Roundup: Davos speech vs Iran support

Posted on by
Reply

In the early hours of Saturday morning, the Americans and Israelis stuck Iran under dubious pretences—later confirming that nuclear talks were merely a ruse, and that Trump and Netanyahu had been planning this for weeks—and managed to effectively decapitate the country’s leadership, including killing Ayatollah Khomeini. Within hours, prime minister Mark Carney sent out a statement from his trip in Mumbai, where he effectively supported the actions, but also did not promise any Canadian support, military or otherwise. Nevertheless, everyone went on a big round of hand-wringing about how this statement jived with his big Davos speech.

My statement on Iran-related hostilities in the Middle East:

— Mark Carney (@mark-carney.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T12:31:32.929Z

It's not small-dick energy.It's smallest dick energy.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T19:10:15.695Z

Of course, the thing about the Davos speech is that it was a bit of a Rorschach test, depending on one’s priors. Sure, Carney talked about sovereignty and territorial integrity, but he also made it clear that the existing system of international law was a mirage, so he was kind of saying that it didn’t matter? In either case, I don’t think we should expect anything other than “pragmatism” without much in the way of principle, because that is the tone Carney has been setting for a while now, which could eventually work to our detriment.

People keep saying that this goes against the Davis speech. It does not. Carney said the rules based international order was always hypocritical, is now dead, and we live in a time of rupture. I disagree with support but this is not against what he said. The sign is gone. GONE GONE.

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T14:54:02.726Z

In Davos, Carney argued that only countries w/ strong economies could afford “principled” foreign policies. Carney’s pro-US, pro-illegal war statement is that idea in action.The thing is, this view is both self-serving and wrong. Wrong because there is always a cost to standing up for principles.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T14:14:37.709Z

But if you always subordinate principles (i.e., non-economic interests like international law) to economic growth, you’ll never stand for anything. ESPECIALLY Canada, since the best we can hope for is only sending HALF of our exports to the US. They will ALWAYS have leverage over us.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2026-02-28T14:14:37.711Z

In reaction, Bob Rae wonders what happens after the military operation ends, which has long been the question for those who want to attack Iran. Anne Applebaum lays out the fact that Trump has no plans for what to do next with Iran, and has already dismantled programmes which might have helped, which is a huge danger of creating something worse. Justin Ling wonders why Carney chose the route he did of cheering on such a dangerous gambit.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-28T22:10:01.821Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Zelenskyy’s chief of staff says that Russia has accepted the proposal for post-war security guarantees (which…means not much).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre’s big foreign trip

Posted on by
Reply

As Pierre Poilievre heads to London and Berlin for his first actual foreign trips as opposition leader, his office released his itinerary, which includes attending a CANZUK reception in London after meeting with parliamentarians and business leaders, and then delivering a keynotes speech in Berlin, along with meeting with officials and business leaders and touring an LNG facility.

And there’s the rub. This is going to turn into another tedious exercise of Poilievre doing a little song and dance about “Look! Europe wants our oil and gas!” when really, European leaders, after much badgering and hectoring, actually said something like “Sure, we’d like it if it was available and the right price,” neither of which is going to happen. We’ve seen this before. Certain political show hosts in our country like to engage in this very same badgering and hectoring whenever they interview a visiting European leader in order to say “Look! There’s a business case! Trudeau was wrong!” But they ignored the caveats and the economics.

The reason why LNG to Europe is never going to happen include:

  1. There is no local supply of natural gas on the east coast, so most of the feed stock would be imported from the US, raising prices locally, and if you think a cross-country pipeline is feasible, that will also increase prices in the east coast;
  2. It would take years to build an export facility, and it would take years to convert the one existing import terminal (which serves not only the local market, but also feeds into the northeastern US market);
  3. Even if these facilities existed, there has been no interest by European buyers in signing a long-term contract, which is one of the reasons why proposals for east coast LNG terminals never got off the ground. Also remember that these facilities essentially need to operate for a good thirty or forty years to make their money’s worth, and Europe is already rapidly decarbonizing.

Of course, Poilievre will ignore all of that, and declare that Europe wants our LNG, and we’ll go through this whole exercise yet again. It’s so tiresome that nobody actually wants to listen to reality on this subject.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-27T23:56:01.183Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia says a temporary ceasefire has been reached around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in order to ensure repairs. Ukraine is setting up a joint venture with allies to produce more air defence ammunition.

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/2027352819905249375

Continue reading →

Roundup: Damage control over India’s foreign interference

Posted on by
Reply

Consider it an own-goal, as the government spent the day doing damage control over the statement by that unnamed senior official who declared that India was no longer engaged in foreign interference or transnational repression. Out of the gate first was Liberal backbench MP Sukh Dhaliwal, who condemned that official and questioned his suitability for the role.

This seems…unlikely, especially in light of reporting a few days ago that another Sikh activist had been warned of a credible threat to life. Either the government is naively believing India, or it is misleading Canadians with this statement. globalnews.ca/news/1170676…

— Jess Davis (@jessmarindavis.bsky.social) 2026-02-26T11:27:33.313Z

As the day progressed, more ministers needed to get involved. Gary Anandasangaree had to come out and say that no, they remain concerned about security issues, while Anita Anand went on TV to very carefully parse what that official said, and insist that they have an ongoing dialogue with the Indian government and that they are working toward dealing with these issues, and tried to very carefully walk the line of doing the whole “Everything’s fine!” line that Carney seems to be demanding as he departed for the trip, and trying to also let the Sikh community know that their concerns are being heard, but not really succeeding at that because their spokespeople were also on the political shows to talk about how they’re feeling like they’re being gaslit.

Honestly, this whole thing feels like another case of ineptitude at the highest levels of Carney’s government. He’s so quick to try and tout these trade deals and “strategic partnerships” that he both ignores real optics questions, and dismisses the concerns about things like, oh, human rights, or international obligations, or anything like that, and keeps bringing it back to his whole CEO shtick, which is frankly not a good look for a government. Things like rights and international law matters, and if Carney is going to keep sweeping this under the rug in order to get his hands on the dollars on offer, it shows those “Value(s)” he wrote a book about to be pretty hollow.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-26T22:27:01.610Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched 420 drones and 39 missiles in the early hours of Thursday morning, injuring at least 26 people. It also appears that Russia has employed nuclear-capable cruise missiles as part of their recent attacks.

Continue reading →

QP: Screaming about strychnine

Posted on by
3

The PM was off to Mumbai, and Pierre Poilievre was in Toronto for his big “foreign policy” speech (which wasn’t much new, really), which meant the b-team was in charge today. Melissa Lantsman led off with a return to the dogpile on Lina Diab, to which Steven MacKinnon called it shameful that the opposition was using this as a wedge issue. Lantsman tried again, and this time Gary Anandasangaree listed the reductions in immigration and asylum levels, and the increase in removal levels. Chris Warkentin took over, and decried “inflationary spending” as killing the hopes of youth. François-Philippe Champagne pronounced there was good news in that Canada had the highest level of foreign direct investment in eighteen years. Warkentin tried again with added bombast, and Champagne praised the government’s record on affordability measures that the Conservatives voted against. Dominique Vien took over to ask the same in French, and Champagne repeated his same points. Vien tried again, and Champange hoped that they would return to their ridings next week to listen to how these benefits help people. 

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and yet again returned to the pension software question, to which MacKinnon praised the modernisation project, and that 7.7 million Canadians are already being served by it. Normandin raised that the National Assembly in Quebec called for an inquiry (which seems to be well outside of their bailiwick), and Patty Hajdu got up to again praise the modernisation project, and that if anyone has an issue, and that they are confident as they transform the next to payment programmes. Sébastien Lemire tried the same again, and Hajdu again reiterated that the system needed to be modernised as the old system was fraught with problems. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stopping because we asked nicely?

Posted on by
Reply

Prime minister Mark Carney departs for India today on the first leg of his major trade trip, and as pretty much as he’s out the door, senior officials giving a background briefing to reporters says that they believe that India is no longer engaging in transnational repression, otherwise they wouldn’t be on the trip. That…defies credulity. And the logic of not going on the trip if they were engaged in the repression doesn’t hold given that Carney was just in China two weeks ago, and lo, they haven’t stopped their own efforts around interference or repression.

Foreign interference from India, including transnational repression, has been going on in Canada since the 1980s. It did not stop last week. You can agree that stabilization of relations is important with India is important, while not believing this BS. www.thestar.com/politics/fed…

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2026-02-25T23:42:11.723Z

“I really don’t think we’d be taking this trip if we thought these kinds of activities were continuing,” a senior government official said. lol ok so by that logic I guess that means China no longer interferes in our democracy either since the govt took a trip there

— Supriya Dwivedi (@supriya.bsky.social) 2026-02-26T00:35:08.800Z

We just had a whole-ass judicial inquiry that found that India was the number two country, following China, engaging in foreign interference and transnational repression in this country. It’s been happening since the 1980s, and we’re supposed to believe that they just folded up shop and went home because we asked nicely? Really? Just this week, more Sikh activists in Vancouver were warned by police that they and their families are being targeted. Are we supposed to believe that this is just a figment of their imaginations?

The worst part of this is that it’s just insulting to everyone’s intelligence. It’s transparently untrue, and it’s done to shut up the reporters who keep asking about the state of the relationship. There were so many better ways he could have answered this, including talking about how they have made progress with dialogue with Indian officials, or that they have police cooperation, or anything, but just saying “they stopped,” because apparently we asked nicely, is not going to cut it, and Carney is misjudging the public on this one yet again.

Ukraine Dispatch

There were overnight attacks on Kyiv and Kharkiv. Ukraine’s defence minister says they plan to have 4000 kilometres of road protected by anti-drone netting by the end of the year. It is estimated that some 1700 Africans are fighting for Russia, mostly having been tricked into doing so.

Continue reading →

QP: Dog-piling on Diab

Posted on by
Reply

The PM was in town but not present, in advance of his big upcoming trip, while Pierre Poilievre was also absent. Michelle Rempel Garner led off, and claimed that by the end of the year, there will be three million people in the country on expired work permits and demanded a plan. Lina Diab gave some boilerplate about how people can extend their permits and those with expired permits are expected to leave. Rempel Garner ginned up the outrage some more, and Dian listed how intakes are down, and that they have exceeded their francophone targets while the population decreased slightly. Rempel Garner cited a CBC story where Diab’s own caucus colleagues have no confidence in her, and demanded she be replaced. Diab listed measures that the government has taken to reform the immigration system. Rempel Garner pointed out that Diab can’t answer basic questions in committee and again demanded she be replaced. Diab switched to French to repeat her same lines about targets being met. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French, and he quoted statistics about “fake” asylum seekers and claimed that appropriate security checks aren’t being done, and Steven MacKinnon got up to praise the minister and read the same script about targets being met. Paul-Hus took swipes at Diab, and MacKinnon went on a tear about how the Conservatives have no immigration policy.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and yet again raised the pension software, and apparently Quebec’s National Assembly passed a motion to decry federal waste. (Huh?) MacKinnon got up to deliver the well-worn lines about the scale of the project and that it is within budget. Normandin tried again, and Patty Hajdu insisted that the Bloc are patently wrong, and that they are moving three major systems to the new software. Sébastien Lemire took over to ask the same again, and Hajdu assured him that they are working to resolve all outstanding cases.

Why exactly is the Quebec National Assembly weighing in on federal software transformation? Do they have nothing better to do? #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-25T19:34:35.135Z

Continue reading →

Roundup: Conflating failed with fraudulent

Posted on by
Reply

The Conservatives went ahead with their Supply Day motion of scapegoating asylum claimants for the strain on the healthcare system, and so many of their claims are based on falsehoods. The claim that a failed claimant is “bogus” of “fraudulent” is not true, and plenty of claimants rejected by the IRB win their appeal in Federal Court. The numbers of actually fraudulent claims are very small, and even rejected claimants may be rejected on technical grounds. Trying to conflate everyone as “bogus” or “fraudulent” is more of the MAGA mindset that they’re trying to tap into, because this is who the party has become. It’s too bad the government is too invested in their own attempts to scapegoat newcomers for problems that the premiers mostly created and refuse to fix, because they should be absolutely savaging the Conservatives on this, and they can’t—and won’t.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-24T22:22:02.270Z

Ukraine Anniversary

Yesterday was the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which was supposed to be a “three-day war.” There were a number of speeches and a moment of silence in the House of Commons to mark the occasion, so it didn’t go unnoticed. Prime minister Mark Carney announced that Canada will extend Operation Unifier to keep training Ukrainian troops for another three years, as well as donating another 400 armoured vehicles, and extending more sanctions. (Not announced were any resources or a competent federal policing agency to enforce those sanctions).

Four years have passed since Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine. Russia was supposed to win in three days. Instead, Ukraine reinvented modern warfare, built a drone industry, and can destroy a thousand Russian soldiers in a day. Ukraine can win.

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T09:58:52.954Z

Prime minister Carney's statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:30:17.057Z

Conservative statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:26:12.386Z

NDP statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:26:12.387Z

Ukraine Dispatch

European leaders were in Kyiv to show support on the anniversary of the start of the war. Here is a look at how the attacks on energy infrastructure is dragging down Ukraine’s economy, and here is a look at how drone warfare has changed the nature of the conflict over the past four years.

Continue reading →

QP: Punching down on the vulnerable

Posted on by
Reply

The PM was present today, as has become his usual Tuesday practice, as was Pierre Poilievre. He led off in French, and he declared that people are fed up with Liberal “waste,” and decried the new software for OAS, which has deprived 80,000 seniors of their cheques. Mark Carney took the opportunity to make a statement of solidarity with Ukraine, and as to the question, he noted that it started in 2017 and was broadened to other departments. Poilievre again railed about this software, claiming that $5 billion was “wasted.” Carney again stated that the “former” government started the process and broadened it to include more programmes, that they are all budgeted, and that the Auditor General already examined the programme. Poilievre switched to English to blame immigrants and asylum seekers for overburdening healthcare, and Carney responded by first saying that we provide care for people, before he returned to the Nigel Farage line of “taking control” of immigration and that they have reduced the numbers of immigration and asylum claims. Poilievre doubled down on scapegoating immigration, and Carney noted that he looks forward to his first anniversary of being in power, and again proclaimed taking “control” of the system. Poilievre was incredulous at this, declared Carney to be “just another Liberal,” and demanded support for their Supply Day motion. Carney stood up and said “Eleven years? I just got here,” and after the resulting uproar, and again patted himself on the back for reducing newcomer intake and put in plugs for Bills C-2 and C-12. Poilievre shot back that Carney was some kind of temporary foreign worker before listing members of the front bench from the Trudeau Cabinet, and then decried the fictional “sentencing discounts” for foreign criminals, and Carney responded that people who commit crimes should do their time.

Matt Jeneroux and Chris D’Entremont are both sitting on the front bench for #QP to fill the camera shot.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T19:18:10.229Z

Michael Ma is also on the front row, a couple of seats down. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T19:19:01.879Z

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he again turned to the pension software system, declaring it the worst cost overrun in history. Carney pointed out that he as governor of the Bank of England when the project got started and that all funding was budgeted for. Blanchet mocked the response, and denounced the “mistreatment” of seniors who aren’t getting their cheques. Carney responded by listing the programmes they have strengthened in Quebec. Blanchet again declared this to be the biggest scandal in history, and demanded an independent inquiry. Carney reminded him that the Auditor General has already reviewed the project and that it was fully budgeted.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Not bothering to amend an abusive bill

Posted on by
Reply

It looks like the Senate’s national security committee has decided not to amend Bill C-12 (which is a border bill that was split out of Bill C-2), and in particular left in the sections that give the immigration minister new arbitrary powers when it comes to asylum claims and immigration files that she will soon be able to cancel any application she likes. The Senate’s social affairs committee had recommended removing this section from the bill because these powers can be exercised with no procedural safeguards, but apparently, they don’t care.

Among other complains in this legislation are the timelines for when people can make a refugee claim since they’ve been in the country, which can be fraught for some claimants who have been traumatized or who are afraid that disclosing certain reasons why they are claiming (particularly in instances of domestic violence or persecution for being LGBTQ+) could mean more time, but attempts to change that timeline were shot down. The changes also have the likelihood of creating a two-tier system that won’t guarantee in-person hearings for vulnerable claimants, but apparently that doesn’t matter. And when it comes to cancelling immigration applications or even permanent residency cards because of “public interest,” which the minister can simply declare arbitrarily, well, they decided not to narrow those powers either.

There is some spectacularly bad and frankly abusive legislation that this government is pushing forward, and the Senate should be doing its job and pushing back, especially in cases like this, where the government is trying to give itself arbitrary powers with no guardrails. This is a bad thing, but apparently, we have a bunch of timid senators who don’t want to rock the boat too much. Wasn’t that why everyone was so busy patting themselves on the back for the “independent” Senate, where they weren’t being whipped (not that the whip has been anything but illusory in the Senate), so that they could actually push back against the government? If this is “independence” or “pushing back” against bad legislation, well, I’d hate to see what a pliant Senate looks like.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-23T14:08:03.542Z

Ukraine Dispatch

There was an explosion in Mykolaiv, similar to the bombing in Lviv. Ukrainian forces have reclaimed eight settlements in a counter-offensive in the Dnipropetrovsk region.

Here is a compilation of stats on the toll that four years of war has had on Ukraine, while here is a look at how costly this has been in Russian lives. AP has a photo essay featuring several people affected by the war, and a gallery of some of the images over the past four years.

Continue reading →

QP: Going MAGA on asylum claimants with little pushback

Posted on by
Reply

The PM was in town but not at QP today, while Pierre Poilievre was also absent. That left it up to Michelle Rempel Garner led off, bringing up their Supply Day motion on stripping health benefits from asylum claimants, claiming that the government enabled “hundreds of thousands of bogus refugee claims,” and that this was costing billions of tax dollars. Lina Diab insisted that they have already made changes to asylum claimant benefits, and that they still respect their obligations. Rempel Garner insisted that wasn’t enough, and again demanded their “common sense” motion. Dian said that they have already introduced co-pay and thanked the Conservatives for their support on Bill C-12. Dan Mazier took over and read another script on the so-called “deluxe benefits,” and cited a PBO report on the cost of these claims. Diab said that the in the report don’t take into account for changes that were already made and were coming in C-12. Mazier tried again, and Diab reminded him that the Supreme Court ruled that the removal of benefits by the Conservatives in 2014 was unconstitutional. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to make the same demand, and Diab responded with more of her bafflegab in French. Paul-Hus tried again, again with the PBO numbers, and Diab repeated that the projections don’t take changes already made into account. 

Christine Normandin led off for the Bloc, and for the fourth sitting week in a row, asked about the problems with the pension system, and Stephanie McLean reminded them that they know about the figures because they were on the committee that approved them, and that the figures are contingency funds, not cost overruns. Normandin tried again, and Patty Hajdu read her standard response about the transformation of the system. Sébastien Lemire tried again, and McLean repeated her same response about their not being cost overruns.

Continue reading →