Monthly Archives: April 2023

Roundup: The scope of the transition

Posted on by

As Alberta heads into an election, one can be certain that Danielle Smith is going to wield the threat of the supposed “just transition” as a cudgel to attack Justin Trudeau and Rachel Notley. Nevertheless, there are issues around the future of work in the province as the oil and gas extraction industry changes—a process that began years ago, and is currently far more automated than it used to be.

As Andrew Leach points out, the scale of the issue is something that the province will need to grapple with.

Ukraine Dispatch:

The death toll from the overnight strike in Uman has risen to 23, with another two deaths from a separate strike in Dnipro. Ukrainian leadership say that they are “to a high percentage ready” to launch their spring counter-offensive, and that modern weapons will serve as an “iron first.” Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy hosted the presidents of Slovakia and the Czech Republic, while seven foreign ministers met with Ukraine’s foreign minister in Odessa, all of whom were expressing support for Ukraine as Ukraine pushes for more modern aircraft.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1651966751268278272

Continue reading →

Roundup: Andrew Scheer, media critic

Posted on by

In the wake of Bill C-11 receiving royal assent, Conservatives have been doing a full court press on social media to denounce this supposed “censorship” bill (which is nothing of the sort—it obligates web giants and streaming services to report Canadian revenues and pay into media creation funds based on a percentage of those revenues). And because he’s a wannabe fourteen-year-old shitposting edgelord, Andrew Scheer is taking shots at the media about the reporting on this.

What you might notice is that Scheer is calling The Canadian Press newswire “CBC’s news service” because CBC is one of CP’s clients and the content they buy from the wire funds its operations. This, of course, taints CP in the Conservatives’ estimation, and Pierre Poilievre bullied a CP reporter about this at a press event a couple of weeks ago, and tried to insinuate that this means that they somehow fit stories to the government narrative in order to get that CBC money. It’s a complete fabrication, but it’s intended to be—this is all about flooding the field with bullshit.

Scheer goes on to complain about how the story is covered—because he’s a media critic, don’t you know. The story doesn’t quote a Conservative source, but it cites their (misleading) position that the bill is “censorship” (again, this is a lie), but because it’s CP, it rather obsequiously both-sides everything. It doesn’t actually call out the Conservative position as the bullshit that it is, but because it’s not complete stenography of the Conservative line, it must be “bought media” and advances this farcical notion that the government is “shutting down dissent.” Hardly.

But truth doesn’t matter to Scheer. He’s been trying to delegitimise mainstream media for years now (recall that he called True North (aka Rebel Lite™) and Post Millennial “credible” sources, which should tell you everything you need to know about Scheer’s media literacy skills and judgment). Even though the Conservatives have learned how to manipulate mainstream outlets with their persistent both-sidesing, and knowing that it lets them get away with lying, it’s not enough, because occasionally, that both-sidesing can showcase how much the Conservative narrative is full of falsehoods, and they couldn’t possibly have that. Best to have their own stenographers and ensure that only their narratives get out.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians made an overnight attack against civilian targets in a variety of cities, leaving at least five dead. Russian forces are also trying to cut off supply lines to Ukrainian forces in Bakhmut, but the Ukrainian forces have managed to resist these attacks, and take back some other sections of the city that Russians have been occupying. Ahead of the spring counteroffensive, some 98 percent of promised NATO aid has arrived in Ukraine, amounting to over 1550 armoured vehicles, 230 tanks, and “vast amounts” of ammunition. Here’s a look at mental health supports available for Ukrainian soldiers.

https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1651785146142453765

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1651456287408832512

Continue reading →

QP: Stop saying New York

Posted on by

While the prime minster was off to conferences in New York, his deputy and most other leaders were similarly elsewhere. Pierre Poilievre, however, was present, and he led off in French, worrying about the cost of bureaucracy rising while the strike happening, but then accused the prime minister of going “on vacation” to New York with “fancy people,” and demanded the prime minister go back to work. Mona Fortier said that they were working hard at the negotiation table to get a fair and reasonable deal. Poilievre repeated the question and false assertion with added misleading bluster in English, and Fortier repeated her same response. Poilievre scoffed at Fortier’s efforts before demanding that the prime minister return to Ottawa to “do his job,” to which Randy Boissonnault called this “bluff and bluster” before praising the economic recovery and lifting people out of poverty. Poilievre scoffed once again at this, using his tired line that the government was telling people they’ve never had it so good, before pivoting to the Glendore bid for Teck Resources, and demanded the government block it. Jonathan Wilkinson said that there was no formal bid, and praised Teck as being headquartered in BC. Poilievre accused the government of shipping off jobs, before he demanded the government remove “gatekeepers” for projects like LNG and more hydro dams in Quebec, to which Wilkinson suggested that Poilievre should do his homework. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and raised testimony from senior Liberal party official Jeremy Broadhurst at committee on foreign funding in the election and not having time to replace Han Dong as a candidate, and accused the prime minister of misleading the House. Dominic LeBlanc suggested they wait for David Johnston to weigh in. Therrien insisted that the prime minster’s version couldn’t be true, but LeBlanc repeated his response.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and he accused the prime minister of constantly being missing in action—got warned by the Deputy Speaker about it—and he restated his question to accuse the PM of doing nothing for two years and demanded he resolve the strike. Fortier insisted that they were at the table looking for creative solutions but would not give into unaffordable demands. Leah Gazan gave a somewhat confused question about the prime minister giving money to women’s institutions internationally but abandoning them at home, while phrasing this with the strike as well, and then accused him of fake feminism. Marci Ien pointed out that they gave emergency funds for shelters during the pandemic, and that she is currently negotiating with provinces on the plan to end gender-based violence.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The choices around Basic Income

Posted on by

Because I saw some news stories floating around this week yet again around Basic Income and the desire for the federal government to implement it, I wanted to point out that economist Lindsay Tedds has co-authored a book which was released yesterday on how to move beyond that discussion into better alternatives, drawing on her experience from the BC Basic Income panel that she was a part of.

To that end, here is Kevin Milligan providing some back-up on why this conversation involves choices that nobody likes to ever talk about. Funny that.

And yes, most Basic Income models keep gutting the supports for those who need them the most, and that is a problem.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1651260056866811904

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces pounded Bakhmut yet again, trying to destroy buildings so that the Ukrainians can’t use them as fortifications. Elsewhere, Ukraine was able to retrieve 44 POWs from Russian company, two of whom were civilians. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had an hour-long call with Chinese president Xi Jinping, which included talk of what role China could play in the peace process with Russia.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1651129503056379905

Continue reading →

QP: One aborted sing-along later…

Posted on by

The PM and all of the other leaders were present, which can sometimes set the stage for a good show, and it actually delivered—more or less—today. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, starting off with a recap of the allegations about the donations to the Trudeau Foundation from Chinese sources, and demanded that the prime minister allow his brother to appear at committee to answer about the donation. Trudeau stated that he hasn’t had any contact with the Foundation for a decade, and committees decide who they will call before them. Poilievre said that Trudeau was taking people for fools if he thinks people don’t believe he has nothing to do with the Foundation, and repeated his demand for the committee motion. Trudeau responded that he hasn’t had any contact with the Foundation, and the Conservatives were focusing on him while he delivers for Canadians. Poilievre pivoted to the strike and the increasing cost of bureaucracy while Canadians are getting less service, and wondered if taxpayers need to go on strike. Trudeau replied that they respect unions and that they are at the bargaining table. Poilievre repeated the question in English, and this time, Trudeau struck back harder with the Conservatives’ cuts to services and attacks on unions, while they respect unions. Poilievre then tried to start a singalong for “New York, New York,” in reference to Trudeau heading there after QP, before the Speaker stopped him, and when he was allowed to resume, wondered if Trudeau would pay for his own hotel room on the trip. Trudeau tried to pivot this into an answer about how his government was attracting investment from companies like Volkswagen. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, started with a plea for the Speaker to allow any singing, before he tried to once again conflate PMO and PCO with that meeting between five deputy ministers and the Foundation. Trudeau restated that he and his staff did not participate in that meeting, then got in a dig that maybe it was different under the Conservatives when they tried to politicise the civil service. Blanchet tried to spin this as the prime minster is deliberately being ignorant, but Trudeau said this was part of baseless attacks on people like David Johnston, which are unworthy of this place.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and in French, said the government was showing an ugly face in not capitulating to the civil service union. Trudeau chided the NDP for not understanding how bargaining works, and said a new offer was on the table. Singh switched to English to demand the prime minister not jet off to New York and settle the strike first, but Trudeau repeated his jibe at the NDP not understanding bargaining.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The campaign leaders testify

Posted on by

Yesterday was the big day when top campaign officials from the Liberals and Conservatives appeared at the Procedure and House Affairs committee to talk about foreign interference allegations in the previous two elections, and we learned a couple of things. One of which is that Fred DeLorey, the Conservative campaign director, is eminently reasonable and acknowledges they don’t know if there was any actual interference in those ridings they lost, or if it was the result of other factors, like their hard-line rhetoric on China, or gun-control measures (as the Liberal campaign insists). Another thing we learned is that the reporting on the CSIS “warnings” about MP Han Dong were not described accurately, and that they didn’t insist the party drop him as a candidate—which never did make sense if you listened to the actual intelligence experts who said at the time that that didn’t sound right.

There was also talk about how it takes an incredibly high threshold for a party to be able to drop a candidate, so if intelligence agencies had concerns, they would need to come up with something pretty tangible for the parties to exercise that kind of power (and don’t forget that their spending caps are determined by how many candidates they’re running, so if they need to drop one after the cut-off point to replace a name on the ballot, that creates even more headaches). There was also talk about how there needs to be more ongoing dialogue between national security agencies and parties, particularly between election cycles, because these agencies didn’t seem to understand how parties operated, which makes it hard for them to be making determinations about how any interference might be happening (and again, considering that the reported leaks had a bunch of details that didn’t make any sense, this could be the reason why).

Suffice to say, these were the people who should have been testifying the whole time rather than the dog and pony show we had with Katie Telford, which was just a waste of time and resources.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile struck a museum in Kupiansk, in the Kharkiv region, killing one civilian and wounding ten others. As well, a woman died from shelling in nearby Dvorichna, and two others in the eastern Donetsk region. Elsewhere, Ukrainian forces staged raids on the east side of the Dnipro river in order to degrade Russian capacity, particularly in their shelling of Kherson, in a sign that the counter-offensive is near. Ukraine is planning on a “complete transformation” of six war-torn cities that were badly damaged in the invasion, to be rebuilt under an experimental programme according to “new principles.”

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1650769182286331905

Continue reading →

QP: Rocketing up the repetitive talking points

Posted on by

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 →

Roundup: No authority to examine

Posted on by

It was not unexpected, but the Auditor General did confirm yesterday that she wasn’t going to be looking into the Trudeau Foundation’s private donations because it’s not within her wheelhouse. Which is what I’ve been saying for over a week now—the Foundation isn’t a Crown corporation, its only reporting relationship to the Industry Minister is around the status of the initial endowment, and the Conservatives put them under the Access to Information and Privacy regime in 2007 because they put all kinds of organisation with a tangential relationship to government under the regime during their performative toughness. It doesn’t fall under the Financial Administration Act, so there is no basis for the AG to examine their books.

This news of course has the Bloc somewhat apoplectic, and they insist that if she doesn’t have the authority to look into their books, then Parliament should give her that authority. Which is, frankly, boneheaded. She already has more than enough work to do. The very last thing we need to do is turn her into some kind of roving commission of inquiry for MPs to sic her upon anyone who turns their ire (through a motion in the House of Commons that she would “consider”), especially because she’s already unaccountable for her parliamentary audits. Extending those into past Parliament or Crown corporations would be a disaster.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives have bene trying to weaponise the Public Accounts Committee into looking into the Foundation, which again, is beyond their ambit. It’s especially beyond their ambit because the Auditor General hasn’t produced a report on them, and she won’t—because she has no authority to—so that particular committee has no authority to look into it. And yet, they voted on doing just so, but with the caveat of not calling any elected officials or members of the Trudeau family to testify. I can’t believe that the committee clerk didn’t warn the Chair this is out of bounds, but this is an opposition-chaired committee—in this case, Conservative John Williamson—and it sounds like he opted to ignore that warning and proceed anyway, which is incredibly poor form, especially since this whole exercise is about little more than letting Garnett Genuis perform for the cameras. And once again, we prove that ours is not a serious Parliament.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Estonia’s prime minister met with president Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the northwestern city of Zhytomyr, and said that she supports Ukraine’s accession to NATO “as soon as conditions allow” (which means the war has to be over and Russian forces no longer occupying territory).

Continue reading →

QP: Deliberately conflating PCO with PMO

Posted on by

The prime minister was busy entertaining the German president, while his deputy was in southwestern Ontario talking about electric busses. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he repeated his line from last week about the “special kind of incompetence” for increasing the size of the civil service while still allowing a strike to happen, and lamented especially the soldiers suffering from heating plant shutdowns and new delays for passports. Mona Fortier praised the work of civil servants and stated the commitment to reach a negotiated solution, but that PSAC’s demands are unaffordable. Poilievre repeated the same in English, and Fortier gave the same response, before Poilievre changed topics to the news story about Trudeau foundation members meeting at PCO. Mark Holland noted that this was a meeting between public servants in a government building and not PMO, and this was just an attempt at being partisan. Poilievre tried to insist that there was a whole strange series of coincidence  that the prime minister didn’t know about it, and insisting this wasn’t credible. Holland started off on a response about Poilievre plugging cryptocurrency, but after heckles and the Speaker calming things down, Holland insisted that Poilievre was delivering a confusing mess that was full of things that weren’t true. Poilievre tried again in French, and Holland reiterated there has been no link between the prime minster and the Foundation for a decade.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he too tried to link the prime minister to that 2016 meeting between the Foundation and five deputy ministers, and Holland repeated that the prime minister was not involved and the implication is ridiculous. Therrien insisted that the Foundation was giving preferential access to the prime minister (never mind that senior officials are not the PM), and demanded a public inquiry. Holland repeated yet again that the prime minster has not had any ties to the Foundation for a decade.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he thundered about the civil service strike and demanded the government capitulate to the union. Fortier read that of the 570 demands from the union, only a few are remaining. Rachel Blaney repeated the same in English, and Fortier repeated her same response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Few details on the Canadian coronation

Posted on by

As the coronation fast approaches, we’re still waiting for details in Canada about what we’re doing here, or what the events happening in Ottawa will be, or who is part of the delegation going to London for the event itself. The level of secrecy is a bit weird, but I have my suspicions that this is trying to be downplayed from the top, meaning PMO.

As for King Charles III himself, the early signs are that he’s looking to be a bit more involved and less removed than his mother tended to be, in part because that was the generation she came from. And what does that mean for Canada? Well, that’s dependent entirely upon the prime minister, because the King can only act on the advice of the PM. And this PM, well, doesn’t like it when the spotlight is away from him. He likes the “ceremonial” aspects of the job, and a lot of that stuff is what the Crown and the Governor General does. So while we’ve just had some incredibly important events in our country as a constitutional monarchy—the loss of the Queen who had been our sovereign for seventy years, and now the installation of the new King—it’s being downplayed in ways that are not healthy for us as a country, but our civic literacy about this is at terrible lows, and there is an organised campaign of misinformation about the role and nature of the Crown in this country, and Trudeau could do something about that, but he won’t, and it erodes the nature of our democracy even more.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian Forces are yet again claiming to have achieved more of a foothold in Bakhmut, while Ukrainian forces continue to insist they’re holding the line. There are also a bunch of denials as to whether or not the Ukrainians have established a foothold on the eastern bank of the Dnipro river in the south of the country. Russian forces are also claiming to have repelled a drone attack against their Black Sea fleet in the Crimean port of Sevastopol.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1650111231196536832

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1650012022371753984

Continue reading →