Tag Archives: Foreign Interference

Roundup: Reasons to oppose a bad judgment

Posted on by

After the federal government filed their appeal of that Federal Court decision that…strongly suggested to them to appoint more judges (because it certainly wasn’t an order), the lawyer behind that suit has filed a cross-appeal because he wants tougher language and more teeth to it, but it’s not something that the courts can really force a government to do because it’s a Crown prerogative. They have no enforcement mechanism, so I’m not sure what the lawyer here is hoping to accomplish other than to keep getting his name in the papers.

Speaking of papers, I do find it to be a problem that in both the National Post and Toronto Star stories about this cross appeal that neither of them referenced the fact that the primary reason the federal government is appealing the decision is not because it’s useless, but because it’s a complete dog’s breakfast that makes up a constitutional convention from whole cloth and then runs with it. There is plenty of commentary from constitutional scholars out there, Emmett Macfarlane’s being one of the most accessible, but this is a real issue, and no government that is the slightest bit responsible wants bad precedents sitting on the books. It’s one of the reasons why they fought the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision on compensation for Indigenous families—they were willing to pay the compensation, but the Tribunal exceeded its authority and they didn’t want that to stand lest it create a precedent (and why that was one of the points of negotiation in the settlement).

Bad precedents, if left unchallenged, create bad case law, and that creates all kinds of problems in the future. Nobody is arguing that this government doesn’t need to make faster appointments, because they absolutely do, and even they recognise that. But this was a bad decision that shouldn’t be allowed to stand.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia subjected Kyiv to intense bombardment for the third time in five days, and once again, damage and injuries were mostly from debris from intercepted missiles and drones. Russia also attacked an underground gas storage facility, at a time where there are already rolling blackouts because of attacks on power supplies, as engineers work to restore power, in particular at Kharkiv and Odesa. Meanwhile, Ukraine continues to make drone attacks on Russian refineries.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Simping for the return of Stephen Harper

Posted on by

Yesterday, former Conservative campaign manager and current media darling Fred DeLorey wrote a column for iPolitics that posited that under a Pierre Poilievre government, appointing Stephen Harper to the Cabinet post of foreign affairs would be a “bold declaration of Canada’s readiness to assume a pivotal role in shaping global affairs.” It’s a…novel…argument, and while I will admit that I haven’t read the piece because my subscription has lapsed, I wanted to make a few points regardless.

The first point is that while it is possible for a prime minister to appoint a minister who doesn’t have a seat, the convention is that they find one as soon as possible, whether in the Commons or in the Senate, because otherwise they can’t report to Parliament or sponsor legislation without needing a proxy to do it for them. Harper himself appointed Michael Fortier to the Senate in order to serve as minister of public works, and later international trade. (Fortier resigned from the Senate to run for a seat in the Commons in the next election and was soundly defeated). I find the notion of Harper being given a Senate seat to be far too ironic considering his utter disdain for the institution, and in particular its appointed nature. The alternative is asking one of Poilievre’s MPs to resign in a safe seat to run a by-election for Harper to run in, but again, I have seen zero desire on his part to get back into electoral politics. He’s also a one-man show, and the party is still very much his cult of personality, three leaders later, so I have a hard time envisioning him being a team player and not undermining Poilievre’s authority at every turn.

As for it being a “bold declaration,” I think that on the face of it, it smacks of trying to copy Rishi Sunak giving David Cameron the post in the UK government (along with a seat in the Lords), and Sunak’s government is about to be wiped out in the upcoming general election. There has also been plenty of chatter since this proposal went up over Twitter, and a lot of it is from people who still, to this day, believe that Harper is some kind of Bond villain, and that his IDU is some kind of SPECTRE. He’s not, and it’s not. The IDU is a social club for terrible people, and Harper has spent a lot of time cultivating friendships with autocrats and dictators, and has been part of the move to create permission structures for far-right parties to engage in increasingly autocratic far-right behaviour. It’s hard to think of what kind of cachet Harper is going to have on the foreign policy circuit given that he didn’t really have any foreign policy wins when he was in office. Conservatives love to recount how he allegedly told Putin to get out of Ukraine at a major summit, and look how effective that was—Putin went from occupying Crimea to launching a full-scale invasion of the rest of the country. Harper really showed him! Meanwhile, he’s spent so much time cuddling up to these terrible people and laundering their actions in pretending that they are “centre-right democratic parties,” unless that’s the kind of foreign policy that Poilievre wants to cultivate (which is possible). I just fail to see where DeLorey sees an upside in any of this.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians have been pounding Ukrainian power facilities, including a hydroelectric dam on the Dnipro River, or power supplies in Kharkiv, during which president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling on allies to summon the political will to deliver needed air defences. Russia says these are “revenge strikes” for attacks across their border, an claims these military targets including “concentrations of troops and foreign mercenaries.” Ukraine says that Russian oil refineries are legitimate targets. Ukraine is also worried that Russia could be preparing as many as 100,000 troops to make a new offensive push this summer, or to replenish depleted units.

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1771149078010765485

Continue reading →

QP: Is the PBO right or out of date?

Posted on by

In spite of the fact that they are both in town, neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present for QP today, and most of the other leaders were absent as well. Andrew Scheer led off, and after rattling off slogans, he raised the story on the cost of the prime minister’s vacation, and got increasingly breathy as he demanded an election. François-Philippe Champagne said that Scheer had become the CIO of Canada—the Chief Inaction Officer, and that he was advocating inaction on climate change and clean growth. This earned him a warning from the Speaker. Scheer then railed about people not being able to afford food and blamed the carbon levy, and again demanded an election. Gudie Hutchings got up to recount the story of a senior in her riding who tracks his expenses, and what happy that he comes out ahead with the rebates. Scheer insisted this was just false, and claimed the PBO stated otherwise, and once again demanded an election. Hutchings recounted more stories from seniors in her riding. Luc Berthold took over in French, took some swipes at the Bloc, and demanded to know what the government promised them for support. Champagne said that it was clear that the Conservatives didn’t believe in climate change while the government takes action and grows the economy. Berthold tried to call out the Bloc on the upcoming vote, and and Steven Guilbeault reminded him that they ran on climate change in the last election, and that just behind him sits a former Quebec minister who brought in Quebec’s system. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and decried how much the government says no to Quebec, Pablo Rodriguez listed things they said yes to, and that the Bloc only wants to start fights. Therrien listed more things the government said no to, including the abolition of the monarchy, and Rodriguez gave much the same reply.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and in French, decried rent increases in Montreal—which is provincial jurisdiction—and wanted something for renters in the budget, Soraya Martinez Ferrada noted the investments in different types of housing, and their agreement with Quebec. Jenny Kwan appeared by video to give the same question with a BC lens, and Martinez Ferrada gave the English version of the same talking points.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A new tone in communications? Maybe?

Posted on by

After some two years of the Conservatives rolling out three-to-five-minute disinformation videos on the regular, the Liberals have finally responded in kind, with something that has reasonable production values, snappy pace, and delivers messages to counter the Conservatives’ message with a bit of a punch at the end. One has to wonder why it took them so long, but they didn’t spare any effort in getting every single one of their MPs and proxies to blast it over their socials over the weekend.

What I will add that was fairly notable was that they didn’t rely on slogans in the video, or on entirely happy-clappy pabulum as they normally do. I’m hoping that perhaps this will finally—finally!—mark a turning point in how they approach their communications, but I’m not going to get my hopes up there either. Until proven otherwise, I suspect this may be a one-off, or Sean Fraser in particular, rather than an overall trend in how this party communicates.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile struck Mykolaiv on Sunday, killing one and wounding at least eight. Ukrainian drones damaged another oil refinery in Russia, and disrupted electricity supplies in order areas.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1768642103968485561

Continue reading →

Roundup: Premiers concern trolling on the carbon levy

Posted on by

A number of premiers have been writing letters to the prime minister, imploring him not to increase the carbon price on April 1st, citing the cost-of-living challenges that people are having. Unmentioned, of course, is the fact that the rebates are also increasing, and they’re front-end loaded, meaning the higher rebates already come into effect as the carbon levy increases, so if you pause the increase, the rebates will have already increased, which is going to cause a problem down the road for the federal books.

Nevertheless, this is largely concern trolling from the premiers, and yes, that includes Newfoundland and Labrador premier Andrew Furey, whom everyone has been making a big deal of because he’s currently the last Liberal premier standing, and he too is making the call. “Oh, just hold off on the increase while rates are still high!” they say, but rest assured, it will never be a good time to raise the price, and it will stall climate action, while the premiers mouth that they still believe in fighting climate change so long as it doesn’t cost them anything or that they don’t have to take any action, or that they’ll solve it through magical technology that hasn’t been invented yet, and never will be, especially not without adequate price signals that the carbon levy provides as it increases. Also, we’ve been down this road before with the price of oil. When it rises, people buy more fuel-efficient vehicles, and when it comes down, they go right back to buying SUVs and ridiculously oversized pick-up trucks that drive on suburban roads and never haul anything (especially because the box sizes in newer models are tiny).

If I were advising the government (and clearly, I’m not), I would insist that they hold the line on the increases, make the point about the rebates as much as possible—especially as they are delivering more to those who need it the most—because they can’t afford to show any further weakness on this file if they want to have any credibility left. They shouldn’t have caved on the home heating oil (but should have come up with a better temporary rebate for those in that particular situation), and they most especially shouldn’t have made the announcement in front of every single Atlantic MP (which was the single dumbest thing they could have done, so of course they did it). Maintaining the credibility of the programme may be its best hope for staying put, particularly when compared to all other options.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles hit two apartment buildings in Kryvyi Rih on Tuesday, killing three people. Ukraine’s security service says it broke up the largest pro-Kremlin “informational sabotage” networks it has found to date. Russia says they fought off “incursions” coming from Ukraine in the Belgorod region, while Ukraine fired drones and missiles at a major refinery in Russia, inflicting serious damage.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More lying to cover up for the lies

Posted on by

Earlier in the week, Conservative MP and justice critic Frank Caputo put out one of the party’s signature shitpost videos where he spent seven minutes talking about how he took a trip to the medium-security prison that houses notorious serial killers Paul Bernardo and Luka Magnotta, and it was replete with this theatrical outrage that the facility has a hockey rink and a tennis court. How dare they! Such “luxury”! Caputo also says he got to tour Bernardo’s cell while Bernardo was away, but that he came face-to-face with him after, and that Bernardo ask him something.

Well, it turns out that encounter didn’t actually happen. Correctional Services says that they were at opposite ends of a corridor and may have seen one another but didn’t interact. They also said that the hockey rink that Caputo was complaining about hasn’t been in service for the past couple of years, so as to dispute the notion that Bernardo is spending his days playing pick-up hockey.

Well, the Conservatives didn’t like that. Andrew Scheer accused The Canadian Press of bias for quoting the Correctional Services. Caputo claims that they denied the existence of the hockey rink, which they didn’t. And Pierre Poilievre’s press secretary accused CP of lying to cover for the government, except he was the one lying.

It’s galling just how egregious the Conservatives have lied throughout this affair—both Caputo lying on his shitpost video, and then all of the other Conservatives trying to run interference and lying about CP’s reporting. CP, the most egregious of both-sidesers in order to maintain strict neutrality in all things. But they will say and do anything to discredit the media, both to build their dystopian alternate reality, but to also condition their followers to believe absolutely anything, and to just ignore all of the cognitive dissonance. And of course, their apologists will either keep lying or keep trying to distract from the lies in order to try and whitewash the whole affair. This is the kind of thing that kills democracies, and they’re gleefully going along with it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say that they have sunk another Russian warship using unmanned sea drones.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A stunt at committee everyone fell for

Posted on by

The Conservatives, and Michael Chong in particular, pulled a stunt yesterday where they tried to call for an emergency meeting at the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics committee to study the Winnipeg Lab documents. Liberal and NDP members on the committee said that this isn’t the right committee and this isn’t an emergency, and shut it down. This was the Conservatives’ plan, so that they could take to social media and scream and caterwaul about the “cover-up coalition,” and just like they planned, virtually every single pundit and media outlet did their bidding for them.

To wit, this is that particular committee’s mandate:

“Under Standing Order 108(3)(h), the Committee’s mandate is to study matters related to reports of the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada, and the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner pursuant to the Conflict of Interest Act (matters related to the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons are studied by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs). The Committee can also study any legislation or regulation or propose initiatives that relate to access to information and privacy and to ethical standards relating to public office holders.”

This study has absolutely nothing to do with it, and while there should be some kind of parliamentary scrutiny, it belongs most likely at the Health Committee, as PHAC would fall within their remit, and possibly Public Safety and National Security, but not Ethics. The NDP think this should go to the Canada-China Relations committee, but I also find that one to be a bit of a stretch (because I also think that committee is little more than a sideshow). But again, it was wholly appropriate for the Ethics committee to shut this down, because it was only meant to be a stunt.

It’s absolutely maddening to see how many media outlets and pundits walked right into this trap and let themselves get played. The CBC, for example, both-sided it, with the headline of “Conservatives accuse,” and the Liberals pointing out this was the wrong committee halfway down the piece. The Canadian Press both-sidesed it more concisely, and didn’t provide any context about the committee. The Globe and Mail, somewhat predictably, downplayed the Liberals and NDP pointing out that this was the wrong committee, gave over plenty of space to the Conservative argument that it should be without actually checking it against the statutory remit of the committee, and privileged Michael Chong’s comments, when he is not on the committee and was 100 percent pulling a stunt.

The thing is that this keeps happening—Conservatives have been regularly proposing studies on issues that committees have no remit over (such as trying to get the Public Accounts committee to go after the Trudeau Foundation), and then crying foul when they don’t play along, and then drive social media engagement off of the faked outrage. Rules matter. Parliamentary procedure matters. It’s not a “process story” you can dismiss, it’s bad faith actors playing the media, and the media going along with it when they should know better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say they stopped a Russian advance near Avdiivka, but that Russian troops appear to be regrouping further south.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford bringing back 1890s patronage

Posted on by

Ontario premier Doug Ford made a rousing defence for his appointing two former senior staffers onto the committee tasked with appointing provincial judges, saying that it’s “democracy” for him to make “like-minded” appointments, which is like a throwback to the 1890s. It’s very true that control of patronage was one of the key reasons why Responsible Government happened in the Canadian colonies back in the 1840s, but there has been a move over decades to professionalise and de-politicise, most especially with the judiciary, and when Ford is talking about needing to appoint his people so that he can get “tough” judges and justices of the peace on the bench, that’s a warning sign that he is backsliding on democratic norms (and he has had a history of very partisan patronage appointments since the very beginning of his government). It’s not that Ford has any particular coherent ideology other than he thinks that locking people up and throwing away the key will please voters, Charter rights, or the presumption of innocence be damned.

https://twitter.com/dwjudson/status/1761064514298986702

This kind of talk undermines the justice system, because it leaves the impression that judges are acting in partisan ways, or who were appointed because of partisan leanings, which is not a feature in the Canadian legal system. And the point Judson made about contagion is because there are people on the political right who feel that they can move the goalposts of what is acceptable for political interference in institutions that should be impartial or independent—and that is a very, very big problem at a time when the political right is undermining whatever institutions they can. It’s a key feature of Orbánism, coming out of Hungary, which the right in America and Canada keeps lapping up. That’s incredibly damaging, and it needs to be called out when it happens, even if Ford isn’t doing this for the sake of becoming like Orbán, but for his own populist ends.

https://twitter.com/dwjudson/status/1761228183674712200

Meanwhile, as an example of premiers politicizing the judiciary, Quebec premier François Legault is attacking the Quebec Court of Appeal as being federally-appointed after they handed him his ass on his attempt to prevent asylum-seekers from accessing the subsidised child care system. Part of this was blasting the Parti Québécois for agreeing with the decision, accusing their leader of “prostrating himself before Ottawa.” That said, Legault is appealing the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, which is also federally-appointed, so I’m not sure why this will be any different if his logic holds. Unsurprisingly, the Quebec bar association is denouncing this, but this is exactly the kind of contagion being referred to with Ford’s comments, and how they undermine confidence in the justice system. Legault is doing it for his own purposes, and it’s a problem just as much as Ford’s comments.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians launched another drone attack against Odesa, which hit a residential building and killed one person and injured another three. Russians are also claiming that they are pushing further west after security Avdiivka. Ukraine took out one of Russia’s early warning aircraft, which is part of their air defences and of which they have very few remaining. Four Western leaders including Justin Trudeau have arrived in Kyiv to show solidarity as the war enters its third year. Ukrainian officials have launched investigations into 122,000 suspected war crimes since the beginning of the invasion, and 511 perpetrators have been identified to date. Meanwhile, Russia has been cranking up its production and refurbishment of old equipment, but there are questions as to whether quantity can outdo quality.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trying to allay diaspora concerns

Posted on by

After two diaspora groups pulled out of the foreign interference inquiry, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue released a statement yesterday outlining precautions that are being taken to protect witnesses and sensitive information, which is hoped will allay their concerns (though some of those concerns have to do with the three politicians being given standing and the ability to cross-examine other witnesses).

It should probably be noted that this was probably inevitable. David Johnston warned as much of this in recommending against a public inquiry, but hey, politics took over and here we are.

https://twitter.com/chercywong/status/1760726555259752568

Ukraine Dispatch:

There has been a drone strike in Odessa, killing three. It is hoped that examining the debris of the North Korean missiles that the Russians have acquired and are using against Ukraine will offer clues as to how they are avoiding sanctions. Here’s a look at two years of conflict through the eyes of one Ukrainian soldier who has seen it all. Here is a look at those whose relatives have gone missing in combat and their bodies not yet found. Reuters has a photo library from the first two years of the war.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1760766644995887429

Continue reading →

Roundup: The King’s cancer diagnosis

Posted on by

There were some shockwaves as news was released that King Charles III was diagnosed with cancer that was found while he was undergoing his treatment for a benign enlarged prostate. The palace insists that it’s not prostate cancer, but have been extremely vague otherwise, and the King will withdraw from public-facing duties over the course of his treatment, though he will still keep up his state duties such as dealing with the Red Boxes daily, and signing things that need to be signed in them.

https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily/status/1754565735655887066

In terms of Canadian reaction, we saw messages from the Governor General and Justin Trudeau, along with a cursory if casual statement from Pierre Poilievre, but nothing from Jagmeet Singh or from Yves-François Blanchet, though that was to be expected. Still, poor form from Singh on this silence for the sovereign of the country he insists he wants to lead.

Meanwhile, Patricia Treble has some added context to this announcement both in terms of the history of the royal family disclosing medical information, and what it is likely to mean for things like the planned upcoming royal tour of Canada, which was supposed to take place in May, but is now likely to be postponed again. Here is some added detail about the Counsellors of State which could act in his stead if he becomes incapacitated due to his illness.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Some of the soldiers fighting near Bakhmut fear that they will be there until the war is over, as mobilization legislation continues to be debated including provisions that would allow those who have been fighting over three years to de-mobilise. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed that he is considering a high-level military shake-up, which has some soldiers concerned. Journalists in Ukraine say that the country’s domestic security service has put them under illegal surveillance; president Zelenskyy has ordered an investigation.

Continue reading →