Roundup: The grifters make nice for the cameras

The first part of the grifter convoy arrived in Ottawa yesterday, probably 80 trucks in total, and they largely blocked the street in front of Parliament Hill and made a bunch of noise, but that was it so far. Much of the day appeared to be devoted PR—the organizers swearing up and down that they wanted this to be peaceful, engaging with the police to that effect, who are on the lookout for “lone wolves,” telling reporters on the scene the fiction that they were frustrated with vaccine mandates (until you scratched the surface, and they insist that they are tired of the “tyranny” of the current “dictator” Justin Trudeau, whom you will all recall just won a free and fair election).

It’s all bullshit, however. All of it. This whole thing was organized by extremists, some of whom have ties to the Sons of Odin. If anyone with “genuine concerns” is really along for the ride, it’s because they’re a hapless moron who can’t do their due diligence before they got swept up into the grift. We don’t know where a lot of the money collected by the GoFundMe is coming from, but it’s a good bet it’s not all domestic—especially as this has been picked up by agitators in the American media ecosystem, who are seeing this as some kind of mobilisation effort (while repeating the bizarre falsehood that this is somehow 50,000 trucks and 1.4 million people headed to Ottawa, which defies credulity). They have a stated aim of overturning democracy and eliminating all public health orders (never mind that 99 percent of them are provincial or municipal), and it’s never going to happen because it’s impossible, but nevertheless, there are more and more Conservative MPs who keep giving them legitimacy while trying to play cute and insisting that they denounce extremism, even though the gods damned extremists are behind it. Erin O’Toole went so far as to stage a photo op with a supposed trucker family while in an RCAF jacket, which is a pretty dubious statement to be making considering this convoy’s goal is to overturn democracy, which includes him.

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1487211790765338628

Meanwhile, Matt Gurney wonders how we deal with the impossible task of marginalizing the extremists, and proposes we actually start fixing the things that can be fixed to show that the system can work. (Not mentioned: Calling out the opportunists who feed the extremists’ irrational anger and the politicians who court them because they think they can use their energy and dollars). Colin Horgan, on the other hand, speaks for all of our weariness, as we are subjected to these conspiracy theorists who are all playing hero in their own minds, and believing their own juvenile bullshit, while even those with “genuine concerns” only make it worse by feeding into it all the same.

Continue reading

Roundup: Holland breaks out the passive-aggressive open letter tactics

The drama over the Winnipeg Lab documents took another turn yesterday as Government House Leader Mark Holland sent a four-page open letter to the Conservative House Leader, urging him to reconsider rejecting the government’s offer to create a new ad hoc panel to have the documents vetted behind closed doors with a panel of three former judges to adjudicate any disputes. In said letter, Holland name-checks nearly every national security and intelligence expert who has weighed in on the topic of the past few weeks, with a couple of exceptions.

While Holland didn’t name Philippe Lagassé’s piece, it’s fairly irrelevant to the concerns at hand. Whether NSICOP gets turned into a full-blown committee or not, it won’t make a material difference because the Conservatives’ objections are not based on any particular matter of principle or specific objection. As I point out in my column, they are merely acting in bad faith in order to be theatrical and try and score points by winking to conspiracy theories in order to paint the picture that the government is hiding something for the benefit of the Chinese, or some other such nonsense.

I don’t expect Holland’s letter to do anything other than look passive-aggressive and ham-fisted as the issue continues to fester—not that there is an order to produce documents any longer, and the committee that made said order no longer exists either (though O’Toole has been under pressure to restore it, as though it actually did anything meaningful other than be yet another dog and pony show). We’ll see if the other two opposition parties come to some kind of agreement, but so far this issue continues to just make everyone look like our Parliament is amateur hour. Which it kind of is.

Continue reading

Roundup: The desperate flailing of provincial governments

We are at a stage of the pandemic when we are seeing a number of provincial governments reach the stage of just flailing. Saskatchewan is a basket case where the premier, who has COVID (and found this out after giving a maskless press conference) refuses to institute lockdown measures so that businesses forced to close because their staff are all sick can’t access federal benefits. In Quebec, that’s François Legault spit-balling major policy with no clue about implementation, and trying to distract from the fact that his polling numbers are plummeting as a result of the latest round of curfews that have been ineffective at curbing spread, as the province’s death rate continues to be the highest in the country (in part because of the horrific first wave continues to skew numbers)—and it’s an election year. It’s also an election year in Ontario, much sooner than in Quebec, and lo, we’ve seen a spate of resignations, many of the MPPs not even bothering to wait for the spring election. Case in point was Doug Ford’s long-term care minister, who resigned abruptly, and plans to resign his seat next month. And because Ford is flailing (on top of being an incompetent murderclown), the portfolio has been handed to Paul Calandra. No, seriously. Paul gods damned Calandra, who was the clownish apologist for Stephen Harper’s government, whose job was to stand up and obfuscate. And he’s now in charge of reforming Ontario’s long-term care system.

Meanwhile, Ford has sent his MPPs to use misleading charts to “prove” that Ontario is doing pretty well, which it’s not. But lying to cover up their incompetence is how his government operates, and they’re only going to get worse, the more desperate they get as the election looms ever closer.

https://twitter.com/HNHughson/status/1482041262639353859

https://twitter.com/HNHughson/status/1482053619700666370

Continue reading

Roundup: Your year-end reminder about Basic Income

Because there is some Basic Income nonsense floating around once again—an NDP private members’ bill, some Senate initiatives, and now of course, some national columnists, so it’s time once again to remind you that economist Lindsay Tedds was a contributor to the BC Basic Income study, and they found pretty conclusively that Basic Income won’t solve the right problems, will create new ones, and that improving existing supports is the best way to go forward. Here’s Tedds reminding us of her findings:

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1474202800833785856

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1474204448905842688

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1474205459095556096

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1474212307982958593

Programming Note: I’m taking the rest of the year off from blogging and video/Patreon content. My Loonie Politics columns will continue on their usual schedule, but otherwise I am taking some very needed time off. (The burnout is real). Thanks for reading, and I’ll see you in 2022.

Continue reading

QP: Deception about deflation

For the final Question Period of 2021—which was still undetermined as things got underway, as the House Leaders were engaged in a game of chicken—neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, but the latter would appear virtually. Erin O’Toole led off, script in front of him, and he immediately started off with a lie about deflation, which did happen, and he was presuming it to be a good thing because it would lower prices, when in fact it would have led to a spiral that turned into a depression as businesses couldn’t service their debts. Chrystia Freeland, by video, called this out as misinformation, and noted that Stephen Poloz cited that the government’s actions averted a second Great Depression. O’Toole railed about Freeland’s alleged misinformation during the election campaign and compared her to Donald Trump, and Freeland called O’Toole the leader of flip-flops, and noted that in the election the Conservatives promised even more spending while they were currently railing against it, and that a consistent position might be nice. O’Toole repeated his first question in French, and Freeland repeated the Poloz comments in French. John Barlow got up and railed about the export ban on PEI potatoes and wondered why the agriculture minister was not currently in Washington resolving the situation. Freeland assured him the federal government was working to resolve if and noted she was next to the prime minister when he raised it with Biden, while Conservatives advocate capitulation. Barlow insisted that this has basically destroyed PEI, and Freeland dismissed this as scaremongering, and reassured farmers they were working on it like they did with previous disputes they won on.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and blamed the Quebec teacher who was reassigned for wearing a hijab, railing that she knowingly broke the law and saying otherwise was Quebec bashing. Freeland calmly recited that they stand with Quebeckers who stand up for individual rights and freedoms. Therrien railed that mayors are funding court challenges, accusing them of not understanding secularism or democracy, and Freeland gave some fairly disarming reassurances that the federal government works well with Quebec and the Bloc shouldn’t pick fights.

Peter Julian rose for the Bloc, and in French, he worried that omicron could lead to lockdowns with no supports, to which Freeland made a pitch for MPs to pass Bill C-2 to provide necessary supports. Julian shouted the same question again in English, and Freeland repeated her response in the other official language. 

Continue reading

Roundup: The inflation stats and what’s behind them

Rounding out the big economic week was the Consumer Price Index report yesterday (made all the more difficult because Statistics Canada’s website is largely offline as they seal the cyber-vulnerability identified on Friday). The top line figure is that inflation remains at 4.7 percent for a second month in a row, meaning that it hasn’t accelerated into the much higher territory that places like the US are sitting at, and several of the price indicators were flat, which could mean that some prices are starting to stabilise. But it’s still early days, though when you drill down into the numbers, there are really three things that are driving inflation: gasoline, housing costs, and meat.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1471125492568838152

To be clear, as noted by StatsCan:

  • Oil production continues to remain below pre-pandemic levels though global demand has increased
  • Prices for fresh or frozen beef increased 15.4% year over year in November. Poor crop yields resulting from unfavourable weather conditions have made it more expensive for farmers to feed their livestock, in turn raising prices for consumers

https://twitter.com/stephen_tapp/status/1471120984702922757

https://twitter.com/stephen_tapp/status/1471172792351657992

So what is the takeaway here? That these are issues that the federal government has very little control over, and that the Bank of Canada raising interest rates won’t tackle either. And yet, we keep hearing demands for “concrete action” from the federal government on this, as though they could wave a want to fix it. Or if not a magic wand, then wage and price controls? Do we need to bring “Zap, you’re frozen!” out of retirement?

Continue reading

QP: A scattershot of unfocused sound and fury

While both Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland were in town and had press events earlier in the morning, neither were present for QP, but neither were any other leader. Candice Bergen led off, script on her mini-lectern, and she demanded a personal apology from Harjit Sajjan for not dealing with sexual misconduct in the Canadian Forces, and Anita Anand, fresh from giving the official apology, stated that said apology was one example of the steps they were taking to work toward a place where there was a safe workplace in the Forces. Bergen then pivoted to the planned CPP premium increase, declaring that it would kill small businesses. Randy Boissonnault shrugged that the Conservatives don’t like the CPP, and he praised it. Bergen accused the government of hating small businesses, and Boissonnault praised the strong economic recovery. Gérard Deltell took over in French to also worry about the CPP increases, and Boisonnault repeated praise for the CPP in French. Deltell specifically raised tourism and hospitality sectors, and demanded the government split Bill C-2 to immediately pass those supports, and Boissonault didn’t bite, and wanted support for the whole bill.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and declared that Bill 21 was democratically passed, and declared that it doesn’t target anyone, to which David Lametti said that nobody should lose their job for wearing a hijab. Therrien demanded that the government declare it would not support court challenges, and Lametti said that there are currently court cases being fought in the province.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and in French, demanded an immediate solution to the clawbacks of GIS payments. Kamal Khera declared that they were working on it. Rachel Blaney took over in English to declare that seniors were homeless because of these clawbacks, and Khera read some good news talking points about supports for seniors before repeating that they were working on the clawback issue.

Continue reading

Roundup: Swift passage, but not for the better

In another surprising move, the Senate passed the bill to ban conversion therapy at all stages yesterday, with no committee study, meaning that it only needs royal assent now, which can happen at any time. But while this is a relief to many, it’s also a tad irresponsible.

The lack of study of the current bill in the House of Commons was a political gambit designed to keep the Conservatives from being trapped by their own social conservative members, and to avoid giving any more media clips about people supposedly overcoming “lesbian activity” and so on. The fact that this version of the bill is different from the one that passed the Commons in the previous parliament is relevant, and there are changes that deserved some actual scrutiny because there were live constitutional questions around them (and yes, I asked the minister about it during the press conference, and I asked other questions about the bill during the not-for-attribution technical briefing, but those are not on the parliamentary record). And yes, this matters because the Senate should have done the work that MPs opted not to do out of political expediency. That’s one of the reasons why the Senate is the chamber of “sober second though”—because they don’t have to deal with the political repercussions and ramifications when the politics wins out in the Commons.

Unfortunately, politics also won out in the Senate (which should be an indictment of its supposed more “independent” existence these days). Acting Conservative leader in the Senate, Senator Leo Housakos, in his speech to give the bill swift passage, said that this issue shouldn’t be made into a political wedge like the Liberals were doing. Which is ironic because it wasn’t the Liberals who were holding up the bill previously by slow-walking it, refusing to let debate collapse, and by putting up speaker after speaker to offer the same concern trolling. That wasn’t the Liberals being political—it was 100 percent on the Conservatives for that, and now they’re trying to shift that blame. Yes, passing this bill at all stages was the expedient thing to do, but from a process and a parliamentary perspective, it was not the right thing to do, and it’s going to make the courts’ jobs that much harder when this inevitably gets challenged and they have little on the record to go by.

Continue reading

Roundup: A newer, worse compromise

The Speaker engaged in a bit of procedural housekeeping after Question Period yesterday, and ruled that the Board of Internal Economy’s vote on a vaccine mandate for MPs in the House of Commons was in fact a violation of MPs’ privileges—which most of us expected, because that’s pretty much what it was. It’s a moot point, however, because the motion passed that re-authorized hybrid sittings included the vaccine mandate for the Chamber, so there remains a vaccine mandate regardless of this outcome. It sounds like the Conservatives are satisfied with this ruling in that it doesn’t create a precedent for expanding the BoIE’s powers, so that’s not necessarily a bad thing in all.

At the same time, the government house leader proposed a compromise for the Winnipeg Lab documents, which had been floated before dissolution but is back on the table now—which is procedurally dumb because the committee that requested those documents is non-existent, as is the order to produce those documents. If said committee were reinstated and they vote on a new motion to produce documents, then the government should have floated this compromise then, but no, they’re going ahead with it unbidden, which is silly. This compromise would see the creation of a new committee that would be advised by a panel of three former senior judges who would vet materials—but again, this is stupid.

The compromise was the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. That was the point. It was the right venue for these documents to go to, and that’s where those documents were sent, before the Conservatives decided that theatre was more important (and the other two parties decided that embarrassing the government was also the point). All this is doing is muddying the waters even further, duplicating efforts, and making MPs even less trustworthy to Canadian security and intelligence services. Because our MPs are not interested in actual oversight or accountability—they are only interested in theatre, and that diminishes our Parliament for everyone.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1466554090452762626

Continue reading

Roundup: A plan hatched in caucus

Events yesterday bring to mind the 76th Rule of Acquisition, which states “Every once in a while, declare peace. It confuses the hell out of your enemies.” It almost feels like that was the tactic at play when the Conservatives decided to move a motion regarding Bill C-4—the conversion therapy ban— that would pass it at all stages. It did not receive any objections, and it went through, so the bill sailed through the House of Commons with no debate, and is now off to the Senate.

As I outline in my forthcoming Xtra column, the truth is that this wasn’t about confusing their enemies – it was about trying to take the heat off of Erin O’Toole and the social conservatives in caucus. After O’Toole’s office told the media that it would be a free vote, like it had been the last time around. Nine of those MPs didn’t survive their election, and O’Toole was being called a hypocrite for labelling himself an ally of the queer community without doing anything meaningful on proving it, like whipping his caucus so that they wouldn’t vote against the rights he said he respected. Thus, a plan was hatched in their caucus meeting where O’Toole basically laid down the law and said this was the route they were going to go, so that they could put this behind them.

I will fully admit that I didn’t expect things to turn out this way. The Xtra column was originally written to say that I expected them to drag out the debate on this bill again because it removed the loopholes around “consenting adults,” which many of the Conservatives were insisting on focusing on given how they couched their support for the ban under the weasel words of “coercive conversion therapy” instead of all forms, and a number of their MPs praised “counselling” that helped constituents deal with same-sex attraction of “lesbian activity.” I’m a little surprised that O’Toole exerted his authority on this particular bill given how much pressure his leadership is under – but there were also a lot of sour faces when the motion passed, and plenty of MPs who resolutely sat down and did not participate in the standing ovation that others in the caucus were visibly seen to participate in (chief among them former leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis). So I had to rewrite part of the column to reflect this change—even though it was a welcome change. But let’s not kid ourselves. This wasn’t a magnanimous gesture or one that showed true allyship—it was a pretty cynical ploy to avoid a recorded vote and further embarrassment of the party.

Continue reading