainian officials have showcased a new locally-produced “rocket drone” that they say has twice the longest range attributed to the missiles supplied by western allies, while Ukraine’s bid to develop new missiles has been hampered by global supply chain issues.

Continue reading →

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 →

QP: Speaker Fergus walks into the trap set for him

Posted on by

The PM was wrapping up at the G20, while his deputy was also elsewhere, as were most of the other leaders. Andrew Scheer was there to lead off, and he listed a bunch of specious allegations around Randy Boissonnault, and Boissonnault responded that he had nothing to do with the person in question. Scheer tried again, listing more salacious allegations, and this time Jean-Yves Duclos responded with the usual lines about Pierre Poilievre not getting his security clearance. Scheer then cited a tweet from Jody Wilson-Raybould that took a swipe at Boissonnault and then got into a back-and-forth with Speaker Fergus about which words he used weren’t parliamentary. Karina Gould got up to to decry the disrespect the Conservatives have been showing the Chamber, and had to start over after a lengthy intervention by the Speaker, who was pretty much exasperated by this point. Fergus then threatened to start taking questions away, before Luc Berthold got up to give the same talking points about Boissonnault in French, and Gould again got up to say that Boissonnault has answered, and it was time to stop the partisan games. Berthold tried one more time, got warned about the use of a first name, and Gould again got up to moralise about how the Conservatives are making a joke of this place.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and railed about their fraud perpetrated against the CRA and the hunt for the whistleblowers. Marie-Claude Bibeau insisted that this was false and that they took it seriously, and that the Privacy Commissioner was involved. Therrien went on a tear about CRA trying to protect their own backsides, and Bibeau replied that they have not hidden anything and that that they have taken action.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and demand the government adopt the NDP’s economically illiterate GST cut plan. François-Philippe Champagne agreed with the framing device that the Conservatives would only cut, while the government is investing in Canadians. Leila Dance made the same demand in English, and Jenna Sudds also agreed that the Conservatives will cut before praising the school food programme.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Who cares about the Speaker’s peril when there are talking points to parrot?

Posted on by

Because this is sometimes a media criticism blog, I want to point you to a piece that was on The Canadian Press wire this weekend about a potential procedural showdown between the ongoing privilege filibuster and the coming end of the supply cycle, when the Supplementary Estimates will need to be voted on. This could have been a fascinating discussion that focuses on the pressure that will be on Speaker Fergus to get it right—which, to be frank, he did not when he made the ruling that allowed the privilege filibuster to begin, and pretty much every procedural expert I’ve spoken to has said he got the ruling wrong, and even more to the point, even a former Law Clerk of the Commons has said that this shouldn’t be a privilege issue because the powers to demand papers doesn’t extend to turning them over to a third party as is the case here.

But did the CP story touch on this? Hardly at all! There was some vaguely-worded talk about how this showdown could be unprecedented, but doesn’t actually explain the procedure, or the ruling the Speaker would have to make, and instead spends most of the piece both-sidesing the Liberal and Conservative talking points about the filibuster, because that’s what CP does best in their desire to be as scrupulously neutral as possible. Because who needs actual facts or an explanation of parliamentary procedure when you can quote talking points? This is a problem that CP refuses to address for itself, as news outlets across the country become more and more reliant on wire copy as the number of parliamentary bureaux for legacy media outlets continue to shrink.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched a massive missile and drone barrage against Ukraine overnight Saturday, which hit an apartment buildingin Sumy, killing eight. Russia launched a further 120 missiles and 90 drones overnight Sunday, targeting power systems and killing at least seven people, which will likely mean power cuts. The invasion is now 1,000 days old, and Russia is continuing to expend massively, including in lives, for small territorial gains. It also appears that President Biden has finally okayed the use of long-range weapons provided by the Americans to strike targets inside Russia. It appears that a Russian factory has been producing hundreds of decoy drones meant to overwhelm Ukraine’s defences, while certain drones will carry thermobaric warheads. (More on that investigation).

Continue reading →

Roundup: “Identity politics” on both sides

Posted on by

As the facile analysis of the Trump victory continues across the political talk shows, there was one particular exchange on Power & Politics last night that I felt deserves a bit more attention, because I think it’s important to call bullshit on, which is the discourse around “identity politics.” There has been a lot written about, particularly over the past two days, about how the left has been too scoldy about said “identity politics” and pronouns, and it caused the public to turn against it, which is both ridiculous given the broad-based rage-and-resentment campaign underway, but it also excuses the very identity politics that the Trump campaign (and the current far-right) play into themselves, particularly with race.

Nevertheless, after this diatribe about identity politics, columnist Emilie Nicolas, who was on that panel, objected and pointed in particular to what is happening right now with young men, who are being raised on a diet of Andrew Tate podcasts and their similar ilk, along with some allusions to the gamer-to-fascism pipeline, who are being taught an absolute load of horseshit about alpha men, male dominance, and rank misogyny. And Nicolas pointed out that this is identity politics, and to insist that it’s only coming from the “left” makes this particular kind of identity politics invisible when that’s exactly what it is.

Trying to dismiss anti-racism, anti-misogyny and anti-homophobia/transphobia as “identity politics” that the general population doesn’t care about (as though the general population consists entirely of white men), while racism, misogyny, and white supremacy are given a free pass and not being called “identity politics” when in fact that is at the core of what they are, is actually kind of damning to those who think the “left” needs to cool it. I do get that the whole “scolding” aspect is something that does need to be re-thought as a tactic, but to pretend that “identity politics” is the domain of the left alone is both wrong, and intellectually dishonest in the extreme.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian guided bomb attack hit Zaporizhzhia, killing four, wounding at least 33, destroyed houses and damaged an oncology centre. Energy facilities in the northern Zhytomyr region also suffered damage in a drone attack. President Zelenskyy told a European summit that “peace through strength” is what is needed (which is in part what he is hoping to flatter Trump with), and also said that North Korean forces have suffered casualties when fighting Ukrainian forces in Kursk.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1854554730325787106

Continue reading →

QP: Swagger around the Trump election

Posted on by

In the wake of the U.S. election results, the prime minister was present today to answer all questions, while his deputy was away. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and claimed that Trudeau had previously caved to Trump on softwood lumber and claimed he would do so again. Justin Trudeau dismissed this and noted how they successfully renegotiated NAFTA, and stood up to other tariffs. Poilievre’s tried this again in English, and Trudeau repeated his same points with the added note that Poilievre wouldn’t get his security clearance. Poilievre went on about what is “dumb” and claimed the carbon levy was driving jobs and investment in the U.S., and Trudeau said that they were going to grow the economy together, and said that that government takes defence and security seriously, and pointed to the defence cuts under the Conservatives and his refusal to get His clearance. Poilievre patted himself on the back for the Conservatives “crushing the Taliban and ISIS,” claimed Trudeau couldn’t shoot down a Chinese weather balloon. Trudeau accused Poilievre of talking down the Canadian Forces, and called him out for not committing to their two percent NATO timeline. Poilievre returned to French to claim that Trudeau has destroyed the economy, and Trudeau listed ways in which they have stood up for Canadian workers and took defence seriously, before one more swipe at the security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the crush of Americans heading for the border to avoid Trump. Trudeau noted that they have been making preparations before some economic back-patting. Blanchet felt that was too vague, and Trudeau again offered some bland assurances that they are protecting the border, and the steps taken to better distribute refugees around the country.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and worried about the American tariffs would raise prices in Canada. (Huh? How?) Trudeau listed the workers they stood up for workers the last time and will do so again. Singh said was “cold comfort” before repeating the question in French, and Trudeau, related his same back-patting.

Continue reading →

QP: Free-wheeling, chaotic, and from an alternate reality

Posted on by

In the wake of that big caucus meeting where little seemed to happen, the prime minister was present for QP—his proto-PMQ day in fact, while his deputy left for Washington. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he needled about 24 Liberal backbenchers signing the document, the Bloc supporting them, and demanded an election. Trudeau got up, for much applause from his caucus, the Conservatives got up with what was supposed to be sarcastic applause but just looked like more applause, and after it died down, Trudeau insisted (in English) that they were totally united and they were focused on delivering for Canadians. Poilievre noted that the question was in French, claimed that backbenchers leaking to journalists from the washroom at caucus, and again demanded an election. Trudeau, in French, trotted out his lines about confident governments investing in people and not resorting to austerity. Poilievre, still in French, listed slogans, claimed immigration was “out of control,” and demanded an election. Trudeau noted Poilievre only offers cuts and empty slogans and not investments in people and the green future. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his slogans, his concern trolling over the 24 backbenchers, lied about the privilege issue, and demanded an election. Trudeau recited his line about while the opposition is focused on politics, he is focused on Canadians. Poilievre again mocked the dissident Liberals, and Trudeau hit back with the Conservatives’ hanging out with white nationalists and Poilievre’s lack of a security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the allegations at a particular school in Quebec, and Trudeau noted that’s a provincial issue but they would defend rights and freedoms for all Canadians. Blanchet wondered if Trudeau was saying “forced religious education” and corporal punishment was freedom of expression. Trudeau reiterated that this was a provincial matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, declared that he knew the prime minister was distracted, and demanded he take action on food prices. Trudeau noted that they have taken action, whether it is with competition reform or a school food programme, before he took a swipe at the NDP for backing away from the carbon rebates. Singh wondered if Trudeau has even been to a grocery store, and was shouted down before the Speaker intervened. When he started again, he read the same line again (proving it was a scripted applause line to be clipped) before switching to French worry about rents. Trudeau, in English, noted he had recently been to a grocery store with the Speaker in his riding, and then turned to French to praise their housing investments.

Continue reading →

QP: Concern trolling about caucus matters

Posted on by

The prime minister was present today for the first time in more than a week, as was his deputy, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led of in French, and he needled the fact that as many of forty Liberal backbenchers are pushing back against him, and concern trolled about their freedom of expression. Speaker Fergus noted that this wasn’t under the administrative responsibilities of the government, but Justin Trudeau got up to speak anyway, and gave a paean about the things they are delivering for Canadians. Poilievre tried to bring the Bloc in on this, but kept it as a question about caucus, but Trudeau again got up to pat himself on the back for pharmacare. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his concern trolling about caucus, and got another warning from Fergus. Trudeau again got up in spite of this and said that Poilievre only wants to score political points and not talk about what the government is delivering for Canadians. Poilievre claimed that these backbenchers were talking to Conservatives to ask this in QP—obvious bullshit—and Trudeau didn’t get up this time. Poilievre listed a lot of non sequitur statistics to demand an election, and Trudeau told that Poilievre’s only solution for tough times is cuts to programmes and services people rely on.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he demanded support for their two bills, on OAS and Supply Management. Trudeau said that they will always protect Supply Management, before listing all the times the Bloc voted against help for seniors. Blanchet called this a “manipulation of the facts,” and demanded support for those bills in order to break the deadlock in Parliament. Trudeau listed ways in which they have been there for seniors.

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP, listed the false statistic of people being $200 away from insolvency (which has been debunked numerous times), and demanded action on forcing corporations to control food prices. Trudeau noted ways they have acted, and threw in a jab at the Conservatives. Lori Idlout got up to note the failure of the agreement on First Nations child and family welfare last week, and demanded immediate action on this. Trudeau noted that they are looking at ways to move forward.

Continue reading →

QP: Conspicuous silence about India

Posted on by

The first day back after a busy constituency week, and the PM was absent, though his deputy was present. Most of the other leaders were also away, but Pierre Poilievre was there, and he once again began in French to lament mortgage costs in Quebec, and complained that Trudeau was too worried about his own survival, before demanding an election. Chrystia Freeland said that she was glad the Conservatives were thinking about the economy, and she praised the fact that inflation has been tamed, which the Conservatives don’t want to talk about. Poilievre needed that Trudeau is facing a backbench revolt and demanded an election, to which Karina Gould noted that the Conservatives were trying to avoid another vote in the Chamber that they would lose. Poilievre switched to English to lament that people lined up in Cloverdale, BC, for “ugly potato day,” and used this to demand an election. Freeland noted that Poilievre was crying crocodile tears because he voted against their school food programme. Poilievre gave a more emphatic version of the same, and Freeland noted that the Conservatives were damning themselves by their intransigence, and described the launch of their school food programme in Manitoba on Friday. Poilievre was incredulous as this, accused the prime minister of being in the “fetal position” under his desk, and demanded an election. Freeland dismissed this as the Conservatives losing the plot, and their concerns about inflation Missed that his has been back in the target range for nine months.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he demanded the government support the Bloc’s OAS enrichment bill. Steve MacKinnon said the Bloc have never voted in the interests of seniors, so this was disingenuous. Therrien then turned to the Supply Management bill in the Senate, and lamented that the prime minister was not pressuring senators, and Jean-Yves Duclos noted the government’s support for system all along.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, worried about foreign interference from India, and wondered if the PM had personally urged Poilievre to get his security clearance. Dominic LeBlanc said that they extended the offer, and that they are working to keep Canadians safe. Singh tried again in French and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →

QP: Misleading about the updated PBO report

Posted on by

The PM was still in Laos, and his deputy was off to Toronto, as was Pierre Poilievre, meaning only one of the mainline leaders were present today. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and worried about the rise in antisemitism and hate crimes, blamed Justin Trudeau’s so-called “divisive rhetoric,” and that it takes too long to list terrorist groups as such, giving the example of the Houthis. Arif Virani says that they denounced the actions of Samidoun in Vancouver, and that they are being reviewed for a designation. Scheer then raised the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s updated report on the carbon levy, grossly mischaracterised it, and cited numbers out of context before demanding an election. Steven Guilbeault quoted the report to point out that eighth out of ten households are net beneficiaries. Scheer insisted that Guilbeault was also misleading because he only focused on the direct costs and not the net economic impact. Guilbeault recited more passages that made his point that only the wealthiest are impacted. John Barlow took over to insist that the impacts were worse for farmers. Guilbeault cited grain reports that prove that droughts have reduced grain yields. Barlow cherry-picked another citation from the report and demanded an election. Guilbeault listed the indirect economic impact costs on things like farms, and that they had the support of different agricultural associations.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc and demanded that the Senate be abolished because they weren’t passing a Bloc bill on Supply Management (and good luck getting the constitutional amendment to make that happen). Lawrence MacAulay recited his support for Supply Management and impressed upon the Senate to pass it. DeBellefeuille demanded that the two senators be brought into line (which is not how this works), and Marie-Claude Bibeau reiterated support for the sector.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and complained about “greedy CEOs” and Thanksgiving dinners, to which François-Philippe Champagne said that they should thank the government for reforming competition, and gave props to Singh for his contributions. Singh switched to French to give the same again, and Champagne patted himself on the back for summoning the grocery CEOs to demand action.

Continue reading →