Tag Archives: Rule of Law

Roundup: Invoking the Emergencies Act

Posted on by

After two years, of begging, pleading, and outright cajoling, the media have finally been giving what they have been demanding, which is to invoke the Emergencies Act. (Speech here). It’s something that really shouldn’t have happened, and yet here we are, because incompetent murderclown Doug Ford refused to do his job with providing adequate support for ending the occupation in Ottawa, using the tools at his disposal at the provincial level like licenses and insurance, and providing more OPP officers. Or if the Ottawa police had done any part of their jobs rather than declaring it to be Purge Rules in the occupied territory. But Ford gave his support to this invocation, because of course he did, as it successfully makes it Trudeau’s problem and not his, even though much of the situation can be chalked up to his failure to take it seriously. Other premiers were not so keen.

The government insists this is narrowly crafted, only targets a few sites, is not about the military, and the Act itself only allows for 30 days increments of it being imposed. We don’t have many more details that what was in the press release, which is a bit concerning, but one thing that did stand out was the promise that the government would freeze corporate and personal bank accounts for these occupiers, as well as have their insurance suspended, which is kind of a big deal if you’re a legit trucker. There is concerned that the bank accounts could be an overreach, so we’ll have to see the details about how this will be crafted before there can be too much determination made, but there are worries this gets weaponized by a future government.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1493341202220990467

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1493343366284820480

Of course, every pundit, talking head, and opposition MP is going to try to spin this as some kind of failure on Trudeau’s part, even though he never had any levers to pull on this problem in the first place as it’s local police jurisdiction, and the most he could offer was performance art. Nevertheless, he’s now taking on the mantle of responsibility and accountability, which just makes holding everyone else who failed to account even harder. (Look for more on this in my upcoming column).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Will the RCMP’s pledge be enough?

Posted on by

The question as to whether or not there was progress on dismantling the protest blockades is a rather fraught one, as the news that the RCMP in BC had announced their plans to withdraw their forces from the pipeline site with the proviso that the company be allowed access, which doesn’t sound like it sits well with those hereditary chiefs, because they insist that their eviction notice for Coastal GasLink stands. However, if removing the RCMP from Wet’suwet’en territory is the condition for the sympathetic protests blockades to come down, then we’ll see if that has the promised effect – we may not find out until the four hereditary chiefs who have travelled to Mohawk territory in Ontario have their meeting. In the meantime, Justin Trudeau had a teleconference with the premiers, who expressed frustration but had no consensus on how they would solve the impasse – though François Legault is threatening to send the police after the blockade near Montreal (though we’ll see if the police there respond to political direction, because that would be a violation of police independence). Oh, and while a lot of people are claiming that CN is blaming previously announced layoffs on the current blockade situation, the Teamsters has come out to say that these current (temporary) layoffs are different from those previously announced, so there goes another talking point.

Meanwhile, there has been increased reporting about those Wet’suwet’en voices who are both in favour of the pipeline, as well as those who are don’t appreciate the protesters invoking them, given that they say the dispute is none of their business. As part of that, here is a lengthy thread that tries to get a better sense of the house and clan structure of the Wet’suwet’en, along with trying to get some clarity as to the status of hereditary chiefs, while this thread explains a bit more of their decision-making structure, and what may be an issue at present with some of the politics with the anti-pipeline factions. It’s complex, and resists easy narratives.

I would add that what I wrote yesterday still stands – that the company still needs to act here, because the reporting on the timeline of the decision-making and consultation seems to indicate that they cut the corners around consultation with the hereditary chiefs, and until they pull back and go through that process, then some of these problems won’t get resolved, and the current situation will drag on until things get really uncomfortable, and people start demanding drastic action, which will only hurt the cause for everyone.

Continue reading →

QP: Radical, anti-free market activists

Posted on by

With some progress being made on the protest blockades over the morning, it remained to see how much that would change the tone of the questions, but if the Member’s Statements were any indication, it wouldn’t do much. Justin Trudeau was in town, but absent from the Chamber. Andrew Scheer led off, mini-lectern on desk, and he seemed confused that Trudeau’s message would change daily — because apparently it’s not a fluid situation — and demanded to know when the blockades would come down. Bill Blair noted that the RCMP had made the decision to withdraw from the Wet’suwet’en site, they hoped for progress. Scheer read some stilted points about the “radical, anti-free market” activists (which is somewhat ironic considering that the Conservative have abandoned free-market solutions around things like climate change) before repeating his demand, and Blair repeated the response. Scheer intimated that Blair ordered the RCMP out and demanded to know that the pipeline would be guaranteed to be built, to which Blair corrected him that they issued no order because police operations are independent of government. Alain Rayes was up next to repeat the demand for a timeline in French, to which Marc Garneau stated that they we working with the provinces, and that Trudeau was speaking to them later today. Rayes repeated his demand for a timeline, and Garneau reiterated his response, stressing the need for a peaceful resolution. Yves-François Blanchet was up next for the Bloc, and he worried that patience was being confused for inaction, and took a swipe at Trudeau not having his conversation with premiers before QP, for which Marc Miller stated that he was hoping for a meeting with the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs while they were in Ontario. Blanchet worried about the situation, and Miller said that they have a clear path forward but wouldn’t make it public just yet. Jagmeet Singh was up for the NDP, and demanded that Trudeau himself meet with those chiefs, to which Miller praised the positive development of the RCMP commitment to withdraw, and stated that there were clear steps to de-escalation. Singh repeated the demand, and Miller said that everyone pretends to know what is being demanded, but he’s the one who has been talking with them.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Media rounds and brand damage

Posted on by

Freed from the expectation that they needed to stay quiet(er) in order to not jeopardise their chances of remaining in caucus, both Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott hit interview circuit, the former in Maclean’s and the Globe and Mail, the latter also in Maclean’s and on CBC Radio and Power Play. And there is no doubt that both of them thought they were doing the right thing, but I’m not sure they quite grasp some of the political realities that the prime minister is grappling with. They kept saying that if Trudeau had just apologised from the start, this all could have been avoided, but that would have meant admitting that he was in the wrong, and that’s both a problem on every level for him to do, and I get the impression that nobody thinks they were trying to interfere or apply inappropriate pressure. And because they both think they’re right, we’re in the situation we’re in. Philpott did tell Don Martin that she’s aware of other conversations that are still relevant to what happened, but she’s not going to dangle them out there (err, she just did) because everything that people need to know is already public, but she didn’t say that she thought the prime minister was lying. In her interview with the Globe, Wilson-Raybould admitted to clashing with Carolyn Bennett over the Indigenous Rights framework, but it was her comments to Maclean’s that really made me pause, where she said she didn’t really understand the Liberal Party anymore, and it makes me wonder if she actually understood them to begin with, given how the party morphed itself as the cult of Trudeau after his messianic leadership campaign, and that many of the new MPs are as a result of that rather than stalwarts who stood with the party through the lean opposition years. Oh, and Wilson-Raybould also sorta disputed that there were negotiations regarding ending the tiff with Trudeau, and some confusion as to whether that was before she quit Cabinet or in the weeks that followed, and we got a bit of clarification.

Speaking of Trudeau, there has been a lot of focus on the damage to his brand, in particular his Feminist™ brand in the past few weeks, and with the ouster of Wilson-Raybould and Philpott (not to mention Celina Caesar-Chavannes’ decision to leave caucus of her own accord). In particular, the symbolism of the whole Affair crashing down around the Daughters of the Vote event was a darkly ironic for the prime minister, with one of his former youth delegates calling his rhetoric hollow. Add to that, there has been an expectation built up around him that his “doing politics differently” led people to believe that when push came to shove that he wouldn’t act like a politician, in spite of all of the symbolism he invested in. (There is probably a lesson in there too about filling in the blanks when someone says they’ll be different, but won’t specify how). Over on Twitter, Moebius Stripper reminds us not to confuse the actual good feminist work of this government with its Feminist™ branding.

Amidst the awfulness and brand-torching, Chris Selley recalls weeks ago when the Liberals floated a trial balloon to say that Trudeau would apologise for…something, didn’t, and now the claims that Wilson-Raybould tried to force an apology. Paul Wells, meanwhile, is in a Mood, and he (quite properly) lambastes this while Affair as another in a line of incidents that reveals the true heart of this government, and the ramshackle way in which they run this government (and if you looked at what they’ve done to the Senate alone, I would absolutely agree).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Caretakers and emergencies

Posted on by

The situation in BC, where there is an emergency situation of wildfires and evacuations in the midst of a change of government, can be pretty instructive as to how our system of government works. Right now, as with during an election period, the machinery of government goes into “caretaker” mode, and because Christy Clark remains the premier until the moment John Horgan is sworn in, she is able to respond to the situation as she is doing now.

https://twitter.com/pmlagasse/status/884468259185209344

This is why, after Clark’s visit to the lieutenant governor, the statement from the LG was that she “will accept her resignation,” not that Clark has resigned on the spot.

Why is this important? Because the Crown must always have someone to advise them, especially in circumstances like this. Add to that, we have a professional, non-partisan civil service means that they are already in place, and don’t need to have a massive new appointment spree to fill the upper layers like they do in the US. That means that they can respond to these kinds of situations, and while the caretaker government gives the orders, the incoming government’s transition team is being briefed so that they can handoff the files when they form government. It’s an elegant system that we’re lucky to have.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Principle over circumstance

Posted on by

After a weekend of yet more wailing and gnashing of teeth about the Omar Khadr settlement, and despite detailed explanations from the ministers of justice and public safety, and Justin Trudeau reminding everyone that this is not about the individual circumstances of Khadr himself but rather the price of successive governments who have ignored the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we’re still seeing a number of disingenuous talking points and facile legal analysis from players who know better. Here is some of the better commentary from the weekend.

https://twitter.com/aaronwherry/status/883736382602194944

https://twitter.com/aradwanski/status/884024742826696704

https://twitter.com/cforcese/status/884031425862828032

https://twitter.com/stephaniecarvin/status/884031824783126528

A number of people over social media have insisted that treatment of Khadr, including the “frequent flier” sleep deprivation technique used to “soften him up” before CSIS agents arrived to question him, or the fact that he was strung up for hours to the point of urinating himself (and then used as a human mop to wipe it up) or being threatened with gang rape didn’t constitute torture.

https://twitter.com/cforcese/status/884047890003505152

https://twitter.com/cforcese/status/884051777850617856

https://twitter.com/cforcese/status/884052141417037825

There was some particularly petulant legal analysis from former Conservative cabinet ministers that got pushback.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/884078867006320640

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/884091668940677120

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/884214974809296898

https://twitter.com/InklessPW/status/883432269976940544

And of course, the broader principle remains.

https://twitter.com/stephaniecarvin/status/884029627546599424

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ignoring legal advice

Posted on by

Looking through the government documents made available to the public during the court challenge on the government’s niqab ban during citizenship ceremonies, a pattern emerges quickly – that the department knew this was a non-starter, and they tried to offer alternatives for accommodation. Jason Kenney, the minister at the time, would have none of it, and pressed ahead anyway. And lo and behold, he used an instrument to implement a ban that was out of order. The Federal Court has said so, and the Federal Court of Appeal upheld it in a ruling from the bench, and this didn’t even touch the Charter arguments. But it shouldn’t be a surprise given the frequency at which this government’s legal and constitutional positions keep getting struck down by the courts, whether it’s with certain mandatory minimum sentences, or the Senate reference. People wonder what kind of legal advice they’re being given, and as this particular case clearly demonstrates in the documents, they’re being told that their positions don’t hold water – and yet they push ahead anyway. As we saw in the Duffy trial that the government created their own legal advisor position within the PMO, never mind that they have the Department of Justice who should be providing them with legal advice. The plain reading of what this means of course is that they didn’t like what Justice had to tell them, so they found a workaround to give them legal advice they found was more palatable. It all seems like such a waste of time, energy and taxpayer’s money – this from a party who insisted that they were going to put an end to waste in government.

https://twitter.com/michaelplaxton/status/646638431653765120

Continue reading →

Senate QP: What about the Rule of Law?

Posted on by

As the final days of the 41st Parliament continue to grind toward its end, the Senate was back in action for what was possibly the last day. After Senators’ statements (Commemoration of the Air India bombing, the Armendian genocide, Ramadan) and Routine Proceedings, and when Question Period started, Senator Moore led off, asking about the Federal Court order to turn the gun registry data hard drive over, and wondered why the government wound itself on the wrong side of the law. Answering for the government, Senator Carignan praised the end of the registry. Moore was not impressed, and wondered why Canadians should follow the law if the government wouldn’t. Carignan repeate his answer. Moore pressed, noting that the government has not followed the will of parliament in the past — noting the contempt charge at the close of the previous parliament — but Carignan stuck to his talking points. Moore raised Magna Carta, and wondered why the government felt itself above the Rule of Law. Carignan reiterated that the destruction was the will of Parliament. Moore raised the contempt motion and wondered if the government gets to pick and choose which laws it gets to follow. Carignan noted the election. Moore did not let up, at which point Carignan raised the spectre of Justin Trudeau and how he would undo everything, saying he was not ready to be Prime Minister. Moore wondered why it as acceptable that Harper could consider himself as the person who makes the rules, but Carignan retreated to his talking points.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Near upsets

Posted on by

There were almost a couple of surprising upsets in last night’s trio of by-elections. Almost, but not quite. The Greens were running a surprising close second in Victoria, while the Liberals were very competitive with the Conservatives in Calgary Centre, until finally the Conservatives pulled ahead. But while it was a hold in all three ridings, it did signal that there are rumblings in the political realm across the country. The Conservatives and the NDP did poorly in two of the ridings where they were incumbents, and nearly lost them. In Calgary Centre, the NDP were virtually non-existent, running a distant fourth to the Greens, who had strong showings in two of the three ridings. And for the Liberals to run a close second in Calgary, their best result in 44 years, is a signal that the Conservatives aren’t tending to their base, and that the Red Tories in the party are restless. And throughout it all, there will be the weird paradox of Justin Trudeau being both blamed for the loss in Calgary Centre, and praised for energising the voters and getting them that best-in-44-years result.

The big news from yesterday morning was that Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney has accepted the position as governor of the Bank of England to start in July. He’ll remain in his current post until June in order to ensure a stable transition. John Geddes sees the inevitability of the decision. Paul Wells looks at the growing phenomenon of the “international mandarin class.” Andrew Coyne looks at Carney’s ambition, and notes that when he returns to Canada five-and-a-half years hence, he’ll be far enough away from his old job that any political ambitions he may have will be more palatable. Stephen Gordon looks at some possible successors at the Bank of Canada. And here’s a look at what the British press is saying about Carney’s appointment.

Continue reading →