Category Archives: Political Roundup

What’s going on in Canadian politics

Roundup: Countdown to the G7 summit

Posted on by

It’s the run-up to the G7 summit on Monday and Tuesday, and it will start with dinner with UK prime minister Keir Starmer tonight, before everyone starts heading to Calgary, where Danielle Smith will be greeting delegates as they arrive for the G7, starting on Sunday, and will host an event with them. We already know that there will be some different features in this summit in that they will forgo the usual joint communiqué, but instead, Carney will put out a chair’s statement (because there is unlikely to be any kind of consensus to be had with Trump in the room).

Another question is about what some of the discussions will wind up being about, given the chaotic nature of what is happening right now, such as Israel and Iran attacking one another, while there are wildfires burning in Alberta, and the conflict in Ukraine has intensified after Ukraine destroyed a significant portion of Russia’s strategic bomber fleet. The number of other non-G7 members invited to attend will also help shape the discussions, which includes Indian prime minister Narendra Modi (whose activities we are apparently overlooking for the sake of the conference), though it should also be noted that “bone saws” Mohammed bin Salman won’t be attending after all, despite being invited. Here is a rundown of the additional invitees to the summit.

Meanwhile, Canada and India have reached an agreement to share information about cross-border crimes, such as transnational crimes, syndicates, terrorism, and extremist activities. That makes the obvious question to be whether the Indian government will disclose its transnational repression and contracting of syndicates to carryout transnational crimes (like extrajudicial killings)? Or do they simply expect Canada to turn over information about the legal activities of Khalistani advocates in this country? Because if we’re not getting any of the former, I’m not sure what value this agreement really has as a “reset” of the relationship.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine and Russia had another swap of bodies of fallen soldiers yesterday.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney making his choice with Modi

Posted on by

Spokespersons for the Sikh Federation Canada and the World Sikh Organisation of Canada were on the Hill yesterday to call on prime minister Mark Carney to rescind his invitation to Narendra Modi to attend the G7 summit, and are not ruling out actions such as barring Liberal MPs from visiting Sikh temples as a protest. They warned that more than a dozen Canadian Sikhs are under active threat from India,  and we also learned in the media yesterday that a suspected Indian government agent had Jagmeet Singh under surveillance, which prompted close RCMP protection eighteen months ago.

Oh, but Carney says, we got assurances about cooperating on a law enforcement dialogue, and yes, RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme does say that Indian officials are now being cooperative on the investigation into the killing of Hardeep Singh Nijjar where they weren’t before, but again, how much longer is this going to continue until it’s no longer convenient and they start making up a bunch of bullshit for their newspapers again like they did with the supposed cocaine found on Trudeau’s plane (which right-wing newspapers in this Canada breathlessly repeated while the journalists who were actually on the plane repeatedly said that this never happened and that this was a bullshit information operation).

Yes, India is an important economy at a time when we can no longer rely on the Americans, but can we rely on India either given Modi’s increasing authoritarian tendencies, and his violation of human rights for minorities? Those Sikh spokespersons made the salient point about how Carney is sending the message that some lives are worth more than others, and that if there’s economic benefit, then we can turn a blind eye to human rights abuses and the fact that they almost certainly contracted an extrajudicial killing on Canadian soil. That should matter, and we should send a message that it does matter. But we’re not getting that from Carney, and even more to the point, the Liberals have had some very effective Sikh organisers in the party (which is why certain MPs were in Trudeau’s Cabinet when they were poor performers) and it would seem odd to waste that goodwill when you want to try and win a majority in the next election. I’m just not seeing a lot of principle or smart politics here.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces are slowly pushing back the Russian incursion in Sumy region. Ukrainian military officials say that the number of Russian soldiers killed or wounded in the conflict is now over one million, as the war is now in its third year. There was another exchange of sick and wounded prisoners yesterday. President Zelenskyy will be attending the G7 in Kananaskis next week.

https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1933028255767941303

Continue reading →

Roundup: The price of going around consultations

Posted on by

As prime minister Mark Carney gets set to ram his major project legislation through Parliament—Henry VIII clause and all—a couple of philosophical questions are popping up about the nature of what it is they’re doing to speed through these approvals. Doug Ford is trying to do it by essentially creating lawless zones, whereas Carney is giving himself the power to override other laws through regulation alone, which is ripe for abuse and which the Liberals would be screaming bloody murder about if they were in opposition. (The Conservatives, incidentally, are not up in arms about this use of a Henry VIII clause). The thing is, though, these laws and regulations exist for a reason—they’re not there just to thwart investment or development (in spite of what the Conservatives might tell themselves), and you’re asking for trouble if you go around it.

Part of that trouble is Indigenous consultation, and what they seem to believe it entails. It’s not just a meeting where you sit down and go “Here’s what we want to do on your lands.” It’s way more complicated, especially as you have some particular First Nations that have been burned in the past by other developers who promised them all kinds of benefits for that development and then reneged on their agreements (often leaving an environmental catastrophe in their wakes that they won’t pay for, leaving these First Nations off even worse). And they are already talking about litigation if their rights are violated, and those rights include free, prior and informed consent. This is a big deal, and we’re not sure that either Carney or Ford have actually thought this through. Things take time—especially within First Nations. Carney may be in for an unpleasant surprise about his timelines.

[Mallory Archer voice]: Do you want litigation? Because that's how you get litigation.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-06-10T04:18:21.071Z

Meanwhile, oil prices have crashed to rock-bottom prices, meaning it will be even more unlikely that we’ll see companies willing to invest in new pipeline infrastructure, even if the Carney government thinks they can ram projects through in a two-year window (which, again, I remain dubious about). Danielle Smith is trying to entice a proponent for some sort of pipeline, but again, money talks. Those rock-bottom prices are also going to hit Alberta’s government hard, because they budgeted for much higher royalties, and that in turn will make Smith panicky and try to pick even more fights, all because she refuses to implement a sales tax that would avoid being dependent on oil revenues above a certain level to balance the books.

Ukraine Dispatch

It was another night of heavy drone attacks, with the hardest-hit area being Kharkiv, killing three people and a total of 64 wounded across the country. Ukraine says that they struck a large gunpower factory in Russia. Another prisoner swap was held yesterday, but it was less prisoners than 1212 bodies.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Auditor General on F-35s and ArriveCan

Posted on by

Yesterday saw the release of the Auditor General and Environment Commissioner’s reports, and lo, these ones actually got a tonne of media attention and took centre stage in Question Period, which is a far cry from most of their recent reports. The reason, of course, is that the topics were sexy—F-35 fighter jets and the ArriveCan app gong show in particular, the latter of which the Conservatives have been salivating over for three years now, which made the day pretty much insufferable as a result. But there was more than just those.

  • The F-35 procurement costs have ballooned because of delays, pilot shortages, infrastructure, and inflation but acknowledged the Canadian government has little control over most of these factors.
  • CBSA failed to follow procurement and security rules when it used GC Strategies to contract out work on ArriveCan, and didn’t follow-up to ensure work had been done before more contracts were awarded.
  • Public Services and Procurement has been slow to modernise and downsize office space, and turn over surplus buildings for housing.
  • Indigenous Services has failed to process Indian Act status applications within the required six-month timeline, with a backlog having grown to over 12,000 applications.
  • The climate adaptation plan is falling short, with only one of its three pillars in place and little connection between spending and results.

I’m not sure that the F-35 news is all that surprising, but it does actually work to either justify a potential move away from the platform, or to reflect increases in defence spending calculations. The GC Strategies findings are also not unexpected, but one thing the Conservatives have been failing to mention is that CBSA is an arms’-length agency, so ministers had no real say over any of its contracting practices (as the Conservatives try to insist that any minister who had carriage on the file should be fired). Meanwhile, their narrative that this was somehow about “Liberal friends” was never mentioned in the report, nor was there any mention about partisan considerations, or indication that the firm had any connection to the government, so these are just rage-bait accusations used solely for the performance art, which is how most things go with these guys.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-06-10T21:22:14.366Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Tuesday’s attack from Russia was one of its largest strikes on Kyiv, which also hit civilian targets in Odesa, and Kharkiv was subjected to a nine-minute-long drone attack that killed at least two and injured 54. Another prisoner swap took place yesterday, this time for an undisclosed number of sick and wounded soldiers.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A big defence commitment?

Posted on by

Yesterday, at Fort York in Toronto, prime minister Mark Carney announced that Canada would meet its NATO commitment of two percent of GDP by the end of next fiscal year instead of by 2030, in part through use of greater pay, more funds for sustainment, support for the defence industry, and some good ol’ creative accounting. Carney prefaced this by making a very real point about the changing nature of America’s place in the world: “The United States is beginning to monetize its hegemony, charging for access to its markets and reducing its relative contribution to our collective security.”

One of the big question marks has to do with the status of the Coast Guard, and how it gets folded into the calculation around defence spending—there were mixed messages on whether it stays under Department of Fisheries and Oceans, of if it will be moved into Department of National Defence (though there is also an argument for it to go to Public Safety), and the question of whether or not to arm those ships is a fraught one because of the training requirements for armaments. It sounds like there will be things like CSE’s cyber-capability being counted as part of this calculation as well, which again, seems to be more fudging numbers that we typically accused other nations of doing while we were more “pure” in terms of what we counted toward our spending commitments, and that seems to be going away.

I would add that while we get a bunch of competing narratives around the target, whether it’s the Conservatives’ memory-holing the fact that they cut defence spending to below one percent of GDP (in order to achieve a false balance on the books in time for the 2015 election), or the notion that we are nothing more than freeloaders in NATO, we should keep reminding people that even with lower per-capita defence spending, we have been punching above our weight taking on the tough missions in NATO (Kandahar, leading a multi-country brigade in Latvia) where as other allies who have met their two percent targets don’t contribute (looking at you, Greece). A poor metric of spending is not a good indicator of contribution, but it has created a whole false narrative that we should be correcting, but that’s too much work for the pundit class, who are more interested in hand-wringing and calling Justin Trudeau names than they are in looking at our actual contributions. (Here’s a timeline of the spending target melodrama).

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia made another massive overnight attack against Ukraine, launching 479 drones and twenty missiles of various types, targeting the western and central parts of the county. Another prisoner swap did go ahead yesterday.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1932086386145841186

Continue reading →

Roundup: Historical revisionism of federalism in the past decade

Posted on by

Last week had largely been spent trying to determine what the love-in with the premiers all means, so much so that Danielle Smith is losing her grip on reality as she insists that she’ll convince BC premier David Eby to let another pipeline cross his province (in spite of there being no actual proposals for one), while also claiming that Albertans have the “lowest living standards in the world,” and I just can’t even.

Meanwhile, I’m seeing comments from the pundit class that I’m just finding hard to square with reality. This one quote from the weekend dispatch of The Line is a good example of these pundit narratives that are completely ahistorical.

The Liberals under Justin Trudeau were so fantastically uninterested in working with the provinces, and so relentlessly hostile to basic economic growth, that having a prime minister simply acknowledge (as Carney has) that we are in an economic emergency seems like a massive step forward.

Trudeau did work with the provinces a lot in his first parliament—he had the first face-to-face meeting with them as a group in years after Harper refused to, and they got big things done—the agreement on carbon pricing, enhancing CPP, a suite of health measures that Jane Philpott negotiated with the provinces. None of this was inconsequential, but there was a very different group of premiers in 2015 than there was in 2024. And let’s also be frank—the premiers didn’t want to work together with the federal government anymore. They wanted to gang up on him for more money with no conditions (those health transfers that Philpott negotiated didn’t go toward fixing anything), while the pleading that everyone was making around finding exceptions to the carbon levy was very unproductive (not that Trudeau did any favours in his “pause” on the price for heating oil rather than a better system of rebates in areas where energy poverty was a problem). But seriously, the premiers get away with blaming Trudeau for all of the things that they refused to do that were their responsibility, and somehow he was the problem?

As well, the notion that Trudeau was hostile to basic economic growth is, frankly, unhinged. How many trade deals did he sign or push over the finish line? What was the whole attempt to stand-up a North American EV supply chain? What were the billions spent to keep the entire economy afloat during COVID? If you’re going to cite the capital gains changes as being “hostile,” then congratulations—you’re a gullible numpty who bought the lines of people who engage in tax arbitrage and want that sweet roll to continue. If you think environmental regulation was killing economic growth, just wait until you see what climate change is already doing to the economy and is going to get exponentially worse. Just because Trudeau didn’t bow to the tax-cut-and-deregulate crowd, it doesn’t mean he was hostile to economic growth. Yes, he and his government had problems. A lot of them. But let’s not make up things that are blatantly ahistorical or outright fictional just to help put a shine on Carney.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-06-07T21:10:14.180Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drone and missile attacks killed four people in Kharkiv on Saturday. Russian forces claim to have crossed into the Dnipropetrovsk region, while a row is now brewing over an agreement to exchange bodies of dead soldiers, which Ukraine says they are not delaying. Meanwhile, a drone attack on a Russian electronics factory has forced them to suspend production.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1931395337958084711

Continue reading →

Roundup: What transnational repression?

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney had a big day planned with the tabling of his big “One Canada Economy” bill, and he managed to stomp all over his own message with news that he had a call with Indian prime minister Narendra Modi and invited him to attend the G7 summit in Kananaskis in a couple of weeks. There was a bit of a collective WTF from around the country considering that we still have not resolved the issue with the Modi government being credibly accused of ordering the murder of Canadian citizens on Canadian soil, along with other extortion rackets. Not only was this upsetting to Sikhs in Canada, but it also came on the anniversary of the attack on the Golden Temple in India, showing once again that Carney has inadequate political sense and is being poorly advised by those who allegedly have more political experience than he does.

chat is it normal to invite the head of a govt alleged to have been involved in the extrajudicial killing a canadian citizen on canadian soil to canada asking for a diaspora

— Supriya Dwivedi (@supriya.bsky.social) 2025-06-06T14:11:12.637Z

honestly hard to see this as anything other than the Carney govt thinking some canadian lives matter more than others it will also be incredibly difficult to take anything this govt says on transnational repression and foreign interference seriously given this pivot

— Supriya Dwivedi (@supriya.bsky.social) 2025-06-06T14:12:22.745Z

Carney defended the move by insisting this was about economic ties, and that he had reassurances that the law-enforcement process was ongoing (which India has refused cooperation around, and instead chose to make up a bunch of absolute horseshit about drugs supposedly being found on Trudeau’s plane). Others insisted that this was a diplomatic necessity, because diplomacy is not a reward for good behaviour (true!) and also stated that the other six members of the G7 have no problem with India and that Canada is an outlier. I would caveat that, however—the US has had their problems with India around this very problem, because some of it was also happening on US soil, and many other G7 countries don’t have the same Indian diaspora as Canada, which doesn’t mean that they would be safe from these kinds of activities. I would also say that there is an added implicit message with this invitation that you can essentially get away with murder if you’re economically important enough, and that’s a really, really bad message to send in this era of increasing authoritarianism and the democratic backsliding happening in Western countries.

On that note, Carney also had a call with Chinese premier Li Qiang, at his behest, about regularising communications channels. No doubt Carney has motivations of trying to get China to lift their tariffs on our agricultural and seafood products, which were in retaliation for our EV tariffs (because China is trying to behave in a predatory manner by trying to build a tech monoculture to suffocate our own EV industry). Not to mention, China continues to be a bad actor with its own foreign interference and transnational repression, so again, it is looking a lot like Carney is behaving like it’s 1995 and just one more trade deal with China will make them more democratic and respect human rights. Really! We mean it this time!

The last word goes to The Beaverton, who got it just right.

Carney limits G7 guests to one assassination each

— The Beaverton (@thebeaverton.com) 2025-06-06T21:09:26.706Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched another missile and drone attack on Ukraine in the early hours of Friday, killing at least six people. They claim this these are “military targets” in retaliation for Ukrainian “terrorist acts” against Russia, when of course we know this is nothing but bullshit. Ukrainian drones hit an industrial enterprise in Russia’s southern city of Engels.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Back-channel tariff talks?

Posted on by

Ever since the latest round of steel and aluminium tariffs went into place, there have been questions as to when and how Canada will respond, and earlier in the week, prime minister Mark Carney counselled patience and that there were “intensive negotiations” happening, but retaliatory measures were also being prepared. We found out yesterday that Carney and Trump have been having back-channel conversations on the subject, so retaliation while this is happening may be counter-productive. But you also have industry worrying that the longer this goes without retaliation, the more they become vulnerable to other things like steel imports from other countries being diverted to Canada, which could make their situation even worse.

That being said, we may not be able to eliminate all tariffs, and some level could remain because Trump does love tariffs, and has a completely wrong-headed notion about them because of the people he has been surrounding himself with. Never mind that our auto sector can’t survive with tariffs, or that the Americans will simply pay through the nose for aluminium that they can’t smelt themselves.

Meanwhile, the Star has a really good five-point explainer about the counter-tariffs, and why the Conservatives’ claims that they were “secretly removed” is false, but rather a certain number of counter-tariffs were suspended for six months to give Canadian companies time to adjust supply chains, but there are still plenty of counter-tariffs in place.

Ukraine Dispatch

There was another missile and drone attack overnight which hit Kyiv, has killed at least four people.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The confidence vote that wasn’t

Posted on by

Debate on the Address in Reply to the Speech From the Throne was due to wrap up, meaning a final vote. Media outlets insisted that this would be the first major confidence vote of the new Parliament, and that if the Liberals lost it, we could go back to an election, and there was all this building drama because of how they lost the vote on the Conservatives’ amendment (to “urge” the government to table a spring budget). And my headache started.

The vote on the Address in Reply is not automatically a confidence vote. It is if the opposition amendments explicitly state that they have no confidence in the government, and sometimes that happens because this is the first opportunity to test the confidence of the Chamber, especially in a minority parliament or legislature, but again, that was not the case here. But along the way, the NDP decided that they were going to play tough and declare that they would vote against it for specious reasons (and because Don Davies is an idiot, and has a long track record of being an idiot and a blowhard), while the Government House Leader, Steve MacKinnon, told reporters that this would be a confidence vote. So, if the government says it’s a confidence vote, it’s a confidence vote, and it was likely intended to be something of a bit a put-up-or-shut-up dare, which can be risky in a minority parliament, but sometimes you also need to play hardball with the opposition. This was likely going to mean that the Bloc would either vote in support or abstain (because they did say they would give the government a year before they started to seriously oppose anything, given the Trump situation), but the government was never in any serious danger of falling. If, by some fluke, they did lose a vote they declared to be confidence, they could simply hold another vote and basically say “Did you mean it?” and chances are they would win that vote, and all would go back to normal.

And in the end, there wasn’t even a vote. News of Marc Garneau’s death reached the Chamber just before the vote was to be taken, and it seems like the appetite for drama was gone, and it passed on division, meaning that they agreed to disagree, that they were going to let it pass, but not bother with a recorded vote. And thus, the least exciting outcome happened.

I must advise the beings of Bluesky that, in a truly only-in-this-particular-Canadian-parliament twist, the much-anticipated will-they-or-won't-they-trigger-an-election over it motion on the Throne speech as amended — has been adopted on division.

— Kady O'Malley (@kadyo.bsky.social) 2025-06-04T22:25:39.121Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-06-04T22:02:26.904Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones struck an apartment building in Kharkiv, injuring at least seventeen. Russian forces have also pushed further into Sumy region. Here’s a look at how Operation Spiderweb was carried out.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A lost vote for the sake of point-scoring

Posted on by

The opposition shenanigans manifested during one of the very first votes of the new Parliament, where the government was not able to defeat the Conservative amendment to the Address in Reply to the Speech From the Throne. Said amendment urged the government to table a spring budget, but it’s not binding, and it looks like Mark Carney and the rest of Cabinet will take it under advisement and leave it at that (because you can’t produce a budget within two weeks’ notice, and the Conservatives know that very well).

What gets me is that you have the Conservatives (and others) going “what does it say when the government loses their first vote?” when it says nothing at all. If anything, it says that in a minority parliament, the opposition parties will do everything they can to embarrass the government, just as they have in previous parliaments, and given the current configuration of parties, this is really just a continuation of the constant juvenile bullshit we’ve seen over and over again that resulted in a paralyzed House of Commons last fall. Nothing really changed, and we’re going to see more that very same thing because we have the same insistence on juvenile point-scoring from the opposition, and we have the same Liberal government that is both inept at communicating their way out of a wet paper bag, and who are tactically incompetent because they think that they will somehow come out looking sympathetic to the procedural warfare and gamesmanship when they absolutely won’t because legacy media will simply not actually call anyone’s bullshit, but just both-sides the whole thing, and the Liberals will always lose in that framing. And I suppose what it says about the government is that they haven’t learned a single gods damned lesson from their near-death experience, and Carney’s complete political inexperience isn’t doing them any favours here either.

Meanwhile, the government introduced their big omnibus border bill, and it has a lot of troubling elements, from lowering thresholds for electronic data collection by law enforcement that won’t always require a warrant, and gives Canada Post more authority to open mail they deem suspicious. It also changes particular thresholds for asylum claims, and gives the government powers to simply stop claims or immigration processes with no explanation or apparent avenues for appeal. There are some positives, such as more resources for financial crimes, but in the grand scheme of things, I’m not sure it balances the negatives. The government claims they found the right balance that respects Charter rights, but I am dubious, and I suspect that law enforcement convinced them that they need these rights-violating powers and used Trump’s threats as a justification to get what they want.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian rocket attack killed at least four and injured at least 25 in Sumy. The city of Sumy remains under threat as Russians advance in that region. Ukraine detonated explosives on the concrete piers supporting the bridge linking Russia to Crimea, forcing its closure.

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1929871991034568954

Continue reading →