Monthly Archives: October 2024

QP: The worst Halloween-themed response imaginable

Posted on by

Neither the PM nor his deputy were present today, which was probably just as well considering what an absolute pathetic mess yesterday’s QP turned out to be. Most of the other leaders were also absent, but Pierre Poilievre was present and started off in French, and he selectively quoted the GDP figures released this morning, and claimed this was the government “destroying” the economy. Jean-Yves Duclos noted that inflation, interest rates and unemployment are all down, but it being Halloween, children should be afraid that Poilievre refuses to get his security clearance. Poilievre countered that diminishing paycheques are what is scary, took credit for all housing starts when he was “minister,” and demanded the government accept his GST proposal. Duclos noted that children could count to six, which were the number of affordable housing units he built as “minister” (not really true), and repeated the security clearance point. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his selective economic doom and demanded an election, to which Randy Boissonnault recited the good economic news about inflation. Poilievre gave some specious comparisons to American economic data, and this time Boissonnault recited the security clearance talking points. Poilievre continued to make facile and false claims about the economy, and demanded the government cut taxes. Boissonnault recited a bunch of non sequitur talking points about foreign direct investment in return.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc, and demanded the government enrich OAS for all seniors, to which Marc Miller noted that the Bloc has consistently all measures the government has put forward to help seniors, including dental care. DeBellefeuille took a swipe at Duclos before repeating the demand, and this time Duclos said that they are simply looking for problems before noting that they have reduced seniors’ poverty since they came to office, and offered a warning about cozying up to Conservatives.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP to worry about software used by landlords to raise rents, and demanded an inquiry be launched. François-Philippe Champagne said he would ask the Competition Bureau do just that with the new powers they have been given. Bonita Zarrillo demanded the same in English, and Champagne repeated that they are going to ask the Bureau to do so.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The PBO’s new NATO numbers

Posted on by

The PBO is at it again, and he released a report yesterday on his particular calculations about how Canada could get to our stated NATO goals of 2 percent of GDP by 2032-33, and that we would need to double defence spending to get there, and what that looks like if the government remains committed to its deficit and debt-to-GDP ratio targets. Fair enough, but there are a number of capital commitments in the works that include new submarines, and one has a pretty good bet that these costs will only increase as time goes by, for what it’s worth.

While this is all well and good, there was some particular language in the report that should raise some eyebrows, because Yves Giroux is talking about how other economic forecasts are “erroneous” and he is insisting therefore that his aren’t, which is…a choice. In his previous report on defence spending, Giroux went on a whole tangent about how the OECD figures used as the baseline weren’t correct and his numbers were, but NATO uses those OECD figures for their purposes, not the PBO’s. For the sake of an apples-to-apples comparison, you would think that he would use the same denominator as NATO does, but of course not. Giroux has a particular sense of hubris around his figures, and we all know what happened when he got them wrong with his first report on the carbon levy and then he tried to prevaricate and rationalize them away, and insisted there wouldn’t be any real changes when lo, there were some pretty significant ones.

While we’re on the topic, the 2 percent figure remains a bad one because the denominator—Canada’s GDP is much larger than many NATO members’, making that figure incredibly hard to reach, particularly as the economy grows, and the fact that any country could exceed that target if their economy crashed. Not saying we don’t need to spend more, because we do (and I would not expect the Conservatives to meet the target either as they pledge to cut significantly should they form government next), but we also need to keep some perspective.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces shot down 33 out of 62 drones plus one missile overnight, which killed at least four in various regions of the country, while Russia claims they downed 25 Ukrainian drones, as North Korea’s foreign minister travelled to Moscow. Last evening, a guided bombs struck a high rise in Kharkiv, killing a child. Russians claim to have taken the village of Kruhliakivka in the Kharkiv region.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1851612628021318115

Continue reading →

QP: Call an election/Get your security clearance ad nauseam

Posted on by

Wednesday, and what sounds like a less exciting caucus meeting for the Liberals, in spite of the talk going around. The PM was present and ready to take all of the questions today, while his deputy was absent. Not all of the other leaders were present, unusually, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, recited his talking points about the supposed “promise” in Canada that was “broken,” and wanted the government to adopt his plan to cut the GST on new homes under $1million. Justin Trudeau noted that the problem with any of Poilievre’s proposals is that they come with cuts, and in this case, it would cut $9 billion in transfers to Quebec to build affordable housing. Poilievre insisted that the government only builds bureaucracy and not homes, and again wanted them to adopt his GST cut. Trudeau listed investments the government is making, while Poilievre only offers cuts. Poilievre switched to English to give a paean to a very white, middle-class “Canadian promise,” which he claims the government broke and demanded they adopt his GST cut plan. Trudeau gave a longer soliloquy about the Conservatives only offering cuts and not help for people. Poilievre insisted that the current plans only build bureaucracy and that his plan was “common sense.” Trudeau noted that one of the fundamental responsibilities of any prime minister is to keep Canadians safe, but since Poilievre refuses a security briefing to keep his own caucus safe, he instructed security services to find a way to offer himself a briefing. Poilievre accused this of being a “tin-pot conspiracy,” before returning to the insistence that his plan was just common sense. Trudeau again repeated that Poilievre only offers cuts, and that he asked security services to figure out a briefing. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and accused the government of abandoning seniors by turning down the Bloc’s OAS bill. Trudeau listed ways in which they are helping seniors, which the Bloc opposed. Therrien took some swipes at the NDP before repeating his demand, and Trudeau linked the Bloc to the Conservatives in voting against measures to help seniors.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised Alberta turning over the administration of some hospitals to Covenant who refuses to provide abortions, and wanted Trudeau to do something. Trudeau noted that they have clawed back transfers to provinces who don’t provide services, and raised their motion to penalise pregnancy support charities that don’t offer the full suite of supports or options. Singh flubbed his attempt at a clip of “It’s her body her choice, not her body Conservative Party’s choice,” before switching to French to complain about housing transfers. Trudeau focused on the abortion aspect, and failed about the anti-choice MPs in the Conservative ranks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Toxifying a committee

Posted on by

The ongoing denigration of this Parliament continues, as the toxic swamp that committees have devolved into has claimed another victim. Liberal MP Anita Vandenbeld, who has a resumé full of doing work with women and civil society engagement in other countries, removed herself from the Status of Women committee after relentless harassment from Conservative members of the committee, in particular Michelle Ferreri, plus the actions of the Chair, Shelby Kramp-Neuman, in facilitating it, all of it stemming from the set-up that the Conservatives engineered over that so-called “emergency meeting” in the summer where the Chair abused her authority to summon witnesses with no agreement for a study that had not been agreed to, which was being used to try and embarrass the government.

The Status of Women committee used to be one of the most functional and non-partisan committees in the House of Commons, but Poilievre and the Conservatives couldn’t have that. They insisted on replacing the previous committee chair for Kramp-Neuman, who has been doing their bidding, and have made it toxic and dysfunctional, like everything else in this current parliament, because that is part of their overall plan. They need to break everything in order to blame the government, justify an election and to tell people who don’t follow politics and don’t understand what’s going on here that they need to come to power so that they can fix things, when really, the plan is that once they are in power, they will start dismantling the guardrails of the state. None of this is subtle, or novel, and it’s been done in plenty of other countries where their democracies have been dismantled by far-right parties, and it’s happening here while our media stands idly by because both-sides and “We don’t care about process stories,” while the Elder Pundits keep tut-tutting and insisting that it won’t be that bad. We’re getting into some seriously dangerous territory, and nobody wants to sound the alarm.

Big #cdnpoli energy.We are headed in a very bad direction.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-29T14:16:59.724Z

Speaking of committees, the public safety committee heard from top national security officials, who were there to talk about the foreign interference including violence and homicide commissioned by the Indian government, and they made some pretty important revelations, but MPs didn’t really want to hear it, because once again, they were too busy grinding partisan axes. The Conservatives only asked about the embargoed briefing to the Washington Post, which has been falsely termed a “leak,” when it was confirmed that they were contacted by writers from the Post to confirm certain details from their reporting, which they agreed to under the embargo, in part because it was seen as a credible newspaper that could counter the coming disinformation from Indian sources (and we know that certain newspapers in Canada had swallowed Indian disinformation whole on previous occasions). And the Liberals? They were too busy gathering clips of these officials explaining why Pierre Poilievre should get his security clearance. Honest to Zeus, this shouldn’t be this difficult, especially for such a sensitive topic, but nope. MPs have once again beclowned themselves.

Ukraine Dispatch

At least nine people were injured and several apartments set on fire by a drone attack on Kyiv. Russians claim they have seized control of Selydove and are moving to encircle the town of Kurakhove in the east. Also facing imminent Russian threat is Pokrovsk, where the coal mines that fuel the steel mills are still operating as Russians close in.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1851276298242466109

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre vs Fraser on GST cuts

Posted on by

Both the PM and his deputy were present today, and as a result, so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he claimed the PM had “copied and pasting” his idea of cutting the GST on rentals, and then patted himself on the back and quoted Mike Moffatt in praising his current plan to cut GST on new houses under $1 million, and wanted the government to adopt it. Justin Trudeau recited the false talking point that Poilievre had only built six affordable units when he was “minister” before saying they wouldn’t sign onto a programme of cuts. Poilievre insisted his plan would build by cutting bureaucracy, and Trudeau pointed out that cutting the Accelerator Fund would mean cutting investment in social housing in Quebec. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and Trudeau noted that the fine print of Poilievre’s plan is to cut affordable housing programmes. Poilievre then recited some particular misleading talking points another the two housing programmes he plans to cut, and Trudeau gave a half-hearted defence of those programmes, getting back to his “fine print” talking points. Poilievre repeated his policy pledge in order to get a clean clip, and Trudeau returned to his same “check the fine print” talking point.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1851331074929918416

Yves-François Blanchet led for the NDP, and in his most ominous tone, brought up that the government didn’t pass their two bills, and tried to sound as though those bills were the most common sense plan for Quebeckers. Trudeau said that they have supported Supply Management and they hoped the Senate would pass it, before listing measures they have taken to help seniors. Blanchet then threw some shade at the Conservatives for their privilege filibuster which prevented any confidence motions that could bring down the government, and Trudeau noted that they could all see who was in the Chamber to play petty politics versus those there to help Canadians.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he complained about Rogers rising fees and said that the Conservatives don’t care because their leader gets “big cheques” from Edward Rogers, before some disruption, before demanding the government force Rogers to lower fees or ban them from federal contracts. Trudeau gave some blame talking points about hold the telcos to account. Singh switched to French to raise the recent documentary that cited Alain Rayes’ comments on the anti-abortionists in the Conservatives before demanding the federal government increase access (which is provincial jurisdiction). Trudeau threw a verbal grenade across the aisle about Quebec Conservatives who are not saying anything about the anti-abortionists in their caucus.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The same government, not a new one

Posted on by

The final results of the BC election started rolling in as the absentee ballots were counted, and lo, it looks like the NDP managed to flip one seat in the final tally, making it a 47-44-2 tally NDP/Conservative/Greens. And while that’s all well and good, the way in which major media outlets described this was a gods damned tragedy, and I was about to lose my mind.

No, the NDP are not going to “form government,” because they are already the government. Only the legislature changes. No, the Lieutenant-Governor didn’t ask Eby to form government, her statement explicitly said “David Evy advised me that he is prepared to continue as premier.” Because she doesn’t sit around waiting to make a decision—she acts on advice, and he never resigned, so he is not forming anything. He will be shuffling his Cabinet, but it’s the same government that carries over to another legislature. That’s it, and it’s a really big problem when neither the national wire service of the national public broadcaster couldn’t actually read what she wrote, and instead wrote their copy based on a falsehood and changed her words to suit their wrong meaning.

Additionally, because I am going to get pedantic here, there is also no such thing as a “majority government” or a “minority government.” Government—meaning Cabinet—is government. What changes is whether they control a majority or minority of the legislature. The legislature is not government. What matters is whether the same government is able to maintain the confidence of the chamber, which is much easier to do when you have a majority of the seats. The fact that Eby has managed to secure a razor-thin majority of those seats means that he has essentially ensured that he can maintain that confidence (though the Speaker issue could remain tricky). But my gods, could our media outlets have a modicum of civic literacy? It’s not only embarrassing that they don’t, but it’s outright dangerous for democracy going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian air attacks killed four in Kyiv and four in Kharkiv, where they also shattered a historic building and celebrated landmark. Critical infrastructure was also damaged in two regions in the north of Ukraine, leading to more power outages.

Continue reading →

QP: Proud of their new housing policy

Posted on by

The PM was ostensibly in town but not present for Question Period, though his deputy was in his stead. All of the other leaders were absent, including Pierre Poilievre, even though he had just launched another policy position on housing. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he raised the plan from said press conference on cutting GST on new house under $1 million, and asked the government to adopt it. Sean Fraser said that it was great that they took inspiration from the policy to remove the GST on purpose-built rentals, but the Conservative plan to pay for this policy, buy cutting other programmes including to existing low-income housing, was irresponsible. Scheer insisted that the current plan was only paying for bureaucracy and photo ops, and demanded again the policy be adopted. Fraser scoffed that their plan was to do less for housing and spend money on a snitch-line for people who don’t like their neighbours’ housing plans. Scheer repeated his “bureaucracy and photo ops” talking points, and claimed housing starts were down. Fraser retorted that housing starts were in fact up, and tens of thousands over when the Conservatives were last in charge, before reiterating that the Conservative plan is to cut housing supports. Luc Berthold took over in French to demand the government match their pledge to cut GST, and this time, Chrystia Freeland responded that at Poilievre’s rare press conference, he accidentally told the truth and said that they would cut two programmes to pay for this, and listed what those might be. Berthold tried again, decrying how long it took people to afford a home, and this time, Soraya Martinez Ferrada gave her own version of the Conservatives will only cut, and that the programmes the would cut included social housing in Quebec.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and worried about an influx of migrants from the U.S. if Trump wins and asked if the government had a plan. Marc Miller repsonded with a single “oui.” Therrien gave another soliloquy that asked the very same thing. Miller repeated that they do have a plan, and that they have always managed the border with the U.S.

Jenny Kwan rose for the NDP, demanded federal action on abortion access, as though the federal government controlled it. Mark Holland got up and gave a rant about the conservatives and that no man should control a woman’s reproductive freedom. Rachel Blaney gave another round of the same, and Patty Hajdu gave her own rant about not standing for attacks on reproductive rights.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pushing back against PMO

Posted on by

There was an op-ed in the Star over the weekend from former Cabinet minister Lloyd Axworthy, in which he lamented the increasing centralization of power under the PMO, and that under Trudeau, ministers have become “infantilised,” particularly after seeing testimony at the Foreign Interference inquiry where chiefs of staff were keeping ministers in the dark about certain files. It’s a valid complaint, but not one unique to the Trudeau PMO, as Canadian academics have been making it since the previous Trudeau government, and was particularly egregious in the Harper government where everything flowed through the PMO—most especially message control—and ministers were rarely without approved talking points on their files.

I will also note that the current Trudeau did make an attempt to return to a system of “government by Cabinet,” and while certain ministers were free and capable to run their files, there was not an equitable distribution of talent in Cabinet as much as there was of gender, ethnicity and geography, so PMO did need to step in for some ministers. But there is also an inescapable reality that governing has also become more difficult than in the days of the first Trudeau government, and power is distributed much more horizontally because most issues require the cooperation of several ministries, and that requires a lot more central coordination from PMO or PCO. This being said, the real sin of the current government is that everything requires the sign-off from his chief of staff, which creates bottlenecks in decision-making, and that has been a continual problem.

In response to the Axworthy op-ed were a couple of tweets from Catherine McKenna about her experience—that PMO would say something, and she would push back if it didn’t come from Trudeau directly. It shows that a minister in charge of their file and who has the spine enough to stand their ground can do so, but not every minister is capable, and it’s something we need more ministers to learn how to do, because that’s how they will actually manage to own their own files.

Ukraine Dispatch

Two civilians were killed in a Russian attack on the southern Kherson region, while Russians have been making air attacks against Kharkiv and Kyiv. Ukraine continue to target ethanol plants in Russia with drones. A high-level South Korean delegation will be briefing the NATO Council about the North Korean troops now fighting on Russia’s behalf.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Calling for the moderates to re-engage

Posted on by

Over in The Line, former provincial Progressive Conservative (and former federal Conservative) comms staffer Chisholm Pothier goes though Blaine Higgs’ downfall in New Brunswick, and in particular how his obsession with “parental rights” as a cover for oppressing trans youth was one of the main drivers of that collapse, particularly because the Liberals in that province were talking about the things people were worried about, like housing and healthcare. He eschewed the usual partisan nonsense and congratulated Suan Holt on a deserved win. But that wasn’t the important part.

The most important takeaway from the piece, however, is that Pothier calls on Tories in New Brunswick to get memberships and get engaged with the party if they want to take it back from what Higgs turned it into, which is a narrow little cult catering primarily to Christian nationalists. This is something I have written columns about in the past—that it’s extremely important for ordinary people and moderates within a party to take out a membership and get involved at the grassroots level, because if you don’t, the crazies absolutely will and they will take over your party. This is what happened with the UCP in Alberta—when Jason Kenney engineered the hostile takeover of the PC party there, and then its merger with the Wildrose to form the UCP, it was done very much by getting the swivel-eyed loons to engage with the process at the expense of the moderates, whom they didn’t want in the party. This was to be a small-c conservative party and not the amorphous centrist mass that the PC party in Alberta had become, constantly reshaping itself and its beliefs to follow those of each successive leader. And now, it’s a party of hardcore fanatics, who turned on Kenney, and whom Danielle Smith is terrified they will do the same to her, so she is becoming increasingly radical in how she is governing as a result.

I cannot stress enough that ordinary people need to be engaged with parties at the grassroots level, or things get really bad. A party that only consists of Kool-Aid drinkers, regardless of the party, becomes toxic pretty fast (especially if they start going on with the purity tests). While the PCs in New Brunswick have a chance to reclaim their party, which is probably too late in Alberta (and couldn’t happen at all with the sudden capitulation of BC United to the BC Conservatives). It also may not be possible for the federal Liberals, who did away with party memberships altogether in favour of sign-ups that will populate their voter database while all power centralized in the leader’s office. Pothier’s advice should carry for all parts of the country, not just New Brunswick—if you want to keep your party from falling prey to fanatics of any stripe, you need to get involved as a member to push back against them.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched two waves of drone attacks over Kyiv, and one of them struck an apartment building, killing one and injuring five. A missile attack struck residences and a medical facility in Dnipro, killing three. G7 leaders announced $50 billion in loans to Ukraine to be repaid with seized Russian assets.

Continue reading →

Roundup: So he is hiding something?

Posted on by

Over the past couple of days, Justin Trudeau and Karina Gould have been intimating that Pierre Poilievre has “something to hide” by not seeking his security clearance. It’s a stupid talking point, it trivialises the seriousness of the issue, and it descends to the same childish accusations that the Conservatives are lobbing at the government over the refusal to turn over certain unredacted documents related to SDTC as part of a banana republic production order (as the subject of the current privilege filibuster). It’s not cute, and it doesn’t make them look like the adults in the room.

And then along comes Michael Chong, who gave this cockamamie story to the Globe and Mail that because security clearances can involve invasive questions like sexual partners or past drug use, and that Trudeau is “so desperate” that he would use that information to publicly undermine Poilievre. But, and former CSIS director Ward Elcock made the point in the same piece, CSIS would never turn that information over to the PM, no matter the political pressure, so not only is Chong just making up conspiracy bullshit (as he has been wont to do increasingly of late), he is actually adding fuel fire by making it look like Poilievre does indeed have something to hide. Like, my dude, did you even think about your stupid conspiracy for five whole seconds before you blurted it out to Bob Fife? Honestly.

Remember when Michael Chong was a man of principle and didn't just constantly make up shitty conspiracy theories to suck up to his leader? #cdnpoli www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/art…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-24T17:20:23.744Z

We all know that the reasons Poilievre won’t get the clearance is because it would require him to lie slightly less than he does currently. Poilievre even tacitly admitted this when he declared in QP “This prime minister will not gag me!” (Phrasing!) But by trying to take this “hiding something” schtick across the board is just tiresome when everyone should be striving to be grown-ups about this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians launched a thermobaric ammunition attack on Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region, while Ukrainian forces shot down 40 out of 50 drones overnight. Russian forces have been making a fast advance into the town of Selydove, which they have been trying to take control of. Ukrainian intelligence suggests that North Korean troops are already in the Kursk region.

Continue reading →