Category Archives: Political Roundup

What’s going on in Canadian politics

Roundup: Refusing a pay raise for populism

Posted on by

Conservative backbench MP Mike Dawon put on a big media show yesterday by declaring that he will be refusing his scheduled pay raise in April, which is something that the party itself is not actually doing a big song and dance about (at least not yet). In his stated reasons for doing so, he says that “the working man (and woman) in this country hasn’t seen a decent raise in decades,” which is not in fact true. Statistics Canada tracks these things, and average hourly wages in this country have been outpacing inflation going on three years now, and while that’s not everyone because this is an average measure, wages are not stagnant.

This being said, I really dislike these particular kinds of populist performances because they are largely designed to denigrate the role of elected officials in public life, and winds up leading to problems in the long term. Poor pay for MPs means it’s harder to attract talent who have professional careers, meaning doctors and lawyers for example, who frequently need to take a pay cut to serve. And frankly, the other side of ensuring that we have adequate compensation for elected officials is that it discourages corruption, so that they don’t feel the need to take bribes to maintain their lifestyle.

Ontario’s MPPs did away with their pensions and scheduled raises for years, and it created problems with MPPs who would ultimately refuse to retire because they couldn’t afford to, and had few options in the private sector, and there was one story about a former MPP whose financial troubles after leaving office left him destitute, which is not something we should want to expose anyone running for office to. Frankly we don’t want a system where only people with previous wealth get into politics because they can afford to, and these kinds of populist attitudes wind up reinforcing that kind of behaviour.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-10T15:08:05.641Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia struck energy facilities on Odesa overnight, meaning more power cuts in the region. There was also an airstrike on Sloviansk the Ukrainian-controlled portion of Donetsk, killing two. President Zelenskyy says that major changes are coming in the way that Ukraine handles its air defences.

Continue reading →

Roundup: “Breaking ranks” to represent his constituents

Posted on by

Every news outlet in the country is framing Liberal MP Bruce Fanjoy as “breaking ranks” because he wrote a letter to the government in opposition to the latest return-to-office mandate for civil servants. Why is this language suspect? Because he’s not a member of Cabinet, so the expectation that he must be a compliant sheep and not step out of line is frankly wrong and non-existent. Backbenchers are there to hold the government to account, even if they’re in the same party. In fact, especially if they’re in the same party, because they are no good to anyone if they are nothing more than mindless clapping seals whose only purpose is to stand up and vote for the government and its programme at every opportunity.

https://twitter.com/brucefanjoy/status/2020920966893928589

The thing about Fanjoy is that he worked that riding in order to oust Pierre Poilievre, and part of that was the message that Poilievre took them for granted, and that he was going to actually represent them, and that’s what he’s doing, because there are a lot of civil servants in that riding. After all of the work in his winning the riding, can you imagine the message it would send for him to say absolutely nothing as the government moves ahead with its very ill-thought-out plan for return-to-office? It’s likely he wouldn’t win it again if that were the case. So yeah, he’s going to “break ranks” to deliver this very gentle message to the government.

This being said, I am once again going to absolutely rage at the expectation that this kind of framing devices places on MPs. It’s an old media dichotomy—we insist we want MPs to act more independently, but the moment they do, they have “broken ranks,” or the leader is “losing control,” or any other means by which We The Media police MPs into being good little drones and just following the (presidentialised) leader when that’s not what they should be doing. It’s beyond frustrating that we are worse whips than the actual party whips, which is saying something in this country with our parliament. It’s just ridiculous that this keeps happening, even when the party has room for disagreement (see: Nate Erskine-Smith).

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched 149 drones and 11 missiles early Monday, killing four people. Russian forces are also trying to push ahead at Pokrovsk, in spite of previously claiming they had already captured it. Ukraine is opening up sales of its domestically-produced weapons to help finance the war effort.

Continue reading →

Roundup: His photo-ops were different, you see

Posted on by

Jamil Jivani has returned from his trip to Washington, and before briefing Dominic LeBlanc or anyone from the government, he turned to the pages of the National Post to pen a self-congratulatory op-ed for the trip that nobody asked for, and that op-ed says pretty much nothing but a collection of platitudes about the GM plant in his riding, and looking for ways to continue the partnership with the US, as though the US isn’t the problem. It’s empty, and has apparently accomplished absolutely nothing

What is hilarious, however, are the fact that conservative posters over on social media have been taking his photos from his meetings with various players in Washington and declaring this to be “leadership,” as opposed to photos that say nothing other than he met with them. And yes, these are the very same voices who denounce the fact that prime minister Mark Carney has travelled across the globe several times over the past nine months and has met with all kinds of world leaders, because of course, that’s just a useless photo op (per Pierre Poilievre’s talking points in Question Period), but Jivani’s pointless photo ops? Totally different. Because of course.

Meanwhile, Kirsten Hillman can’t actually say if she thinks Trump wants to preserve the New NAFTA because his positions change from day to day, and there is no consistency from anyone around him, so that’s fun. Here is more about Hillman’s time in Washington as she wraps up her diplomatic career.

Ukraine Dispatch

There was a massive drone attack on Odesa overnight, which followed a previous massive attack on energy facilities with over 400 drones and 40 missiles earlier in the weekend. The US says they want the war over by summer, but Russia can go home at any point, and these deadlines do nothing but encourage Russia.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The annual Standing Orders debate

Posted on by

Either out or morbid curiosity or as a cry for help, I watched yesterday’s House of Commons’ debate on proposing changes to the Standing Orders, and…I didn’t hate it? There were actually some good ideas in there, and there were calls to undo a couple of changes that were made during the height of the pandemic to accommodate “hybrid parliament,” which I hadn’t realised had been changed. While this was kicked off by Liberal MP Corey Hogan’s suggestions for reforming Question Period, which I wrote about in my weekend column, there were a number of other reasonable suggestions. One common theme by several MPs across party lines was to end the vestiges of hybrid sittings, which I wholeheartedly agree with, and some of that included the remote voting app (which again, is an affront to Parliamentary democracy and should be abolished), but that will be a tougher sell. A number of MPs also had gripes about the ability of the Senate to stall or kill private members’ bills through delay, but that has nothing to do with the Standing Orders, as the House does not write the rules of the Senate.

  • Michael Chong wants to restore the Speaker’s right of recognition and do away with speaking lists, and adopt the UK practice of allocating time among the number of MPs who want to speak to a specific bill or motion. (Agreed!) He also wants to ensure that the Speaker and a committee of MPs appoint the Clerks and Sergeant-at-Arms, and wants committee spots and chairs determined by secret preferential ballots, and for the Board of Internal Economy to only be comprised of backbenchers. All of these are reasonable.
  • Yves Perron wants the prayer replaced with a moment of reflection, and to have a designated time on Fridays for a more free-flowing question-and-answer session with ministers akin to the special committee of the whole sessions during COVID. He also wants limits on the size of panels at committees to ensure that they are more manageable He also wants unanimous consent motions to be held on Wednesdays and to be tabled in advance (which I’m very dubious about).
  • Jenny Kwan and Pat Kelly both want the return of voice votes/standing five to trigger recorded votes, which was one of those hybrid rule changes that needs to be undone. Kwan wants new rules on dissenting committee reports being presented, and no Supply Days on Wednesdays of Fridays (but they are already limited as to the number they can have, and that would take up all Tuesdays and Thursdays).
  • Kelly wants to invert the times for speeches and questions and answers, so you have shorter speeches and longer question/comment segments (which I’m not opposed to).
  • John-Paul Danko is concerned about parliamentary privilege being weaponized to allow slander to be clipped and shared over socials.
  • Scott Reid had some very specific concerns about ethics complaints being weaponized (but I’m not sure that’s in the Standing Orders).
  • Kevin Lamoureux wants concurrence debates to be held after government orders, as they are used as dilatory motions. He also wants a segment where MPs can speak to any bill of their choosing for five or ten minutes on a Friday.
  • Garnett Genuis wants guardrails on unanimous consent motions used to pass bills at all stages, and wants to do away with the parties asking suck-up questions during question/comment segments after speeches.

In all, there are actually a few good ideas in there, but we’ll see how much the Procedure and House Affairs committee takes up any of them (and I am not hopeful on most). Nevertheless, it was nice to see a reasonable debate on some (mostly) reasonable ideas on how to make the House of Commons work better.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-06T23:56:01.289Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Canada is sending AIM missiles for Ukraine’s air defence. President Zelenskyy is calling for faster action on air defence and repairing the power grids.

https://twitter.com/FedorovMykhailo/status/2019728147579871319

Continue reading →

Roundup: No federal backstop for Smith’s threats

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith’s threats around withholding funding for her province’s justice system if she doesn’t get her own way on judicial appointments is attracting broader attention, and there was a particular exchange at a Senate committee the other day that bears pointing out. When asked about this thread, federal justice minister Sean Fraser essentially said that if Smith does this, it’ll be a choice, but also that the federal government is not going to swoop in and backstop this funding lapse with federal dollars.

https://bsky.app/profile/senatorpaulasimons.bsky.social/post/3me4zvsm23k27

This is a good thing. Frankly, if the federal government did this, it would set a terrible precent because all provinces are underfunding their justice systems, and if they backstop Alberta because Danielle Smith is acting like an entitled baby throwing a tantrum, then every other province will cut their own funding and hope for a federal backstop, and once again, things will get worse in our system because provinces aren’t living up to their obligations. They’re not right now, but this would make things infinitely worse. Of course, if this does happen, the federal government will actually have to get off their asses and loudly point this out repeatedly that this is the provincial government’s fault. They should be doing it right now, with the whole nonsense going on around bail reform, but this would be infinitely worse. Court delays for simple matters? Thank Smith. Criminals going free because they can’t get trial dates? Thank Smith. Did that accused murderer get released because they couldn’t actually hold a trial with no functioning court house, no prosecutors and no court staff? Thank Smith. That’s the kind of thing that they need to be doing as is, but they lack the gonads to do so, but they would need to step it up even more if Smith did pull that trigger.

Meanwhile, the Canadian Bar Association is speaking out about Smith’s unconstitutional demands, and other law organizations are joining them, while also explaining how the judicial appointment process works, and why Smith is wrong to characterize them as “activists” who act on the federal government’s behalf. It also bears reminding that the UCP purged the provincial judicial nomination committees in favour of partisan appointees, and that two sitting judges are under investigation for donating to the party, so maybe Smith’s concerns about supposedly political choices are just her projecting and admitting she wants to fix the process for her own political ends.

Ukraine Dispatch

Two people were injured in the overnight attack on Kyiv early Thursday. Ukrainian forces made a successful strike against one of Russia’s missile launch sites. The “peace talks” have seen another agreement on exchanges of prisoners of war.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A sit-down meeting to foster cooperation?

Posted on by

Yesterday, prime minister Mark Carney had a sit-down meeting with Pierre Poilievre about, well, we’re not entirely sure. Both of their readouts are very different spins on their conversation, but I guess it was about looking at ways to cooperate over the next few months? But let’s take this with a shaker’s full of salt.

Carney is certainly looking to get bills passed through the current minority parliament in a way that won’t be drama with every vote, particularly as he is now down two MPs (soon to be three), while Poilievre has no actual interest in going to an election anytime soon because a) he can read the polls just as much as anyone else and Carney’s favourables are particularly high right now, and b) he wants the NDP to be able to actually fight an election so that they can peel voters away from the Liberals, as the Conservatives need a relatively strong NDP to make that happen, and they are in no position right now. So he needs to save some face while playing along with Carney, so that translates to this faux conciliatory tone, while his “specific suggestions” are always to destroy all environmental laws, and to inevitably drive investment away through uncertainty and increased litigation—such a winning strategy! In any case, I suspect that they will have agreed to pass certain bills, possibly with amendments, by a certain date, before Poilievre gets to carry on with his little song and dance about imaginary taxes and “red tape,” because he has demonstrated time and again that “cooperation” means “do what I say.”

Meanwhile, Jamil Jivani headed to Washington, and apparently got a briefing from Dominic LeBlanc before he left. That said, Carney was throwing some shade around about how Jivani is not the party’s trade critic, and that he was mostly doing it for media attention. Mélanie Joly also noted that he has never said anything about the job losses at the GM plant in his riding, so she was not exactly convinced by his desire to help. In any case, Jivani had his meetings, and tweeted that he had a message from Trump, which was that he “loves” Canadians. Gee, thanks.

Ukraine Dispatch

At least seven people were killed when Russia shelled a front-line town in Donetsk. There are evacuations taking place in Zaporizhzhia region as Russians advance on more settlements. More power cuts are expected as they expect more attacks on Kyiv. Zelenskyy says that 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed so far, which is a lot less than the Russian casualties, which total over a million deaths and injuries.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Inventing a new grievance to get mad about

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith is at it again, by inventing a grievance regarding the appointment of judges, and is threatening the federal government to withhold funding for the justice system in the province if she doesn’t get her own way when it comes to having a say in who gets appointed, both with Superior Court and Court of Appeal appointments, but also with the upcoming appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada, as the vacancy opening up is a “western” seat on the bench. This is insane, it’s unconstitutional, and it’s possibly the dumbest thing to threaten. Her claim that she needs input because of the “distinct legal traditions” of Alberta is a load of absolute horseshit—Alberta has no distinct legal traditions. Quebec has a civil code which is separate from the common law that the rest of Canada employs, so yes, they have a distinct legal tradition. Alberta does not. It’s beyond risible that she is threatening to implode the province’s justice system over something that does not exist.

1) This is blatantly unconstitutional2) Withholding funding from which judicial appointments? Provincial? Because federally-appointed judges get paid from the federal budget. That's why new judicial spots end up in federal budget bills3) Withholding any funding will make the justice system worse

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-03T21:57:28.042Z

Provinces are already underfunding their judicial systems (provincial judges, court houses, clerks, bailiffs, Crown attorneys, remand facilities, etc). If she wants to withhold more funding, and then claim the federal Liberals caused crime, well, that'll be a real choice on her part.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-03T21:57:28.043Z

Also, this is just an other invented grievance, which conservatives in Alberta love to do, and then claim that they are being oppressed because they're not getting something that nobody gets in the first place. Call it out, as just that.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-03T22:04:53.329Z

It’s almost certain that this is supposed to be some kind of a stunt to demand judges that are tougher on crime, and that she can somehow “direct” as she has been quoted as wanting to do, which is an affront to judicial independence and the very nature of the rule of law. And frankly, we don’t have a judicial culture in this country of ultra-conservative judges who throw the book at everyone like they do in the US, because those judges tend to be elected, so they go extra hard to win votes. That’s not how this works here. And frankly, the appointment of judges is for lawyers to self-nominate to a judicial advisory committee, who then vets them and then either recommends them to the minister or not. Smith trying to insert herself into this process is simply asking to undermine the process and to personally reduce confidence in the justice system. Just absolute lunacy.

She is her inventing a grievance to be mad about. There are no distinct legal traditions in the province. They are a common law jurisdiction like eight other provinces in the country. Quebec has a civil code, which is a distinct legal tradition, and Alberta does not.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-03T22:06:57.965Z

Let’s call this out for what it is—Smith is quite literally inventing things to get mad about, and then throwing a tantrum about an imaginary problem that doesn’t exist, so that she can be performative in her “Western alienation” pantomime. None of this is real, but she has determined that constantly having everyone mad at Ottawa is her ticket to staying in power perpetually, but it’s a really stupid plan. That kind of anger is exhausting, and will lead to unintended consequences, but most of all, this is just more fodder for the separatists that she claims not to represent (even though we all know that she doth protest too much over that one). Now the question becomes whether anyone in the federal government will call this out, and point-blank say that this is just an invented grievance, or will they back down, and try and placate her in some manner? Because if it’s the latter, that’s a very big mistake.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-03T15:08:06.097Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The attack on Zaporizhzhia on Tuesday killed two people and injured at least nine others, while a power plant in Kyiv was badly damaged. President Zelenskyy says that Russia used the US-backed “energy ceasefire” to simply stockpile more ammunition and drones, and launch another attack.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Some noticeable omissions from the GDP concerns

Posted on by

The latest GDP data was released on Friday, when the House wasn’t sitting, so the Conservatives spent yesterday making up for it, both with concern-trolling questions during QP, plus a lengthy statement about their concern about the “grim picture” of the Canadian economy. Yes, real GDP was flat in November, but that seems to be about as far as they are willing to read, because if you scratch the surface, one of the biggest drags on the economy was the fact that those motor vehicles and parts numbers were down 6.4 percent as a result of the global shortage of semiconductors. That is most assuredly not the fault of the Liberal government. Without that drag, it’s likely that the GDP would have been in the positive for the month, in spite of the other economic drags.

All of these words from the Conservatives, and none of them point out that Trump's trade war is the primary cause of this economic malaise (for which we have been surprisingly resilient to date). No, it's all the Liberals' fault.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-02T21:38:44.075Z

The thing is, much as with Poilievre’s big speech on Friday, there is absolutely no mention of Trump in their statement like there wasn’t in the speech. Trump and his trade war are having a deleterious effect on our economy, because we grew over-reliant on them as an export market because they’re right there, and they were a willing market that was simply too easy to trade with. Disentangling parts of our economy from theirs is going to take time, and we are taking damage from it, but to be frank, most economists figured we’d be in a recession by now as a result of Trump, and we haven’t been, showing that we had some more resilience than they initially thought. But the fact that the Conservatives cannot acknowledge the reality of the situation in order to blame the Liberals is sad and pathetic.

And it’s not just the GDP data. They’ve been doing this with food price inflation, and putting out a bunch of absolute nonsense to “prove” that their obsession with imaginary “hidden taxes” and environmental laws are the real problems, not climate change, not Trump, not factors beyond our control. Nope, it’s all Liberals and their deficits. And because they get so little pushback on it, from either the government or the media (though, to be fair, David Cochrane was actually producing data to push back on Power & Politics yesterday), they get away with this false version of reality and people believe them. It’s a problem, but nobody wants to actually acknowledge it because that seems like work, or math, which they are allergic to.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-02T14:08:02.462Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia is once again attacking Kyiv, Kharkiv, and other major centres, destroying energy infrastructure after a “ceasefire” for a whole couple of days. Russia also claims to have taken another settlement in Zaporizhzhia region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A predictable 87.4 percent

Posted on by

After a speech that was mostly a rehash of his same talking points—falsehoods about the cost of living, blaming the Liberals for the rise of separatism, promising more trickle-down economics, and talking about hearing his autistic daughter speak for the first time, while also not talking about Trump—Pierre Poilievre won a predictable 87.4 percent approval in his leadership review. It’s not unexpected, and it endorses his current path, because these are the things his base apparently wants to hear in spite of the fact that it’s apparently not what most Canadians are looking for, particularly because his personal numbers remain so negative. If anything, this will just reinforce his behaviour, because that’s what we all need.

Could Poilievre or any of his lackeys actually look up what "post-national" means?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-31T04:28:44.469Z

Catherine O’Hara

The loss of Canadian icon is gutting. As author Kate Heartfield put it, she was like every Canadian’s cool aunt, and her loss will be deeply felt. I believe that the government should declare a national funeral be held for her (which is one step below a state funeral), because she is that important to us as a nation. Here is a collection of tributes.

She deserves a national funeral.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-30T18:55:31.866Z

Message from the Governor General on the passing of Catherine O'Hara.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-30T22:14:10.099Z

From @glasneronfilm.bsky.social:

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-31T04:53:49.181Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Putin has allegedly agreed to halt strikes on Kyiv until Sunday, but that hasn’t stopped Russia from claiming to have captured three more villages.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another meeting that ends in all smiles

Posted on by

The premiers’ meeting went off as expected—all smiles and talk of unity ahead of the New NAFTA review, and hey, Mark Carney even announced the launch of the Team Canada Trade Hub to provide coordination for trade diversification efforts as certain premiers go on their own trade mission abroad. There were also some timelines around certain trade barriers like credentials recognition and harmonization of health and safety requirements, even if those timelines may not be until next year. (But that’s something, right?)

In his remarks to the premiers, Carney invokes Sir John A Macdonald and the railway, before talking about "how we build," and being in "true partnership" with Indigenous people.The railway *might* not be the best example of "how we build" (600+ deaths) or partnership (dispossession of land).

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-29T15:19:08.664Z

There was some added side drama as Danielle Smith said that they may be taking Kitimat off the table as the destination for the hoped-for pipeline, but that doesn’t necessarily open up better options on the northwest coast of BC, given that it was determined that it was too dangerous to put a pipeline to Prince Rupert, even though a bunch of people seem to think that’s where it should have wound up in the first place. (Again, this is why Poilievre’s “approve a pipeline today” cries are so ridiculous, because there is no actual route even planned yet).

The other thing on everyone’s mind was the piece in the Financial Times that confirmed that the Alberta separatists were in meetings with the State Department in the US, and David Eby referred to their actions as “treason.” (Incidentally, this activity doesn’t meet the Criminal Code definition of treason). Smith, however, refused to condemn them because they’re politically useful to her, and Carney sidestepped any kind of denunciation, saying that the topic hadn’t come up in his conversations with Trump, when what he should be doing is summoning the ambassador and threatening to PNG him.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-01-29T22:27:01.937Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian drone strike killed three in Zaporizhzhia, while Trump says Putin agreed not to attack Kyiv for a week due to the cold (and I’ll believe that when I see it). An exchange of war dead was carried out, with 1000 Ukrainian bodies turned over for 38 Russians. The Kremlin says they invited Zelenskyy to Moscow for “peace talks.”

"Kremlin says Russia has invited Ukraine's Zelenskyy to come to Moscow for peace talks."Guys. Come on. www.reuters.com/world/europe…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-30T05:36:13.695Z

Continue reading →