Tag Archives: Prostitution

Roundup: “Credible allegations” of an assassination on Canadian soil

Posted on by

It was an unexpected moment after Question Period, when Justin Trudeau returned to the House of Commons, and took advantage of the Statements by Ministers slot in Routine Proceedings to speak on an issue of “national security,” and revealed that credible intelligence from Canadian agencies has found that an agent of the Indian government was likely responsible for the murder of a Sikh leader in British Columbia several months ago. Other opposition leaders expressed their shock, and support for the government in this—being unusually less dickish than usual (until they denied Elizabeth May her own opportunity to speak—the dickishness resumed at that point). It also sounds like the timing of this announcement was earlier than anticipated—the Globe and Mail got a leak and went to confirm it with the government, and were asked if they could hold off publishing for a week, and the Globe said they had 24 hours, so Trudeau was forced to do this now, and not after he returned from the UN General Assembly.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1703856088238416330

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1703879668842016904

Shortly thereafter, Mélanie Joly and Dominic LeBlanc scrummed in the Foyer and said that a high-ranking Indian diplomat was expelled from the country, and it sounds like the government is considering further measures in the near future. It also sounds like this was being discussed at the G20 meeting in India last week, as both the head of CSIS and Trudeau’s National Security Advisor were on the trip, and suddenly the frostiness with Narendra Modi and the cancelled trade mission make so much more sense, being as this was being pursued in back channels during the summit, not only with Indian officials but also with allied countries including the US and the UK.

For background, here is what we know about the victim, and the timeline of events surrounding the murder. India, predictably, refutes this.

Ukraine Dispatch:

There have been Russian attacks on both Lviv in the west and Kherson in the south. Ukrainian forces say they breached Russian lines near Bakhmut in the east, and have reclaimed two more villages. Six deputy defence ministers were fired, possibly in relation to a corruption scandal.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The “bigger picture” of continued hybrid sittings

Posted on by

The Procedure and House Affairs committee is looking in to the future of hybrid sittings, and the Speaker wants them to consider the “bigger picture” of all of this. Of course, the bigger picture is that a) by trying to tie future use of hybrid to sickness or work-life balance, MPs will be creating an impossible attendance standard and create a monstrous culture of presenteeism; b) ministers will not only evade accountability not being in the House, and will be unavailable for MPs to see them during votes—which is the one time they are most available—and this is already happening as ministers are getting used to taking off when votes start and doing them from their phones in their cars, which is very bad; it also means that minister and MPs in general are less available to be found by the media; and c) the big one is of course the human toll that these sessions take on the interpretation staff. The NDP, as usual thinks you can just hire more interpreters, except there are no more interpreters to be hired. They literally cannot graduate enough of them to cover the existing attrition even before the injury and burnout rate from Zoom is factored in.

But MPs have consistently ignored the human toll, preferring their convenience, and whinging about long travel distances and having families, as though there aren’t options available to them that aren’t to most other Canadians. I will keep beating on this drum, because we won’t be able to maintain a fully bilingual parliament for much longer if this keeps up (we’re barely doing so as it is), and it’s probably going to take things absolutely falling apart for them to care, and that’s a problem.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 223:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces have made rapid and powerful advances in both the east and south, and in places where Russian forces are retreating, they are abandoning posts so rapidly that they are leaving dead comrades behind.

https://twitter.com/noclador/status/1577324136220839937

Continue reading →

Roundup: Independent thought alarm, Iran edition

Posted on by

I hear the independent thought alarm sounding as Liberal MP Ali Ehsassi, who is Iranian-Canadian, is being critical of the government’s response when it comes to sanctions on the Iranian regime, and he wants them to do more. This being said, he has stressed that the minister, Mélanie Joly, has been very receptive to talking to him about the situation, and hearing his ideas, but that wasn’t of any interest to the CBC. No, they were interested in the narrative that even Liberal MPs aren’t happy with the government’s moves to date on sanctioning the Iranian regime, and lo, they put on an “expert” who says the government should do more, in spite of the fact that the don’t have the actual capacity to enforce more sanctions, let alone monitor the entire Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.

I don’t expect the party to come down on Ehsassi for this, and the Liberals have demonstrated that they are willing to put up with a certain degree of independence from their MPs (more so than pretty much any other party right now), but I always find the reaction of the media interesting in situations like this, because as much as they claim they want more independence for MPs, when it gets demonstrated, they immediately start acting like this is either an attack on the government/prime minister, and they try to wedge it as much as possible to make it sound exciting. But all this really does is crack the whip without the party Whip ever needing to do a thing, because the media is enforcing discipline more than he ever could. Some members of the media should probably reflect on that fact

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 222:

Ukrainian forces have made a major breakthrough in the south, advancing along the Dnipro River and threatening Russian supply lines in the region. In the northeast, the liberation of Lyman is providing a staging ground to press into the Donbas region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Some shocking civic illiteracy stats

Posted on by

I generally make it a policy not to talk about polls, but this one was just so disheartening that I feel the need to say something about it. Abacus Data asked a series of questions about federal government and governance, and it’s just…depressing to see the rate of responses that clearly show a lack of interest and a lack of education in how our system works.

These are the very basics of Responsible Government, and it’s important to understand what that means. But I recall that when I was in school, we talked about achieving Responsible Government as a recommendation in the Durham Report, and that Canada eventually got there, but they never explained what it actually meant, or what it entails in practical terms. And that’s a problem, especially when we are inundated with American popular culture about their politics, and their conception of how the UK’s system works (the rate of them who believe that absolute monarchy still exists is high. It’s very high) bleeds over to our popular understanding as well, and it’s a problem. That’s why I wrote The Unbroken Machine.

Some of these responses are simply an indication that people aren’t paying attention to the news, and that the way in which media communicates things can be unhelpful and confusing in how things are discussed. Abacus didn’t make sides for other questions in the survey, such as which level of responsibility does education fall under – which was better at 83 percent correctly answering that it falls under provincial jurisdiction, but again, this is the kind of ignorance that leaders like Jagmeet Singh like to exploit in order to drive cynicism. Civics education is vitally important, as is media literacy, and we are failing Canadians fundamentally because we refuse to teach them correctly in this country.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The flailing incompetence of Ontario’s new sick days

Posted on by

If there was any doubt that the murderclowns in Doug Ford’s government were flailing incoherently, they announced a new paid sick leave programme yesterday, and wouldn’t you know it, it defies all common sense or logic. The idea is that employees get up to three days of paid sick leave – temporarily, because heaven forbid they stand up to the small business lobby and make this permanent – and employers can claim up to $200 per day for those employees, but they have to do it through the Workers Compensation bureaucracy, for some unknown reason. And we still have no idea what kinds of protections are actually in place for the workers if they use those days, because that’s a very big part of this. Furthermore, this was the province doing the bare minimum – they chose three days apparently because a) it’s what is currently in the Canada Labour Code for federally-regulated workers, and b) after three days, a person could claim the federal sickness benefit (because it pays out for the week), so they’re still trying to fob people off on to a system that was designed for those who can’t access employer-paid sick leave because they don’t have a traditional employer. And possibly the most galling part was how much the provincial labour minister was patting himself on the back for these woefully inadequate half-measures (which people were having to say was a “great first start” through gritted teeth all evening).

It shouldn’t have been like this. The easy fix was to simply allow sufficient days (probably up to ten given the current circumstances) under the provincial labour code, and employers could then access rebates either through the federal wage subsidy, as it’s been designed for, or a provincial stop-gap if they’re not currently on said subsidy, and it would have been easier, it would have protected jobs and workers’ rights, it would have been seamless, and we wouldn’t have the same problems that we’re having right now with those trying to access the federal benefit (which was not designed for these circumstances). But that would have angered the business lobbies, and Doug Ford would never want to do that, because they’re whom he considers the “little guy” that he looks out for. So here we are instead, with another badly designed system that seeks to do the bare minimum, and because this was done in haste, and with this government’s usual flailing incompetence, I suspect we won’t be out of problems with it anytime soon – just like everything else that has gone to wrong in this province, because it’s being run by incompetent murderclowns.

In case you were wondering what all of this flailing was trying to cover, it would be the Auditor General’s report on long-term care, which was a not unexpected recounting that there was a woeful lack of preparation, where long-standing problems quickly got amplified, while the ministry of long-term care was not prepared or equipped to deal with those issues. Again, not a surprise, but damning nevertheless. And what did the minister responsible for long-term care do? Blame everyone else including the NDP – who haven’t been in power since 1995 – for “starting the fire,” and she insisted that she was the one who ran into the burning building to save people, which…is a novel interpretation, especially considering that her government reduced the number of inspections and made things worse. Of course, we are in a system of Responsible Government, and she is the minister in charge of the portfolio, and guess what – she is responsible. If she had any modicum of shame or decency, she would tender her resignation for allowing the deaths of thousands on her hands, but this band of murderclowns are absolutely incapable of decency or shame.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1387459497803796481

Continue reading →

Roundup: A worrying bureaucratic bottleneck

Posted on by

A lot has been written about this budget, and much of it falls under the usual narratives of Canadian media, such as wedging it into the box of election speculation (despite the fact that no party is suicidal enough to want an election in the middle of the third wave), of that it’s apparently still 1995 and will always be 1995, and that we are forever on the precipice of a debt crisis (we’re really not). And while there is certainly a bit of the latter in this piece, it nevertheless lays out some perfectly legitimate concerns that bureaucratic bottlenecks will imperil many of the plans laid out in this year’s budget, because there really is only so much capacity in the federal governmental machinery. As well, it noted that without clear priorities among the hundreds of items, it risks the very salient point that when everything is a priority, then nothing is.

Astute readers may recall that a couple of weeks ago, Paul Wells noted the very same thing coming out of the Liberals’ big virtual policy convention, where it was one big exercise in everyone agreeing to everything and nobody articulating any kinds of priorities for the items under discussion (and agreed to). This should raise alarm bells, because it signals that a government won’t be able to control its own agenda. To wit:

I never cease to be amazed by the weightlessness of Trudeau Liberalism. After a year that has often seemed to come quite literally from Hell, when every parent, worker, small business, youth and elderly Canadian had to make grinding choices several times a week, I’m not sure it’s entirely encouraging to behold a government for which every need is imperative, no cost exists, and no choice among priorities is ever necessary. There is, somewhere in it, the jarring sound of unchecked privilege.

I think he’s got a very good point, and it demonstrates that five years later, there are still moments where this government betrays a lack of seriousness to what it’s trying to do. There are files, particularly in justice, where they have managed to drag their feet for so long that courts have to push them. It’s worrying, especially because there are very important measures in that budget that will have a big impact on future economic growth and prosperity, but if they can’t ensure these particular measures get prioritized and through the bureaucratic process, then it will have a very big impact on this and the next generation of Canadians who have been stymied economically.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cheering on an attack on institutional independence

Posted on by

Yesterday, Senator Claude Carignan tabled a bill that seeks to strip Julie Payette of her pension, and would strip any former Governor General of a pension if they don’t serve at least five years (never mind that nine of our 29 past Governors General did not serve at least five years). It’s an attack on the institutional independence of an office that can serve as a check on government, and needs to be called out as such.

https://twitter.com/LagassePhilippe/status/1376970875031945217

https://twitter.com/LagassePhilippe/status/1376971807576711168

https://twitter.com/LagassePhilippe/status/1376998266282328065

But just how was it discussed on Power & Politics last night? Over several segments, each of them with different pundits, the common consensus that this was great populist politics to go after an unpopular figure like Payette, and digging into the issue of their other benefits – because nothing sells in Canadian media like cheap outrage and hairshirt parsimony. The most we got to the cautionary tale was to beware unintended consequences, and that a future GG may have to invent a medical reason for a resignation (which the bill states that Cabinet would have to approve, which is entirely bonkers). Not one person – not one – raised the issue of institutional independence, and why it’s a Very Bad Thing to open the door to governments being able to threaten their financial well-being as a way to hold power over them, most especially when the beneficiaries of this independence (not only the GG, but also senators and Supreme Court justices) provide a check on the power of government. This is the level of discourse in this country? Seriously? And even more to the point, the host of the show kept steering the topic to this kind of populist, vindictiveness rather than the actual consequences of making an action like this. It is absolutely boggling, but it gives you a sense as to why things have degenerated as they have. This bill represents an existential threat to our parliamentary system, and it’s being played for petty drama and populist cheap shots.

We need better pundits in this country, and better politics shows. This is horrifying.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The ritual fiscal demands

Posted on by

With the fiscal “snapshot” on the way on Wednesday, we are seeing the ritual demands of opposition parties being laid out – the Conservatives demanding accurate fiscal forecasts, a proper picture of the deficit and debt, and changes to CERB that they claim will keep it from being a disincentive to work. Oh, and to basically deregulate the energy sector, as though it’s regulation and not the price of oil and a global supply glut that are the cause of a drop in investment. The Bloc want CERB phased out except for the arts, hospitality and agriculture industries. And the NDP want the programmes extended and to be financed by down on tax havens – because that can be done unilaterally and at the drop of a hat!

Of course, the biggest problem with the economic recovery is education and childcare, the lack of which threatens to set women’s participation in the labour force back by 40 years, and yet most of the provinces don’t seem to be too motivated by this fact, as they allow school boards like those in Ontario to come up with cockamamie plans like having kids in school for two days a week. And the worst of it is when you have provinces demanding federal help for things that are explicitly in their jurisdiction like education and childcare – which the federal government has made clear is part of the $14 billion they have on the table – but they don’t want the strings attached. “Just give us the money,” Doug Ford demanded, which isn’t how this works.

And to drive home the point, economists like Jennifer Robson have calculated that keeping these women out of the workforce cuts household incomes by 40 percent, or $113 billion in direct earnings (to say nothing of lifetime earnings), which is a devastating blow to the economy. Would that these provincial governments didn’t assume that it’s fine that they have loaded this onto the shoulders of women in the workforce, and that there won’t be any consequences. It’s time for provinces to behave like grown-ups and make some adult decisions that include women in the labour force.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1279931083430285312

Continue reading →

Roundup: The limits of Trudeau’s patience

Posted on by

Late in the day yesterday, Justin Trudeau announced that he had come to the limit of his patience, that his calls for dialogue were not being heeded, and that it was time for the barricades to come down – something that was hinted at during Question Period a couple of hours earlier when the parliamentary secretaries sent to recite scripts said that “dialogue has its limits.” Trudeau did not say how those blockades were to come down – he wasn’t issuing orders to police, given that the enforcement was a matter of provincial jurisdiction, but part of the call was for Indigenous leadership to basically get their own people to stand down (though that didn’t seem to go so well on Wednesday after one Mohawk grand chief had to walk back his calls for de-escalation). And while some of the premiers, Scott Moe included, said they were pleased by the changed message, Doug Ford continued to blame Trudeau for things happening in his own backyard.

https://twitter.com/mattgurney/status/1230971079092514816

In the hours after the press conference, one sympathetic blockade south of Montreal was abandoned when riot police showed up to enforce the court injunction there. And in BC, the province’s Environmental Assessment Office suddenly told Coastal GasLink that they needed to engage in further consultations with the Wet’suwet’en people, since deficiencies in their previous efforts were pointed out to them over the course of the past couple of weeks, and were given 30 days to do so, which could further de-escalate the situation as the RCMP are moving out of their enforcement operations. But at the same time, that same group of hereditary chiefs has been shifting their demands, so that one minute on TV they’re saying the RCMP physically removing themselves from those operations was enough to start talks, the next minute putting out a press release saying that the RCMP needed to be out of their territory entirely, including routine policework, and then telling a radio station that because of Trudeau’s statement that they’re going to delay talks even further – all things that seem to me to further bolster Trudeau’s position that he’s been the reasonable one and the other side hasn’t been. And as for all of those people who insist that Trudeau is simply saying what Scheer did four days ago are ignoring the very important nuances of what has happened, as Andrew Coyne points out below.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1230958409530429440

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1230958637696344064

As for the handwringing by the likes of Scheer and Jason Kenney that these protests send a signal that things can’t get built in Canada, perhaps the signal is that things can’t get built the same way, cutting corners and running roughshod over these First Nations like they used to be able to. It’s like people who lament that we couldn’t build the railways these days, who seem to blithely ignore that said railways were built by displacing First Nations along its path, and importing virtual slave labour from China to do the work. If they think that’s the kind of thing that would fly today, then perhaps they need to give their heads a shake.

Meanwhile, Chantal Hébert worries that these protests were the “dress rehearsal” for future protests against the Trans Mountain construction, however I have a feeling that there are enough points of difference between the facts related to Wet’suwet’en territory and the Trans Mountain route that it will wind up playing very differently if that were to happen. Matt Gurney delves into the logistics and supply chains that depend on the rail corridors in this country, and how vulnerable the blockade has made us. Gurney also has a very good three-part series on Wet’sewet’en law and how it relates to the situation, which is well worth your time (parts one, two, and three). Paul Wells is dubious about Trudeau’s four-day limit to his patience, and the signals that it sends.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Convention confusion

Posted on by

The Conservatives announced over the weekend that their policy had convention had been postponed to November in order to give more time to their leadership contest – but then had to spend the rest of the day explaining that no, this didn’t mean that the leadership was going to be held in November, and no, they hadn’t made any final decisions on the leadership, and so on. Because it would have been great if they’d actually said that in their press release.

With this in mind, I figured I would do my best to clarify what part of the problem is here, which is that they don’t actually have leadership conventions anymore, but “leadership events” where all of the mailed in ranked ballots get counted up in a dramatic way to try and replicate the fun and excitement of a delegated convention. One might assume that they might try to kill two birds with one stone and have both events at the same time, but we’ll see if that is actually the case.

This having been said, we also need to remember that so long as we have a system where there is direct election of party leaders by their membership, and that those leadership candidates are running on policy slates as though this were an American presidential primary, it starts making party policy conventions into a bit of a farce. Why? Because so long as leaders feel empowered to move ahead with the policies that they have a “democratic legitimacy” to enact, then what does the grassroots policy preferences matters? We’ve seen this erosion across parties for years, and it will continue apace under this Conservative system just as it has with everyone else so long as we keep up this bastardized system of membership votes for leaders.

Continue reading →