QP: Rocketing up the repetitive talking points

Not only were the prime minister and his deputy present, so were all of the other leaders, and the benches were full. This while we had astronauts—the crew of Artemis II—in the Gallery to watch proceedings, along with the head of NASA, the US Ambassador to Canada, the head of the Canadian Space Agency, and other handlers. Even though MPs aren’t supposed to call attention to people in the Gallery, the final Members’ Statement of the day did praise said astronauts, and they got much applause, and the Speaker let this breach of the rules slide.

Pierre Poilievre led off in English for a change, comparing that the costs of the bureaucracy are “rocketing up,” and then lamented the civil service strike, wondering how much it would cost to end it. Justin Trudeau said that they believe in the importance of the bargaining table, which is why they are negotiating to reach an agreement that is good for civil servants and fair to taxpayers. Poilievre repeated the question in French, minus the pun, and Trudeau reiterated his response. Poilievre returned to English, and listed a serious of events that he incredulously wondered how anyone he could believe Trudeau was not involved with the Trudeau Foundation. Trudeau stated that he hasn’t had any contact with the Foundation, directly or indirectly for ten years. Poilievre focused on that meeting with the Foundation members and deputy ministers, and Trudeau recited his too-worn line that while the opposition focuses on him, he is focusing on Canadians. Poilievre quipped that nobody focuses more on the Trudeau than Trudeau himself, and that he seemed to think people were too dumb to see the links with the Foundation. Trudeau said that it was amazing to see the lengths to which the Conservatives would go to avoid talking about the budget, and listed about how great it was.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, recounted a storybook character that reminded him of Trudeau, and went after that PCO meeting again. Trudeau shrugged off the attack and said that he was focusing on helping Canadians. Blanchet insisted that there was all kinds of coordination in an office to have five deputy ministers hold a meeting os he must have known it was taking place, and Trudeau again listed the measures in the budget that was helping people.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and in French, demanded the prime minister “show leadership” and capitulate to the public sector union demands. Trudeau praised the work of civil servants but said that taxpayers also need to be respected, which is why they were at the negotiating table. Singh repeated the question in English with added emphasis, and Trudeau gave a more robust and melodramatic version of the same response. 

Continue reading

QP: Fighting to take credit for the Telford decision

After a morning full of rapid-fire decisions around what was happening with Katie Telford heading to committee and David Johnston’s mandate being released, the prime minister was present, as were all other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, took credit for pressuring Trudeau to change his mind in letting Telford testify, and took a swipe at Johnston before demanding a public inquiry starting today. Justin Trudeau responded that this should’t be a partisan issue, which is why the appointed Johnston and were waiting for his recommendations. Poilievre switched to English to again take credit, and took several more swipes at Johnston before demanding a public inquiry right now. Trudeau repeated that this shouldn’t be a partisan issue which was why they appointed Johnston, and that they would abide by his recommendations while they moved forward on other measures. Poilievre then switched topics to inflation, blamed rising food prices on carbon prices (it’s not the cause) and demanded the planned increase be cancelled. Trudeau said that when he sat down with farmers, they underlined their real problems and leadership on climate change, before he listed climate rebates levels. Poilievre went on his usual talking points about carbon prices, and Trudeau listed how much the climate rebates were going up in Poilievre’s riding. Poilievre spouted some disingenuous bullshit about the ongoing heating costs at 24 Sussex and Trudeau’s flights, while Trudeau shrugged off the personal attack while patting himself on the back for dental care and rental benefits.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he demanded a public inquiry be called right here and now. Trudeau insisted that appointing Johnston was the first step and that they would follow his recommendations. Blanchet was talked around the appointment of Johnston, before again demanding the inquiry. Trudeau read some praise for Johnston and insisted he rejected the attacks against Johnston.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he too took credit for forcing the government to make Katie Telford appear at committee, and then tried calling out Poilievre for blocking their attempt to move a motion on calling a public inquiry. Poilievre theatrically got up to answer, before the Speaker stood up to remind everyone what Question Period was for, which is holding the government to account, and Trudeau took the opportunity to denounce personal attacks and praise Johnston. Singh said that his proves neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals wanted a public inquiry before he switched to French to demand said inquiry right here and now. Trudeau insisted that they appointed Johnston to who could make recommendations about next steps, while NSICOP was doing their work.

Continue reading

Roundup: Poilievre’s facile budget demands

Pierre Poilievre called a Sunday morning press conference, which is a particularly Conservative tactic that tries to set the agenda for the week, in which he made his demands around the upcoming budget. We all know that it’s pretty much set in stone by this point and is on its way to the printers, but that never stops parties from making performative demands right up until the end. To that end, Poilievre had three main demands:

  1. Bring home powerful paycheques with lower taxes, so hard work pays off again.
  2. Bring home lower prices, by ending inflationary carbon tax hikes & deficit spending that drive up inflation & interest rates.
  3. Bring homes people can afford by removing government gatekeepers to free up land and speed up building permits.

First of all, the thing he refuses to acknowledge or understand is that tax cuts fuel inflation. If he’s worried about the increasing cost of living, tax cuts won’t actually do anything meaningful, and are more likely to just add fuel to that fire. (Meanwhile, taxes aren’t going up for anyone except profitable corporations and on luxury goods). When it comes to housing prices, carbon prices are not inflationary (the Bank of Canada has cited that their effect on inflation is negligible), and deficit spending has absolutely nothing to do with either inflation or interest rates. This is a facile narrative that Poilievre keeps insisting, preferring an austerity budget that will only make the vulnerable even more precarious without government supports, but this economic message still resonates for a particular generation. Meanwhile, none of this will affect housing prices, because that is driven by a lack of supply, which is because municipalities refuse to zone for density, and because provincial governments won’t use their powers to force the issue. And that leads us to the third point, which is that the federal government has no ability to “remove gatekeepers” at the provincial or municipal level. They can’t do anything about building permits, and I am dubious that there is enough federal land that is suitable for housing developments in major cities around the country that is underutilized. I may be wrong, but this has been a perennial promise by governments for years and nothing has really moved, which leads me to believe there’s not a lot to be had.

It’s not at all surprising that Poilievre is sticking to facile and wrong budgetary narratives, but it would be great if he could actually be called out on it rather than both-sides at best, which is barely even happening. This is important stuff and we’re just shrugging it off, and focusing on more bullshit polls about people believing the Conservatives are still the better economic managers in spite of decades of proof to the contrary.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces have believed to have suffered more than 1100 dead in a week of battles near Bakhmut, with another 1500 wounded so badly as to be removed from the fighting. The Institute for the Study of War believes Russia’s planned advance has stalled in Bakhmut, and that the assault will be more difficult to sustain without more significant losses.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1634849209840173057

Continue reading

Roundup: The allegations reach Queen’s Park

Another day, another Global news story about supposed foreign interference allegations, this time naming Ontario PC MPP Vincent Ke as someone who has been working on behalf of the Chinese government, and who was given funds to disperse for election influence. Ke denies this, but Doug Ford swiftly demoted him from parliamentary assistant to committee chair, and then hours later, Ke “voluntarily” stepped out of caucus for the time being. But there are a lot of problems with the reporting in the piece, as both Stephanie Carvin and Jessica Davis—both of whom are former CSIS analysts—point out in separate Twitter threads that are absolutely essential reading to understand why this reporting is so suspect.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1634268769697640449

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1634272246817607682

Meanwhile, former Senator Vern White is calling out the Conservatives’ characterisation of NSICOP to be the bullshit that it is, and says that it would be faster and cheaper for that committee to do the review into interference allegations than a public inquiry. He also doesn’t believe an NSICOP member leaked an unredacted report to Global news considering how strict the security is. I previously wrote a piece about the legislation empowering NSICOP and how it compares to other Westminster parliaments’ own parliamentary national security committees, and they too face redactions from their political executives—NSICOP is not out of line in that regard, not to mention that we don’t have secure places for a secret-cleared parliamentary committee to meet on Parliament Hill (which should be part of the renovations to Centre Block).

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1634335994525757440

Ukraine Dispatch:

An aide to president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the decision to stick out the battle in Bakhmut has to do with the ability to pin down and degrade Russia’s best forces ahead of the planned spring Ukrainian counter-offensive. Meanwhile, most of the power in Kyiv has been restored after Thursday’s missile barrage from Russia.

https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1634182540868108290

Continue reading

Roundup: Few answers at committee

The Procedure and House Affairs committee met yesterday for an emergency meeting around these recent allegations of Chinese interference in the last election, and it wasn’t the most illuminating exercise—not just because MPs constant attempts at point-scoring, but because most of the national security agencies couldn’t answer very many questions, because answering questions can jeopardise sources or investigations. And we got the same cautions that virtually every media outlet is ignoring, which is that intelligence is not evidence, and much of it is out of context or incomplete, which is why everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt and not repeated credulously the way absolutely everyone is.

We did learn a couple of things. The first is that the RCMP were the ones who opted not to proceed with any investigations or charges around interference when presented with information about it. The second is that the prime minister is being briefed constantly about these kinds of threats, and that the problem is getting worse instead of better.

And then there were all of the calls for a national public inquiry, which the NDP insisted they were going to try and look tough in demanding. Not to be outdone, Poilievre not only demanded an inquiry, but said that all recognised party leaders had to have a say in who would chair it, otherwise it would just be another “Liberal crony” (which was again used as a smear against Morris Rosenberg). The prime minister’s national security advisor said that a public inquiry wouldn’t get many more answers because of the nature of the secret information, and all of that would still be kept out of the public eye, which is a good point. Incidentally, the opposition parties cannot demand a public inquiry—it doesn’t work like that. They can’t force a vote in the House of Commons, or anything like that, so this is once again, mostly just performance.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Despite the warnings that the Ukrainians may not be able to hold Bakhmut for much longer, they nevertheless held positions for another day, while Russian forces are also gearing up for a renewed offensive in the Zaporizhzhia region.

Continue reading

Roundup: An easy way to close a loophole

While Ontario continues to go full-steam ahead toward trying to divert more surgeries to private for-profit clinics (that bill the system), we need a reminder yet again that solutions exist within the existing system, using existing staff and personnel, if only they had the funding and support to do more. Dr. Warner here has a great example of how more can be done with existing facilities and staff that could have the same outcomes or better than these private clinics are purporting to offer.

Of course, that’s inconvenient for Ford, so I doubt he’s going to take this into account going forward. I also saw another news story yesterday about another clinic that is offering access to a nurse practitioner if you pay a monthly subscription fee, because there is a loophole that it exploits. Provincial governments could close this loophole immediately by declaring that visits to a nurse practitioner are billed to the system in the same way that visits to a doctor are—and provide said billing code—which would once again make it illegal to use this kind of loophole. We’ll see if they are committed to doing so with any haste, or if they’re content to accept more of this creeping privatisation because it serves their interests to do so.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces trying to capture Bakhmut are trying to encircle Ukrainian defenders, hoping to cut off their supply lines in the process. Ukrainians say they repelled over sixty attacks by Russians in the past week.

https://twitter.com/lyla_lilas/status/1629906366163742720

Continue reading

Roundup: Silence on some un-apologies

After Friday’s dubious denunciation of visiting far-right extremist MEP Christine Anderson by a proxy of Pierre Poilievre, and notably not Poilievre personally, either in front of a camera or on social media, and Colin Carrie’s completely insincere apology and lies that he didn’t know who Anderson was, well, the other two MPs doubled down. Despite the party-written apology, Leslyn Lewis used whataboutery in order to defend her meeting, while Dean Allison told a known white nationalist that he wasn’t consulted about the apology and didn’t agree with it, and found Anderson to be a “good lady.”

And Poilievre? Well, he was tweeting about a Black History Month event with Lewis, after she defended her meeting with Anderson, and has not distanced himself from Lewis’ meeting or her whataboutery in any way. So, it sounds like there’s a problem here.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives appear to be content to wink and nod to these extremists, and will simply issue more insincere apologies every time they get caught out, because that’s the whole game these days.

Ukraine Dispatch:

While battles continue to wage around Bakhmut, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling for yet more sanctions on Russians, in order to keep ratcheting up the pressure on them. But with any sanction regime, compliance is key. Ukraine’s energy minister says half of the country’s energy infrastructure has been damaged by Russian attacks since October. And here is a look at how the war is impacting children in Ukraine.

Continue reading

Roundup: Feigning ignorance of far-right figures

It’s another day of Canadian politics covering itself in glory, starting with the Conservatives starting to backpedal when pressure mounted after three MPs—Leslyn Lewis, Colin Carrie and Dean Allison—attended an event with German MEP Christine Anderson, who is part of the far-right AfD party. As the pressure mounted, Pierre Poilievre issued a denunciation saying that he disavowed her racist rhetoric, and the three MPs gave a half-hearted apology, claiming they didn’t know who she was.

And that’s bullshit.

They knew exactly who she was. Carrie even quoted her in the House of Commons because she gave a speech denouncing Trudeau in the European parliament, and Canadian conservatives and far-right figures were lapping it up. (Carrie is one of the MPs who refused to get vaccinated, and has said that public health officials should be prosecuted. He can google all kinds of conspiracy theories but not the woman he’s quoting? Bullshit.) And yes, her trip to Canada included meeting with leaders from the Ottawa occupation from last year, whom the Conservatives also have associated themselves with. Even more interesting is the fact that the Western Standard asked her about Poilievre, and she said she had spoken with him a couple of times and he seemed like a decent guy, which Poilievre’s office disavowed and insisted that he had never spoken with her. But there is a pattern of behaviour here, with these faux apologies when they get caught, because they know there aren’t any actual consequences, and their followers lap it up.

Justin Trudeau got a few minutes of getting to rip into Poilievre and the Conservatives for their pattern of behaviour before he was struck with another bombshell, in which it is alleged that CSIS warned the Liberals to rescind the nomination of their now-MP Han Dong before the last election, citing that he was too close to the Chinese consulate. The PMO says that there was so much false information in the questions put them that they couldn’t answer, which doesn’t help things. But nobody is confirming anything, so this is likely to drag on into next week (where there may be some lawsuits in the works).

Ukraine Dispatch:

The Chinese government has decided they want to get involved in resolving Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and proposed a “peace plan,” but it doesn’t say anything about returning the land Russia currently occupies (including Crimea) or have any mention of accountability. To that end, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he’ll await more details (but I wouldn’t hold my breath). Zelenskyy did say there will be no peace talks until Russia leaves all of Ukrainian territory, so that’s probably China’s answer. Meanwhile, drone footage is showing how badly the eastern part of the country has been smashed by Russian forces. CBC talks to some people about their recollections of when the invasion began.

Continue reading

Roundup: Some unnamed inaccuracies

Because this story didn’t have enough drama attached to it, prime minister Justin Trudeau said yesterday that the Globe and Mail’s story on alleged election interference from China included “inaccuracies” in the leaked documents—but then wouldn’t say what those inaccuracies are, leaving them to sully the field and cast doubt on his assurances and are again told to just trust him. Frank communication is a good thing! When will he learn this?

Meanwhile, the report from the panel of senior public servants that monitor for election interference hasn’t been completed and released yet, even though it’s been over a year since the election. Privy Council Office says it’ll be coming “in due course,” but the delay is raising more eyebrows, especially given the CSIS leaks and what has been reported on them.

While this is going on the National Post spoke to former Clerks of the Privy Council and members of the panel about the determination of what they say about these allegations of interference, and the answer was basically that it’s complicated—there is no bright line for when you disclose, and disclosing could raise even more issues and that public alarm could sway the vote, which is why they were trying to avoid. It’s an interesting read about what factors they are trying to balance, and good on the Post for actually reaching out, which other outlets have not done.

Ukraine Dispatch:

It’s the one-year anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, a “special military operation” which was supposed to last three days, let them engineer regime change, and cross back over the border. Somehow things didn’t turn out that way. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed that they will “defeat everyone.” Russians have stepped up their attacks in the hopes of depleting Ukrainian resources (but they seem to have no qualms about how many of their own are dying in the process). Here’s a look at how Canada successfully delivered grain sleeves to Ukrainian farmers to help protect their harvests until they could get to market rather than risk them going to waste. Back in Canada, this armoured vehicle manufacturer is hiring Ukrainians displaced in Canada to build the vehicles destined for the war.

Continue reading

Roundup: The frustrated Commissioner was part of the problem

The outgoing Ethics Commissioner is starting to do exit interviews, and he’s expressing frustration that these kinds of ethics violations keep happening, despite the law being in place for 17 years now. To that I say two things:

1) No matter how many rules you put in place, it won’t matter because the Liberals under Trudeau fundamentally believe that so long as they mean well, the ends will justify the means, and that it’s better to simply apologise after having broken rules than it is to scrupulously and slavishly adhere to them in the first place. You can’t just put new rules to stop them from that particular belief, and no amount of training from the Commissioner’s office is likely to shake them from such beliefs.

2) Our ethics regime sucks, in large part because so much of it is predicated on the whims of the Commissioner, and this Commissioner had a lot of whims. His predecessor had a habit of reading her mandate so narrowly that nothing ever applied, except for a small handful of cases, one of which was Trudeau’s vacation with the Aga Khan, in which she made up rules around what a family friendship entails. The current Commissioner has been the opposite, reading his mandate very, very expansively so that things it should not encompass, it does (like the SNC-Lavalin issue). He has made up statutory interpretation from whole cloth, such as the definition of what constitutes “family” under the Act, and capturing relatives through marriage that no other statute in the country captures in its definitions (the issue with Dominic LeBlanc). There is no consistency, and even when they believe they are within the law, he will make up a rule that says they’re not.

I’m not suggesting the Liberals are blameless, because they’re not (see the part about them not caring about rules), but the statue itself is a problem, as are the perceptions around it, and the apocalyptic language being used to describe minor transgressions. They keep talking about the transgressions making it hard to have trust in politicians, but when the system itself fails them because it’s poorly designed and poorly administered, it’s just one vicious circle that nobody wants to show a way out of.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 359:

Russia launched 36 missiles early in the day and struck the country’s oil refinery, while also shelling two dozen settlements in the east and south of the country.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1626479351045804032

Continue reading