About Dale

Journalist in the Canadian Parliamentary Press Gallery

Roundup: A choice to be dickish about pensions

Over the past few days, the NDP have put on a big song and dance about the bill to update the Elections Act, which they had a hand in drafting with the government as a part of the Supply and Confidence Agreement. They now claim that they were blindsided by the provision to move the “fixed” election date by one week so that it doesn’t clash with Dwivali, because the knock-on effect is that it will qualify a number of MPs for their pensions in that extra week because they’ll have had their six years of service then. So they are now moving an amendment to the bill to return the election date to its original schedule, because who cares about Dwivali, right?

This is actually a new low for the NDP, who are trying to play populist politics but are doing it very, very badly. And if the intention is for this to come off as mean-spirited at the expense of Hindus, Jains and Sikhs who are celebrating and can’t vote of campaign on that day, well, who cares? As I believe Emilie Nicholas pointed out on Power & Politics, if the bill is to eliminate barriers to voting, why would the NDP then put up a new barrier for Hindus, Jains and Sikhs, so that they can try and outdo the astroturf charlatans in the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation? Because that’s the only group not actually is going to derive any joy from this. And media framing this as tAxPaYeR dOlLaRs is complicit in this kind of base thinking.

Frankly, we shouldn’t begrudge MPs their pensions because they put their lives on hold for years to serve the public in this way. (Whether they serve effectively is another story). We underpay them for the work they are doing (well, the work they are supposed to be doing—the current crop is not exactly doing themselves any favours), and to make these MPs lose out on the pensions they’ve earned because they are a few days shy of the cutoff is actually kind of cruel, and is the sort of thing that makes people rethink ever wanting to run for office, and to come out of it at the end with nothing for the time they put into public service when they could have made much more money and gotten a pension in the private sector. Instead of being gracious enough, every opposition party now wants to be dickish about it, which is pretty much fitting for the moment we’re in.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile attack overnight destroyed a power facility in Kyiv and damaged the electricity grid. Ukraine struck an oil terminal in Kavkaz in Russia thanks to missiles fired from their navy. Both Germany and the US have now said that Ukraine can use their weapons to strike inside of Russian territory, so long as it’s for the defence of Kharkiv. A prisoner swap with Russia took place on Friday, exchanging 75 people on each side. Ukraine has had four thousand prisoners apply to join the army in exchange for parole. And the factory in Ukraine that makes Oreo cookies is back online after two years of rebuilding after being damaged by the Russians.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1796518606832017524

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1796445849683419207

 

Continue reading

Roundup: Anecdotes about emigration

It was a CBC story that caught the attention of Pierre Poilievre, and which his deputy leader brought up in Question Period, being one centred around census data showing a growing number of Canadians who are relocating to the US, and which tries to focus the attention on those who insist that they’re moving because Justin Trudeau has been so terrible. But this is also a story from a particular usual suspect, so it’s thinly sourced and written by a certain usual suspect who had a habit of this kind of sloppy work (and no, it’s not because he has any particular political agenda—it’s because he thinks he’s being edgy and that he’s tackling “big” things, even though he’s been relatively terrible about it.

To be clear, the story has no breakdown in the data to show much of anything useful about just who is moving, particularly from certain age groups and demographics, nor where they are moving to. This could be a case of retiring Boomers heading to Arizona and Florida and saying farewell to Canadian winters for good, but we don’t know. It does point out that a third of those who emigrate to the US were themselves Americans by birth returning home, and less than a third are immigrants to Canada from elsewhere who have since decided to move to the US, but for some of them, that could have been their plan all along. One of the profiled couples are fairly young and say that housing prices are an issue, but given how restrictive their immigration policies are, it’s hard to see how that many people are able to move just because housing is cheaper. This could also be a largely Ontario-driven phenomenon, but again, we have no breakdown in the data.

This is a big issue, but there is no attempt to get more clarity in the data. Instead, the focus is on getting anecdotes about how they hate Trudeau and want to move because of it, which is both an attempt to make this a federal story instead of a provincial housing one (and the usual suspect writing this piece has a history of doing that), but also because he thinks it’s going to get attention to the piece, and that’s exactly what it did, no matter how thin those anecdotes are, and the plural of anecdotes is not data. We shouldn’t need to remind a reporter at the gods damned public broadcaster of this fact, but things are off the rails there, and this is the kind of bullshit we get as a result.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles hit three sites in Kharkiv overnight, as Ukrainian forces work to shoot down seven missiles and 32 drones. While Russians continue aerial attacks on Kharkiv, they have also increased their troop concentration in the region, looking like they will make a push toward the city. Word is coming out that president Joe Biden has quietly given the okay for Ukraine to use American-made and supplied weapons to strike military targets inside of Russia.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1796418752411840609

Continue reading

QP: Fun with gas tax math

The PM was off in Toronto, where he had made a vaccine facility announcement, while his deputy was off to Halifax, and all of the other leaders were similarly absent (because why sit on a Thursday?). Andrew Scheer led off for the Conservatives, and after spelling out a doom scenario for families over the summer, pitched their Supply Day motion of cancelling all federal gas taxes until Labour Day, under the rubric that this will let these suffering families take a road trip. Steven Guilbeault called this a “prime cut of Conservative baloney,” and that the savings the Conservatives claim for a family from Alberta is based on them travelling 37,000 kilometres, saying you could to from the North Pole to the South Pole and have kilometres left. Scheer insisted this was just not true, and repeated his talking points, and this time Guilbeault walked Scheer through the math, where the Albertans would have to use 3293 litres in those three months, at an average of 8.9 kilometres per litre, getting to the 37,000 kilometre figure, meaning they would have to drive for ten consecutive days. Scheer deployed the monetary policy and budgets balancing themselves lines, and accused Trudeau of going to the private islands of “wealthy lobbyists” (which is false, and if you bring up the Aga Khan, he was not a lobbyist, and his foundation was lobbying for increased relief funds for Syrian refugees), so he doesn’t worry about family road trips. This time Mark Holland got up to say that Canadians’ summertime fun isn’t to be locked in a car for ten straight days, and turned this into an accusation about trying to cut dental care and child care. Luc Berthold took over in French, demanding the gas tax holiday with a Quebec spin, to which Guilbeault insisted that their calculations were off, and to achieve the savings they claim, a family would have to drive from Quebec City to Mexico City and back again, and then there again and back. Berthold insisted that the Liberals can’t do math, and demanded the tax holiday. Guilbeault again noted that to achieve the savings the Conservatives claimed, and repeated that it would require using 3293 litres over three months, along with his line about the North Pole to the South Pole.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, claimed that the Liberals have woken up to the healthcare crisis in the Outaouais region, and demanded higher transfers for Quebec. Steve MacKinnon said that the Quebec government needs to wake up to the problems in the region. Therrien insisted that they needed more federal funding, and again demanded it. MacKinnon repeated that the province needs to invest in the region.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and blamed the federal government for increased homelessness in Montreal, which is a real reach. Soraya Martinez Ferrada said that they are working with municipalities and not insulting them like the Conservatives do. Bonita Zarrillo raised a recent report on the inability for women with disabilities to get adequate care when pregnant, and Mark Holland insisted that they are providing care, and that the Conservatives want to vote against it.

Continue reading

Roundup: The PBO immolates his credibility

In their need to constantly frame issues as both-sides, The Canadian Press inadvertently downplayed the severity of what happened with the notice that the Parliamentary Budget Officer quietly put on his website to say that they got some of their analysis on the federal carbon levy wrong. The CP story focused it on a Liberal MP writing the PBO to get him to broadcast the correction, rather than framing the story as the PBO made an error, and giving the briefest of mentions to the MP and his open letter, because that letter shouldn’t have been the story.

The story, as it turns out, is not only that the PBO made the mistake in his analysis, it’s that he is steadfastly refusing to take any responsibility for it, never mind that this particular report has been politically charged and is at the centre of much of the debate over the carbon levy. Putting aside that the report itself was not very well done (the distributional analysis was undermined by his insistence on including average figures and that the calculation on the impact of the price were done in the absence of any kind of counterfactual, and in a binary price/no price way that is in itself inherently misleading, the fact that the PBO didn’t advertise that there was a problem with the report, didn’t include any kind of correction (he’s planning a fully re-done report in the fall), and he’s saying thing that don’t logically follow, such as it’s too complex to recalculate like this…but the outcome from the error is unlikely to change the outcome of that portion of the report (this being the impact on the broader economy, which the Conservatives misleadingly cherry-pick to “prove” households are worse off). So, in addition to refusing to take responsibility, he won’t pick a lane.

But it gets worse. Yves Giroux went on Power & Politics to discuss this incident, and immolated his credibility as he not only continued to refuse to take any responsibility, but tried to prevaricate, and make excuses with a wall of bafflegab, but he also started arguing that his “small office” shouldn’t be responsible for the climate-related economic modelling that MPs are demanding, that the government should be doing it, but his one job is literally doing this kind of analysis to provide an independent analysis from the government’s. Of course, Giroux has always had a problem sticking within the bounds of his legislated mandate, and has preferred to act like a talking head pundit and opining on all kinds of things the government is doing, while still insisting that he’s independent and hence more credible than the government as a result. And I’m not too surprised that Giroux is trying to avoid taking any responsibility, being that he is a career civil servant for whom responsibility is something to be avoided, but in refusing to do so, he has tainted his office. There can’t be trust about his numbers going forward, and as was pointed out, especially if he’s going to be costing election platform promises (which he’s done a pretty shite job of so far, such as sticking his letterhead on Andrew Scheer’s handwaving), but that was something the PBO never should have done in the first place. This should be a resignation-worthy offence, but so should it have been when he decided he wanted to be a television pundit. But we’ll see if he can finally accept responsibility and do the right thing here and step down.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Four people were injured in a Russian missile attack on Kharkiv early Thursday morning. NATO’s secretary general is proposing a way to help Trump-proof military aid for Ukraine, but there will be obstacles that include Hungary’s objections. Reuters has a lengthy look at the front lines in Donetsk.

Continue reading

QP: Mocking each other’s housing plans

With precious few Wednesdays remaining in the spring sitting, the prime minister was present today, while his deputy was off at a Senate committee meeting to talk about the budget bills. The other leaders were all present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and raised an interview that the PM gave where he said that if he spends more, That inflation will go up, and claimed that he had been saying that the whole time. Justin Trudeau noted that he ignored the rest of the sentence from the interview and talked about investments in helping Canadians like dental care. Poilievre mocked this, and demanded his “dollar for dollar” budget slogan be implemented. Trudeau noted that dental care is not inflation, it’s help for people who need it, which the Conservatives are against. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the quote from the interview, and Trudeau repeated that the Conservatives have been using inflation as the excuse not to support programmes like dental care. Poilievre mocked this, saying Trudeau was going against his own words, which he actually wasn’t, but Trudeau insisted that they have been focused on bringing down inflation, which the Conservative found uproarious. Poilievre again mocked that Trudeau was finally talking about monetary policy, and Trudeau repeated the Conservatives were standing against help for people.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, worried about what was happening in Rafah, wanted a ceasefire, humanitarian aid, and to work with the Arab League for a peacekeeping force in the area toward an independent Palestinian state. Trudeau noted that they have been calling for a ceasefire and working toward a two-state solution. Blanchet asked if he believed they needed a peacekeeping force in the region, and Trudeau noted they were working with partners in the G7 and the region to get to a sustainable solution.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he insisted that Trudeau could do more about Rafah like a two-way arms embargo and sanctions against the Netanyahu government. Trudeau reiterated that he was sickened by what happened in Rafah, and that they continued to call for a ceasefire, humanitarian aid, and the hostages being released. Singh repeated the demand in French, and got much the same response. 

Continue reading

Roundup: Responding to events isn’t a desperation move

If you’ve been paying attention to Question Period over the past several days, you may have noticed that the Liberals haven’t been asking endless questions about abortion, or rather, asking the government to comment on the Conservatives’ stance about abortion. Throughout this, you had a bunch of pundits, almost all of them located outside of Ottawa, going “The Liberals are desperate! They’re using the abortion move 18 months too early!” The problem with that particular analysis is that it ignores the events going on around them.

What the Liberals were really doing, if someone bad bothered to pay attention, was responding to things the Conservatives have been doing around them. It started with Pierre Poilievre’s speech where he promised to use the Notwithstanding Clause to “make” tough-on-crime policies and laws “constitutional” (never mind that invoking the Notwithstanding Clause is a flashing red light that what you’re doing isn’t constitutional, and you’re doing to do it anyway—at least for the next five years, anyway. The Liberals were not going to pass up an opportunity to ask Poilievre just what else he planned to use those powers for, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to ask.

From there, Arnold Viersen tabled his petition calling for abortion restrictions, and the March for Life happened on the same week, which the Liberals (and usually the NDP) always put on a big production in Question Period about how important a woman’s right to choose is. This all happened within a few days, so of course they were going to respond to it. And once those events happened, they moved onto other things (like lambasting Poilievre’s “housing” bill). Not everything is a desperation move. They talked about abortion back in December when the Conservatives swapped a bill so that Cathay Wagantall’s backdoor abortion-banning bill could be voted on before they rose for the winter break (so it wouldn’t act as a millstone around their necks, even though the entire caucus voted for it), and everyone wasn’t insisting this was some kind of desperation move then. The moral here is that sometimes you need to pay attention to what is going on around Question Period, because it’s not the only thing going on.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukraine shot down 13 out of 14 drones launched by Russia on Monday night, with most of the debris falling on the Rivne region. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Belgium to sign another security agreement.

Continue reading

QP: Blaming federal dollars for permit delays

Both the prime minister and his deputy were present today, as were all of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and worried that the time to get a permit in a Montreal has doubled, blaming the prime minister for it. Justin Trudeau read an attack script about how terrible Poilievre’s housing “plan” terrible was. Poilievre insisted that the built all kinds of housing when he was “minister,” taking credit for all builds that happened during that period, and for rent being cheaper then. Trudeau pointed to how the Conservatives withdrew from affordable housing and co-op funding. Poilievre switched to English to worry about rents rising in Toronto and how the city there raised development charges, and wondered why he was spending money on bureaucracy. Trudeau repeated his attack script on Poilievre’s bill in English. Poilievre repeated his false claim about how many units he ostensibly built, and Trudeau repeated the line about the Conservatives withdrawing from affordable housing and co-ops. Poilievre worried about the rise in homeless encampments, and Trudeau listed the measures they are taking to help combat homelessness. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the NSIRA report on foreign interference and the worry therein that certain briefings may not have been read. Trudeau read a line about the challenges of foreign interference. Blanchet called this unacceptable, before demanding more cooperation with the Hogue Commission in turning over documents, and Trudeau insisted that they have shared more documents than ever before, and that they were transparent. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and demanded the federal government build a hospital in Moose Factory near James Bay, to which Trudeau insisted that they were working with the province and First Nations in order to make it happen. Singh switched to French to accuse the Liberals of abandoning Montreal, and Trudeau dismissed this as rubbish, and listing all of the things they have done for the city.

Continue reading

Roundup: Recruitment rage-farming

It’s getting exhausting to think of the number of things that Justin Trudeau is supposedly personally responsible, whether it’s global inflation or the rise in interest rates. Today, it’s apparently the military recruitment crisis that the country faces.

First of all, in his tweet, Conservative MP James Bezan mischaracterized what the exchange between the committee chair and the Canadian Forces officer was, and the Chair said nothing about Trudeau or the government at all. But that’s what Conservatives to when they clip these committee exchanges and try to gin them up to make them look like it’s something scandalous happening, because that’s how they get their clips for their socials. To reiterate—nobody said anything at all about the government in the clip. The Chair was frustrated that the military can’t process potential recruits faster, not the government, because the government doesn’t play a role in this at all.

And even more to the point, Bezan knows this. He was a long-standing parliamentary secretary to successive ministers of defence in the Harper government, and he knows gods damned well that nobody in government approves or disapproves of recruits. But like everything these days, facts or truth doesn’t matter—it’s nothing but constant rage-farming to keep people angry, over the dumbest, most illogical things, because rage-farming doesn’t need to make sense. It’s all about feelings and vibes, and they’re willing to undermine democracy for clicks.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Three people were killed and six wounded in a Russian missile attack on the southern Mykolaiv region, while the Russians claim to have captured two more settlements—one in Kharkiv region, the other in Donetsk. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Spain, and secured a promise for more air defence systems to help deal with the onslaught of Russian glide bombs.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1795083380192604436

Continue reading

QP: Concern trolling about mortgage rates

The prime minister was in town but not present for QP today, while his deputy was, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and raised the OFSI report on rising mortgage rates, and falsely said the prime minister said the rates would stay low, before blaming the Bloc for supporting the government, and then demanding the government “cut waste and lower interest rates,” never mind that the two have absolutely nothing to do with one another. Chrystia Freeland said that they know that Conservatives don’t really support people having trouble with their mortgages because they oppose their mortgage charter. Poilievre then raised a newspaper stories about Quebec taxpayers being “bled dry,” and demanded the government accept their plan to suspend gas taxes for the summer. Freeland responded saying that the Conservatives don’t have a plan outside of austerity. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the OFSI talking point, and the same false attribution about the prime minister saying rates would stay low, before citing another Scotiabank report on government spending, but conveniently ignored that it was largely talking about provincial and not federal spending. Freeland repeated that the Conservatives don’t care about people struggling with their mortgages. Poilievre listed increasing food bank use and homeless encampments, and again blamed government spending. Freeland listed how much they reduced poverty thanks to their measures and repeated that the Conservatives only want to cut. Poilievre repeated his same point again, to which Freeland pointed out that Poilievre only built six affordable housing units when he was “minister” on the file, and repeated that they only want to cut programmes.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and railed that the working group on migration has done no work, to which Marc Miller said that work is ongoing ahead of their upcoming meeting. Therrien demanded that Miller stop “demonising” Quebec round resettlement capacity, and Miller shot back that the Bloc doesn’t understand the difference between capacity and desire.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and decried the bombing on Rafah and demanded the government do something about Netanyahu. Mélanie Joly denounced the attack, and demanded an imminent ceasefire. Singh repeated the question in French, and Got the same response. 

Continue reading

Roundup: Hoping to master the algorithm

As I often rail about terrible government communications and Parliament being reduced to a content studio for social media clips, I was struck by two stories over the weekend. The first was a look into the Liberals’ trying to use social media more effectively to bring back Millennial and Gen Z voters, which means staffers are directing their ministers to tailor content more specifically to these platforms, and ministers using influencers more to get their messages across. While I’m less concerned about the latter because I do think that can be helpful and savvy, it’s the former that concerns me more because we have too many politicians chasing the algorithm as it is, and the algorithm is bad and fickle. If you listen to Aaron Reynolds of Effin’ Birds fame talk about using social media to build his business, he will warn that tailoring your business to specific algorithms is doomed to fail because those algorithms change and can wipe you out, and politicians chasing the algorithm is not only cringe-worthy, it’s frankly bad for media literacy and democracy in general.

The other story was that Conservative MP Branden Leslie produced a Facebook video chock-full of fake news clips that purport to show a future where Trudeau has resigned, but amidst the complaints that using news branding for this kind of deep-fake content is problematic and deeply unethical, Conservatives are defending it as perfectly justified because “nobody could mistake it for reality.” This from the party that is actively building a dystopian alternate reality built on disinformation for their followers to believe in, because they want them to forgo things like critical thinking in order to simply swallow whatever falsehoods the party wants to tell them, and now they’re asserting that people won’t be taken by the very falsehoods this video perpetuates, after they have been training that same audience to swallow falsehoods? Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. This is nothing good, and a sign that there is no moral compass in the party whatsoever.

Throughout this, I am reminded of something Paul Wells said last week that really struck a chord with me:

I think the social-media revolution has constrained government’s attempts to explain themselves, and radicalized citizens’ responses, more than it’s helped anyone do anything good. And I think most political organizations’ attempts to master these tools end up looking like the tools are, quite thoroughly, mastering the organizations.

This is exactly right, and it’s why I worry that the Liberals trying to push more to social media to reach those Gen-Zers is going to make this actively worse, while the Conservatives are already using the worst features of these platforms to their most unethical extent. This is the state of political communications these days, and it’s very, very scary, and it’s dragging democracy down with it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians bombed a big box store complex in Kharkiv on Saturday, killing 14, wounding 43, with 16 others still unaccounted for, even though Ukrainian forces are pushing them back from areas outside of the city.

Continue reading