Tag Archives: Euthanasia

Roundup: Preparing to gut environmental laws

Posted on by

The federal government is openly musing about changes to the Impact Assessment Act and the Fisheries Act in order to speed up project approvals, which sounds like it could be a dubious proposition. Federal Sources™ still insist that they will need Indigenous consultations and “robust” environmental assessments for projects, but if they keep “streamlining” these processes, they’re not robust. And then you just get more litigation. They don’t seem to learn this lesson.

The Conservatives, meanwhile, continue to demand that all environmental laws be repealed as “anti-development,” and continue to propagate falsehoods about projects that didn’t move ahead for reasons that have nothing to do with the assessment regime. They seem to have no concept of the fact that there are other factors at play, whether it’s the crash in oil prices in 2014, or the fact that there were no customers willing to sign long-term contracts that would make these projects viable enough to pursue.

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2052386968798118276

And then there are the oil companies themselves, who continue to try and flex their influence in order to scrap environmental laws. While whinging that any carbon pricing makes them uncompetitive (blatantly untrue given the credits in the system), Canadian Natural announced yesterday that they are moving ahead with two steam-driven oilsands projects, but still holding off on expanding one of their mines. Looks like they can still operate within the regulatory environment, even while grousing about it. These companies are not fragile babies who are one look askance away from insolvency, and government needs to stop treating them as though they were (while the Conservatives really need to stop credulously believing everything that these companies say).

Ukraine Dispatch

Ahead of its ceasefire, Russia fired dozens of more drones into Ukraine, hitting a kindergarten in Sumy, claiming Ukraine violated their own ceasefire first. President Zelenskyy has warned that if Russia continues to violate the ceasefire, then Ukraine will carry on with its long-range strikes.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Taking what advice on appointments?

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney once again said on Wednesday that Senate appointments will be made “in due course,” which doesn’t help when nearly ten percent of the Chamber’s seats are vacant or will be before summer is out, but for the first time, he indicated that he would be preserving the independent appointment committees. Sort of. (Currently only the federal members of these committees remain in place, and those for Nova Scotia, but none of the other provinces). “I will take into account the advice of the independent advisory committee that was established by my predecessor,” was what Carney said.

The problem is that’s not actually saying anything. Taking advice into account? Either these committees will be providing short-lists for appointments that Carney will choose from, or they won’t be. That was the point—they took the applications (which was always a mistake—they should have been doing the searching for worthwhile nominees to tap on the shoulder), vetted them, and honed them down to the short-lists, which Trudeau would then choose from, because he remains constitutionally responsible for those appointments. But what “advice” are they supposed to be offering if not a short-list of candidates? Will he look at their list and then decide to choose one of his friends from another hedge fund or big bank? Will he give them a list to do due diligence on? Maybe. None of this is clear, and it looks like he either doesn’t understand this responsibility that is part of his office, or he doesn’t care, and I’m not sure which is worse at this point when he’s been in office for a year now.

Meanwhile, Carney also said that he’s waiting on the joint parliamentary committee report before coming to any decision on the MAiD expansion for irremediable mental health issues, but it cannot be understated that said committee has been an absolute sham process. The two co-chairs are hostile to MAiD and have stacked the witnesses to be overwhelmingly against it, and have sidelined groups like major national psychological and psychiatric organisations who might actually argue that they can provide adequate safeguards. This is just going to result in more Charter litigation, and so many people will continue to suffer needlessly because a bunch of MPs and senators were too squeamish to actually listen to evidence that they didn’t want to hear.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-05-06T19:08:02.023Z

Ukraine Dispatch

In spite of Ukraine giving Russia an early start to their Victory Day ceasefire, Russia attacked several cities in eastern Ukraine, killing at least 27 people. The new Hungarian government returned to Ukraine the confiscated $82 million USD in cash and gold that was seized while transiting the country.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/2051983745297617183

Continue reading →

Roundup: Overplaying the ethics committee report

Posted on by

The Commons committee on access to information, privacy and ethics released their latest report yesterday, reviewing the Conflict of Interest Act, and it was, well, a doozy. This is one of those kinds of reports that was always going to be a problem because it’s so highly partisan, and the fact that the committee reflects a minority parliament made this even more so. Reading through it, it was quickly obvious that this was mostly an exercise in the Conservatives (and Bloc) looking to score points based on Mark Carney’s past, and trying to suggest a whole bunch of new rules that would essentially target him personally, which goes against pretty much every principle of good governance. Remember that bad facts make bad case law, and well, this is terrible all around.

It was also quite striking just who the majority on the committee was listening to, which was mostly “Democracy Watch’s” Duff Conacher, whose only credibility is that he branded himself a one-man watchdog who answers media requests, so he gets phoned all the time and provides quotes on too many stories. He’s also lost pretty much every court battle he’s ever waged, and thinks that he should be the only arbiter of parliamentary ethics in this country. They also listed to disgraced “journalist” Sam Cooper (who is so credulous he once believed that a clip from a Hong Kong film was secretly obtained proof of a Canadian official being compromised by Chinese agents), who pretty much was only there to back up Conacher. Experts who warned the majority that they were creating more problems than they were trying to solve were largely ignored, because they didn’t fit the narrative. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals had a nine-page dissent at the end of the report that called these kinds of things out, for all the good it will do.

Why? Because looking at the reporting of the report’s contents and recommendations, it was framed in such a way that the committee agreed to these points when in fact it was only the Conservative and Bloc members of the committee and not the Liberals, which then distorts the report because it makes it sound like it was more unanimous than it was. Mention of the Liberal dissent was waaaaaaay down in the copy, and doesn’t really spell out that this was the Conservatives and Bloc trying to use the committee to attack Carney and the Liberals, which is pretty relevant information when you’ve got a report of this nature. And while I don’t want to give the reporter on this piece a hard time, you can’t really consider what the main body of the report says as what the committee believed—only what the opposition members believed.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-23T19:08:02.093Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The Russian strike on Dnipro early Thursday killed three people and injured another ten. Ukraine is boasting that their new interceptor drones can be controlled over thousands of kilometres.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Missing the point about the Senate

Posted on by

Because everything is so stupid all of the time, a new conservative think tank popped up in Calgary that is issuing stupid polls, some of the questions of which fundamentally do not understand how Parliament works. They call themselves the “Aristotle Foundation,” and it’s a collection of the usual right-wing (and in some cases, far-right) suspects, and when they claim to be championing “reason, democracy and civilization,” well, you can start picking up where the dog-whistles are sounding.

In any case, they published this stupid poll (and of course, the National Post picked it up, because a bunch of their columnists are members of this think tank), and the very premise of their questions are absurd. “55 percent of non-Western respondents would be open to negotiating with Alberta or other Western provinces amid the threat of separation.” As well, there was a question on whether they “favoured reform of the House of Commons and Senate in the case of threats from Western separatism and Quebec separatism.” Why anyone would want to negotiate with a group of crybabies who make up a marginal fraction of the population is beyond me, but it’s not my poll. Nevertheless—negotiating about what, you ask? Supposed under-representation in the House of Commons and the Senate. They even have a handy chart about population per senator to make their case. I swear to Zeus, I am going to lose my mind.

If you're complaining about "per capita representation" in the Senate, might I suggest you read a fucking book for once in your life? nationalpost.com/news/canadia…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-19T04:29:03.776Z

The Senate is not and has never been a rep-by-pop chamber. It is, in fact, designed not to be. That’s the whole fucking point of why it was constructed the way it was in 1867. It’s explicitly designed along regional lines in order to counter the rep-by-pop of the House of Commons, because having two rep-by-pop chambers would be stupid and counter-productive. Yes, the Atlantic provinces have outsized representation explicitly to counterbalance their small populations in the Commons. That’s why the breakdown is regional: 24 seats for Quebec, 24 for Ontario, 24 for the Maritimes, and 24 for the west (and then the three for the territories and six for Newfoundland and Labrador were later additions). If you don’t understand this basic bit of Canadian civics, what exactly are you doing? Other than shit-disturbing? This is beyond idiotic, and I cannot believe that they want to be taken seriously.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-18T22:01:56.308Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones struck several apartment buildings in Odesa. Ukraine struck two Russian plants building and maintaining military and cargo planes. Here is a look at the interceptor drones that Ukraine is sharing with several Gulf states.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Any excuse to delegitimise the Court

Posted on by

There was a big eruption yesterday after the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the mandatory minimum sentence for possession or accessing child sexual abuse materials, but nearly all of the outrage is based on the headline and not actually reading the decision, because of course it is. Who wants to actually read when you can just rage? While I would suggest you read my story on the decision (go ahead, I’ll wait), the highlights remain that the Court strongly denounced this kind of activity, that the two accused in this instance did receive sentences that met the mandatory minimum, but that the decision focused on the scope of the mandatory minimum. Essentially, it is a challenge to Parliament—if you make laws overly broad, they are vulnerable to being struck down because you risk giving a grossly disproportionate sentence to someone on certain sets of facts, so maybe craft better laws.

That of course didn’t stop the demands for the Notwithstanding Clause to come from Pierre Poilievre, Danielle Smith, Doug Ford, and Scott Moe, who charmingly added that this kind of decision is why Parliament alone should make laws. None of them bothered to actually read the decision. None of them actually thought about what it said, and why using blunt instruments can do more harm than good in certain cases. More than that, there was an immediate need to delegitimise the Court on manufactured outrage rather than accept that the Court still has to safeguard rights when Parliament doesn’t do its job properly. Oh, but wait—these are all premiers and leaders who are less interested in rights than they are in targeting and scapegoating minorities for their own political ends, so of course they want to keep the courts at bay.

Watch out! Kenney's decided to start stroking his rage-boner again!

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-01T02:43:07.978Z

We are at a place in this country right now where rights are under attack by populist leaders, be it Alberta, Quebec, Saskatchewan, or Ontario (though Ford is more likely to back down when actually confronted). They like to use language like “the will of the people,” which means that it becomes open season on minorities, which is antithetical to a liberal democracy like ours, and they don’t want any checks on that, which is why they take every opportunity to delegitimize the Court. This particular situation was just too easy for them to weaponise, and so they went with it, to hell with the facts. There is an outcome they want, and that is unchecked power.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-31T22:56:01.799Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Russia has deployed some 170,000 troops to try and claim Pokrovsk, but Ukraine is slowly whittling them away. To that end, special forces troops have been landed at the city. Meanwhile, Ukraine reports that they have successfully struck 160 Russian oil and energy facilities this year.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1984173351720440022

Continue reading →

QP: Call an election/Get your security clearance ad nauseam

Posted on by

Wednesday, and what sounds like a less exciting caucus meeting for the Liberals, in spite of the talk going around. The PM was present and ready to take all of the questions today, while his deputy was absent. Not all of the other leaders were present, unusually, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, recited his talking points about the supposed “promise” in Canada that was “broken,” and wanted the government to adopt his plan to cut the GST on new homes under $1million. Justin Trudeau noted that the problem with any of Poilievre’s proposals is that they come with cuts, and in this case, it would cut $9 billion in transfers to Quebec to build affordable housing. Poilievre insisted that the government only builds bureaucracy and not homes, and again wanted them to adopt his GST cut. Trudeau listed investments the government is making, while Poilievre only offers cuts. Poilievre switched to English to give a paean to a very white, middle-class “Canadian promise,” which he claims the government broke and demanded they adopt his GST cut plan. Trudeau gave a longer soliloquy about the Conservatives only offering cuts and not help for people. Poilievre insisted that the current plans only build bureaucracy and that his plan was “common sense.” Trudeau noted that one of the fundamental responsibilities of any prime minister is to keep Canadians safe, but since Poilievre refuses a security briefing to keep his own caucus safe, he instructed security services to find a way to offer himself a briefing. Poilievre accused this of being a “tin-pot conspiracy,” before returning to the insistence that his plan was just common sense. Trudeau again repeated that Poilievre only offers cuts, and that he asked security services to figure out a briefing. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and accused the government of abandoning seniors by turning down the Bloc’s OAS bill. Trudeau listed ways in which they are helping seniors, which the Bloc opposed. Therrien took some swipes at the NDP before repeating his demand, and Trudeau linked the Bloc to the Conservatives in voting against measures to help seniors.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised Alberta turning over the administration of some hospitals to Covenant who refuses to provide abortions, and wanted Trudeau to do something. Trudeau noted that they have clawed back transfers to provinces who don’t provide services, and raised their motion to penalise pregnancy support charities that don’t offer the full suite of supports or options. Singh flubbed his attempt at a clip of “It’s her body her choice, not her body Conservative Party’s choice,” before switching to French to complain about housing transfers. Trudeau focused on the abortion aspect, and failed about the anti-choice MPs in the Conservative ranks.

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre vs Fraser on GST cuts

Posted on by

Both the PM and his deputy were present today, and as a result, so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he claimed the PM had “copied and pasting” his idea of cutting the GST on rentals, and then patted himself on the back and quoted Mike Moffatt in praising his current plan to cut GST on new houses under $1 million, and wanted the government to adopt it. Justin Trudeau recited the false talking point that Poilievre had only built six affordable units when he was “minister” before saying they wouldn’t sign onto a programme of cuts. Poilievre insisted his plan would build by cutting bureaucracy, and Trudeau pointed out that cutting the Accelerator Fund would mean cutting investment in social housing in Quebec. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and Trudeau noted that the fine print of Poilievre’s plan is to cut affordable housing programmes. Poilievre then recited some particular misleading talking points another the two housing programmes he plans to cut, and Trudeau gave a half-hearted defence of those programmes, getting back to his “fine print” talking points. Poilievre repeated his policy pledge in order to get a clean clip, and Trudeau returned to his same “check the fine print” talking point.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1851331074929918416

Yves-François Blanchet led for the NDP, and in his most ominous tone, brought up that the government didn’t pass their two bills, and tried to sound as though those bills were the most common sense plan for Quebeckers. Trudeau said that they have supported Supply Management and they hoped the Senate would pass it, before listing measures they have taken to help seniors. Blanchet then threw some shade at the Conservatives for their privilege filibuster which prevented any confidence motions that could bring down the government, and Trudeau noted that they could all see who was in the Chamber to play petty politics versus those there to help Canadians.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he complained about Rogers rising fees and said that the Conservatives don’t care because their leader gets “big cheques” from Edward Rogers, before some disruption, before demanding the government force Rogers to lower fees or ban them from federal contracts. Trudeau gave some blame talking points about hold the telcos to account. Singh switched to French to raise the recent documentary that cited Alain Rayes’ comments on the anti-abortionists in the Conservatives before demanding the federal government increase access (which is provincial jurisdiction). Trudeau threw a verbal grenade across the aisle about Quebec Conservatives who are not saying anything about the anti-abortionists in their caucus.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The same government, not a new one

Posted on by

The final results of the BC election started rolling in as the absentee ballots were counted, and lo, it looks like the NDP managed to flip one seat in the final tally, making it a 47-44-2 tally NDP/Conservative/Greens. And while that’s all well and good, the way in which major media outlets described this was a gods damned tragedy, and I was about to lose my mind.

No, the NDP are not going to “form government,” because they are already the government. Only the legislature changes. No, the Lieutenant-Governor didn’t ask Eby to form government, her statement explicitly said “David Evy advised me that he is prepared to continue as premier.” Because she doesn’t sit around waiting to make a decision—she acts on advice, and he never resigned, so he is not forming anything. He will be shuffling his Cabinet, but it’s the same government that carries over to another legislature. That’s it, and it’s a really big problem when neither the national wire service of the national public broadcaster couldn’t actually read what she wrote, and instead wrote their copy based on a falsehood and changed her words to suit their wrong meaning.

Additionally, because I am going to get pedantic here, there is also no such thing as a “majority government” or a “minority government.” Government—meaning Cabinet—is government. What changes is whether they control a majority or minority of the legislature. The legislature is not government. What matters is whether the same government is able to maintain the confidence of the chamber, which is much easier to do when you have a majority of the seats. The fact that Eby has managed to secure a razor-thin majority of those seats means that he has essentially ensured that he can maintain that confidence (though the Speaker issue could remain tricky). But my gods, could our media outlets have a modicum of civic literacy? It’s not only embarrassing that they don’t, but it’s outright dangerous for democracy going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian air attacks killed four in Kyiv and four in Kharkiv, where they also shattered a historic building and celebrated landmark. Critical infrastructure was also damaged in two regions in the north of Ukraine, leading to more power outages.

Continue reading →

QP: Proud of their new housing policy

Posted on by

The PM was ostensibly in town but not present for Question Period, though his deputy was in his stead. All of the other leaders were absent, including Pierre Poilievre, even though he had just launched another policy position on housing. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he raised the plan from said press conference on cutting GST on new house under $1 million, and asked the government to adopt it. Sean Fraser said that it was great that they took inspiration from the policy to remove the GST on purpose-built rentals, but the Conservative plan to pay for this policy, buy cutting other programmes including to existing low-income housing, was irresponsible. Scheer insisted that the current plan was only paying for bureaucracy and photo ops, and demanded again the policy be adopted. Fraser scoffed that their plan was to do less for housing and spend money on a snitch-line for people who don’t like their neighbours’ housing plans. Scheer repeated his “bureaucracy and photo ops” talking points, and claimed housing starts were down. Fraser retorted that housing starts were in fact up, and tens of thousands over when the Conservatives were last in charge, before reiterating that the Conservative plan is to cut housing supports. Luc Berthold took over in French to demand the government match their pledge to cut GST, and this time, Chrystia Freeland responded that at Poilievre’s rare press conference, he accidentally told the truth and said that they would cut two programmes to pay for this, and listed what those might be. Berthold tried again, decrying how long it took people to afford a home, and this time, Soraya Martinez Ferrada gave her own version of the Conservatives will only cut, and that the programmes the would cut included social housing in Quebec.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and worried about an influx of migrants from the U.S. if Trump wins and asked if the government had a plan. Marc Miller repsonded with a single “oui.” Therrien gave another soliloquy that asked the very same thing. Miller repeated that they do have a plan, and that they have always managed the border with the U.S.

Jenny Kwan rose for the NDP, demanded federal action on abortion access, as though the federal government controlled it. Mark Holland got up and gave a rant about the conservatives and that no man should control a woman’s reproductive freedom. Rachel Blaney gave another round of the same, and Patty Hajdu gave her own rant about not standing for attacks on reproductive rights.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Calling for the moderates to re-engage

Posted on by

Over in The Line, former provincial Progressive Conservative (and former federal Conservative) comms staffer Chisholm Pothier goes though Blaine Higgs’ downfall in New Brunswick, and in particular how his obsession with “parental rights” as a cover for oppressing trans youth was one of the main drivers of that collapse, particularly because the Liberals in that province were talking about the things people were worried about, like housing and healthcare. He eschewed the usual partisan nonsense and congratulated Suan Holt on a deserved win. But that wasn’t the important part.

The most important takeaway from the piece, however, is that Pothier calls on Tories in New Brunswick to get memberships and get engaged with the party if they want to take it back from what Higgs turned it into, which is a narrow little cult catering primarily to Christian nationalists. This is something I have written columns about in the past—that it’s extremely important for ordinary people and moderates within a party to take out a membership and get involved at the grassroots level, because if you don’t, the crazies absolutely will and they will take over your party. This is what happened with the UCP in Alberta—when Jason Kenney engineered the hostile takeover of the PC party there, and then its merger with the Wildrose to form the UCP, it was done very much by getting the swivel-eyed loons to engage with the process at the expense of the moderates, whom they didn’t want in the party. This was to be a small-c conservative party and not the amorphous centrist mass that the PC party in Alberta had become, constantly reshaping itself and its beliefs to follow those of each successive leader. And now, it’s a party of hardcore fanatics, who turned on Kenney, and whom Danielle Smith is terrified they will do the same to her, so she is becoming increasingly radical in how she is governing as a result.

I cannot stress enough that ordinary people need to be engaged with parties at the grassroots level, or things get really bad. A party that only consists of Kool-Aid drinkers, regardless of the party, becomes toxic pretty fast (especially if they start going on with the purity tests). While the PCs in New Brunswick have a chance to reclaim their party, which is probably too late in Alberta (and couldn’t happen at all with the sudden capitulation of BC United to the BC Conservatives). It also may not be possible for the federal Liberals, who did away with party memberships altogether in favour of sign-ups that will populate their voter database while all power centralized in the leader’s office. Pothier’s advice should carry for all parts of the country, not just New Brunswick—if you want to keep your party from falling prey to fanatics of any stripe, you need to get involved as a member to push back against them.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched two waves of drone attacks over Kyiv, and one of them struck an apartment building, killing one and injuring five. A missile attack struck residences and a medical facility in Dnipro, killing three. G7 leaders announced $50 billion in loans to Ukraine to be repaid with seized Russian assets.

Continue reading →