Tag Archives: First Nations

Roundup: A failure to condemn Carlson

Posted on by

The increasing unseriousness of our Parliament continues apace. After Question Period yesterday, NDP MP Matthew Green stood up to move a unanimous consent motion to condemn Fox “News” personality Tucker Carlson for his comments calling for an armed invasion of Canada in order to depose Justin Trudeau, apparently before we “become Cuba.” (Carlson also called for a “Bay of Pigs” invasion, apparently not understanding how badly that went for the Americans). And when the Speaker asked if there was consent to move the motion, a few Conservatives said nay (and no, I couldn’t tell which ones did).

https://twitter.com/markgerretsen/status/1620592776697237505?s=61&t=KIxQXaMgTmXV7qHS5V9-FQ

A couple of points. Number one is that Green shouldn’t have bothered because this just gives Carlson the attention he craves, but we know what this is for—social media clips, so that he could plaster it over Twitter and whatever other socials he’s on that he got Parliament to condemn Carlson, and isn’t he a hero for doing so. It’s performative bullshit, and that’s what our Parliament runs on these days to our detriment. Point number two is that the Conservatives could have shut up and not shown support for foreign regime change, but they did not, meaning they a) agree with Carlson, b) want to appease the Carlson fans in their base, or c) didn’t want to give Green the clip he was fishing for. None of those three are good looks, and just shows the continued decline in the state of debate. Everyone should rethink some of their life choices here.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 343:

The villages of Klishchiivka and Kurdyumivka, which are on the southern approach to Bakhmut, came under renewed Russian fire. As well, a new assault against Vuhledar is unlikely to make gains. Meanwhile, a new US aid package to be announced later this week is said to include longer-range rockets, which Ukraine has been asking for.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1620441189710450690

Continue reading →

QP: Field-testing a new talking point

Posted on by

While Justin Trudeau was in the building, he didn’t show up for Question Period today, nor did his deputy, but all of the other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and decried that the national debt has doubled (ignoring the reason, being the pandemic), and decried that rent and mortgage payments have doubled, worried about seniors, lamented supposed rising crime rates, and then somehow tied this all to McKinsey contracts, because that makes logical sense. Pascale St-Onge got up to agree that it was a difficult period with high inflation, but the government would be there for people who need it. Poilievre wondered if those most in need were McKinsey consultants, and lamented how much the government was spending on consultants (never mind the explosion in such contracts under the Conservative government and in Poilievre’s department in particular when he was a minister). Mark Holland got up to remind the Conservatives that when they were in government, they never talked about poverty or people using food banks, while praising his own government’s record on lifting people out of poverty. Poilievre then accused the government of telling people that they should stop complaining because they’ve never had it so good. Holland called out Poilievre for doing nothing about the situation other than making YouTube videos. Poilievre went on a tear about rental costs—which is provincial responsibility—and red tape preventing housing development—a municipal issue—and blamed the federal government for it. Holland got back up to insist that Poilievre is just amplifying anxiety. Poilievre then accused the government of trying to silence the debate, and demand they fix the problems instead, and Holland reiterated that the government is playing it straight about the problems the country is facing, while Poilievre’s only solution was to tell people to invest in crypto. Poilievre got back up, but had run out of questions. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc to wonder what the Notwithstanding Clause was for if not preemptive use—which is hilariously wrong. David Lametti got up to talk about minority rights, the dialogue between legislatures and the courts, and why the last word should not be the first. Blanchet rambled for a moment before quoting Pierre Trudeau on the Charter, and Lametti reminded him that Charters in Canada and Quebec were about protecting minority rights, and he repeated his point about dialogue with the courts.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and recalled the horrors that were in long-term care homes early in the pandemic and accused the government of doing nothing since, demanding legislated standards—never mind this is provincial jurisdiction. Kamal Khera got up to remind Singh that she was a nurse, and that the government appreciated the work of the Canadian Standards Association in developing national standards. Singh switched to French to lament increased privatisation, and Jean-Yves Duclos insisted they were holding up the principles of access and the public system.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Reducing chances of a wage-price spiral

Posted on by

There have been a lot of misleading things said about the Bank of Canada’s concerns around a potential wage-price spiral, most of them from left-wing economists or union leaders (as well as Jagmeet Singh and Pierre Poilievre), who have wrongly said that either governor Tiff Macklem was blaming wages for inflation (false), or that he told business leaders not to raise wages (also false). What Macklem said was that when negotiating contracts, to remember that they were determined to get inflation back to two percent as quickly as possible, so don’t keep high raises out for too long, because that is what could drive a wage-price spiral. What that means is that because wages would be above the rate of inflation, it means that prices—particularly for services—would need to be raised to pay for those wages, which then keeps inflation higher for longer. It’s also why it’s not just price controls that have happened in the past, but wage and price controls, to try and keep that impetus in check.

Payroll data has been released, which demonstrates why the concerns about a wage-price spiral are abating. Kevin Milligan explains:

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618678055396081665

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618679010099359744

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618680872106086402

https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1618691478653644800

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 338:

Russians fired more missiles at Kyiv and places like Zaporizhzhia, killing eleven civilians in the process.

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1618859295851921409

Continue reading →

Roundup: A note of optimism from the Bank of Canada

Posted on by

The Bank of Canada’s decision to raise rates another quarter point yesterday was not a huge surprise, given that inflation is still running hot, and the labour market remains unsustainably tight, but what was of particular note was that the Bank was much more clear in saying that they are more likely to hold the rate at where it is if things continue in the current trajectory—though they did also provide the caveat that if things continue to run too hot they won’t hesitate to hike rates yet again. (Here is Kevin Carmichael’s great explanation of the decision).

It is also noteworthy that the Monetary Policy Report, which explains the economic landscape and gives some insight into the Bank’s thinking, was really quite optimistic in terms of the possibility of avoiding a recession, but seeing stalled growth in the middle of the year, with a return to slower growth by the end of the year—certainly more of a soft-landing scenario. It’s not guaranteed, mind you, given global economic forces and the mood of the public, but the report was not all doom and gloom, in spite of media narratives.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 337:

Weeks after both Wagner Group mercenaries and Russia forces claim they have taken the town of Soledar, Ukraine only now has started to withdraw its forces from the area, given the heavy toll it is taking as Russians and mercenaries essentially keep feeding lives into the grinder. This puts Russian forces once step closer to the strategically important town of Bakhmut. Meanwhile, Germany has indeed agreed to send its Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, as they were expected to.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1618294048187617283

Continue reading →

Roundup: Fire which gatekeepers?

Posted on by

It sounds like Pierre Poilievre is back on his bullshit again (do the kids still say that?) with his “gatekeeper” nonsense, as in releasing another one of his cringey videos where he promises to “fire the gatekeepers” in order to build housing. Except I’m not sure exactly which gatekeepers he’s proposing to fire, because the biggest impediments to building housing are NIMBY homeowners and neighbourhood associations that oppose any kind of densification, not to mention the elected city councillors who enable said NIMBYism. How, pray tell, does Poilievre propose to “fire them”? I’m sure he’ll tell you that he’ll threaten to withhold federal transfers to municipalities that don’t comply, but then you’ve got elected councillors beholden to voters in conflict with the dictates of a federal leader, so that’s going to be fun.

Poilievre also held a press event in Vancouver yesterday where he unveiled plans to consult on a proposal that would allow First Nations to keep more federal tax revenue from projects on their lands—which sounds like a great policy! But it’s vague, has no details, and is almost certainly going to be a hell of a lot more complicated than he’s making it out to be, especially if he’s going to insist that provincial royalties and taxes won’t be affected either. Listening to the language he used, it also sounds like he hopes that this will be the kind of thing that will ensure projects get built, as though the money from this tax revenue will make concerns over environmental or social impacts evaporate, and I suspect he’ll be surprised when they don’t.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 336:

While Russian forces increase pressure around Bakhmut and Vuhledar, it is expected that Germany will announce today that it will send Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, and allow other countries to transfer them as well. Meanwhile, more officials have been named and fired in relation to corruption allegations, as Zelenskyy’s government continues their pledge to clean up the graft in government so that they can attain EU membership.

https://twitter.com/cfoperations/status/1617887130625413123

https://twitter.com/uasupport999/status/1618043593285062656

Continue reading →

Roundup: Say no to a Consultant Commissioner

Posted on by

Because a lot of people continue to be wringing their hands over government contracts to outside consultants, we’re starting to hear a few…less than stellar ideas. One of them came from Paul Wells yesterday, while on the CBC’s Front Burner podcast (Wells’ portion starts at 20:46). While there is some good context from Carleton University professor Amanda Clarke on the size of the problem (thread here), Wells is wrong about two particular portions, and he would have avoided this had he listened to my conversation with professor Jennifer Robson on my YouTube channel last week.

The first is the notion that when these consultants’ job is done, nobody is accountable for the work because most of their agreements mean that it can’t be subject to Access to Information rules, which is wrong. Fundamentally the minister is accountable no matter what. It wouldn’t matter if the work was done by outside consultants or the civil servants in the department, the minister remains responsible, and people seem to be forgetting this in their rush to condemn the consultants. The other part where he’s wrong is his idea to create a “consultant commissioner of Parliament” or other such independent officer.

No. Absolutely not.

We already have way too many gods damned independent officers of parliament, who are unaccountable, and to whom MPs have completely abandoned their constitutional responsibilities of oversight. Sure, the media and the opposition want someone independent they can quote on command to say mean things about the government, but that winds up just creating more bureaucracy, and doesn’t help the overall situation, especially as it drags us further down the road to technocracy rather than parliamentary oversight. The absolute last thing we need are more independent officers, and I wish to gods people would stop proposing them.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 335:

Russian forces have continued to pound the Donetsk region in the country’s east. Russians are also claiming Ukrainians are storing Western weapons in the country’s nuclear power plants, but have provided no proof. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is promising personnel changes at both senior and lower levels after high-profile graft allegations, as part of the country’s attempt to clean up its corruption problem.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Warning signs of grassroots demise in Ontario

Posted on by

The Star profiles the four potential leadership candidates for the Ontario Liberal party, two of whom are sitting MPPs, the other two being sitting MPs, and I had a couple of observations. One is that the whole piece is framed in the absolutely toxic discourse of looking for a messiah to resurrect a party’s fortunes, which is one of the big problems in Canadian politics in the current era, and a big part of that is because we have devolved leadership contests into pseudo-presidential primaries, the result of which has been to hollow out parties and turn them into empty shells to be inhabited by leaders like hermit crabs. Those leaders turn that hollow shell of a party into a personality cult, until their time is done, and then the next leader does the same again. It’s also worth noting that the Ontario Liberals are currently one of the few remaining parties in the country that still used delegated conventions for the leadership—yes, a problem, but not as bad of one as one-member-one-vote systems. Of course, the article also derides delegated conventions as favouring “party elites,” which is a load of bullshit. Delegated conventions are better at engaging grassroots than OMOV because the riding associations need to get together to elect the delegates, who are then trusted to carry their wishes forward on subsequent ballots.

The other observation I see is that it largely glosses over the fact that the grassroots party in the province has crumbled, and many of its riding associations exist only on paper. This is absolutely shocking, because this is an admission that the party has completely failed in keep up the absolute basics of how our democratic system is structured. This is what leader-centric parties have led to, where the grassroots are seen only as votes for a leadership contest, donors, and a pool of volunteers at election time rather than the people who make up the party, who do the policy work, who run the nominations, and who do the work of accountability at the local level. The grassroots riding associations are supposed to be the interface between the riding and the caucus, especially in ridings that the party doesn’t hold currently. The fact that the party leadership (and I’m guessing Steven Del Duca most especially was part of the problem here) allowed things to atrophy this badly is a really worrying sign about the health of democracy in this province, but also this country generally because these trends are across parties and provinces, because we have failed to learn our lessons when it comes to the basics of civics. This is the kinds of things that people should have learned about in school (and why I wrote my book).

I will add that I would really prefer if the two MPs didn’t jump into this race, and that they stayed in Ottawa and did the work here rather than try to be saviours for the provincial party, especially because voices like Nathaniel Erskine-Smith are so necessary in Ottawa and being a “rogue” in the caucus, which I fear would be swamped and workshopped to death if he were to try to apply that to leadership. But maybe I’m just being cynical here.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 334:

Russian forces have increased shelling outside of their held territories in the East, particularly around Zaporizhzhia. The head of the Russian-occupied parts of Donetsk region says that he visited Soledar, which the Russians claim they captured but Ukraine still denies. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with families of the victims from the helicopter crash earlier in the week. Zelenskyy is also promising further action to root out corruption, with key decisions coming this week, given that this continues to be one of the sticking points for Ukraine in joining with the European Union and other alliances. Elsewhere, here’s a look at how organisations are working to counter Russian disinformation about the war.

https://twitter.com/melnykandrij/status/1616832357826265091

Continue reading →

Roundup: New Zealand’s leadership selection

Posted on by

New Zealand is about to have a new prime minister, and lo, it was a process that took a single day. Yes, it was an acclamation where only one person put his name forward (“to avoid disunity,”), but that is less of an issue because New Zealand is one of the last remaining parliaments where it’s decided by a vote held within the caucus among the MPs—the way that Westminster parliaments are supposed to work. And of course, it’s completely alien to how things have devolved in this country.

The quasi-American pseudo-presidential primary system that we’ve adopted in this country is corrosive to politics. It has hollowed out the political parties, and pretty much killed grassroots riding associations, because they no longer matter to the party. Memberships—paid or unpaid (as is the latest craze)—is about leadership selection, not sticking around to do the hard policy work, because the parties have centralized that and justify it using Big Data. It’s all about populating databases rather than ensuring you have a base of engaged partisans who act as a link between the community and the caucus in Parliament. The leader then turns the party into a personality cult while they wield almost absolute power because there are almost no checks on that remaining. At least with caucus selection, there is a direct line of accountability so that the caucus that chose the leader can remove said leader as well, which is one of the most important considerations.

Suffice to say, while one might have preferred that they at least had a vote between two candidates for the job, the fact that they have retained caucus selection is important, and Canada needs to return to the same system if we are to have any hope of fixing the damage to our system.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 332:

Russian forces claim that they took control of the town of Klishchiivka, south of Bakhmut, which their mercenaries claimed to have taken already. And they’re still claiming they’ve taken Soledar, which Ukraine disputes. Meanwhile, the NATO meeting in Ramstein, Germany, ended without an agreement on sending Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, as Germany is the holdout and needs to authorize the use of their technology.

https://twitter.com/oleksiireznikov/status/1616506280876642317

Continue reading →

Roundup: Danielle Smith and prosecutorial independence

Posted on by

Because it never ends in Danielle Smith’s Alberta, we learned last night that members of her staff were indeed calling up Crown prosecutors to totally not pressure them on cases, only it wasn’t around public health order rule-breakers—it was around those arrested as part of the blockade at the Coutts border crossing. Remember that? Where they arrested Diagolon members for their plot to murder RCMP officers, where they had a hit list? Yeah, totally normal for the premier’s office to be calling them up and totally not pressuring them by asking if those prosecutions are in the public interest, over and over.

https://twitter.com/emmmacfarlane/status/1616209929165213696

When news broke, Smith denied that she was in contact, or that anyone in her office was…except there are emails, and her story around totally not pressuring those very same Crown prosecutors around pandemic rule-breakers kept changing, depending on which media outlet she was talking about, so her denials are pretty hard to believe, especially since she didn’t seem to understand how pardons work in Canada until earlier this week, by which point her story had changed about six or seven times (and is probably still changing).

Of course, I don’t expect that anyone is going to resign or be fired for this, because that would mean that someone would need to possess enough self-awareness, or have a shred of humility, or even be capable of feeling shame for their actions, and that’s pretty much a foreign concept in Smith and her cadre. And all of those voices who were having meltdowns about the Double-Hyphen Affair and the alleged pressure being applied to Jody Wilson-Raybould (which my reading of the situation seems to have largely come from Bill Morneau’s office) are strangely silent about what happened here, because I’m sure it’s totally different.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 331:

Ukraine is awaiting the decision of allied governments and particularly Germany about providing them with modern tanks, especially Leopard 2 tanks (which Germany controls the export licences for) as they meet at the Ramstein Air Base in Germany. Meanwhile, here are some testimonials from Ukrainian soldiers who are big fans of the armoured vehicles we have sent them so far, with another 200 on the way.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The committee goes after McKinsey

Posted on by

The Commons’ government operations committee met and, as expected, launched a study into those McKinsey contracts, but because the Liberals decided to be tricksey about it, they got consent to amend the terms so they’re going to review contracts going back to 2011, which means they’ll also be reviewing Conservative-era contracts. But it’s all pretty stupid because McKinsey does very little in the way of government contracts overall (especially compared to a number of other big firms), and this is just about politics and the Conservatives trying to accuse McKinsey of being a “Liberal-friendly firm” because of Dominic Barton, not to mention the fact that McKinsey has had a lot of bad press of late. But this doesn’t touch the overall issue of use of outside consultants by government, and is mostly going to be about showboating, because why do actual valuable work in committee when you can spend all of your time scoring partisan points.

With that in mind, I will point you to my most recent YouTube episode, where Carleton university professor Jennifer Robson and I discuss the rise of the so-called “shadow public service,” and it’s a lot more nuanced than you think. Additional context from Robson below:

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 330:

The major news out of Ukraine was a helicopter crash, killing the country’s interior minister, senior staffers, and one child when it crashed into a kindergarten in a suburb of Kyiv. What we know and don’t know about the crash can be found here, but there is no indication yet if it was downed by Russian missiles. Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency is placing teams in all four of Ukraine’s nuclear power plants to reduce the risk of accidents as the fighting carries on.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1615719966820507684

 

Continue reading →