Roundup: Play stupid procedural games, win stupid procedural consequences

Posted on by

My patience for the stupid procedural games being played in the House of Commons is wearing incredibly thin as Liberal House Leader Mark Holland is moving a motion to extend sitting hours to midnight. Now, this would be fairly normal for the last four sitting weeks of the year, but Holland is moving the motion to extend until June. *sighs, pinches bridge of nose* Holland claims it’s because the Conservatives are being obstructionist, and putting up long speaking lists for every bill, so he’s going to accommodate them, and the Conservatives are saying that it’s their job to have vigorous debate on every bill, but this is beyond excessive. (The NDP are also in favour of this, because they too have essentially had a policy of talking every bill to death for the past decade or so). But that should make everyone happy, no?

Of course not. Andrew Scheer is, not incorrectly, pointing out that midnight sittings take resources (read: interpreters) away from committees, and calls this the Liberals trying to kill accountability by stealth. That’s one interpretation, but one could also say that it’s the consequences of the Conservatives decision to fill up the speaking lists like they are. And it’s all so unnecessary. This insistence of filling up speaking lists and having MPs read canned speeches into the record for hours on end is a particularly Canadian phenomenon, and it’s a symptom of our politics being treated un-seriously. It’s stupid gamesmanship that started years ago, and it gets worse with each passing parliament, and we need to stop it. The fact that Holland and Scheer are now exacerbating it even more as a kind of brinksmanship is killing our democracy, and MPs need to grow the hell up, on all sides of the Chamber.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Protecting nominations is corrosive to democracy

Posted on by

Remember back when Justin Trudeau promised that the Liberals were going to be the party of “open nominations,” because this was good for democracy and all of that? Well, it seems like once again, his party is firming up their rules to protect incumbents from nominations, which is not open nominations, and is very bad for democracy. Very, very bad. Nomination races are one of the only tools that grassroots party members have to hold incumbents to account without voting against the party in a general election. It’s how the party is supposed to hold its own to account, and if they can fundraise enough and keep their memberships above a certain level, they’re being given a free pass rather than the accountability the system is supposed to provide. This is a very bad thing for our democratic system. It’s bad enough that under Trudeau, the Liberals tore up their party constitution and centralized power in his office. Now they are short-circuiting one more accountability measure and keeping tight control over the nomination process, which focuses even more power on the leader (for whom the party constitution states doesn’t have to face a leadership review unless they lose an election). This is not how a party is supposed to be run.

The practice of democracy in this country is backsliding, as much as our parties like to pat themselves on the back. They have been undermining the rules at every turn, and have hollowed out the safeguards and the grassroots participation. And yes, I know that sitting MPs insist that they need protected nominations because they’re not in the riding to fend off any nomination challenges, but a) you’re in the riding an awful lot, because the number of sitting days has been in decline, and b) you have incumbency advantage already, and if you keep up the door-knocking and activities that you’re required to for these protections, you might as well do it for real stakes. Because yes, grassroots democracy matters, and we desperately need to rebuild it in this country before it’s too late. Protecting nominations just corrodes the system even more than it already has been, and the Liberals cannot pat themselves on the back and talk about how good they are for democracy if they can’t even be bothered with the fundamental basics.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 260:

Russian Forces made a big song and dance about pulling out of Kherson, saying they can’t supply it, but Ukraine is sceptical because it looks like Russia is setting a trap, because they tend to do the opposite of what they say they’re going to. And indeed, they say that they haven’t actually seen signs that Russians are completely leaving the city. Meanwhile, here’s a look at the task ahead of rebuilding Kharkiv after Russian occupation.

https://twitter.com/StratCom_AFU/status/1589649656338067464

Continue reading →

Roundup: The federal walkout in the face of the premiers’ games

Posted on by

The federal-provincial health ministers’ meeting broke down with federal ministers Jean-Yves Duclos and Carolyn Bennett walking out after a communiqué from the premiers was leaked, decrying a failure of the talks, drafted five days ago, indicating that there was no intent to listen to the federal government’s position on tying increased funding to accountability measures like outcomes and pan-Canadian data. Duclos said in his press scrum after walking out that just increasing the transfer to provinces is not a plan, which is one hundred percent correct, because we know that provinces have a demonstrated history of spending additional federal dollars on other things that are not healthcare. (Duclos’ statement here). The provincial spokes-minister, Adrian Dix, carried on with his disingenuous talking points about not being able to fix the system without more money, or demanding a first ministers’ meeting about this, the only purpose of which would be for the premiers to gang up on the prime minister for the cameras. Dix also painted this false picture of lamenting that the federal government couldn’t come together with them like they did over COVID, completely ignoring that the federal government sent billions of additional dollars to provinces for COVID and most of those provinces simply put that money directly onto their bottom lines to end their fiscal year with a surplus, which is not the point of sending money to them for healthcare.

Justin Trudeau, earlier in the day, was already calling the premiers out on this bullshit by pointing out that they are crying poor while they are offering tax breaks for their wealthier citizens, which is not a sign that their budgets are hurting for federal dollars. And this is exactly the point—premiers have largely decided to make this the federal government’s problem, because they can get away with this particular lie. Legacy media will continue to take the line that so long as a single federal dollar is involved, this becomes a federal responsibility, which is not how this works. The crumbling healthcare system is not the federal government’s problem. They have done nothing but increase funding year over year. The provinces have created this mess, and in all likelihood exacerbated it deliberately in order to force the federal government’s hand in giving them a lot more money with no strings attached, but the federal government isn’t blinking, and is finally starting to call bullshit. Let’s see if legacy media actually catches on (but I have serious doubts they will).

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 259:

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he’s willing to negotiate peace—on his terms, and not Russia’s, but forestalled criticism Russia was levelling against him. Otherwise, there was more shelling in Bakhmut, and two civilians were seriously wounded by unexploded mines around Kharkiv.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pretending the promise of money was new

Posted on by

Provincial health ministers met in Vancouver yesterday in advance of their federal counterpart joining them, and boy did the bullshit ever flow, particularly in their characterisation of what has transpired. The federal minister, Jean-Yves Duclos, put out a statement before the provincial minsters had a press conference that basically reiterated what the federal government has been saying for months now—that yes, they are willing to spend more money, but they want outcomes attached. What was different was specific language about common metrics for health data, cooperation on health workforces, and that the federal government was willing to also engaged in specially tailored one-off agreements with provinces on specific investments.

To hear BC’s health minister, Adrian Dix, tell the tale, the federal government has been “radio silent” for over a year, which is not true, or that this is the first time they’ve raised money issues, which is again, not true, and the message has been consistent. But some of his counterparts are already rejecting the federal strings, and insisting that this is some kind of centralization or micromanaging (it’s not). Dix also pretended that the progress he has made around some reforms in BC are being done elsewhere around the country (they’re not) as “proof” that the provinces are getting their acts together on healthcare, which is, again, not true, and nobody wants to call out the provinces for letting things get to a crisis through chronic underfunding, in large part because they spent federal dollars on other things, and because certain premiers appear to be wilfully breaking their systems in order to try and privatise as much as they can without penalty under the Canada Health Act. If the starting point for these negotiations is the truth, well, that appears to be in short supply, which could be a big problem for everyone going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 258:

Ukrainian officials are accusing Russian forces of looting empty homes in Kherson after they ordered civilians out of the city (likely a forced deportation, which is a war crime) in advance of the Ukrainian advance on the city, and then the Russians cut the power to the city and blamed Ukrainian “sabotage.” The epicentre of the fighting remains Bakhmut and Avdiivka in the Donetsk region, where Ukrainians say that hundreds of Russians are being killed every day.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bored with the discourse?

Posted on by

Over the weekend, I was forwarded this particular diatribe from the Globe and Mail’s generally awful television columnist, John Doyle, about how boring Canadian political shows are. And he’s right about that—they’re generally pretty terrible (even if their hosts are wonderful people), but Doyle largely misdiagnoses why.

“This boredom-with-the-government narrative is very much the story that pundits like to peddle in Canada and part of a broad-brush assumption that only furthers the dangerous idea that Canadian politics are tedious and unworthy of engaged attention,” Doyle asserts, not incorrectly, but this needs a bit more delving into where the issues are. Doyle is again not incorrect when he points out that the repetition of the same small group of talking heads across different shows is a sign that “Ottawa is a small place with a small set of people jawing on about the same topic, often using the same phrases, over and over,” but it’s getting closer to one of the problems.

“What’s missing from these political conversations on TV is the sense that Canada is socially, politically and economically dynamic,” Doyle says. “What we see is a media power structure that is entrenched and sometimes literally bored by the discourse.”

This is part of it, and while he talks about how he doesn’t want us to devolve into American-style political coverage of partisan shouting matches (which was de rigeur when Evan Solomon was hosting Power & Politics because he believed it was what led to “good TV”) and that he wants Canadian TV to make better use of the medium, part of the problem is the shrinking media environment. These shows are made on a shoestring budget with a very small group of producers, and have to fill a defined news hole every day, and in order to do that, they have established rolodexes of reliable commentators who they know will drop everything to show up on TV, even if they have little of use to say (actual experts not always being reliably available which is why they are harder to book), and talking heads to fill that airtime. To add to that, there is pressure to diversify who those talking heads are, so they wind up using the same few across all channels because they’re all trying to tick the same boxes with the limited number of bodies available.

For the rest of the airtime that isn’t devoted to the talking head panels, much of that is devoted to things like MP panels, in an age of iron-clad message discipline, so you don’t get actual insight or debate, you get recited talking points and hosts simply both-sidesing everything rather than calling bullshit on any of it. Not every host—some are better than others (particularly some that are filling in for main hosts), but when the main tactic is to play Devil’s advocate and simply recite the other party’s talking points and getting them to respond, it doesn’t make for illuminating television, and it lets the politicians get away with murder, because they’re not being challenged. I only wish we had Rosemary Barton back doing the accountability interviews on a daily basis, because she was good at it and did call the MPs on their bullshit because she knew how. But this isn’t because the media power structure being bored with the discourse—it’s because it’s under-resourced and afraid to challenge that discourse, which is a very different problem than what Doyle imagines it to be.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 257:

More Russian strikes over the weekend continued to attack electrical generation in Kyiv and other regions in Ukraine, causing more blackouts as winter approaches. In all, some 35 towns and villages in nine regions were hit, while Russians continue to dig in at Kherson in the south in advance of a Ukrainian counter-offensive, while the front line in Donetsk is now at the outskirts of Bakhmut. The good news is that the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant has been re-connected to the power grid, so it doesn’t have to rely on emergency diesel generators to cool the reactors (which are currently all shut down).

https://twitter.com/PatronDsns/status/1589023166542024705

Continue reading →

Roundup: Don’t just rely on the federal government

Posted on by

While at a feel-good announcement yesterday about the enhanced GST rebates going out to Canadians, Justin Trudeau told reporters that he was weighing “all options” on what to do about Doug Ford’s pre-emptive use of the Notwithstanding Clause, though federal options are extremely limited because it is a legitimate constitutional power under certain circumstances, and doing anything about that would require a constitutional amendment, which if Quebec or Ontario are not on board with, would be dead in the water. And disallowance is likely a Pandora’s box of federal-provincial warfare, which limits options.

Trudeau also said that Canadians themselves need to stand up to provinces using this power rather than waiting for the federal government to intervene (as the pre-emptive use pretty much rules out the courts becoming involved), because we shouldn’t underestimate the power of popular discontent—particularly for someone like Doug Ford, who doesn’t like it when people are mad at him. The powers are being invoked by populists who think they can get away with it by pandering to baser instincts, and of people put sustained pressure on those governments to let them know that no, using these powers are not okay, that could force them to back off, but that means actual sustained pressure, and not just the kinds of slactivism that we have become accustomed to. That is the kind of democratic power that still exists and holds sway, and we shouldn’t discount it.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 255:

Russian authorities in occupied Kherson continue to attempt to evacuate civilians from the city, moving them deeper into Russian-occupied territory, but President Volodymyr Zelenskyy warns that Russia could be laying a trap to ensnare Ukrainian forces into intense urban warfare. Zelenskyy also said that Ukrainian forces have been holding their positions around Bakhmut and Soledar in the Donetsk region, while Russians send more troops into the “meat grinder.”

https://twitter.com/AnitaAnandMP/status/1588684951381508097

Continue reading →

Roundup: A thinnish Fiscal Update

Posted on by

It was the Fall Economic Statement yesterday, which did not have a lot of new measures within it, highlighting the upcoming economic uncertainty and possibility of a short recession, though its optimistic scenario is for a simple economic slowdown that will help to tame inflation. The deficit is also slated to be lower than predicted in Budget 2022, and there is a path to balance within a couple of years. What it did offer was fairly targeted—eliminating interest on student loans, providing advances to the Canada Worker Benefit (but done in a really problematic way that will likely create future headaches because they didn’t listen to advice), a promise to do something about credit card fees for small businesses, and a tax on share buybacks by 2024 (which could create a run on them before it kicks in, because of course). The$15-billion Canada Growth Fund will be willing to accept lower returns or increase its loss exposure in order to stimulate institutional investment in riskier green projects,  A few more of the smaller measures in the document can be found here and also here.

In the meantime, check out the threads from Lindsay Tedds and Jennifer Robson.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1588264168037449729

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1588264815319207936

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1588266088739274752

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1588268099312418819

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 254:

Unsurprisingly, International Atomic Energy Agency has found no evidence that Ukraine is building “dirty bombs,” contradicting Russian claims. More shelling near the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant means that it has been cut off from the power grid again and is running on emergency generators to cool the reactors. Here is a look inside Russia’s “cleansing” campaign in the town of Bucha, where one of the mass graves was found, as well as the Kyiv suburb of Andriivka, where more civilians were killed.

https://twitter.com/UNICEF_UA/status/1587883993940123648

Continue reading →

QP: It’s hogwash and poppycock

Posted on by

In advance of the Fall Economic Statement, neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, and neither was Pierre Poilievre, for a change. That left Jasraj Hallan to lead off, and declared the Statement to be the “last chance” to stop tax increases and inflationary spending (of which there are no actual taxes being raised for ordinary Canadians, nor is the spending actually inflationary). He insisted that people are paying more in taxes than ever before (not sure that’s actually true), and railed about the so-called “Liberal inflation tax,” and demanded the prime minister stop spending. Randy Boissonnault reminded him that the plan would be released in two hours, but that they could rely on the government to do what is right, and supporting Canadians who need it. Hallan insisted the government’s “greed knows no bounds” and decried rising interest rates because of the “Liberal inflation tax” and demanded the government stop spending. Boissonnault reminded him that they reduced taxes on Canadians five times, and that the Conservatives voted against it every time. Hallan repeated his demand a third time, to which Boissonnault listed that the Conservative plan is to cut benefits, EI, climate incentives, child care, and so on. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French, and declared that the government is in no hurry to reduce inflation because that would reduce its revenues (which doesn’t actually match what the government is doing and is completely misleading), and demanded no new taxes, and Boissonnault said the statement was both economically false and cruel, as helping Canadians who need it is not inflationary. Paul-Hus misquoted Mark Carney about inflation and blamed it on “irresponsible spending” (which, once again, is not true), and Boissonnault quoted former Bank of Canada governor Stephen Poloz in saying that the government’s measures stopped a deflationary spiral, while the Conservatives only want to cut, cut, cut.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he worried about the announced immigration targets, insisting that Quebec cannot handle that many and wanted a slowdown. Sean Fraser stated that the Quebec doesn’t set targets, the federal government does, and we need immigration. Blanchet insisted that this was about trying to weaken the Quebec nation and drown them out, to which Pablo Rodriguez needled that the Bloc was so concerned about percentages when these are about men, women and children.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and in French, he cited a report stating that the government was losing $30 billion per year to tax evasion and the Irving family in particular was  a prime offender. Diane Lebouthillier said that those who evaded taxes would get a knock on the door from the CRA. Daniel Blaikie then worried about Loblaws’ profits, demanding that the chains “pay what they owe,” and a windfall profit tax, to which Boissonnault listed the actions they have taken around raising income taxes and investments in the CRA to combat evasion.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The possible constitutional crisis Ford wrought

Posted on by

The fallout of Doug Ford’s pre-emptive use of the Notwithstanding Clause to bigfoot labour rights carried on yesterday on a few different fronts. In Queen’s Park, the NDP’s interim leader and half of their caucus were ejected by the Speaker for calling Doug Ford a liar over his comments about the CUPE strike, and not retracting. And when one was ejected, another one did on their turn, and so on. This is becoming a problem in legislatures and the House of Commons federally, where it becomes difficult to call out blatant falsehoods because of the prohibitions from calling someone a liar, which has absolutely emboldened parties and elected officials in their respective legislatures at different times, but it’s really bad right now.

Federally, NDP MP Matthew Green tried to call for an emergency debate on this abuse of the power, but it was not deemed worthy, and I’m at a loss as to how it could be because this isn’t a federal matter, and there is nothing the federal government can legitimately do (and don’t say Disallowance, because that is a constitutional dead letter). Later in the day, Justin Trudeau had a call with Doug Ford to tell him that his pre-emptive use of the Notwithstanding Clause was “wrong and inappropriate,” but I’m not sure what more he can do about that, other than try and encourage enough public sentiment against Ford. After all, he likes to be the fun uncle, and if enough people are mad at him, he will back down. The question is sustaining enough anger and ensuring it is widespread enough for Ford to blink.

https://twitter.com/AaronWherry/status/1587989392383148032

Meanwhile, Andrew Coyne argues that federal disallowance powers should be revived to stop provinces’ abusive pre-emptive use of the Notwithstanding clause, and it’s a position I’m going to have to give more thought to, because in a limited way there could be an argument, but it would have to be very particular. I will also note that over Twitter, there has been some chatter that there wasn’t this disallowance talk with Quebec using the Notwithstanding Clause, which is wrong—it has been there, but it is usually met with the same reply, that it’s a constitutional dead letter, and you’re provoking a constitutional crisis. But the constant abuse may have provoked that very crisis, so it’s going to need some very careful consideration as to what next steps are, and what the unintended consequences may be.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 253:

Russia is re-joining the deal to export Ukrainian grain through the Black Sea days after it pulled out of the agreement, saying that their security concerns have been met. Ukraine has officially denied being involved in the attack on Russian ships over the weekend, but president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Russia seeking security guarantees from Ukraine is a sign of how badly its invasion has gone for them.

Continue reading →

QP: Getting shouty to build their narratives

Posted on by

It being Wednesday, the benches were largely full, and the prime minister was present for his designated day to answer everything. Pierre Poilievre led off partly in French, and worried about the shortage of children’s Tylenol, and switched to English halfway through to reiterate. Justin Trudeau started talking about Health Canada taking action and there were challenges to supply chains around the world, but was shouted down and needed to reiterate his answer when it quieted down. Poilievre then moved onto his bog standard inflationary nonsense and “triple, triple, triple” ear worm, and demanded that tomorrow’s fiscal update have a spending freeze. Trudeau noted that they have supports for Canadians as the GST rebate comes out on days, and other supports are on the way. Poilievre repeated his question in French, and Trudeau noted that the Conservatives only want austerity and cuts. Poilievre returned to English to claim only he was protecting pensions from inflation, and repeated his demand to cap spending and taxes. Trudeau called Conservatives cold-hearted if they considered dental care for children to be pouring fuel on the inflationary fire. Poilievre tried to turn over the “cold-hearted” accusation with his tripling nonsense, to which Trudeau reiterated that in spite of Conservative misinformation and disinformation, the climate rebates give more back to most Canadians than they pay.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he accused the federal government of starving the healthcare system (which is utter bunkum), and wanted more funding without conditions. Trudeau reminded him that Quebeckers and Canadians expect results from the system, but if systems don’t work as expected, they want to work with provinces to ensure that more money gets better results. Blanchet accused the federal government of micromanaging, and Trudeau reiterate that the systems are not working, which is why they are trying to get provinces onside to improve things for that money.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he attacked Doug Ford’s preemptive use of the Notwithstanding Clause, and demanded the prime minster do something about it. Trudeau denounced Ford’s actions, and called out Poilievre for not denouncing it. Singh repeated the question in French, and got the same answer.

Continue reading →