Author Archives: Dale

About Dale

Journalist in the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery

Roundup: The threat of annexation is serious

Posted on by

Well, things got real again today, as Justin Trudeau told the audience at his Canada-US Economic Summit that Trump isn’t joking around with his talk of annexation, and that part of the reason why is access to our critical minerals. Trudeau apparently also talked about the need to mend fences with Mexico as well, which was apparently an oblique shot at Doug Ford, who has been trying to throw them under the bus rather than working with them to counter Trump. (Ford, meanwhile, disparaged the whole summit while on the campaign trail, because apparently, it’s stealing his thunder). There was also talk at the summit about pipelines, nuclear energy (and conservative shills who claim Trudeau is anti-nuclear are straight-up lying), and removing some of the federal-situated trade barriers around financial services regulations and procurement.

As the day went on, more details came out about those two calls that Trudeau had with Trump on Monday about the tariffs and the “reprieve” that was granted. Comments included that Trump was musing about breaking a 1908 boundary treaty, was dismissive of our contributions to NORAD, and listed off a litany of complaints. (Because “it’s all about fentanyl,” right?) It was also on this call that Trudeau apparently deduced that Trump hadn’t been briefed on the $1.3 billion border plan, but maybe that’s what you get when Trump refuses your calls for weeks while he plays gangster. (And he was also refusing the Mexican president’s calls as well, so this was not a Trudeau-specific snub).

So this is where things are at—the stakes are higher than we may want to admit (and certainly the head of the Canadian American Business Council doesn’t want to admit it and still believes this is just an offensive joke), but maybe this existential threat will help shake off the normalcy bias that has perpetuated a certain status quo. Nevertheless, the political landscape is shifting drastically right now, and it’s going to make for a very different election campaign than what everyone was counting on.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian guided bomb attack on Sumy region in the northeast killed three. Russians claim to have taken the settlement of Toretsk, but the Ukrainian brigade in the outskirts says they haven’t moved. International nuclear monitors are concerned that the number of attacks on the Russian-occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant have increased.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Baylis brings back boneheaded ideas

Posted on by

Yesterday, no-hope Liberal leadership candidate Frank Baylis offered his ideas about how to make politics better, and…*sighs, pinches bridge of nose* It’s so bad, you guys. Back when he was an MP, Baylis had proposed a motion to change the Standing Orders to do a bunch of dumb things that he felt would improve things for MPs, but then didn’t show up for the debate on his own motion, so it died on the Order Paper, fortunately. But I see that he’s back at it again.

I cannot stress enough how stupid of an idea term limits are in a system like ours, because you actually need to have institutional memory in politics, and you can’t build that up in ten-year increments. You just can’t. That’s one of the reasons why the Senate tends to be more valuable in that capacity (which has been curtailed thanks to Trudeau kicking Liberal senators from his own caucus and only appointing independents), but you need experienced MPs in your caucus. Term limits make that impossible, especially for ten years. Canada already has a problem with a higher-than-normal rate of turnover for MPs as compared to other similar democracies, and making the churn worse doesn’t help. Baylis kept justifying this by saying “I’m a professional engineer” when questioned about this on Power & Politics, which doesn’t actually give him any special insight.

His idea of letting the Speaker choose who gets to speak and not party leaders is partially sound, but only in particular circumstances. I get that he wants to eliminate speaking lists, which I do agree with, particularly for Question Period, but it’s not as much of a problem as the rules around speaking times, and how we structure debates. Of course, he then screws up that decent idea with the boneheaded notion of petitions to trigger debates. Parliament is not supposed to be about empty take-note debates. Debates should have a purpose—speaking to motions or legislation that actually do something, rather than speaking for speaking’s sake. That’s all that this idea does.

Finally, Baylis wants a second chamber like they have in Westminster and Canberra, but again, this is ill-thought-out. We already don’t have enough MPs to fully staff all committees (particularly without having parliamentary secretaries as voting members), and to keep debate going in the Chamber, and now you want to add a second chamber? He says this would “speed up decision-making and end legislative gridlock,” but it absolutely wouldn’t because that’s not what those chambers do in the UK or Australia. They are largely used for non-votable debates, and giving speeches or statements. That kind of thing may be of more use in the UK where there are 650 MPs who can’t make members’ statements with much frequency, but it doesn’t affect the pace of legislation at all. It’s so stupid that he didn’t even bother to read up on his own gods damned proposals, but hey, he’s a “businessman” and an “engineer,” so why bother to actually learn how politics works? Honestly.

Meanwhile, speaking of his other no-hope candidate…

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians claim to have repelled an offensive in the Kursk region. Ukraine received some more F-16 fighters from the Netherlands, and Mirage jets from France. Eight Ukrainian children who had been seized from their families were returned home.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cautious optimism on trade barriers

Posted on by

Anita Anand told reporters yesterday that she is making progress with provinces when it comes to eliminating interprovincial trade barriers, which sounds great. In fact, she claims that some of those barriers could be “wiped away” in the next thirty days. It would be great news if that’s true, but I have my doubts because these barriers are incredibly difficult to harmonise around the country, and they’re mostly differing regulations, which are perfectly valid exercise of provincial powers. They’re extremely difficult to harmonize because sometimes they differ for a reason. Kevin Milligan explains in this thread if you click through. (He also throws cold water on the notion that we could or should join the EU).

Glad we got through the tariff emergency (at least the first wave of it….). Also glad that people are bringing creativity, energy, and determination to figuring out a medium and long-run response.But I want to throw cold water on three ideas I've seen floated. I'll explain…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-02-04T20:24:14.385Z

I have to say that I am very curious regarding the method by which Anand is securing these changes, because I have heard no chatter about provinces being willing to surrender some of their provincial sovereignty in order to eliminate some of these barriers. I have also heard nothing about any kind of common regulatory body that could make determinations and that the provinces would adhere to, because they’ve all eschewed a common securities regulator, which should be low-hanging fruit for regulatory harmonisation, and yet… That would seem to imply that they have been establishing some sort of framework around mutual recognition of standards or credentials, but as of yet we have no real details.

As one example from that story: size and weight regulations for transport trucks.There is a very good reason that BC has detailed rules about snow chains for trucks and other provs may not. We have snowy mountains; some provs do not….www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-02-05T20:36:21.924Z

…so this doesn't mean we can't have a Canada-wide standard for truck size/weight. It means you really have to work hard to ensure the standard makes sense for each prov.If you get this wrong, people die. Regs that are too loose result in trucking accidents. So it takes work to get it right.

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-02-05T20:40:05.709Z

The other note of caution I would make is that even if these barriers were reduced or eliminated, it would take time to reorient supply chains east-to-west rather than north-to-south, so there would be no immediate cushioning effect from any Trump tariffs. People will need to have realistic expectations about what this will achieve, particularly in the short-to-medium term.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine is blaming an explosion at a draft office in Khmelnytskyi region that killed one person and wounded several others as a series of Russian spies orchestrating attacks. 150 Ukrainian POWs were returned in a prisoner swap with Russia. Here are some of the details about how Ukrainians captured two North Korean soldiers fighting in Kursk region. Ukrainians are also noting a marked improvement in the accuracy of North Korean missiles fired at Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sad skits to demand Parliament’s summoning

Posted on by

With the “reprieve” now granted, the Conservatives are back to demanding that Parliament be summoned, for…reasons. They have not actually spelled out what they need to legislate, because there are no actual proposals on the table, and you don’t need legislation for retaliatory tariffs (which are currently on hold). There may be a need to give new powers to CBSA around export controls, but we’re not there yet. Nevertheless, pretty much every Conservative MP put out some kind of tweet demanding Parliament be summoned, because it’s all about social media. MP Michael Barrett went up to the West Block to shoot a shitpost video where he tried to open the main doors to the House of Commons, but they were locked, so that he could perform for the camera, but the pièce de résistance here is that those doors are normally open when the House isn’t sitting, and closed when they are, which means that he had to get security to close the doors for him so that he could perform his little skit for the cameras. Just ridiculous.

The thing that nobody is really denying is that their only plan is to have Parliament summoned so that they can immediately call for a non-confidence vote, and the poll numbers are moving away from their previous landslide position because Trudeau is on his way out, and most of his likely successors are also moving away from the carbon levy (which is stupid and self-defeating, but I’m not a strategic genius). Poilievre is hoping to still capitalise on the anger against Trudeau while he can, because the longer it goes, the less the election is going to be about Trudeau or the carbon levy, and it will be more about who can deal with Trump, and Poilievre is far less favourable in many eyes on that front, hence his desperation to go now.

That leaves it up to Jagmeet Singh to determine if any proposals to counter Trump threats would pass, or if the country goes straight to an election and be even less ability to respond to any of Trump’s threats, and he continues to play performatively tough, insisting he’ll pass any measures introduced before the beginning of March, but he’s still voting non-confidence at the end, which…makes no sense, other than he’s still playacting like a tough guy. I would ask why everything needs to be so stupid, but we’re in a cursèd timeline.

The past two weeks, absolutely. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-04T15:15:33.437Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile strike killed five and wounded over 55 in the town of Izium in the Kharkiv region. As well, drone strikes hit a railway depot in Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukrainian drones sparked another fire at an oil refinery, this time in The Krasnodar region. Frozen US aid means that funds to support people evacuated from front-line settlements may be in serious jeopardy.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1886757333042098399

Continue reading →

Roundup: A thirty-day reprieve—maybe

Posted on by

In the wake of the weekend of anger and betrayal, one of Trump’s economic advisors went on television to insist that we mistakenly believed this to be a trade war when it’s a drug war. You know, except for all of the talk from Trump about trade deficits, and using economic warfare to force annexation, and the fact that he pardoned the guy who founded a big drug trafficking site on the dark web. Trump himself was talking about “51st state” as this very line was being delivered, along with the new whinge that American banks can’t operate in Canada (which they can in various capacities and some of them already are, but they need to adhere to Canadian banking regulations). Yeah, totally about the drug war. And yes, a number of Vichy Canadians also swallowed this bullshit line of reasoning.

Ah, I see, we've reached the stage of gaslighting with a smile. Cool. Coolcoolcool.

— Shannon Proudfoot (@sproudfoot.bsky.social) 2025-02-03T17:32:32.248Z

Also applies to Vichy Canadians.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-03T18:27:30.038Z

While Scott Moe called for de-escalation, we got word that Mexico had reached a reprieve in exchange for ten thousand troops along their border (when they already have fifteen thousand), so while we waited for Trump to have his call with Justin Trudeau, what did Pierre Poilievre demand, as he stated that while the tariffs were unjustified, that Trump was nevertheless right about the border? Troops along our border, along with adoption of his handwavey slogan-plan (of which I will have more in a full column later). Because militarizing our border for the first time since before Confederation is really the solution here. (Scott Moe also suggested putting CBSA under the military, because the man is a gods damned idiot). Never mind that Poilievre has consistently lied about the border, claiming that Trudeau “weakened” it, and that it took Trump to get us to take it seriously, all of which is false. He nevertheless is giving Trump all the more ammunition he needs, and giving succour to the Vichy Canadians who desperately want to believe Trump.

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lhccxlwz3c2j

Moreover, what role would the military play? Would we be searching people before they exit Canada at a border crossing? Or would we just be trying to stop people from crossing away from border crossings? Would the military be given powers to arrest, etc., similar to peace officers?

— Timothy Huyer (@tim4hire.bsky.social) 2025-02-03T20:17:48.186Z

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3lhc5z2pvlk27

Finally, Trudeau had his call with Trump, and we also got our thirty-day reprieve on the promise of what we were already doing, plus another couple hundred thousand dollars for dealing with organised crime (which yes, is needed), and appointing a “fentanyl czar,” which can get into the sea. We don’t have “czars” in our system of government. Yes, this is empty theatre, and whatever minister or deputy minister is given this title won’t make that much difference, but nevertheless, the precedent becomes set, and future governments are going to start appointing more “czars” to ape Americanisms, which is the very last thing we need.

This isn’t even security theatre, it’s a security puppet show.

— Tabatha Southey (@tabathasouthey.bsky.social) 2025-02-03T22:47:31.062Z

While plenty of Americans mocked that Trump just got played by Canada and Mexico, I’m not really convinced. None of this was done in good faith, and Trump has given so many different reasons for why we deserved to be punished that no one reason can ever be sufficient. The tariff threat hasn’t gone away, and the “reprieve” will be threatened continually every time he thinks of some new shakedown, and it won’t stop. This was only the opening salvo, and while it exposed the positions of some of the players, we’re a long way even seeing the finish line. Buckle up.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian troops in Pokrovsk are losing ground as Russians have begun switching up tactics as they try to take the strategic city, while Ukraine’s logistics are in peril. Ukrainian drone strikes have triggered more fires at oil refineries in Russia. Trump says he wants Ukraine to supply the US with rare earth elements as “equalization” for future aid, because everything is a shakedown. The UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission reports an alarming rise in Russians executing captured Ukrainian soldiers.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Touching off a trade war

Posted on by

On Saturday afternoon, it happened—under false pretenses, Donald Trump signed the executive order to put tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China (25 percent on all imports except oil and gas, which is at ten percent) coming into effect on Tuesday, with the likelihood it will rise later, and threatening that it will go up further if we retaliate. Because how dare we exercise our sovereignty.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-01T19:37:55.910Z

By late evening, prime minister Justin Trudeau gave a speech, spent part of it “speaking directly to Americans” (which was not covered live on any US news stations, but did get play on Sunday), and outlined the first tranche of retaliatory tariffs, with further non-tariff measures to come into place in about twenty-one days. (The Logic has a roundup of Canadian reaction here).

Some Americans seemed confused by the response, including the New York Times, which pretty much brings us back to that Onion headline.

Hey, @nytimes.com. Go fuck yourselves.

— Alex Usher (@alexusherhesa.bsky.social) 2025-02-02T17:20:07.562Z

Reading the posts from US political junkies on here like

— Chris Turner (@theturner.bsky.social) 2025-02-02T04:11:19.060Z

More troubling were the Vichy Canadians, who continue to blame Justin Trudeau for this state of affairs, including tech bros in this country, such as Canada’s Specialest Tech Bro, Tobi Lütke, who not only blamed Canada for fighting back, but bought all of Trump’s bullshit excuses. It was never about the border, or fentanyl, or NATO spending, or even trade deficits. This is about Trump wanting to use tariffs to give more billionaire tax cuts (which the tech bros in the US are all salivating over), and to assert his dominance, no matter how much it costs him internationally.

And then there was Pierre Poilievre, and while he was not explicitly being a Vichy Canadian, it didn’t help that he was still incapable of articulating an actual response other than yet another slogan (“Canada First!”), demanding things that won’t actually help (a tax cut will only help the rich, and the killing the carbon levy early will do absolutely nothing about the shocks from the tariffs, and the capital gains stopping changes only allow the wealthy to continue to engage in tax arbitrage), that require magic (internal trade barriers cannot be brought down with the snap of a finger—they’re differing regulatory standards that can’t be harmonized with the stroke of a pen), and he’s continuing to give credence to Trump’s lie that the border is a problem, because he’s been trying to claim that Trudeau “weakened” them, which has always been a lie. And while he and Conservatives cry that Parliament needs to be summoned immediately, the only reason to do so is for performance art (gotta get those clips for their socials), and for him to bring down the government at his first opportunity, because he refuses to say he will actually let any package the government brings forward, whenever that happens, pass.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1886158003272925684

https://twitter.com/mikepmoffatt/status/1886172330394636539

And then, of course, a gods damned CBC journalist made it all the worse in Poilievre’s press conference by phrasing “supporting government measures” as “stepping aside,” and Poilievre and company used that to play victim, and demand the CBC be defunded, yet again. What an absolutely stupid own-goal, and so many journalists keep making them with Poilievre.

Can confirm.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-03T03:15:14.066Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drone and missile attacks on Saturday killed fifteen, mostly in Poltava. Ukrainian drone attacks targeted more Russian energy facilities, and sparked fires at an oil refinery in Volgograd. And Ukrainian officials are unimpressed with the American “negotiation” position of ensuring that elections are held in Ukraine after a ceasefire, given that it does nothing to deter Putin.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney’s boneheaded “green incentives”

Posted on by

Liberal leadership hopeful Mark Carney revealed his plan to replace the consumer carbon levy yesterday, and it’s a handwavey bunch of “green incentives” for things like improving your home insulation, furnace, appliances, or buying an electric vehicle. This would be offset by maintaining or increasing the industrial carbon pricing system, along with carbon border adjustments. Carney claimed that the current system isn’t working, which is false, because emissions have been driven down, and then shrugs and says it’s “too divisive,” which is the Liberals’ own gods damned faults for being such incompetent communicators about how the levy works, the rebates (remember when they thought that calling them “climate action incentives” was a genius idea?), and how reducing one’s own carbon footprint maximises those rebates. The government was absolutely incapable of communicating any of it, and Pierre Poilievre swooped in and filled the space with lies and disinformation.

This is so unbelievably stupid. "Green incentives?" I live in an apartment. I can't change the insulation or heating system. Instead, with the rebate from the carbon levy, I get cash, which is a pretty nice incentive given that I don't have a car or do much that I need to pay the carbon levy for.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T15:13:28.930Z

This is just about as moronic as Erin O'Toole's "airmiles for carbon" plan, where you would get more rewards the more you pollute, and those of us who are already living low-carbon lifestyles get nothing. The carbon levy was fine if the Liberals could actually properly defend it.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T15:13:28.931Z

I find Carney’s plan absolutely infuriating for a number of reasons. One of them is that this imparts a false narrative that carbon emissions reductions can happen for free for consumers. Even if there is no consumer-facing price, industrial emitters will pass along costs, and people won’t get a rebate for those higher costs, which hurts lower-income households harder. Everyone fawning over Carney’s economic credentials should be smacking themselves upside the head because of this fiction he is trying to perpetrate and just how economically illiterate it actually is.

Meanwhile, how much of an “incentive” can it really be for one-time purchases? You can only really re-insulate your house once, or buy a new furnace once every twenty years. There is no price disincentive to increased carbon use, and there is no ongoing reward for a low-carbon lifestyle, which the rebates provide. Again, very few people actually understand this because the government steadfastly refused to actually communicate how the levy and rebates actually work, how to maximise them, and how it rewards ongoing low-carbon behaviour. They hoped that legacy media and would communicate that (they absolutely will not), and it was basically up to five economists on Twitter, which is useless to ninety-five percent of the population. So now the people who have done the work to reduce their carbon footprint will now be punished, and people will take advantage of those one-time purchases for what? The pat on the back that they can give themselves? Everyone involved here needs to take a long, hard look at some of their life choices, but then again, if they had any modicum of self-reflection, they likely wouldn’t be in politics. What an absolute disaster.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones injured four in Odessa, damaging a hospital and grain warehouse, while a missile attack seriously damaged a historic centre in the same city. Russian forces are also tightening their approach to Pokrovsk, which is a key logistics hub in the region. Ukrainian forces destroyed a Russian command post in the Kursk region, and are also reporting that they haven’t seen any North Korean troops in the area for three weeks. Ukrainian drones also damaged an oil refinery in Russia’s Volgograd region.

Continue reading →

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 →