Tag Archives: Public Health

QP: The Empty Chair gambit makes a return

Posted on by

Even though the prime minister was in town and in his office, he was not in QP today, and neither was his deputy, and other leaders were absent as well. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he complained that Quebeckers would be paying for the fictional “second carbon tax,” and claimed it was to fund the scandal at the clean energy agency. Diane Lebouthillier stood up to ask what plan the Conservatives had for the environment, and then answered that it was nothing. Poilievre tried to be cute about Trudeau not being present, claimed there was “carbon tax chaos” and demanded he cut the carbon price. Fergus gently warned Poilievre not to do indirectly what he can’t do directly, after which Randy Boissonnault asked if the Conservatives would pressure western premiers to sign up to the heat pump programme. Poilievre got on the empty chair tactic and demanded the prime minister answer, and this time Jonathan Wilkinson said that Poilievre was too busy patting himself on his own back to do his homework, and explained about heating oil being a driver of energy poverty which is why they were phasing it out. Poilievre carried on with the empty chair gambit, and this time Boissonnault launched into an attack on the Conservatives not standing up to Danielle Smith for her attack on CPP. Poilievre again railed at the absent prime minister not answering, and demanded support for a motion about removing the carbon price on all heating. Wilkinson pointed out that the government was doing public policy rather than slogans.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and demanded that the government consult with Quebec before announcing their immigration targets later in the day. Mark Miller said that they have been consulting, and that the spoke with the minister, and even if they don’t agree, they were still consulted. Therrien railed that they had not consulted on the “federal targets,” and Miller launched into an explanation about the immigration funding that they provide to the province.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and railed about the carbon price “pause,” and demanded the government tax the profits of oil companies to provide relief to all Canadians. Wilkinson suggested that Singh do his homework, disputed that there was an onerous process for the heat pump programme while they fight climate change. Singh repeated the question in French but with an added mention of “the era of Duplessis” for local Quebec flavour, and Wilkinson repeated his answer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Scott Moe challenges Trudeau to a (metaphorical) duel

Posted on by

Because the fallout over the decision to pause the carbon price on heating oil gets dumber by the day, Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe has decided that if he doesn’t get other heating sources similarly treated that he’s going to order the province’s provincial Crown Corporation that delivers natural energy to stop collecting the federal carbon price, which would be illegal, and which would expose the CEO of said Crown corporation for some potentially serious liabilities including possibly jail time, so one has to suppose that’s not going down very well. Nevertheless, this was entirely predictable and Trudeau should have chosen another course of action with the heating oil transition, but he didn’t, and this bed he made is getting really, really uncomfortable for him to lay in.

Of course, this has ramped up a bunch of other stupidity from political leaders, like Jagmeet Singh reviving his party’s long-time call for GST to be removed from home-heating, never mind that it would be impossible to disentangle for those who have electric heat, and that this kind of policy disproportionately benefits the wealthy who have larger houses. BC premier David Eby also wants relief for heating bills, but the province has their own carbon price separate from the federal one, so complaining to Ottawa isn’t going to help.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian shells killed a 91-year-old woman in the southern Kherson region when it struck her apartment building, while two others were killed in shelling in the region when a shell struck a bus. Ukrainian forces say they are switching from defensive to offensive positions around Bakhmut. Russians claim that they shot down 36 Ukrainian drones in the eastern part of the country.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A “dull as hell” House

Posted on by

Jean Chrétien gave an interview yesterday to mark the 30th anniversary of his election win to form government in 1993, and there’s one part in it that sticks out for me in particular, which was about his time in politics, pre-dating his becoming prime minister, which has to do with the use of television in the Chamber:

“When I became a member of Parliament, there was no TV… In the House of Commons, we had no television. In those days in the House of Commons, we didn’t have the right to read anything. We had to get up and speak. It was fun. Today, they all come with speeches prepared by kids in the office and it is dull as hell, rather than have a real debate like we had in those days.”

This is spot on. It wasn’t just the arrival of the cameras that changed things, it was the relaxation of the rules around prepared speeches. It used to be that you weren’t allowed them, with very limited exceptions—the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne, the budget, and if you needed some particular help with specific facts or figures or translation (because simultaneous interpretation was a later arrival into Parliament). When they relaxed the rule around prepared speeches, it meant MPs started reading speeches into the record; time limits started to mean that they didn’t just speak up to that twenty-minute mark, but they were expected to fill the time entirely, which again, makes for very bad prepared speeches. There’s no actual debate either—during “debate” on a bill, the period for “questions and comments” is usually reserved for recitations of established talking points, with no actual exchange. One question, one response is not actually debate. Without relying on prepared speeches, and actually being allowed to debate, it would have made for actual tension or frisson between them, and to force them to know their material.

The other thing with the arrival of television is how it changed the nature of Question Period. It became very much about trying to a) get on TV, and b) providing clips for the evening news, which is one reason why parties started to do things like asking the same question in English and in French, so that they could get clips for both news services. With the advent of social media, however, the incentives changed again, and it was about creating content for those social feeds, which could include bad behaviour to drive up engagement. This is where we’re at now. It’s not exciting, and like Chrétien says, it’s “dull has hell” because you’re just watching badly scripted performances meant entirely for the consumption of clips. Politics should not be about this.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A civilian was killed in the Kherson region early Wednesday after Russians bombed the area. Russians are ignoring their losses and pressing on at Avdiivka, Debris from downed Russian drones downed power lines near a nuclear plan in the western part of the country, knocking out power for hundreds of people. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukraine will strike back if Russia attacks their power grid again this weekend. Here is a look at some Ukrainian sappers who have returned to the job of de-mining after they lost limbs doing the work.

Continue reading →

QP: Return of the carbon price mendacity

Posted on by

While the prime minister was away at an EV battery plan announcement in Quebec, his deputy off in Toronto, and other leaders were also absent. Chris d’Entrement was again in the big chair for the day, even though one would think they would rotate Alexandra Mendès in there as well. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, accused the prime minister of looking like “a clown” around the world, called Rota a “Liberal Speaker,” railed that it took him five days to say anything, and then repeated it in English in the same question. Karina Gould said that everyone agreed it was the Speaker who was responsible and he resigned. Poilievre then accused the prime minister of creating “the middle-class hungry” and demanded they cut the carbon price. Anita Anand stood up to wonder if the Conservatives would support their bill on cutting the GST on rentals and increasing competition. Poilievre then called out Atlantic Liberal MPs who say that they have concerns about the carbon price while at home but not while in Ottawa. Randy Boissonnault accused the Conservatives of looking to cut programmes and let the planet burn. Poilievre rambled about the supposed “NDP coalition” before demanding they vote for their Supply Day motion to cut the carbon price. Boissonnault repeated his same response about the Conservatives only looking to slash and burn. Poilievre then returned to French to call out the Bloc leader for voting to increase the carbon price (which is not entirely true). Pascale St-Onge insisted that what doesn’t make sense is a party that doesn’t have a climate plan.

Yves-François Blanchet got up and wondered why the Conservatives wouldn’t axe subsidies, before wondering why the prime minister still hasn’t called president Zelenskyy or Jewish leaders. Gould said that calls were made, and that the prime minister apologised to everyone harmed. Blanchet insisted that the headlines would have been different if the prime minister had apologised immediately (which would have given Rota cover), and Gould repeated that calls were made and apologies were made through diplomatic channels from the beginning.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he demanded that the government end all new fossil fuel projects and move the net-zero date up to 2045. St-Onge insisted that they have brought emissions down since 2018, and that they would do more. Boulerice the worried the chaos caused by changing insurers for civil servants, and Anita Anand insisted that they were working with the leadership and Canada Life to ensure the situation was rectified.

Continue reading →

QP: More mendacity in the wake of Rota’s resignation

Posted on by

At long last, and about 27 hours too late, Speaker Anthony Rota announced his intention to resign, but would make it official at the end of the sitting day tomorrow and that he would vacate the chair in the interim, leaving Deputy Speaker Chris d’Entremont to preside in his place.

The prime minister, meanwhile, was on his way to Toronto, as was his deputy, albeit for separate events. Every other leader was present, however.  Pierre Poilievre led off in French, noted f nation, and demanded that Trudeau take responsibility for not vetting all of the guests in the Chamber, which is an outrageous overreach, as PMO has no business doing so. Karina Gould noted that the Speaker is independent and that he took responsibility. Poilievre demanded to know why Justin Trudeau was hiding and not standing up for this, and got warned by the Deputy Speaker. Gould repeated that the Speaker resigned for his actions that he took alone. Poilievre switched to English to claim that the “Liberal Speaker” took the fall, and again claimed that PMO should have engaged in a massive overreach. Gould repeated that the Speaker took responsibility. Poilievre listed all of the things that Trudeau claims he’s not responsible for, like inflation, and claimed he didn’t take responsibility for things he did, to which Gould accused Poilievre of being irresponsible in politicising the issue. Poilievre made another dig at Trudeau’s absence, and demanded he take responsibility for this diplomatic embarrassment. The Deputy Speaker warned Poilievre again about pointing to absences, and Gould tried to turn the tables saying that she has barely heard a word of support for Ukraine from Poilievre, and there was much uproar and cries of shame.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he asked if the prime minster intended to apologise on behalf of Canada for Rota’s incident. Gould repeated that Rota took responsibility for his actions. Blanchet again demanded an apology, including one specifically to president Zelenskyy. Gould recited that as the granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, the incident hurt her personally, and that the Speaker did the right thing.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he lambasted the industry minister for summoning food producers to only stabilise and now lower prices (a sign that he doesn’t really know how inflation works), to which François-Philippe Champagne patted himself on the back for summoning those CEOs and those of the grocery oligopolies, and their bill on increasing competition. Singh then worried about people living in a campground in Halifax who can’t get any other housing and winter approaches, and blamed the prime minister. Sean Fraser said that Halifax is currently debating their rules to build more homes, and the government was pleased to work with them on that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stupid polls about the monarchy

Posted on by

It appears to be the season for reporting on really stupid polls, because there was yet another one yesterday, saying that an increasing number of Canadians want to “reconsider” our ties to the monarchy, which is already a misleading turn of phrase because we have a domestic monarchy, and have since 1931. Yes, we time-share their natural persons with the UK and thirteen other realms, but the Canadian monarchy is a Thing, and it’s not a gods damned foreign imposition.

What makes this kind of polling even more irresponsible is the fact that there is simply nothing in there about what they expect to replace it with, because there are myriad options, and absolutely no exploration of any of them. It’s also extremely relevant because that’s how Australia’s republican movement faltered—voters were not in favour of the appointed head of state option presented in the referendum, and since its failure, support for the monarchy in that country has increased. (Better the devil you know, and all of that. On top of that, getting rid of the monarchy would require a wholesale rewrite of our constitution (because it’s the central organizing principle), and would abrogate all of the treaties with First Nations, because they are all with the Crown, which would add a whole other layer of complexity for our relationship and reconciliation. (In fact, there is a compelling argument that ending the monarchy would simply mean completing the colonial project).

There is no simple yes/no choice for the future of the monarchy in Canada—it’s yes/which model to replace it with (because you can’t not have an organizing principle for executive power, and you really want to have some kind of a constitutional fire extinguisher available), and how to go about doing it, and stupid poll questions like this just elide over that reality in a completely misleading way.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Ukrainian attack on a shipyard in occupied Crimea has damaged two Russian ships undergoing repairs at the facility and caused a fire. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has vetoed an anti-corruption bill that contained a loophole that allowed people to forgo disclosing assets for another year. European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen also praised Ukraine’s progress toward EU membership, but said that they still have more work to do.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1701984458960765381

Continue reading →

Roundup: Credulously repeating the 20-year line

Posted on by

The big story that everyone was credulously repeating yesterday was the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s report on the Stellantis-LG Energy Solutions electric vehicle battery plant, and what he termed to be the “break-even” for the subsidies provided by the federal government and Ontario. To hear the two governments tell the tale, it would have earned back the subsidies within about five years, provided you factor in all of the indirect benefits from it. The PBO says that break-even would take twenty-years, but that didn’t take into account indirect benefits, just the revenues from the plant’s output. While I don’t trust the government’s five-year figure because it’s based on a lot of optimism and fuzzy math, I also don’t trust the PBO’s figures, because he and his office have a demonstrated history of just pulling methodologies out of their collective asses, and calling it a day, no matter how puzzling the results or the presentation.

Legacy media, however, takes the PBO at face-value, every time. “Oh, but he’s politically neutral so he’s credible!” is usually the cry, even though credible economists will tell you that his numbers don’t make sense much of the time (to say nothing of the fact that many of his reports are well outside of his legislated mandate). And if you look at the reporting, The Canadian Press, The Star, and the National Post all just quote from the report in full credulity, with some quotes from MPs or the minister in reaction. Not one of them appeared to try to get a second opinion. The CBC, however, decided to take things one step further and engage in actual journalistic malpractice by getting a quote from Ian Lee—a business studies professor with no expertise or credibility other than the fact that he answers his phone and provides bullshit answers about every topic under the sun—and the gods damned Canadian Taxpayers Federation, an Astroturf organization that exists solely to provide outraged quotes to the media. That’s what passes for getting a second opinion at the national public broadcaster.

Officers of Parliament are not infallible, and this PBO is especially a problem. In fact, one economist I was chatting with yesterday referred to him as the “Ian Lee of PBOs,” which pretty much says it all. It would be great if legacy media would actually take his utterances with a grain of salt, but they won’t, because nobody dares to challenge Officers of Parliament, and that is a problem that has a corrosive effect on our democratic institutions.

Ukraine Dispatch:

No news on the wires about any Russian strikes or the progress of the counter-offensive, but there was talk of Sweden considering donating some of its Gripen fighters to Ukraine. As well, Ukraine’s Antonov, which primarily has been in the business of building cargo planes, has been shifting their focus to building drones as the war carries on.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A foreign interference inquiry after all

Posted on by

The announcement finally came down yesterday that the government will be launching a public inquiry into foreign interference, with terms of reference that include China, Russia, and any other state or non-state actors whom they see fit, and that this will be expected to have an interim report by the end of February next year, with a final report at the end of the year. Leading the inquiry will be Quebec Court of Appeal justice Marie-Josée Hogue, who has no national security experience, but says she is “honoured” to lead the exercise (though that is not what I would be feeling). The choice of judge and the terms of reference are apparently all unanimously agreed to by the government as well as the three main opposition parties, which is in part why it took so long, but there are still a few red flags, particularly around the timeline. It doesn’t seem either remotely possible or even plausible that the bulk of the work can be completed in five months (Hogue doesn’t start until the 18th), considering how much time it will take to stand up the inquiry’s infrastructure, and for her and her staff to be properly briefed on how to read top secret information and how to contextualise intelligence. This having been said, Dominic LeBlanc says the government will turn over any Cabinet documents she needs, and Justin Trudeau says he’ll willingly testify before said inquiry when asked to, so they’re certainly making a big show about cooperation.

As expected, the opposition parties fell all over themselves to take credit for this, and chided the government for why this took so long to get to this point, as though they weren’t a big part of the problem, most especially in trying to find someone to lead this process who was willing to do the job and subject themselves to the likelihood of daily character assassination in the process (because as much as they say they’re all in favour of this, the moment they think they can score points off of what is happening, they will have zero hesitation in being ruthless in doing so). Already Twitter was abuzz with her political donation history (Conservative), who appointed her to the bench (Peter MacKay), and her previous law firm (which has Liberal and China connections), so you can bet that there will be those who won’t hesitate to move into character assassination at a moment’s notice.

In related news, LeBlanc says he’ll be meeting with MP Han Dong in the near future to discuss his future and whether he’ll be able to re-join the party given the allegations against him, which David Johnston found to lack credibility in his report. It sounds like LeBlanc hasn’t had the time to deal with this with everything else going on over the summer, so we’ll see where that leads.

Programming note: It’s my birthday this weekend, so I’m going to make it a long-ish weekend on the blog. See you next week!

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians attacked the Danube port of Izmail for the fourth time in five days, damaging more grain silos and critical infrastructure. Ukrainian forces are gearing up air defences in preparation for another winter of attacks on their energy systems and power grid. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has tasked his new defence minister with rebuilding trust after a series of corruption allegations in the defence forces, particularly around procurement. Ukraine is also calling for more international pressure on Russia to return the children they have taken from Ukraine over the course of the invasion.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A resignation that won’t solve the problem

Posted on by

A couple of days after everyone declared ministerial responsibility dead for Ontario housing minister Steve Clark’s refusal to resign over the Integrity Commissioner’s report and his own gross negligence and dereliction of his duties, Clark did resign, at 9 AM on Labour Day, pointing to an attempt to take the sting out of the messaging. Ford later announced changes to his Cabinet which would put Paul Calandra in the housing file, in addition to Calandra’s existing role as House Leader.

Ford, however, insists that the tainted process for those Greenbelt lands will carry on, and while he is promising a “review” of the process, he won’t do the one thing the Auditor General and Integrity Commissioner have said, which was to cancel this process and start over. In fact, yesterday morning, Ford left open the possibility of reviewing all Greenbelt land and opening it up for development, which is unnecessary for housing needs—he hasn’t even implemented the recommendations of his government’s own housing task force, which explicitly stated they don’t need to develop those lands because there are fifty other things they should be doing instead.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1699015630316360078

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1699103206893056279

And that hasn’t been all. As this sordid affair continues to drip out, the identity “Mr. X” from the reports has been identified as a former mayor and developer who Ford has ties with, and his operation is practically stuffed with Batman villains. The jokes write themselves, but just make the corruption all the more hard to take.

My latest:

  • My weekend column looks at how ministerial responsibility changed in the age of message discipline, but how Doug Ford and Steve Clark can’t do the bare minimum.
  • At National Magazine, I look at the number of “secret trials” that we have seen come to light recently, and what could be behind them.
  • Also at National Magazine, I get some reaction to the Competition Tribunal’s cost award to the Bureau and the signals that they are sending by it.
  • My column points out just how inappropriate it is for premiers to write open letters to Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem, and how it corrodes our system.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian strikes damaged more grain warehouses at the Danube port of Izmail. Ukrainian forces say that they have taken more ground in both the eastern and southern fronts, as president Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited two front-line areas. Ukraine’s defence minister is being replaced by Rustem Umerov, a Crimean Tatar, who headed a privatization fund. Ukraine’s parliament passed an anti-graft law that contains a loophole, and many are urging Zelenskyy to veto it as a result. A parts shortage and a dispute over intellectual property rights is hobbling the ability to repair the Leopard 2 tanks we sent to Ukraine. And Ukrainian intercepts show Russian soldiers complaining about poor equipment and heavy losses.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The torqued six attendees

Posted on by

The National Post’s series on judicial appointments continued apace yesterday, with the torqued and misleading headline that “High-level judges may have paid to meet Trudeau before their appointments,” and members of the pundit class and commentariat swooned with disbelief, and social media was blanketed with caterwauling about “corruption” and “bribery” and so on. Some of the excitable far-right fanboys started ranting about the whole judiciary being corrupted and needing to be bulldozed (because how better to enable fascism?)

But if you read the piece, and put it into context with the previous work, it says that as many as six out of 1308 lawyers who later got judicial appointments may have attended Liberal fundraisers that the prime minister or other Cabinet ministers attended. Which is…nothing. And yet, the framing and the headline suggests that they paid for access and that said meeting resulted in their appointment to the bench, in absence of any evidence to the contrary—just innuendo and correlation that has no relation to causation. This kind of journalism tends to be bullshit.

I have made this case before, and I’ll re-up it again—we absolutely do not want or need purity tests to be applied to applicants to the bench, and we should not bar anyone who has ever donated to a party from receiving an appointment. Donation is a necessary form of civic engagement, and lawyers tend to be more engaged in their communities, and often have the means to donate. This is important—we need people engaged in the system, and if we bar them from promotion because they have donated at one point in time or another, we are losing talent from the judiciary. The process as it stands is working (albeit slow for other reasons), and we don’t need concern trolls dismantling it for the sake of purity tests.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Three Ukrainians were killed in an overnight Russian attack on Poltava, and two others were killed in shelling later in the day in the Kherson region. Ukrainian officials have confirmed that they have liberated the strategic settlement of Robotyne in the country’s south, as they are pushing further in the area as part of the counteroffensive. Russians are claiming that they scrambled jets in response to two US drones flying near occupied Crimea.

Continue reading →