Tag Archives: The Monarchy

Roundup: A tale of two rage-farmers

Posted on by

Yesterday during Question Period, I made an unoriginal joke about Garnett Genuis’ terrible performance. But we live in Extremely Online times, and so Andrew Scheer decided that he was going to do something about my lame joke. He claimed that I called for Genuis to be shot—which I most certainly did not—and began the process of online intimidation through rage-farming. Of note, Scheer tried this previously against Gerald Butts for using the term “defenestrated,” and that whipped up a huge frenzy, because of course it did. While a handful of randos started the process of harassing me, a short time later, the Canada Proud account decided to pick up on it, putting out a wholly unoriginal shitpost declaring me to be a “Liberal journalist” who owes Genuis an apology for advocating he be shot—which again, I did no such thing, and I owe him no apology. If anything, he owes everyone an apology for subjecting us to his attempt to be clever with the lyrics of “Bohemian Rhapsody.” And lo, more of Jeff Ballingall’s winged monkeys tried to harass me online, with one or two Conservative MPs chiming in, insisting that I “crossed a line,” which again, I did no such thing. I fully expect Pierre Poilievre to put out another wounded-sounded fundraising email about me by tomorrow.

The point here is that this is how the intimidation game is played, and why they think that journalists are uniquely vulnerable. If you are critical about anyone on their team, they declare that you are biased, even though you are critical about every team. They howl and moan, in the hopes that you either apologise and retract, and then they know that you’re weak, and that they can silence you through these kinds of tactics. It’s partially why so many journalists have resorted to scrupulously both-sidesing all of their lies—because they screamed and moaned about being treated unfairly, and insisting that they were “insulted” when they were called out for their blatant falsehoods, and yes, this has absolutely happened—until those reporters and their editors stop calling them out, and instead, just both-sides what is said. Both-sidesing in turn allows them to lie with impunity, because they know they won’t be called out for it, lest they begin this cycle again. And now, our political discourse is completely fucked as a result. So no, I’m not going to let Scheer or Ballingall intimidate me, and their winged monkeys don’t scare me.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 210:

Russian president Putin announced a partial mobilisation of Russian reserves to fill positions in the army, if that’s any indication of how well this is going for him. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy made a video address to the UN General Assembly, assuring victory for Ukraine, but also calling for punishment for Russia, including stripping them of their permanent seat on the Security Council.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Gatherings in advance of the funeral

Posted on by

As Canadian officials were in London over the weekend in advance of the Queen’s funeral, a number of meetings took place between the prime minister and King Charles III, and the King also met with the Governors General of the Realms. Trudeau also met with the new UK prime minister, Liz Truss and other world leaders, while back at Canada House, Mary May Simon invested Stephen Harper into the Order of Canada, while former prime ministers and Governors General took some time together.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 207:

While the counter-offensive remains paused to allow supply lines to catch up and the units to recuperate, discoveries continue in cities and villages recently liberated. Beyond the mass grave found in Izyum, torture chambers have been found in Kozacha Lopan near the border. Russian forces continue to target civilian infrastructure, and have stepped up attacks since being forced from recently liberated areas. Meanwhile, Kharkiv is celebrating Pride, which is an accomplishment in a country still largely hostile to LGBTQ+ rights, as they are being invaded by a country that has been weaponising homophobia.

https://twitter.com/maksymeristavi/status/1570891880178786304

Continue reading →

Roundup: The edgy reporting on the state of the monarchy

Posted on by

It wasn’t unexpected, but Canadian media has decided to go full-on concern trolling for the republican cause while the world mourns the passing of the Queen. There is no end to the polls about Canadians’ feelings about the “British” monarchy (oblivious to the fact that we are under the Canadian monarchy, which is separate and distinct), or stories about Indigenous people and their relationship with the Crown, but they seem to entirely lack the nuances of the treaty relationship and the failure of the Queen’s Canadian government to properly uphold those treaties, and instead putting forward a narrative that the Crown was directly responsible for the cultural genocide of residential schools. There are stories aplenty of some of the Realms who are considering abandoning the monarchy in favour of republicanism, as Barbados just did, but some can’t seem to distinguish between the Commonwealth (a voluntary organisation mostly made up of former British colonial holdings, but has since expanded to include countries with no such colonial ties) and the Realms (the fifteen countries for whom the Queen served as monarch), and it makes the questions very awkward if they really don’t know what they’re asking (looking at you, Power & Politics). And then there are the stories, largely American, which can’t get the basics right about the funding of the monarchy, or that taxpayer dollars are paying for the Queen’s funeral (as though American taxpayer dollars don’t pay for their presidents’ state funerals, or for their presidential libraries/personality shines).

It’s predictable, and it’s utterly provincial. I’m sure plenty of them think they’re being edgy, or getting to the real hard news of the day, but it’s mostly coming off as ill-informed, devoid of proper context, and in some cases, without much in the way of constitutional reality. I wish I could say we should expect better, but sadly, it’s about exactly what we can expect form our media outlets.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 203:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ventured out of Kyiv yesterday, visiting the strategic city of Izyum now that it has been liberated from the Russians. On the way back to Kyiv, however, his motorcade was involved a collision, though his injuries were said to be minor. One of the towns recently freed was Hrakove, which was largely levelled by Russians, and its original population of 1000 is now about 30. Meanwhile, nearly 5000 Ukrainian recruits have completed basic training in the UK from allied trainers, including Canadians. Ukraine is also seeking a more formalised treaty with Western partners to ensure its protection from future Russian invasion.

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1570006459324284928

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre plays victim around the media

Posted on by

We’re in the first week of Pierre Poilievre’s leadership, and he’s already sticking to his antagonistic playbook. He announced his leadership team first thing in the morning, with two deputies—Melissa Lantsman (a Jewish lesbian) and Tim Uppal (a Sikh) in order to inoculate himself against the usual cries that the party is racist and bigoted. A short while later, Quebec MP Alain Rayes announced he was leaving caucus and going to sit as an independent, because he didn’t like the direction Poilievre was going. (Cue everyone insisting that the party has “never been more united,” which is what they all say just before and after such an exit).

Fast-forward a couple of hours, and the federal government has announced their assistance package for low-income people dealing the effects of high inflation, and Poilievre calls a press conference to react. And the spectacle begins. David Akin, one of the reporters present, takes offence that Poilievre insists he won’t take questions (and he hasn’t since he was made leader), and starts shouting questions at him. And what does Poilievre do? Call Akin a “Liberal heckler” (because the pool camera can’t see Akin as he’s behind it), and a few hours later, sends out a fundraising appeal to his base that plays victim, that the media is out to get him, and that they’re all protecting Trudeau, and that you need to send him money to take on both Trudeau and the media. It’s gross, it undermines institutions, it undermines democracy, but he doesn’t care. It’s his game. And most of the media in this country have no idea how to react to it, and it’s going to be a real problem going forward.

https://twitter.com/glen_mcgregor/status/1569903207555497985

https://twitter.com/mattgurney/status/1569872613228400642

As for the government’s assistance package (dental care for low-income children under 12, enhanced rent support for low-income people, doubling the existing GST tax credit, which again, targets low-income households—and yes, the NDP are loudly taking credit for all of it), there are some good analysis threads from Lindsay Tedds and Jennifer Robson, and because these are targeted at the low end, they’re really unlikely to drive inflation, unlike say the cheques certain provinces are sending out to everyone, whether they need them or not. And Poilievre’s insistence that this will make things worse because they increase the deficit (the deficit, if there will even be one this year, isn’t driving inflation—global factors are), and then demands that the government not raise taxes. The only taxes going up is the luxury tax on boats, private planes, and luxury cars. The carbon price is not a tax, and rebates more to lower-income households than they spend. CPP and EI premiums are not taxes. Higher taxes actually fight inflation, lowering them makes it worse. The absolute economic illiteracy should be mind-numbing, until you realises that he gets his information from crypto-bros on YouTube, which tells you pretty much everything you need to know.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1569770945895895042

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 202:

Russian troops are not only retreating from positions in the northeast of the country, they are also retreating in the south, and heading toward positions in Crimea. As these towns and cities are liberated, authorities are moving in to document war crimes against civilians. Of course, shelling does continue around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, and Russians are still hitting Kharkiv, even though they have been repelled from the area, which is being taken as a sign of desperation. Analysts believe this rapid retreat is the sign of a spent Russian military, their approach unsustainable,

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre on the first ballot

Posted on by

Not unexpectedly, Pierre Poilievre won the Conservative leadership race quite handily on the first ballot, with some sixty-eight percent of the vote, and winning the point share in about 300 of the 338 ridings around the country. This is going to be declared “decisive,” and that it will force the caucus to rally around him, but I have some doubts, particularly as you had MPs who were openly questioning their future in the party under a Poilievre win. We’ll see where they go in the coming weeks, but Poilievre is already making some backroom changes, including replacing the board of the party’s fundraising arm—because replacing the entire party machinery with loyalists is one way to ensure that the membership is stymied from holding you to account in the future (and yes, the Liberals are most especially guilty of this after Trudeau oversaw the party’s constitution be replaced with one dedicated to total control by the leader’s office). We’ll also see who he picks for his front-bench.

As for what this means moving to the next election, there is a lot of doubt that Poilievre is going to “pivot to the centre,” because he doesn’t think he can win there. He is likely to try and get more votes from the far-right, and access votes from there by appealing to them in various ways, as he has explicitly done so far, whether it was supporting the occupation in Ottawa, or playing along with conspiracy theories like those around the World Economic Forum. You’re going to have a lot of talking heads bring up that “300 ridings!” figure to show that he somehow has support across the country, when that is a massive sample selection bias, which shows that he knows how to organize small numbers nationally, but says nothing about the broader public. And while this thread from Justin Ling is good to read, I will echo his caution that calling Poilievre a “white supremacist” plays into his hands—his wife is from Venezuela, his children are mixed-race, and if the media tries the narrative on him, he will eviscerate them for it, while reminding everyone yet again about Trudeau’s history of Blackface. His opponents can’t play the game he wants them to play, but we’ll see if they have the capacity or ability. As for media, well, I suspect they will continue to keep both-sidesing his lies, and he’ll keep beating up on them, and on and on it goes.

For pundit reaction, Aaron Wherry remarks on Poilievre’s vow to remain as loud and antagonistic a populist as possible, and how he has been willing to undermine the institutions of democracy his whole careers. Jen Gerson considers Poilievre’s win the death knell of moderate conservatism in Canada, but it’s less a question of policy than of temperament. Althia Raj buys into the notion that Poilievre’s caucus will be more united, which frees up energy to fight the Liberals. Chantal Hébert believes that Poilievre’s victory will convince Trudeau to stay on for the next election, believing that he can’t let Poilievre win.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 200:

The counter-offensive, particularly in the north-eastern part of Ukraine, has been advancing at a rapid pace, and Russians are fleeing with minimal resistance, leaving a lot of weapons and ammunition behind. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy put out a video mocking the Russian retreat, saying that it’s showing their best side. Further south, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant has now been completely shut down in order to prevent a nuclear catastrophe as shelling continues in the region. Meanwhile, in Sloviansk, in Donetsk province, continues to see artillery attacks as Russian forces try to take the entire Donbas region. While the counter-attack is a positive sign, it is likely that the conflict will continue for some time, with the added complication that Western allies are starting to run out of inventory to donate to the effort, and everyone needs to beware of what Putin may do when he feels like he’s been backed into a corner.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Charles III’s first address

Posted on by

King Charles III made his first public address in his new role, and like his mother before him, pledged to serve for as long as he lives (sorry fantasists who think he’ll abdicate in favour of William). And this was addressed not only to the UK, but also to all of the realms where he is also King, and to the rest of the Commonwealth as well, even if he is not their head of state.

More of the ceremonial aspects of the transition takes place today, from the Accession Council in the UK, to the meeting of the Privy Council at Rideau Hall, where the Canadian Cabinet will make the accession declaration for the King of Canada.

https://twitter.com/Gray_Mackenzie/status/1568435618304098305

Meanwhile, I cannot get over the fact that Canadian media outlets cannot get the basic civics straight in the fact that Elizabeth II was the Queen of Canada, and Charles III is the King of Canada. The CBC in particular continues to treat the monarchy as a foreign curiosity rather than the very centre of our constitutional order. Occasionally they will cite that the Queen was Canada’s head of state, which is only true on a technicality, and outlets like The Canadian Press are making similar declarations. We’re a constitutional monarchy. I don’t know why this seems to be so difficult for mainstream media outlets to process and relay correctly. There should be no excuse for it, and yet when it matters, they are simply unable—or unwilling—to present the facts as they exist. It’s no wonder we’re in such trouble.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 198:

The Ukrainian counter-offensive continues to make slow and steady progress on various fronts, but that hasn’t stopped Russians from shelling cities like Bakhmut in the east, or Kharkiv in the north. Shelling also continues around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, which continues to be on emergency power to run its cooling systems because repairs cannot be made to the power lines connecting it to the grid so long as the shelling continues. The International Atomic Energy Agency continues to call for a “safety zone” around the plant, but we know how well Russia abides by agreements.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Queen is dead. Long live the King.

Posted on by

The Queen is dead. Long live the King.

With the passing of the Queen, Charles immediately has ascended to the throne as Charles III, as you do in a monarchy. Because of the continuity of the Crown as a corporation sole, everything carries on as it was, with a few cosmetic changes as all of the references to the Queen in legislation and in offices and institutions transition to references to King, all done automatically thanks to legislative instruments like the Interpretation Act.

  • Here is a BBC royal correspondent’s look back at the Queen’s life.
  • Philippe Lagassé lays out the legal matters of succession in Canada.
  • Anne Twomey explains the Queen’s use of soft power in the Australian context, where she had more power than she let on.
  • From the archives, Susan Delacourt spoke with former prime ministers and Governors General about their time spent with the Queen.
  • The Queen’s image will remain on coins and banknotes for years to come, and would be phased out gradually as new coins and bills enter circulation.

 

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 198:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces have liberated over 1000 square kilometres of territory since the counter-attacks began on September 1st, but information is still hard to come by.

Continue reading →

Roundup: On oaths to the Queen

Posted on by

We’re in day one-hundred-and-twenty-six of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and much of the attention has been on the reverberations of the attack on the shopping centre in Kremenchuk, where the death toll is up to 18, with more than 20 missing, and many more wounded. French president Emmanuel Macron denounced the attack, and said that because of it, Russia “cannot and should not win” the war (but then again, Macron’s attempts to get Ukraine to give territorial concessions to end the conflict is not exactly reflecting well on him either). As well, CBC interviews a Ukrainian marine who survived the battle of Mariupol with severe injuries before spending two weeks as a Russian prisoner of war before he was able to be sent back to Ukraine for treatment.

https://twitter.com/MFA_Ukraine/status/1541839370747011072

Meanwhile, Turkey has dropped their objections to Finland and Sweden joining NATO, which means that their membership can move ahead. This while NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg is talking about an eight-fold increase in Western troops being placed at an increased state of readiness, and more troops headed to the Baltic states, to make Russia very aware that they really, really shouldn’t cross their borders.

https://twitter.com/ChristinsQueens/status/1541845991225278474

Closer to home, I spent way too much time yesterday being angry at a garbage piece of Canadian Press wire copy that was bad PR masquerading as a news story. I mean, we’re not even a week into Parliament’s summer recess, and this is what CP is using as void fill for the news hole? The piece claims that 56 percent of Canadians oppose the oath of allegiance to the Queen, then cites a “poll,” but it wasn’t actually a poll, it was online panels that are not actually random samples, but that fact isn’t mentioned until six paragraphs down. The only person quoted in the piece is the guy who runs the think tank who commissioned the panels, and he says that most Canadians are unaware that newcomers have to swear an oath to be “faithful to the Royal Family,” which is a wilful distortion of the truth. The oath is to the Queen and her “heirs and successors,” because heredity is kind of the point of monarchy. It’s not the whole Royal Family. Nobody is swearing fealty to Prince Andrew, or even Princess Anne for that matter. And for a think tank that claims to be devoted to increasing Canadians’ knowledge of their country, that kind of distortion is malpractice at best, but I suspect it’s more about trying to build a case that the monarchy is not a unifying force, particularly for immigrants. As for the CP journalist, this was simply retyping a press release with no added context. There were no basic civics in there about how we’re a constitutional monarchy, that the Queen of Canada is different from the Queen of the UK, or that the oath to the Queen is not to her natural person, but to the Crown as the central organizing principle of our constitution (which is why we would need to rewrite the entire thing if we ever were insane enough to ditch the monarchy—not that we would ever get the unanimous agreement of the provinces to do so). It’s really disappointing that CP has descended to this kind of stenography when they used to be one of the most enviable bureaux on the Hill.

Continue reading →

QP: Tough on Black and Indigenous people

Posted on by

In between events with the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall, the prime minister was present in QP, as were all other leaders. Candice Bergen led off, script in front of her, and she declared that the stated reason for invoking the Emergencies Act was “falling apart” as the interim Ottawa police chief said he did not request it, and she insisted there was a cover-up. Justin Trudeau quoted another witness at the committee who praised the efficacy of the measures. Bergen blamed Trudeau for the blockade with a litany of dubious accusations, and Trudeau retorted that the opposition doesn’t want light shed into their role in prolonging the occupation. Bergen insisted this was “misinformation” before she pivoted the complaining about airport delays and demanded a return to “pre-COVID normal.” Trudeau reminded her that COVID is not over, and that they are identifying ways to help bottlenecks. Bergen started ranting that Trudeau got to go maskless in other countries while Canadians are tired of doing everything being asked of them (erm, which they haven’t been). Trudeau again reiterated that they are following the science. Bergen then launched into a tirade about COVID measures affecting youth, and Trudeau somehow hating youth, and Trudeau listed all of the help they gave young Canadians over the course of the pandemic.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he gave a bizarre rant about the “British monarchy” and the Anglican Church, and demanded to know how much this would cost. Trudeau, bemused, said that Ottawa must really be delivering for Quebec if the Bloc had to dig to reach this. Blanchet continued to complained that royal tours cost money, and Trudeau took the opportunity to praise our system and its stability at a time when democracy is under threat around the world.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, noted the inflation headline number, and repeated yesterday’s demand to cut oil and gas subsidies and to give that money to people in a GST rebate. Trudeau listed that they have been cutting subsidies, that they are going “line by line” on emissions cuts, and that they have affordability measures. Singh repeated the question in French, and got the same reply.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Limited federal options on Bill 21

Posted on by

So, the fight over Bill 21 in Quebec is gaining some traction now that there have been real-world consequences, and a bunch of MPs (mostly Conservatives) who previously said nothing about it—and who previously supported odious things like “barbaric cultural practices tip lines” and “Canadian values tests”—are now speaking up and recanting previous positions. Which is good, but while everyone is hoping for some kind of federal response or action on the legislation, I’m not sure there is an actual avenue. Consider this from constitutional law professor Carissima Mathen:

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/1469013986142298114

This is essentially what Justin Trudeau has been saying—he’s opposed to it, but this isn’t the time for the federal government to step in. That time will be when the fight reaches the Supreme Court of Canada, because then they have a legitimate avenue to be an intervenor in the case. Until then, they can say they oppose it—and they have much more so than other parties—but they’re also not making wild symbolic actions that won’t mean anything. And while both Erin O’Toole and Jagmeet Singh say they are personally opposed (and Singh has a legitimate dog in this fight), Singh has been somewhat blank on actions a federal government could take, while O’Toole made it clear he wouldn’t interfere in any way because a) provincial jurisdiction, and b) he’s spent his entire leadership trying to suck up to François Legault and out-Bloc the Bloc, for all of the good it did him in the election. And there are demographic considerations that play into the political calculations as well:

Meanwhile, Chantal Hébert, lays out the political calculations and options for Trudeau and O’Toole when it comes to challenging Bill 21. Paul Wells adds a boatload of more context to the situation both federally and in Quebec, and gives some sharper thoughts as to why the federal government has vanishingly few levers but nevertheless has options.

Continue reading →