Roundup: The problem with “building things” nostalgia

In all of the announcements that prime minister Mark Carney made this week, particularly around the Major Projects Office and the first tranche of projects that he was championing, there was something he said that bothers me. “We used to build big things in this country and we used to build them quickly,” he said, which is something that we hear a lot, particularly from conservatives. “We built a cross-country railroad in seven years!” But nobody wants to mention how that railroad, or any of those big projects got built, and what changed, because nostalgia is a seductive liar.

What changed, of course, is that we realized we can’t just devastate the environment, and that we can’t just keep displacing Indigenous peoples on their own lands, or that we can’t treat imported labour like slaves, or with working conditions that ensured that a great many of them died along the way. (Yes, I know there are problems with temporary foreign workers and modern-day slavery, but that is a separate discussion). And what is particularly concerning is that while Carney is not acknowledging what changed is that he gave himself a giant Henry VIII clause in his major projects legislation that lets him ignore environmental legislation, or whatever he finds inconvenient, in order to get these big things built fast. Does nobody see a problem here? Really?

Meanwhile, Poilievre mocks the “speeds not seen in generations” talks, and the unspoken part of his “government get out of the way” line is that it ultimately means environmental degradation, ignoring Indigenous rights, labour rights, you name it, because those are the things that are inconvenient. So, in a way, Carney and Poilievre are ultimately aligning on these particular things, and we shouldn’t be shrugging this off. Things changed for a reason. Going back to the 19thcentury is not a sustainable way forward, no matter how dire the economic situation we find ourselves in.

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people were killed in an incursion in the Sumy region, but that incursion has been pushed back. Ukrainian drones hit Russia’s key oil terminal in Primorsk. NATO announced plans to further shore up defences on their eastern flank after the incursion into Polish airspace. And Prince Harry made a surprise visit to Kyiv in support of wounded soldiers.

Good reads:

  • Anita Anand says that her department summoned the Russian ambassador after the drone incursion into Polish airspace.
  • It looks like the death of the emissions cap is on the way as the federal government is now “working with” Alberta and the oil industry on them.
  • Briefing materials for Gregor Robertson show the dire housing situation across the country (but I see zero blame allocated to premiers in the story).
  • François-Philippe Champagne is directing ministers to review procurement contracts to try and get more value out of them.
  • G7 finance ministers were meeting today, and included in the discussion were further measures to sanction Russia.
  • The immigration department is suggesting the government freeze private refugee sponsorship for three more years to clear the backlog. (So those refugees just wait?)
  • The government plans to table legislation about cracking down on intimidation and obstruction around places of worship or cultural community centres.
  • The government also sounds like they’re ready to revive a home retrofit programme, with a strong focus on those who can’t afford to do them on their own.
  • The government’s chief data officer says that there will likely be civil service job cuts as departments adopt more digital asbestos (and this is all going to go so badly).
  • The G7 Rapid Response Mechanism condemned recent actions by Iran regarding trans-national repression.
  • Here is a look into the government’s talk about building a sovereign computer cloud.
  • The Port of Vancouver wants their own expansion plans to be considered by the Major Projects Office.
  • Pierre Poilievre says he worries for his family amidst rising political violence (but is awfully silent when his own MPs encourage political violence).
  • Catherine McKenna talks about the fight for carbon pricing and the abuse she suffered in her new memoir.
  • Dan Garnder ponders the struggle that liberal democracy is having in the current moment, as its tolerance of difference is fraying as social capital erodes.
  • Justin Ling explains the history and context of the fascist who was murdered this week, and why he was so central to the MAGA movement.
  • Supriya Dwivedi calls out Carney’s inability to separate Canada from the US when he’s pushing legislation that would just turn over private data to US authorities.

Odds and ends:

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: The problem with “building things” nostalgia

  1. I feel totally gaslit by Mark Carney. For years he was in the public eye as a climate change/economics warrior. Now he’s showing every sign of pushing those in his caucus who are concerned about it into the back corner. His comment comparing the environment wing to “other” cultural ones in the caucus is a trip back to the 1970s.

    He’s aided and abetted by his fan club, who are quickly coalescing around a message that rewrites Carney’s history. On Peter Mansbridge’s podcast this week, Bruce Anderson was downright fawning in his defense of Carney, citing data that showed climate change was diminishing in importance to Canadians. I’m sorry, but that guy has never talked about polls in relation to the subject before, and for years you would have thought it was his number one concern too. I was actually embarrassed for him.

    I’m not even a fervent climate change type myself. But we’re just walking in circles if we have to keep reversing policies and then getting into crisis mode. And Carney’s about face is truly unsettling. I don’t trust him on anything.

  2. This seems to mostly miss the real problem with Carney’s talk about how we used to build big things: It neglects just HOW we used to build big things. And how we used to build big things is, government used to build them. You know, itself. Directly.
    The masses of postwar housing that was built for veterans had nothing to do with lack of environmental regulations, and there were probably more union workers involved than we have in the construction trades today. The point is, the government spent money and hired people directly to do it. They didn’t try to cajole the private sector into maybe doing something kind of like what they wanted done, they just Did The Thing. And so it got done.

Comments are closed.