Tag Archives: Cyber-security

Roundup: Exit David Johnston

Posted on by

Around 5.30 PM on a Friday evening, the Rt. Hon. David Johnston tendered his resignation as the special rapporteur on foreign interference, citing that the political firestorm around him has reached a point where his job of trying to restore confidence in our electoral system is now impossible, and while he does not counsel a public inquiry, he did urge consultation on choosing a replacement, for what it’s worth. Of course, what this really means is that instead of doing the work of the actual process part of this issue, sorting out what happened in the senior levels of bureaucracy and how to fix it going forward, we now get to spend the next six months fighting over a name that will be acceptable to all parties, whether it’s to continue the existing process or a public inquiry like everyone thinks they want.

In response, the Conservatives crowed and declared that this “proves” that Johnston was flawed from the start, and that his determination that we don’t need a public inquiry was also wrong, so launch a public inquiry, with a lot of Trudeau Foundation conspiracy theories thrown in for good measure. The Bloc were insisting that the head of an inquiry be chosen by Parliament (which is wrong and insane), while the NDP were declaring victory and patting themselves on the back because Johnston, in their estimation, heeded their motion to resign, never mind that he said nothing about that in his resignation letter, and repudiated their performance while at committee. (Peter Julian insisted that by his action of resigning, he took the NDP’s position, which is the most self-aggrandising bullshit this side of Pierre Poilievre). But the underlying notion that Parliament choose the head of an inquiry is both contrary to the law, which clearly states that the head of an inquiry is a Governor-in-Council appointment, and it also launders accountability going forward, which of course MPs can’t get their heads around because almost none of them understands that their role is about holding government to account.

None of this solves the underlying problem that a public inquiry is not magic. Everyone demanding one seems to think it can be wrapped up in the space of a few months, and that can be broad enough in scope to fully understand how deep Chinese infiltration goes into our country, while also providing concrete recommendations for protecting the next election. That’s not going to happen in a few months—that kind of scoping takes years, and is not going to get to the fundamental issue here, which is that this is ultimately a process story about the machinery of government, dealing with classified information, and that a public inquiry can’t hear most of it. That is, if they can find someone to head it who meets everyone’s satisfaction and who is willing to put themselves through the character assassination that will follow. This is one giant mess, and there’s more than enough blame to go around to absolutely everyone, and it’s not going to get any better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian authorities claim that they have repelled a Ukrainian advance into Zaporizhzhia, and inflicted heavy casualties, but there is no confirmation of these claims. Meanwhile, more Ukrainians are being evacuated from flooded homes after Russia destroyed the dam on the Dnipro river.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1667133462787047425?s=61&t=OQl-ixPj-I_27b0NFGeMZg

https://twitter.com/kyivpost/status/1667094711994052609?s=61&t=OQl-ixPj-I_27b0NFGeMZg

Continue reading →

Roundup: Involving Elections Canada?

Posted on by

The Chief Electoral Officer is talking about approaching parties about monitoring nomination races, which I have some mixed feelings about. While the impetus around this is of course the ongoing paranoia about foreign interference and the notion that Chinese agents are trying to stage-manage these contests, that’s really the least of our concerns, because more often than not, the real problem is party leaders gaming these races in order to get their own preferred candidates on the ballot. Mind you, that is increasingly becoming a quaint notion as many parties are increasingly just foregoing nomination races entirely, and the leader is simply using their powers to appoint people to nominations, which betrays the whole mechanism of grassroots politics, and the Liberals have become some of the absolute worst about this.

But seriously—Samara Canada did a study on this a couple of years ago, and it’s shocking just how much parties have put their thumbs on the scales of these contests. (It’s actually worse than the report describes because the researchers credulously believed the NDP around their own claims around open nominations, ignoring everything that had been printed about all of their paper candidates who won in 2011, who absolutely did not even visit the ridings they had been assigned to beforehand, let alone face an actual nomination battle). The drama with the current by-election in Oxford is because the retired Conservative MP is outraged that Poilievre and Scheer put their thumbs on the scale to get their friend parachuted and nominated against someone from inside the riding, which is why he’s now supporting the Liberal candidate.

The big drawback, however, is that Elections Canada monitoring these contests is likely to become even more intrusive, because parties are essentially private clubs, which is not an especially bad thing. But we also have a huge volume of registered parties in this country who will never win a seat, and if Elections Canada has to monitor all of their nominations as well, that could be a giant swelling of their bureaucracy in order to have people who can monitor every one of these contests, particularly in advance of an election call, and in the time between the election being called and the cut-off date for names to be on the ballot. I’m not sure how feasible that’s going to be. The way our laws are currently structured were done in a way to explicitly keep Elections Canada from getting involved (which is why we developed a system of leaders signing off on nominations, which in turn became abused and a tool of blackmail). So while I’m cognisant that we have a problem with nominations in this country, I’m not sure that involving Elections Canada is the right solution.

Ukraine Dispatch:

There was another round of fire against Kyiv early on Sunday, which was largely repelled in the city but a regional airfield was hit. Russian forces struck the city of Dnipro, killing a child and wounding at least 25 others in what President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says have been five hundred child deaths so far. Meanwhile, Ukrainian forces keep up their operations around Bakhmut, preventing Russian forces from solidifying gains in the city itself. Russians claim to have thwarted Ukrainian attacks in Donetsk province. This as Zelenskyy says that they are ready to begin the spring counter-offensive. Elsewhere, that survey of air raid shelters across Ukraine found that a quarter of them were locked or unusable, which is resulting in some charges.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1665267153778401280

Continue reading →

Roundup: Johnston carries on with the job

Posted on by

As expected, all of the opposition parties voted for the NDP’s motion to call on David Johnston to step aside and for the government to call a public inquiry, and it passed. It’s a non-binding motion, and so it doesn’t have much weight, and Johnston put out a reply shortly thereafter saying that his mandate comes from government and not Parliament, so he’s going to keep doing his job. (Of note, only government and not Parliament can call a public inquiry as well, so the notion that Johnston is “not independent” because his mandate comes from government is stupid, illogical, and made in bad faith). The NDP motion also ignores one other crucial bit of reality, which is that there is almost zero chance that there would be a suitable replacement who would actually want to subject themselves to ongoing character assassination and harassment, whom every party leader can also agree to because they have no conflicts of interest, real or invented (and there are a hell of a lot of invented ones at play).

I will note that David Cochrane put these questions to Jagmeet Singh on Power & Politics last night, and Singh just flailed and kept repeating his talking points about the “appearance of bias,” and accusing Johnston’s lawyer of being biased because she has been a Liberal donor (never mind that she doesn’t actually make any decisions here), and kept saying that he wasn’t casting aspersions on Johnston when he obviously was by repeating the false accusations of bias.

Meanwhile, here’s Jessica Davis on how untenable this situation has become, which is why Johnston unfortunately remains the best-placed person to finish the job (click through for the whole thread).

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians have kept up their air attacks on Kyiv, and at least three people were killed overnight as a result. Russians are claiming that Ukrainians shelled one of their towns, and that their drones struck two oil refineries (the veracity of said claims remains untested).

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1663786012164734977

Continue reading →

Roundup: Why read when you can have a dog and pony show?

Posted on by

The morning after the David Johnston report and his recommendation not to hold a public inquiry, and the day was largely just more people demanding one anyway. Yves-François Blanchet decided to team up with Pierre Poilievre to declare that any ability to give them classified briefings was a “trap” to shut them up, which is a) patently ridiculous, b) a test of being adults that they both failed, and c) an admission that they would rather make hay than actually do the work of accountability that their job requires of them, which again, goes to the fact that ours is no longer a serious Parliament.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1661329685546975232

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1661383973488975872

https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1661372432676954118

As if to prove that Parliament is not serious, opposition members on the Procedure and House Affairs committee are now demanding that Johnston appear before them to explain his decision not to recommend a public inquiry. I mean, those reasons are all in his report if they bothered to read it, but that’s not what this is about. Rather, they want a dog and pony show, a chance to mug for the cameras while they hurl either invective or sanctimony toward him (depending which opposition party we’re discussing here) so that they can take those clips for their social media.

Meanwhile, two of the journalists reporting on the leaked documents were on Power & Politics last night, an as expected, there was zero self-reflection or acknowledgement that they might be getting played, particularly after Johnston debunked things they have written about. Instead, we got self-justification and rationalization, and trying to insist that Johnston wasn’t the expert while their leaker was—never mind that we can see that what was leaked was done in a way to craft a particular narrative that appears to have partisan ends. And lo, the same pair produced one of the laziest stories I’ve seen in weeks, where they got two former commission counsel to insist that a public inquiry would “restore confidence” without actually saying how.

Ukraine Dispatch:

All the news appears to be about those Russian dissent groups crossing into Belgorod region in Russian, denying reports that they were “crushed” by Russian forces ad saying that they’ll keep up the incursions, which is likely to stretch Russia’s forces even more than they are already over-extended maintaining their invasion of Ukraine. Meanwhile, Norway will also help train Ukrainian pilots on F-16 fighter jets (but I haven’t heard who will be donating the aircraft just yet).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1661405030388310018

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1661249400281202688

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre’s fictions about crime

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre held a press event in Edmonton yesterday, and it was…quite something. From the bullying of the Canadian Press reporter, the doublespeak and particularly notable omissions in his “defund the CBC” shtick, the economic illiteracy, the complete fiction he was peddling about violent crime, it was just another sign of how things are degenerating in our political discourse. The name of the game is flooding the zone with bullshit, and being an odious troll. Much of his base knows that he’s lying and they love it because he gets away with it, sticking it in the faces of people who care about things like facts or the truth (while the ignorant portion of said base laps up everything he says uncritically, which he also likes because they’re easily manipulable). It’s corrosive to political norms that we rely on, and he doesn’t care. This can’t end well, and I worry things are going to get worse.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1646585470866915354

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces have been shelling Bakhmut unrelentingly, and have also fired on the southern city of Kherson. Here’s a look at LGBTQ+ soldiers fighting in Ukraine, and the added challenges they face while doing their part to defend their country.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1646534358415671302

Continue reading →

Roundup: No political interference, and an incompetent commissioner

Posted on by

The final report of the Mass Casualty Commission, arising from the Nova Scotia mass shooting, was released yesterday, and it is wholly damning on the RMCP, as well as on the state of gun control measures. While I have a column about RCMP reform coming out later today, there were a couple of other threads that I wanted to pick up on here. One is that Trudeau says that they’ll make changes to the RCMP, but I’m dubious. Like the column will point out, there’s almost nothing left to save, and I fear that inertia will carry the day—especially when Saskatchewan starts bellyaching about recommendations to phase out training at Depot in Regina, and provincialism will win the day.

The other is that the whole drama around allegations of political interference in the investigation have been resolved, and unsurprisingly, there wasn’t any. “[Commissioner Brenda] Lucki’s audio recorded remarks about the benefits to police of proposed firearms legislation were ill-timed and poorly expressed, but they were not partisan and they do not show that there had been attempted political interference,” the report concluded. Because the claims never made any sense. The gun control changes were not drawn up on the back of a napkin in the wake of the shooting—they had been worked on for months at this point, and were being finalised, and Lucki would have known that because she would have been consulted the whole way through. And there was no reason for the local detachment not to release that information because they knew where the guns came from, and there was no investigation to jeopardise. The report had a lot of things to day about the RCMP needing to be more transparent, and to learn how to admit mistakes, and yes, it did call out that they were actively lying to the public throughout the incident and its aftermath.

One of the other aspects yesterday that deserves to be called out even more is that the interim RCMP Commissioner was given the report the day before, and he couldn’t be bothered to read it, or to have an adequate briefing on its contents, before he went before the media. It’s rank incompetence, and all the more reason why the Force needs to be disbanded.

Ukraine Dispatch:

At least six Russian missiles hit the city of Kharkiv yesterday. Here is a look at Bucha, one year since its liberation.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Feigning ignorance of far-right figures

Posted on by

It’s another day of Canadian politics covering itself in glory, starting with the Conservatives starting to backpedal when pressure mounted after three MPs—Leslyn Lewis, Colin Carrie and Dean Allison—attended an event with German MEP Christine Anderson, who is part of the far-right AfD party. As the pressure mounted, Pierre Poilievre issued a denunciation saying that he disavowed her racist rhetoric, and the three MPs gave a half-hearted apology, claiming they didn’t know who she was.

And that’s bullshit.

They knew exactly who she was. Carrie even quoted her in the House of Commons because she gave a speech denouncing Trudeau in the European parliament, and Canadian conservatives and far-right figures were lapping it up. (Carrie is one of the MPs who refused to get vaccinated, and has said that public health officials should be prosecuted. He can google all kinds of conspiracy theories but not the woman he’s quoting? Bullshit.) And yes, her trip to Canada included meeting with leaders from the Ottawa occupation from last year, whom the Conservatives also have associated themselves with. Even more interesting is the fact that the Western Standard asked her about Poilievre, and she said she had spoken with him a couple of times and he seemed like a decent guy, which Poilievre’s office disavowed and insisted that he had never spoken with her. But there is a pattern of behaviour here, with these faux apologies when they get caught, because they know there aren’t any actual consequences, and their followers lap it up.

Justin Trudeau got a few minutes of getting to rip into Poilievre and the Conservatives for their pattern of behaviour before he was struck with another bombshell, in which it is alleged that CSIS warned the Liberals to rescind the nomination of their now-MP Han Dong before the last election, citing that he was too close to the Chinese consulate. The PMO says that there was so much false information in the questions put them that they couldn’t answer, which doesn’t help things. But nobody is confirming anything, so this is likely to drag on into next week (where there may be some lawsuits in the works).

Ukraine Dispatch:

The Chinese government has decided they want to get involved in resolving Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and proposed a “peace plan,” but it doesn’t say anything about returning the land Russia currently occupies (including Crimea) or have any mention of accountability. To that end, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy says he’ll await more details (but I wouldn’t hold my breath). Zelenskyy did say there will be no peace talks until Russia leaves all of Ukrainian territory, so that’s probably China’s answer. Meanwhile, drone footage is showing how badly the eastern part of the country has been smashed by Russian forces. CBC talks to some people about their recollections of when the invasion began.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1629142902776512513

Continue reading →

Roundup: It’s like the market is deciding

Posted on by

There remains a lot of insistence that Canada should be exporting more LNG, and confusion as to why we’re not. And lo, there are a bunch of market forces at work, as fully permitted projects are not getting underway. Justin Trudeau’s remarks about there not being a business case turns out to actually be true. Funny how that works.

 

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 345:

Russia hit more apartment buildings in Kramatorsk in overnight bombings, while they try and encircle Bakhmut in the East. Meanwhile, the UK is saying no to providing fighter jets to Ukraine because they say that training the pilots takes three years (and yeah, I can see that, not to mention the maintenance on them is hideously time-consuming). Ukraine is also restarting repairs to some of its power plants, which is relieving the electricity shortages brought on by attacks.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1621193898948182021

Continue reading →

Roundup: Reducing chances of a wage-price spiral

Posted on by

There have been a lot of misleading things said about the Bank of Canada’s concerns around a potential wage-price spiral, most of them from left-wing economists or union leaders (as well as Jagmeet Singh and Pierre Poilievre), who have wrongly said that either governor Tiff Macklem was blaming wages for inflation (false), or that he told business leaders not to raise wages (also false). What Macklem said was that when negotiating contracts, to remember that they were determined to get inflation back to two percent as quickly as possible, so don’t keep high raises out for too long, because that is what could drive a wage-price spiral. What that means is that because wages would be above the rate of inflation, it means that prices—particularly for services—would need to be raised to pay for those wages, which then keeps inflation higher for longer. It’s also why it’s not just price controls that have happened in the past, but wage and price controls, to try and keep that impetus in check.

Payroll data has been released, which demonstrates why the concerns about a wage-price spiral are abating. Kevin Milligan explains:

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618678055396081665

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618679010099359744

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618680872106086402

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618691478653644800

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 338:

Russians fired more missiles at Kyiv and places like Zaporizhzhia, killing eleven civilians in the process.

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1618859295851921409

Continue reading →

Roundup: Warning signs of grassroots demise in Ontario

Posted on by

The Star profiles the four potential leadership candidates for the Ontario Liberal party, two of whom are sitting MPPs, the other two being sitting MPs, and I had a couple of observations. One is that the whole piece is framed in the absolutely toxic discourse of looking for a messiah to resurrect a party’s fortunes, which is one of the big problems in Canadian politics in the current era, and a big part of that is because we have devolved leadership contests into pseudo-presidential primaries, the result of which has been to hollow out parties and turn them into empty shells to be inhabited by leaders like hermit crabs. Those leaders turn that hollow shell of a party into a personality cult, until their time is done, and then the next leader does the same again. It’s also worth noting that the Ontario Liberals are currently one of the few remaining parties in the country that still used delegated conventions for the leadership—yes, a problem, but not as bad of one as one-member-one-vote systems. Of course, the article also derides delegated conventions as favouring “party elites,” which is a load of bullshit. Delegated conventions are better at engaging grassroots than OMOV because the riding associations need to get together to elect the delegates, who are then trusted to carry their wishes forward on subsequent ballots.

The other observation I see is that it largely glosses over the fact that the grassroots party in the province has crumbled, and many of its riding associations exist only on paper. This is absolutely shocking, because this is an admission that the party has completely failed in keep up the absolute basics of how our democratic system is structured. This is what leader-centric parties have led to, where the grassroots are seen only as votes for a leadership contest, donors, and a pool of volunteers at election time rather than the people who make up the party, who do the policy work, who run the nominations, and who do the work of accountability at the local level. The grassroots riding associations are supposed to be the interface between the riding and the caucus, especially in ridings that the party doesn’t hold currently. The fact that the party leadership (and I’m guessing Steven Del Duca most especially was part of the problem here) allowed things to atrophy this badly is a really worrying sign about the health of democracy in this province, but also this country generally because these trends are across parties and provinces, because we have failed to learn our lessons when it comes to the basics of civics. This is the kinds of things that people should have learned about in school (and why I wrote my book).

I will add that I would really prefer if the two MPs didn’t jump into this race, and that they stayed in Ottawa and did the work here rather than try to be saviours for the provincial party, especially because voices like Nathaniel Erskine-Smith are so necessary in Ottawa and being a “rogue” in the caucus, which I fear would be swamped and workshopped to death if he were to try to apply that to leadership. But maybe I’m just being cynical here.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 334:

Russian forces have increased shelling outside of their held territories in the East, particularly around Zaporizhzhia. The head of the Russian-occupied parts of Donetsk region says that he visited Soledar, which the Russians claim they captured but Ukraine still denies. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with families of the victims from the helicopter crash earlier in the week. Zelenskyy is also promising further action to root out corruption, with key decisions coming this week, given that this continues to be one of the sticking points for Ukraine in joining with the European Union and other alliances. Elsewhere, here’s a look at how organisations are working to counter Russian disinformation about the war.

https://twitter.com/melnykandrij/status/1616832357826265091

Continue reading →