Tag Archives: Budget 2024

Roundup: More provincial buck-passing, FCM edition

Posted on by

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities had their big conference in Ottawa over the past couple of days, and there were a host of mayors and councillors on the Hill to meet with MPs. Yesterday afternoon, Mark Carney addressed their conference to basically give the same speech he’s been giving for the past couple of weeks about things like “moving to delay to delivery,” and so on. But I did find it interesting that as part of this address to the FCM, he essentially told them that he’ll be too busy with nation-building projects to reform municipal funding structures.

It’s kind of funny, but at the same time, I have to ask how that’s actually his job, or the job of the federal government at all. Cities are creatures of provincial legislation. If you want to reform their funding structures, the provinces need to sit down and hammer that out, unless you want to start amending the constitution, and I’m pretty sure that nobody wants to open that particular Pandora’s Box (which, incidentally, was not a box but a jar). We could let cities collect their own income or sales taxes, or other forms of financing that would be better than simply property taxes, but provinces refuse, and in some cases, have specifically legislated against it. And we’ve known for decades now that cities have funding challenges that they need something to be done about, but have provinces responded? Of course not. They simply demand the federal government send them more money.

With this in mind, Toronto mayor Olivia Chow was also here for the FCM meeting, and she says she is encouraged by Carney’s sense of urgency on tackling the housing crisis, but again, she too is here calling for the federal government to directly intervene with money. One thing she has proposed is for necessary infrastructure to build more housing, for the federal government to basically pay the municipality’s one-third share (so they essentially pay two-thirds and the province pay the other third), and it’s just so infuriating. The federal government is not the purse for every other jurisdiction. Provinces have the very same revenue-generating tools as the federal government does, but they refuse to use them because they would rather beg for money and let the federal government be the bad guy with their taxes than the province. This kind of absolute immaturity is just exhausting, and it’s one of the reasons why things just aren’t getting done in this country.

Or ever, if we're being honest.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-30T13:30:00.766Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s massive drone attack overnight Thursday injured two people in Kharkiv, and hit a town that sits on the border with Romania, which is a NATO member.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Leaders on the final push

Posted on by

Day thirty-four, and leaders are all in the final push, making last-minute stops in key ridings that they either hope to keep, or win outright. Mark Carney was in Sault Ste. Marie to visit Algoma Steel, where he gave the Ontario-centric and, more importantly, steel-focused, version of his pitch to voters. He did say, in response to a question, that he was open to electoral reform but didn’t think that a prime minister should champion it because it politicises it. (I swear to Zeus, if this turns into another round of “citizen assembly” nonsense, I will lose my mind). He also said he’s open to reviewing the Access to Information regime (which every leader says), and called on Israel to end the blockade on food aid to Gaza. The then made stops in Georgetown, Cambridge, and London, Ontario. He also made his appearance at the virtual AFN forum, where he committed to implementation of UNDRIP. Carney is sticking in Ontario today with events in King City, Newmarket, Aurora, Markham, Mississauga, and then Windsor.

Pierre Poilievre was in Saskatoon, where he laid out his plans for his first 100 days in office (which is another imported Americanism), and it involved promising to sit through the summer in order to pass three massive omnibus bills that dealt with large swaths of his agenda. Part of his hundred days, however, was a promise to get a deal with Trump, which is not only ridiculous because nobody is getting an actual deal with Trump, but he’s been saying that Carney thinks he can control Trump but nobody can, and yet he’s simultaneously insisting that only he can control Trump enough to get a deal. It’s laughable that he thinks this is at all serious. Poilievre then stopped in Calgary for a rally, where he called for bigger voter turnout, before heading to Nanoose Bay, BC. Poilievre will be in Delta, BC, today for one of his finally rallies.

Poilievre is still peddling the fantasy that *he* can make a deal with Trump that will stick, after he says Carney is delusional for thinking he can control Trump.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-25T15:44:59.656Z

Jagmeet Singh was in Toronto, where he just invented the threat that the Liberals will cut healthcare if there aren’t enough NDP MPs elected, which is outrageous bullshit. For one, the problem is with the provinces, and they have long-term funding agreements with the federal government, and two, the threats of cutting healthcare are at the provincial level. This is just outright mendacity from an increasingly desperate Singh. His campaign then stopped in Hamilton and London, Ontario. Singh starts the day in London, then heads to Windsor before flying to Vancouver and Burnaby.

Singh is just literally making shit up at this point.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-25T15:02:12.089Z

On a side note, Yves-François Blanchet made the statement today that Canada is an “artificial country with very little meaning,” in response to questions about previous remarks about sitting in a “foreign parliament.” While this is probably self-defeating at a time of heightened patriotism, what Blanchet is really trying to do is appeal to ethnic nationalism in Quebec. All countries are artificial, but a good many around the world are bound together by a common ethnicity and language, and Canada is not. Certain elements of Quebec would like to think that they have a common ethnicity and language, but this is the kind of ethnic nationalism that fuels racism and xenophobia. It’s what François Legault has been appealing to as he attacks the rights of religious minorities. And Blanchet is trying to appeal to it to say that Liberals can’t represent Quebec because only the Bloc can truly represent “ethnic” Quebeckers. But he’s also been hoping that he’ll get a bump in the polls like he did last time after Shachi Kurl raised (badly formed) questions about Law 21, which Blanchet was able to spin into “She’s calling us racists!” and that gave him the boost in the polls he needed. It looks like he won’t get that this time around.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1916013202388721995

In other campaign news, Equal Voice’s tally shows that the Liberals, Conservatives, and Bloc are all running fewer women as candidates in this election. Elections Canada says that Poilievre’s riding of Carleton had the highest advance turnout in the country. None of the parties have been clear about how they plan to meet existing climate commitments. Singh is trying to convince George Stroumboulopoulos that their poll numbers are rebounding (really!) so they’ll come out of the election with “lots” of re-elected MPs. (Aside from the quarter of his caucus that’s not running again?)

For Canadians being inundated by riding-level polls right now:The data is crap if it has no dates, small samples (<800), high margins of error.The people showing them to you are trying to persuade you to vote for their own preferred party. It's sales pitch, not an evidence-based argument.

— Jared Wesley (@jaredwesley.ca) 2025-04-26T01:02:15.747Z

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lnnrnrygrs2r

Yes. Yes I do.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-25T13:35:18.917Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A drone attack on Pavlohrad killed five and injured at least eleven. A Russian general was killed by a car bomb, and Russia is blaming Ukraine (who have not yet claimed responsibility).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1915669752787149047

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney and the premiers

Posted on by

Mark Carney held a First Ministers’ meeting yesterday at the Canadian War Museum, which we’re given to understand was a bit of deliberate symbolism for the current moment, and most of the premiers arrived in person, save Danielle Smith, Scott Moe, and Andrew Furey (who is on a trade mission to Japan, and not in a fit of pique). The meeting ran long, and came out with a number of promises that the cynic in me feels are incredibly optimistic in terms of timelines and ambition. Not that we shouldn’t be ambitious, but oftentimes things are slow for a reason.

In particular, Carney is looking for complete internal free trade by July 1st (barring a few Quebec-specific carve-outs, which one assumes are mostly related to linguistic requirements). He’s also promising to temporary lift the waiting period for EI, to allow businesses to defer corporate income tax and GST/HST filings, creating a new Large Enterprise Economic and National Security Facility for financing, doubling the Indigenous Loan Guarantee programme, increasing funding for regional development agencies, and removing mobility restrictions for federally-regulated workers. The promise around “one window” approvals for major project assessments confuses me somewhat because we already have joint review panels—the whole point being that the federal and provincial assessment processes work together, hence “joint,” so there isn’t duplication. This has been the practice for environmental assessments for decades now, so I’m not quite sure what he’s talking about. Carney was also talking about expediting projects like high-speed rail, but looking at their timeline, I have questions about how much they can realistically speed things without creating new problems. But hey, there’s great enthusiasm in the moment for doing Big Things, so we’ll see if they can actually get off the ground.

In response to questions, Carney clapped back at Trump’s suggestion that he’s the one who changed Canada’s political landscape (not untrue, but not for the reasons he is suggesting),  and gave a line about how Canadians will choose their own leaders. He clarified that yes, he intends to keep the emissions cap (and made the point that it’s an emissions cap and not a production cap), but wants to spur investments in emissions reductions (but really, the carbon price and cap should actually do that on their own). He also did not rule out future investments in pipelines but says he wants to clear the way for private sector investment.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia continues to hammer civilian targets in Odesa and Zaporizhzhia, but then gets all precious about a major pumping station that blew up as Ukrainians have been withdrawing from Kursk region, even though Ukraine says that Russia blew it up themselves as a provocation.

https://twitter.com/DefenceHQ/status/1902662502334259284

Continue reading →

Roundup: Tantrums, and Ford capitulates

Posted on by

The day started off with a tantrum—Donald Trump screaming that Ontario wasn’t allowed to put the “surcharge” on their electricity exports, and said he was going to make Canada pay dearly, and then threatened to ramp up the incoming steel and aluminium tariffs to 50 percent. That caused another huge panic, and by the end of the day, Doug Ford had secured a meeting with Howard Lutnick (apparently with Dominic LeBlanc), and suspended the “surcharge,” while Trump decided that the global steel and aluminium tariffs were still coming, but only at 25 percent, and those are now in effect. And that in turn will trigger more retaliatory tariffs from the Canadian federal government. Trump also went on an extended rant about annexation, but flattered Ford in the process, which made me want to throw up a little.

Guys, I’m just so tired.

I scarcely know where to begin. The regulations for that “surcharge” were released, and it reads very much like a cute attempt to pretend that they’re not tariffs for the sake of international trade, so that he can pretend this is provincial jurisdiction and not federal. After two days of bluster and going on every cable news show in the US insisting he wasn’t going to back down on this “surcharge” until the tariffs were gone, and that he was going to go even further, it took one phone call with Lutnik and Ford capitulated right as the global steel and aluminium tariffs were coming into place, so how exactly did he help Ontario or anyone? I’m at a loss. He’s also pretending that he has a role in international negotiations, neglecting in his tweet to mention that Dominic LeBlanc will be at the table with Lutnik, but on top of that, you think you’re actually going to be negotiating a renewed NAFTA? Really? Given that Trump has proven that any agreement he signs isn’t worth the paper it’s written on because he only operates in bad faith? And you still want to go ahead with this farce?

Trump needs to stop these tariffs for the sole reason that people are starting to believe that Doug Ford is a good leader, and I cannot have that

— Clare Blackwood (@clareblackwood.bsky.social) 2025-03-11T15:18:15.159Z

Meanwhile, Poilievre demanded 50 percent retaliatory tariffs if the steel and aluminium tariffs went to 50 percent, Jagmeet Singh continues to demand that Parliament be summoned to pass a package of aid for workers before the election, and Elizabeth May wants a “wartime Cabinet,” and I just can’t because it misunderstands what actually happened during the First World War. Also, Alberta’s energy minister Brian Jean thinks he’s an international negotiator too. And hey, here’s a plausible explanation for Trump’s constant tariff chaos—because affected CEOs have to pay millions to see him at Mar-a-Lago to plead their case, and he’s making a lot of money that way.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine downed a ballistic missile and 70 out of 126 drones in Monday night’s attack, while Russia claims they are making progress in reclaiming Kursk region. Ukrainian drones struck two more Russian oil facilities, with explosions recorded. The US says they are resuming military aid and intelligence sharing after Ukraine said they were willing to sign onto a ceasefire proposal, but Russia has not agreed yet (and won’t agree because they don’t want a ceasefire). AP has a selection of photos from the war.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An ambush in the White House

Posted on by

It was an ambush. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s visit to the White House, ostensibly to sign some kind of agreement around access to critical minerals in exchange for some kind of military support or security guarantees was a set-up for Trump and JD Vance to try and humiliate Zelenskyy in front of the cameras, with one of the reporters from Russian state outlet TASS in the room (who was removed at one point by the Secret Service, but it was obvious that someone in the White House arranged for him to be there). The whole video is sickening to watch.

Vance blew up that meeting on purpose

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T20:00:00.112Z

I've just looked again at the Starmer meeting – Vance tried to blow that up too. But Trump didn't take the bait.

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T20:38:07.909Z

While Trump and Vance started broadcasting this for their followers as a supposed sign of strength, and their lackeys and apologists broadcast Russian propaganda to justify it, word also started leaking out that Trump is planning on cutting off military aid to Ukraine for Zelenskyy’s supposed intransigence and lack of desire for peace, which is of course mendacious and part of the set-up.

This was the plan all along

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-03-01T04:52:42.168Z

In the wake of this, world leaders started tweeting their support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and this was probably the death knell of NATO as we know it. The one leader who has been silent is Keir Starmer, but he is also hosting a summit in London today about Ukraine and European security, which Justin Trudeau will also be attending.

I have to wonder what words are going to be had between Trudeau and Starmer…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T23:49:23.352Z

I wonder if this was planned at the Munich Security Conference?

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2025-02-28T23:57:08.362Z

Here are some hot takes from Tom Nichols and David Frum, while Philippe Lagassé has some additional thoughts on the situation.

Closer to home, in an interview with the Spectator, Trump took credit for Chrystia Freeland’s supposed “firing” (she was not fired), and said that Poilievre’s problem is that “he’s not a MAGA guy.” Which is true—Poilievre doesn’t have much of a coherent ideology, but he’s not MAGA. What he is, however, is someone who will say anything that he feels he needs to in order to attract the MAGA crowd to his banner, no matter how ridiculous it is, and he has no morals, ethics, or scruples about it. Poilievre jumped on this to declare that he’s “Canada First,” and later did tweet support for Zelenskyy and Ukraine, and immediately got roasted in the comments by his MAGA supporters for it. Funny what happens when you play with fire.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1895631503469449464

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones struck a medical facility, among other targets, in Kharkiv. The framework for a mineral agreement that Ukraine was supposed to sign with the Americans, before the ambush, contained a number of gaps around security or dispute resolution, before it turned out to be a sham.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney’s boneheaded “green incentives”

Posted on by

Liberal leadership hopeful Mark Carney revealed his plan to replace the consumer carbon levy yesterday, and it’s a handwavey bunch of “green incentives” for things like improving your home insulation, furnace, appliances, or buying an electric vehicle. This would be offset by maintaining or increasing the industrial carbon pricing system, along with carbon border adjustments. Carney claimed that the current system isn’t working, which is false, because emissions have been driven down, and then shrugs and says it’s “too divisive,” which is the Liberals’ own gods damned faults for being such incompetent communicators about how the levy works, the rebates (remember when they thought that calling them “climate action incentives” was a genius idea?), and how reducing one’s own carbon footprint maximises those rebates. The government was absolutely incapable of communicating any of it, and Pierre Poilievre swooped in and filled the space with lies and disinformation.

This is so unbelievably stupid. "Green incentives?" I live in an apartment. I can't change the insulation or heating system. Instead, with the rebate from the carbon levy, I get cash, which is a pretty nice incentive given that I don't have a car or do much that I need to pay the carbon levy for.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T15:13:28.930Z

This is just about as moronic as Erin O'Toole's "airmiles for carbon" plan, where you would get more rewards the more you pollute, and those of us who are already living low-carbon lifestyles get nothing. The carbon levy was fine if the Liberals could actually properly defend it.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T15:13:28.931Z

I find Carney’s plan absolutely infuriating for a number of reasons. One of them is that this imparts a false narrative that carbon emissions reductions can happen for free for consumers. Even if there is no consumer-facing price, industrial emitters will pass along costs, and people won’t get a rebate for those higher costs, which hurts lower-income households harder. Everyone fawning over Carney’s economic credentials should be smacking themselves upside the head because of this fiction he is trying to perpetrate and just how economically illiterate it actually is.

Meanwhile, how much of an “incentive” can it really be for one-time purchases? You can only really re-insulate your house once, or buy a new furnace once every twenty years. There is no price disincentive to increased carbon use, and there is no ongoing reward for a low-carbon lifestyle, which the rebates provide. Again, very few people actually understand this because the government steadfastly refused to actually communicate how the levy and rebates actually work, how to maximise them, and how it rewards ongoing low-carbon behaviour. They hoped that legacy media and would communicate that (they absolutely will not), and it was basically up to five economists on Twitter, which is useless to ninety-five percent of the population. So now the people who have done the work to reduce their carbon footprint will now be punished, and people will take advantage of those one-time purchases for what? The pat on the back that they can give themselves? Everyone involved here needs to take a long, hard look at some of their life choices, but then again, if they had any modicum of self-reflection, they likely wouldn’t be in politics. What an absolute disaster.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones injured four in Odessa, damaging a hospital and grain warehouse, while a missile attack seriously damaged a historic centre in the same city. Russian forces are also tightening their approach to Pokrovsk, which is a key logistics hub in the region. Ukrainian forces destroyed a Russian command post in the Kursk region, and are also reporting that they haven’t seen any North Korean troops in the area for three weeks. Ukrainian drones also damaged an oil refinery in Russia’s Volgograd region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Gould’s stumble of a first proposal

Posted on by

Liberal leadership candidate Karina Gould made a policy announcement in Ottawa yesterday, and it was…not great. Gould says she’s serious about tackling cost-of-living challenges, so she wants to give a one-year GST cut, and to pay for it by increasing the corporate tax rate for businesses making over $500 million in profit in one year. That sound you’re hearing is every economist in this country crying out in anguish.

Here's a conventional (and IMHO correct) public finance view of this proposal:- The GST is a very efficient way to raise revenues and I simply would not cut it.- Brackets on CIT are bad because, more easily than people, corps can split into multiple entities.www.cbc.ca/news/politic…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T03:54:01.703Z

Look sales tax holidays are just so very silly. A so much better use of $11b is….breathes…targeted transfers.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T03:34:11.186Z

A real Canada Disability Benefit would start at around $12B. We have a leadership candidate that would forgo that for everyone to get a couple dozen dollars in one year fromGST relief.

— Dr Lindsay Tedds (@lindsaytedds.bsky.social) 2025-01-31T03:37:16.297Z

It’s just so needlessly dumb, and you would have thought that Gould might have paid attention to what an absolute fiasco the HST “holiday” has been, and how her fellow Cabinet ministers debased themselves to sell it to the public. It’s also giving shades of Stephen Harper circa 2006, and how that government increased income taxes to pay for the first GST cut, and then spent through the surplus they inherited to give a second cut, which permanently hampered the fiscal capacity of the federal government (which was Harper’s plan). And reducing it for one year? So that you face the blowback of the tax going back up? Seriously? I get that Gould is trying to break through the noise around Mark Carney, but come on. There are plenty of economists whom she could consult with, who would gladly give her the time of day and to explain these things to her, but she decided to go with the same kinds of populist stunts that the Conservatives and NDP run on, while ignoring the notion that the Liberals have been the party doing the sensible policies in spite of them being less popular (such as the carbon levy) because it’s the right thing to do. It’s a disappointing first move by Gould out of the gate.

In a related note, Jaime Battiste has dropped out of the race, and will be backing Carney instead. Battiste was a marginal candidate to begin with, so this move isn’t really a surprise, as much as he wanted to be a First Nations candidate in the race, there just wasn’t a viable path forward for it.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian drone hit an apartment building in Sumy overnight Wednesday, killing at least six people. Aid groups in Ukraine are scrambling to compensate after the Americans suddenly cut funding to their programming.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Foreign interference commission final report released

Posted on by

Justice Marie-Josée Hogue released the final report of the Foreign Interference public inquiry yesterday, and there really weren’t too many surprises involved. While there have been attempts at foreign interference, it hasn’t affected the outcomes of any elections, and that our institutions have held up rather well—though not perfectly. Government has been too slow to respond in many cases, and we don’t have enough transparency around national security issues, nor is there a culture of national security in government to make these issues a priority. There has been progress, but we’re not there yet. In many respects, this report proves that David Johnston’s report was right, and we’ve spent a year-and-a-half duplicating efforts because opposition party leaders decided it was more fun to smear Johnston than take him seriously.

One of the most significant aspects was a repudiation of the NSICOP report that claimed there were parliamentarians that were somehow compromised, and Hogue went through how the intelligence didn’t actually say that, and how NSICOP’s characterisation torqued what had been alleged—and frankly, much of the news reporting torqued further because they didn’t bother to read the context in that report. Hogue also noted that much of the reporting that drove this moral panic and the subsequent inquiry was wrong, though she didn’t necessarily blame the journalists because they only had so much to go on. (Nevertheless, this should be a warning about just how absolutely credulous some of those reporters have been on this file since the beginning, and why they failed to adequately question the motives of those doing the leaking).

Two cents: The Chair of NSICOP should have been far more willing to explain what message the committee's report was meant to convey last summer.NSICOP reports have exaggerated things in the past. Hopefully, the next chair takes a more measured approach.

— Philippe Lagassé (@plagasse.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T17:55:57.033Z

Hogue's call for greater transparency in the national security space is key, too. That should be a key priority for whichever party is in government after the next election.

— Philippe Lagassé (@plagasse.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T18:02:26.554Z

Probably a good thing that the pressure to 'name names' wasn't followed through on, eh? We could have outright destroyed innocent people with potentially empty innuendo.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-28T17:38:06.873Z

A couple of other notables—Hogue noted that transnational repression is probably a bigger threat, but her mandate didn’t give her the latitude to explore that, so that remains a big flag for this or the next government to address. Even more to the point, she flagged disinformation as the most existential threat to our democracy, and called for a dedicated federal watchdog to monitor and intercept foreign meddling that uses social media platforms and “AI” tools like deep-fakes. She also recommended developing digital and media literacy among Canadians, which feels a bit like a “perfect world” wish, or at least something that we may be able to impart onto the next generation but I worry that the current one may be lost in that regard.

For more, here’s a thread from Stephanie Carvin who went through the report:

For those of you who have no idea what I'm talking about, here is the summary

— Stephanie Carvin (@stephaniecarvin.bsky.social) 2025-01-29T00:25:45.506Z

In the wake of this, Pierre Poilievre has let it be known that he’s not going to take that CSIS threat reduction briefing after all, because he can’t talk about what it says, so he is once again relying on the false notion that this, or any other security clearance, is somehow going to “gag” him. It won’t, but it would mean he has to be responsible with his commentary, which he does not want to do. He wants to be bombastic, and to lie at every opportunity, and so he will keep refusing a clearance or briefings, because he only cares about “owning the Libs,” not national security or the good of the country.

Because he's a self-interested venomous partisan who wants maximum freedom to be act like a weasel. I'm not sure why some Liberal partisans decided there was anything more nefarious than that at play.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-28T19:12:35.197Z

exactly so.Phil and I found in our work that the average MP would rather speak ignorantly than know more and then have to be somewhat responsible.PP is the extreme version of this–rather be a bomb thrower than have any responsibility.

— Steve Saideman (@smsaideman.bsky.social) 2025-01-28T19:23:04.269Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Overnight Russian air attacks wounded eight and damaged residential buildings around Ukraine on Monday night. Ukrainian drones are targeting power and oil facilities in the west and northwestern regions of Russia.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trudeau’s slow exit

Posted on by

And Monday morning, the inevitable happened. Prime minister Justin Trudeau summoned the media outside of Rideau Cottage, and first announced that he had been granted a prorogation until March 24th, and then stated that he had told his children and the president of the Liberal Party that he intends to resign as leader and prime minister once a successor has been chosen in a robust national competition. While he was tinged with sadness, there were still some elements that rankled—he blamed the decision on “internal divisions” in the party rather than a self-aware recognition that he was dragging them down, and that his time had come (or had come months ago and he refused to listen). When asked about Chrystia Freeland, he implied that her version of events was not what happened and that he offered her a chance to work on the most important file but she turned him down (and no, a portfolio with no department, staff, or levers of power, is not a promotion). When asked about his biggest regret, he said that it was that he couldn’t implement ranked ballots (which he never actually tried to do during the whole bloody Electoral Reform Committee process).

holy shit, did I do this??

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-01-06T17:19:31.856Z

All those Conservatives introducing Pierre Poilievre as "Canada's next Prime Minister" turned out to be wrong, if only on a technicality.

— Jason Markusoff (@markusoff.bsky.social) 2025-01-06T16:18:11.576Z

Response from other parties was quick. Jagmeet Singh was first out the door with a statement devoid of class or graciousness, and Pierre Poilievre soon followed on with the same. In a video message shortly thereafter, Singh said that he plans to vote non-confidence no matter who the leader is, but well, his mind changes with the cycles of the moon and the phases of the tide. Poilievre also delivered an absolutely psychotic video message about how the “dark days” are nearly over, and near sweet Rhea, mother of Zeus, that is absolutely divorced from reality.

Jagmeet Singh first out of the gate with a statement that lacks any semblance of class. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-06T16:32:04.683Z

And next up is Poilievre to also offer a classless statement. #cdnpoli

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-01-06T16:50:12.984Z

Like an absolute psychotic, Pierre Poilievre's opening remark is about the potential end of "a dark chapter in our history."

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-06T16:59:17.610Z

And then it's a litany about how terrible crime is in Canada.FACT CHECK: Crime in Canada actually remains near historic lows.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-06T17:00:07.538Z

"Everything is out of control" Poilievre says.It's very depressing people fall for this fantasy shit. So many valid criticisms could be made about this listless government, and Poilievre is relying on 1980s-style Republican fear-mongering about crime and taxes.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-06T17:02:03.861Z

The party now has to come to decisions about the length of the contest, the rules, and how they plan to deal with the potential for any foreign interference that comes with such an open system that doesn’t even have paid memberships (which, I will reiterate, was always a stupid move, and the Alberta Liberal Party, which instigated this kind of scheme, is now pretty much extinct). Those rules will help determine the shape of the race, and who may throw their hat into the ring, to take what could very well be a poisoned chalice.

Here is a high-level look over Trudeau’s political career. The Star has assembled a list of possible candidates for the job, but that’s going to start changing rapidly. There are concerns about what this will do with the response to Trump tariffs.

In reaction, Emmett Macfarlane sees no issues with the prorogation call (which is not unexpected). Susan Delacourt looks back over Trudeau’s political career and the air of inscrutability he has cultivated around himself. Althia Raj wonders about where the party goes next after Trudeau, and if they have enough runway to make a difference. Paul Wells lays out the four main challenges that Trudeau’s announcement has unleashed.

In case you missed it:

My weekend column on Poilievre and the lessons he seems to be eager to take from the “tech broligarchy” that is flexing its muscles around Trump.

My column on how Poilievre’s plan for a “massive crackdown on crime” is predicated on repealing laws that don’t do what he claims.

My weekend column on why there’s no such thing as an “interim” prime minister, and how the Liberals need to consider their next steps in replacing Trudeau.

My Loonie Politics Quick Take points out that the Conservatives’ plan to use the Public Accounts committee to call for non-confidence is a non-starter.

My year-end column on the four main political lessons that we’ve learned (or in some cases, refused to learn) over 2024.

My weekend column on the considerations around prorogation, now vs 2008, and what’s changed and what hasn’t since them.

Happy to see two of my stories in the top ten!

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-31T20:05:37.785Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian forces claim to have taken the stronghold of Kurakhove, but Ukraine says they are still fighting. The fighting appears to have intensified in the Kursk region of Russia with a possible new Ukrainian offensive, and they are saying that Russia and North Korea has suffered 38,000 casualties, with nearly 15,000 of those dead.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The shuffle and the kabuki responses

Posted on by

The Cabinet shuffle happened, and four ministers had a change in portfolio, with eight new faces joining the ranks. Nothing is too much of a surprise here—David McGuinty did get public safety, Nathaniel Erskine-Smith got housing as was expected and that means he is going to run again. Anita Anand is now solely transport but also got “interprovincial trade,” which is interesting. There is no minister from Alberta, as George Chahal remains tainted (and has been vocal in calling for a secret ballot in caucus on Trudeau’s future), so Terry Duguid from Winnipeg is pretty much it for the prairie representative. In some respects, this may be a “caretaker” Cabinet as the leadership question remains in the air, or it could have a short shelf-life, as threats of non-confidence circle ever-closer. It doesn’t solve any problems, it doesn’t really put a fresh face on government, and the only thing that can do that is for Trudeau to make as graceful an exit as possible, because the number of MPs who are publicly against him continues to grow, and he could very well be pushed by the next caucus meeting.

Trudeau does keep saying he wants MPs to be the "voice of their ridings in Ottawa"…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-12-20T16:36:01.558Z

Amidst this, Jagmeet Singh decided to publish an open letter to say that he was ready to vote non-confidence in the government, but…blamed them for things that are completely within provincial jurisdiction, like healthcare and building housing. But more to the point, this is more performance art after he got called out by absolutely everyone for his “all options are on the table” equivocation, and this letter also didn’t specify that he would seek to vote them out at the first opportunity, so he has wiggle room. Trudeau may yet prorogue (but most likely if he does decide to step down), and if a new leader is chosen before Parliament comes back, Singh can always prevaricate and equivocate yet again about giving said new leader a chance, or something else like that. This is just more of the kabuki theatre that Canadian politics has descended into.

And Jagmeet Singh wants to rush us into the Poilievre era. Great.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2024-12-20T17:53:04.092Z

And then to top it all off (and possibly to try and call Singh’s bluff), Pierre Poilievre called a press conference to say that he wrote a letter to the Governor General so that she can “reconvene” parliament and demand a confidence vote. Erm, except we’re not prorogued, so Parliament is merely adjourned and not suspended, and it’s at the call of the Speaker to recall the House on a non-sitting week, not the Governor General. Never mind that the government just survived a series of confidence votes, this is deliberate obfuscation and confusion of our system, and no doubt he will attack the GG if she doesn’t accede to his request (which she can’t, because it’s not in her powers to do so). Poilievre is deliberately misleading people about how our system operates so that he can claim that constitutional safeguards are illegitimate if anyone tries to use them against him. Aspiring autocrats love to weaken the guardrails, and Poilievre is engaged in a very concerted effort to do that right now.

Programming Note: This is it for 2024, barring some major news happening. Loonie Politics content will continue on its usual schedule, but the blog is on holiday because the burnout is real. Thanks for sticking with me all year, and we’ll see you in 2025.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck Kyiv in the morning rush hour, killing at least one person and damaging a historic cathedral. Ukrainian forces needed to pull back from two locations in the eastern Donetsk region, lest they become encircled. Here is a look at some of the people staying in Pokrovsk, in spite of Russia’s advance.

Continue reading →