Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Roundup: Ministers don’t control committees

Posted on by

In a bid to try and extend the Status of Women committee imbroglio story for another day, The Canadian Press tried to draw the Minister for Gender Equality and Youth, Marci Ien, into the fray to comment on what happened. Ien, who isn’t an idiot, refused, which was the right thing to do. Why? Because as a minister, she has no authority over committees, nor should she, because that’s how Parliament works.

Parliament exists to hold the government, meaning Cabinet, to account. Committees are tasked with holding ministers to account over specific subject matter areas, which is one of the reasons why ministers must come before their respective committees as part of the Estimates cycle (because one of the primary means by which Parliament holds the government to account is by controlling the public purse). Hence, the Status of Women committee is tasked with holding Ien to account for her department, and in fact, they should be doing a whole lot more of that accountability work because frankly, this government’s record on doing gender-based-analysis-plus (GBA+) is actually terrible, and most of the time consists of them just saying “GBA+” and not actually doing the work. A functioning committee would be addressing this, and even though Anita Vandenbeld wrote in her op-ed this week that the committee was functional and worked by consensus, this is a major issue that they have not been tackling like they should, not that this is a surprise. It is absolutely not Ien’s place to comment on what happened at that committee, and it would in fact be a major breach of decorum if she did.

It shouldn’t surprise me that a reporter couldn’t make this distinction for herself before writing the story, but honestly, this is basic parliamentarianism. It should be embarrassing for them to even make this basic error and not understanding the roles between ministers and committees, but this is also the state of political journalism, where actual knowledge of the system has become a rarity among those who are supposed to cover it.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian guided bomb killed two when it hit a schoolyard in the Sumy region. Ukrainian forces have confirmed that they have breached Russia’s Kursk region, sending Russians into disarray and panic, and have launched a massive drone attack further into Russia. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy calls this proof of Ukraine’s ability to surprise on the battlefield.

https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1821336708916347359

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another committee demand

Posted on by

The Conservatives are demanding yet more “emergency” committee hearings, but because it’s a committee they don’t control, they are getting in front of the cameras to make performative demands. Case in point, yesterday Andrew Scheer called a press conference to demand that the NDP and Bloc agree to recall the public safety committee to examine how a suspected terrorist was able to immigrate and obtain citizenship when he may have been videotaped dismembering a prisoner in 2015.

Of course, the Conservatives’ case and rationale is largely hyperbolic, and their blaming the current government for crime rates is both specious and done entirely in bad faith. But then again, Scheer is a lying liar who lies constantly, so he’ll say anything to get attention, and that’s all this is really about—attention. The Conservatives need to get fresh clips for their socials, and summer committee meetings are precisely the kind of thing that they think makes them look good, so that’s why they have been trying to run committees over the summer, and claiming that the other parties want to be “on vacation” rather than doing work in their constituencies. (This becomes one of those areas where you could accuse the Conservatives of projection in that they treat constituency time as “vacation” or a “break” rather than simply doing other kinds of work in the riding).

This is just one more demand for a dog-and-pony show. I’m not sure what exactly a parliamentary committee could do here.

In case you missed them:

  • For National Magazine, I look at BCCLA’s fight to try to see secret documents to hold CSIS to account for possibly improper spying on environmental groups.
  • Also for National Magazine, I delve into the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on annuities the Crown owes for several Ontario First Nations for treaty breaches.
  • My weekend column conducts a thought experiment on how the Liberals could possibly hold a leadership contest under their current rules anytime soon.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take looks at the performative hairshirt parsimony on display as people lose their minds over the purchase of the diplomatic condo.
  • My column goes through some of Poilievre and company’s recent deceitful claims when it comes to drug decriminalisation and safer supply.
  • My feature story in Xtra looks at queer diplomacy in Canada, and how we’ve made great strides in the past decade, but we still have a lot more to do.
  • My weekend column on Jagmeet Singh’s continued announcements that are either economically illiterate, or entirely the domain of the provinces.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine says that their forces downed four Russian missiles and 15 drones overnight. Nevertheless, a missile did strike the Kharkiv region, killing one and injuring twelve. The first group of F-16 fighters are now in Ukraine, and ready to be deployed.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1820400963833958849

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1820799395371110697

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lies about legalisation

Posted on by

For months now, Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives have been claiming that the Liberals “legalised” hard drugs in BC, which is false, and have been trying to build up a particular lie that they are planning to do so across the country. Again, to repeat, this is a lie, and the limited decriminalisation that happened in BC was done reluctantly, but only after the province, the provincial police force, and municipal authorities all wanted to give it a go as a way of reducing mortality from the toxic drug crisis. They’ve had limited success, but have started rolling back some of those measures which had nothing to do with decriminalisation, mainly being open drug use, because it’s spooking voters. And I get that, but it has nothing to do with decriminalisation and everything to do with the toxic supply. Drug users have taken the notion that if they use openly, then someone may save them with Naloxone if they overdose in public. It’s not just happening in BC, but everywhere across the country now—I see it on the streets in Ottawa all the time, and there is no decriminalisation happening.

Nevertheless, this week Poilievre claims he has “proof” that there is a national decriminalisation plan—which he and his MPs use “legalise” with interchangeably, even though they are absolutely not the same thing. The problem? That the very text he’s highlighting doesn’t say that there is a national decriminalisation plan, only that the federal government is willing to work with willing jurisdictions using the tools at their disposal, that can include decriminalisation. It doesn’t matter that they apparently have no reading comprehension ability—they’ve just highlighted a couple of words and made a false declaration.

And now Poilievre and his MPs are blanketing their social channels with this blatant lie, because they want to make people angry and afraid. The truth doesn’t matter. It never did. They’re going to keep lying, because it works, and because nobody, least of all legacy media, is going to call them on it.

Ukraine Dispatch

While both sides have traded drone assaults, the Russians claim to have taken over two villages—one in Kharkiv region, the other in Luhansk. Russians are moving in on the town of Pokrovsk in the east, which serves as a logistics hub for Ukraine. The Czech Republic says that artillery deliveries to Ukraine are going to accelerate. And Ukraine is closing in on a deal to restructure $20 billion of its debt.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1815394403675988039

Continue reading →

Roundup: Elections Canada’s helpful suggestions

Posted on by

Amidst the (possibly overblown) hysteria that party nomination contests are a possible vector for foreign interference, Elections Canada has come along with a series of “helpful” proposals to parties in order to reduce the vulnerabilities. They insist they don’t want to actually manage these contests (which is good, because that would be an enormous expansion of the organisation, which I’m not sure we really want), but nevertheless they could play some kind of role around financial oversight of these contests, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

Their suggestions include limiting votes to Canadian citizens, or at least permanent residents, which I think is reasonable, because much like I think it’s good that parties let people join by age 14 so that they can learn about and participate in grassroots organisation before they’re able to vote, bringing in permanent residents before they can also vote could help foster better civic engagement (well, if parties hadn’t decimated their grassroots as they centralised power in their leaders’ offices). Other suggestions include published nomination rules and processes (which parties will hate because they have become used to the ability to tip the scales at the behest of the leader and his or her cult of personality), publishing fuller results such as number of ballots cast and vote distribution, requiring all contestants file a financial return, and banning the sale of party memberships in bulk (the Liberals no longer have paid memberships, while the Conservatives are more expansive rules around this, for the better).

Some of these are quite reasonable, but I have my doubts that parties will do more than theatrically take them under advisement, because they simply don’t want to. They’ve spent so much time and energy in order to minimise their grassroots in favour of the leader and his or her office that they have eliminated most of the checks and balances that are supposed to keep them from getting too big for their own britches (and the Liberals have been the absolutely worst with this, with the 2016 changes to their party constitution). Will they start to re-impose these minor changes in order to hold themselves accountable? I’m not going to hold my breath.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck a playground in the southern city of Mykolaiv, killing three. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was invited to attend Cabinet in Westminster, where he reiterated the need reduce restrictions on long-range missiles so that they can strike sites in Russia where they are being attacked from.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1814328171543580848

Continue reading →

Roundup: Straying far out of their lane

Posted on by

After their big song and dance about wanting the federal government to stay in their own lane, the premiers decided to start weighing in on defence spending—an explicitly federal jurisdiction—yesterday, trying to insist that Canada should meet its NATO spending target sooner than the outlined plan. I’m really not sure how this is exactly the premiers staying in their own lane if they expect the prime minister to stay in his, but they certainly made no shortage of ridiculous excuses for their demands, such as this being about trade with the Americans and so on, but come on. Justin Trudeau did write a letter in response to Tim Houston and Doug Ford, saying the federal government is only trying to help the provinces improve the lives of Canadians, and that maybe they should sign on rather than be obstructionist.

Also from the meeting, Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador expressed an interest in resettling some the asylum seekers who landed in Quebec, but that hasn’t stopped Doug Ford from demanding more money for resettlement, nor has it stopped David Eby and Danielle Smith from demanding money for “newcomers,” when the specific issue is just what obligation the federal government has for asylum seekers before their refugee claim is approved, at which point they genuinely become a federal responsibility. This isn’t about helping to settle economic migrants or other mainstream immigrants, which aren’t the federal government’s sole responsibility, but they want to pretend that it is because they want to whinge for more money when what they’re trying to conflate has nothing to do with the actual obligations of the federal government. Again, it’s not really that tough to understand, but these premiers are going to be obtuse and engage in sophistry along the way.

Meanwhile, because several of the premiers are talking equalisation again, I cannot stress enough how badly the CBC described the programme in their article today. Provinces do not write cheques for equalisation. Not province transfers money to another province. It is paid for out of the federal treasury from the income taxes collected from all Canadians, and distributed to those provinces who fall below the threshold of fiscal capacity to have equal programming. Even more to the point, while not raised in the CBC piece, fiscal capacity has nothing to do with whether or not a province is running a deficit, because that would be absolutely absurd and no province would run a surplus if they thought they could get equalisation dollars if they didn’t. Regardless, this was extremely sloppy journalism from the CBC and reads to me like the reporter just relayed how one of the premiers described how the programme works rather than actually looking it up or asking someone who has a clue (and that’s not any of the premiers). Hermes wept…

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia and Ukraine exchanged 95 prisoners of war each yesterday.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1813524697964823028

Continue reading →

Roundup: Oh noes! Diplomatic residences!

Posted on by

The absolute worst instincts in Canadian politics—and Canadian political journalism—are being indulged, being that of hairshirt parsimony. This time it’s about the decision by Global Affairs to purchase a new condo in New York for the consul general, because the current residence is no longer fit for purpose, and it’s cheaper to buy a new one than to refurbish the existing residence, and the new unit is expected to come with additional savings in terms of other maintenance costs. But lo, it’s worth about CAD$9 million, so immediately we need to frame this as being “luxurious” and “elite” while Canadians can’t find places to live.

It’s a diplomatic residence in New York. Real estate is expensive there, but it’s important to have a residence where our diplomats can entertain, because that’s what diplomacy is and diplomacy costs money. Nevertheless, there is a pervasive (and poisonous) attitude in the Canadian discourse that the Elder Pundits nevertheless reinforce is that spending money on this kind of thing is terrible, and there is an absolute attitude (which was more prevalent during the Conservative years) that Ritz Crackers and ginger ale is good enough for a church social, so it’s good enough for diplomats, which makes us as much of a laughingstock internationally as the prime minister’s (former) decrepit plane did, and they only just retired that one. And it’s why the media keeps indulging astroturfers like the “CTF” who phone them up to complain that the embassy in Tokyo wasn’t furnished by IKEA. (No, seriously). It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Of course, when I tweeted about this, all everyone complained about was Bob Fife which largely misses the point, other than the fact that he is one of the voices of the Elder Pundits, who must enforce the set narratives. Others went back as far so the Duffy Diaries to suggest that Fife is grinding some kind of axe with Tom Clark because he spilled that Duffy was leaking information to the press and Duffy complained to Fife (then the bureau chief) and the president of CTV about it, but that doesn’t make any sense either because Fife is amoral, and only cares about the scoops, not about the ramifications. (Seriously, did you see him get misty-eyed when he told Vassy Kapelos that he doesn’t like being called “Fife the Knife”?) What’s more concerning is that Andrew Scheer started going around saying that this purchase is furthering “Liberal insiders,” which is patent bullshit, but every story was going to reprint that because both-sides.

Ukraine Dispatch

Six people were killed and thirteen injured in a Russian missile attack on the town of Myrnohrad in the Donetsk region. Reuters profiles president Volodymyr Zelenskyy and how the war has changed him.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Target 2032

Posted on by

The government’s slow rollout of NATO announcements continued apace yesterday with the formal announcement that their roadmap to meeting the defence spending target of two percent of GDP was expected by 2032, at which point that would include not only the submarines, but some other air defences as well. But because the details on that roadmap remain scarce, it allowed the usual narratives to carry on, while the Conservatives took to their socials to insist that the government had no intention of really following through on this promise, with no evidence at all (unless it was an admission that they have no intention of sticking to any of these plans, because they have already admitted that they have no intention of meeting the two percent target, merely “working toward it.”)

There was also an announcement that Canada and the US would work with Finland on icebreaker capability, with the details to be worked out in the next six months.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched two missiles and six drones at Ukraine, mostly at the Sumy and Mykolaiv regions. US intelligence reports that Russian agents tried to assassinate the CEO of a German arms manufacturer sending weapons to Ukraine. And Ukraine’s former army chief, who clashed with president Zelenskyy, has begun his new role as ambassador to the UK.

Continue reading →

Roundup: New subs on the menu

Posted on by

We all knew it was coming, but the day finally arrived—the announcement that yes, Canada is officially embarking on a new submarine fleet, that we’re planning for up to twelve (from the current four), and that they will be conventionally powered and not nuclear (so no, we won’t be getting into the AUKUS nuclear subs club).

This is going to push us past the two percent spending target for NATO, but it does amaze me that the government waited until this long at the NATO conference to announce it, after they spent the past two days being punching bags for American congressmen and senators who want to look tough and make a point, while also feeding the bullshit narrative back home that the Elder Pundits have decreed we must follow. You would think that the supposed communications geniuses that this government purports to employ would get ahead of the entire situation, but no, that is apparently beyond their capabilities. Hermes wept; this government is so gods damned incompetent at these kinds of things that should be absolute gimmes. Cripes.

Meanwhile, the CBC tried to pin down the Conservatives on their totally serious plan to both “move toward” meeting the NATO target (note the hedging language that does not say they promise to meet it—remember, the Conservatives love “aspirational” targets that they can pay lip service toward with no intention of ever meeting), while cutting the budget overall (that means cuts at defence because that’s the easiest target and most able to push back capital expenditures). Unsurprisingly, the Conservative wouldn’t actually give direct answers, nor would they say what they mean by restoring “warrior” and not “woke” culture in the Forces. Of course, that’s generally code for the culture of toxic masculinity that got the military into so much trouble in the first place, with both sexual misconduct and abuse of power, but these guys are up late watching bro culture videos on YouTube, so they know all about “warrior culture.”

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile strike in the Mykolaiv region has killed one and injured eight including a local mayor. A combined drone and missile attack on Odesa has killed two and damaged port infrastructure. Russian forces also claim to have taken control of Yasnobrodivka in the Donetsk region, which Ukraine won’t confirm. Ukraine’s top prosecutor alleges that Russians killed two prisoners of war from the Zaporizhzhia region. Here’s a look at why the incoming F-16 fighters likely won’t have an immediate impact on the war.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Provinces learned they can underfund disaster management

Posted on by

The House of Commons’ national defence committee tabled their report on disaster management earlier this week, and one of its recommendations is for a permanent civilian federal disaster management force that can be deployed for wildfires, floods, hurricanes, or other natural disasters—but they stopped short of recommending a Canadian FEMA, which may not be possible given that this is constitutionally largely an area of provincial jurisdiction, and would require some kind of provincial agreement to operate, and because this is Canada, the provinces would want some kind of say in its operations but wouldn’t want to pay for it, because of course.

One of the problems we’re dealing with as a country is that we’re dealing with the Canadian Forces being at their capacity and they are constantly being asked to deal with disaster management across the country because provincial capacity maxes out too soon. But why does provincial capacity max out? Because they keep cutting funds or under-investing, and creating these situations because they know that regardless of what happens, they can simply call up the federal government to ask them deploy the Canadian Forces, and even more to the point, that they can do it for free because the federal government won’t ask for reimbursement even though they are entitled to. And this has wound up teaching the premiers that there are pretty much no consequences for their under-investing or even cutting the funding for this kind of emergency management, so they are incentivized to rely on the Canadian Forces to do the work for them for free, and now we have reached the end of that being possible.

So, what is the solution? I am wary of the notion of building up a federal force because even if they can manage to get provincial agreements, staff it up (because you would be drawing from the same pool as the Canadian Forces, which has a recruitment and retention crisis), and even if they paid for all of it (which they shouldn’t), this will exacerbate the existing problem of provinces not funding or bolstering their existing forces that are their constitutional responsibility because there will still be a federal backstop. And if the federal government starts asking for reimbursement, either for the use of the Canadian Forces or this hypothetical future force, then the media will be aghast that the federal government is making the province pay in their time of need, completely ignoring that the provincial under-funding created the situation in the first place. We’re at a bit of a rock and hard place, because we have let federalism break down like this, and that’s not good for the country.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian guided bombs struck the Eastern settlement of Selydove, killing two. Ukrainian forces captured a Russian “barn” tank that has been modified to protect against drone attacks. Ukraine launched a drone attack that struck three Russian oil refineries overnight.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Abdicating responsibilities and calling on Justice Hogue instead

Posted on by

The reverberations from the NSICOP report continued over the weekend, with the rhetoric still as ridiculous as ever. For example, everyone keeps shouting the word “treason” about what these MPs are alleged to have done (with the exception of the one former MP in the report), and lo, it doesn’t actually meet the Criminal Code definition of “treason,” which means that it’s unlikely anyone is going to face charges for what is alleged to have happened (if indeed any of it was in fact foreign interference and not actions undertaken as part of diplomacy, and the jury is still out on that).

And rather than continue to use this opportunity to behave like adults, the Bloc and the Conservatives now want to turn this over to Justice Hogue so that she can make some sort of determination rather than put on their big-boy pants and get their classified briefings. Turning this over to Justice Hogue would be an absolute abdication of responsibility by both the Bloc and Conservative leaders, and soon it could just be the Conservative leader since Yves-François Blanchet is now considering getting a classified briefing. That hasn’t stopped Michael Chong from going on national television to literally claim that he knows better than former CSIS directors about this, and saying that if Poilievre gets briefed, his hands are tied. That’s wrong, that’s bullshit, and that’s fabricating excuses so that he can continue to act as an ignorant critic rather than an informed observer.

This is not new. This is a long-standing problem in Canadian politics that opposition leaders don’t want to be briefed because if they do, then they have to be responsible in their commentary, and they don’t want to do that. They want to be able to stand up and say inflammatory things, and Poilievre is not only no different, but that’s his entire modus operandi. He can’t operate if he has to act like a responsible grown-up, where he would have to get the information and do something with it internally in his party, but he doesn’t want to do that when he can continue screaming that the prime minister is hiding something. But it’s hard to say that the prime minister is hiding something when he is quite literally offering Poilievre the opportunity to read the classified report, so instead he lies about what that would mean, and he gets Michael Chong to debase himself and also lie about it. This is the state of politics, and it’s very, very bad for our democracy.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians appear to be making headway in their attempt to capture the strategically significant town of Chasiv Yar. Ukraine says that it struck an “ultra-modern” Russian aircraft six hundred kilometres from the front lines. The Globe and Mail has a longread about of Ukraine’s most elite special forces units, on the front lines of the war with Russia.

Continue reading →