Tag Archives: Environment

Roundup: Proactively calling in Navigator

Posted on by

There was some late-in-the-day excitement in the political sphere last night as it was confirmed that David Johnston has hired crisis communications firm Navigator to help with his media relations, because of course he has. Now, there is some context here in that he hired them off the start and not only in the last week as the toxic bullshit that surrounds his report has been cranked up to eleven, but that would also mean that they were likely the ones who advised him on how to handle the allegations of the conflict of interest, which doesn’t actually exist, but the fact that he spent so much time on it during his press conference didn’t seem to help matters any.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1664764909974896640

Yes, Navigator has become something of a punchline in Canadian politics, particularly of late, and someone remarked over Twitter that it’s on par with people hiring former Supreme Court of Canada justices to burnish their reputations. (And lo, Johnston did just that as part of his ensuring he didn’t have an actual conflict of interest). And if I were to hazard a guess, I would say that this blind spot that people in politics seem to have around Navigator’s waning reputation is in part because of their clubbiness with the people who work there. It’s full of people who spent a lot of time in politics and who are still actively involved, and everyone knows them, so they feel they can trust these people they know, never mind that their reputation as a whole has taken a beating. And yeah, that blind spot is a problem.

Nevertheless, I’m not sure this news changes anything. Johnston pretty much has to keep on working because frankly, there is no one else who can take over at this point. The field has been flooded with bullshit, and the opposition attacks have made this poisonous for anyone to step into the role, either to take over from Johnston as a special rapporteur or to head a public inquiry. (I have a column on this that should be out later today).

Ukraine Dispatch:

The total air barrage countered overnight on Thursday was 15 cruise missiles and 21 drones, while President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is ordering an audit of air raid shelters after three people died after being locked out on the street during a raid. Zelenskyy has also acknowledged that NATO membership is impossible until after they win the war against Russia (for reasons that should be immediately obvious). Meanwhile, top US military officials say that Abrams tanks and F-16 jets are long-term plans for Ukraine, and training is being organised, but they won’t happen for the upcoming spring/summer counteroffensive.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1664615530215485443

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1664600643305193472

https://twitter.com/anitaanandmp/status/1664582278897434627

Continue reading →

QP: Conspiracies and scrambling the speaking list

Posted on by

The prime minister was off to Toronto to mark the first day of awareness of gun violence, and his deputy and at least one other leader was away as well. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, insisting that the House of Commons declared non-confidence in David Johnston, said that Johnston’s declaration that he works for the government and not Parliament was part of the problem—never mind that Johnston is not an officer of parliament, and any public inquiry would also report to the government and have its terms of reference set by government, so functionally it would be no different. Bill Blair responded that Johnston was doing the work asked of him. Poilievre switched to English and haltingly asked Blair about the wildfire situation in Nova Scotia, and Blair assured him that they responded immediately to the request for assistance. Poilievre then pivoted to the news that Bay du Nord was being postponed for three years, blaming government “gatekeepers” as he blamed the government for other projects that have not gone ahead (mostly because oil prices didn’t warrant them). Steven Guilbeault said that he did approve the project but they paused it because of market conditions. Poilievre scoffed at the notion of market conditions, and this time Julie Dabrusin said that they have tabled a bill to help Atlantic provinces diversity their economies with offshore energy projects. Poilievre insisted the government keeps suffocating projects, and Dabrusin disputed this, listing mining projects approved. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he decried that Johnston reports to the government and demanded a public inquiry. Pascale St-Onge said she was disappointed that the opposition parties were not being responsible about combatting foreign interference or strengthening democracy, and implied them to get the briefings. Therrien was not mollified and tried again, and got the same response. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and worried about the early and severe wildfire season. Blair got up to note the size of the fires but also the federal assistance. Singh switched to French to asked about the opioid crisis, which gave Carolyn Bennett an opportunity to denounce Poilievre’s retrograde beliefs on drug policy.

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre won’t be gagged, but he will spread vile smears

Posted on by

On a scorching day in the Nation’s Capital, the prime minister and all other leaders were present, for what was about to come. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he asked how many Chinese-operated police stations were in Canada. Justin Trudeau expounded on how unacceptable it was that this interference was taking place, but the RCMP were investigating. Poilievre reiterated in asking how many. Trudeau repeated that the RCMP were on the case. Poilievre went on about how he admitted they existed and asked again how many. Trudeau reiterated that the RCMP are dealing with them, and said that if he wanted to know more about foreign interference he should take the CSIS briefing. Poilievre switched to English to decry that taxpayer dollars went to work of these organisations hosting the stations, and demanded to know how many more there were. Trudeau repeated that the RCMP were looking into it, and that Poilievre could take the briefing if he wanted to know details. Poilievre demanded the prime minister brief all Canadians right now on how many there were on our soil. Trudeau reiterated that if Poilievre took foreign interference seriously, he would get the facts from the briefing, and that he knows full well the RCMP is conducting their investigations.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and declared the death of democracy in Canada because the prime minster won’t call a public inquiry. Trudeau noted that Blanche has also chosen not to get a briefing in order to get the facts, preferring partisan facts instead. Blanchet insisted that this secrecy was hiding close connections between the government and China, and Trudeau noted that Blanchet complains about secret information when he has the opportunity to see it.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he cited a former CSIS investigator who testified at committee calling for a public inquiry. Trudeau noted that the current leadership have said that a public inquiry is not the best way because all of the secret information needs to remain behind closed doors, before praising David Johnston. Singh switched to French to raise that Johnston’s counsel is a Liberal donor and again demanded a public inquiry. Trudeau listed the actions they have taken to combat foreign interference.

Continue reading →

Roundup: O’Toole claims privilege over foreign interference

Posted on by

Yesterday in the House of Commons, Erin O’Toole rose on a point of privilege to say that his briefing from CSIS warned of “active” campaigns against him from China in four categories—that they are funding operatives to build propaganda campaigns against him, funding networks to amplify it, using WeChat for that purpose, and run voter suppression against his party and one MP in particular. His claim is that the government’s inability or unwillingness to act on the intelligence of foreign interference impacts his privileges as an MP.

I’m dubious that this constitutes an actual breach of privilege, because frankly, if disinformation campaigns, social media amplification and voter suppression are happening, well, his own party is just as guilty as the Chinese regime of doing exactly the same thing. I also fail to see what the House of Commons can do about addressing this supposed breach of privilege other than vote on sending a strongly-worded rebuke to the regime in Beijing. I also don’t necessarily trust that O’Toole is giving us all of the relevant details because he seemed to be very selective with what he wrote about his meeting with David Johnston on his Substack, and I cannot stress this enough, Erin O’Toole is a serial liar. Unfortunately, because he does it with a solemn tone and not, say, a clown nose and a unicycle, he manages to bamboozle a swath of the pundit class who are convinced that he’s the upstanding guy that they all want him to be rather than who he proved himself to be during his leadership, and that somehow, now that he’s no longer the leader, he’s gone back to being the guy they all want him to be. I don’t get it.

Meanwhile, the NDP used their Supply Day to call on David Johnston to step down so that the government will call a public inquiry. This while Pierre Poilievre is daring Singh to bring down the government, and Singh saying he won’t until trust is restored in elections (which is tactically stupid). The government insists they have confidence in Johnston, but it does raise the point that if everyone but the Liberals vote for this, it becomes politically untenable for the government to maintain the current course of action, even if it’s the right thing to do (because I remain unconvinced that a public inquiry will do absolutely anything more in this situation other than take three years, cost $180 million, and create a media circus with a daily drip of “revelations” that will amount to nothing but will nevertheless fuel said media circus). But this may wind up backing the Liberals into a corner and forcing them to call an inquiry, lest the damage get worse.

Continue reading →

QP: Why won’t you take the briefing?

Posted on by

The prime minster, his deputy, and all of the other leaders were present today, which was a nice change of pace. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and declared that nobody believes that the prime minister’s “chalet buddy” David Johnston has to say, accuse him of covering up foreign interference, and demanded the prime minister fire his “Trudeau Foundation Buddy” and call a public inquiry. Justin Trudeau pointed out that Poilievre claims to want the facts but he has refused briefing in order to know them. Poilievre insisted that a briefing was a trap to silence him, to which Trudeau suggested that it was why he didn’t do anything about foreign interference when he was minster of democratic reform. Poilievre gave a tortured recitation about secrets, and suggested Trudeau was so enamoured with Chinese dictatorship that he wants to silence his critics. Trudeau repeated that Poilievre would rather hide behind a veil of ignorance so he that he can carry on making baseless personal attacks. Poilievre insisted that he would have been subject to silencing measures, and Trudeau noted that as a former minister of the Crown, he was already subject to oaths of secrecy and he could handle those, but now he prefers ignorance in order to make personal attacks. Poilievre returned to French to again link Johnston to the Trudeau Foundation and demanded a public inquiry. Trudeau said that this was a clear demonstration that Poilievre has no understanding of how security and intelligence works, and that he is manufacturing reasons to remain in ignorance.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc and listed people calling for a public inquiry, and wondered if Trudeau would listen to David a Johnston or Morris Rosenberg. Trudeau recounted Johnston’s calculation as to why he chose not to recommend one. Blanchet insisted that Johnston and therefore the report had no legitimacy, and Trudeau pointed out that Blanchet was also refusing briefings in order to maintain partisan attacks.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, claimed an “overwhelming perception of bias” and demanded that Johnston stand aside and call a public inquiry. Trudeau sang Johnston’s praise, and that it was too bad the opposition was too busy playing politics. Singh switched to French to demand support for his Supply Day motion on a public inquiry, and Trudeau insisted they took the allegations seriously, which is why they have instituted a number of mechanisms to combat it.

Continue reading →

QP: Not reading the Johnston Report

Posted on by

While the prime minister was elsewhere in the building entertaining the president of Iceland, most of the other leaders were present today, as was the prime minister’s deputy. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and accused the government of using China to help them win two elections, and demanded they fire David Johnston and call a public inquiry. Dominic LeBlanc responded by pointing out that Poilievre refused a briefing in order to make outrageous comments rather than be serious. Poilievre insisted that he refused to be “silenced,” and repeated his demand. Marco Mendicino repeated the point that Poilievre refused briefings for partisan reasons. Poilievre moved onto the Chinese “police stations” in Montreal that got government funds, and were still active. Mendicino carried on with the retorts that Poilievre was closing his own eyes. Poilievre repeated the question in French, and Mendicino gave his same response. Poilievre then said that he can ask question of any member of the government, and tried to ask Jagmeet Singh demand a public inquiry or end his “coalition.” Mark Holland gave a sanctimonious speech about the Conservatives attacking Johnston, who Harper appointed as GG, for the sake of partisan games.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he called Johnston’s inquiry a farce, and demanded a public inquiry. LeBlanc got back up to tell them that they should let NSICOP do their work rather than casting aspersions prematurely. Therrien repeated his demand for an inquiry, and LeBlanc urged him to speak to his leader and take the briefing on the evidence, along with NSICOP.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he worried about the failing negotiations with Stellantis over their blackmail. Chrystia Freeland assured him they will ensure the deal goes forward and that the jobs stay in Canada, but also that Ontario pay its fair share. Singh switched to French to worry about rising rents in Montreal. Soraya Martinez Ferrada reminded him that they sent $5 billion to Quebec for housing.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Claims O’Toole also was a target

Posted on by

It is being alleged that Erin O’Toole has been briefed by CSIS that Chinese agents had been targeting him during his time as party leader because of his bellicose language about the regime. While there is no indication his family was also being targeted, his sister did live in Hong Kong for a number of years. Of course, I am taking the language in the article with a few grains of salt because the Johnston report pointed out that threats weren’t actually made to Michael Chong’s family, but that there was an indication that the agent in Canada was trying to gather information, so what exactly this “targeting” of O’Toole consists of I am keeping my powder dry on.

This has, of course, given rise to another round of cries for a public inquiry. Not one of them has articulated just how such an inquiry would make any iota of difference from the current process being undertaken by Johnston (aside from taking three years and costing a few hundred million dollars). How exactly does this situation require additional subpoena powers when the government has willingly turned over all of their documentation? If most of it will need to be behind closed doors because of the nature of the information, how exactly does this build trust? Nobody has yet articulated this, and “it just will” is not an answer—especially when the media and the opposition have been undermining trust in how these matters are being reported and discussed, and I fail to see how a public inquiry will change any of this.

Meanwhile, David Johnston took to the op-ed pages of the Globe and Mail to defend his decision to carry on with the review in light of the criticisms of his involvement, which has been pointed out seems to misunderstand the nature of how the political game is played these days. Of course, Johnston is hoping that he can get MPs and party leaders to be grown-ups and work together on this problem, but that’s unlikely to happen in the current climate and especially with the current players, and in that same token, writing an op-ed in the Globe seems a bit like that same kind of naïve hope that people will treat this as they did a couple of decades ago.

On a related note, the CBC has one of the worst examples of both-sidesing the supposed controversy around Johnston’s alleged conflict of interest—two professors who say it’s probably not a conflict, all things considered, but Democracy Watch (which has no actual credibility other than they are a reliable quote generator for lazy journalists) says it is, so it’s up to Canadians to decide. Seriously? This is exactly the kind of thing that has allowed misinformation and disinformation to flourish, because they refuse to call out bullshit when they see it. This is killing democracy, and they absolutely refuse to engage in any self-reflection about it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile struck a clinic in the city of Dnipro, killing two and wounding 30, after Ukrainian forces shot down ten missiles and twenty drones targeting Dnipro and Kyiv overnight. Meanwhile, the disaffected Russian group has allegedly shelled more targets in Belgorod region in Russia. Ukraine’s defence ministry is warning that Russia plans to simulate a major accident at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in order to thwart the coming counter-offensive.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1662024887731474432?s=61&t=P3QULyv63iAc0o1A98RiWQ

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1661975921455161344?s=61&t=P3QULyv63iAc0o1A98RiWQ

Continue reading →

Roundup: Arguing over an appearance already scheduled

Posted on by

It’s not even a sitting week, and yet we were treated to another instalment of the parliamentary clown show that has infected our House of Commons. The Procedure and House Affairs committee held an emergency meeting to demand that David Johnston appear before them to explain his reasons for not recommending a public inquiry. But the moment they got there, the chair said that Johnston was already scheduled to appear at the committee on June 6th, and that this had been arranged previously, and it just confirmed that this insistence he appear right away was just really, really bad theatre.

And then it went downhill from there, as MPs spent the next four hours debating a motion for Johnston to appear even sooner than the 6th, for no less than three hours, alone, because remember, they need to put on a bit song and dance about how they’re so serious! about all of these allegations. As I said, bad theatre. And then, the Liberals and NDP decided to try and be clever about this, and include a recommendation in the motion that all party leaders go through the security clearance process in order to read the full report and all of its classified evidence used to compile it. Well, that didn’t go over very well, and in the end, the Conservatives voted against their own motion because they didn’t want to be called out for refusing to actually read the full documents.

Spending four hours to try and sound tougher about a pre-scheduled meeting, to give themselves the last word, is just one more reason why our Parliament is no longer a serious institution. It’s appalling that they have wasted everyone’s time and resource like this, because Michael Cooper needed to make himself look like a tough guy. Inexcusable.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Wagner Group mercenaries are preparing to turn over control of their positions in Bakhmut to Russian soldiers, while Ukraine says that Wagner is only turning over positions on the outskirts of the city, and that they have drawn Russian forces into the city, where they are inflicting high casualties and weakening Russian defensive lines elsewhere. A prisoner swap took place for 106 Ukrainian soldiers, some of them captured in the fighting in Bakhmut. Russian control of one of the dams along the Dnipro river is causing flooding because they haven’t been working to level the water flow with the other dams in the network.

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: A bad report and a bad debate

Posted on by

The Parliamentary Budget Officer released another one of his highly dubious reports yesterday, this time on the incoming clean fuel regulations. Why is it dubious? Because it’s entirely one-sided and assumes no costs to climate change, and no adaptation on the part of industry in order to bring costs down to meet their obligations under the regulations, which is the whole gods damned point of these kinds of mechanisms. Oh, and this isn’t fiscal policy, so it’s not clear why he’s even doing this kind of report in the first place.

As you may have noticed during Question Period, the Conservatives jumped all over this report and its findings, and when they were questioned, their media staff were over social media accusing people of calling the PBO a liar. Well, it’s not that he’s a liar—it’s bad data, a bad report, and the numbers taken from it were used dishonestly and entirely in bad faith. And the PBO gets the attention he’s looking for, and around and around we go.

Rachel Notley vs Danielle Smith

For the purposes of researching my column last night, I subjected myself to the leaders’ debate in the Alberta election and it was…not great. Yes, lots of people gushed at how nice it was just to have two leaders going head-to-head and not four or five, but we don’t have a two-party system federally (and it’s a bad sign that Alberta has a de facto one provincially).

My not-too-original observations were that Notley was weirdly on the defensive most of the night, while Smith was pretending to be the upstart challenger rather than the incumbent, attacking Notley on her record at every turn when Notley wasn’t effectively throwing many punches herself. Yes, she did well on the healthcare and education portions, but was not effectively countering Smith’s confident bullshit throughout, and that’s a real problem in a lower voter-information environment, where that confidence plays well regardless of the fact that Smith lied constantly with a straight face. On the very day that Smith was found to have broken the province’s Conflict of Interest Act, Notley had a hard time effectively making this point, while Smith claimed vindication because it showed she didn’t directly call Crown prosecutors, while it full-out warned that Smith’s behaviour was a threat to democracy, and Notley could barely say the words.

Programming Note: I am taking the full long weekend off, so expect the next post to be on Wednesday.

Ukraine Dispatch:

There are reports of more air raids in Ukraine early Friday morning. Russians fired 30 cruise missiles against Ukrainian targets in the early morning hours on Thursday, and Ukraine shot down 29 of them, with the one that got through striking an industrial building in Odessa, killing one and wounding two. There were also further gains made around Bakhmut, and even the Wagner Group’s leader says that they have bene in retreat. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy set up a reintegration council in order to provide advice for the restoration of Ukrainian rule when they liberate Crimean.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1659213321927794693

Continue reading →