Tag Archives: Danielle Smith

Roundup: An unearned victory lap amidst the Court’s repudiation

Posted on by

Yesterday morning, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the federal Impact Assessment Act is partly unconstitutional, and that the federal government was over-broad in the criteria they used to trigger a federal environmental assessment. Ironically, while Jason Kenney and the federal Conservatives liked to call the legislation the “No More Pipelines Bill,” the section that governs pipelines was found to be entirely constitutional, so it was fairly laughable as they started crowing over social media about their supposed victory. It might have helped if they had actually read it and not just the headlines.

The more important part of the decision, however, was the fact that while it did find part of the federal legislation ultra vires Parliament, it also explicitly repudiated the arguments that the Alberta government and the Alberta Court of Appeal were making, in claiming that the province somehow has interjurisdictional immunity for so-called “provincial” projects. That’s not true, and the Court said so, which means that when Danielle Smith and Pierre Poilievre were claiming that the Supreme Court “affirmed” that provinces have the exclusive right to develop their own resources, that’s wrong. It’s not what the Court said, and in fact they said the opposite of that. Alberta’s “victory” was a pretty hollow one because the Court affirmed the federal role in environmental assessments and that they can assess whatever they want once their ability to make said assessment is triggered—the only real issue was the criteria for the trigger, which needs to be narrowed. The federal government has pledged to do just that, and because this was a reference opinion by the Court and not a decision on legislation, it has not been struck down. In fact, because there don’t seem to be any projects under assessment that would be affected by the decision, it seems to show that the law is carrying on just fine, and that the amendment will be a fairly surgical tweak (and yes, I spoke to several legal experts to that effect yesterday).

Meanwhile, the reporting on the decision largely ignored this repudiation of the provincial argument. The Canadian Press, the National Post, and the Star all missed that point entirely in their reporting. Only the CBC caught it—in the main story it was given a brief mention amidst the egregious both-sidesing, but Jason Markusoff’s more nuanced analysis piece did get a little more into it, but again, it did not really point out that Kenney’s crowing over social media was for naught, and that Smith’s victory lap was not really deserved. (Smith later went on Power & Politics and lied about what projects that the Act supposedly impacted, such as the Teck Frontier mine—that project was assessed under the Harper-era regime, and was shelved because the price of oil couldn’t justify the project’s viability). It would be nice if we had more journalists actually talking to more experts than just one while they both-sides the ministers and Smith, because they would find that they missed a pretty significant part of the decision. (My own story that does precisely this analysis was delayed in publication, so it should be up on Monday).

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces pounded Avdiivka in the Donbas region for a fourth day in a row as they try to make gains in that area. Ukrainian authorities say that Russians have destroyed 300,000 tons of grain since they started attacking Ukrainian port cities in July (because they’re trying to weaponise hunger).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1712871747672744431

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cancelling an invitation that was never issued

Posted on by

Danielle Smith is at it again, claiming that accepted “on behalf of the Government of Alberta” an invitation to appear at the federal environment committee next week, and that she was sent a letter “rejecting my attendance.” The problem? It’s yet another load of horseshit from Smith, because she was never invited to the committee. Two of her ministers were invited, and she thought that she could just show up and put on a dog and pony show, but that’s not how committees work. You can’t just invite yourself to appear. The witnesses are agreed to by all parties beforehand and a motion is passed to send the invitations. Even if she’s premier, Smith can’t just attend in place of the invited ministers—again, that’s not how committees work.

https://twitter.com/emmalgraney/status/1712598055885910272

https://twitter.com/EmmaLGraney/status/1712599648609972476

https://twitter.com/EmmaLGraney/status/1712601220232446093

https://twitter.com/EmmaLGraney/status/1712602741120684351

In any case, the meetings were cancelled because it was really about hearing from Suncor’s CEO, and they declined, so the committee abandoned that line of testimony, but in any case, Smith is lying again, and trying to spin this into some kind of federal-provincial flamewar, and people shouldn’t treat her with any level of credulity.

Oh, but wait—The Canadian Press did just that, and the headline on the wire overnight repeats the bullshit that her appearance was cancelled, which again, is not true because she wasn’t invited, and in the meagre text of the piece, it both-sides the whole thing, because of course it does. This is utterly irresponsible of CP, who should know better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

There has been fierce fighting around Avdiivka, as Russians have been moving troops and equipment there to try and make a push to show that they’re still capable of making gains in the country as they lose territory elsewhere in the counter-offensive.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More both-sidesing Smith’s mendacity

Posted on by

Because this is occasionally a media criticism blog, I found myself somewhat gobsmacked by the way in which The Canadian Press has written up the pushback against some of Danielle Smith’s ridiculous accusations against the federal clean electricity regulations. She has been panned by experts for weeks, but how does CP frame this? With statements by a Liberal MP in Calgary, George Chahal.

“The fuse is lit for fireworks in Ottawa after a Liberal member of Parliament accused Alberta Premier Danielle Smith of making false claims days before Smith is slated to appear before a federal environmental committee,” is the lead, and the piece proceeds to methodically both-sides this to death. It’s Chahal-said about Smith’s batshit crazy things she’s claiming about these regulations, like how this is going to mean blackouts and energy company executives being hauled off to jail, versus statements from Alberta’s energy minister, who in turn accuses the federal government of misinformation. There is no third-party expert weighing in, it’s simply the two sides, and the reader is supposed to determine whom they feel is more credible based on a handful of quotes. Come on.

We are in the middle of a misinformation and disinformation crisis in the Western world, and legacy media—of which a wire service like CP is a foundational element of—cannot arse themselves to do some basic gods damned due diligence and provide evidence that Smith and her ludicrous allegations are nothing more than mendacity for the sole purpose of rage-farming and stoking anger against the federal government (because that works so well in Alberta). There are ways to call out lies in a fair and transparent manner, but there was absolutely zero attempt her, and that just lets lies fester in the open, which is why leaders like Smith and Pierre Poilievre (as Andrew Scheer and Erin O’Toole before him) have all learned from, that it means they suffer no consequences for their lies, because nobody calls them out—just other partisan actors who can be dismissed as such. We’re playing with fire when it comes to the health of our democracy, but nobody seems to care, and that’s a very big problem.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian drones have attacked Danube port infrastructure in the Odesa region once again. Ukraine’s intelligence service has accused two villagers who fled to Russia of helping guide the missile strike on the village of Hroza that killed 55 people last week. Ukraine’s prime minister says they need $42 billion in budget support this year and next to help aid reconstruction. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Brussels to meet with military leaders and to impress upon them the importance of keeping up aid to Ukraine, and not to get distracted by the outbreak of hostilities in Israel—NATO leaders have pledged ongoing support.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1712119948749717958

Continue reading →

Roundup: Danielle Smith threatens to use a magical incantation

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith has launched a new ad campaign trying to agitate against the federal government over the clean electricity regulations, trying to get other provinces to similarly fight back against them, claiming that people will freeze in the dark, and there will be rolling blackouts, and so on. None of this is actually true, and the fact that energy prices in her province have shot up have little to do with the clean electricity transition than the choices that her government made around how those prices are regulated. She has also lied and said that because the federal regulations use the criminal law powers that energy CEOs will be jailed in 2035 if they still use natural gas—an absolute falsehood that is not only lurid for the sake of scoring points, but ignores that not every criminal penalty is jail, but can mean large fines (because fines over a certain size become the domain of criminal law instead of administrative monetary penalties.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1707491205678858379

The most hilarious part, however, is that Smith is “threatening” to invoke her risible “Sovereignty Act” to fight these regulations, which will do absolutely nothing. She might as well threaten to use a magical incantation for all of the good it will do. Unfortunately, there are far too many credulous journalists and pundits who actually believe that this kind of magical incantation has any power, which is disappointing and allows Smith to continue with her nonsense.

Anyway, here’s Andrew Leach with some actual facts that Smith is missing.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Not a lot of news out of Ukraine yesterday, except for a visit from NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who says that Ukraine is gaining ground in their counter-offensive, while president Volodymyr Zelenskyy continues to call for more air defences, given how many drone attacks they have been under in recent nights.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The credible intelligence gets a lot weightier

Posted on by

At the UN General Assembly, prime minister Justin Trudeau reiterated what he said about credible intelligence pointing to Indian agents responsible for the murder of Sikh activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil, and said that he is calling on India to help with the investigation. But what we have since learned is that the credible intelligence includes both human sources and signals intelligence from Five Eyes allies that includes Indian diplomats’ communications, and that is certainly lending a lot more heft to these allegations—on top of the fact that the director of CSIS and the National Security Advisory made trips to India to deal with government sources there, and sources are saying that behind closed doors, the Indian government isn’t denying the existence of this intelligence. That’s a pretty big deal, particularly as members of the Pundit Class in this country are trying to insinuate that this is really about Trudeau ginning up controversy to create a distraction (which doesn’t follow this government’s pattern at all).

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1705084748823961930

In the meantime, India has stopped processing travel visas from Canada under the transparently ludicrous excuse that their facilities face security threats, which affects a lot of people here hoping to visit family. Trudeau didn’t say if he would respond in kind, but it seems unlikely if he is serious about saying he’s not trying to provoke or escalate this with India, but to actually get to the bottom of this. (The fact that India doesn’t want to cooperate in public does appear to be something of a tell).

Zelenskyy Visit

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy landed in Ottawa last night. He will be visiting Governor General Mary May Simon this morning, followed by a visit to Parliament Hill, where he will be greeted my parliamentarians in advance of an address to Parliament that will take place around 1 PM Eastern.

https://twitter.com/journo_dale/status/1705081288808403189

Ukraine Dispatch:

While president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Washington, Russian forces pounded more Ukrainian cities, with more deaths being reported in the southern city of Kherson. There has been more shelling of Kherson early this morning. Here is a look at the Ukrainian soldiers fighting their way back to reclaiming Bakhmut.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Singh’s curious housing assertions

Posted on by

It looks like Jagmeet Singh is going to make another attempt at overplaying his hand, as he promises to use his “leverage” to try and squeeze more concessions from the government, particularly around housing. And sure, he can try, but part of this is going to go back to his absolute inability—or unwillingness—to understand how process works, and that’s kind of a big deal when you’re trying to demand the federal government do things.

For example, Singh was on Power & Politics the other day and insisted that the federal government can “rapidly” build new affordable houses, because they have “the land, the money, and the power” to do so. But I’m not sure this has entirely been thought through. Yes, the government has been going through their property portfolio to identify lands that can be sold for housing purposes, but that’s been ongoing for a couple of years and there hasn’t been a lot of traction because I suspect there isn’t a lot that’s available that is suitable for housing, and even if there was a glut that could be released, could they get it re-zoned for housing in short order by municipalities? I have my doubts. Yes, they have money, but that’s not infinite, and spending too much can have impacts on inflation, which they are trying to bring down (which is not helped by Singh’s stubborn insistence that only corporate greed is fuelling inflation, which is not true, and that a windfall tax will fix it, which is also not true). I’m also not sure what he means by the “power” to build homes—housing is primarily a provincial and municipal jurisdiction, where the federal contribution is mostly financial. Does he envision that they tender the construction of these houses? Because if that’s the case, a federal procurement process is neither simple nor quick (and just wait for the losing companies to sue the government, like what happens with defence procurement). Do they hire site planners, architects, and construction workers directly? Again, do you know what a federal hiring process looks like? And more to the point, there is a very tight labour market, which means that this will increases costs (and money is not infinite).

So, again, what process does he envision that the federal government can use to “rapidly” build these houses? Because remember, the timelines that the NDP are insisting on with their supply-and-confidence agreement have created their own problems, such as with the construction of the dental care programme, which has relied on a very poor kludge to get out the door within the deadline, and bad programme design just creates headaches, especially if it’s to meet an arbitrary deadline. Pharmacare is going to be similar—they’re insisting on particular timelines, but even if enabling legislation is passed this year, it’s not really going to matter unless nine other premiers sign on (and I haven’t seen Singh publicly haranguing NDP premier David Eby to do so). Process matters, and Singh pretending it doesn’t is a sign he’s not a serious person.

(As an aside, could every gods damned person who interviews Singh please stop asking why he hasn’t taken the nuclear option of tearing up the agreement as their first question? Seriously).

Ukraine Dispatch:

A combined overnight drone and missile attack on Kyiv killed two people, while an overnight drone attack, purportedly from Ukraine, struck military targets inside Russia and allegedly damaged four transport planes. Even more curious is that some of these Ukrainian drones appear to be made out of cardboard—for real!

Continue reading →

Roundup: Smith can’t get her story or timeline straight

Posted on by

Danielle Smith took to the microphones yesterday to thump her chest about the proposed clean electricity regulations, but what wound up happening was a series of wrong facts about her government’s “pause” on approvals for new clean electricity projects. Smith claims that the moratorium came at the request of the Alberta Utilities Commission and the Alberta Electric System Operator, except neither requested it, the timelines don’t add up, and it looks a lot like Smith’s government has been going out of their way to screw with clean energy stakeholders.

Receipts are all below.

Smith also refused to say whether our record wildfire season across the country is related to climate change, but insisted that most of the fires in her province were set by humans. That’s also a lie, but that’s Smith’s modus operandi.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia launched a large-scale air attack against western Ukraine including the city of Lviv, which was the largest attack on the city since the start of the war. There were missile and drone strikes against Odessa which wounded three in the early hours of Monday. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited troops near the eastern front line yesterday.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The temporary, temporary House of Commons

Posted on by

Something that caught my eye over the long weekend was a look at the “just in case” temporary, temporary House of Commons Chamber that has been assembled inside the Parliamentary ballroom in the Sir John A Macdonald Building. It seems that while maintenance is happening in the actual temporary Chamber in the West Block, and the threat of a possible recall over the BC ports issue, they decided to do some contingency planning and assemble this contingency Commons. This being said, I wouldn’t expect all MPs to attend it—a good many of them would avail themselves of the hybrid sitting rules (because they have so many things happening in their ridings *jazz hands* that they couldn’t possibly attend), with the exception of the Conservatives, because they would attend in person to prove a point. My biggest complaint is that the configuration shown in the CBC piece would have two lecterns at the end of the Chamber, rather than be arranged as despatch boxes like they do in Westminster, which would certainly be how I would have preferred it.

Meanwhile, new Government House Leader Karina Gould is taking on the perennial promise to make Question Period better, which…isn’t really her call. And, frankly, the one thing that the government could do to make it a serious exercise would be to ban talking points, pat lines and happy-clappy pabulum in favour of making ministers answer questions properly…but they won’t do that, because PMO would never allow it because it goes against the whole ethos of message control that has rotted politics but they insist on following.

So, with the greatest of respect, all of the platitudes in the world about making Question Period something Canadians can be “proud” of is empty rhetoric unless the government is committed to doing the hard work and communicating like human beings, which they absolutely won’t do. And so, our Parliament will continue to slide into a place of irredeemable unseriousness, because that’s apparently the way they like it by adhering to that ethos.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Following missiles strikes on the city of Pokrovsk, Ukrainian authorities are accusing Russians of deliberately targeting emergency workers by drawing them to the scene of a missile strike, and then targeting that scene with a second strike a short while later. Russians launched a massive air attack, largely on western Ukraine, on Sunday, purported in retaliation for a Ukrainian drone strike against a Russian tanker delivering fuel to its forces. Meanwhile, Ukrainian authorities say they prevented a Russian hack on their armed forces’ combat information system. Ukraine’s commander-in-chief says that they are putting in place the conditions to advance on the battlefield.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Misguided “free-rider” complaints

Posted on by

The Wall Street Journal had an unsigned editorial board op-ed yesterday that denounced Canada as a “military free rider,” but then did little to actually back up their assertions, omitted a bunch of facts, and went on a tear about the current government’s mission to fix the toxic culture within our armed forces, citing “See how that cultural manifesto works on the Ukrainian front lines.” Um, considering that our soldiers are successfully training the Ukrainians into a fighting force that is nimble and not just throwing bodies at the enemy like the old Soviet system did, it’s working fairly well? And how is Russia’s toxic masculinity doing on the battlefield anyway? Oh, right. In a similar vein, the editorial rages that we don’t spend enough on defence while we “shovel money into public unions and social-welfare programmes.” Like our health care system, which even in its current broken state is still far superior to the Americans? I mean, really?

To add to Steve Saideman’s comments, where the paper seems to fall into that same basic trap of not understanding how NATO works, which is that it requires participation from countries, and we participate. We may not spend to the same percentage, but several high-spending countries don’t actually participate, and because the two percent target is a really stupid metric, it ignores that the denominator is far higher in Canada than in a lot of these higher-percentage countries. Could our spending be better? Yes. Is our procurement system completely screwed? Yes. Have we been something of a free-rider in continental defence because we know the Americans will be there regardless? That’s fair. But trying to assert that it’s because we’re too “woke” is just puerile.

Oh, and about their seeming to prefer Poland, who is sliding into illiberalism and who has a major problem with homophobia, there was this gem on the wire yesterday about how that government broke EU law by suspending a judge who for criticising the government. Yeah, that’s totally who should be replacing Canada at the G7 and in a leadership position in NATO. Well done, WSJ. Slow clap.

Ukraine Dispatch:

At least 20 Iranian-made drones attacked mostly the Kyiv regions early Thursday, with debris wounding two people. American intelligence suggests that Wagner mercenary forces are no longer participating militarily in Ukraine in any significant capacity. Russia appears to be detaining thousands of Ukrainian civilians without charges, and appear to be planning to create even more prison colonies.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1679477329804902401

Continue reading →

Roundup: The usual NATO meeting tropes

Posted on by

In advance of the NATO summit happening today in Latvia, Justin Trudeau was in Latvia to announce that Canada would be doubling our military presence in that country by 2026, which is actually easier said than done with the current state of our Forces. This was, of course, superseded by news that Turkey has agreed to drop their objections to Sweden joining NATO (leaving Hungary as the last to sign off, though they insisted they won’t be the last). Here’s Stephen Saideman to parse what this means.

Of course, as with any NATO meeting, we get the usual lazy tropes about Canada supposedly being a “freeloader,” because we don’t spend the minimum two percent of our GDP on defence. But that analogy doesn’t actually work because NATO isn’t a club where members pay dues and then it does stuff with them—it’s a military alliance that depends on the participation of member countries, and Canada participates. We participate more than a lot of other countries who have a higher percentage of defence spending than we do. And it bears reminding yet again that the two percent target is a stupid metric, because the fastest way to meet the target is to tank your economy and have a recession, and it’s easier for countries with a smaller GDP denominator to meet. But hey, the two percent target is easy fodder for media because they can make hay about it with little regard for the nuance, which is why it has been a fixation for years now.

And yes, one of our biggest issues when it comes to our military spending and capacity to spend is our ability to recruit, which we have had a hard time doing—it’s a very tight labour market, and it can take a long time for applications to be processed, by which time potential recruits are likely to have found new jobs. It also seems to me that the military has never adapted to the changes that happened about two decades ago, when they could no longer rely on economically-depressed regions (such as the Atlantic provinces) because of the rise of the oil sands and the ability for people to fly out to Fort McMurray on two-weeks-in-two-weeks-out shifts, that changed their fortunes. We’ll see if they can fix their recruiting now that they are allowing permanent residents to apply, but that is one of the major challenges they need to address.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia launched 28 drones over Kyiv and Odessa in the early morning hours, 26 of which were downed. Ukrainian forces also say that they have trapped Russian occupation forces in Bakhmut and that they are pushing them out. A statistical analysis shows that as many as 50,000 Russian men have been killed in the fighting to date.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1678651881185243137

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1678332390052098048

Continue reading →