Tag Archives: RCMP

Roundup: A couple of notes on Campbell’s record

Posted on by

The weekend was full of conservatives and other right-leaning commenters chirping about Kim Campbell’s record after her (verifiably true) assessment that Pierre Poilievre is a “liar and a hate-monger” who doesn’t believe in the urgency of climate change. Some of them—such as a certain self-aggrandising independent MP—have been utterly dismissive of Campbell and her record, but most people don’t really understand what happened in 1993, and why the fact that the PCs went from a majority to two seats was hardly her doing.

The thing to remember about Brian Mulroney’s massive majorities was that he had managed to build a particular coalition of conservatives in the Prairies, and that he was won over Quebec, which is incredibly difficult for any conservative to do, and no doubt a lot of this was premised on the (somewhat hubristic) promise that he was going to finish the constitutional project that Pierre Trudeau wasn’t able to complete and bring Quebec “into the fold” (which is mostly hyperbolic nonsense anyway). By 1993, that coalition has collapsed, in part because of the failure of Mulroney’s constitutional projects, being Meech Lake and Charlottetown, the latter referendum failing.

Conservatives in Quebec has largely fallen away to the Bloc, which was formed in part by Mulroney’s old friend and confidante, Lucien Bouchard. To this day, the Dean of the House, Bloc MP Louis Plamondon, was first elected in 1984 as part of Mulroney’s PC landslide, and in 1990, crossed to the nascent Bloc. Meanwhile, the prairie conservatives had defected to the nascent Reform Party under the banner of so-called “Western alienation,” in part because of decisions that Mulroney had made, not only in areas of the constitutional reforms that failed, but also because of things like CF-18 maintenance contracts that were supposed to go to a Winnipeg firm were instead given to those in Montreal, and it exacerbated the existing grievances that the Pierre Trudeau’s National Energy Programme had inflamed (though he was largely blamed for things that were not his fault, like the collapse in world oil prices that the NEP didn’t cause, but were blamed for regardless).

Campbell inherited a PC party that had lost its voter coalition, thanks to Mulroney’s actions. The election went from three parties to five, with two very different regional parties at play. Trying to pin the blame for that collapse on Campbell is classic glass-cliff logic, where she was handed a bag of dogshit and when she didn’t perform a miracle, was given the blame for it. Did she make mistakes in that campaign? Indeed she did. Could she have resurrected the party’s fortunes with the voter coalition disbanded? Certainly not in the time allotted. For modern conservatives to say that her “record speaks for itself” don’t seem to understand what actually happened in the early 1990s, and instead are showing a particularly misogynistic streak in how they are choosing to attack her and her record.

Ukraine Dispatch:

One woman was killed in Russian shelling in the Kursk region on Sunday. Two people were killed, including a teenager, in Russian artillery attacks on the Dnipropetrovosk region on Saturday, and Russia claimed to have shot down a Ukrainian fighter jet. Here is a horrifying look at the rapes and torture that Russians have subjected Ukrainian prisoners to, particularly in occupied areas.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Running interference for Scott Moe

Posted on by

There is no shortage of terrible opinion pieces in Canadian media, but I believe that the prize for utterly missing the point comes from the Globe and Mail yesterday, where John Ibbitson tried to lay the blame for Saskatchewan’s flirtation with lawlessness on Justin Trudeau, with the headline accusing him of “botching” national unity. It’s a…curious accusation, because the implication therein is that if the federal government doesn’t accede to every demand or tantrum of the provinces that they can be accused of damaging national unity. I take that back. It’s not curious, it’s utterly absurd and wrong.

Ibbitson goes to great pains to both point out how unprecedented it is that Saskatchewan is going to break federal law, but then turns around to run interference for Scott Moe and tries to insist that this is really Trudeau’s fault because he used federal spending powers to “bend provinces” to his will rather than negotiate, and in imposing the federal carbon price on provinces who failed to meet national standards. Both of those are half-truths at best—there is nothing illegitimate about using federal spending powers to get provinces on board to ensure that there are equitable services across the country, particularly for programmes with greater economic good such as early learning and child care. As for the carbon price, provinces had an opportunity to come up with their own system that met minimum standards, and most provinces refused. He also didn’t explain that when the system was enacted, most provinces already had carbon pricing in place (Alberta and Ontario both changed governments who dismantled their systems and were subsequently subjected to the federal system), and he doesn’t spell out that BC and Quebec have their own systems that meet the standards.

Yes, the federal government should have found a different solution to the problem of heating oil than the “pause,” and doomed themselves when they announced it with all of their Atlantic MPs behind them. I’m not disputing that. But while Ibbitson insists that this doesn’t justify Saskatchewan’s lawlessness, he thinks that the best solution is to “reach some sort of compromise.” Like what? He won’t say. He just laments that “Canada doesn’t work like that right now.” Did it ever? What compromise can there be when one province breaks the law and tries to justify it with a fig leaf of “fairness” but obscures the facts and truth of the situation? This kind of white bread, milquetoast “Why can’t we find a compromise?” handwringing is a hallmark of a certain generation of punditry, and it serves absolutely no one.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces downed 33 out of 37 Russian drones fired at Odesa, the remainder of which damaged infrastructure, though there were other attacks in the north in Sumy and Kharkiv that cost civilian lives. There are concerns that safety is deteriorating at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, as the international community keeps trying to convince Russians to leave the site. India says they have encountered a human trafficking racket which promises young men jobs in Russia, and then forces them to fight in Ukraine on their behalf.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An investment in more artillery

Posted on by

Bill Blair made an announcement yesterday related to Canada’s ability to produce more artillery, both for our domestic stockpiles and to be able to send more to Ukraine, to the tune of $4.4 million to go to two defence contractors to come up with plans to increase their production. Our inability to produce enough artillery domestically at a fast enough pace has been a problem for a while, but there has been this resistance within those same contractors to scaling up production without guaranteed, long-term plans signed with governments (as though the need and market for said artillery wasn’t obvious enough).

There are problems with some of this, however—a new production facility would need to be built, to the tune of $400 million, and you can bet that they’re going to demand that the government subsidise invest in such a facility, and it could take as long as three years to come online, which means it won’t be much help to Ukraine in the meantime. But it also makes one wonder why the company didn’t start investing on its own two years ago when the writing was on the wall, and why they have been so insistent on needing deals and funding from the government when there has clearly been a demonstrated need that they should be addressing.

It’s great that Bill Blair finally announced this kind of investment, but it feels too little and too late, but also like he’s caving into industry pressure to have the government pick up costs that they should be absorbing for their own growth and future profits, because they’re pretty much guaranteed.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian attack in Kharkiv region killed two civilians, and another in the Chernihiv region. There seems to be consensus that the Russian strike on Odesa on Wednesday was aimed at port infrastructure and not president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, but it reiterates how very real the stakes are. Zelenskyy has named the former top general, whom he recently dismissed, to be the next ambassador to the UK. Zelenskyy also issued a decree allowing for conscripts currently fighting to be discharged into the reserves in the next two months, in order to give them some respite. The Czech president says that their multilateral plan to buy 800,000 rounds of ammunition for Ukraine has secured enough funding.

Continue reading →

QP: Lobbing points past one another

Posted on by

The prime minister was present today, while his deputy was away in São Paulo for G7/G20 finance ministers’ meetings. All of the other leaders were present today for the first time of the week. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and once again falsely claimed that the RCMP were investigating ArriveCan, and demanded that he waive Cabinet confidences to allow the RCMP to have those documents. Trudeau said that anyone who abused the system will face consequences. Poilievre said that was a non-answer, raised SNC-Lavalin, and repeated his demand. Trudeau said that Poilievre we simply focused on personal attacks. Poilievre repeated the same demand in English, and Trudeau repeated that the situation was unacceptable, which is why authorities were looking into it. Poilievre falsely insisted that there were previous criminal investigations into SNC and the Aga Khan, and Trudeau dismissed this as digging up things that were settled year ago, and Trudeau dredged up connections between people involved in ArriveCan and Poilievre during his time in government. Poilievre then demanded the government support their Supply Day motion on producing more ArriveCan documents, and Trudeau said this was a distraction from Poilievre not wanting to talk about the things the government is doing for Canadians. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and demanded Quebec be given the ability to withdraw from any pharmacare system with full compensation and no strings. Trudeau said that too many people didn’t have coverage. Blanchet insisted that they did have coverage in Quebec, which was why they want full compensation, and he took a swipe at the NDP in the process. Trudeau said that even in Quebec, people face gaps in pharmacare, which is why the government was working with the provinces with the goal of filling those gaps.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and railed about the revelation that Shopper’s Drug Mart was overcharging for health services, which should have been asked in Queen’s Park and directed to Doug Ford. Trudeau took a swipe at Jenni Byrne participating in Conservative caucus meetings before praising their agreements with provinces. Singh switched to French, and worried about the environmental assessment for the NorthVolt battery plant. Trudeau praised the investment, but didn’t answer the question. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Making up censorship claims

Posted on by

Facing pressure for dismissing the Online Harms bill before he had even seen it, Pierre Poilievre put out a statement yesterday that said that things like child sexual exploitation or “revenge porn” should be criminal matters, and that police should be involved and not a new “bureaucratic” agency. It’s a facile answer that betrays the lack of resources that law enforcement devotes to these matters, or the fact that when it comes to harassment or hate, many police bodies have a tendency not to believe victims, especially if they are women.

But then Poilievre went one step further, saying “We do not believe that the government should be banning opinions that contradict the Prime Minister’s radical ideology.” I’m not sure where exactly in the bill he sees anything about banning opinions, because he made that part up. More to the point, the provisions in the bill around hate speech quite literally follow the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Whatcott, and codifies them, which means the standard is exposing someone to “vilification or detestation” if they are a member of a group that is a prohibited grounds for discrimination. That means that it goes beyond “opinion” one doesn’t like. The minister confirmed that “awful but lawful” content will not be touched, because the standard in the bill is hate speech as defined by the Supreme Court of Canada. And it would seem to me that if the standard of “hate speech is bad” is “radical ideology” in your mind, well then, you are probably telling on yourself.

Speaking of Poilievre making things up, he spent the afternoon loudly proclaiming that the RCMP sent him a letter saying they were investigating ArriveCan. Then he posted the letter on Twitter. The letter doesn’t say they are investigating. It literally says they are assessing all available information. That is not an investigation. That’s deciding if they want to investigate. The fact that he released the letter that doesn’t say they are investigating, and says that it proves they are investigating, feels like a big test of the cognitive dissonance he expects in his followers, which is just one more reason why our democracy is in serious trouble.

Ukraine Dispatch:

As Ukrainian forces withdrew from two more villages near Avdiivka, one of which Russia has claimed the capture of, there are concerns that Russia is stepping up influence operations to scupper international support. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has landed in Saudi Arabia for meetings related to his peace plan and a push to get prisoners and deportees released from Russia. In Europe, NATO countries have been backing away from statements that French president Emmanuel Macron made about not excluding any options to avert a Russian victory in Ukraine, which were presumed to mean western troops. (Macron said this was about creating “strategic ambiguity.”)

Continue reading →

QP: Brandishing an RCMP letter

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present today, though both were back in town (if a bit jet-lagged from their travel over the weekend), while only a few other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and after reciting some slogans, he said that the RCMP had confirmed that they have opened an investigation into ArriveCan, and tried to tie in the Aga Khan and SNC Lavalin. Dominic LeBlanc said that they have been giving authorities all of the documents they request. Poilievre repeated the question in English, and LeBlanc repeated his same response in English. Poilievre then cited a Food Bank report, and demanded the carbon levy be lifted (which has nothing to do with food price inflation). François-Philippe Champagne deployed his usual “take no lessons” line before saying that Conservatives on the committee were defending the profit margins of food processors, and exhorted then to support Bill C-59. Poilievre tried again, and Champagne patted himself on the back for spearheading the largest reform of competition in history. Poilievre then cited the existence of a dumpster diving Facebook group and blamed it on the carbon price. Sean Fraser got up to list assistance programmes that Poilievre and the Conservatives have voted against.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he repeated yesterday’s question about federal government spending to give other provinces what Quebec already has, and wanted compensation to opt out of any national pharmacare. Mark Holland said that a bill would be coming soon, and exhorted them not to criticise a bill they haven’t seen. Therrien wanted compensation to Quebec and the ability to opt out of dental care, and Holland insisted this was just trying to pick fights rather than helping people who need it.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he complained that people in Quebec can’t get a family do form which should be a question for François Legault. Holland said that they were cooperating with provinces, and that it takes time. Don Davies gave a non-Quebec-centric version of the same question, and Holland went on a tear about how the Conservatives would cut while the current government is investing. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford bringing back 1890s patronage

Posted on by

Ontario premier Doug Ford made a rousing defence for his appointing two former senior staffers onto the committee tasked with appointing provincial judges, saying that it’s “democracy” for him to make “like-minded” appointments, which is like a throwback to the 1890s. It’s very true that control of patronage was one of the key reasons why Responsible Government happened in the Canadian colonies back in the 1840s, but there has been a move over decades to professionalise and de-politicise, most especially with the judiciary, and when Ford is talking about needing to appoint his people so that he can get “tough” judges and justices of the peace on the bench, that’s a warning sign that he is backsliding on democratic norms (and he has had a history of very partisan patronage appointments since the very beginning of his government). It’s not that Ford has any particular coherent ideology other than he thinks that locking people up and throwing away the key will please voters, Charter rights, or the presumption of innocence be damned.

https://twitter.com/dwjudson/status/1761064514298986702

This kind of talk undermines the justice system, because it leaves the impression that judges are acting in partisan ways, or who were appointed because of partisan leanings, which is not a feature in the Canadian legal system. And the point Judson made about contagion is because there are people on the political right who feel that they can move the goalposts of what is acceptable for political interference in institutions that should be impartial or independent—and that is a very, very big problem at a time when the political right is undermining whatever institutions they can. It’s a key feature of Orbánism, coming out of Hungary, which the right in America and Canada keeps lapping up. That’s incredibly damaging, and it needs to be called out when it happens, even if Ford isn’t doing this for the sake of becoming like Orbán, but for his own populist ends.

https://twitter.com/dwjudson/status/1761228183674712200

Meanwhile, as an example of premiers politicizing the judiciary, Quebec premier François Legault is attacking the Quebec Court of Appeal as being federally-appointed after they handed him his ass on his attempt to prevent asylum-seekers from accessing the subsidised child care system. Part of this was blasting the Parti Québécois for agreeing with the decision, accusing their leader of “prostrating himself before Ottawa.” That said, Legault is appealing the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, which is also federally-appointed, so I’m not sure why this will be any different if his logic holds. Unsurprisingly, the Quebec bar association is denouncing this, but this is exactly the kind of contagion being referred to with Ford’s comments, and how they undermine confidence in the justice system. Legault is doing it for his own purposes, and it’s a problem just as much as Ford’s comments.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians launched another drone attack against Odesa, which hit a residential building and killed one person and injured another three. Russians are also claiming that they are pushing further west after security Avdiivka. Ukraine took out one of Russia’s early warning aircraft, which is part of their air defences and of which they have very few remaining. Four Western leaders including Justin Trudeau have arrived in Kyiv to show solidarity as the war enters its third year. Ukrainian officials have launched investigations into 122,000 suspected war crimes since the beginning of the invasion, and 511 perpetrators have been identified to date. Meanwhile, Russia has been cranking up its production and refurbishment of old equipment, but there are questions as to whether quantity can outdo quality.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre punches down

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre made a lot of statements yesterday, and they were all alarming in their own ways. First up was expressing support for Bill S-210, which aims to require ISPs to ensure age verification for any online porn sites, or face massive penalties—a bill that passed the Senate and is now headed to committee with opposition support in the Commons. It’s a hugely problematic bill that is going to be a privacy nightmare and cause more problems than it solves. Poilievre also said he doesn’t want this implemented by way of a government digital ID or that prevents people from access legal materials, and his MPs keep handwaving and insisting that there must be some kind of technological solution here. There’s not, this is bad, and frankly is pretty Big Government/gatekeeping, which Poilievre claims to hate. What it does, however, is tap into the moral panic over porn being the root cause of a bunch of social ills, and Poilievre loves getting in on that action.

He was then asked by Rebel Media about trans people and washrooms—because of course the far-right remains obsessed about this—and Poilievre stated that he was against trans women in changing rooms, washrooms, or women’s sports, which is an outrageous egregious overreach and is Poilievre punching down in order to appease the Rebel Media audience. (I will note that you had pundits on Power & Politics baffled by this, believing that Poilievre has this demographic “locked down.” Not true—he needs to actively court them because they see him as being too soft and establishment—see Christine Anderson referring to him as “Pussyvere”—and he has to constantly prove himself to them). It’s also worth noting that for Poilievre’s press conferences, which are limited to five questions and no follow-ups, Rebel and True North are often at the front of the line for questions, which is another particular sign of who he’s speaking to. Justin Trudeau did respond and push back about this making trans people unsafe, which is true, but this is another moral panic Poilievre is trying to cash in on.

The last bit was perhaps the ugliest, where Poilievre was asking about the upcoming online harms bill, and he said that Trudeau shouldn’t be the one to bring it in, claiming this would be censorship, misquoting the line about “those with unacceptable views” (again, playing to the “convoy” audience who took up this misquote with great aplomb), and then launched into a tirade about how Trudeau needs to look into his heart about his past racism and Blackface. And then, because of course, a certain CBC journalist wrote this up (which I’m not going to link to) and devoted half of the story to rehashing the Blackface history including photos, because they didn’t learn a gods damned thing about how Trump got in (and this goes beyond just egregious both-sidesing). None of this is good.

Ukraine Dispatch:

With the loss of Avdiivka, Ukrainians are expecting more advances from Russians. This has spooked enough of the elderly in villages in the area, who are now heading for safer regions, worried that their towns are going to be the next to be ground to dust. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is downplaying the loss of Avdiivka as he calls for more western arms and support, but it has been relentless grind for Ukrainian forces. This said, western intelligence suggests that Russia doesn’t have the domestic capacity to manufacture the ammunition it needs either, so we’ll see how long they can keep up their current pace. Meanwhile, anti-corruption authorities in Ukraine are investigating more than sixty cases involving the defence sector.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1760235411987980541

Continue reading →

Roundup: Leaking an MP’s private conversation

Posted on by

There were plenty of tongues wagging yesterday as a private phone conversation that parliamentary secretary for foreign affairs Rob Oliphant had with a constituent about the situation in the Middle East was leaked to the media, showing how he disagreed with some of the positions the government has taken for political reasons, and how they have badly communicated on some of the particulars. It’s a little bit grubby to have leaked the conversation, because it makes it harder for more MPs to be frank in their interactions for fear of this exact thing happening, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the leaders of other caucuses in particular used this as an object lesson in message discipline and never straying from it. (And before anyone says anything, the NDP tend to be worse than the Conservatives about this sort of thing).

When asked about the leaked comments, prime minister Justin Trudeau didn’t go off, and talked about how it’s great how much diversity of opinion there is in the Liberal caucus, so it sounds like Oliphant’s job is safe, but then again it’s also possible Trudeau was saying this and that Oliphant will be dropped in a week or two, once the spotlight isn’t directly on him, because he broke message discipline, even if this was supposed to be a private conversation.

Regardless, Oliphant says he sticks by his words and says there’s nothing he wouldn’t say publicly, and if anything, he’s probably conveying the delicate tightrope that the government is being forced to walk on this better than the government is doing, in particular because he has a deep knowledge of the region, and can express it better. If Trudeau and his inner circle have any brains, they would get him to do a better job of crafting their messaging for them, but we all know that the communications geniuses in this PMO are allergic to taking any lessons, so I have my doubts that they’ll turn to Oliphant to up their game.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia launched new missile and drone attacks against several Ukrainian cities, air defences taking out half of them. At least three civilians were killed in an airstrike on the Kharkiv region; in spite of the constant attacks, the people of Kharkiv keep on. Ukraine is withdrawing some of its forces from Avdiivka in order to get them to more defensible positions while one of their special forces heading to the region. France will be signing a security assurances agreement with Ukraine in Paris today.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1758143268313870473

Continue reading →

QP: Call in the RCMP…that we don’t direct

Posted on by

Both the prime minister and his deputy were present today, as were all of the other leaders, so that was nice to see. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and after reciting some slogans, he mischaracterized the Auditor General’s report into ArriveCan and boasted that he wrote to the RCMP to call on them to expand their investigation into wrongdoing and demanded that the prime minister not block their efforts. Justin Trudeau stated that the pandemic was a once-in-a-century event and that they expected rules to be followed in spite of this, and that the RCMP will do their job, but that this government is for border security, which the Conservatives vote against. Poilievre listed some revelations in the report and demanded that the prime minister respect the independence of a criminal investigation. Trudeau assured him that they would, and that there would be consequences for any civil servants that broke rules. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his boast that he wrote the RCMP to expand their investigation, and Trudeau repeated that the pandemic was once-in-a-generation event, and that they expected civil servants to follow the rules, but they don’t need to tell the RCMP to do their jobs. Poilievre howled that Trudeau keeps blocking investigations and accused him of filling the pockets of friends, all of which is specious on its face. Trudeau said that this was an example of Poilievre reverting to type and playing partisan games. Poilievre tried to spin this as Trudeau calling the Auditor General the conspiracy theorist, which was bizarre. Trudeau said that Poilievre needs to work on his listening skills, and that they await the results of the investigation so that those who broke the rules will be held to account.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and wanted the government to adopt the motion to allow for advanced directives on assisted dying. Trudeau recited that this is a very personal decision, and that they responsible for ensuring that vulnerable people are protected. Blanchet insisted that they move ahead with their motion, and Trudeau insisted that these are the kinds of conversations they need to be having.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP and quoted the National Housing Advocate and demanded that he follow her recommendations. Trudeau said that he welcomed the NDP’s support in their housing measures. Singh repeated his demand in French, and Trudeau said that they will continue to listen to community organisations and municipal partners. 

Continue reading →