Author Archives: Dale

About Dale

Journalist in the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery

QP: Poilievre vs Fraser on GST cuts

Posted on by

Both the PM and his deputy were present today, and as a result, so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he claimed the PM had “copied and pasting” his idea of cutting the GST on rentals, and then patted himself on the back and quoted Mike Moffatt in praising his current plan to cut GST on new houses under $1 million, and wanted the government to adopt it. Justin Trudeau recited the false talking point that Poilievre had only built six affordable units when he was “minister” before saying they wouldn’t sign onto a programme of cuts. Poilievre insisted his plan would build by cutting bureaucracy, and Trudeau pointed out that cutting the Accelerator Fund would mean cutting investment in social housing in Quebec. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and Trudeau noted that the fine print of Poilievre’s plan is to cut affordable housing programmes. Poilievre then recited some particular misleading talking points another the two housing programmes he plans to cut, and Trudeau gave a half-hearted defence of those programmes, getting back to his “fine print” talking points. Poilievre repeated his policy pledge in order to get a clean clip, and Trudeau returned to his same “check the fine print” talking point.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1851331074929918416

Yves-François Blanchet led for the NDP, and in his most ominous tone, brought up that the government didn’t pass their two bills, and tried to sound as though those bills were the most common sense plan for Quebeckers. Trudeau said that they have supported Supply Management and they hoped the Senate would pass it, before listing measures they have taken to help seniors. Blanchet then threw some shade at the Conservatives for their privilege filibuster which prevented any confidence motions that could bring down the government, and Trudeau noted that they could all see who was in the Chamber to play petty politics versus those there to help Canadians.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he complained about Rogers rising fees and said that the Conservatives don’t care because their leader gets “big cheques” from Edward Rogers, before some disruption, before demanding the government force Rogers to lower fees or ban them from federal contracts. Trudeau gave some blame talking points about hold the telcos to account. Singh switched to French to raise the recent documentary that cited Alain Rayes’ comments on the anti-abortionists in the Conservatives before demanding the federal government increase access (which is provincial jurisdiction). Trudeau threw a verbal grenade across the aisle about Quebec Conservatives who are not saying anything about the anti-abortionists in their caucus.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The same government, not a new one

Posted on by

The final results of the BC election started rolling in as the absentee ballots were counted, and lo, it looks like the NDP managed to flip one seat in the final tally, making it a 47-44-2 tally NDP/Conservative/Greens. And while that’s all well and good, the way in which major media outlets described this was a gods damned tragedy, and I was about to lose my mind.

No, the NDP are not going to “form government,” because they are already the government. Only the legislature changes. No, the Lieutenant-Governor didn’t ask Eby to form government, her statement explicitly said “David Evy advised me that he is prepared to continue as premier.” Because she doesn’t sit around waiting to make a decision—she acts on advice, and he never resigned, so he is not forming anything. He will be shuffling his Cabinet, but it’s the same government that carries over to another legislature. That’s it, and it’s a really big problem when neither the national wire service of the national public broadcaster couldn’t actually read what she wrote, and instead wrote their copy based on a falsehood and changed her words to suit their wrong meaning.

Additionally, because I am going to get pedantic here, there is also no such thing as a “majority government” or a “minority government.” Government—meaning Cabinet—is government. What changes is whether they control a majority or minority of the legislature. The legislature is not government. What matters is whether the same government is able to maintain the confidence of the chamber, which is much easier to do when you have a majority of the seats. The fact that Eby has managed to secure a razor-thin majority of those seats means that he has essentially ensured that he can maintain that confidence (though the Speaker issue could remain tricky). But my gods, could our media outlets have a modicum of civic literacy? It’s not only embarrassing that they don’t, but it’s outright dangerous for democracy going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian air attacks killed four in Kyiv and four in Kharkiv, where they also shattered a historic building and celebrated landmark. Critical infrastructure was also damaged in two regions in the north of Ukraine, leading to more power outages.

Continue reading →

QP: Proud of their new housing policy

Posted on by

The PM was ostensibly in town but not present for Question Period, though his deputy was in his stead. All of the other leaders were absent, including Pierre Poilievre, even though he had just launched another policy position on housing. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he raised the plan from said press conference on cutting GST on new house under $1 million, and asked the government to adopt it. Sean Fraser said that it was great that they took inspiration from the policy to remove the GST on purpose-built rentals, but the Conservative plan to pay for this policy, buy cutting other programmes including to existing low-income housing, was irresponsible. Scheer insisted that the current plan was only paying for bureaucracy and photo ops, and demanded again the policy be adopted. Fraser scoffed that their plan was to do less for housing and spend money on a snitch-line for people who don’t like their neighbours’ housing plans. Scheer repeated his “bureaucracy and photo ops” talking points, and claimed housing starts were down. Fraser retorted that housing starts were in fact up, and tens of thousands over when the Conservatives were last in charge, before reiterating that the Conservative plan is to cut housing supports. Luc Berthold took over in French to demand the government match their pledge to cut GST, and this time, Chrystia Freeland responded that at Poilievre’s rare press conference, he accidentally told the truth and said that they would cut two programmes to pay for this, and listed what those might be. Berthold tried again, decrying how long it took people to afford a home, and this time, Soraya Martinez Ferrada gave her own version of the Conservatives will only cut, and that the programmes the would cut included social housing in Quebec.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and worried about an influx of migrants from the U.S. if Trump wins and asked if the government had a plan. Marc Miller repsonded with a single “oui.” Therrien gave another soliloquy that asked the very same thing. Miller repeated that they do have a plan, and that they have always managed the border with the U.S.

Jenny Kwan rose for the NDP, demanded federal action on abortion access, as though the federal government controlled it. Mark Holland got up and gave a rant about the conservatives and that no man should control a woman’s reproductive freedom. Rachel Blaney gave another round of the same, and Patty Hajdu gave her own rant about not standing for attacks on reproductive rights.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pushing back against PMO

Posted on by

There was an op-ed in the Star over the weekend from former Cabinet minister Lloyd Axworthy, in which he lamented the increasing centralization of power under the PMO, and that under Trudeau, ministers have become “infantilised,” particularly after seeing testimony at the Foreign Interference inquiry where chiefs of staff were keeping ministers in the dark about certain files. It’s a valid complaint, but not one unique to the Trudeau PMO, as Canadian academics have been making it since the previous Trudeau government, and was particularly egregious in the Harper government where everything flowed through the PMO—most especially message control—and ministers were rarely without approved talking points on their files.

I will also note that the current Trudeau did make an attempt to return to a system of “government by Cabinet,” and while certain ministers were free and capable to run their files, there was not an equitable distribution of talent in Cabinet as much as there was of gender, ethnicity and geography, so PMO did need to step in for some ministers. But there is also an inescapable reality that governing has also become more difficult than in the days of the first Trudeau government, and power is distributed much more horizontally because most issues require the cooperation of several ministries, and that requires a lot more central coordination from PMO or PCO. This being said, the real sin of the current government is that everything requires the sign-off from his chief of staff, which creates bottlenecks in decision-making, and that has been a continual problem.

In response to the Axworthy op-ed were a couple of tweets from Catherine McKenna about her experience—that PMO would say something, and she would push back if it didn’t come from Trudeau directly. It shows that a minister in charge of their file and who has the spine enough to stand their ground can do so, but not every minister is capable, and it’s something we need more ministers to learn how to do, because that’s how they will actually manage to own their own files.

Ukraine Dispatch

Two civilians were killed in a Russian attack on the southern Kherson region, while Russians have been making air attacks against Kharkiv and Kyiv. Ukraine continue to target ethanol plants in Russia with drones. A high-level South Korean delegation will be briefing the NATO Council about the North Korean troops now fighting on Russia’s behalf.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Calling for the moderates to re-engage

Posted on by

Over in The Line, former provincial Progressive Conservative (and former federal Conservative) comms staffer Chisholm Pothier goes though Blaine Higgs’ downfall in New Brunswick, and in particular how his obsession with “parental rights” as a cover for oppressing trans youth was one of the main drivers of that collapse, particularly because the Liberals in that province were talking about the things people were worried about, like housing and healthcare. He eschewed the usual partisan nonsense and congratulated Suan Holt on a deserved win. But that wasn’t the important part.

The most important takeaway from the piece, however, is that Pothier calls on Tories in New Brunswick to get memberships and get engaged with the party if they want to take it back from what Higgs turned it into, which is a narrow little cult catering primarily to Christian nationalists. This is something I have written columns about in the past—that it’s extremely important for ordinary people and moderates within a party to take out a membership and get involved at the grassroots level, because if you don’t, the crazies absolutely will and they will take over your party. This is what happened with the UCP in Alberta—when Jason Kenney engineered the hostile takeover of the PC party there, and then its merger with the Wildrose to form the UCP, it was done very much by getting the swivel-eyed loons to engage with the process at the expense of the moderates, whom they didn’t want in the party. This was to be a small-c conservative party and not the amorphous centrist mass that the PC party in Alberta had become, constantly reshaping itself and its beliefs to follow those of each successive leader. And now, it’s a party of hardcore fanatics, who turned on Kenney, and whom Danielle Smith is terrified they will do the same to her, so she is becoming increasingly radical in how she is governing as a result.

I cannot stress enough that ordinary people need to be engaged with parties at the grassroots level, or things get really bad. A party that only consists of Kool-Aid drinkers, regardless of the party, becomes toxic pretty fast (especially if they start going on with the purity tests). While the PCs in New Brunswick have a chance to reclaim their party, which is probably too late in Alberta (and couldn’t happen at all with the sudden capitulation of BC United to the BC Conservatives). It also may not be possible for the federal Liberals, who did away with party memberships altogether in favour of sign-ups that will populate their voter database while all power centralized in the leader’s office. Pothier’s advice should carry for all parts of the country, not just New Brunswick—if you want to keep your party from falling prey to fanatics of any stripe, you need to get involved as a member to push back against them.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched two waves of drone attacks over Kyiv, and one of them struck an apartment building, killing one and injuring five. A missile attack struck residences and a medical facility in Dnipro, killing three. G7 leaders announced $50 billion in loans to Ukraine to be repaid with seized Russian assets.

Continue reading →

Roundup: So he is hiding something?

Posted on by

Over the past couple of days, Justin Trudeau and Karina Gould have been intimating that Pierre Poilievre has “something to hide” by not seeking his security clearance. It’s a stupid talking point, it trivialises the seriousness of the issue, and it descends to the same childish accusations that the Conservatives are lobbing at the government over the refusal to turn over certain unredacted documents related to SDTC as part of a banana republic production order (as the subject of the current privilege filibuster). It’s not cute, and it doesn’t make them look like the adults in the room.

And then along comes Michael Chong, who gave this cockamamie story to the Globe and Mail that because security clearances can involve invasive questions like sexual partners or past drug use, and that Trudeau is “so desperate” that he would use that information to publicly undermine Poilievre. But, and former CSIS director Ward Elcock made the point in the same piece, CSIS would never turn that information over to the PM, no matter the political pressure, so not only is Chong just making up conspiracy bullshit (as he has been wont to do increasingly of late), he is actually adding fuel fire by making it look like Poilievre does indeed have something to hide. Like, my dude, did you even think about your stupid conspiracy for five whole seconds before you blurted it out to Bob Fife? Honestly.

Remember when Michael Chong was a man of principle and didn't just constantly make up shitty conspiracy theories to suck up to his leader? #cdnpoli www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/art…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-24T17:20:23.744Z

We all know that the reasons Poilievre won’t get the clearance is because it would require him to lie slightly less than he does currently. Poilievre even tacitly admitted this when he declared in QP “This prime minister will not gag me!” (Phrasing!) But by trying to take this “hiding something” schtick across the board is just tiresome when everyone should be striving to be grown-ups about this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians launched a thermobaric ammunition attack on Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region, while Ukrainian forces shot down 40 out of 50 drones overnight. Russian forces have been making a fast advance into the town of Selydove, which they have been trying to take control of. Ukrainian intelligence suggests that North Korean troops are already in the Kursk region.

Continue reading →

QP: A victory lap for immigration concern trolling

Posted on by

The PM was absent today, his deputy off in Washington, and all of the other leaders absent as well—even Pierre Poilievre, who was in Toronto for the day. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he rhymed off slogans, claimed the Liberal caucus is “revolting,” and gave a declinist vision before debanding an election. Sean Fraser said that while Canadians have had a tough time because of global inflation, they are right to ask who is fighting for them, which isn’t the Conservatives, who want to cut supports they need. Scheer rhymed off more slogans, concern trolled some more about Liberal backbenchers rebelling, and again demanded an election. Marci Ien wondered if her own ministry would even exist in a Conservative government because they plan to cut supports for women, and said the Conservatives don’t stand for women or gender-diverse people. Scheer listed things they would cut, such as the CBC, and again claimed that Liberal backbenchers were confiding in Conservatives because they can’t get a hearing from Trudeau and claimed Marc Miller called these rebels “garbage” (which is not what he said), and he yet again called for an election. Patty Hajdu got up this time to decry just what the Conservatives would cut if they ever returned to power, including to First Nations for clean water. Luc Berthold took over in French to claim that Trudeau was all smiles when he left caucus yesterday because he knew he could count on the support of the Bloc, and listed a number of falsehoods before demanding an election. Diane Lebouthillier stood up to denounce cuts the Conservatives made when they were in office. Berthold continued unabated, and again demanded an election, to which Jean-Yves Duclos cited the falsehood that Poilievre only built six affordable housing units when he was “housing minister.”

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, did a little round of self-righteous told-you-so about immigration capacity, and wondered why they didn’t listen to Quebec earlier. Miller said that the targets were still close to those around 2020, and that immigration was still valuable. Therrien tried again, and this time Miller thanked him for his contributions to Canadian unity.

Heather McPherson rose for the NDP, and lambasted the government for not ensuring enough abortion access across the province (because apparently provincial governments don’t exist). Marci Ien recited the funding the federal government delivered to help increase access. Lindsay Mathyssen gave more of the same, and Mark Holland pointed to agreements they are signing with provincial governments. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: No backbench rebellion…for now

Posted on by

As far as backbench revolts go, this one was a bit of a damp squib, or to put it another way, Wells’ First Rule has once again borne out in practice—For any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome. Purportedly, Trudeau addressed caucus and got emotional talking about the toll has taken on him, including his children constantly seeing the “Fuck Trudeau” flags and so on, but nevertheless there was a frank airing of grievances from some MPs, though nobody had a copy of that memorandum calling on him to step down that had names attached (oh, the bravery!). In the end, it looks like it was only 24 backbench MPs who had signed onto this (not that anyone could see the names), which is not 40, and makes it easier for them to be dismissed (though still, that number could very well grow). Nevertheless, there was a commitment for everyone to reflect more about what was said, and a few voices have said that they want Trudeau to give some indication by Monday if he plans to stick around or to call it a day (though I can’t imagine that he would want to make any such decision on their timetable).

While the message coming out of caucus was that they have never been stronger or more united, that sounds an awful lot like the “We’ve never been more united” speech just before or after someone crosses the floor. Others, like Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, said that the palace intrigue needs to stop and that the knives need to turn outward rather than inward—a reference that the real enemy is Pierre Poilievre, and not Trudeau, though again, nobody is saying that this matter is done with, particularly given that everyone needs to reflect on what happened.

This having been said, I think it’s fair to question the organizational abilities of those leading this backbench revolt, because a lot of what has come out in public has been pretty shambolic, as is the fact that there seems to be absolutely no plan for the day after if Trudeau did take their message and decide to start planning his exit. I think in part that’s because there has been no heir apparent, or nobody for anyone to rally around as a focal point for who could replace Trudeau, and that may have as much to do with the fact that a good many MPs were political operatives or even staffers who were around during the Chrétien-Martin wars, and remain traumatized by them, and the fact that Trudeau had very consciously focused on rooting out those camps when he took over the party. We’ll see what happens over the next week or two, but just because nothing happened today doesn’t mean that the tide isn’t shifting.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians have captured two villages in the Donetsk region in the east, and are currently storming four more settlements in the Donbas region, but those attacks are currently being repelled. The Americans have now corroborated that as many as 3000 North Korean troops are now in Russia, training for a possible deployment to Ukraine. Here is a look at how fire trucks in Nikopol now have anti-drone jammers mounted on them because Russians have been targeting them.

Continue reading →

QP: Free-wheeling, chaotic, and from an alternate reality

Posted on by

In the wake of that big caucus meeting where little seemed to happen, the prime minister was present for QP—his proto-PMQ day in fact, while his deputy left for Washington. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he needled about 24 Liberal backbenchers signing the document, the Bloc supporting them, and demanded an election. Trudeau got up, for much applause from his caucus, the Conservatives got up with what was supposed to be sarcastic applause but just looked like more applause, and after it died down, Trudeau insisted (in English) that they were totally united and they were focused on delivering for Canadians. Poilievre noted that the question was in French, claimed that backbenchers leaking to journalists from the washroom at caucus, and again demanded an election. Trudeau, in French, trotted out his lines about confident governments investing in people and not resorting to austerity. Poilievre, still in French, listed slogans, claimed immigration was “out of control,” and demanded an election. Trudeau noted Poilievre only offers cuts and empty slogans and not investments in people and the green future. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his slogans, his concern trolling over the 24 backbenchers, lied about the privilege issue, and demanded an election. Trudeau recited his line about while the opposition is focused on politics, he is focused on Canadians. Poilievre again mocked the dissident Liberals, and Trudeau hit back with the Conservatives’ hanging out with white nationalists and Poilievre’s lack of a security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the allegations at a particular school in Quebec, and Trudeau noted that’s a provincial issue but they would defend rights and freedoms for all Canadians. Blanchet wondered if Trudeau was saying “forced religious education” and corporal punishment was freedom of expression. Trudeau reiterated that this was a provincial matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, declared that he knew the prime minister was distracted, and demanded he take action on food prices. Trudeau noted that they have taken action, whether it is with competition reform or a school food programme, before he took a swipe at the NDP for backing away from the carbon rebates. Singh wondered if Trudeau has even been to a grocery store, and was shouted down before the Speaker intervened. When he started again, he read the same line again (proving it was a scripted applause line to be clipped) before switching to French worry about rents. Trudeau, in English, noted he had recently been to a grocery store with the Speaker in his riding, and then turned to French to praise their housing investments.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Senators won’t be pushed around

Posted on by

The Bloc Québécois are trying to sweeten their demand for their two private members’ bills to pass before October 29th, saying they will help end the current filibuster in the House of Commons if the government does. Couple of small problems there—one is that the Senate can’t speed passage of any private members’ bills, no matter how much MPs or even the government strongly encourages them to; and the second is that the government isn’t going to give a royal recommendation to their OAS bill, because they absolutely don’t want to set a precedent there.

Nevertheless, Mary Ng wrote a letter to Senator Peter Boehm, who chairs the committee studying the Supply Management bill, urging him to speed it along, and it was co-signed by a few MPs from different parties, no doubt to try and demonstrate that they all care about this. Boehm, rightly, responded by telling them to go pound sand. The committee estimates it’ll get to clause-by-clause of the bill in the first week of November, because that’s how long it’ll take, end of story. And let me reiterate once again—there is no mechanism in the Senate to fast-track private members’ bills, and that’s for very good reason. In fact, during the Harper years, they tried to rewrite the Senate rules to allow for it to happen—in part because they were moving some odious legislation through as private members’ bills instead of government bills for various reasons (including the fact that PMBs get very little study and are automatically time-allocated so they can’t really be filibustered), and enough senators pushed back on that attempt that it didn’t happen. Again, for good reason.

As for the Bloc’s frankly boneheaded suggestion that the prime minister needs to get on the phone to order senators “that he appointed” around undermines the entire institutional independence of the Upper Chamber. They are appointed in such a way as to make them largely immune to this kind of political pressure for very good reason, and this is proving that very point. By that logic, should the prime minister be phoning up judges that they appointed in order to pressure them to deciding cases in a particular way? How about the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? This extended tantrum they’re throwing is embarrassing for them, particularly when it began as a ham-fisted attempt at blackmail that it turns out they weren’t very good at.

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people, including a child, were killed in a Russian drone strike in Sumy. The UN estimates that the Ukrainian population has declined by ten million since the start of the invasion, a combination of people being displaced and war deaths. Ukraine has been targeting alcohol plants in Russia over the past several days. With news that North Korea is sending troops to fight with Russians, South Korea is now considering sending weapons to Ukraine.

Continue reading →