Tag Archives: Public Health

QP: Interminable questions about Trudeau’s Xmas vacation

Posted on by

Both the prime minister and his deputy were present, together, for the first time in probably two months, which should have been notable, but ended up not being as a result of today’s news cycle. Pierre Poilieve led off in French, cited a poll that said many Canadians had to cancel summer vacation plans, and then raised that CBC story about the prime minister’s Christmas vacation where he stayed at the villa of someone who donated to the Trudeau Foundation. (Note that this link is entirely specious), and asked if the prime minister paid for his lodgings at the villa. Justin Trudeau noted that he has been friends with that family for 50 years and that they worked with the Ethics Commissioner to ensure that all rules were followed, and if Poilievre was really preoccupied by the cost of living, he would support the budget. Poilievre switched to English to reiterate the question, with some added smarm, and Trudeau repeated his response with a couple of added attempted jabs. Poilievre insisted that nothing was free and demanded to know who much was paid for the accommodation, to which Trudeau noted that Poilievre seems to have struggle with the concept of friendship, and that this family friendship goes back fifty years, before he pivoted to Poilievre running to American billionaires in order to attack the local news that Canadians rely on. Poilievre insisted that this was about power and influence, and took a swipe at the Aga Khan, before Trudeau hit back that there were security considerations before chiding Poilievre for not voting to support Canadians. Poilievre took more swipes, including at the Queen’s funeral (which he termed “a vacation”) before deploying his tired “this prime minister is out of touch while Canadians are out of money” line. Trudeau said that if Poilievre cared about Canadians as he did about partisan attacks, he would support their plans for things like child care and dental care.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he took his own swing at the vacation story, and Trudeau insisted that the Ethics Commissioner cleared everything. Blanchet tried to pivot to that dubious Chinese donation to the Trudeau Foundation, and Trudeau stated bluntly he hasn’t had anything to do with the Foundation for ten years.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded help for workers instead of CEOs. Trudeau recited his lines from a script about the grocery rebate and the help they are delivering. Singh repeated the question in French, and Trudeau repeated his response extemporaneously.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The dog and pony show around Telford at committee

Posted on by

After weeks of haranguing, filibusters, and Question Period clown shows, the prime minister’s chief of staff, Katie Telford, appeared at the Procedure and House Affairs committee. Shortly before she appeared, documents were tabled to show some dates of briefings the prime minister had with his National Security and Intelligence Advisor, but there weren’t many specifics, and in her testimony, Telford didn’t fill in any of those blanks. And nearly two-and-a-half hours were spent with Telford largely telling MPs that she couldn’t confirm or deny anything, except when the Liberals asked her to pat herself on the back for all of the actions the government has thus far taken around taking foreign interference seriously.

And of course, the Conservatives spent the time putting on a show for the camera, whether it was Larry Brock playing prosecutor—in spite of committee chair Bardish Chagger repeatedly warning him that this was a committee and not a court room—or Rachael Thomas’ rehearsed Disappointment Speech at the end. It was nothing but a dog and pony show.

This never should have happened. Telford never should have been summoned. We’ve once again damaged the fundamental precepts of parliamentary democracy and Responsible Government for the sake of some cheap theatre and clips for social media. Our Parliament should be a much more serious place, but this was just one more incidence of MPs debasing themselves and the institution for the sake of scoring a few cheap points.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles struck the eastern city of Sloviansk, hitting residential buildings and killing at least nine people and wounding over 21.

Continue reading →

Roundup: It wasn’t just social housing

Posted on by

A speech by NDP MP Daniel Blaikie is making the rounds in which he blames the rising housing unaffordability on the federal government vacating the social housing space in 1993, and that this is all the consequence of that. As economist Mike Moffatt explains, this isn’t actually true. But that’s one of the issues with the NDP—they have singular narratives that they must fit things into, whether it’s true or not, and singular policy prescriptions to go along with them. (Yes, other parties do this to, to greater or lesser extents).

Anyway, here’s Moffatt on the more complicated picture. (Full thread here, select portions below).

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642488918435155970

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642489599900495872

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642490391969636355

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642491809065574401

Ukraine Dispatch:

Wagner Group mercenaries are again claiming victory in Bakhmut, not for the first time, while Ukrainian forces again insist they remain in control of the territory. Russians shelled the eastern city of Kostiantynivka, killing six civilians and wounding eight others. Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials are outlining plans for what to do with Crimea once they have recaptured it, and those plans include dismantling the bridge to Russia. Here is a look at the Canadian training programme for Ukrainian soldiers in teaching them how to check for booby-traps and mines in captured territory.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1642087035715420160

Continue reading →

Roundup: Evading a direct question with fiery rhetoric

Posted on by

Yesterday’s press conference with the prime minister and US president was the first opportunity to ask Justin Trudeau about the allegations made against MP Han Dong, and whether he believed them. Trudeau said that he accepts that Dong left caucus to fight the allegations, prompted people to watch Dong’s speech in the House of Commons, and then went on a tear about how any foreign interference was unnecessary, and it was why the G7 meeting at Charlevoix set up the Rapid Response Mechanism to deal with it in elections. And it sounded like the kind of answer he should have been giving three weeks ago when he was simply flailing, until you stopped to realise that he didn’t actually answer the question, but sidestepped it with the rhetoric. So that’s a choice.

Meanwhile, here is an interesting deep dive thread into what the Globe and Mail published on Thursday night, and the subtle shade they were throwing at Global about the decision not to print allegations they could not confirm without seeing the transcript of the alleged call or listen to audio. I still think it’s interesting that this seems to confirm that the same source appears to be shopping leaks to both outlets.

Stephanie Carvin answers some questions about the kinds of warrants that could be in play as it appears that CSIS was monitoring the calls of the Chinese consulate.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1639255538021339136

Former national security analyst Dennis Molinaro gives a good gut-check about the kinds of intelligence we’re dealing with, and why none of it can be taken as conclusive, particularly as much of it is time and context specific, which may be why it wasn’t acted upon at the time.

https://twitter.com/dennismolin11/status/1639402944708632576

And finally, while some are hoping that a public inquiry might stop the leaks, I wouldn’t be so sure. The leaks are intended to cause damage, but to the government in particular, and that’s partly why they are being shopped to the journalists that they are. That they are causing damage to the intelligence service and institutions seems to be considered collateral damage, particularly if the op-ed from last week is indicative of a narcissistic personality who thinks they know better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces attacked stretches along the northern and southern fronts in the Donbas region, as their assault on Bakhmut has flagged. Ukrainian forces are using three Soviet-era helicopters to pummel Russian forces on the front lines from afar. Slovakia has delivered the first four of 13 MiG-29 fighters to Ukraine. The UN’s human rights monitors have seen cases of abuses and killing of prisoners of war on both sides of the conflict (though disproportionately more on the Russian side).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Few answers at committee

Posted on by

The Procedure and House Affairs committee met yesterday for an emergency meeting around these recent allegations of Chinese interference in the last election, and it wasn’t the most illuminating exercise—not just because MPs constant attempts at point-scoring, but because most of the national security agencies couldn’t answer very many questions, because answering questions can jeopardise sources or investigations. And we got the same cautions that virtually every media outlet is ignoring, which is that intelligence is not evidence, and much of it is out of context or incomplete, which is why everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt and not repeated credulously the way absolutely everyone is.

We did learn a couple of things. The first is that the RCMP were the ones who opted not to proceed with any investigations or charges around interference when presented with information about it. The second is that the prime minister is being briefed constantly about these kinds of threats, and that the problem is getting worse instead of better.

And then there were all of the calls for a national public inquiry, which the NDP insisted they were going to try and look tough in demanding. Not to be outdone, Poilievre not only demanded an inquiry, but said that all recognised party leaders had to have a say in who would chair it, otherwise it would just be another “Liberal crony” (which was again used as a smear against Morris Rosenberg). The prime minister’s national security advisor said that a public inquiry wouldn’t get many more answers because of the nature of the secret information, and all of that would still be kept out of the public eye, which is a good point. Incidentally, the opposition parties cannot demand a public inquiry—it doesn’t work like that. They can’t force a vote in the House of Commons, or anything like that, so this is once again, mostly just performance.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Despite the warnings that the Ukrainians may not be able to hold Bakhmut for much longer, they nevertheless held positions for another day, while Russian forces are also gearing up for a renewed offensive in the Zaporizhzhia region.

Continue reading →

QP: Crossing a line around MAiD access allegations

Posted on by

The prime minister was allegedly in town, but didn’t show up for QP today, while his deputy was out of town, and most of the other leaders were absent as well, save Pierre Poilievre. And he led off QP in French, worrying about how much mortgage costs have risen, rent increases, and blaming this on “inflationist policies” of the government (which is completely contrary to economic data). Pascale St-Onge, who is apparently now the designated French responder during the leaders’ round when Trudeau is away, gave the back-patting that Canadians know the government is there for them when times are tough. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the same question, demanding that the prime minister take responsibility for pricing working-class youth out of a home. Ahmed Hussen praised their measures such as the rent-to-own programme, the tax-free savings account for first-time buyers, and that the Conservatives voted against these kinds of measures. Poilievre insisted that they voted against inflationary policies, and complained about how much housing prices have gone up in markets like Toronto, demanding the federal government take responsibility for this failure (never mind that these are clearly municipality and provincial responsibilities). Randy Boissonnault reminded him that mothers who took CERB and parents who take their kids to the dentist don’t create inflation, and that the Conservatives dealt in nonsense economics. Poilievre insisted that the government created that inflation, and blamed government spending for inflating the housing market (which is lunacy), and Hussen got back up to demand that Poilievre take responsibility for voting against housing supports. Poilievre took on a tone of faux gravitas and drew a specious link between people at food banks and asking for Medical Assistance in Dying because poverty has them depressed, and accused the government of being more in favour of them accessing MAiD for depression rather than helping them (which is frankly outrageous, particularly since the expansion of MAiD for mental illness is explicitly not about simple depression, no matter what its opponents will falsely claim). Carolyn Bennett tried to dispute this and point out that the eligibility criteria screens out suicidal behaviour, but she was shouted down and the Speaker didn’t allow her to start again from the top.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc and demanded the resignation of Amira Elghawaby, because of course he did. Hussen read that she already clarified and apologised for her past comments and invited Therrien to read that statement. Therrien insisted that the position itself was a problem and that it was only about demonising Quebec, and demanded the position be abolished. Hussen got up to talk about his attending the memorial for the Quebec City mosque shooting and how many people attended it, before reiterating that she already clarified and apologised for her past comments.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and he yelled about use of consultants as privatisation and decried that they were being too cheap with public servants at the bargaining table. Mona Fortier recited some pabulum about good jobs for Canadians. Gord Johns read the English version of the same question with added sanctimony, wanting a full investigation into government outsourcing. Helena Jaczek said that she looked forward to answering their questions at committee. 

Continue reading →

QP: Like an interminable rerun

Posted on by

For caucus day, all of the leaders were present, which has been nice to see more consistently over the course of the week, for as long as this is going to last. Pierre Poilievre led off, and in French, asked how much the federal government had spent on contracts with McKinsey. Justin Trudeau said that he asked the deputy prime minister, the minister of public service as the president of the Treasury Board to follow up to ensure all rules had been followed, and that they are open and transparent with the committee. In English, Poilievre asked the same question again, and lamented that McKinsey is shrouded in scandal. Trudeau repeated his same response, noting that most of those contracts were signed by the public service. Poilievre quoted a previous Trudeau statement about his recruiting Dominic Barton, and demanded again to know how much they got paid. Trudeau noted that he has been touched by the number of Canadians of extraordinary backgrounds who have asked to contribute to the country, and Barton was someone who served the country; with regards to the contracts, he repeated his previous response. Poilievre accused Trudeau of never taking responsibility, and shed some crocodile tears about the civil servants feeling undervalued by those McKinsey contracts—never mind the history that the Conservatives and Poilievre personally had with using outside consultants because they didn’t trust the civil service—and again demanded a figure for those contracts. Trudeau mouthed some platitudes about supporting Canadians through a difficult time with direct supports. Poilievre listed mortgage prices, the cost of rent, the number of people going to food banks and blaming the carbon price for that (which is specious to say the least), and somehow tying this to the use of consultants, and his pathetic “just inflation” line. Trudeau said that while the Conservatives focus on schoolyard taunts, he’s helping Canadians.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, mentioned his meeting with the new special representative for combatting Islamophobia, Amira Elghawaby, and wanted Trudeau to admit that he did things indirectly. Trudeau noted that there are difficult conversations that needed to be had around the country, such as systemic racism, which is why they appointed Elghawaby in the first place. Blanchet wanted the prime minister to say that Quebec’s Law 21 is not Islamophobic, but Trudeau gave some platitudes about learning together. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he blamed the prime minister for the growing nursing deficit across the country, which is solely a provincial issue. Trudeau noted that they sent billions of dollars to the provinces in the pandemic, and they were sitting down with premiers next week to discuss next steps. Singh made the same accusation in French, and got the same answer.

Continue reading →

QP: Field-testing a new talking point

Posted on by

While Justin Trudeau was in the building, he didn’t show up for Question Period today, nor did his deputy, but all of the other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and decried that the national debt has doubled (ignoring the reason, being the pandemic), and decried that rent and mortgage payments have doubled, worried about seniors, lamented supposed rising crime rates, and then somehow tied this all to McKinsey contracts, because that makes logical sense. Pascale St-Onge got up to agree that it was a difficult period with high inflation, but the government would be there for people who need it. Poilievre wondered if those most in need were McKinsey consultants, and lamented how much the government was spending on consultants (never mind the explosion in such contracts under the Conservative government and in Poilievre’s department in particular when he was a minister). Mark Holland got up to remind the Conservatives that when they were in government, they never talked about poverty or people using food banks, while praising his own government’s record on lifting people out of poverty. Poilievre then accused the government of telling people that they should stop complaining because they’ve never had it so good. Holland called out Poilievre for doing nothing about the situation other than making YouTube videos. Poilievre went on a tear about rental costs—which is provincial responsibility—and red tape preventing housing development—a municipal issue—and blamed the federal government for it. Holland got back up to insist that Poilievre is just amplifying anxiety. Poilievre then accused the government of trying to silence the debate, and demand they fix the problems instead, and Holland reiterated that the government is playing it straight about the problems the country is facing, while Poilievre’s only solution was to tell people to invest in crypto. Poilievre got back up, but had run out of questions. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc to wonder what the Notwithstanding Clause was for if not preemptive use—which is hilariously wrong. David Lametti got up to talk about minority rights, the dialogue between legislatures and the courts, and why the last word should not be the first. Blanchet rambled for a moment before quoting Pierre Trudeau on the Charter, and Lametti reminded him that Charters in Canada and Quebec were about protecting minority rights, and he repeated his point about dialogue with the courts.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and recalled the horrors that were in long-term care homes early in the pandemic and accused the government of doing nothing since, demanding legislated standards—never mind this is provincial jurisdiction. Kamal Khera got up to remind Singh that she was a nurse, and that the government appreciated the work of the Canadian Standards Association in developing national standards. Singh switched to French to lament increased privatisation, and Jean-Yves Duclos insisted they were holding up the principles of access and the public system.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Keeping the focus on the distraction

Posted on by

If our Parliament were at all serious, we would see House of Commons committee studies be actual serious affairs. But we’re no longer a serious Parliament, and MPs seem to go out of their way to demonstrate this at every opportunity. Yesterday it was the government operations committee, which is studying those McKinsey contracts, and they had an expert from Carleton University before them, who studies the use of external consultants by governments. She kept telling them that the focus on McKinsey was a distraction from the real problems. But what did the Conservatives in particular want to ask about? McKinsey, because they think it’s a political winner for them to start building this bullshit conspiracy theory that somehow Dominic Barton is secretly running Canada, and that McKinsey got all of these contracts because Trudeau likes Barton (never mind that the McKinsey contracts are on the extremely low end of the consultancy scale).

If we had a serious Parliament, they would have asked better questions and been more on the ball about the larger problem. But we don’t, and instead we got a bunch of showboating for the cameras, which will all wind up in social media shitposts.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 342:

Russian forces have been shelling both Kharkiv and Kherson, hitting residential buildings in both cities, while moving on the towns of Maryinka and Vuhledar, which are near Bakhmut. Meanwhile, France and Poland appear to be seriously considering getting fighter jets like F-16s to Ukraine, even though the Americans are unwilling.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Reducing chances of a wage-price spiral

Posted on by

There have been a lot of misleading things said about the Bank of Canada’s concerns around a potential wage-price spiral, most of them from left-wing economists or union leaders (as well as Jagmeet Singh and Pierre Poilievre), who have wrongly said that either governor Tiff Macklem was blaming wages for inflation (false), or that he told business leaders not to raise wages (also false). What Macklem said was that when negotiating contracts, to remember that they were determined to get inflation back to two percent as quickly as possible, so don’t keep high raises out for too long, because that is what could drive a wage-price spiral. What that means is that because wages would be above the rate of inflation, it means that prices—particularly for services—would need to be raised to pay for those wages, which then keeps inflation higher for longer. It’s also why it’s not just price controls that have happened in the past, but wage and price controls, to try and keep that impetus in check.

Payroll data has been released, which demonstrates why the concerns about a wage-price spiral are abating. Kevin Milligan explains:

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618678055396081665

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618679010099359744

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618680872106086402

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618691478653644800

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 338:

Russians fired more missiles at Kyiv and places like Zaporizhzhia, killing eleven civilians in the process.

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1618859295851921409

Continue reading →