Tag Archives: Foreign Aid

Roundup: Not bothering to amend an abusive bill

Posted on by

It looks like the Senate’s national security committee has decided not to amend Bill C-12 (which is a border bill that was split out of Bill C-2), and in particular left in the sections that give the immigration minister new arbitrary powers when it comes to asylum claims and immigration files that she will soon be able to cancel any application she likes. The Senate’s social affairs committee had recommended removing this section from the bill because these powers can be exercised with no procedural safeguards, but apparently, they don’t care.

Among other complains in this legislation are the timelines for when people can make a refugee claim since they’ve been in the country, which can be fraught for some claimants who have been traumatized or who are afraid that disclosing certain reasons why they are claiming (particularly in instances of domestic violence or persecution for being LGBTQ+) could mean more time, but attempts to change that timeline were shot down. The changes also have the likelihood of creating a two-tier system that won’t guarantee in-person hearings for vulnerable claimants, but apparently that doesn’t matter. And when it comes to cancelling immigration applications or even permanent residency cards because of “public interest,” which the minister can simply declare arbitrarily, well, they decided not to narrow those powers either.

There is some spectacularly bad and frankly abusive legislation that this government is pushing forward, and the Senate should be doing its job and pushing back, especially in cases like this, where the government is trying to give itself arbitrary powers with no guardrails. This is a bad thing, but apparently, we have a bunch of timid senators who don’t want to rock the boat too much. Wasn’t that why everyone was so busy patting themselves on the back for the “independent” Senate, where they weren’t being whipped (not that the whip has been anything but illusory in the Senate), so that they could actually push back against the government? If this is “independence” or “pushing back” against bad legislation, well, I’d hate to see what a pliant Senate looks like.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-23T14:08:03.542Z

Ukraine Dispatch

There was an explosion in Mykolaiv, similar to the bombing in Lviv. Ukrainian forces have reclaimed eight settlements in a counter-offensive in the Dnipropetrovsk region.

Here is a compilation of stats on the toll that four years of war has had on Ukraine, while here is a look at how costly this has been in Russian lives. AP has a photo essay featuring several people affected by the war, and a gallery of some of the images over the past four years.

Continue reading →

QP: Just who is standing with Trump?

Posted on by

The PM was in southwestern Ontario for his auto strategy announcement, while Pierre Poilievre was present, and he led off in French, with a somber delivery of his script on food price inflation, with the added accusation that the government gave us a weak dollar. François-Philippe Champagne said that it was the Conservatives obstructing their measures to grow the economy. Poilievre hit back that Champagne promised to stabilise food prices two years ago and they were still rising, to which Champagne quoted Poilievre’s own words around the past support for the previous GST rebate. Poilievre switched to English to denounce that auto production has fallen by half and decried that the government was subsidising American vehicles, and Champagne praised the “good news” of their auto strategy. Poilievre hammered that Champagne saw the loss of auto production and jobs, and wanted the government to eliminate the GST on Canadian-made vehicles. Champagne countered that he brought over a European auto manufacturer to Canada. Poilievre made the same demand, and Champagne patted himself on the back for their investments in the auto sector of tomorrow with EV supply chains. Poilievre pivoted and accused the government of letting Bishnoi Gang members into the country with no screening and letting them stay with refugee claims. Sean Fraser retorted that the Conservatives were obstructing lawful access measures (as well they should, because it’s unconstitutional!)

Yves Perron led for the Bloc, and he raised the Bloc’s issue of the week around the problems with pension payment software. Patty Hajdu read a script about the department working to rapidly resolve the issues. Perron tried again, and Stephanie McLean haltingly read her own statement of the same. Andréanne Larouche gave it another round of the same, and Hajdu defended her bilingualism before thanking the civil service for shrinking the backlog.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A sit-down meeting to foster cooperation?

Posted on by

Yesterday, prime minister Mark Carney had a sit-down meeting with Pierre Poilievre about, well, we’re not entirely sure. Both of their readouts are very different spins on their conversation, but I guess it was about looking at ways to cooperate over the next few months? But let’s take this with a shaker’s full of salt.

Carney is certainly looking to get bills passed through the current minority parliament in a way that won’t be drama with every vote, particularly as he is now down two MPs (soon to be three), while Poilievre has no actual interest in going to an election anytime soon because a) he can read the polls just as much as anyone else and Carney’s favourables are particularly high right now, and b) he wants the NDP to be able to actually fight an election so that they can peel voters away from the Liberals, as the Conservatives need a relatively strong NDP to make that happen, and they are in no position right now. So he needs to save some face while playing along with Carney, so that translates to this faux conciliatory tone, while his “specific suggestions” are always to destroy all environmental laws, and to inevitably drive investment away through uncertainty and increased litigation—such a winning strategy! In any case, I suspect that they will have agreed to pass certain bills, possibly with amendments, by a certain date, before Poilievre gets to carry on with his little song and dance about imaginary taxes and “red tape,” because he has demonstrated time and again that “cooperation” means “do what I say.”

Meanwhile, Jamil Jivani headed to Washington, and apparently got a briefing from Dominic LeBlanc before he left. That said, Carney was throwing some shade around about how Jivani is not the party’s trade critic, and that he was mostly doing it for media attention. Mélanie Joly also noted that he has never said anything about the job losses at the GM plant in his riding, so she was not exactly convinced by his desire to help. In any case, Jivani had his meetings, and tweeted that he had a message from Trump, which was that he “loves” Canadians. Gee, thanks.

Ukraine Dispatch

At least seven people were killed when Russia shelled a front-line town in Donetsk. There are evacuations taking place in Zaporizhzhia region as Russians advance on more settlements. More power cuts are expected as they expect more attacks on Kyiv. Zelenskyy says that 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers have been killed so far, which is a lot less than the Russian casualties, which total over a million deaths and injuries.

Continue reading →

QP: Asking for theories when we all know the data.

Posted on by

The PM was present today, as was Pierre Poilievre, so there was a buzz of anticipation for this show-down after his convention (though really, nothing was going to really change). As well, Stephen Harper and several of his former ministers were in the gallery to watch the proceedings in advance of Harper’s portrait unveiling. Poilievre led off in French, and launched into his spiel about “hope” and his “theory” on “hidden taxes” on food price inflation, and wondered what the government’s theory was. Mark Carney said that the industrial carbon price worked out to zero, and there was no food packaging tax, but that the biggest problem was the currency exchange, tariffs, and climate change. Poilievre insisted that it couldn’t be the problem, because other countries face lower food price inflation, and Carney registered his points. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and got much the same response with an added bit about the clean fuel regulations being good for the canola farmers in his riding. Poilievre again tried to contest these assertions, and Carney returned that he knows that Poilievre is “just visiting his riding,” and after things calmed down, he suggested that Poilievre spend time with the farmers in nis riding to see how the biofuel charge helps canola production. Poilievre retorted that Carney was just visiting Canada, and listed towns in his riding to ask people there about the charges. Carney said he would always be happy to go back to his home province. Poilievre returned to his “theory” and demanded Carney’s, and Carney said that the fall of the Canadian dollar, thanks to Conservative obstruction, was one of the drivers.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and after an acknowledgment to Harper, he asked about the expropriation in Quebec as it related to Mirabel. Carney also acknowledged Harper before saying high speed rail is a national project that is getting consultation. Blanchet railed about the “trauma” of the expropriation related to Mirabel and wondered if he was aware that high speed rail would do the same. Carney insisted that they were cooperating closely with the constituents there about a small corridor and not a huge airport. Blanchet said that C-5 and C-15 were “heartless” bills, and Carney wondered if Blanchet was actually in favour of high speed rail.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Dabrusin does damage control

Posted on by

There is some damage control happening, as environment minister Julie Dabrusin is making the rounds on the weekend political talk shows to insist that the MOU with Alberta is not abandoning climate action, and that the clean electricity regulations, for example, are not being carved out, but given more flexibility for each province to come up with equivalency plans. That might be more believable if Danielle Smith wasn’t doing a victory lap claiming that it was being scrapped (after she lied about what it entailed for the past several years).

Meanwhile, I have to question the editor who let this particular CBC headline run over the weekend: “Do activists have a role in government? Steven Guilbeault’s resignation raises questions.” Seriously? Activism is the lifeblood of politics, and that includes roles within government (meaning Cabinet). We don’t live in a technocratic state where bureaucrats are governing and making policy decisions. Activism is what gets people involved, precisely because they have issues that they care about and want to make change. That’s part and parcel of the system.

What this winds up doing is trying to paint Guilbeault as some kind of zealot unable to make compromises, which is again, something that is not borne out by the facts. Guilbeault ran for the Liberals federally after the Trans Mountain decision. He was very much seen as a pragmatist within the environmental movement. The piece mentions that he was first given the heritage portfolio and wasn’t immediately slotted into environment, but that was also something Trudeau started doing more broadly, to give someone somewhere to get their training wheels on and learn how to deal with how government works before giving them the portfolio from their previous career, because it didn’t always go well from his first Cabinet when he tried to simply slot subject-matter expertise into Cabinet roles where they may wind up being captured, or simply not suited in spite of all appearances (*cough*Jody Wilson-Raybould*cough*). The whole piece is just poorly conceived and written, and someone should have exercised more editorial oversight.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched nearly 600 drones and 36 missiles at Ukraine overnight Saturday, killing six and wounding dozens, while knocking out electricity to much of Kyiv. Ukrainian naval drones struck two Russian tankers as part of their “shadow fleet” used to evade sanctions. Reuters tracked a cohort of 18-24-year-olds fighting in Ukraine; none of them are fighting any longer.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1995035870307483725

Continue reading →

QP: Fumbling around “Who cares?”

Posted on by

The PM had just returned home from his trip to the G20, but was not present as a result. Pierre Poilievre, however, was, and he led off in French, and he raised that when Carney was elected, it was on the notion that tariffs were an “existential threat,” but when asked over the weekend about the state of talks with Trump, Carney said “Who cares?” and Poilievre railed that he doesn’t care about forestry or auto workers. Steve MacKinnon ignored the question, and raised that last week, Conservative MP Bob Zimmer took up MAGA talking points that immigrants drag down the Canadian economy, and wondered if Poilievre approved of those comments. Poilievre said that his question was for the PM, who was in Ottawa (but he couldn’t directly say that he wasn’t preset in the Chamber), and repeated his incredulity about the “Who cares?” and how the prime minister couldn’t care about the people losing their jobs due to his “incompetence.” MacKinnon responded in English by again asking about Zimmer’s comments, and asked again if Poilievre endorses such claims. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his incredulity about the “who cares?”, but MacKinnon again raised comments made by Zimmer and Stephanie Kusie, and wondered if there would be apologies. Poilievre raised an $80 billion contract Brookfield got from the White House, and accused Carney of being more concerned about that. MacKinnon insisted that this was another attack questioning the prime minister’s loyalty to Canada. Poilievre listed industries affected by tariffs and declared that he about them, and this time Dominic LeBlanc got up to say that the government was elected to defend Canadian workers, which the budget does, and the Conservatives voted against it. Poilievre repeated the claim about a Brookfield deal, and François-Philippe Champagne got up to praise the good news in the budget.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he relayed that he was shocked that the government has given up on its feminist foreign policy, and he demanded to know if gender equating was still a Canadian value. Mona Fortier got up to read a script about how Canada continues to support gender equality and is still committed to eliminating gender-based violence, but that the foreign policy will be guided by three values, the third of which includes feminism. Blanchet needled that there was discomfort on the other side over this “gaffe” by the PM, and wondered if this was about pleasing the sexist regime in the U.S. Fortier repeated that they still hold feminism and a value. Blanchet called this speaking out of both sides of his mouth, pointed out that Carney said this as he was trying to get billions out of the UAE. Fortier read the same statement about values.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Confusion over who authored the “peace plan”

Posted on by

It has been a crazy weekend when it comes to making heads of tails of what is happening with the so-called “28-point peace plan” between Russia and Ukraine. A bunch of US legislators at the Halifax Security Conference were insisting that they were told that the plan was the starting point of negotiations, that the deadline of Thursday was to start talks, and that this was all a big misunderstanding. You had other reports saying that people were saying that this was the Russian plan that was just for discussion purposes. Then you had reports saying that no, the White House said that this is the plan, leaving everyone in the dark as to just what the hell was going on.

What the actual fuck is going on.America put forward a nearly carbon copy version of the Russian plan for Ukrainian conquest, admitted it and backtracked, then doubles down.

— Justin Ling (@justinling.ca) 2025-11-23T02:54:54.829Z

As this was happening, world leaders, including Canada, were treating this as if it’s a starting off point that “needs work” as opposed to being a betrayal of Ukraine and that it should be killed with fire, because nobody wants to make Trump too angry, because they rely too much on the Americans for too many things still (though Ukrainians have pointed out that it’s no longer 2023, and they are much more self-reliant). European leaders did come out with their own suggested 28 pointswhich are far more fair to Ukraine, but seem to be willing to let Russia continue to occupy territory it has gained by force (unless I’m misreading it), and still doesn’t call for much in the way of penalties other than to pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine.

PMO readout of Carney's call with Zelenskyy. Maintaining the façade that the "peace plan" is a good start (when it is in fact a betrayal).

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-23T20:07:37.708Z

Meanwhile, Anne Applebaum savages the plan as not being anything more than a starting off point for a larger future war, while the only beneficiaries are some unnamed Russian and American investors, because this is what Trump is really all about. Paul Wells laments the “don’t wake Trump” tactic that those world leaders are using, because it rewards how much of a betrayal it is, and soft-pedals the fact that it invites future wars of aggression.

G20 Outcomes

There were a number of things coming out of the G20 summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, and it leave a whole lot of questions about prime minister Mark Carney and his values and priorities. Carney had plenty of praise for his hosts, and talking about the G20 being a bridge following the rupture of the US withdrawing from its role with global institutions, and that he has no “burning issue” to talk with Trump at the moment, and they’ll talk when they’re ready to. This being said, Carney also declared that the government’s “feminist foreign policy” was effectively dead, in spite of it being about the best way to achieve outcomes and at a time when the US is doing things like calling reproductive rights and gender equity “human rights violations” (no, seriously). Carney announced a joint technology partnership with India and Australia, and that talks were being revied about a comprehensive trade agreement with India, in spite of their foreign interference in Canada and trans-national repression (that their High Commissioner insists is all a delusion).

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3m6dt3iyjjc2i

So, nothing on trans-national repression or India's foreign interference.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-23T22:26:23.696Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Four people were killed in a drone attack on Kharkiv on Sunday. The death toll from last week’s missile strike on Ternopil is now up to 34. Ukraine has struck power and heat stations in the Moscow region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Running the party like a frat house

Posted on by

With the House of Commons not sitting this week, one can expect the drama of the Conservative ranks to continue to reverberate this week, seeing as the government’s big budget roll-out has been ringing a little bit flat, in part because they already announced everything ahead of time, but also the fact that it’s missing the mark in some key places. Regardless, MP Chris d’Entremont is now speaking to media a bit more now that he’s crossed the floor, and it’s revealing.

d’Entremont told the CBC over the weekend that he hadn’t been 100 percent on board with crossing the floor until his remarks were published in Politico, and Andrew Scheer and Chris Warkentin barged into his office to yell at him and call him a snake, which was the point he knew it was time to go. And frankly, that’s not a surprise, but my dudes, this did not work for Erin O’Toole when he was in the dying days of his leadership, so why do you think that bullying your caucus is going to work for you? And for Poilievre’s office to respond by saying that d’Entremont is a “liar” for “wilfully deceiving his voters, friends and colleagues” is rich coming from known liars like Poilievre and Scheer. And d’Entremont also said that it wasn’t just Poilievre, but his entire leadership team who are running the party like a frat house, which sounds about right because there are no adults in the room.

I will add that something that has come up a couple of times online but not in the media was the fact that d’Entremont has been a pro-life voter throughout his political career and time in Parliament, which was something that would have mattered in the Trudeau years, but looks like Carney has dumped (possibly because he is more devoutly Catholic than Trudeau was). That wasn’t to say that certain pro-life Liberals weren’t still in Trudeau’s caucus, likely under some kind of promise extracted from them not to vote in certain ways on those issues, but there has been no discussion as to whether any similar promise was extracted from d’Entremont, or if being resolutely pro-choice is no longer a requirement for the Liberal caucus.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-09T15:08:04.404Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Over the weekend, Russia targeted the power sub-stations to two nuclear power plants, killing seven, along with other strikes on cities like Dnipro. Ukrainian strikes have apparently disrupted power and heat in two Russian cities near the border.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A floor-crossing during the budget reveal

Posted on by

So, that was the “generational” budget, which is cutting away at the civil service, and claiming “efficiencies” in most government departments (though a few defence and security related departments, as well as Indigenous Services only faced a two percent cut), while there are plenty of those investments for resource projects. The “climate competitiveness” strategy is promising to remove the emissions cap if provinces and industry can get other things like methane emissions reductions and carbon capture implemented at scale, but considering the latter isn’t cost-effective without a sufficiently high carbon price, I’m guessing that’s going to wind up failing (and no, there is “grand bargain” because Alberta and the industry won’t respect it). The deficit is at $78 billion, which is actually smaller than Stephen Harper’s $55.6 billion deficit in 2009-10 if you adjust for today’s dollars.

Here are some highlight stories, starting with some key numbers:

  • A $2 billion “critical minerals sovereign fund” that can include equity stakes
  • A suite of new tax measures designed to help compete with the US
  • $73 billion for national defence by the end of the decade, but there are few details about how it will all happen..
  • Slashing temporary immigration numbers and freezing permanent resident intake (because that’ll help with labour shortages)
  • $150 million more for CBC, and “exploring” participation in Eurovision.
  • Using buying power to spur the development of data centres without actually funding those projects (because it’s likely a bubble).
  • Moving ahead with regulating stablecoins.
  • Oversight over open banking was moved from the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada to the Bank of Canada.
  • Ending investment transfer fees to encourage more banking competition.
  • $2.7 billion in cuts to foreign aid over four years (as the destruction of USAID has created a massive need for foreign aid, so well done there).
  • Research and Development tax incentives aren’t limited to Canadian-owned firms.
  • They lifted the tax on luxury yachts and on foreign-owned vacation homes.
  • Weakening the laws around greenwashing, because of course they are.
  • Establishing sovereign space-lift capabilities.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T21:31:12.741Z

The seemingly outsized cuts to Global Affairs Canada in Budget 2025 are hard to square with the government’s repeated call to expand and deepen Canada's international partnerships. Reinvesting in the military is welcome – but defence is just one tool of our international policy.

— Roland Paris (@rolandparis.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T22:00:30.407Z

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3m4tnilpugk2j

We're cutting $s to low-income 18 year-olds to access education, but we still have half a billion a year to make student loans interest-free for early-career 20-somethings "to help with the rent" AS DUMB AS A BAG OF HAMMERS.

— Alex Usher (@alexusherhesa.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T23:47:10.318Z

Staring at Canada's own gender-based analysis of its budget. Give you one guess at the main beneficiary of all the major spending investments….

— Lauren Dobson-Hughes (@ldobsonhughes.bsky.social) 2025-11-05T01:09:27.537Z

In pundit reaction, Heather Scoffield has a quick overview of some of the tax and investment measures. Mike Moffatt is sorely disappointed in just how little there was for the housing crisis in the budget, particularly as it puts too much focus on reducing immigration. Justin Ling notes the corporate tax cuts, and the fact that the budget doesn’t acknowledge the short-term problems associated with Trump’s gangster economics. Kevin Carmichael considers this a hybrid of Harper and Trudeau’s budgets, which winds up missing the mark as a result. Paul Wells remarks on some of the political considerations in the budget that is geared to investment when business hasn’t been keen to do so, and that there is a whole lot of downside in the budget, some of which is the fact that our chronic weaknesses of low productivity and internal barriers are an even bigger problem than they were before. Susan Delacourt says the budget misses the mark, being too vague in where the cuts will come from, and does a poor job in telling its story.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-04T22:22:02.466Z

Floor-crossing

In amidst budget being delivered, Conservative MP Chris d’Entremont went on record with Politico that he was considering crossing the floor to the Liberals, and my immediate thought was that there was some residual bitterness because he was forbidden from running to be Speaker, and to be put forward as Deputy Speaker once Francis Scarpaleggia had been voted in. But he has also seemed dejected when I’ve seen him in the Chamber of late, never wearing a tie, not participating in anything. Once this was public, I heard from a source that there was screaming happening in the opposition lobby outside of the House of Commons. d’Entremont quickly resigned from caucus, and within an hour, had formally crossed to the Liberals, who were happy to have him, particularly because he’s an affable Red Tory, and it doesn’t hurt that this completes the Liberals’ sweep of Nova Scotia. The Conservatives later put out a bitter statement (and by contrast, when Leona Allslev crossed from the Liberals to the Conservatives, Justin Trudeau wished her well). This means that the Liberals only need two more votes or abstentions to get their budget through, so we’ll see what that looks like in the days ahead.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Making his own budget shoes

Posted on by

On Budget Eve, finance minister François-Philippe Champagne summoned the media to Saint-Tite, Quebec, where he was not just buying new shoes for the budget, in that strange Canadian tradition, but he was actually helping to make them at a shoe manufacturer, which was to symbolise the importance of investing in Canadian business. His message was that there will be no surprises in the budget, which they keep describing with the term “generational investment.” (Carney has also used “austerity,” so there’s that as well).

Meanwhile, more leaks about what’s in the budget are coming out, like the cancellation of the two billion trees programme (meaning by the time the current contracts are fulfilled, it will be about one billion trees). Or the fact that they have rejected calls to increase judges’ salaries to attract more talent to the bench. There are also going to be tax changes and updates to things like the capital cost allowances, because of course there are. Here is the updated tally of what has been promised so far. Also of note is that it looks like about $3 billion was collected in counter-tariffs in the trade war with the US before most of them were lifted—but they promised to raise $20 billion as part of their election platform.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives keep making the same demands for things that are imaginary—ending supposed “hidden taxes” which are not taxes, and in some cases are regulatory regimes either for the environment or other purposes, but they’re calling them taxes because dur, taxes are bad. But the worst canard that they have been allowed to get away with scot-free is this bullshit notion that somehow, deficits are being financed by “printed money” which is driving up inflation, which is not true at all. No money has been printed, even at the height of COVID, when the Bank of Canada did briefly engage in quantitative easing to keep liquidity in the market, but that’s not printing money, and they have been engaged in quantitative tightening for at least two years now. And even more to the point, if inflation was rampant, the Bank of Canada wouldn’t have cut interest rates again, but what are facts? And Carney, as a former central banker, should be putting a stop to this kind of thing, but he refuses, and sticks to his four prepared bullet points instead. To what end? I do not understand the reluctance to challenge this economic disinfo.

The Conservatives' budgetary demands include fiction. There are no "hidden taxes" on food. The industrial carbon price doesn't apply to agriculture. There is no "food packaging tax," and plastic regulations largely exempt food packaging. The clean fuel standard "17¢" was one scenario over time. 1/2

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-03T14:31:01.939Z

And most egregious of all, nobody is printing money to pay for deficits. Nobody. There isn't even quantitative easing happening as there was during the height of the pandemic, and the Bank of Canada has been on quantitative tightening since. These are all lies that the Liberals just let fester. 2/2

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-03T14:31:01.940Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-03T23:08:02.163Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims they have advanced within Pokrovsk, but Ukraine says they continue to hold them at bay. Meanwhile, Ukrainian troops have advanced near Dobropillia, reclaiming territory. Ukrainian drones have attacked a Russian petrochemical plant in Bashkortostan.

Continue reading →