Author Archives: Dale

About Dale

Journalist in the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery

Roundup: Showboating at PROC over allegations of Chinese interference

Posted on by

The Procedure and House Affairs committee met yesterday to vote on a motion around expanding their study on election interference to include the recent revelations from the Globe and Mail about alleged Chinese interference in the past two elections. Despite some arguing, particularly with Conservatives demanding both the appearance of Katie Telford (once again, for those of you at the back, you do not summon staff to committee because ministers are responsible!), and they were going to demand classified documents, which is becoming just part of the show these days, but they were eventually talked out of both of those demands and have instead summoned a few ministers, plus CSIS, the RCMP, and Elections Canada to discuss these particular allegations.

But of course, there was showboating. And the Liberals, who usually try to pretend that they’re the grown-ups in the room, were all-in on it as Jennifer O’Connell responded to the allegation that the Liberals were covering up what happened because it benefitted them (allegedly), saying “This is the same Trump-type tactics to question election results moving forward,” and that created a giant stir. She’s not entirely wrong, and the Conservatives have dealt in enough bad faith that they could start going down that particular road (and still might), but she wasn’t helping.

Amidst all of this, the Star obtained documents from the Conservatives showing that they were considering going public about the alleged interference over Chinese-language social media they were seeing during the last campaign but decided not to for fear of political backlash. Instead, they sent it to the committee overseeing the integrity of the election, but didn’t get much response from them at the time, who are now complaining that their concerns weren’t taken seriously.

Throughout this, I keep going back to my misgivings about the way in which the original Globe and Mail story was framed, particularly in giving the impression that the Chinese were trying to engineer a minority parliament, which is impossible to do. The piece should have simply stated that the Chinese preferred it because of chaos, but there is no interference they could do, short of stuffing ballot boxes in certain regions, to hope to achieve it, and that’s not going to happen in our system. Likewise, with the allegations around campaign financing, which don’t make any sense as written. Of course, the Globe has a well-known tendency of producing a lot of smoke for very little fire, but all of that smoke is just fuelling the MPs’ showboating, and it’s making it difficult to demonstrate that we have a serious parliament as a result.

https://twitter.com/mrmubinshaikh/status/1628216781901905922

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 364:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces are holding positions on the front lines in the east, while Russia claims that they are advancing in the Donbas region toward Bakhmut. Here is a look at five significant battles over the past year. Meanwhile, Ukraine is asking Canada to lend rail expertise and parts to help keep its crucial system running (but seriously? We’ve not been good to rail in this country).

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1628044033321848833

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1628137356556439585

Continue reading →

Roundup: Empathy for the deeply selfish?

Posted on by

Update: Sorry for the delay. I had issues with the website but everything should be running smoothly now.

In spite of the Emergencies Act public inquiry report being released on Friday, there seem to be some awfully short memories as to what was happening at the time—or a bunch of people are acting disingenuously or in bad faith. Take, for example, Pierre Poilievre, who took to claiming that the assembled mass of far-right extremists, conspiracy theorists, grifters and grievance tourists were concerned about their costs of living and not being able to live. Which is funny, because inflation hadn’t spiked then, and interest rates were still at rock bottom. He is taking his current talking points and casting them back in time to a situation that didn’t exist, and has consigned the talking points of the era (“Freedom!”) to the memory hole. Funny that.

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1627033913188290560

And then there’s the Globe and Mail, whose editorial board decided that what the occupiers need is empathy. After all, they had hurt feelings, and this narrative of the prime minister’s “divisive” comments keep circulating, even though he was telling the truth. The fact that certain people kept telling on themselves by openly identify as racists and misogynists to somehow “own Trudeau” was quite something.

Oh, and the Globe and Mail’s editorial board, comfortable in their downtown Toronto offices, should take a look at their own life choices as they demand empathy for a group of deeply selfish people who refused to take public health measures for the good of everyone around them, and who traded in conspiracy theories instead of behaving like grown-ups, and who held a city hostage in an extended three-week temper tantrum, instead of empathy for the citizens of Ottawa as their city police and provincial government abandoned them.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 363:

US president Joe Biden made a “surprise” visit to Kyiv yesterday, and stayed for some five hours, meeting with president Volodymyr Zelenzkyy and pledging more support for the country. (Here’s a look at how that trip came together). Ukrainian troops training on Leopard 2 tanks compare them to a Mercedes. Ukrainian forces say they are inflicting “extraordinarily significant” losses on Russian forces in the Donbas as Russia continues to move toward Bakhmut. Meanwhile, midwives in Ukraine are looking to Canada for training on how to better deliver babies outside of hospitals (as they are not licensed for home deliveries).

https://twitter.com/re_dailymail/status/1627639235665702913

Continue reading →

Roundup: Inquiry report and influence reports

Posted on by

Justice Paul Rouleau delivered his final report from the Emergencies Act public inquiry yesterday, and in it, he concluded that the government was justified in invoking the Act, albeit somewhat reluctantly because of failures at every level, particularly with policing, but also most especially from Doug Ford and the Ontario government, whom he reserves some particularly even-toned scorn for. There was also some blame apportioned to Justin Trudeau for his “fringe minority” comments as having hardened the resolve of occupiers (erm, except it was true what he said). There was plenty of blame apportioned to the Ottawa police, as well there should be, and he did reject the occupiers’ claims that they were peaceful.

Rouleau made 56 recommendations, including better intelligence coordination and coordination among police, as well as to make changes to the Act, which Trudeau has promised to study and come up with a response to, and that he regrets the phrasing of his “fringe minority” comments (which, I repeat, were true). Pierre Poilievre, predictably, went before a microphone and insisted that Trudeau created the whole mess by “attacking his own population,” and went on a tear about inflation (which was not a pressing concern when the occupation happened), and then went on a rant about the CBC for daring to ask him a question, and around and around we go.

https://twitter.com/stephaniecarvin/status/1626702909017554945

In pundit reaction, Susan Delacourt filters the report through the weaponization of the term “freedom,” and what it represents and misrepresents. Paul Wells offers some of his initial thoughts on the report. Justin Ling has his own perspective of the report based on his own reporting of the occupations’ membership and the role of disinformation that fuelled it. And of course, the Beaverton gets the last word.

Chinese Interference

The Globe and Mail published a story where their two journalists had been shown CSIS documents (illegally!) to show how Chinese officials were trying to interfere in the last two elections, and how their Vancouver consul was claiming to have defeated two Conservative incumbents in the last election. And it sounds concerning…but details don’t add up for me. The Chinese say they wanted a Liberal minority, but targeting eleven ridings cannot give you that kind of outcome. And the section on political donations doesn’t make sense given the rules around them, so I have a lot of questions that this story doesn’t answer.

In response, Justin Trudeau says that whatever Chinese officials claim, the election result was unaffected (and given how the alleged Chinese scheme doesn’t make much sense, I am giving this a bit more weight). Pierre Poilievre says that Trudeau turned a blind eye because the interference was to his advantage (again, how?) One of the defeated Conservatives says he fears the country has become an “open market” for foreign governments trying to sway elections (again, how?)

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 360:

Ukrainian soldiers fighting near Bakhmut make the direct plea to western countries to send more weapons, while president Volodymyr Zelenskyy made similar requests of assembled allied leaders in Munich. American intelligence is estimating that Wagner Group mercenaries (most of them convicts) have suffered more than 30,000 casualties in Ukraine, with about 9,000 of them killed in action.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1626559600110469125

Continue reading →

Roundup: The frustrated Commissioner was part of the problem

Posted on by

The outgoing Ethics Commissioner is starting to do exit interviews, and he’s expressing frustration that these kinds of ethics violations keep happening, despite the law being in place for 17 years now. To that I say two things:

1) No matter how many rules you put in place, it won’t matter because the Liberals under Trudeau fundamentally believe that so long as they mean well, the ends will justify the means, and that it’s better to simply apologise after having broken rules than it is to scrupulously and slavishly adhere to them in the first place. You can’t just put new rules to stop them from that particular belief, and no amount of training from the Commissioner’s office is likely to shake them from such beliefs.

2) Our ethics regime sucks, in large part because so much of it is predicated on the whims of the Commissioner, and this Commissioner had a lot of whims. His predecessor had a habit of reading her mandate so narrowly that nothing ever applied, except for a small handful of cases, one of which was Trudeau’s vacation with the Aga Khan, in which she made up rules around what a family friendship entails. The current Commissioner has been the opposite, reading his mandate very, very expansively so that things it should not encompass, it does (like the SNC-Lavalin issue). He has made up statutory interpretation from whole cloth, such as the definition of what constitutes “family” under the Act, and capturing relatives through marriage that no other statute in the country captures in its definitions (the issue with Dominic LeBlanc). There is no consistency, and even when they believe they are within the law, he will make up a rule that says they’re not.

I’m not suggesting the Liberals are blameless, because they’re not (see the part about them not caring about rules), but the statue itself is a problem, as are the perceptions around it, and the apocalyptic language being used to describe minor transgressions. They keep talking about the transgressions making it hard to have trust in politicians, but when the system itself fails them because it’s poorly designed and poorly administered, it’s just one vicious circle that nobody wants to show a way out of.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 359:

Russia launched 36 missiles early in the day and struck the country’s oil refinery, while also shelling two dozen settlements in the east and south of the country.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1626479351045804032

https://twitter.com/denys_shmyhal/status/1626151901686337538

Continue reading →

QP: Uproar over calling out misinformation

Posted on by

The prime minister was in the Bahamas for CARICOM meetings, and his deputy elsewhere, most of the other leaders were again away from the Chamber. Andrew Scheer led off, with a script in front of him, and he demanded the prime minister “take responsibility” for “waste and corruption” that caused inflation, which is utter bunkum. Ahmed Hussen chided the Conservatives for delaying and voting against rental supplements for two million Canadians. Scheer insisted that this was all about the Liberals giving contracts to friends—which is a bit rich considering how much he helped himself to party funds when he was leader. Mark Holland got up and praised their work in lowering poverty and reducing unemployment. Scheer railed about wage subsidies to profitable corporations, and then went on a tirade about Liberal ethics lapses. François-Philippe Champagne accused the Conservatives of talking down the country and gave a non sequitur of praise for an electric vehicle project. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French and called out the Bloc for voting in favour of Bill C-5 on reducing some mandatory minimum sentences, which is very strange. David Lametti praised their supports for victims. Paul-Hus raised a particular sexual assault case, and repeated his accusations, and this time Lametti said he couldn’t comment on a particular case which could still be appealed, but reiterated that Bill C-5 was about tackling systemic racism in the justice system.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he once again raised concerns about Liberals raising objections to the amendments to the official languages bill. Ginette Petitpas Taylor praised that the bill will given new powers to the Languages Commissioner. Therrien tried calling out individual Liberals, and this time Pablo Rodriguez said the Bloc were going to vote against it anyway, so what did it matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he railed about rising rental prices, which is provincial jurisdiction. Hussen praised their housing measures. Singh repeated the question in French, and this time Randy Boissonnault acknowledged the NDP’s support in the measures they passed.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Opposing amendments at committee

Posted on by

I find myself amused by the ongoing stories that some Liberal MPs may vote against the official languages bill when it comes out of committee as amended, and the constant oh noes! Trudeau is losing control of his caucus! narrative that accompanies it. This said, there are egregious amendments that I have a hard time believing that they’re in order, because they reference provincial legislation in Quebec. For example, the change to the preamble of the bill to acknowledge Quebec’s Law 96 should have no place in federal legislation. There is also an amendment that says that if federal and provincial language laws come into conflict, the provincial law (especially Quebec’s Law 96) takes precedence, which is against every single constitutional practice and statutory interpretation principle in this country, and beyond that, it sets an absolutely terrible precedent for other areas of the law where one level of government tries to impose something on another jurisdiction, and because this one went unchallenged its okay. Yeah, we don’t want that to happen.

As mentioned, these are a result of Conservative and Bloc amendments, and the Conservatives are back to pandering to Quebec voters (and François Legault) by being as shameless as possible in trying to out-bloc the Bloc, and in some cases, they are being supported by the NDP’s Niki Ashton. It stands to reason that if the government objects to a number of these amendments, they can vote them down during report stage debate, and that would mean the whole chamber is voting, not just the Bloc and the Conservatives, so it could be enough votes to ensure that these amendments are left out of the final bill, which would mean this “rebellion” by a few Liberal MPs has done its job. There are still a couple of meetings left for this bill in committee, so we’ll see what the final shape of the bill looks like.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 358:

Russian troops are mounting constant attacks, and are claiming to have broken through two fortified lines in the Luhansk region (but they make lots of claims that aren’t true), while the regional governor denies that Ukrainian troops are in retreat. The Russians have been changing their tactics at Bakhmut, moving in smaller groups, without the support of tanks or armoured personnel carriers, and the Ukrainians are adapting to the new tactics. Reuters has a photo essay of one family’s evacuation from the area near Bakhmut, during which their grandmother died in the van.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1625861957549948929

Continue reading →

QP: The kings of misinformation

Posted on by

The prime minister was absent, somewhat unusually for a Wednesday, jetting off to the Bahamas for a CARICOM meeting to discuss the situation in Haiti. His deputy was also absent though in town, and even Pierre Poilievre was away, spending the day in Calgary. Melissa Lantsman led off with a script in front of her, and she went on a disappointed tirade about the government constantly breaking the law, and raised the Ethics Commissioner’s report on Greg Fergus, and wondered why nobody gets fired. Mark Holland said that Fergus apologised and was trying to promote a Black business in his riding, but realised his error. Lantsman listed other past ethics violations and wondered why nobody got fired. Holland said it was important that everyone show up and do their best, and then praised their economic record and poverty reduction. Lantsman tried a third time, and Holland said that the government is trying to shepherd the country though some of the most difficult economic times since the Second World War. Luc Berthold took over in French and worried about people not meeting their financial needs and blamed the prime minister for it. Pascale St-Onge noted that while times are difficult, they are ensuring supports for people who need it. Berthold tried again, and this time Randy Boissonnault gave the usual talking points about the Conservatives voting against supports for people.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he blamed the government for underfunding healthcare, and Adam van  Koeverden read a script about the deal the government has imposed on the provinces and what it entails. Blanchet railed that the money was not enough, and this time Pablo Rodriguez enthused about how great the deal was, and how it only bad news for the Bloc.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the Bloc and railed about private clinics that are operating in the country, to which van Koeverden recited by rote the talking points about upholding the public system. Singh repeated the question in French, and van Koeverden read the French version of the same talking points.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An upcoming vacancy that will be impossible to fill

Posted on by

The report was expected after the complaint had been made, but yesterday, the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner released a report that confirmed that Liberal MP Greg Fergus did break the rules by writing a letter of support to the CRTC for a constituent, given that he is a parliamentary secretary and that position could be construed as trying to exert pressure on a quasi-judicial body. Fergus owned up to the mistake and apologised, and the Commissioner suggested that perhaps ministers and parliamentary secretaries would benefit from additional training from his office.

But that wasn’t all—the commissioner, Mario Dion, announced that he would be retiring in a few days because of persistent health issues. While Dion has not been a great Commissioner (some of his rulings have been highly dubious because he over-interpreted his mandate or his enabling statute), the real problem is going to be in finding a replacement, because the legislation about who can apply for the job is, well, nearly impossible to meet. The previous Commissioner, Mary Dawson, needed to keep extending her tenure because they couldn’t find anyone to replace her, and now Dion is leaving without a replacement in the wings. And like I said, the criteria are nigh-impossible, because there are vanishingly few retired judges in this country who want the aggravation of this job with its modest pay, and the other option is the head of an administrative tribunal (which is how Dion got the job), and again, there are only so many of those. So good luck, MPs—you’re really, really going to need it.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 357:

Russian forces were concentrating their artillery on Bakhmut and the surrounding settlements. Meanwhile, NATO defence ministers met in Brussels to discuss getting more firepower to Ukraine as quickly as possible, now that Russia’s new offensive has begun. Germany has signed a deal to produce more ammunition for the anti-aircraft guns provided to Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/lyla_lilas/status/1625525076182310912

Continue reading →

QP: Re-litigating the hotel room

Posted on by

While the PM and his deputy were on their way back from Hazel McCallion’s funeral in Mississauga, most of the other leaders were also absent from the Chamber for QP. Andrew Scheer led off, like a flashback, and after a preamble of nonsense about inflation, he demanded to know why the prime minister billed taxpayers for a “$7000” hotel room (that number has been inflated) which he neglected to mention was for the funeral of the Queen. Ahmed Hussen got up and listed housing measures that the government put in place that the Conservatives voted against. Scheer tried again, this time comparing the cost of that hotel room to mortgage payments. Hussen repeated his same response. Scheer then raised the National Post story about trying to stifle disclosure of that information, and this time Rob Oliphant raised that this was for the Queen’s funeral, and that the delegation was appropriate for that occasion. Dominique Vien took over in French, and the cost of the hotel room was back to $6000 and demanded the government cap spending. Pascale St-Onge got up to say that the spending was targeted to those who need it most, while the Conservatives seek to cut that help. Vien and St-Onge went another round of the same with little difference.

Alain Therrien led for Bloc, and he thundered about health transfers, saying that provinces don’t really agree and accused the federal government of chronic underfunding, which is not exactly true. Adam van Koeverden read a statement about how pleased they are with the “agreement.” Therrien demanded over and over about “35 percent!” This time Pablo Rodriguez wondered where Therrien was with all of the newspaper headlines talking about an “agreement.”

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and cited a StatsCan figure about people struggling, and turned this into a demand that the government stop the Rogers-Shaw merger. François-Philippe Champagne said that he wanted more competition in the sector. Singh wondered if that meant that he would oppose the merger today, then switched to French to repeat his question. Champagne repeated his enthusiasm for competition.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A baffling way to fast-track a bill

Posted on by

The House of Commons began their fast-tracked debate on Bill C-39 yesterday, which is the bill to delay the onset of making mental disorder the sole criteria for accessing Medical Assistance in Dying, but even before debate got started, the government moved their motion to fast-track it in the most unusual and frankly unserious way possible. The motion extends sittings to midnight Monday and Wednesday (they sat until about 10:30 last night), all in the service of second reading debate. At midnight or collapse of debate on Wednesday, the bill is deemed to have been adopted at second reading, deemed to have been send to committee of the whole, deemed adopted and reported back, deemed to be adopted at third reading, and sent off to the Senate. The same motion also authorized the justice committee to sit as long as they need to today to consider the bill, and to be given priority of resources (i.e. interpreters) from any other committee for their study. But they don’t actually report back to the Commons (remember it is deemed to have gone to committee of the whole), so I’m not sure what the point of the exercise is.

Procedurally, this is bonkers, and furthermore, it just exacerbates the fact that we have a completely broken understanding of what second reading debate is supposed to be in this country. It’s where you debate the overall purpose of the bill, and it should last a single afternoon, with a handful speeches and some debate, and then be sent off to committee where they can do the real work. But instead, our Parliament has decided that second reading debate needs days upon days of canned speeches—particularly on a bill like this where everyone can stand up and say how “deeply personal” the issue is, and where a large number of Conservatives in particular can decry it and repeat a bunch of false assertions and misinformation about what this is supposed to be about. None of how they went about this makes any sense (and I remind you that the bill is one line). If all of the parties decided to fast-track this, there should have been a single speech from each party, and then to send it to committee for actual consideration today, so it can be sent back on Wednesday for final consideration. They didn’t need to contort themselves in this way in order to give everyone speaking time (like they did with the interminable speeches for the invocation of the Emergencies Act).

Once again, this is another signal of how unserious our Parliament is, and that it has devolved into little more than an exercise in reading canned speeches into the record. Nobody is actually being served by this, and our MPs need to grow up and start actually engaging with the material before them.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 356:

Bakhmut and its suburbs are being subjected to heavy shelling as Russia’s new offensive has begun, and Ukraine says that they have fortified their positions in the area. Russians have also struck in Kharkiv, Luhansk and Zaporizhzhia regions, and have been fortifying their own positions in the south of the country. Meanwhile, the Secretary-General of NATO warned that Ukraine is using ammunition faster than allies can provide it, and is trying to put pressure on Western defence industries to ramp up production as Russia is with its own industries.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1625178486926196740

Continue reading →