Roundup: Turnabout is fair play in procedural warfare

If you needed yet another example of how the state of the current parliament continues to degrade, yesterday was yet another example. It was the first of the allotted Supply Days (aka “opposition days”) that the Speaker had to intervene in order to schedule, and it barely happened at all. Why? The NDP used procedural shenanigans to delay the debate on the confidence motion that used Jagmeet Singh’s words as the fodder by calling for concurrence debate on a committee report that dealt with abortion access, and the Liberals played along, which meant that the Conservatives’ debate didn’t end up happening until after QP, meaning they only had a couple of hours’ worth of clip-gathering instead of a full day, and boy were they put out about it. But that’s the thing with procedural warfare—if you wage it against others, eventually they will wage it against you.

There were other shenanigans that happened after QP—Liberal MP Jaime Battiste tried to move a unanimous consent motion to get the First Nations water bill out of committee and over to the Senate, but the Conservatives refused. As they did, Battiste took his water glass and started shouting at the Conservatives, and went into the aisle, apparently planning to throw the glass at them before he thought better of it. And then Andrew Scheer tried to move a motion that would have had the same effect, but with language that denigrated the government, and of course that too was shut down, and Scheer had the audacity to play the victim after that stunt.

It’s good that there’s only one sitting week left, because my tolerance for this kind of bullshit is at its end.

Ukraine Dispatch

The Americans have been pressuring Ukraine to lower the conscription age to 18 in order to bolster their fighting force, which is creating dilemmas for those teenaged boys.

Continue reading

Roundup: Boissonnault out (for now?)

Just before Question Period yesterday, a very brief press release was issued that prime minister Justin Trudeau and Randy Boissonnault “agreed” that Boissonnault would step away from Cabinet in order for Boissonnault to clear the allegations against him. The wording was a little curious, but at this point it was probably inevitable given the sheer volume of stories coming out, never mind that most of them involved coincidences, or unproven allegations about his former business partner and not him.

I’m not going to remark much about any of the allegations, including those of “race-shifting” because Boissonnault has been issuing corrections to media outlets for more than five years that he didn’t say he was Indigenous even if the party said he was (which seems to never get mentioned in these stories), and the Ethics Commissioner keeps looking at each new allegation and saying there’s nothing to investigate. However, what I will note is that we are back to the situation where there is no longer anyone around the Cabinet table from Alberta or Saskatchewan. Now, Freeland did grow up in Alberta and can claim some credibility there, and Jonathan Wilkinson used to work for the Saskatchewan government, so he has some credibility there too, but Trudeau doesn’t have many options when it comes to replacing an Alberta seat because his only other alternative is George Chahal, who pretty much burned his future prospects when he got caught removing a rivals flyers during the campaign, and he has recently been vocal about looking to see Trudeau resign as leader.

I will also note that it remains particularly curious that for as much as media outlets and the National Post most especially have been pouring time and resources into these Boissonnault allegations, and every time they call up another Indigenous leader to denounce Boissonnault and call for his resignation, there is a particular silence around Danielle Smith and previously claims she has made about Indigenous ancestry, which have definitively been proven false. If the Conservatives are so offended by claims Boissonnault may or may not have made, or have been made about him, I have yet to see a single Conservative or pundit in this country call Smith a “fake” or a “fraud,” or a “phoney,” and demand that she resigns for the very same offences they are accusing Boissonnault of having made, when Smith’s has been plainly on the record for a couple of years now. As far as I can determine, the Post ran a single story about it, and not three weeks of constant, breathless reporting about it. It’s incredibly funny how that happens, no?

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine has now fired UK-provided cruise missiles into Russian territory, striking targets in Kursk. Ukraine also says it successfully struck a command post in the Belgorod region, likely in a drone attack. Here is a look at the Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy system.

Continue reading

QP: Boissonnault out vs caucus muzzling

Fresh from his trips to Peru and Brazil, the prime minister was present for QP today, ready to respond to any and all questions, though his deputy was elsewhere. All of the other leaders were present, and just before QP started, it was announced that Randy Boissonnault was stepping away from Cabinet to “clear his name” from the various allegations against him. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and led off with the various salacious allegations against Boissonnault. Justin Trudeau noted that Boissonnault has left Cabinet to focus on the allegations, but the Conservatives only want to cut. Poilievre raised Jody Wilson-Raybould and tried to compare her to Boissonnault, and Trudeau noted that for a leader who claims to want the truth is muzzling his own caucus. Poilievre switched to English, gave a quip about doubling hosing prices and gun crimes, and up until a minute ago, had a minister with a “double identity,” and Trudeau again repeated the points about Poilievre muzzling his MPs rather than letting them advocate for their communities. Poilievre again tried compare Wilson-Raybould to Boissonnault, and Trudeau repeated that Poilievre won’t let his caucus talk because he’s afraid of what they are going to say about him. Poilievre retorted that twenty Liberals want Trudeau gone, and demanded an election. Trudeau said that MPs on his side were free to share their opinions unlike the other side.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, said this display proved why Quebec needs to be on its own, and then demanded that the government force the Senate to pass the Supply Management bill. Trudeau noted that his party was in favour of it, and demanded the prime minister personally meet with senators to get them to pass it, and Trudeau noted that he does meet with them often, but regardless, the government will protect the system.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, complained about the cost of living, and demanded the government support their economically illiterate GST cut plan. Trudeau said that if the NDP was so concerned about the cost of living, they would help the government break the Conservative obstruction in the Chamber. Singh repeated the demand in French, and Trudeau repeated his same response. 

Continue reading

Roundup: Ignoring the abuse and the banana republic tactics

While on the one hand, it’s nice that legacy media is once again paying attention to the fact that there is an ongoing filibuster in the House of Commons that has largely paralyzed any work for six weeks now, but it would be great if they could actually make a gods damned effort at it. Pretty much every story, and the CBC’s turn was yesterday, just types of the quotes from Karina Gould and Andrew Scheer blaming one another for the filibuster. The current fascination to this story, however, is that the Supplementary Estimates votes are coming up, and every gods damned Hill reporter is dying to use the phrase “American-style government shutdown” to go along with it that they continue to gloss over the actual issues at hand.

There is a legitimate issue about the abuse of the parliamentary privilege to demand documents, because the power is only in relation to Parliament summoning those documents for their own purposes, not to turn them over to a third party. The Speaker and the clerks who advise him should never have allowed this to be considered a matter of privilege because the powers are being abused, but this is too much of a “process story” for them, so they don’t like that angle. There is also the even more pressing issue that these powers are being abused in a manner befitting a banana republic, where the powers of the state are being weaponized against those that the legislature doesn’t like, and that should be absolutely alarming to anyone paying attention.

This kind of abuse sets precedents, and if it’s allowed to happen now, it’ll be allowed to happen the next time someone wants to abuses these powers. The most that media outlets can muster up is “The RCMP says they don’t want these documents, so why are you so insistent?” but never “Why do you think it’s appropriate to behave like this is a banana republic where you are using the state to go after your perceived enemies?” We are in a particular moment in western democracies where autocrats are threatening to take over, and Viktor Orbán in Hungary has provided them a template to dismantle the guardrails of the state to delegitimize opposition and stay in power as long as possible. This is creeping into Canada, and legacy media in this country needs to be alive to the issue and call out these kinds of tactics and behaviours, rather than just both-sidesing it and using words like “polarized” or “divisive,” because that just plays into their hands.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine fired eight US-supplied longer-range missiles into Russia, two of them being intercepted, the rest hitting an ammunition supply location. President Zelenskyy addressed Ukraine’s parliament with a speech to mark the 1,000th day of the invasion.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1858871441032155385

Continue reading

Roundup: Just which system is privileging the party?

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.

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.

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 character assassination of Boissonnault continues

While the prime minister was still in Rio for the G20 summit, his deputy was present, but most other leaders didn’t bother. Pierre Poilievre was present, however, and he led off in French by equating the prime minister to a firefighter setting fires, who blamed “bad actors” for the immigration problems, and that he needed to look in the mirror. Marc Miller spoke about the decision to lower targets as being the responsible thing to do. Poilievre repeated this in English, and Miller said they wouldn’t take any lessons from someone who has spent twenty years lighting fires in the House of Commons. Poilievre switched to the various allegations about Randy Boissonnault and demanded his resignation. Boissonnault said that despite the innuendo, he had not met and has no dealings with the person referred to in the article today. Poilievre tried again, with a couple of added swipes, and Boissonnault repeated that the same denial, and the article stated that fact. Poilievre then took a swipe at Trudeau saying people are confused by misinformation about the carbon levy, repeated lies about it, and demanded an election. Jonathan Wilkinson called out the disinformation and chanted that eight out of ten households get more money back. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he decried the amendments to their Supply Management bill in the Senate, and demanded the prime minister order senators to defeat the amendment. Karina Gould reminded him that senators are independent. Therrien railed about that independence and didn’t believe it, and repeated his demand. This time Marie-Claude Bibeau suggested that the Conservatives tell their own senators to pass the bill. 

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, complained about prices “not making sense” and more, and demanded the government adopt their economically stupid plan to cut the GST on certain items. Jean-Yves Duclos responded with a swipe about the Conservatives not supporting dental care. Don Davies repeated the same demand in English, and François-Philipppe Champagne repeated that the Conservatives will cut, and patted himself on the back for creating economic opportunities. 

Continue reading

Roundup: Clapping back at the provinces and their JPs

Justice Minister Arif Virani has been honing his responses to the cries for bail reform lately, both in pointing out that the provinces are not living up to their responsibilities—whether that’s with properly resourcing the court system so that trials are conducted in a timely manner, or in dealing with overcrowded remand centres where people are locked up awaiting trial, and because of the overcrowding and poor conditions, many accused are being given bail rather than subjected to those conditions. Even more recently, he has started pointing to how certain provinces, and Ontario especially, have been appointing Justices of the Peace, to decide on most bail hearings.

Ontario in particular had this whole song and dance about how great it was that they were appointing JPs who weren’t all lawyers, because it gave them greater breadth of experience or whatever, but if it’s true that they’re not actually applying the law of bail properly, that’s a problem. It could simply be that their training is inadequate, which again is a provincial responsibility, because if they are being expected to read, understand and apply case law that the Supreme Court of Canada has laid out when it comes to the law of bail, then again, that is a problem that the provinces need to solve.

And yes, there are going to continue to be voices chirping that the law is the problem, and that the Liberals created an “open door” through two pieces of legislation, but this has been an orchestrated disinformation campaign. The one law that the Conservatives refer to codified Supreme Court jurisprudence, and actually toughened bail in certain respects, especially around domestic violence; the other law they refer to had to do with doing away with solitary confinement in federal penitentiaries, which has nothing to do with bail in the slightest, but repeated lying that has not been pushed back against by both-sidesing media has led a whole lot of credulous people to believe the bullshit. The law of bail is not the problem—it’s everything else that is, and the provinces are once again being allowed to get away with not doing their jobs.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian security services have detained a special forces unit commander accused of being Russian mole. Russian air defences claim to have downed a series of Ukrainian drones in a number of different regions. There could be another mass displacement of Ukrainians if energy systems continue to be damaged over the winter. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz had a call with Putin, asking him to withdraw his troops and negotiate, which of course Putin won’t, and now Zelenskyy is angry with Scholz because these kinds of calls decrease Putin’s isolation.

Continue reading

Roundup: Promising populist GST cuts

In a speech to the Canadian Club in Toronto, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh laid out a pre-election campaign pledge of removing the GST on certain “essential” items like ready-made food, diapers, home heating, and mobile phone and internet bills—all of which he would finance through an “excess profit tax” on large corporations. It is possibly the dumbest economic policy possible, but our politics are moving into an absolutely brainless phase of populism.

Removing the GST on these items will have a negligible impact, particularly for those in low-income brackets. If anything, most of those reductions will benefit higher-income households, such as the GST cut on home heating (because wealthier households have bigger houses that take more fuel), and it when it comes to apartment buildings, the cut has little impact, or for places with electric heat, how exactly do you disentangle how much of the hydro bill is heat versus other electricity usage? I know that the NDP have been pushing this policy for years now, long before Singh was leader, but has anyone thought about it for more than five seconds?

In addition, making more exceptions to the GST are hard to administer, and it will reduce the GST rebates that lower-income households rely on. And promising the “excess profits” tax is basically an arbitrary exercise in determining what they consider “excess,” and that will basically be how much they think they can soak out of these companies, who will inevitably engage in creative accounting to suddenly lower profit margins or incur paper losses to avoid paying said tax, and all of the things the NDP had hoped to spend that windfall on will blow away like ashes in the wind. This isn’t progressive policy, but the NDP are going to pursue it anyway because they think that they can get the populist win here, when it’s almost certainly going to fail.

Ukraine Dispatch

A combined Russian strike hit a residential building and energy installations in Odesa, killing one on Thursday evening. As well, the Russian assault on Kupiansk in the northeast broke through the outskirts of the city, but were eventually repelled.

Continue reading

Roundup: “Identity politics” on both sides

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch

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

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

Continue reading

QP: Concern trolling about climate targets

Thursday, and neither the PM nor his deputy were in town to attend QP, and all of the other leaders decided to be absent as well. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, giving a misleading condemnation of the emissions cap, claiming this was driving jobs and investment to the US, and wondered if the PM was getting a commission from the US energy department for all the jobs he was creating. Steven Guilbeault started that it was a cap on pollution, and that oil production was projected to keep increasing another 16 percent by 2030, and companies in the sector were making billion-dollar investments to ensure that the sector has a future while they fight climate change. Scheer insisted that this was a cap on production, and then used the Environment Commissioner’s report to concern troll about the slow progress on emissions reductions, before demanding an election, claiming the current path was “insanity.” Guilbeault noted that it was extraordinary that the Conservatives were talking about climate change, and repeated that emissions were going down after they had to pick up the slack after a decade of inaction. Scheer then cited a Salvation Army report about food insecurity and blamed the carbon levy before demanding an election, to which Soraya Martinez Ferrada responded in French that the Conservatives have an inferiority complex, noted that Canada had lower inflation than other countries and the Conservatives were jealous. Luc Berthold took over in French, repeated the concern trolling about emissions reductions, and Guilbeault repeated that it was extraordinary that the Conservatives were talking about climate change and that they have no plan. Berthold repeated the claims that the Liberals have done nothing for climate, and Guilbeault reiterated that the Conservatives would just let the planet burn because they have no plan for climate or the economy. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and railed about the amendment to the Supply Management bill in the Senate, claiming those senators were doing Trump’s bidding (seriously?!) and demanded the government call on senators to vote down the amendment. Karina Gould said that they were disappointed by the move and called on senators to vote it down. Therrien railed further about the amendment, and Marie-Claude Bibeau reiterated their support for Supply Management and encouraged senators to vote down the amendment. 

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he too railed about the Environment Commissioner’s report, and that the Liberals weren’t doing their jobs. Guilbeault suggested he actually read the report and insisted it showed progress because emissions were going down while the economy was growing. Lisa Marie Barron repeated the condemnation in English, and Guilbeault noted previous NDP support for carbon pricing and thanks to Conservative pressure, they are no longer progressive or environmentalists. 

Continue reading