Author Archives: Dale

About Dale

Journalist in the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery

QP: Fighting to take credit for the Telford decision

Posted on by

After a morning full of rapid-fire decisions around what was happening with Katie Telford heading to committee and David Johnston’s mandate being released, the prime minister was present, as were all other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, took credit for pressuring Trudeau to change his mind in letting Telford testify, and took a swipe at Johnston before demanding a public inquiry starting today. Justin Trudeau responded that this should’t be a partisan issue, which is why the appointed Johnston and were waiting for his recommendations. Poilievre switched to English to again take credit, and took several more swipes at Johnston before demanding a public inquiry right now. Trudeau repeated that this shouldn’t be a partisan issue which was why they appointed Johnston, and that they would abide by his recommendations while they moved forward on other measures. Poilievre then switched topics to inflation, blamed rising food prices on carbon prices (it’s not the cause) and demanded the planned increase be cancelled. Trudeau said that when he sat down with farmers, they underlined their real problems and leadership on climate change, before he listed climate rebates levels. Poilievre went on his usual talking points about carbon prices, and Trudeau listed how much the climate rebates were going up in Poilievre’s riding. Poilievre spouted some disingenuous bullshit about the ongoing heating costs at 24 Sussex and Trudeau’s flights, while Trudeau shrugged off the personal attack while patting himself on the back for dental care and rental benefits.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he demanded a public inquiry be called right here and now. Trudeau insisted that appointing Johnston was the first step and that they would follow his recommendations. Blanchet was talked around the appointment of Johnston, before again demanding the inquiry. Trudeau read some praise for Johnston and insisted he rejected the attacks against Johnston.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he too took credit for forcing the government to make Katie Telford appear at committee, and then tried calling out Poilievre for blocking their attempt to move a motion on calling a public inquiry. Poilievre theatrically got up to answer, before the Speaker stood up to remind everyone what Question Period was for, which is holding the government to account, and Trudeau took the opportunity to denounce personal attacks and praise Johnston. Singh said that his proves neither the Conservatives nor the Liberals wanted a public inquiry before he switched to French to demand said inquiry right here and now. Trudeau insisted that they appointed Johnston to who could make recommendations about next steps, while NSICOP was doing their work.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Forcing a confrontation for point-scoring alone

Posted on by

The whole sorry affair over summoning Katie Telford to testify at committee is coming to a head today with the vote on the Conservatives’ Supply Day motion to bypass PROC and have her testify at the Ethics Committee (where they hold the chair). And in the meantime, the Liberals are deciding if they want to make this a confidence vote, while the NDP are deciding if they are going to go along with the Conservatives on this, or back the Liberals—particularly if this does become a confidence measure.

It’s all really stupid. While I have a longer piece on the underlying parliamentary implications around forcing staffers to testify at committee coming out later today, we can’t lose sight of why this is happening. The Conservatives knew the government would balk at forcing a staffer to testify, so they would use the reluctance to push the line that they are hiding something, and if they’re fighting this hard “it must be really bad.” Which is bad faith bullshit, but that’s the name of their game, and true to form, the Liberals walked right into it, because they flailed over the leaks in the media, and can’t communicate their way out of a wet paper bag. And the Conservatives get to jam the NDP in the process, and try to force a wedge between them and the government. None of this is about foreign interference or taking the issue seriously. This is entirely about the Conservatives smelling blood in the water and going on the attack so they can score as many points as possible, because nobody in this parliament is serious or a grown-up. This is all a gods damned game to them, and it’s destroying our Parliament in the process.

Do I think the Liberals will force a confidence vote? No, because as much as the principle of ministerial responsibility is of importance, they’re not going to risk bringing down the government over it—particularly to have an election over allegations of interference in elections without any chance to ensure there are proper safeguards before that election happens. Then again, miscalculations have happened in minority parliaments before, and sometimes games of chicken go wrong. But really, this is yet another instance of play stupid games, win stupid prizes. And this really is the stupidest game.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces are warning that the town of Avdiivka could become a “second Bakhmut,” as they have held out against assault for eight months while avoiding being encircled, but Russians are trying to cut off their supply lines. Meanwhile, Ukraine sort of claimed responsibility for destroying a shipment of cruise missiles travelling by train through occupied Crimea. Elsewhere, here is a look at the de-mining work that needs to take place in places freed from occupation before they can complete critical infrastructure repairs.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1637881139355328523

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1637750630566486016

Continue reading →

QP: Attempts to call out the NDP

Posted on by

While the prime minister was in town, neither he nor his deputy was present, and neither were most of the other leaders, save Pierre Poilievre. After a moment of silence for the two police officers who were killed in Edmonton over the weekend, Poilievre led off in French, and said that he was prepared to let any Conservative staff to testify at committee and wanted the Liberals to do the same, particularly Katie Telford. Dominic LeBlanc said that they have taken steps to combat foreign interference, which Poilievre didn’t do when he was minister for democratic reform. Poilievre switched to English to accuse the Liberals of getting help from the communist regime in Beijing, and demanded Telford appear at committee, and called out the NDP for possibly helping the Liberals. LeBlanc said that repeated that they were always transparent, and that they had appeared before committee, and that they looked forward to Johnston’s recommendations. Poilievre said that the question was for the leader of the NDP saying he’s “part of the government”—which is more of his bad faith bullshit—made an un-clever quip about coalitions, and called the NDP out again. This time Pam Damoff recited the lines about taking interference seriously. Poilievre switched back to French to demand that there be national licensing for foreign-trained doctors and nurses—which is not federal jurisdiction. Jean-Yves Duclos said that as part of their new transfer agreement included language about credentials recognition. Poilievre returned to English to ask the same question again, and Duclos repeated that they were already working on this with provinces.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he demanded a public inquiry into foreign interference. LeBlanc praised David Johnston’s credentials. Therrien took several swipes at Johnston before repeating his demand, and LeBlanc insisted that Johnston will work independently to determine next steps.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he too demanded that Johnston be directed to recommend a public inquiry—which undermines his role. LeBlanc returned to the recitation of talking points about what they have done to combat interference to date, and praise around Johnston. Leah Gazan railed about wages for child care and personal support workers—which is provincial jurisdiction—and Karina Gould said that recruitment and wages are part of their agreements with provinces.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The “Blue Seal” nobody else ever though of

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre held another Sunday press conference (which I fear is going to become a regular feature for the coming months, because the calculation is that it lets them set the agenda for the week), wherein he proposed a “blue seal” programme for doctors, nurses, and other medical practitioners, akin to the “Red Seal” programme for skilled trades, so that they can work anywhere in the country. Gosh, it’s as though nobody had ever thought of this before, and that these kinds of regulatory non-tariff barriers have been a bane on the country since literally Confederation. But hey, I’m sure because he’s demanding it, it’ll be different this time.

This being said, some provinces have been finally moving ahead on this kind of thing, with the Atlantic provinces loosening restrictions so that doctors can practice in any of those provinces, so there is progress. But it has taken a crisis for us to get to this point (because that is apparently how we overcome our pervasive normalcy bias in this country) and not because Poilievre goes around calling things “broken.”

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces destroyed five Russian ammunition depots near Bakhmut on Friday, and say that they are still able to supply their forces in the city and get wounded to safety, as they continue to cause massive damage and casualties to Russian invaders. Meanwhile, Russian president Vladimir Putin made a surprise visit to occupied Mariupol, which Ukrainian officials regarded as “the criminal always returns to the scene of the crime.”

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1637345862077513730

Continue reading →

Roundup: The leaker comes forward (sort of)

Posted on by

The big Friday bombshell from the Globe and Mail in their continued series of allegations of foreign interference was an op-ed from the primary leaker, who gave a self-serving justification for doing so, insisting that they were tired of the problem of foreign interference going ignored, and that they hoped to  ignite a conversation and that they didn’t intend for things to get this ugly. Erm, seriously? You leaked to Bob Fife, and you didn’t think he would torque the absolute life out of it? That seems dangerously naïve for an intelligence official. Even more to the point, their frustration with the pace of work is not justification for violating their oaths to secrecy (and comparing themselves to Jody Wilson-Raybould seems to be particularly ill-considered). There is an attitude of “I know best,” which former senior intelligence official Artur Wilczynski called “narcissistic,” and I did take that tone from the op-ed.

One of the things I’ve really come to recognise and have been building a series of columns around is that there is a pervasive normalcy bias in our governments at all levels. It’s why provincial governments inadvertently allowed their healthcare systems to collapse. It’s why we are now in a housing crisis nation-wide. It’s why our military was allowed to degrade, and it’s why successive governments of all stripes have not taken foreign interference seriously enough. We disbelieve and downplay threats and warnings because we’ve been sheltered for a century now under the wing of the Americans, and very little bad has happened to us in comparison to most other countries. We got lazy and complacent. That’s hard to shake, but I would say we’ve made more progress in the last five years than we have since the ned of the Cold War. And unfortunately, it’s probably going to take crises to shake us from our complacency (like what is happening in healthcare). Unfortunately, the crisis that this leaker precipitated has likely made the situation worse and not better because it’s now become a partisan battleground.

Speaking of partisan battlegrounds, yesterday we had the prime minister accusing Pierre Poilievre of “ginning up a partisan circus” and trying to take a flamethrower to our institutions in order to win power (not untrue), and Poilievre saying that the intelligence community is in full revolt because of Trudeau (and hey, it turns out it’s largely one narcissistic leaker). Trudeau also defended Johnston against the “horrific” partisan attacks, though Trudeau does deserve a measure of criticism for putting Johnston in this position. Johnston, incidentally, provided a statement saying he was working to finalise the details around his role and the mandate, so it looks like he is going ahead with it, concerns notwithstanding.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces continue to resist the Russians’ attempt to encircle Bakhmut. While this is happening, the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin, for his war crimes but most especially for his programme of forcibly relocating Ukrainian children and working to re-educate them and place them with Russian families—a hallmark of a genocide. Meanwhile, Slovakia has now pledged their 13 MiG-29 fighters to Ukraine after Poland got the ball rolling.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The allegations reach Vancouver

Posted on by

The Globe and Mail had another leak yesterday, and this time it involved municipal politics, and more particularly, the allegation that the Chinese consulate in Vancouver was meddling in that city’s election last year. Later in the day, former mayor Kennedy Stewart appeared on Power & Politics to confirm that yes, he did get a visit from two CSIS officials to warn him that they were concerned about interference, but there wasn’t really anything Stewart could do about it, since the Vancouver police couldn’t investigate. The new mayor, Ken Sim, rejected any insinuation he was helped by Beijing, and that there wouldn’t be the same questions if he were Caucasian.

The most interesting thing from the story in my opinion was that these diplomats were hoping to get a council member or two in place in the hopes that they could groom them into having political careers that included provincial or federal ambitions, but again, this is mostly about trying to get people into place who will be sympathetic to Beijing and who can help project a better image for them, and is less about actual espionage, for what it’s worth.

I’m seeing a couple of issues here. One is that we’re going to start seeing “Did the Chinese interfere?!” with every lost race in this country, I fear, no matter how ridiculous the charge, because that’s how media tends to operate. I also think there is a lot of “not my problem” happening on the official side, especially because the federal government doesn’t want to be seen to be bigfooting any municipal races, while lower levels of government don’t know what to do with warnings because they don’t have any systems in place (because we have an enormous normalcy bias in our politics). I also question why so much emphasis seems to be placed on the boasts of these consular officials who are claiming credit for election outcomes that there is no possible way they could have meaningfully influenced. People take credit for lots of things they didn’t do. We shouldn’t believe them because it’s convenient for our narrative. Cripes.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Poland has decided to give its MiG-29 fighter jets to Ukraine, with the first four to be sent in the coming days, answering Ukraine’s pleas for more fighters. Because they are Soviet-era fighters, the Ukrainians already know how to fly and service these planes, so they can be put into operation immediately and not requires months or years of training on newer platforms. Meanwhile, the artillery battle continues around Bakhmut.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1636430656954671105

https://twitter.com/oleksiireznikov/status/1636376268781531136

Continue reading →

Roundup: David Johnston, special rapporteur

Posted on by

The “unimpeachable” eminent Canadian chosen to be the special rapporteur on allegations of foreign interference is former Governor General David Johnston, and it took mere minutes for the Conservatives to start denouncing him, citing that he was affiliated with the Trudeau Foundation, and that his role on the election debate commission saw Rosemary Barton ask questions during the last debate when she “sued” the Conservatives (note: she did not sue them, but the CBC sued the party in her name for unauthorised use of footage; also, I don’t believe Johnston chose the moderators or questioners, considering that it was a demand of the broadcast consortium that their talent each be allowed to have time during the debate), and on and on it went. The pundit class largely insisted that Johnston should have recused himself right away because he is too closely associated with Trudeau, and others insisted that if it was truly a non-partisan appointment then Pierre Poilievre and Jagmeet Singh should have been part of the process and naming him, and anyway, the whole special rapporteur thing was stupid and so on.

https://twitter.com/SusanDelacourt/status/1636102797623009281

I mean, I understand why Trudeau decided to go this route—not everyone agrees that a public inquiry is the best route to go, because it could go for years and that could mean delaying action that should be taken now. Even if it is the route we want to go (and several Liberals are now saying that it’s the only option at this point), it would still be Trudeau and Cabinet setting the terms of reference, which is also part of the rationale—Trudeau says that he would leave that determination up to Johnston, and he’d follow his recommendations, thereby trying to put some measure of distance between himself and any such task. I do say that it mystifies me that everyone demanding an inquiry right now if not yesterday never seems to care about this very point, even though we all damned well know that they would immediately cite these points as to why the inquiry is illegitimate.

But honestly? Canada is a small pond. There are not too many “eminent Canadians” who have the track record to take on this kind of task, and who don’t have some kind of perceived conflict, no matter how unrealistic it is. But that’s the whole thing with perceived conflicts, and this notion of “smell tests” that don’t actually mean anything but which get the chattering classes frothing. Is Johnston the best choice? Maybe, maybe not. The likely other option was a former Supreme Court Justice, which has become a running joke in Canadian politics these days. Regardless, the fact that this is just more partisan fodder is all the more proof that parties are not actually taking this seriously, and would rather be out to score points instead.

Ukraine Dispatch:

American intelligence suggests that the Russians are making small advances toward Bakhmut, but at great cost. Further north near Kreminna, similar battles are playing out, with the Russians making unsuccessful attacks, but they worry that the attempts to surround Bakhmut could have repercussions for their section of the front, while fatigue is starting to set in.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Demanding the Speaker to something he can’t

Posted on by

The Liberals are no stranger to stunts, and the “poor me” stunts are some of the worst of all. With this in mind, it should be no surprise that MP Ya’ara Saks has written an open letter to the Speaker to demand apologies from Conservatives for sexist remarks, be it Michael Cooper in Committee or Rick Perkins telling Jean Yip that she deserves a participation ribbon. The problem? There’s nothing the Speaker can really do about it.

Saks didn’t cite any Standing Orders that were contravened, and the Speaker is bound to operate within the Standing Orders. Those are the rules by which he is refereeing. And for well over a generation now, the Canadian House of Commons has seen fit to effectively neuter the Speaker so that he (or she) doesn’t have much in the way of leeway in order to enforce, well, anything. Other Speakers in other Westminster parliaments have a lot more authority and latitude—Australia’s Speaker can even demand that governments answer the question when they are seen to be evasive (though this can sometimes stray into Speakers acting in potentially partisan ways). But ours? Nope—because MPs chose to have a ridiculously unempowered Speaker. The result? More of a gong show, more speaking lists, more canned speeches without any flow, and overall, an unserious Parliament, particularly in relation to our comparator countries.

And MPs could change this. But they don’t want to, so they won’t. And that is a problem.

Ukraine Dispatch:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that his country’s military chiefs are unanimous to keep defending Bakhmut, probably because they are grinding the Russian forces down there at a fairly alarming rate. Meanwhile, the Americans are accusing the Russians of downing one of their drones over the Black Sea, which Russia denies.

https://twitter.com/yermolenko_v/status/1635649300922245120

https://twitter.com/oleksiireznikov/status/1635665484954718208

Continue reading →

Roundup: Commonwealth Day reminders

Posted on by

Yesterday was Commonwealth Day, and also the ten-year anniversary of the Commonwealth Charter, which was supposed to be a project to spearhead the adoption of more common human rights legislation that would include better inclusion of LGBTQ+ rights in those Commonwealth countries where they are still an issue. In those ten years, that seems to have fallen off the radar, and I have barely heard any mention of that Charter at all, until when the anniversary was mentioned yesterday.

With anything related to the Commonwealth, we were guaranteed a bunch of bad media takes, and lo, for their inaugural episode, CTV News Channel’s new debate show had one of their topics as to whether Canada should stay in the Commonwealth or abandon the monarchy, which is a dumb false dichotomy because the vast majority of Commonwealth countries are not monarchies. Only fifteen member countries are Realms, meaning that we share Charles III as our monarch in a natural capacity (we each have separate Crowns), and newer members of the Commonwealth are not former British colonies, but have requested membership because they see value in the institution. Even if we did abandon the monarchy (which isn’t going to happen because it would mean rewriting our entire constitution and good luck trying to make that happen), we would still probably retain membership in the Commonwealth because of the relationships forged there, and it can be good forum for getting things done with countries.

Meanwhile, I’m going to re-up this interview I did with MP Alexandra Mendès, who is the chair of the Canadian Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, about the work these associations do and how Canada helps to train the legislatures and parliaments of smaller Commonwealth countries.

Ukraine Dispatch:

The battle near Bakhmut continues to rage, while the International Criminal Court is expected to seek the arrest of Russian officials responsible for the policy of forcibly deporting children from Ukraine, as well as their continued targeting of civilian infrastructure.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre’s facile budget demands

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre called a Sunday morning press conference, which is a particularly Conservative tactic that tries to set the agenda for the week, in which he made his demands around the upcoming budget. We all know that it’s pretty much set in stone by this point and is on its way to the printers, but that never stops parties from making performative demands right up until the end. To that end, Poilievre had three main demands:

  1. Bring home powerful paycheques with lower taxes, so hard work pays off again.
  2. Bring home lower prices, by ending inflationary carbon tax hikes & deficit spending that drive up inflation & interest rates.
  3. Bring homes people can afford by removing government gatekeepers to free up land and speed up building permits.

First of all, the thing he refuses to acknowledge or understand is that tax cuts fuel inflation. If he’s worried about the increasing cost of living, tax cuts won’t actually do anything meaningful, and are more likely to just add fuel to that fire. (Meanwhile, taxes aren’t going up for anyone except profitable corporations and on luxury goods). When it comes to housing prices, carbon prices are not inflationary (the Bank of Canada has cited that their effect on inflation is negligible), and deficit spending has absolutely nothing to do with either inflation or interest rates. This is a facile narrative that Poilievre keeps insisting, preferring an austerity budget that will only make the vulnerable even more precarious without government supports, but this economic message still resonates for a particular generation. Meanwhile, none of this will affect housing prices, because that is driven by a lack of supply, which is because municipalities refuse to zone for density, and because provincial governments won’t use their powers to force the issue. And that leads us to the third point, which is that the federal government has no ability to “remove gatekeepers” at the provincial or municipal level. They can’t do anything about building permits, and I am dubious that there is enough federal land that is suitable for housing developments in major cities around the country that is underutilized. I may be wrong, but this has been a perennial promise by governments for years and nothing has really moved, which leads me to believe there’s not a lot to be had.

It’s not at all surprising that Poilievre is sticking to facile and wrong budgetary narratives, but it would be great if he could actually be called out on it rather than both-sides at best, which is barely even happening. This is important stuff and we’re just shrugging it off, and focusing on more bullshit polls about people believing the Conservatives are still the better economic managers in spite of decades of proof to the contrary.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces have believed to have suffered more than 1100 dead in a week of battles near Bakhmut, with another 1500 wounded so badly as to be removed from the fighting. The Institute for the Study of War believes Russia’s planned advance has stalled in Bakhmut, and that the assault will be more difficult to sustain without more significant losses.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1634849209840173057

Continue reading →