Tag Archives: Canada Post

Roundup: A big defence commitment?

Posted on by

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch

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

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

Continue reading →

Roundup: The confidence vote that wasn’t

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch

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

Continue reading →

QP: The difference between budgets and estimates

Posted on by

A Tuesday in June, and the prime minister was present today, as were the other leaders. Even though Andrew Scheer was present, but stayed seated, and left it up to Dan Albas to lead off, who crowed that the House voted last night to make the government table a spring budget (the motion doesn’t actually require, it merely “urges”) and went on to mischaracterise how the Budget and Estimates work, and gave the nonsense quote about how people need a budget before they spend, before demanding that the “minority” government table a budget immediately. Mark Carney praised the London Knights hockey team, and patted himself on the back for his successful meeting with the premiers. Albas listed supposed “facts,” and demanded to know when a spring budget would be tabled. Carney listed a bunch of other non sequiturs, also punctuated by “fact.” Kelly McCauley read another demand for the spring budget, and Carney noted that Canadians deserve the transfers in the Main Estimates. McCauley said those things would be in a budget, and again demanded one. Carney said that he knows the difference between the Main Estimates and the budget, unlike the members opposite, and there was an uproar. When things calmed down, Carney repeated the line and said that they know how to grow the economy without spending money. Joël Godin took over in French to read the same demand for a budget and falsely called the Estimates a “blank cheque.” (It has line items for departmental spending, for fuck sakes). Carney said in French they took note of the vote, but they stand with the premiers of Quebec to have one Canadian economy. Godin trotted out the nonsense line about people needing a budget before spending, and Carney said that they would be a budget, but in the meantime they would boost growth with a bill to build a strong economy.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and wondered about the potential project to create a pipeline to Hudson Bay. Carney said that they had plenty of projects around infrastructure and green energy. Blanchet wondered whether they were trying to find markets in Europe or refine heavy crude in western Canada. Carney said they hadn’t come to any decisions, but the projects need to have environmental standards and have a big impact. Blanchet demanded that the prime minister respect Quebec’s environmental agency. Carney said that they discussed the possibility with the premier, and that they need to have commitments around environmental standards.

Continue reading →

Roundup: First ministers meeting on nation-building projects

Posted on by

Today is the day where Mark Carney meets with the other first ministers in Saskatoon, and they’re going to hash out the list of major “nation-building” projects that they hope to start prioritising over the next year or two under the proof-of-concept that Canada can indeed build Big Things once again. In the lead-up to this, Carney held a closed-door meeting with oil and gas executives in Calgary, in order to discuss “partnerships” with them, never mind that the series of demands that they sent to him (essentially, scrap all environmental regulations) is a non-starter, but I’m sure we’ll get even more of this posturing from Danielle Smith in the coming days.

While I’m sure there will be more announcements at the end of the meeting, whether it’s more trade barriers being knocked down (Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario signed another MOU yesterday), I find myself bracing for what is likely to be a boneheaded level of discourse that is going to be Conservatives and most members of the media wondering where the agreement for a pipeline is at the end of the day, completely ignoring the fact that there are currently no pipeline proposals on the table, and you can’t just pre-approve a theoretical pipeline in a vague direction. But surely, Energy East! That project died because the proponent thought the safer bet was Keystone XL. There is no west-east pipeline being proposed currently by anyone, and not one that is going to displace oil imports in Atlantic Canada (Energy East was an export pipeline). We are not going to build LNG terminals on the East Coast, because there is no business case for it. Carney saying he wants to build isn’t going to change the economics of these non-existent projects, but you just know that people are going to be pointing to a lack of agreement on “pipelines” or whatever is just going to subject us to an insufferable discourse, and I’m really, really not looking forward to it.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-06-01T14:08:14.462Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia engaged in overnight shelling and air attacks on Sumy and Zaporizhzhia regions. Previously in the weekend, they had a major drone attack that included Kyiv. But Ukraine got their kicks in, in a big way—a massive drone attack that had been in the works for nearly 18 months, dubbed “spiderweb,” which saw transport trucks with hidden compartments placed across Russia near strategic airfields, and over Sunday, they all attacked, destroying upwards of 40 Russian strategic aircraft on their airfields, some of which are irreplaceable nuclear bombers. After which, Ukraine said sure, we’ll meet for “peace talks” in Istanbul again, and they’re bringing a “roadmap” to a peace settlement. After the kicking they gave Russia, I’m sure talks will be interesting.

Pretty dramatic day in Russia: Ukrainian drones have reportedly attacked four Russia air bases, destroying a significant number of strategic bombers and radar planes. (Tu-95s, Tu-22, A-50)Russian milbloggers are furious. One calls it a "black day," another says they need to nuke Kyiv.

— Justin Ling (@justinling.ca) 2025-06-01T12:10:24.320Z

Good reads:

  • Carney has named former UN ambassador Marc-André Blanchard has his new chief of staff, starting in July, and David Lametti will be his principal secretary.
  • Canada Post has rejected its union’s offer for binding arbitration, wanting instead a vote from the membership on their “final offer.”
  • The NDP are starting to opine about what the leadership race should look like, but very few are declaring their intentions to jump into that race.
  • Don Davis is grousing that the government isn’t being transparent enough about trade talks with the US that aren’t actually happening.
  • New language laws came into effect in Quebec over the weekend, and here are five things to know about them.
  • Kevin Carmichael notes that a decade of “feminist” government hasn’t done enough to eliminate the economic “child penalty,” which requires more child care spots.
  • Kevin Milligan laments that a form of NIMBYism has essentially made tax reform in this country impossible.
  • Susan Delacourt pays heed to the fact that while Carney talks about humility, there was a whole lot of humbling that happened in that election.

Odds and ends:

New episodes released early for C$7+ subscribers. This week I'm back with @patriciatreble.bsky.social to talk about what we saw during the royal visit. #cdnpoli #MapleCrown

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-06-01T23:29:40.604Z

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

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: Budget complaints vs Estimates votes

Posted on by

The talk about the lack of a spring budget is reaching histrionics in the House of Commons, while the Conservatives nevertheless agreed to the unanimous consent motion to conduct the study of the Estimates in a rushed manner within the House of Commons as committee of the whole instead of splitting departmental spending off to relevant committees, because it will take too long to establish said committees before these votes need to be taken. And the Estimates are the actual money votes—a budget is a political document, so if the Conservatives are that concerned about where the government plans to spend, well, that’s entirely in these Estimates. The information is entirely there for them.

At the same time, we’ve heard these very same Conservatives (and some of their mouthpieces in the media) decry that there is no reduced spending within these Estimates. And of course not—these are based on last year’s budget and statutory obligations, so there wouldn’t have been any time to book any particular savings in the four weeks since the election. Not to mention that if you want to do a proper programme review in order to achieve smart savings, those take time—up to two years, which would have a better chance of achieving lasting savings. The Conservatives were masters of achieving paper savings in their last couple of budgets when they were in power, as they were so eager to get to a faux balanced budget that they booked a tonne of savings that not only didn’t materialise, but in many cases wound up costing them more (Shared Services, Phoenix) because the act of cutting the spending before the enterprise transformation was complete wound up costing more money in the end. It would seem that nobody learned a single gods named lesson from that exercise.

Meanwhile, Conservatives and their proxies keep insisting that they would rather sit into July so that they can get a budget, and let me once again say that no, they actually do not. There is almost nothing pleasant about an Ottawa summer, and if any of those MPs think they want to be sweltering in Parliament with jacket-and-tie dress codes with a humidex of 39ºC, no, they actually do not. This is performative nonsense, and everyone needs to grow the hell up.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-05-28T13:25:16.198Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people were injured in a Russian attack on Svitlovodsk yesterday. President Zelenskyy warned that Russia is massing 50,000 troops outside of Sumy region, which appears to be preparations for a summer offensive. Ukrainian drones hit several Russian weapons production facilities overnight. Russia is now proposing new peace talks in Istanbul (again)—but of course, this is one more deception. If they actually want peace, they can simply pack up and go home.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Delay to delivery?

Posted on by

The new natural resource minister, Tim Hodgson, gave a speech in Calgary yesterday and everyone in the energy sector was all hot and bothered because he insisted that they were moving to a culture of delivery instead of delay. And you’ll have to forgive my cynicism, but that seems to completely ignore what the actual issues of delay have been, and if you say “Liberal regulation!” you’re going to get a smack. The premise of saying they need “one project, one review” ignores that that’s been the case for ages now—there are no duplicative reviews, because federal and provincial reviews look at different things, and on projects where they had shared jurisdiction, they set up a joint review panel so that it was *gasp!* one review. Anyone who says they were mired in duplication is frankly not being that honest.

The real issue has been proper consultation, which is what leads projects to wind up in litigation, particularly from Indigenous groups. Harper’s attempt to reform assessments to “streamline” them meant that most of those projects wound up in litigation because, well, they ignored their obligations. In some cases, like Northern Gateway, the Conservatives ignored the process that they put into place for meaningful consultation, and well, the project died on the vine as a result. And with BC and Ontario both pushing legislation to “streamline” projects which basically means bulldozing over environmental and Indigenous obligations, well, that’s all going to wind up in litigation too. This was the whole point of the Impact Assessment Act that Jason Kenney in particularly successfully villainized—it was to ensure proper consultation up-front, at the design phase of a project, so that the rest of the process would go faster because you did the hard work at the beginning. But it became the subject of lies and disinformation, and yes, the federal government’s attempt to exert jurisdiction over certain projects because the polluting effects cross borders didn’t convince the Supreme Court of Canada, but that didn’t render the entire statute or the issues of up-front consultation obsolete or moot, and nobody seems to want to explain that part.

One more thing about Hodgson’s speech was the he singled out Pathways Alliance as a project he wants to see move forward. I’m really hoping that this means he’s telling them to put up or shut up, because we know that they basically went dark because their claims about building a massive carbon capture and storage hub were overblown and they were about to face legal consequences for greenwashing thanks to new powers for the Competition Bureau. And frankly, the whole point of the emissions cap was to tell the energy sector to put up or shut up—that they have been boasting about how they’re going to reduce their emissions, so when the government basically told them to prove it, suddenly they started crying about how this as a “production cap” and it was unfair to them. Girl, please. You insisted you could do this, so prove it.

Meanwhile, we’ve had our first glimpse into Mark Carney’s PMO, and while he’s insistent on punctuality, business attire, and UK spellings (hooray!), and decision paralysis is not setting in (so far), he’s also starting to micromanage all kinds of things that he shouldn’t be, which sounds an awful lot like a Harper trait. Part of the problem so far is a lack of a proper chief of staff, and that ministers haven’t staffed up yet either, and yet he wants to operate at a breakneck pace. But there are other warning signs—because he doesn’t understand politics, he really hasn’t given thought to how to navigate a minority House of Commons, to say nothing of the Senate (ahem), and not knowing how to deal with Parliament could lead to a situation where the Conservatives can team up with the Bloc and the NDP yet again to start frustrating anything passing once again—and for all of their talk about working together and getting things done, don’t think for a second that they’re actually not more interested in scoring points and embarrassing the Liberals. Trudeau lost the ability to manage these things, in part because of disinterest, and we’ll see if Carney doesn’t make the same mistake.

Ukraine Dispatch

There was a massive missile and drone attack against Kyiv overnight, which has injured at least eight people (Photos). Ukraine and Russia exchanged 390 prisoners each on Friday, marking one of the largest swaps since the war began.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The new ambassador doesn’t get it

Posted on by

The new US ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, has been making the media rounds, and is just one more in a long line of American politicians who just can’t understand why Canadians are so upset with the Americans. (It’s a complete mystery!) Surely, we must be happy that we could have the “lowest tariffs of any country,” instead of, oh, the free trade that allowed for integrated supply chains between both countries. Why wouldn’t we be happy with that? And in a preview for an interview to be aired over the weekend, he says there are easier ways to send messages to Trump than to bring over the King.

*sighs*

Having the King open the next session of Parliament is not only about sending a message to Trump. Yes, that is part of it, and you can bet that it’s actually going to be something he pays more attention to than a phone call because his attention span only lasts as long as the next person who talks to him, so what good is a phone call in that regard? Also? This is as much about domestic reassurance as it is a message to Trump. As Trump has threatened us, we had a bunch of people wrongly believe that the King needed to act unilaterally and say something that might cause a diplomatic incident, and others actually believed that he personally invited Trump on the second state visit when no, that was at the behest of the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer. And no, he can’t say anything unilaterally, because that goes against what constitutional monarchy stands for, and why there was the Glorious Revolution in 1688. If anyone is to blame for Charles not speaking up on Canada’s behalf earlier, it was Justin Trudeau’s, because he very much liked to ignore the Crown as much as he possibly could (probably because it pulled the focus away from him).

Oh, and Hoekstra keeps saying that the “51st state” stuff is over, and that Trump isn’t saying it, and they have more important things to worry about. But he said it just two weeks ago, and do you actually think that anything is really over for Trump? He’s incredibly angry with his past self for signing the New NAFTA. And I get that Hoekstra needs to play this particular role, but come on. Demonstrate that you’ve paid the slightest bit of attention to Canada since you were named ambassador, and read the room.

https://bsky.app/profile/effinbirds.com/post/3lps2mm7mmf26

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia is claiming to have taken a settlement between Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in Donetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Signing decision notes as performance art

Posted on by

It was Mark Carney’s first Cabinet meeting yesterday after the election and the shuffle, and hoo boy, is there a lot to talk about, starting with the fact that Carney once again called the media into the Cabinet room so that they could film him signing a “decision note” about implementing his planned tax cut. This is pure theatre—essentially this note is to instruct the civil service to prepare the legislation that will make this happen, but having the media witnessing him signing a document is both very Trumpy, and also a continuation of Trudeau-era politics by comms exercise. It’s not how things work in our system, and this is a very bad sign about how they’re doing things “differently” from Trudeau.

I have to say, I'm really not a fan of this new performance art of calling the media into the Cabinet room so that Carney can sign a mysterious document in front of them, Trump-style.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-14T17:29:26.165Z

Oh, look, it's another "Decision Note." Glad that this is now a vehicle for policy performance.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-14T17:40:41.329Z

And then there was the gauntlet of ministers saying things unfiltered to the press, with no message discipline. On the one hand, it’s pretty glorious to finally have ministers unleashed. On the other hand, the kinds of trouble that they are inviting is exactly why iron-fisted message discipline has been implemented for the past two decades. First up was François-Philippe Champagne saying that there won’t be a budget tabled in the short spring sitting, but that there will be a “comprehensive” fall economic update. He could have articulated that there simply isn’t time for the civil service to put one together in those four weeks or to talk about how the private sector forecasts are pretty much unusable in the current trade war uncertainty, but he went on about the Speech from the Throne, because reasons.

New Secretary of State Wayne Long says that it sounds like government is going to be run “like a corporation,” and I cannot even. This kind of thinking never, ever works out in government because it doesn’t have a bottom line to deliver to shareholders—it has to do the things that companies won’t, and government is set up to be held to account, whereas corporations are explicitly set up in a way to limit accountability and liability.

There was Gregor Robertson who stumbled on his very first outing, saying that housing prices don’t need to come down and that more supply will make housing affordable—except the math on that one is that it would take 20 to 40 years to do so. This is a tightrope to walk because of the number of people who have their nest eggs in their home equity, but he’s going to have to do better than what he answered.

The Housing Minister suggested that home prices don't need to go down to restore affordability. We examined this, and it's technically true. They don't. However, in large parts of the country, it would take 20-40 years to reach affordability.Read here: www.missingmiddleini…

— Dr. Mike P. Moffatt (@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social) 2025-05-14T15:50:37.000Z

And Steven Guilbeault. Oh, boy. Guilbeault was asked about Carney’s comments around building more pipelines, and Guilbeault—whose new job is “Canadian identity” (and good luck to him on that Pandora’s box)—said that we should actually use our existing capacity for building more. And he’s right—but he got the current TMX values wrong. He also pointed out that both the Canadian Energy Regulator and the International Energy Agency have said that peak demand is going to happen is around 2028-29 (so it may not make sense to build a bunch of assets to be stranded), but man, did this go over like a lead balloon. And of course, Danielle Smith pounced on it, while every TV pundit declared that Guilbeault should have just shut up since it’s not his portfolio anymore. But he has a point—there are no pipeline projects waiting to go ahead, and there is no demonstrable market demand for more, so everyone is getting hot and bothered over a fantasy or a dead letter (such as Energy East), which absolutely nobody is asking for. We’re twisting ourselves into absolute knots over imaginary projects.

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1922731670043517191

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1922722025291858017

Feds bought & built TMX. Complain about the cost but it’s operating. They delivered. This was supposed to be a bargain. Tidewater in exchange for meaningful reductions in GHGs.Has the oil industry delivered there? That’s the starting point for discussions about further pipelines. #ableg #cdnpoli

— Martin Z. Olszynski (@molszyns.bsky.social) 2025-05-15T00:21:34.144Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile killed three people in Sumy. President Zelenskyy looks to still be headed for Istanbul to continue to call Putin’s bluff on “peace talks”, and it looks like Trump won’t be there either.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Maligning legitimate Senate appointments

Posted on by

One of CBC’s worst reporters is back again with the “scandalous” news that the prime minister is preparing to fill all ten vacant Senate seats before he resigns, and the original title of the article was “Trudeau plans on stacking Senate before retiring: source” before it was toned down in an update. The framing that the prime minister—who is still the prime minister—is doing his job and filling these vacancies as he is constitutionally mandated to do, is somehow inappropriate or unfair, is wrong, and frankly, is well into the category of misinformation (which is probably why the headline got changed).

It's notable the media consistently uses hedging language when it comes to things like racism (Musk's explicit Nazi salute) but will casually imply wrongdoing in headlines about debatable constitutional practices like making Senate appointments.

— Emmett Macfarlane (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-01-27T15:05:32.107Z

The story then quotes a single Conservative senator to claim that this is somehow illegitimate, which it’s not, and there is no counter voice from an expert. For the TV version of this story, said reporter got video of Andrew Scheer claiming it’s inappropriate and that the vacancies should be left until after an election, which is again false, and there was no counter. There was no proper acknowledgment that Trudeau won a series of confidence votes in December, and that gives him the constitutional right to make these appointments, but hey, then he couldn’t frame the story as this being somehow wrong or inappropriate, and the fact that he gets away with this is infuriating.

This particular reporter has a pattern when it comes to trying to gin up scandals around any appointments. When it’s with judges, he resorts to histrionics about appointees who made political donations in the past, as though the low campaign contribution limits in Canada allows one to buy influence or access, or that they somehow bribed their way into these appointments. With recent Senate appointments, he’s now judging what is and is not a partisan appointment given past history, ignoring that a) there is no Liberal caucus in the Senate for them to be a part of, and b) past legislative experience is actually a good thing to have in that Chamber, and that the lack of it with so many appointees has been a problem. But hey, the CBC editors let him get away with these self-imposed purity tests, so he’s going to keep on doing them. It’s a disservice to the country, and the gods damned public broadcaster shouldn’t be letting their reporters personal bugaboos dictate their coverage, particularly when it taints the reporting.

Ukraine Dispatch

An overnight air attack injured four in Kharkiv after houses were hit. Other critical infrastructure was damaged during overnight drone attacks on Sunday night, where 57 out of 104 drones were downed. Russia’s Ryazan oil refinery suspended operations after a Ukrainian drone attack last week. President Zelenskyy says that the realities of the current war means that they can’t change mobilisation rules as soldiers leaving for home en masse would mean Russians would “kill us all.”

Continue reading →