Tag Archives: Federalism

QP: Fantasizing about a “collapsing” economy

Posted on by

Wednesday, the final proto-PMQ of the year, and the prime minister was indeed present and ready to respond to all questions put to him, while his deputy was elsewhere. All of the other leaders were also present today, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and again cited the Globe and Mail story about the supposed tensions between Freeland and Trudeau over the size of the deficit, and demanded to know why he pushed her to break her promise on capping it. Justin Trudeau said that Poilievre was dramatizing things to distract from his voting against programmes that help people, and that he muzzles his MPs to prevent them from speaking out for their communities, or get his security clearance. Poilievre again demanded to know why Trudeau forced his finance minister to break her promise and Trudeau responded with a list of things Poilievre voted against. Poilievre switched to English and repeated his first question on the Globe story, and Trudeau once again called these little “dramas” a distraction from his record of voting against supports for Canadians or refusing to get his security clearance. Poilievre accused a Trudeau of bullying Freeland, said that he is too weak to control his own caucus, and then Poilievre proclaimed that he leads by inspiration and that Trudeau leads by intimidation. Trudeau said that Poilievre likes to claim things are broken because he keeps breaking them. Poilievre  mocked this, and then claimed that Freeland was going to be humiliated by reading a fiscal update authored by Mark Carney, and Trudeau accused Poilievre of using Canadians’ struggles for his own gain but that he won’t lift a finger to help them.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, complained about a committee study, and wondered what the PM would say to the thousands of Muslims who are happy to assimilate into Quebec. Trudeau praised diversity and rights. Blanchet then wondered if Trudeau was defending religious “indoctrination” at certain Quebec schools, to which Trudeau praised the Charter, and then said it was the responsibility of those schools to hire the best teachers they could.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, said that Trump was a bully and that Trudeau was too weak to stand up to him. Trudeau said that they were taking a measured approach, working with leaders across the country, and were not freaking out like the NDP were. Singh exclaimed that Trudeau’s job wasn’t safe either, and then repeated the same question/demand in French. Trudeau reminded him that they defeated Trump tariffs in the past.

Continue reading →

QP: More swipes before a confidence vote

Posted on by

The PM was away in Halifax, and his deputy was elsewhere, and most of the other leaders were also away. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he accused the prime minister of a litany of economic sins, and demanded he stop raising taxes and “inflationary” spending. Arif Virani said that they were proud of their record and that the Fall Economic Statement would be released on Monday, and praised that inflation as on target and that interest rates have come down. Poilievre mocked that the government wants to bury their record, and wondered if the deficit would remain under target. Jonathan Wilkinson praised the GST cut on purpose-built rentals, and that they are building more houses than ever before. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and Virani got back up, but this time praised how their childcare programme has seen one of the largest rates of female participation in the labour force. Poilievre lied about debt causing inflation (ignoring the pandemic and the global supply shock), and again asked about the deficit target. Virani cited current and former Bank of Canada governors about the current inflation spike being tamed and how Harper muted the recovery from the 2008 financial crisis by cutting too quickly. Poilievre then said that in the spirit of non-partisanship, they took Jagmeet Singh’s words and put them in a non-confidence motion, and wondered if the prime minister was going to let the NDP to vote for the motion. The Speaker warned that this stretched what was permissible under the administration of government, but Karina Gould got up to point out that it was the Conservatives who muzzled their members.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and raised concerns about religion in schools in Quebec, and demanded the federal government stop “undermining” secularism in Quebec. Jean-Yves Duclos reminded him that education was a provincial matter. Therrien insisted that multiculturalism is what is undermining the ability to live together, and Duclos noted that there is strength in diversity before returning to the reminder that education is a provincial matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP to give an anecdote of the plight of a retiree in relation to the demand to extend the $250 “rebate” cheque. Virani got back up to pat himself on the back for their other programmes for seniors, including dental care. Singh retorted that Virani didn’t answer the question, before repeating it he demand in French. Virani said that they always fight against poverty, and the data shows progress.

Continue reading →

QP: The “brains and backbone” to defend Canada

Posted on by

The prime minister was present and ready to take all questions, as is his usual wont on Wednesdays, and nearly all of the other leaders were also there. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and worried about the threat of tariffs from the US, but insisted that our economy, the borders, and the PM himself was weak, and demanded an election so that a “strong leader” could put Canada First™. Just Trudeau said it was ironic because they had given the Conservatives a chance to put Canadians first, but they kept voting against initiatives to help people, such as dental care and the school food programme. Poilievre repeated the mocking falsehood that Trudeau’s only plan was a Zoom call with premiers, Trudeau insisted that while the other guy was putting on a little show, he and his party were there for Canadians, and added that the Conservatives are only sowing chaos and discord. Poilievre switched to English, and once again listed things he considered the government to have “weakened,” and wanted an election so there was someone with the “brains and backbone” to defend the country, to peals of laugher from the Liberal benches. Trudeau said that while Poilievre is concerned only about himself and Trudeau, they were focused on Canadians. Poilievre said that was an example was a sign that Trudeau has lost control, and demanded an election. Trudeau mocked that Poilievre was up all night practicing that line in the mirror, and listed ways that the government was there for Canadians. Poilievre insisted that was a “mass hallucination” and that those programmes don’t exist outside of his head, and again demanded an election. Trudeau said this was an example of Poilievre trying to gaslight Canadians, and used dental care as an example of a programme that is working.

Poilievre says that only he has the “brains and backbone” to defend the country.The Liberal benches erupted in peals of laughter. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-27T19:33:11.389Z

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and said that nobody wants Trudeau’s vote-buying Christmas gift, to which Trudeau praised the GST holiday as helping those struggling. Blanchet said that those who need the cheques most won’t get it, and demanded a confidence vote. Trudeau said it was up to the opposition parties to vote to help people rather than engage in petty partisan games.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP to raise the story of a woman on disability who can’t work, but her spouse is a high-income earner and he will get the cheque and not her (which doesn’t seem like a great anecdote). Trudeau mocked that he remembered a time when the NDP stood up for workers, but now they are not supporting this rebate for workers, and said that they wanted the rebate to acknowledge the hard work of workers. Alistair MacGregor took over in English to also denounce that seniors were not getting the cheque, and Trudeau repeated his same mocking in English. 

No, that spike of inflation was not the worst we had ever seen. It was much higher and more persistent in the seventies and eighties. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-27T19:39:49.718Z

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pants-wetting about a marching song

Posted on by

News stories yesterday that the Royal Canadian Navy was, of their own initiative, exploring changing their marching song from “Heart of Oak” caused an inordinate amount of absolute pants-wetting from not only the usual suspects, but even some other otherwise rational voices who insisted this was all Justin Trudeau’s fault. When pointed out that the government had nothing to do with this, that the military brass was doing this on their own, they replied with things like “A military leadership shaped by, and following the direction of, the government. This horseshit is absolutely on the prime minister.”

I find it borderline incomprehensible that people cannot accept that the military itself has recognised that they need to change their own culture. They are in a recruitment and retention crisis because they can no longer count on straight white men from economically-depressed regions to fill their ranks in perpetuity. The country has changed, and they need to change with it—to say nothing of the fact that the former culture was rife with racism, misogyny, homophobia, sexual violence, and abuse of power in the top ranks. That kind of toxic environment wasn’t good for anyone, but it is being mythologised as “warrior culture.”

Even more to the point, this is being dismissed as “DEI” or “woke,” even from people who should know better. Trudeau is not sitting there forcing them to adopt “quotas” or so-called “DEI” or he’ll take away their lolly. But this goes back to my column last week about how a lot of these voices are pretty unconsciously privileging anything from straight white men as the “norm” and as the default “neutral,” and everything else is “woke,” and if you point out that privilege, you’re “divisive.” People need to grow the hell up and realise it’s 2024, and that means recognizing that the world has moved on from treating straight white men as the only “normal” that matters, and that includes the military.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian drone attack on residential buildings in Sumy killed two and injured more than twelve. Russians also claim to have overtaken the village of Novodmytrivka in the Donetsk region. There are more details about the hypersonic missile attack on Dnipro earlier in the week, to which president Zelenskyy says that Ukraine is developing new types of air defence to counter “new risks.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: Senators won’t be pushed around

Posted on by

The Bloc Québécois are trying to sweeten their demand for their two private members’ bills to pass before October 29th, saying they will help end the current filibuster in the House of Commons if the government does. Couple of small problems there—one is that the Senate can’t speed passage of any private members’ bills, no matter how much MPs or even the government strongly encourages them to; and the second is that the government isn’t going to give a royal recommendation to their OAS bill, because they absolutely don’t want to set a precedent there.

Nevertheless, Mary Ng wrote a letter to Senator Peter Boehm, who chairs the committee studying the Supply Management bill, urging him to speed it along, and it was co-signed by a few MPs from different parties, no doubt to try and demonstrate that they all care about this. Boehm, rightly, responded by telling them to go pound sand. The committee estimates it’ll get to clause-by-clause of the bill in the first week of November, because that’s how long it’ll take, end of story. And let me reiterate once again—there is no mechanism in the Senate to fast-track private members’ bills, and that’s for very good reason. In fact, during the Harper years, they tried to rewrite the Senate rules to allow for it to happen—in part because they were moving some odious legislation through as private members’ bills instead of government bills for various reasons (including the fact that PMBs get very little study and are automatically time-allocated so they can’t really be filibustered), and enough senators pushed back on that attempt that it didn’t happen. Again, for good reason.

As for the Bloc’s frankly boneheaded suggestion that the prime minister needs to get on the phone to order senators “that he appointed” around undermines the entire institutional independence of the Upper Chamber. They are appointed in such a way as to make them largely immune to this kind of political pressure for very good reason, and this is proving that very point. By that logic, should the prime minister be phoning up judges that they appointed in order to pressure them to deciding cases in a particular way? How about the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? This extended tantrum they’re throwing is embarrassing for them, particularly when it began as a ham-fisted attempt at blackmail that it turns out they weren’t very good at.

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people, including a child, were killed in a Russian drone strike in Sumy. The UN estimates that the Ukrainian population has declined by ten million since the start of the invasion, a combination of people being displaced and war deaths. Ukraine has been targeting alcohol plants in Russia over the past several days. With news that North Korea is sending troops to fight with Russians, South Korea is now considering sending weapons to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A promise to waste millions of dollars

Posted on by

There are a lot of stupid, performative things being said right now, particularly in those three provincial elections, but one of the dumbest yesterday was courtesy of incumbent New Brunswick premier Blaine Higgs, who promised that if re-elected, he will mount a new legal challenge of the federal carbon levy. And to make that worse, several Conservative MPs picked that up and declared during Question Period that the challenge was already underway (it’s not), as though it were a devastating argument for their demands to “axe the tax” or to call an election.

Higgs’ promise is premised entirely on bullshit. There is no basis for him to mount a new challenge because nothing about the programme has changed since the Supreme Court of Canada already ruled that it’s constitutional and within the powers of the federal government, particularly because of the existential challenge that climate change poses to Canadians. The fact that the price is increasing or that we have been though a bout of higher inflation—which has already stabilised and returned to target, and for which the carbon levy did not actually cause any of said inflation because that’s not how inflation works—don’t change any of the legal bases or arguments around the levy. And because the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled, any lower court that Higgs tries to mount a new challenge in is going to tell him to go pound sand.

Higgs is essentially promising to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, because you know that when the courts tell him to go pound sand, they’ll also tell him to reimburse the legal costs of the federal government because they wasted everyone’s time and money in bringing such a frivolous suit in the first place. But there is a political calculus, particularly on the right, where they are prepared to waste millions of dollars in doomed legal challenges because they think that it’s good electoral calculus to show that you’re fighting. Federally, Conservatives have made this argument a number of times when the government didn’t pursue doomed appeals and just made changes, and no doubt Higgs figures that this will work the same way for him. But then again, I guess they’re not bothered by the cognitive dissonance of “we need to balance the budget” and “we need to waste millions of dollars on a doomed legal crusade,” because that might require introspection or self-awareness, both of which are in incredibly short supply in politics these days.

Pretty much all of #cdnpoli. It's really hard to be optimistic about any of it right now.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-01T14:21:44.377Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Six civilians were killed and more wounded when Russian artillery struck a bus stop in Kherson. Russian troops have also reached the centre of Vuhledar, a Ukrainian bastion in the strategic high ground of the Donbas region, which is significant because of where it borders and the supply routes it controls. Ukraine is also investigating an apparent shooting of sixteen POWS by Russian troops.

Continue reading →

QP: Spiralling into a cavalcade of bullshit

Posted on by

The prime minister was back from New York and in Question Period for his proto-PMQ day, and his deputy was then along with him, in advance of the confidence vote that was to happen right after. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and rattled off some slogans to demand an election. Justin Trudeau said that they only thing they have to offer are cuts and austerity, while the government was investing in Canadians and Quebeckers. Poilievre trotted out the lines about people in poverty already living in austerity, made claims about when he was “housing minister,” and demanded an election. Trudeau said that if Poilievre was so concerned about single mothers, he shouldn’t have voted against child care or the Child Benefit. Poilievre switched to English to rattle off his slogans again to preface the confidence vote. Trudeau dismissed this as a “clever little slogan” that disguises his self-interest rather than help for Canadians, before saying they would have an election “in the right time,” but the rest got drowned out by competing applause. Poilievre said that if he wants an election if he would call it today. Trudeau said that today, they would see that the House doesn’t have confidence in the leader of the opposition, before mouthing pabulum talking points. Poilievre again called for an election and made some swipes about politicians versus people deciding, while Trudeau rattled off the lines about eight out of ten families getting more back, before saying that Poilievre doesn’t understand science, math, or economics, and and that they can arrange briefings for him that won’t require a security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and asked if the government would agree to their demands on the OAS and Supply Management bills. Trudeau said that they have already shown a commitment to seniors and to protecting Supply Management. Blanchet again wanted assurances, but Trudeau took this as an opportunity to plug dental care, which the Bloc didn’t support.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and Jagmeet Singh complained that Trudeau wasn’t standing up to Danielle Smith on healthcare. Trudeau said that they stand up for universal healthcare, and that in those provinces, the NDP couldn’t stand up to conservatives in those provinces to protect healthcare. Singh demanded Trudeau use his powers to stop Smith (HOW?!), and Trudeau talked up their agreements to get accountability from provinces for the money that gets sent to them.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Angry over an invented grievance

Posted on by

Two new Senate appointments were made over the weekend, both from Alberta, which naturally resulted in a mountain of utter bullshit, because neither were from the so-called “senators in waiting” that Alberta periodically “elects” as a stunt in order to invent a grievance against the federal government. There was also more of this nonsense hand-wringing that one of the two is a habitual Liberal donor and held roles as an organiser in the party in the past, but hasn’t for well over a decade. Nevertheless, clueless journalists and bad faith opposition members decry this as “partisan,” even though there is no actual Liberal caucus in the Senate for them to sit with, nor any Liberal whip to direct their votes (even though that has only ever really been illusory in the Senate).

The whole “Senate consultative elections” schtick in Alberta has only ever been a stunt—even when Stephen Harper appointed those who won them, because he was trying to make a point about reforming the Senate through the backdoor without actually doing constitutional changes. The logic of how they’re “just consultations” and that they are still appointed and don’t have any additional legitimacy within the Senate was laid bare during the Supreme Court hearings when Justice Cromwell asked the person making the argument “So why isn’t a consultative auction just as legitimate?” and they didn’t have an answer. But really, the whole thing was just to invent one more reason to make people mad at the federal government, at a time when there was a political impetus to stoke such regional divisions and resentments because that always helped them score political points, and lo, it’s still working for them decades later as they continue to get angry about something they just invented for the sole purpose of making them angry. It’s predictable, and it’s childish, and we should expect provincial governments like Alberta’s to behave like adults (but good luck with that these days).

Of course, where would we be without the conservative columnists in this country, making pronouncements about this without actually understanding a gods damned thing about it. “Not representative of Albertan thinking”? What exactly is “Albertan thinking?” If the insinuation is that their appointment is somehow illegitimate because they’re not conservatives, then I have news for you because the Senate is often a place where political outliers in a province can gain representation, such as Liberals in Alberta, particularly during the “bad old partisan days” where they may be shut out of the province electorally but could still have representation in the Senate and be present in caucus to provide that representation. That doesn’t happen anymore thanks to Trudeau’s short-sighted decision to boot all of the senators from his caucus, which is also why Ivison’s comments about Trudeau “renouncing” his reforms are such utter nonsense, because if Trudeau had renounced them, he would invite senators back into his caucus. He won’t (even though he should), but hey, Ivison needs to think of something from his perch in Costa Rica, and reinforcing a bullshit narrative is about the best it’s going to be.

Ukraine Dispatch

It was a bloody day in Ukraine as Russian missiles struck a military academy and a hospital, killing over fifty people and wounding more than 200. In the hours since, Russia has since launched missiles and drones against Kyiv and Lviv. This as children are returning to school, and in Kharkiv, those schools are now underground because of constant bombardment. Meanwhile, president Zelenskyy continues to call on Western countries who haven’t yet allowed their weapons to be used for long-range strikes inside Russia to not only allow them, but to supply further weapons so that Ukraine can make crucial hits. It also looks like a major government shake-up is on the way after a wave of resignations.

Continue reading →

Roundup post: No other orders of government

Posted on by

The Conservatives put out a statement yesterday about a Statistics Canada report on dwelling units, and blamed the federal government for the lack of creation, never mind that the federal government isn’t actually responsible for housing, and has very few levers at their disposal, and the levers they do have they are pretty much maxed out in terms of what they’re able to do. But reading this particular statement, you wouldn’t know that we have provincial and municipal governments who are responsible for housing, and who have the policy levers to do something about it, whether it’s zoning, or density rules, or building codes, or direct financial levers. Thos are all at their disposal, but Pierre Poilievre would have you believe that none of those exist.

The sad irony of course is that the moment that the Conservatives next form government, they will immediately insist that these issues aren’t their problem, that the provinces should be dealing with this, and they will play stupid games with funding (which Paul Wells noted last week, Poilievre’s planned incentives are rounding errors for city budgets).

And yes, my reply column is full of chuds who insist that Trudeau created this situation with immigration, again ignoring the role that provinces played in demanding more arrivals to fill labour shortages while simultaneously doing nothing about housing or social services (their responsibilities), and that there is a counterfactual in terms of what would have happened to the economy in terms of inflation and controlling it if we hadn’t brought in as many new immigrants as we did. The answer is that things probably would have been a whole lot worse for us as a whole, and we can’t ignore that while trying to look for blame for the current situation.

Ukraine Dispatch

A top Ukrainian commander says that they now control as much as a thousand square kilometres of territory in Kursk, while Putin vows a “worthy response.” There are concerns by Ukraine’s state security service that Russia is trying to falsely accuse them of war crimes as part of the operation. Here is a good look at the Kursk operation, its goals and the future options that will need to be weighed in terms of what Ukraine does next.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sophistry and the “Canadian Dream”

Posted on by

A piece widely shared over the weekend in the Globe and Mail, titled “The Canadian dream is on life support,” was a curious bit of writing, as the Elder Pundits of this country treated it like a damning indictment of the current government. While Omer Aziz’s ultimate conclusions in the piece are correct—that the federal government needs to admit that things have gone wrong, throw out their old assumptions and pivot, and they need to throw away their talking points while they’re at it—his process of getting there was torturous, and full of outright sophistry.

One of the things that really stood out for me in the piece was just how shallow the analysis really was, particularly in the fact that it served as something of an apologia for the premiers. You wouldn’t know it from reading the piece, but while he levels much of his scorn at the federal government, many of the problems he described are the fault of provincial governments, even where he asserts that they are solely federal such as with immigration. His attention to things like international students were the fault of provincial governments—most especially Ontario and BC—who let their post-secondary institutions treat these international students like cash cows (because they cut funding to those institutions), and allowed the public-private partnership colleges that were largely fraudulent to flourish, again because these provincial governments weren’t doing their jobs, while the federal government was told to just trust them (and I’m not sure how the federal immigration department was supposed to be auditing these institutions in the first place). Likewise, provincial governments scream for temporary foreign workers, and the federal government has to operate on a certain level of trust that these provincial governments know their labour markets best. With his condemnation of the supposed laxity of our criminal justice system again ignores that policing and the administration of justice are provincial matters, but that is never mentioned. He even sides with Facebook on their cutting off of Canadian news and says that the Canadian government wasn’t nice enough to them. Come on.

There are things going wrong in this country, but many of them are complex, and have roots in decades of policy choices by federal and provincial governments that have taken us to this point, and it’s hard for any one government to unwind these structural problems. This kind of essay does a disservice by trying to be simplistic about the problems and solutions to those problems.

Ukraine Dispatch

A father and son were killed in a Russian missile strike on the Kyiv region on Sunday, while three civilians were killed in attacks on Kharkiv and Donetsk on Saturday. In the Kursk incursion, Russians claim that they are increasing security in the area (as videos of their troops surrending en masse flood social media), while president Zelenskyy says that this move puts pressure on Russia as the aggressor. There was a fire reported on the grounds of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant, but the structure itself appears to be intact.

Continue reading →