Tag Archives: Border

Roundup: Low expectations for the Alberta MOU

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s the big day where prime minister Mark Carney will be in Calgary to sign that Memorandum of Understanding with Alberta premier Danielle Smith regarding the province’s plans for their energy future. Everyone is focused on the potential for a pipeline to the BC coast as part of it, though it is apparently about more, such as maybe giving Albertan an out from other environmental regulations if they can complete certain other measures (which still leaves them off the hook considering that they are one of the largest emitters in the country).

But again, there is no actual pipeline deal as part of this. It lays out conditions that are probably going to be impossible to meet (particularly given that the Coastal First Nations, who are the rights and title holders in the area, have repeatedly said there is never going to be a pipeline that is acceptable). And while industry wants the tanker ban lifted, even as a “symbolic measure,” again that ban was the social licence for a number of other projects in the area to move ahead. And industry observers will still point out that even if they get everything they want, it’s still unlikely to find a proponent because the existing pipeline network can absorb the planned production capacity—and it’s no longer the world it was before 2014 and the oil market has changed significantly. That’s one reason by BC’s energy minister says this is little more than a $14 million “communications exercise.”

Meanwhile, Carney’s caucus problem is not going away, and while government thinks that they did a great job having Tim Hodgson explain things to BC caucus, members of said caucus were not exactly thrilled as Hodgson used words like “naïve” and “ideological” when responding to their concerns (thus cementing his status as the most overrated members of Carney’s front bench). And it also sounds like they’ve needed to calm Steven Guilbeault down from resigning in protest, though the current line is that he’s staying to do more good on the inside, but that’s not exactly offering much in the way of reassurance. So much of this goes back to what we were saying yesterday, that Carney is still operating like a boss and not a leader, and who thinks that he can dictate to caucus rather than live in fear that they can oust him if he oversteps (because they absolutely can, even if they don’t think they have that ability).

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-26T23:01:36.461Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The toll from the attack on Zaporizhzhia late Tuesday has risen to 19 injuries. The background of that “peace plan” has been leaked and proven to be Russian in origin, but Russia claims the leaks amount to “hybrid warfare.”

Continue reading →

QP: Admitting a poor choice of words

Posted on by

After a week away, they PM was back in the Chamber for QP, and so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, declaring that Mark Carney hasn’t been able to reduce a single tariff in his 28 trips abroad, but he did manage to find gains for Brookfield, including a deal that was signed days after his meeting with Trump, and he also noted that the European Space Agency is on a Brookfield-owned campus, and wondered why every time he goes abroad, Canadians get poorer and Brookfield gets richer. Carney dismissed this, saying that Poilievre should check his figures as Indonesia reduced their tariffs on Canadian goods, and that they got a $70 billion commitment of investment from the UAE. Poilievre then switched to English to declare how much he cares for workers after Carney made his “Who cares?” aside at the G20. Carney noted that since he became PM, Canada has secured the lowest tariff rate in the world, and that there are sectors for whom they are under pressure, and the he does care and they are enacting further supports. Poilievre gave another “who cares?” exhortation, and Carney took a swipe at Poilievre not getting elected before admitting that he made a poor choice of words on a serious issue, and rounded off with some back-patting about his trade deals. Poilievre insisted that Carney has made nothing but mistakes on trade, and raised that Stephen Harper got a softwood deal when he came into office, before going on another paean about how much the cares. Carney insisted that they care about Canadians, which is why they have a budget to “catalyze” investments, while the Conservatives voted against Canada’s future. Poilievre returned his first question on Carney not getting any wins on tariffs and the supposed gains for Brookfield. Carney repeated out that Indonesia is reducing its tariffs by 95 percent, that we have the best deal with the Americans, and the UAE wants to invest $70 billion in Canada. Poilievre again insisted this was about Brookfield, before pivoting to the MOU with Alberta and demanded to know what date construction would begin on a new pipeline. Carney said that this was about necessary conditions, not sufficient conditions, and that the government of BC and the First Nations need to agree.

Christine Normandin rose for the Bloc and immediately accused the Liberals of cheating, and said that Chrétien sped up citizenships to help sway the Quebec in 1995, and wondered if they would cheat again in a new referendum. Carney pointed out that they have more Liberals in their caucus than the Bloc, and they respect Quebeckers. Normandin repeated her accusations, and again demanded a fair fight in a future referendum. Carney said the Bloc dwell in the past while he is turned to the future. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe took over to make the same accusations, and Carney gave the same bland assurances around building for the future.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Political support for a new pipeline?

Posted on by

More details are emerging about the Memorandum of Understanding that prime minister Mark Carney looks set to sign with Alberta premier Danielle Smith on Thursday, which would set the stage for political support for a pipeline to the northwest coast of BC if certain conditions are met. Those conditions include a stricter industrial carbon price in the province, and a “multibillion-dollar investment in carbon capture from the Pathways Alliance,” and there is apparently some language about Indigenous ownership and equity. In return, it looks like Alberta also gets a bunch of exemptions from other environmental legislation, which it would seem to me is just setting up fights with every other province who will want their own special deals and carve-outs.

BC premier David Eby is rightfully upset about being left out of the process (as Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe initially claimed he was part of the talks, which turned out to be mere self-aggrandisement). And while it’s true that the province can’t veto a project that falls under federal jurisdiction (and we have Supreme Court jurisprudence on this), it definitely feels impolitic to freeze him out, considering that making an agreement with Smith to overrule Eby’s stated wishes—and the wishes of the coastal First Nations—certainly has the feel of the US and Russia coming up with a “peace plan” for Ukraine. Eby also, correctly, points out that they would never do this with Quebec, which is a good point.

This being said, this remains about a hypothetical pipeline that may never come to fruition because they are unlikely to get a private sector proponent, because the oil market changed in 2014 and Alberta refuses to accept that fact. What I am more concerned about is just how many billions of public dollars are going to be consume by Pathways in order to try and make it viable, and it just won’t be, and we’ll have wasted years, billions of dollars, both of which could have been better spent coming up with a more reasonable transition to a greener future, because again, it’s not 2014 anymore.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-24T23:08:02.124Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones and missiles have hit residential buildings in Kyiv, starting fires and killing at least one person. Ukrainian officials are apparently working with the Americans on the so-called “28-point peace plan” to make it more palatable.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Making his own budget shoes

Posted on by

On Budget Eve, finance minister François-Philippe Champagne summoned the media to Saint-Tite, Quebec, where he was not just buying new shoes for the budget, in that strange Canadian tradition, but he was actually helping to make them at a shoe manufacturer, which was to symbolise the importance of investing in Canadian business. His message was that there will be no surprises in the budget, which they keep describing with the term “generational investment.” (Carney has also used “austerity,” so there’s that as well).

Meanwhile, more leaks about what’s in the budget are coming out, like the cancellation of the two billion trees programme (meaning by the time the current contracts are fulfilled, it will be about one billion trees). Or the fact that they have rejected calls to increase judges’ salaries to attract more talent to the bench. There are also going to be tax changes and updates to things like the capital cost allowances, because of course there are. Here is the updated tally of what has been promised so far. Also of note is that it looks like about $3 billion was collected in counter-tariffs in the trade war with the US before most of them were lifted—but they promised to raise $20 billion as part of their election platform.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives keep making the same demands for things that are imaginary—ending supposed “hidden taxes” which are not taxes, and in some cases are regulatory regimes either for the environment or other purposes, but they’re calling them taxes because dur, taxes are bad. But the worst canard that they have been allowed to get away with scot-free is this bullshit notion that somehow, deficits are being financed by “printed money” which is driving up inflation, which is not true at all. No money has been printed, even at the height of COVID, when the Bank of Canada did briefly engage in quantitative easing to keep liquidity in the market, but that’s not printing money, and they have been engaged in quantitative tightening for at least two years now. And even more to the point, if inflation was rampant, the Bank of Canada wouldn’t have cut interest rates again, but what are facts? And Carney, as a former central banker, should be putting a stop to this kind of thing, but he refuses, and sticks to his four prepared bullet points instead. To what end? I do not understand the reluctance to challenge this economic disinfo.

The Conservatives' budgetary demands include fiction. There are no "hidden taxes" on food. The industrial carbon price doesn't apply to agriculture. There is no "food packaging tax," and plastic regulations largely exempt food packaging. The clean fuel standard "17¢" was one scenario over time. 1/2

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-03T14:31:01.939Z

And most egregious of all, nobody is printing money to pay for deficits. Nobody. There isn't even quantitative easing happening as there was during the height of the pandemic, and the Bank of Canada has been on quantitative tightening since. These are all lies that the Liberals just let fester. 2/2

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-03T14:31:01.940Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-03T23:08:02.163Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims they have advanced within Pokrovsk, but Ukraine says they continue to hold them at bay. Meanwhile, Ukrainian troops have advanced near Dobropillia, reclaiming territory. Ukrainian drones have attacked a Russian petrochemical plant in Bashkortostan.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An “explainer” that ignores provincial culpability

Posted on by

The Star had a supposed explainer piece on bail reforms over the weekend, which talked a lot about over-incarceration, and poorly explained stats about certain offenders being out on bail with no context as to the charges they were facing prior to the alleged second offence, but absolutely nothing about the actual problems that the system faces, which is the continued and pervasive under-funding of courts by provinces, and Ontario most especially. It’s absolutely maddening how an explainer piece can lack that whole entire and most vital piece of the supposed puzzle. (It’s not a puzzle).

Part of the problem is who the reporter spoke to, being the “balanced” choices of the Toronto Police Association and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. The CCLA is just fine, because they provided a lot of relevant points about lack of data that means we don’t actually have any proper information on reoffences on bail, or anything like that (because—wait for it!—provinces have refused to fund that data collection). But police associations, by and large, are not credible sources. (Police associations, by and large, exist to protect bad apples within police forces, and remain a huge problem when it comes to reforming police services). There was nobody from the broader legal community interviewed for this piece, neither Crown nor defence counsel, who could have explained the resourcing issues. Am I biased because I write for legal publications? A little, but the perspective from my piece on bail reform differs vastly from the “explainer” in the Star for that very reason.

This is one of the most quintessential policy issues of our times where provincial underfunding is having an outsized impact on the system in question, this being the justice system, and it keeps getting ignored by the vast majority of legacy media, while the federal minister is behaving naively when he says that his provincial counterparts say they understand the problems in the system. But the problem is them, and their governments not funding the system. They like to complain that the problem is the Criminal Code, or that judges are being too lenient, but no, the problem is the provincial funding, and no changes to the Criminal Code will ever change that. And for yet another legacy media publication to ignore this, and let the provinces off the hook yet again, is beyond irresponsible.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-25T21:10:02.092Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks on Kyiv and Dnipropetrovsk killed four and wounded at least twenty early Saturday, while attacks early Sunday wounded at least 29 in Kyiv.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Terminating talks (but there is no deal to be had)

Posted on by

The day was largely dominated by the fallout of Trump’s declaration that he was terminating negotiations with Canada in the wake of that Reagan ad after the Reagan Foundation—which is being run by a Trump loyalist—falsely claimed that the material was misleading and that it was used without permission. It was neither misleading, nor is permission required for presidential speeches (transcript here). Doug Ford had insisted that he was going to keep airing them, and Wab Kinew egged him on while David Eby said that BC was preparing similar ads of their own. But then Ford had a conversation with Mark Carney and decided to back down on the ads as of Monday (which means they will still run over the weekend, during the first two games of the World Series).

Yep. Never forget that Doug Ford is, above all else, an idiot.

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇨🇦 (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-10-24T13:52:34.523Z

Meanwhile, Trump’s loyalists are on American TV badmouthing Canada, saying that we’re not collegial and difficult to work with, when what they mean is that we haven’t unilaterally capitulated to them like everyone else has, which is a problem for them. The point has also been made that while there seems to be a strategy at play to try and energize the Reaganite Republicans against the MAGA Republicans, this is ultimately a losing strategy because the Reaganites have long-since capitulated and have no energy or will to have that fight, so Canadians trying to make that their strategy seems self-defeating in the long run.

The thing is, there is no deal to be had with Trump, and never has been. This was never about ads—it was about finding an excuse to end the negotiations, because this was never about a trade deal, but about trying to dictate terms of our economic capitulation. Trump ending negotiations just rips that band-aid off—we need to stop pretending that there is an achievable end-goal here, or that we can somehow get a better deal when there are no deals to be had—only capitulation. Carney needs to send the signal to Canadian industry that we can’t count on things returning to status quo, and wasting our time trying to get to that outcome because it won’t happen, and everyone is better off spending their energy and capital transitioning to whatever is next.

I think Ford possibly blundered into a good thing: forcing Mark Carney to see there is simply no deal to be had with Trump, and to get us pivoting away from the US with more seriousness, urgency, and comprehensiveness than whatever the hell he's been doing.

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇨🇦 (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-10-24T13:23:53.488Z

Trump is posting on Truth Social that he's terminating negotiations with Canada over a "fake" ad criticizing tariffs (that was run by Ontario, and which isn't fake.)It's all theatre. There was never a deal to be gotten. Trump just wants to claim victory. #giftlink www.thestar.com/opinion/cont…

— Justin Ling (@justinling.ca) 2025-10-24T12:12:12.132Z

I broke things down further here.I'm starting to think we're wrong to even say that Trump's trade negotiations are getting "deals." They're not deals. They're the terms of other countries' economic capitulation. #giftlinkCanada is lucky not to have signed!www.thestar.com/opinion/cont…

— Justin Ling (@justinling.ca) 2025-10-24T12:23:27.974Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims to have taken control of three more villages—one in Kharkiv, one in Donetsk, and one in Dnipropetrovsk regions. President Zelenskyy was at a coalition of the willing meeting in London, calling for deep-strike weapons, and saying that Ukraine will need to find a way to produce more of its own air defences.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cold water on that fantasy pipeline

Posted on by

Ever since Alberta premier Danielle Smith started her latest scheme of trying to get the ball rolling on a bitumen pipeline to the northwest coast of BC, everyone has been trying to get some kind of answer as to whether this project—which has no actual proponents, no route, and no hint of buyer contracts—is going to get some kind of fast-track approval. Of course, that’s the kind of thing that the government’s Major Projects Office push has engendered by its very existence, because Smith and the Conservatives federally have been ratcheting up their rhetoric to stake the future of the country on this imaginary project.

At a committee appearance, Major Projects Office CEO Dawn Farrell didn’t answer MPs questions as to whether her powers include being able to violate the BC tanker ban, which would be essential for such a project to happen. But of course, this response was because there is no project, no route, nothing to judge any hypotheticals on, so the safest course is not to answer, because hypotheticals have a way of spinning out of control. And such a question may not wind up mattering at all, because natural resources minister Tim Hodgson came out to say that any pipeline through BC needs approval of the provincial government and affected First Nations. So good luck with that.

So now we will start seeing the fallout from this, with more threats from Danielle Smith, and howling denunciations from the Conservatives. Apparently, the country can’t work so long as we have things like environmental laws, and who cares that oil production increased while emissions as a whole declined (though not necessarily within the sector), so it’s not like those laws were exactly detrimental to the sector. “Oh, but we could have been making even more money!” Really? Would pumping more supply into the market not have possibly depressed prices? There is no guarantee that just trashing our environmental laws would increase investment and make us more prosperous, because things are complex, and climate change has costs. We need to start talking about that fact.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-09T14:05:25.084Z

Programming Note: I’m going to take the full long weekend off, so have a great Thanksgiving everyone.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack on Kyiv hit an apartment building and targeted energy sites. Here is a look at the use of saboteurs in the war, both in Russia recruiting them in Ukraine, and Ukraine employing them within Russia. President Zelenskyy is taking credit of the gas shortages in Russia, thanks to new missile and drone strikes against Russian energy facilities. That could be one reason why the Russian war economy has stalled, forcing producers to furlough staff.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pipeline necromancy in the discussions

Posted on by

With the prime minister back in Canada, a couple of additional things were made known about the meeting with Trump, and one of them was the fact that the “energy” portion of their conversation involved Mark Carney floating the possibility of reviving the Keystone XL pipeline. For those of you unaware, this is entirely an American decision—all of the infrastructure on the Canadian side of the border is pretty much in place, and this project was never in contention. The Trudeau government supported it, but the resistance was on the American side of the border, not only from environmental concerns, but also because there were conspiracy theories developing in places like Nebraska that this was a secret ploy to drain their aquifers. No, seriously. Nevertheless, this is something that the proponent abandoned after Biden rescinded the permits (even though part of the network was built and renamed), so it would need someone to pick it up again.

Meanwhile, US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick spoke virtually at a Eurasia Group event in Toronto, and said that there will be no tariff-free auto deal with Canada, that the most we can hope for is a relationship around auto parts, and that Canada needs to get used to coming in second place to the US. Lutnick also expressed a desire to replace the New NAFTA with bilateral deals rather than a trilateral agreement with Mexico. When Carney later addressed the same event virtually, he said that the government will come to some bilateral agreements with the US, and spoke of “granular discussions” around steel and aluminium tariffs, but didn’t address these comments, just as he didn’t address the reports of Lutnick’s remarks during QP.

It’s hard to know what to make of any of this. After insisting that there was a “rupture” in our trade relationship, this is yet one more proposal to deepen integration and reliance on the American market…but it’s also probably the most viable pipeline for Alberta (though there are proposals to optimise the capacity of the Trans Mountain Expansion that would increase its maximum capacity for west coast exports—not that it’s anywhere near capacity at the moment). On the other hand, if they want to pay for our oil, and also pay their own tariffs to do so, then why not take their money? None of this is going to stop Danielle Smith or the Conservatives from demanding that Carney rip up all of the government’s environmental legislation so that they can crank up production with no consequences (even though there are absolutely environmental consequences that are getting more and more expensive each year), and this isn’t going to create that many jobs in the sector, even if production is increased, given that they are increasingly relying on automation and have been since the last price crash in 2014. But everything is stupid all the time, so this is no exception.

effinbirds.com/post/7804636…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-08T13:25:07.008Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces are inflicting heavy losses on the Russians in a counter-offensive in the Donetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Managing the expectations from Washington

Posted on by

Monday was a weird day of expectations management as prime minister Mark Carney headed to Washington for a “working lunch” with Trump to happen today. There were murmurs from Senior Government Sources™ that there could be some kind of relief for some—but not all—of the steel and aluminium tariffs, but those were heavily caveated and is not going to be any kind of comprehensive tariff deal, because Trump loves his tariffs. (And there is no deal to be had). Oh, and while all of this expectations management was going on, Trump declared new 25 percent tariffs on medium and heavy-duty trucks. Because of course.

Amidst this, Pierre Poilievre released a peevish open-letter to Carney that demanded “no more losing” when it comes to dealing with Trump, and a list of things he wants “wins” on, whether it’s tariffs or softwood lumber, or what have you. Because remember, under this framing, Trump is the rational actor and Carney is the one who is the inept negotiator who simply can’t get anything done. Reality of course, is entirely the opposite, that you can’t really negotiate with Trump because he has no logical basis or consistency for his “deals,” and anything he agrees to isn’t worth the paper its written on (if it’s even written down, as some “deals” were nothing more than blank pages with a signature on it).

To that end, Andrew Scheer went on Power & Politics looking to pick a fight with David Cochrane about this, and when Cochrane pointed out that yes indeed, Trump’s tariffs are both affecting our economy and we still do have the best deal of anyone with Trump, that Scheer twisted this into “agreeing” that Carney’s ineptitude has cratered the economy and soured any deal with Trump, because Scheer is a liar and a braying doofus. But this is what everyone has to deal with when it comes to the level of rhetoric and sheer sophistry coming from the Conservatives these days, which is not exactly conducive to informed debate.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-06T22:08:02.378Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s forces say that Russian sabotage groups are active in the city of Pokrovsk, which Russians have been trying to capture for months. Ukraine’s long-range drones have struck a Russian ammunition plant, a key oil terminal, and an important weapons depot.

Continue reading →

QP: Scary crime script day

Posted on by

Unusually for a Thursday, the PM was present, and maybe he would correct false accusations again? Maybe? Pierre Poilievre led off in French, reciting scary tales of an murder while on bail and a child who found a crack pipe, and blamed it on “Liberal laws.” Mark Carney offered sympathy for families, and said that “comprehensive” legislation was on the way. Poilievre switched to a English to only mention the murder, and told the government to “get out of the way” to pass their bill. Carney expounded on how the government’s consultations and said that they have evidence-based laws on the way, and not just cut-and-paste American laws. Poilievre accused him of “screaming” and “ranting and raving,” and again decried the bail system. Carney, more calmly, said that they have only been in government for six months, and that comprehensive was on the way. Poilievre insisted that there were “massacres” happening in the streets, and Carney repeated that they have comprehensive bail reform on the way in a few weeks. Poilievre ranted about me tales of victims of crime, and got the same answer again from Carney. Poilievre again spouted falsehoods about past laws, and demanded the government set-aside partisanship to pass their own bill at all stages. Carney said that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms won’t just “get out of the way” like the Conservatives want, and invited the Conservatives to support their incoming legislation. 

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and accused the government of letting the postal strike happen. Carney said that Canada Post is no longer viable and that they need reforms, which is why they need to implemented the policies from the industrial report. Normandin said the government was absent on reforms for the years, and allowed things to get to this point. Carney again raised that report as a path forward and said that they need to come to an agreement. Marie-Hélène Gaudreau read a script that said the same thing, and Carney repeated that they need a real solution.

Continue reading →