Tag Archives: Public Health

Roundup: Just which system is privileging the party?

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday morning, the charlatans at Fair Vote Canada put out a press release that, straight-faced, said that Pierre Poilievre’s refusal to let his MPs advocate for Housing Accelerator funding is because the current single-member plurality voting system means that it’s always “party first,” which is hilarious because one of the defining features of proportional representation, which they advocate for, is that it privileges the parties over the MPs—so much so that certain PR systems don’t even allow for independents because of how the voting is structured.

Hilarious nonsense from the charlatans at Fair Vote Canada.PR privileges parties over MPs. This kind of behaviour would be worse under PR, not better, because the party has more control over individual MPs, not less.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-18T14:30:33.890Z

Their argument was more along the lines of “If you have more than one member in a riding, they don’t have to fight to be the sole voice” or something like that, which is only a feature in certain forms of PR (because there are many), but one that is wholly unworkable in Canada. Why? Because of our vast geographic distances. Some ridings are already the size of France, and allowances need to be made for some of these rural and remote ridings to have a smaller population than the median riding size because the distance is just too great otherwise. Each of the Territories is a good example of that. Expanding those ridings to be multi-member is a non-starter, and if you think that means that we can have two different systems—multi-member ridings in cities, single-member ridings in rural and remote areas—well, good luck convincing the Supreme Court of Canada that the inequities are constitutional.

Nevertheless, it will never not be hilarious for Fair Vote Canada to try and claim that the current system puts the party first when in actual fact, it privileges the rights of individual MPs to make their own choices, and allows them the freedom to buck their party lines if they have the spine to do so, because they are elected as an individual, not as a name on a party list. That matters a lot in terms of the rights of an MP, and for them to dismiss it is yet another sign that they’re a bunch of pretenders who don’t actually understand the system, or let alone enough to want to change it for some hand-waving that pretends it will be a panacea to problems when in fact it will just trade one set of problems for a new set that could very well be worse.

Especially when it consists of three-word slogans, or feel-good pabulum.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-18T14:18:06.943Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile hit a residential building in Sumy late Sunday, killing 11l and wounding over 89. On Monday, a missile hit a residential neighbourhood in Odesa, killing ten and wounding over forty-four. President Zelenskyy visited the frontline towns of Pokrovsk and Kupiansk. The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons has found evidence of Russia using tear gas last month in battles in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Here is a look at how the 1000 days of Russia’s invasion have changed the landscape of drone warfare, and what the invasion has cost Ukraine. Here is a look at what the US’ decision to allow Ukraine to use its weapons for strikes in Russian territory could mean.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1858432305305424302

Continue reading →

QP: The worst Halloween-themed response imaginable

Posted on by

Neither the PM nor his deputy were present today, which was probably just as well considering what an absolute pathetic mess yesterday’s QP turned out to be. Most of the other leaders were also absent, but Pierre Poilievre was present and started off in French, and he selectively quoted the GDP figures released this morning, and claimed this was the government “destroying” the economy. Jean-Yves Duclos noted that inflation, interest rates and unemployment are all down, but it being Halloween, children should be afraid that Poilievre refuses to get his security clearance. Poilievre countered that diminishing paycheques are what is scary, took credit for all housing starts when he was “minister,” and demanded the government accept his GST proposal. Duclos noted that children could count to six, which were the number of affordable housing units he built as “minister” (not really true), and repeated the security clearance point. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his selective economic doom and demanded an election, to which Randy Boissonnault recited the good economic news about inflation. Poilievre gave some specious comparisons to American economic data, and this time Boissonnault recited the security clearance talking points. Poilievre continued to make facile and false claims about the economy, and demanded the government cut taxes. Boissonnault recited a bunch of non sequitur talking points about foreign direct investment in return.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc, and demanded the government enrich OAS for all seniors, to which Marc Miller noted that the Bloc has consistently all measures the government has put forward to help seniors, including dental care. DeBellefeuille took a swipe at Duclos before repeating the demand, and this time Duclos said that they are simply looking for problems before noting that they have reduced seniors’ poverty since they came to office, and offered a warning about cozying up to Conservatives.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP to worry about software used by landlords to raise rents, and demanded an inquiry be launched. François-Philippe Champagne said he would ask the Competition Bureau do just that with the new powers they have been given. Bonita Zarrillo demanded the same in English, and Champagne repeated that they are going to ask the Bureau to do so.

Continue reading →

QP: Call an election/Get your security clearance ad nauseam

Posted on by

Wednesday, and what sounds like a less exciting caucus meeting for the Liberals, in spite of the talk going around. The PM was present and ready to take all of the questions today, while his deputy was absent. Not all of the other leaders were present, unusually, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, recited his talking points about the supposed “promise” in Canada that was “broken,” and wanted the government to adopt his plan to cut the GST on new homes under $1million. Justin Trudeau noted that the problem with any of Poilievre’s proposals is that they come with cuts, and in this case, it would cut $9 billion in transfers to Quebec to build affordable housing. Poilievre insisted that the government only builds bureaucracy and not homes, and again wanted them to adopt his GST cut. Trudeau listed investments the government is making, while Poilievre only offers cuts. Poilievre switched to English to give a paean to a very white, middle-class “Canadian promise,” which he claims the government broke and demanded they adopt his GST cut plan. Trudeau gave a longer soliloquy about the Conservatives only offering cuts and not help for people. Poilievre insisted that the current plans only build bureaucracy and that his plan was “common sense.” Trudeau noted that one of the fundamental responsibilities of any prime minister is to keep Canadians safe, but since Poilievre refuses a security briefing to keep his own caucus safe, he instructed security services to find a way to offer himself a briefing. Poilievre accused this of being a “tin-pot conspiracy,” before returning to the insistence that his plan was just common sense. Trudeau again repeated that Poilievre only offers cuts, and that he asked security services to figure out a briefing. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and accused the government of abandoning seniors by turning down the Bloc’s OAS bill. Trudeau listed ways in which they are helping seniors, which the Bloc opposed. Therrien took some swipes at the NDP before repeating his demand, and Trudeau linked the Bloc to the Conservatives in voting against measures to help seniors.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised Alberta turning over the administration of some hospitals to Covenant who refuses to provide abortions, and wanted Trudeau to do something. Trudeau noted that they have clawed back transfers to provinces who don’t provide services, and raised their motion to penalise pregnancy support charities that don’t offer the full suite of supports or options. Singh flubbed his attempt at a clip of “It’s her body her choice, not her body Conservative Party’s choice,” before switching to French to complain about housing transfers. Trudeau focused on the abortion aspect, and failed about the anti-choice MPs in the Conservative ranks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The same government, not a new one

Posted on by

The final results of the BC election started rolling in as the absentee ballots were counted, and lo, it looks like the NDP managed to flip one seat in the final tally, making it a 47-44-2 tally NDP/Conservative/Greens. And while that’s all well and good, the way in which major media outlets described this was a gods damned tragedy, and I was about to lose my mind.

No, the NDP are not going to “form government,” because they are already the government. Only the legislature changes. No, the Lieutenant-Governor didn’t ask Eby to form government, her statement explicitly said “David Evy advised me that he is prepared to continue as premier.” Because she doesn’t sit around waiting to make a decision—she acts on advice, and he never resigned, so he is not forming anything. He will be shuffling his Cabinet, but it’s the same government that carries over to another legislature. That’s it, and it’s a really big problem when neither the national wire service of the national public broadcaster couldn’t actually read what she wrote, and instead wrote their copy based on a falsehood and changed her words to suit their wrong meaning.

Additionally, because I am going to get pedantic here, there is also no such thing as a “majority government” or a “minority government.” Government—meaning Cabinet—is government. What changes is whether they control a majority or minority of the legislature. The legislature is not government. What matters is whether the same government is able to maintain the confidence of the chamber, which is much easier to do when you have a majority of the seats. The fact that Eby has managed to secure a razor-thin majority of those seats means that he has essentially ensured that he can maintain that confidence (though the Speaker issue could remain tricky). But my gods, could our media outlets have a modicum of civic literacy? It’s not only embarrassing that they don’t, but it’s outright dangerous for democracy going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian air attacks killed four in Kyiv and four in Kharkiv, where they also shattered a historic building and celebrated landmark. Critical infrastructure was also damaged in two regions in the north of Ukraine, leading to more power outages.

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 →

Roundup: A tight election, but no change in government

Posted on by

It looks like it’s a tight finish in BC’s election, and that there won’t be clear winners in some of the most contested ridings until later in the week, but right now it’s sitting at 46-45-2 NDP/Conservative/Green. And because a lot of people are civically illiterate, they need to be reminded that a) The NDP are still the government and David Eby is still the premier because he hasn’t resigned, and no, the lieutenant governor is not sitting around waiting for the results to declare who will form government. That’s not how the system works.

Eby will meet the legislature, whenever that happens, and his ability to maintain the confidence of the Chamber will be tested, and there will likely be some kind of supply and confidence agreement with the Green Party, but the real question is going to be who is going to put up a Speaker, because this could change the dynamics if there are no changes once the results are finalized. The Conservatives are unlikely to want to do so, and the NDP might order their caucus to refuse, leaving a situation where nobody comes forward, paralyzing the legislature. If that lasts longer than six months, that could trigger another election. (This was already a drama in BC after another election a few years ago, when the BC Liberals basically tied, and eventually one of their number broke ranks to run for Speaker, then Christy Clark lost a confidence vote, the LG refused her another election, and the NDP formed a government with Green support).

This having been said, I have already seen certain progressive types on social media declaring that if the Greens don’t use their kingmaker status in this legislature to push for electoral reform, they might as well not bother to exist. I’m unsure about the logic there because just what kind of electoral reform, and do they really think that ramming it through in a partisan manner in a minority legislature without consensus is going to work against them, and that the Conservatives won’t run in the next election howling about how the evil NDP changed the rules for their own benefit? BC is dealing with the far-right being *this* close to being in power (and make no mistake—the BC Conservative Party is a far-right party, and thus far it looks like four of their elected MLAs were previous People’s Party candidates). Giving them any ammunition is a Very Bad idea, and no, electoral reform won’t save you from the far-right. In fact, it might just wind up enabling them.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1848007688417919426

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians have been targeting Kyiv with drones for a second night in a row. They hit Kryvhi Rih with a ballistic missile attack that injured 17, while they also claim to have shot down over a hundred Ukrainian drones on Sunday, but Ukraine says they hit an airfield and an explosives factory in Russia. Military bloggers report fighting in the streets of Selydove.

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: A $7 million ad buy to tell on themselves

Posted on by

Over the past several days, the Alberta government has been on a very strange campaign where they are in essence, telling on themselves by lying about the forthcoming federal emissions cap. How so, you ask? They keep insisting that this is a production cap on the energy sector, which is not what it is intended to be, particularly because the sector has been saying that they fully plan to be net-zero by 2050, and that these kinds of rules, while disliked by economists, would essentially force these companies to put their money where their mouths are. And, well, they have certainly been admitting that all of those promises to meet those targets through things like carbon capture have been pretty much all talk.

When Danielle Smith and her ministers tried to justify their ad campaign, well, things got even worse for them.

Meanwhile, the Alberta government bought the front pages of newspapers across the Postmedia chain at a cost of $7 million in order to decry this same policy, and in another telling lie, claim that it would increase grocery prices, because that’s the anxiety that they want to hit on in order to really stick it to the federal Liberals. But again, the problem here is that the driver of those higher grocery prices is climate change, and in particular, recurring droughts in food-producing regions, including in Canada, with a few flash floods or hurricanes along the way that also damage crops or livestock.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack on the southern city of Mykolaiv has killed one and injured at least sixteen. A drone attack was also launched against Kyiv. The town of Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region, and three surrounding settlements, were ordered evacuated. Russians claim to have taken the village of Levadne in the Zaporizhzhia region over the weekend.

Continue reading →

QP: Poorer than Alabama

Posted on by

The prime minister was jetting off to Paris for the Francophonie summit, and his deputy was off to Toronto, so other leaders also took the cue to be absent for QP. Pierre Poilievre, however, was there and started off in French by listing times the Bloc leader supported the government, and wondered if the government wanted to thank him. Jean-Yves Duclos talked about dental care, and all of the seniors getting treatment, which the Conservatives claim doesn’t exist. Poilievre then turned to the current privilege fight and that the government is refusing to turn over documents related to SDTC. Karina Gould called this out as misleading and an attempt to overturn Charter rights and politicising police independence. Poilievre repeated that in English, and Gould repeated her response with the added coda that if Poilievre doesn’t understand that, it would be worse if he does understand and doesn’t care about Charter rights. Poilievre turned to the police shooting in Toronto yesterday and trotted out the “hug-a-thug” line. Gould said that while their hearts go out to the officer, but turned to the issue of Poilievre trampling Charter rights. Poilievre complained about the Charter rights of criminals and asked the Liberls “What is wrong with you people?” After being warned by the Speaker about directing questions through the Chair. Arif Virani reminded him that bail is decided upon by provincial-appointed justices of the peace and Crown prosecutors.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and demanded a royal recommendation for their OAS bill or face an election. Steve MacKinnon pointed out that the Bloc voted against dental care when 6,900 people in his riding were signed up. Therrien pointed out the number of seniors on MacKinnon’s riding not getting the OAS enrichment, and MacKinnon reminded him that the government’s track record on taking care of seniors spoke for itself.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and complained about rent, which is a provincial jurisdiction. Duclos got up to talk about how Poilievre dismissed social housing as “soviet.” Bonita Zarrillo demanded immediate enhancement to the Disability Benefit, to which Kamal Khera read her bankrupt talking points about how historic the clearly inadequate is.

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 →