Monthly Archives: January 2025

Roundup: Gould’s stumble of a first proposal

Posted on by

Liberal leadership candidate Karina Gould made a policy announcement in Ottawa yesterday, and it was…not great. Gould says she’s serious about tackling cost-of-living challenges, so she wants to give a one-year GST cut, and to pay for it by increasing the corporate tax rate for businesses making over $500 million in profit in one year. That sound you’re hearing is every economist in this country crying out in anguish.

Here's a conventional (and IMHO correct) public finance view of this proposal:- The GST is a very efficient way to raise revenues and I simply would not cut it.- Brackets on CIT are bad because, more easily than people, corps can split into multiple entities.www.cbc.ca/news/politic…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T03:54:01.703Z

Look sales tax holidays are just so very silly. A so much better use of $11b is….breathes…targeted transfers.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T03:34:11.186Z

A real Canada Disability Benefit would start at around $12B. We have a leadership candidate that would forgo that for everyone to get a couple dozen dollars in one year fromGST relief.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T03:37:16.297Z

It’s just so needlessly dumb, and you would have thought that Gould might have paid attention to what an absolute fiasco the HST “holiday” has been, and how her fellow Cabinet ministers debased themselves to sell it to the public. It’s also giving shades of Stephen Harper circa 2006, and how that government increased income taxes to pay for the first GST cut, and then spent through the surplus they inherited to give a second cut, which permanently hampered the fiscal capacity of the federal government (which was Harper’s plan). And reducing it for one year? So that you face the blowback of the tax going back up? Seriously? I get that Gould is trying to break through the noise around Mark Carney, but come on. There are plenty of economists whom she could consult with, who would gladly give her the time of day and to explain these things to her, but she decided to go with the same kinds of populist stunts that the Conservatives and NDP run on, while ignoring the notion that the Liberals have been the party doing the sensible policies in spite of them being less popular (such as the carbon levy) because it’s the right thing to do. It’s a disappointing first move by Gould out of the gate.

In a related note, Jaime Battiste has dropped out of the race, and will be backing Carney instead. Battiste was a marginal candidate to begin with, so this move isn’t really a surprise, as much as he wanted to be a First Nations candidate in the race, there just wasn’t a viable path forward for it.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian drone hit an apartment building in Sumy overnight Wednesday, killing at least six people. Aid groups in Ukraine are scrambling to compensate after the Americans suddenly cut funding to their programming.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Freeland’s smaller Cabinet promise

Posted on by

Chrystia Freeland released another policy statement/promise yesterday which says that she will cut the size of Cabinet and the PMO in half—both to make Cabinet more efficient, and to give ministers more control over their files, rather than PMO dictating everything for them. While on the one hand, every incoming prime minister has promised to cut the size of Cabinet and then it starts to grow over time, I also suspect this is a bit of a screw you to Katie Telford, who runs Trudeau’s PMO, and who selects the chief of staff for all ministers with her own loyalists, and who has been a bottleneck for so much of this government’s business as it flows through her office. Caucus has been calling on Trudeau to get rid of Telford for a while now, correctly identifying her as the source of some of their problems (including the fact that she is in the caucus room taking notes, which was never the case under previous leaders), and Freeland appears to be heeding those concerns as endorsements pile up (mostly for Carney).

I do think it’s a fairly bold plan, and it reminds me of Trudeau’s initial attempt to have a “government by Cabinet” in the early days, but all ministers are not created equal, and gradually PMO started to exert more control for many of those ministers who were having trouble managing their files. It also looks like Freeland would be reverting to an older model of having the hard cap of twenty ministers, while additional responsibilities would be filled by ministers of state, which is also essentially how the UK operates, where there is a hard cap on Cabinet, but there are numerous junior ministers. Trudeau did away with this and made everyone a full minister as part of the gender parity promise, given that it would be likely that there would be an imbalance between how many women were in senior versus junior portfolios, and by making everyone a full minister, they also got a full minister’s salary. It seems clear in Freeland’s promise that she feels this was bloating Cabinet, particularly as Trudeau made it the practice that all appointments and Orders in Council needed to be presented to the full Cabinet, which took up a lot of time and focus. Does that mean that a lot will change if junior positions are restored? I guess it will depend on her leadership style if she’s successful, but it is an interesting signal nevertheless.

I will also note that Freeland has been consistently putting out these kinds of statements, unlike Carney. Meanwhile, Ruby Dhalla is turning out to be a clown show of braggadocious claims that the online right is amplifying.

Ukraine Dispatch

The Russians claim to have taken control of Novoielyzavetivka in the Donetsk region, near Pokrovsk. An overnight Ukrainian drone attack hit an oil pumping station and a missile storage facility, while a drone attack has hit Russia’s fourth-largest oil refinery in Kstovo. Ukraine’s corruption watchdog has opened an investigation into the defence minister over a procurement dispute.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1884525942229364847

Continue reading →

Roundup: Foreign interference commission final report released

Posted on by

Justice Marie-Josée Hogue released the final report of the Foreign Interference public inquiry yesterday, and there really weren’t too many surprises involved. While there have been attempts at foreign interference, it hasn’t affected the outcomes of any elections, and that our institutions have held up rather well—though not perfectly. Government has been too slow to respond in many cases, and we don’t have enough transparency around national security issues, nor is there a culture of national security in government to make these issues a priority. There has been progress, but we’re not there yet. In many respects, this report proves that David Johnston’s report was right, and we’ve spent a year-and-a-half duplicating efforts because opposition party leaders decided it was more fun to smear Johnston than take him seriously.

One of the most significant aspects was a repudiation of the NSICOP report that claimed there were parliamentarians that were somehow compromised, and Hogue went through how the intelligence didn’t actually say that, and how NSICOP’s characterisation torqued what had been alleged—and frankly, much of the news reporting torqued further because they didn’t bother to read the context in that report. Hogue also noted that much of the reporting that drove this moral panic and the subsequent inquiry was wrong, though she didn’t necessarily blame the journalists because they only had so much to go on. (Nevertheless, this should be a warning about just how absolutely credulous some of those reporters have been on this file since the beginning, and why they failed to adequately question the motives of those doing the leaking).

Two cents: The Chair of NSICOP should have been far more willing to explain what message the committee's report was meant to convey last summer.NSICOP reports have exaggerated things in the past. Hopefully, the next chair takes a more measured approach.

— Philippe Lagassé (@plagasse.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T17:55:57.033Z

Hogue's call for greater transparency in the national security space is key, too. That should be a key priority for whichever party is in government after the next election.

— Philippe Lagassé (@plagasse.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T18:02:26.554Z

Probably a good thing that the pressure to 'name names' wasn't followed through on, eh? We could have outright destroyed innocent people with potentially empty innuendo.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-28T17:38:06.873Z

A couple of other notables—Hogue noted that transnational repression is probably a bigger threat, but her mandate didn’t give her the latitude to explore that, so that remains a big flag for this or the next government to address. Even more to the point, she flagged disinformation as the most existential threat to our democracy, and called for a dedicated federal watchdog to monitor and intercept foreign meddling that uses social media platforms and “AI” tools like deep-fakes. She also recommended developing digital and media literacy among Canadians, which feels a bit like a “perfect world” wish, or at least something that we may be able to impart onto the next generation but I worry that the current one may be lost in that regard.

For more, here’s a thread from Stephanie Carvin who went through the report:

For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, here is the summary

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2025-01-29T00:25:45.506Z

In the wake of this, Pierre Poilievre has let it be known that he’s not going to take that CSIS threat reduction briefing after all, because he can’t talk about what it says, so he is once again relying on the false notion that this, or any other security clearance, is somehow going to “gag” him. It won’t, but it would mean he has to be responsible with his commentary, which he does not want to do. He wants to be bombastic, and to lie at every opportunity, and so he will keep refusing a clearance or briefings, because he only cares about “owning the Libs,” not national security or the good of the country.

Because he's a self-interested venomous partisan who wants maximum freedom to be act like a weasel. I'm not sure why some Liberal partisans decided there was anything more nefarious than that at play.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-28T19:12:35.197Z

exactly so.Phil and I found in our work that the average MP would rather speak ignorantly than know more and then have to be somewhat responsible.PP is the extreme version of this–rather be a bomb thrower than have any responsibility.

— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T19:23:04.269Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Overnight Russian air attacks wounded eight and damaged residential buildings around Ukraine on Monday night. Ukrainian drones are targeting power and oil facilities in the west and northwestern regions of Russia.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Maligning legitimate Senate appointments

Posted on by

One of CBC’s worst reporters is back again with the “scandalous” news that the prime minister is preparing to fill all ten vacant Senate seats before he resigns, and the original title of the article was “Trudeau plans on stacking Senate before retiring: source” before it was toned down in an update. The framing that the prime minister—who is still the prime minister—is doing his job and filling these vacancies as he is constitutionally mandated to do, is somehow inappropriate or unfair, is wrong, and frankly, is well into the category of misinformation (which is probably why the headline got changed).

It's notable the media consistently uses hedging language when it comes to things like racism (Musk's explicit Nazi salute) but will casually imply wrongdoing in headlines about debatable constitutional practices like making Senate appointments.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-27T15:05:32.107Z

The story then quotes a single Conservative senator to claim that this is somehow illegitimate, which it’s not, and there is no counter voice from an expert. For the TV version of this story, said reporter got video of Andrew Scheer claiming it’s inappropriate and that the vacancies should be left until after an election, which is again false, and there was no counter. There was no proper acknowledgment that Trudeau won a series of confidence votes in December, and that gives him the constitutional right to make these appointments, but hey, then he couldn’t frame the story as this being somehow wrong or inappropriate, and the fact that he gets away with this is infuriating.

This particular reporter has a pattern when it comes to trying to gin up scandals around any appointments. When it’s with judges, he resorts to histrionics about appointees who made political donations in the past, as though the low campaign contribution limits in Canada allows one to buy influence or access, or that they somehow bribed their way into these appointments. With recent Senate appointments, he’s now judging what is and is not a partisan appointment given past history, ignoring that a) there is no Liberal caucus in the Senate for them to be a part of, and b) past legislative experience is actually a good thing to have in that Chamber, and that the lack of it with so many appointees has been a problem. But hey, the CBC editors let him get away with these self-imposed purity tests, so he’s going to keep on doing them. It’s a disservice to the country, and the gods damned public broadcaster shouldn’t be letting their reporters personal bugaboos dictate their coverage, particularly when it taints the reporting.

Ukraine Dispatch

An overnight air attack injured four in Kharkiv after houses were hit. Other critical infrastructure was damaged during overnight drone attacks on Sunday night, where 57 out of 104 drones were downed. Russia’s Ryazan oil refinery suspended operations after a Ukrainian drone attack last week. President Zelenskyy says that the realities of the current war means that they can’t change mobilisation rules as soldiers leaving for home en masse would mean Russians would “kill us all.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: Piercing Lantsman’s kayfabe

Posted on by

Because everything is so stupid, Conservative Twitter got itself all hot and bothered over the weekend because Nathaniel Erskine-Smith had the temerity to break the kayfabe when the Melissa Lantsman was engaging in performative outrage.

Context: This was an event Erskine-Smith held in his riding for Mark Carney, and Lantsman stood outside to say ludicrously stupid things, and Erskine-Smith, who was standing right there, made a good-natured objection, and did so in a way where Lantsman broke—her performative outrage cracked, she smiled and basically admitted it was all bullshit, and then tried to carry on to finish the performance, got her talking points backwards, but she finished the scene. Conservatives, however, were incensed that the fakery was exposed, so they edited the clip, invented the charge that Erskine-Smith was a creep because he touched her shoulder and shook her hand—the most regular things in politics—and *gasp!* suggested they get a drink like a good-natured colleague would. This would not stand.

What’s particularly hilarious about this is that this is just more Conservative cry-bullying (which I have been on the receiving end of), where they pretend to be the wronged party in order to have someone “cancelled,” while they bemoan and wail about so-called “cancel culture” (which has never actually cancelled anyone, especially in a country where the National Post gives them column inches the very next day). Meanwhile, if they think that women like Lantsman are that fragile, perhaps they should start insisting that women not be accompanied outdoors without a male relative escorting them, or that they should start wearing burkas so as not to attract unwanted attention—you know, like the Taliban would say.

It’s all so fake, and this is what they want our political discourse to be.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine downed 50 out of 72 Russian drones launched overnight Saturday. President Zelenskyy replaced the commander of the eastern forces for the third time in a year, as Russia continues to encroach on strategic settlements.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford’s false “mandate” demands

Posted on by

Ontario premier Doug Ford confirmed that yes, he will be calling an early election on Wednesday, and spouted a bunch of bullshit about needing a “strong mandate” to deal with Trump, which is fiction. He went so far as to call for the “largest mandate in Ontario history,” which veers dangerously close into one-party-state delusions. And incredibly, Ford said “So you better pray that we get elected, because I’m going to protect everyone’s job, including the media’s job,” which no he won’t, and then said, “Imagine Bonnie Crombie or Marit Stiles sitting across from President Trump negotiating a deal. It would be an absolute disaster. And God help us if that ever happens.” Premiers do not engage in international negotiations. Ever. That is explicitly outside of their jurisdiction. Ford is not going to negotiate with Trump, even if he thinks that “businessman to businessman” they can work something out.

This is pure distraction. Ford has been planning on an early election for months, and now he has Trump as a fig-leaf of an excuse. He wanted to go to an election before the federal election because he doesn’t want Pierre Poilievre to taint his chances in 2026, when the next election is supposed to be held, and he’s afraid of this nonsense “theory” that Ontarians like to have different parties in power federally and provincially. And by running against Trump, he figures he can distract everyone from his corruption (RCMP investigation ongoing) and absolute mismanagement of the healthcare system to the point of its collapse, his dismantling of the post-secondary education system, and the size of the deficits he’s been running after all of his lamentations about Kathleen Wynne’s record when he has done worse by absolutely every metric. But Trump? Well, that’s a real distraction, and his playacting the “Captain Canada” role has been helping him build that, even though he hasn’t actually filled any federal vacuum in leadership (there is a conscious decision not to react to every Trump utterance), and it’s already had the Baby Spice effect on people’s brains.

Meanwhile, his constant claims that he needs a “mandate” is a fraught political concept that doesn’t actually mean anything in a Westminster system. He has a majority legislature. His opposition parties are largely ineffective or in disarray (and he has invoked the Notwithstanding Clause to neuter third-party groups from campaiging against him). Those opposition leaders said they will support anything he needs to do to counter the effect of any Trump tariffs. His claims that he needs a “mandate” to do this is an import that doesn’t actually mean anything. He was elected to govern for four years—he doesn’t need to call an election every time a crisis comes up to say that he needs a “mandate” to deal with it. Nothing would get done if he did. This is naked self-interest, and it needs to be exposed as such, but the Queen’s Park media won’t, and I suspect that Uncle Doug will sail to another election victory, both because he continues to beguile the population, and the opposition parties continue to be useless. It’s absolutely embarrassing.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched a drone barrage against residential buildings in Kyiv overnight Friday, killing three. Russians claim they are about to overtake the town of Velyka Novosilka in the Donetsk region. Ukraine launched an overnight drone attack against one of Russia’s largest oil refineries in the Ryazan region, causing an explosion and damage. Reuters got access to the drone unit that is launching these long-range attacks into Russia to damage their war capabilities.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Enduring mythologies around cancelled energy projects

Posted on by

The continued predations by Trump are giving people amnesia about energy projects in this country, and mythologies about what actually happened with projects are taking hold. Energy East is a good example, and people continue to believe fact-free versions of history, or that these projects are somehow still just waiting for approval and that enough political willpower is all that’s needed to get them signed off. But they don’t exist any longer, and the reasons they didn’t move ahead are more complex than the comforting lies they like to tell themselves. As usual, Andrew Leach brought the receipts.

Pierre Poilievre then decided to weigh in, because he’s a trustworthy authority on the history of energy investments in this country, particularly in the Harper era. Oh, wait—this is Poilievre, and everything he says is a lie.

There are so many projects that got approved under the Harper years that never went ahead even during Harper’s majority parliament, but they are happy to blame Trudeau, because it’s a pathology. The 2014 oil crash did permanent damage to the industry, and the recognition of a carbon-constrained future has not helped either. And as much as they like to bemoan “government regulation” on these projects, their attempt at massive de-regulation in the Harper era merely led to a succession of lawsuits and uncertainty, which is what proper regulations seek to avoid. It’s too bad that they refuse to understand that particular lesson.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched a drone and missile strike against Zaporizhzhia overnight Wednesday, killing one and wounding at least 31, leaving tens of thousands without heat or power. Ukraine is drafting new recruitment reforms to attract 18- to -25-year-olds currently exempt from mobilisation orders. NATO’s Secretary General says that he wants the US to keep sending arms to Ukraine, and that he’s sure that Europe will pay for them if necessary.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Moe looks to capitulate as well

Posted on by

There was another virtual first ministers’ meeting yesterday to discuss ongoing preparations for dealing with threats from Trump, and yes, Danielle Smith was in attendance (virtually, from Washington), and most of the premiers are on board with the need for dollar-for-dollar retaliation. Most. Smith herself was trying to sound conciliatory and saying that things were “better” from her perspective this time, but now Scott Moe is starting to say that he’s not in favour of dollar-for-dollar retaliation, because he too is more interested in capitulation to Trump. Then again, Moe is one who has a history of capitulation, like the time he caved to the demands of the so-called “Freedom convoy” and then begged them not to blockade the border crossings in his province. That’s who Scott Moe is.

For no reason at all, I am reminded of when Scott Moe capitulated to the convoy, and then begged them not to blockade border crossings in his province. Because that's who he is.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-23T03:10:09.276Z

Meanwhile, Danielle Smith says that the premiers agreed that they need to build more east-west pipelines, and good luck with that, mostly because people in Eastern Canada aren’t really keen on paying the premium that shipping Alberta oil and gas would cost (particularly on the east coast), particularly if we are moving to a carbon-constrained future where it would probably be cheaper and better in the longer-term to simply invest in building up capacity for a faster adoption of EVs rather than spend billions on infrastructure for stranded assets. Oh, and don’t think that more pipelines to the west coast are going to mean a boon for LNG either, considering that there are numerous LNG proposals on the books that have all of their approvals, but haven’t been built because the market hasn’t found a case for them, either in terms of investments or a willingness to sign long-term contracts for these projects.

There is some hope that the current situation may finally let provinces see the wisdom of eliminating internal trade barriers, largely around regulation and credentials recognition, but then again, this has been an irritant since Confederation, and that kind of inertia is really hard to overcome.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian-installed officials claim that Ukraine launched a drone attack near the Zaporizhzhia nuclear facility.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Such concern about drugs

Posted on by

Another day, and other leak that claimed that Trump wasn’t really serious about the tariffs, but that this was just him trying to get an early start on New NAFTA re-negotiations rather than waiting for 2026, and trying to bring more auto manufacturing back to the US-side of the border. But when asked about this during his media availability, Trump insisted that no, he was very serious about the “millions” of people who had come illegally through Canada (it’s certainly not in the millions), and the scourge of fentanyl. He even went on this extended tirade about how mothers never recover when they lose their sons to drugs, and so on. But then he also issued a pardon to Ross Ulbricht, a crypto drug dealer. So yeah, he’s really concerned about the scourge.

Really puts his overwrought speech about mothers who've never recovered after losing their sons to drugs into perspective.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-22T01:54:41.112Z

Meanwhile, Danielle Smith spent the day in full-on appeasement mode, insisting that we need to find a diplomatic solution rather than stand up to Trump’s bullying. Oh, and she also tried to blame this situation on Trudeau, because of course she did. What I find particularly irksome, however, are the whitebread pundits who also try to keep blaming Trudeau for Smith not falling into line, because he should somehow debase himself in order to get her on-side when it’s clear that she has no interest (and absolutely no incentive) to do so. Her political brand and that of her party right now is about hating Trudeau. Nothing he can or will do will get her on-side, particularly when her ideology is more in line with Trump’s than it is to stand up for Canada.

Back home, Pierre Poilievre is demanding Parliament be summoned because we’re in an “emergency,” erm, except there is nothing for Parliament to do. Cabinet has all of the powers they need in the current situation, and they continue to function. The only reason for the House of Commons to sit would be to have a take-note debate to read prepared speeches that would be used for clips. But more likely, Poilievre wants to try and force an election right now, because that suits his political interests rather than the country’s as a whole (because once there is dissolution, government goes into caretaker mode and really can’t respond to Trump). In fact, Trudeau has a lot more latitude right now because he’s on his way out and doesn’t need to worry about re-election. We’re not leaderless, there is no “vacuum,” and it would be great if the media stopped repeating this nonsense, just because Cabinet hasn’t been lighting their hair on fire on a daily basis.

I know most people actually think that Justin Trudeau being on his way out ties his hands, but IMO it arguably *frees him up to be more aggressive, not less*.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-21T14:41:45.522Z

The restraints on Canada's response are political, and Justin Trudeau no longer needs to worry about his electability. Fire on all cylinders at these assholes.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-21T14:42:25.284Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Continue reading →

Roundup: Day one depravity

Posted on by

Yesterday was inauguration day in the US, and it was pretty much as horrible as you can imagine, with the pardoning of insurrectionists, and the executive order that made a full-on assault on the rights of trans people (which is always the first target of authoritarian regimes, followed by the rest of the queer communities). Oh, and Elon Musk threw a Nazi salute. So yeah, it was pretty much everything you thought it would be.

I think the pardons are the worst thing thus far because they signal that political violence on behalf of Trump is to be rewarded.But the anti-trans stuff might be worse because it is directly targeting a vulnerable minority.So many choices for the worst. It will be a daily thing.

— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman.bsky.social) 2025-01-21T01:25:06.197Z

What didn’t happen on day one was the tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Instead, word came out early in the morning that Trump wouldn’t sign them on day one, and he would instead order an investigation into trade imbalances, and so on. So that was a reprieve, or a stay of execution, right? Danielle Smith certainly thought so, and started taking credit for it. Her followers and media apologists quickly amplified that self-praise. And then, after a few hours, Trump said that yes, the tariffs would be coming as of February 1st. Oops.

How did these age?

— Greg MacEachern (@gregmaceachern.bsky.social) 2025-01-21T01:25:33.384Z

That was day one, and we can only imagine what worse predations are to come. There will be a number of demands for retaliation, but the government is keeping their powder dry for the moment, as is probably best. This may yet come to nothing, because Trump believes he’s an ace negotiator and these are his usual tactics to extract some kind of “win” from us, because that’s who he is. It may yet come to naught, but it could still be a kneecapping of our economy. It’s still too early to say, but nobody should be doing victory laps right now—especially those who tried to obey in advance.

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lg7y2jnygs2t

Yes. Yes it is.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-20T18:35:12.136Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s state investigation bureau has detained two generals and a colonel accused of negligence in failing to adequately defend the Kharkiv region last year.

Continue reading →