Tag Archives: RCMP

Roundup: The Auditor General is not infallible

Posted on by

I have to say that I am both amused and irritated by the number of stories out over the past couple of days about the Conservatives supposedly “defending” the Auditor General, or that there is a “battle brewing” between the AG and the Canada Revenue Agency because they didn’t agree with her calculations around some of the benefits or whom she believed were receiving them on a fraudulent basis. For one, the Conservatives didn’t come to her defence—it was a bit of cheap theatre for them to suddenly start screaming that the government somehow attacked her independence and therefore “democracy itself” (no, seriously, they said that) because the revenue minister said that the CRA didn’t agree with her calculations, and then cheekily added that it wasn’t her fault because the opposition was forcing her to do the audit (which is partially true—it was the compromise that they insisted on to pass the emergency COVID legislation back at the start of the pandemic, so the mandate was legislated, but because they demanded it).

My bigger problem is the fact that this disagreement is somehow scandalising because we have an unhealthy veneration of Officers of Parliament and the Auditor General most especially in this country. A virtual cult has been built around them, particularly by media, who love nothing more than watching the AG go to town on criticising the government of the day, no matter which stripe of government it is, and they will uncritically believe absolutely everything the AG says because they are independent, and therefore must be inherently credible. There are similar problems with this lack of critical engagement with the Parliamentary Budget Officer (and the current one has been a real problem around that, as he picks methodologies out of thin air), and again, his word is gospel. But they’re not infallible. The previous AG ballsed up the Senate audit really badly, and it was an absolute mess, but nobody wanted to talk about it because you can’t badmouth the Auditor General. It’s like a cardinal sin in this city. And departments should be allowed to have disagreements, because the AG isn’t going to get it right every time. That’s just a physical impossibility, and we should acknowledge that fact, but as we see, when it happens, it’s like heresy. People need to grow up, and media needs to be more critical of these Officers, because media is the only check they have.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 288:

Kyiv’s mayor is warning people that while there is no need to evacuate at present, it could become necessary if Russian strikes continue on critical infrastructure over the winter. There are some concerns around movements inside of Belarus, but it is also suspected this may be a decoy and an information operation to keep Ukrainian troops near that border rather than at the front lines. Elsewhere, here is the harrowing tale of a Ukrainian father who was separated from his children by Russians while trying to flee Mariupol, and his ordeal in getting them back from Russian hands.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1600404008463523841

Continue reading →

QP: “Bludgeoning” the Auditor General

Posted on by

The prime minister was still in Montreal at the COP15 biodiversity conference, and his deputy was in town but elsewhere, while only some of the other leaders were present today. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he decried the interest rate hike from the Bank of Canada, but blamed “inflationary deficits” from the government as the cause, which is not actually true, no matter the misquote that Poilievre attributed to the Bank Governor, and told the government to stop spending. Randy Boissonnault responded that the Bank is independent, that Canadians are living through difficult times, and he rejected the notion that their investments caused inflation, quoting the former Bank Governor, Stephen Poloz, that the investments stopped deflation, and then implored them to support Bill C-32. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the same misleading concerns before quoting a single mother from a news story, saying that she listened to the government’s assurances that interest would be low for long. Boissonnault responded that Poilievre shouldn’t talk about advice given that he told people to invest in crypto, before he listed measures the government has taken to help people. Poilievre then changed topics, and raised objections from the Liberal MP for Yukon to the firearms legislation as currently envisioned and needled the government about it. Marco Mendicino gave a fairly standard response about not targeting hunters and farmers and that the bill gives resources to police and border agencies. Poilievre switched back to French, to raise the story of the RCMP getting a contract linked to someone under criminal suspicion for espionage in the United States, and whose parent company is in China. Helena Jaczek noted that they are studying the issue, but the company did meet their needs, so they are ensuring that they are protecting national security. Poilievre returned to English to accuse the answer of being “encrypted in bureaucratese” before repeating the question, and Mendicino noted that there is a rigorous process for contracts and they are scrutinising the process run by independent civil servants, and then raised the independent panels observing the last two elections to point out that they took actions but the Conservatives did not.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and gave an analogy about dangerous driving as a way of demanding the federal government increase health transfers to provinces. Mark Holland stood up to offer bland assurances that they are continuing to invest in the system. Therrien insisted there was no cooperation, and demanded increased transfers. Carolyn Bennett insisted they were working with the provinces to ensure there was not only funding but a national vision on healthcare, and listed the transfers sent to provinces.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and decried the interest rate hike, and demanded the prime minister find a way to tackle inflation without hurting workers. Boissonnault reminded him that the Bank of Canada is independent and the government is doing their job of keeping fiscal firepower for when they need it and listed actions they have taken. Singh switched to French to worry about consumer debts and repeated his same demand, Boissonnault repeated his same answer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A bill drawn up by deranged constitutional saboteurs

Posted on by

The fallout of the rollout of Danielle Smith’s “Alberta Sovereignty in a United Canada Act” carried on for much of the day, starting with a “clarification” that the province’s justice department sent out, but it didn’t clarify anything because it contradicted the plain language of the text, and I am forced to wonder why we aren’t seeing a raft of resignations because this whole affair has been an egregious, unconstitutional omnishambles from the get go. (From bean to cup…)

For his part, Justin Trudeau is keeping his powder dry and standing well back. While he said nothing is “off the table,” but added that he’s not looking to pick a fight, he knows full well that a fight is what Smith wants, because that’s what she hopes to use to leverage support in the next election, because there is a demographic in Alberta who likes the attitude of pugilism with the federal government, even though most of the grievances are imaginary or overblown. And no, he is not going to invoke disallowance on this because it’s a constitutional dead letter and would be provoking an even bigger constitutional crisis. But I also get the sense that “disallowance” is the new “Emergencies Act” that the press gallery in Ottawa is going to ask Trudeau about at every single opportunity, like they did through the height of the pandemic. But seriously, Gretchen—stop trying to make disallowance happen. It’s not going to happen. As for what Trudeau will do, I suspect it’ll be a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada after the bill receives royal assent, whenever that happens.

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/1597961310779891713

For commentary on the bill, law professor Eric Adams lists the bill’s many unconstitutional aspects which will result in court cases, one way or the other. Emmett Macfarlane pulls no punches in calling it the most unconstitutional bill in modern history, goes through the many problems, and asserts that the bill was “drawn up by deranged constitutional saboteurs,” and he’s right. David Moscrop points out that the bill gives Smith a temporary win by harnessing populist forces to her benefit, where she can play victim when the courts eventually strike this down. Colby Cosh doesn’t take Smith at her word that she hopes never to use this legislation, and hopes that people can cool down before this escalates.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 281:

Fighting continues both in the east, as Russians continue to try and advance to Bakhmut, and near Kherson in the south. Meanwhile, nine people were killed by fire over a 24-hour period as they tried to find ways of providing heat, and it didn’t go very well for an of them.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Sovereignty Act is an attack on democracy itself

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith tabled her “Alberta Sovereignty in a United Canada Act” yesterday, and it was worse than anyone had previously imagined.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1597736239960297473

For starters, the “in a united Canada” part is an attempt to be clever in trying to insist that this isn’t about separatism, but that’s mere window dressing. (I also suspect that it’s not much of a coincidence that just days ago, conservative luminary Ken Boessenkool declared Stephen Harper’s “The Québécois are a nation within a united Canada” motion to be a genius unifying move, never mind the fact that just who “the Québécois” were was never defined and created rifts with Anglo-Quebeckers). The substance of this bill is a wholesale power grab using the most extreme form of a Henry VIII clause known as enabling legislation. In this case, it allows Cabinet to amend any legislation they see fit to after being given a mandate by way of a resolution passed by the legislature (where they have a comfortable majority). Smith and her justice minister, Tyler Shandro, kept insisting that this resolution process was democratic and transparent, but this kind of enabling legislation is anything but, particularly because it allows Cabinet to define the terms of what they deem “injurious to Alberta’s interests,” or whatever the excuse they’re giving themselves to take these powers. It violates the separation of powers by declaring federal legislation to be null and void in the province, and directs police not to enforce federal laws, which is an attack on the rule of law.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1597732003411267584

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1597761564257701888

Smith justified the need for such powers as saying that Alberta has been “ignored” by the federal government for the past ten years, which is a) complete bullshit, and b) that’s not a justifiable reason to give yourself the power to ignore the legislative process. She insisted this was just defending rights like Quebec does, but Quebec doesn’t do this. Her list of grievances was largely all strawmen—the incoming emission cap on the oil and gas sector, the plan to reduce fertilizer emissions, environmental assessment legislation, and the worst affront of all—that the federal government would dare to try to attach strings to federal dollars. How very dare they! But this kind of mendacious grievance-mongering is how politics has been practice in the province for years now, so it’s not unexpected that this is what she would fall back to.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1597733033754386434

Smith’s apologists immediately came out to defend the bill saying that it’s “symbolic” and Smith herself was insisting she doesn’t want it to be used. That’s all horseshit. You don’t give yourself very real enabling legislation powers for “symbolic” reasons if you don’t intend to use it. The federal government has largely been signalling that they won’t be engaging, though I wouldn’t be surprised if, now that we’ve seen the text and the huge overreach, that they would refer this to the Supreme Court of Canada so fast that it will give you whiplash. While this could be Smith imagining that it’s a fight she wants, I have severe doubts that it would give her the legitimacy in a fight that she so desperately wants.

As this was all going down, Jason Kenney announced that he had resigned his seat, with a letter attached that bemoaned how polarized politics had become—after he spent 25 years actively engaging in that very polarizing behaviour and driving it to partisan effect. The kicker here is that Kenney was vehemently opposed to the proposed Sovereignty Act, and planned to oppose it in the legislature, but as soon as the bill is tabled, whoops, there he goes. I can’t quite decide if this is weaselly behaviour, or Kenney being a chicken shit. Either way, it was a choice.

https://twitter.com/jkenney/status/1597741099971641344

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 280:

NATO foreign ministers met in Bucharest, Romania, and have pledged additional non-lethal support with things like more blankets and generators to help Ukrainians to get through the winter, but also to send them Patriot missiles. The Americans announced $53 million to buy parts to help repair the electrical grid. Inside Ukraine, “Points of Invincibility” have bene set up which are stations to get food, drinks, and warmth as the shelling of critical infrastructure continues.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1597661671560024067

Continue reading →

QP: We created two independent panels!

Posted on by

Both the prime minister and his deputy were in the House together for the first QP in weeks, which is always nice to see. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, he asked if any public servants, security officials, or police inform the prime minister of Beijing’s alleged interference in elections. Justin Trudeau said that while security and police take foreign interference very seriously, he could assure Canadians that in the 2019 and 2021 elections, there was no foreign interference that could have changed any of the results in any significant way. Poilievre found the answer to be tricksy, and in English, wanted to know if there was any interference period. Trudeau pointed out that there is always some level of interference, be it cyber or disinformation, but they had assurances this was not an issue and that the elections were free and fair. Poilievre still was not satisfied, and asked again. Trudeau reiterated that they had the panel of top civil servants and national security who monitored both 2019 and 2021 and found no interference. Poilievre tried again, more slowly, if there were any briefings about alleged interference, period. Trudeau stated that he had no briefings, period, around foreign-funded candidates. Poilievre insisted this was a denial of an absurdity, and repeated yet again if he had any intelligence of any interference of any kind from Beijing during either election. Trudeau reiterated that the report from the non-partisan panel that there was no interference that impacted those elections.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the NDP, and raised that the RCMP was now investigating, and if democracy was at stake, the prime minister needed to know which alleged eleven candidates were in question. Trudeau repeated that all of the reports stated anything about any interference or funding directly or indirectly from China. Blanchet was not mollified and worried that Trudeau was somehow isolating China for the sake of grandstanding. Trudeau once again cited that China does try to interfere, which is why we work with allies to protect ourselves. 

Jagmeet Singh led for the NDP, and worried about conservative premiers trying to privatise healthcare, and demanded the prime minister do something about that. Trudeau noted that on some days the NDP demand he send more money to premiers and today he was telling them not to, but any future transfers would be subject to the Canada Health Act. Singh switched to French and sounded concern about Quebec hospitals in particular, and Trudeau reiterated that they were working with provinces to deliver “real results.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: More Macklem misquotes

Posted on by

I’m going to revisit more of Tiff Macklem’s appearance at the Commons finance committee, because things he said were being taken wildly out of context in Question Period yesterday, and we all have an obligation to call out egregious bullshit when we hear it. For example, when Macklem admits that stimulus may have been applied for too long, nobody knew if it was safe to withdraw it yet and they were operating on best guesses and advice from observers, and more to the point, the Bank was also engaged in forward guidance, and they needed  a cycle to wind that back before raising rates, otherwise they risked damaging their reputation as doing what they way they’re going to. This is a very important consideration for a central bank. As well, the questions about the level of spending during the height of the pandemic and whether that led to more inflationary stimulus ignores that it was impossible to better target supports like CERB because the government and its IT structure had no real ability to do that. That’s why the used the CRA’s system to kludge together CERB as quickly as they did—there wasn’t an ability to be more targeted (even though it was temporary). Trying to elicit quotes to blame the government for inflation is both cheap and intellectually dishonest, but that’s pretty much par for the course these days.

Meanwhile, former governor Stephen Poloz told an audience at Western that the economy is much more sensitive to interest rate hikes than it was ten years ago, so we should start seeing inflation start to fall shortly, but he also stated that it will only get part of the job done, so other policy action will be needed to get inflation back to its target zone. This said, Poloz also says that it’s impossible to say if rates were hiked too much over a short period, because as we should know by now, inflation can move about 18 months later than the rate changes happens, so stay tuned.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 275:

As Russian bombing of critical infrastructure continue, people in Kyiv are collecting rainwater to survive, while Kherson is facing renewed attacks. Russia is openly admitting to these attacks now, claiming it’s about disrupting military command and control and stopping the flow of ammunition, never mind that they’re openly admitting to war crimes as they do.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The gong show of Macklem at committee

Posted on by

Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem and his senior deputy governor, Carolyn Rogers, appeared at the Commons finance committee last night, and as you might expect, it was a complete gong show, because most MPs can’t be grown-ups in the face of serous business or policy questions. And once again, the Bloc were the adults in the room, which is a sad indictment. Without further ado, here’s the Wall Street Journal’s Paul Vieira on what went down:

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1595556537912758272

 

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 274:

Russia sent another 70 or so missiles into Ukraine to continue targeting power and water systems, and president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Russia is doing to is to try and weaponize the winter weather. And it’s not just critical infrastructure targeted—it’s also civilian targets including maternity hospitals, where a newborn was killed. Here’s a look at some of the personal stories of those who are affected by these blackouts bas a result of the attacks. Meanwhile, more evidence is being accumulated regarding Russia’s use of rape as a weapon of war.

https://twitter.com/Podolyak_M/status/1595462972536676359

Continue reading →

Roundup: The false binary in MAiD coverage

Posted on by

The stories about the hearings on expanding the Medical Assistance in Dying regime continue apace, complete with lurid tales of people threatening to access MAiD for reasons of poverty rather than because they want to die at this particular moment of whatever condition they suffer that makes them eligible, and almost all of them frame it as the federal government forcing people to die. Althia Raj’s latest column was literally titled “Why does the Trudeau government leave people no option but to take their own lives?” before it was changed several hours later, which may or may not have been because I pointed out the fact that disability supports and housing are provincial responsibilities and not the responsibility of the federal government, who are concerned only with the Criminal Code prohibitions against providing MAiD.

Once again, provinces are being let off the hook for their own responsibilities to care for these vulnerable people. In all of the cases going to the media, it’s over areas that the province should have been responsive to, but we also know that they have been in the business of legislating poverty for those who require disability supports, so it’s not a surprise, but it’s not something the federal government can just swoop down and fix. Yes, they have committed to their disability benefit, which is still in still at committee and will take time to implement because of the complexity of dealing with provincial programmes and most especially ensuring that any federal benefits don’t mean that provincial ones are clawed back (like several provinces did with CERB payments, because again, they are legislating poverty), but even this federal support does not make it a federal responsibility, nor should it impact the considerations for the Criminal Code provisions around providing MAiD to those who request it. That road leads to “perfect world” thinking, where people will be made to suffer needlessly because premiers can’t do their jobs. (Full disclosure: My mother accessed MAiD when she had terminal cancer, and was afforded a good and dignified death).

I also think that there is a growing media ethics problem where we are seeing an increasing number of these stories with either unverified accounts of people who accessed MAiD for seemingly illegitimate purposes (though they obviously had a qualifying condition), or those who are taking to the media to threaten to access MAiD if they can’t get supports they need, as is the case cited in Raj’s column. The framing of these stories is often badly flawed, the facts usually unclear, and frankly, it is emboldening people to use the lurid threats of suicide (albeit medically assisted) in order to draw attention to their plight. Media outlets need to start reconsidering how this is being covered, because the number of these stories appears to be on the rise, and it doesn’t help anyone when things are covered in such a way.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 272:

The damage to the electrical system in the country has president Volodymyr Zelenskyy urging Ukrainians to conserve electricity where possible and to think about options that will help them wait out long outages. He also said that people from liberated Kherson can apply to relocate to places where security and heating issues are less acute, considering how much of Kherson’s civilian infrastructure was destroyed. Here is more about how Kyiv is dealing with the blackouts.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Backseat driving healthcare talks

Posted on by

I occasionally find myself amused by some of the backseat driving/armchair quarterbacking that happens in Canadian politics, and there was no more perfect example that Jagmeet Singh putting out a press release yesterday declaring that if he were prime minister, he would have sat down with the provinces and not left until he was satisfied that they have all the resources they need. On the one hand it’s kind of hilarious because most of the time, Singh can barely recognise that provincial jurisdiction actually exists, or he seems to think that a Green Lantern Ring and sufficient political will would actually solve federalism. On the other, I can’t decide if that means that he thinks he’s got amazing powers of negotiation, or if he’s declaring himself a chump who will fall for the provinces’ strong-arm tactics.

Imagine for just a moment what Singh means when he says he won’t leave the table until he gives the provinces what they need. It sounds an awful lot like he’s going to give them a blank cheque and then pat himself on the back for having fixed healthcare. Meanwhile, the provinces take that money, put a paltry amount back into the system, continue on with privatizing as much as they possibly can (look at what Danielle Smith is up to in Alberta now that she’s fired the entire board of Alberta Health Services), reduce their own share of the funding because of the increased federal dollars, and then give tax breaks in the hopes of getting re-elected. And we know this because all of this has happened before, and all of it will happen again if this funding doesn’t come with some pretty strict conditions and strings. And the sooner more people start calling the premiers on their bullshit, the faster we can get to a deal where they accept strings that will actually do something meaningful with those increased federal dollars.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 269:

Ukraine’s electricity grid operator is warning people that blackouts can last for several hours as Russians continue to pound the country’s electrical systems. Russians are also continuing their push toward Bakhmut with renewed intensity. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy appeared at the Halifax Security Forum by video to ask NATO countries to assist with a ten-part peace plan, and that he hoped Canada would show leadership on one of those items.

https://twitter.com/kiraincongress/status/1593694607459717124

Continue reading →

QP: Theatrical accusations of breaking Canada

Posted on by

With the PM still in Bali, his deputy was present, though it was unlikely that she was going to take on the usual proto-PMQ practice of the PM taking every Wednesday question. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he wondered why children in other countries could get access to pain medications but not Canada, and accused the government of inaction when there were warning signs in April. Freeland said that as a mother she understood the stress that families were going through, which was why the government announced a supply of additional medications from abroad. Poilievre repeated the question in English, with the added question of what date the Cabinet was aware of the shortages, but Freeland repeated her same response in her slow and deliberate style as she read the script in front of her. Poilievre turns back to French, somewhat unusually, and raised the inflation numbers that were released earlier, and blamed it on the so-called “triple, triple, triple” carbon price, which is of course not accurate. Freeland started off in English, saying that the only thing that has tripled was our Aaa credit rating, before switching to French to note how inflation stabilised. Poilievre was back in English to be dismissive, noted that heating oil costs were up over 70 percent in Newfoundland and Labrador, and gave his usual demands. Freeland noted that the people who are broke are those who followed Poilievre’s advice about crypto. Poilievre spouted a bunch of nonsense about the threat of deflation (which was real, which could have spiralled into a depression), and made some jibes about Disney+. Freeland responded that Poilievre lives in a nineteen-room mansion with a chef and a driver, and that while this is fine for the leader of the opposition, he was irresponsible in advising people to invest in crypto. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, raised the federal debt position relative to the provinces, and demanded higher transfers to provinces. Freeland noted that transfers had increased by 4.8 this year, and that any other increased funding must come with accountability. Therrien insisted that people were suffering and blamed the federal government for under-funding the system, and Freeland agreed that there were real challenges in the system, and that Quebec got $10.1 billion this year, which was the 4.8 percent increase.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP in French, and denounced grocery CEOs and the Bank of Canada while demanding those grocery chains pay more taxes. Freeland read the approved lines about increasing corporate taxes, the recovery dividend, and luxury taxes. Daniel Blaikie took over in English to demand government intervention in the way of windfall taxes, and Freeland repeated the same points in English.

Continue reading →