Tag Archives: First Nations

QP: A few last kicks at David Johnston

Posted on by

While the prime minister was in town, he was not at QP, though his deputy was. Most of the other leaders were also present, for what that’s worth. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, accusing the prime minister of letting China interfere in two elections on his behalf, slandered David Johnston, and with Johnston’s resignation, he said that the Conservatives were willing to work with other parties on a public inquiry and demanded one be called. Dominic LeBlanc said that he appreciates the desire to work collaboratively, that a public inquiry was always an option, and that Johnston’s advice was that it would be difficult because of national security matters, but wanted opposition input on a commissioner, the timeline, and terms of reference. Poilievre pivoted to the rising cost of housing, blamed the prime minister, and demanded a balanced budget (as though there was a correlation between the two). Chrystia Freeland noted that while the country was burning and the government was trying to build a green economy, the Conservatives were block action. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his same nonsense-laden question, and Freeland noted the OECD projections about our strong economic growth before repeating her point about partisan games over a green economy. Poilievre cited the IMF’s concerns about the possibility of a major mortgage default in Canada, and again demanded a balanced budget. Freeland cited IMF praise for Canada and criticised the appalling behaviour of Conservatives blocking budget measures. Poilievre raised a CBC story about the state of student housing, to which Freeland pointed out that the Conservatives were blocking measures to punish Russia for their invasion of Ukraine.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, praised David Johnston for stepping down, and demanded a public inquiry with the commissioner chosen by the House (which is a bad thing) and that it be wide-ranging. LeBlanc said that he looked forward to working with opposition parties on next steps in a responsible manner. Therrien demanded a full public inquiry no matter what, and LeBlanc insisted it was not off the table but there were a lot of things that could not be made public.

Jagmeet Singh worried about mortgage increase and wanted advice for how people could cope. Freeland thanked him for the question, and praised their tax-free first home savings account and the housing accelerator fund. Singh said that doesn’t help a family now and repeated the question in French, with a Quebec figure instead of a Toronto one, and Freeland repeated her response.

Continue reading →

QP: Inflation isn’t burning, the country is

Posted on by

As the city was blanketed in smoke from the forest fires burning further north, things got underway in the West Block. The prime minister, his deputy, and all other leaders were present for the day, which was always a good sign. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, denigrated David a Johnston and his staff, and demanded a public inquiry. Justin Trudeau said that if Poilievre wants the facts he can get the top secret briefing, but he won’t because he would rather make baseless partisan attacks. Poilievre repeated the demand in English, and this time, Trudeau recited Poilievre singing his praises a decade ago. Poilievre said that it was tragic that the prime minister destroyed Johnston’s reputation, and demanded a public inquiry. Trudeau said that he didn’t hold Johnston’s previous appointments by Conservatives against him, while it was Poilievre’s judgment that was in question because he refuses the briefings. Poilievre pivoted to the topic of deficits and inflation, with all of the attendant misinformation, to which Trudeau decried the Conservative focus on austerity and listed things the Conservatives are blocking in the budget. Poilievre repeated the misinformation-laden demand in French, and got much the same response.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he took his own kicks at Johnston, and Trudeau said that he knows Blanchet looks forward to Johnston’s public hearings, and pointed out that they too are refusing the briefings in order to make unfounded partisan attacks. Blanchet chided that Johnston said that a public inquiry would be too long and too costly, and accused of him being hired to put a lid on the issue. Trudeau said that Blanchet would be more credible if he got the briefing.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he worried about the exploding costs of houses in Toronto, and demanded steps to deal with it. Trudeau picked up a script to pat himself on the back for the action the government is taking on “so many fronts.” Singh switched to French to grouse that Trudeau has official housing which he equated to meaning that Trudeau was out to protect the rich. (How?) Trudeau repeated his list of actions.

Continue reading →

QP: Setting the stage for a filibuster

Posted on by

While the prime minister was in town, he was not at Question Period, but his deputy was. Most of the other leaders were present, and just hours before, the Conservatives announced their plans to filibuster the budget with every tool in the book until they got their demands about a balanced budget and an end to increase on carbon prices. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, worrying that the budget adds fuel to the “inflationary fire” (it actually doesn’t), and demanded a plan for a balanced budget. Chrystia Freeland said that this shows they are completely irresponsible and trying to pick partisan fights, as they are trying to suppress the help that Canadians need, such as the Workers’ Benefit. Poilievre worried that Canadians were the most heavily indebted in the G7 ands worried about higher interest rates. Freeland considered this an adolescent position, and listed actions in the budget to help Canadians. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question around deficits and demanded a plan to balance the budget, and Freeland said that she was “truly appalled by the reckless and irresponsible behaviour” of the Conservatives, preferring adolescent partisan games instead of help for Canadians, adding in a line about “Parliamentary childishness.” Poilievre said that what was reckless as high inflation and interest rates before repeating his demand. Freeland suggested that someone who told Canadians they could opt out of inflation by crypto was in no position to offer advice on finances. Poilievre returned to French to worry about Quebec families impacted by forest fires, and wanted an update on the situation. Bill Blair said that there are 370 forest fires, with 217 out of control, and noted that Canadian Forces are involved in three provinces.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, offering cooperation on forest fires and climate change. Pablo Rodriguez gave a paean about the efforts of firefighters assisting Quebeckers. Therrien then turned over to David Johnston preemptively hiring Navigator, suggesting that he knew off the top that the fix was in. Dominic LeBlanc dismissed this, and said that Johnston did his job thoroughly and reached an independence conclusion.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he cited a survey about people struggling to make housing payments, and demanded steps to bring down the cost of rent (never mind that this is provincial jurisdiction). Chrystia Freeland patted herself on the back for the top-up provided to renters in last year’s budget. Singh railed both the possibility that the Bank of Canada raising rates, and corporations, to which Freeland assured him that the government was on the side of Canadians.

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 →

Roundup: Danielle Smith stays, Alberta still a one-party state

Posted on by

Well, Alberta has decided that it remains a one-party state, no matter how corrupted that party is, or how completely awful the leader is, and just how utterly unsuited Danielle Smith is for office, and that she has embraced all manner of conspiracy theories, or behaved in ways that imperilled democracy. While I have a full column on this coming out later today, there are a couple of things not mentioned therein that I did still want to mention.

One is that I cannot fathom how the whole “Take Back Alberta” narrative persisted. Take it back from whom? From what? You’ve been a one-party state for nearly fifty years, minus the four-year NDP interregnum that came about as a result of a perfect storm that in no way could be replicated this time around.

The NDP ran a weak campaign, and they are now comforting themselves with the fact that they have the largest official opposition in the province’s history, for what little it matters because Smith still has a majority, and they have no actual leverage to make any particular difference in the legislature. I am feeling some flashbacks to 2011 when the federal NDP formed official opposition and felt like they won the election, when they also handed the Conservatives a majority and they had no actual ability to make change or have leverage.

There is also still a particular ugliness in this election, as exemplified by the fact that the UCP candidate who compared trans children to faeces in cookie batter won by a landslide. Smith claims that she’s out of caucus “for good,” but I don’t actually believe her, and I have no doubt that after a few months in that penalty box, she’ll be welcomed back into the party because Smith believes in forgiveness, or some bullshit like that. And not nearly enough people will do any soul-searching over this, and this ugliness will fester.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Another night, another massive air raid against Kyiv and other cities in Ukraine, with more than 20 drones shot down as of this writing, and at least one high rise is being evacuated as falling debris has caused a fire. The constant nightly air attacks against Kyiv are taking a toll on its citizens (which is of course why the Russians are doing it). Russians did also allegedly hit a Ukrainian air base, plus port infrastructure in Odessa. There was also a Russian attack on the city of Toretsk in the Donetsk region, which killed two and injured at least eight.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1663350609385254912

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1663176973793861633

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: Johnston says no public inquiry

Posted on by

It was David Johnston Day, as his first report was delivered, and he did not recommend a public inquiry for very good reasons—particularly that it could not be necessarily public given the nature of the information, and that it would be window dressing at this stage of the game, considering he had already done a lot of the heavy lifting, and planned to do public hearings as part of his final report. You can read the full report here, but here are the five key takeaways. There was plenty of scathing material in there, particularly to the system of information dissemination within government, but also to the way media stories torqued partial information into falsehoods (the Han Dong allegations were discredited in the report). There is a problem with information culture within government, and while this government has done a lot to fix some things, they are not adapting fast enough to the changing environment, and that is on them. (Check out some of the threads linked below as well).

https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1661045080705187842

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1661080153122848781

https://twitter.com/stephaniecarvin/status/1661211717924188161

Johnston’s decision was necessarily a no-win scenario, and everyone is unhappy, but nobody has exactly explained how a public inquiry was going to restore trust in the democratic system—particularly as it comes under attack by bad faith actors who spent the day trying to discredit Johnston and his report (never mind that he did address the alleged conflicts and consulted with a former Supreme Court of Canada justice before accepting the job), and that no matter who would lead either the Special Rapporteur process or a theoretical public inquiry, there would be the same bad faith attacks because they don’t actually want to restore faith in the process. They want people to distrust because they cynically hope to leverage that in the next election. Pierre Poilievre in particular has refused to strike any kind of statesmanlike tone and refuses to be briefed because he knows that the moment he actually knows the intelligence and can’t talk about it, he can’t outright lie and make accusations with wild abandon, and that’s his entire shtick. But this is a fairly classic Canadian problem, where MPs don’t want to know the actual secret information, because then they’d have to stop talking, which they don’t want to do. Remember, ours is no longer a serious Parliament.

There is a conversation to be had about the role media is playing in undermining the faith in democracy, but you can rest assured there will be no self-reflection around it. Rather, there will be self-justification and rationalization, and sniping that Johnston expects us to take the intelligence he’s seen at face value, which is ironic considering that the media outlets reporting on these leaks are expecting us to do the very same thing, even though there are agendas at play within that reporting.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1661050997936996356

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1661051520018706432

In pundit reaction, Justin Ling gives a fairly balanced summation of the report with some insightful commentary. Susan Delacourt is sceptical of Johnston’s assertion that politicians and media can play their parts in restoring faith in democracy. Andrew Coyne is unhappy with the notion that we are expected to just trust Johnston (ignoring the contradiction made above), and while he credits Johnston with inviting NSICOP and NSIRA to review his findings, the same secrecy problem remains. Matt Gurney despairs at the picture of incompetence the report paints.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Following his return to Ukraine after meetings at the G7 in Hiroshima, Japan, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visted marines on the front lines in the country’s east. Over the weekend, the Russians claimed they overran Bakhmut over the weekend, which Ukraine denies, particularly as they have been reclaiming territory surrounding it. Russians are also claiming Ukrainian “sabotage groups” are crossing the border into the Belgorod region, but it sounds like these may be disaffected Russians, as Ukrainans deny involvement. Russians later claim to have “crushed” these groups.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1660291196030271490

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1660884230174560256

Continue reading →

QP: Misquoting a bad report on fuel standards

Posted on by

The prime minister was in Japan for the G7, and his deputy was off in Brampton. Most of the other leaders were also absent, save the leader of the opposition, and Elizabeth May. Pierre Poilievre led off, and in French, he tried spin the upcoming fuel standard as a second carbon “tax” that will punish Quebeckers. Steven Guilbeault said that Quebeckers believe in climate change while the Conservatives don’t. Poilievre said that the federal government was preventing Quebec from building more green hydro, and demanded they scrap this “tax.” Guilbeault said that this wasn’t true, and that refineries who made record profits need to do their fair share. Poilievre switched to English to insist this was all according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer (it’s not), to which Guilbeault quoted from a separate section of the PBO report where he said that he was not looking at the environmental costs, which were real. Poilievre insisted that those costs would not be reduced with a tax, and repeated his overwrought math. Guilbeault said that emissions went down beyond the pandemic lockdowns. Poilievre then switched to his bullshit concern trolling on safe supply and demanded it be ended in favour of treatment. Carolyn Bennett said that the deaths are from poisoned supply, and the BC coroner has said there is no evidence that safe supply had led to any deaths.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and insisted that the government was hiding Chinese interference and demanded a public inquiry. Dominic LeBlanc said said that it was hard to consider a public CSIS report to be “hiding something,” and that they have taken measures to counter it. Therrien demanded an inquiry immediately, to which LeBlanc said that Johnston would make his recommendations around an inquiry next week.

Gord Johns rose for the NDP, and he railed about McKinsey and Company and tried to tie it to the opioid epidemic. Helena Jaczek said there are open fair and transparent procurement processes, and there is an integrity regime. Jenny Kwan railed about corporate landlords and demanded the federal government do something that as clearly in provincial jurisdiction, to which Ahmed Hussen recited his usual talking points on rental assistance.

Continue reading →