Tag Archives: Gun Control

Roundup: Ford casting blame for his own failures—bail edition

Posted on by

While the federal Conservatives are tabling a litany of “tough on crime” bills in order to make themselves look like they’re offering solutions to what they term the “warzone” on Canadian streets, Ontario premier Doug Ford decided that he didn’t want to be left out. Ford tasked his attorney general with sending an open letter to the federal government to call for a bunch of performative nonsense like mandatory minimum sentences or “three strikes” laws, most of which are unconstitutional, and is making all kinds of noises about the problems with the bail system and demanding that the federal government fix them. The problem? The biggest problems with bail are Ford’s fault.

The administration of justice is a provincial issue, and the biggest problem with bail by far is resourcing in the court system. There aren’t enough functional courthouses (especially in Peel Region), there aren’t enough clerks and other staff at these court houses to run trials, there are not enough provincially-appointed judges who handle the bulk of criminal cases, there are issues with the appointment and training of justices of the peace, who deal with nearly all bail hearings. The province isn’t hiring enough Crown attorneys to prosecute cases, and they are burnt out and nearly went on strike fairly recently because of being underpaid. Oh, and provincial remand facilities are overcrowded and they can’t keep people in custody there, and those who are will wind up getting sentencing discounts if they are convicted, because the conditions are so terrible. All of these things are on Ford. But he would rather blame the federal government. Oh, and during this all, Ford is also going to war against photo radar, because of course he is—apparently, it’s all well and good to break traffic laws (which are provincial jurisdiction), but he’s big mad about other laws being broken. Just incoherent.

This being said, I am once again absolutely livid that the media outlets who did report on this letter couldn’t be arsed to get the basics right, such as the provincial responsibilities. It was straight-up stenography from both The Canadian Press and CBC, both of whom should know better. (Neither the Star nor the National Post ran this story). So once again, Ford gets his bullshit repeated uncritically, the federal government again gets blamed, and the very real problems that are his responsibility will again go unchallenged. Utterly infuriating.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-09-21T20:02:03.613Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s attack on Zaporizhzhia early Monday morning killed three and injured at least two others.

Continue reading →

QP: Two ministers under fire

Posted on by

The PM was away on this grey and rainy Monday, off to the UN General Assembly in New York, while that meant other leaders felt they could get away with not showing up. Pierre Poilievre, however, was present, and led off in French, and he raised the story of the secretly recorded call with Gary Anandasangaree about the gun buyback. Anandasangaree said that his comments were “misguided.” Poilievre repeated the question in English, and this time, Anandasangaree talked about Canadians demanding gun control after mass shooting. Poilievre repeated phrases from the recording, and again thundered about playing politics with guns. Anandasangaree repeated his same points about the mass shootings. Poilievre said Liberals only tell the truth when they think nobody is listening, and Anandasangaree said it was a good thing it was on tape, and accused Poilievre of playing politics. Poilievre decried the entire gun buyback scheme, and this time Sean Fraser railed about Poilievre’s record in opposing gun control. Poilievre demanded the government pass their “three strikes” law instead, and Fraser pointed out their tabling the hate crimes legislation and said that more legislation is on the way.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and suggested the government was engaging in conspiracy theories with their factum to the Supreme Court. Fraser said they were working toward the national interest in protecting the constitution, and that the Supreme Court was the right forum to debate these issues. Normandin said that this should be litigated in Parliament, and Steven Guilbeault said that her assertions were misinformed, and that their factum doesn’t put forward that provinces can’t use the Notwithstanding Clause. Rhéal Fortin gave his own jab at the factum, which was similarly devoid of facts, and Guilbeault pointed to his own pride in being a Quebecker before pointing to the government’s record on supporting Quebec.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Asking for declaratory powers, not limits

Posted on by

There is a bunch of confusion and/or bad faith arguing going on around just what the federal government said in their factum to the upcoming Supreme Court of Canada hearing on the challenge of Quebec’s Law 21, which they claim is “state secularism” but is really just wholesale discrimination and racism. The reporting hasn’t been great—in fact, the National Post’s is downright misleading—because they keep describing this like it’s a reference question to the Court, which it isn’t, but rather, the argument that they’re putting forward during the existing challenge, and something that they feel the Court should address (which is how factums tend to work).

What their argument consists of is that the Court should be able to declare when a law that is protected by the Notwithstanding Clause is actually unconstitutional. They can’t strike it down, but they can weigh in and say “Yeah, this contravenes Charter rights.” They also want the Courts to be able to do this when something has been ongoing in its use of the Clause (which only lasts for five years before it needs to be renewed in legislation), and to rule on whether it may result in the “irreparable impairment” of rights, because they argue that repeated use of the Clause amounts to “indirectly amending the Constitution.” This is also not coming out of nowhere—the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal just recently ruled that they have this right when it comes to the challenge around the province’s attack on trans youth, saying that invoking the Clause should not be the last word.

Why is this important? Because the point of the five-year time-limit on the Clause is that it allows that government to be voted out before it can be renewed. Having the courts weigh in and say “Yeah, this is discrimination,” even if they can’t strike down the law, is powerful information for voters to have. And it’s absolutely democratic. But you have conservative thinkers who are trying to say that this will cause a “constitutional crisis,” or a national unity crisis if it offends Quebec or Alberta, is frankly absurd. It’s trying to give cover for attacks on minority rights and abuse of the Clause, and they should be honest about those intentions rather than trying to sow confusion and undermining the Court.

Ukraine Dispatch

An overnight Russian attack on the Kirovohrad region has partially cut power and disrupted railway operations. A top Russian commander claims they are advancing on all fronts, in contravention to Ukrainian reports. Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies say they need more resources to crack down on the “shadow economy.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: Undue back-patting for Poilievre

Posted on by

It really should not have been a surprise to anyone that Pierre Poilievre won the by-election in Battle River—Crowfoot by around 80 percent, which is why he chose that riding after all. But that won’t but an end to the back-patting about the “hard work” he put in, and so on. What I find particularly odd is this narrative that has emerged, from Jason Kenney and others, about how this somehow proved that Poilievre stuck it to the so-called “separatist” movement in the province, and exposed them for the empty shell that they are. Because I don’t see him having done that at all.

https://twitter.com/jkenney/status/1957815691299713180

This was a federal by-election and there was no real “separatist” presence, particularly when the ballot question in the riding was whether Poilievre deserved a second chance after he was defeated in his own riding. There was no actual separatist narrative being advanced, and even if there was, Poilievre basically said that they have “legitimate grievances,” which is not exactly a rousing condemnation. More to the point, those separatists are focused on the provincial level, because they know that they can wedge Danielle Smith internally within the UCP, because these are the same face-eating leopards that Jason Kenney invited into the party while he kicked out the centrist normies (and those leopards subsequently ate his face). Smith is the one giving these losers oxygen, especially as she has tried to do everything she can to ensure that they get the referendum that they’re looking for, so that she can play it to her advantage in trying to leverage concessions from the federal government. It’s going to blow up in her face eventually, but this has nothing to do with Poilievre and everything to do with Smith, so giving Poilievre any credit here is grasping.

As for Poilievre’s return to Ottawa, could legacy media be less credulous about his supposed change in tone, or his bullshit about how he’ll work with the government on “non-partisan solutions,” which in his mind is the obliteration of environmental legislation, and the other bullshit in his so-called “Canadian Sovereignty Act.” He has explicitly stated this outright. Stop pretending he’s going to act “prime ministerial” or “statesmanlike,” because he is completely incapable, nor is he willing because that doesn’t get him clicks on social media/funds in the party’s coffers.

Ukraine Dispatch

Within hours of the “peace” talks in Washington, Russia launched their biggest overnight attack of the month, with 270 drones and ten missiles, striking energy facilities in Kremenchuk and Chernihiv. But hey, they’re going to draw up options for “security guarantees” that Russia won’t agree to, because their goal is the elimination of Ukraine. (Why are we pretending otherwise?)

Continue reading →

Roundup: Going to war over the EV mandate

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre called a press conference yesterday in rural Saskatchewan to declare that he’s going to war with the government over the EV mandate, during which he said that he’s going to call it a “Carney tax” (for the nonsense reason that manufacturers that don’t meet their targets can face penalties), and he lied entirely about what the mandate does, right up to claiming that this is about killing rural and small-town life in Canada. It’s not only unhinged, but entirely indicative of the fact that Poilievre hasn’t learned a single gods damned lesson about why he lost the last election. These kinds of stunts for the sake of the attention economy aren’t exactly showing him to be credible about, well, anything.

He also once again demanded that the prime minister cancel the loan to BC Ferries for the ships they plan to get from China, because of the canola tariffs, which again, is not how this works. The prime minister can’t tell the Infrastructure Bank what they can and can’t do, because it was set up to ensure that it wasn’t ministers directing their investments. That’s the whole point of making it an arm’s-length agency. (And also, once again, no Canadian shipyards bid on this contract).

But Poilievre also decided to blame Carney for China’s bullying tactics, saying that they smell weakness. Erm, China bullies regardless. That’s why we shouldn’t be giving into their pressure tactics, because it’ll embolden them to do more again, and to do other things, like kidnapping more Canadians, and engaging in hostage diplomacy. Again, did Poilievre pay absolutely no attention for the past decade? Or is this yet more elaborate performance art for the sake of getting clicks on his social media, in the hopes that those clicks turn into gullible people opening up their wallets to him. The answer, of course, is the latter.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-08-14T14:08:08.062Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces say that they have stabilised their eastern front after that brief breakthrough by Russians earlier in the week. The latest prisoner swap with Russia returned 84 Ukrainians, many of them civilians.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More proof the carbon levy didn’t raise food prices

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre is at it again, railing about food price inflation, but lo, he can no longer blame it on the carbon levy because that was never actually the problem or the cause of food price inflation, but he certainly vilified it, and Mark Carney capitulated and allowed Poilievre’s vilification to work. Poilievre is now blaming government spending on food price inflation, which is hilariously wrong, but Carney has also capitulated to that as well and is ushering in a new wave of austerity, because why actually explain things when you can just surrender to the bullshit?

Meanwhile, here’s Andrew Leach walking you through why it wasn’t the carbon levy and never was the carbon levy.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians broke through the front lines near Dobropillia, but were quickly contained (but it’s a poor narrative for the upcoming Trump-Putin talks). Ukraine has also been regaining territory in Sumy region. President Zelenskyy says that Russia wants the remaining 30 percent of Donetsk region for a ceasefire, which they won’t give him.

Continue reading →

Roundup post: Shuffle expectations

Posted on by

It’s Cabinet Shuffle Day, and the “leaks” and PMO lines are that it will be more than 50 percent new faces, though it sounds like some of the key players—Dominic LeBlanc, Chrystia Freeland, David McGuinty, Anita Anand—are staying put. CTV had two sources tell them Freeland was out before being told that no, she’s staying. It also sounds like Sean Fraser will get back in, as it was the understanding for him running again after saying he was going to retire to spend more time with his family. One also has to wonder about Nathaniel Erskine-Smith in a similar boat, so we’ll see. New faces are supposed to include Gregor Robertson and Carlos Leitao, and you can bet that Buckly Belanger from Saskatchewan will have a role, as will either of the two Alberta MPs. (More rumours and speculation from the National Post, The Canadian Press, CBC, the Star, and the Globe and Mail).

It was also confirmed that it will return to a tiered structure, with a smaller core of ministers, with other portfolios likely being given to secretaries of state (who are subordinate to ministers) rather that ministers of state (who can have their own departments like regional development portfolios or certain agencies). This is in part where the commitment to gender parity will become apparent—will there be women leading in major portfolios, or will there be a disproportionate number of women relegated to secretaries/ministers of state? Trudeau decided to make everyone ministers to ensure that they were all equal in rank and salary, and that there was less of a “pink ghetto” effect with second-tier appointments. Carney will have to work to avoid playing into that effect (which is also an example of formal versus substantive equality.

Meanwhile, Jennifer Robson has some thoughts on the probable structure of Cabinet we’ll see.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched over 100 drones overnight after president Zelenskyy called Putin’s bluff on peace talks in Istanbul.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Letting a hockey game take precedence

Posted on by

Day twenty-four, and the announcements didn’t really matter because the only thing anyone was concerned about was the fact that tonight’s French debate was at the same time as a Montreal Canadiens hockey game, and the Bloc and NDP demanded the debate be rescheduled (but when exactly, given that it’s Easter weekend and that’s when the advance polls are open). So, the organizers and the networks agreed to change the time to 6 from 8, which means that it’ll be on at 3 for anyone out in BC. Yeah, that’s going to get viewership by francophones in the west. We are such a parochial country sometimes.

Mark Carney was in Saint-Eustache, Quebec, and announced a plan to provide more assistance for job training or retraining in certain priority areas, with some additional promises for those whose jobs are affected by the tariffs. Carney will have a photo op in Montreal around noon before the debate, now two hours earlier.

Pierre Poilievre was in Montreal, and he announced plans to crack down on people who scam seniors, which means forcing phone companies and banks to have mandatory “scam detection systems,” which sounds a bit like a magic wand given that the field is constantly changing to keep one step ahead. I also fail to see what tougher penalties will do given that the vast majority of these scams operate overseas. Poilievre will hold a press conference this morning, in advance of the debate.

Do we need to have a conversation about why those prices are up? -Beef continues to rise because drought has meant culling herds, which raises prices-Eggs are up because we have bird flu outbreaks, albeit not as bad as the US-That fruit figure is mostly oranges, because the FL crop was devastated

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-15T19:02:03.936Z

Are the Conservatives planning to do anything about climate change that has meant more droughts on the prairies? Nope. Part of what devastated the Floria orange crop were hurricanes, which are exacerbated by climate change. Again, do they want to do anything about that? Nope.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-15T19:02:03.937Z

Now, have the Liberals pointed any of this out? Of course not. They're too busy patting themselves on the back for killing the consumer carbon levy, and pretending that it was imposed by some mysterious force. We have real issues to discuss in this election, but they're not being discussed.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-15T19:02:03.938Z

Jagmeet Singh was also in Montreal, where he promised to restore the changes to the capital gains inclusion rate, under the rubric of making the ultra-wealthy pay the price, and promising to use these revenues to fund all of his promises (good luck with that magical money tree), but didn’t actually spell out the actual issue of tax arbitrage and fairness for all different types of capital gains to be taxed at the same rate. Singh’s only engagement today is the debate.

In other campaign news, Poilievre is now saying there’s no timeline for defunding CBC after previously saying he wants to do so as soon as possible. Carney says that he wants the F-35 review to go swiftly, but DND is still establishing the parameters of said exercise. And the White House confirmed that annexation talk is still on the president’s mind.

This election is *really* testing my limit.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-04-15T21:35:48.964Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones hit homes on Odesa overnight, injuring at least three. This after NATO secretary general Mark Rutte was in Odesa to reaffirm “unwavering” support for Ukraine. Meanwhile, life in Sumy is carrying on after Sunday’s deadly attacks.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1912116063560495426

Continue reading →

Roundup: Moving onto the dairy front

Posted on by

The trade war seemed slightly more stable yesterday as the reprieve on most goods seemed to be holding, but it took no time at all for Trump to start musing about new, invented grievances and irritants. The latest is the dairy sector, for which there are limits as to how much the US can export to Canada tariff-free, but again, Trump has blown this out of proportion in his own mind. And as a result, he threatened 250 percent tariffs on Canadian dairy…but we don’t really export to them, certainly not liquid milk in large part because of the Supply Management system, so that would have very little impact on our industry.

The thing that did have people worried was fresh news out of the New York Times that Trump’s annexation talk has moved into threats about tearing up boundary treaties, particularly around things like the Great Lakes and cross-border river systems, and moving into things like shared military operations and NORAD, and after the floated threats about the Five Eyes a couple of weeks ago, it’s hard to ignore any of these threats, and why there needs to be a very concerted effort by the government to make plans for how we’re going to deal with this once it happens, because we know that nothing is off the table with Trump any longer.

I’m generally not into White House drama, but following it becomes more necessary than I’d like to admit these days. To that end, here is a look at an explosive meeting in the Cabinet room where several cabinet secretaries unloaded on Elon Musk, which wound up reining him in (somewhat, for now). But oh, man, the absolute stupidity of what is happening in that administration is boggling. As well, here’s a look at how framing the Trump presidency through the lens of reality television helps to make some of the chaos make a little more sense.

https://twitter.com/josheakle/status/1898212255604568305

Ukraine Dispatch

After the US cut off military aid, including access to satellite imagery for Ukraine, Russia launched a major missile attack, which targeted energy infrastructure, killed four in the eastern town of Dobropillia, while another five died in attacks in the Donetsk region. The Ukrainian forces within Kursk region appear to be nearly surrounded by Russians, though there have been counteroffensives in the past few days. Ukrainian drones did attack the Kirishi refinery.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Caretaker doesn’t apply

Posted on by

Sometimes, the pundit class in this country boggles me. Case in point—the National Post’s John Ivison wrote yesterday that the announcement about moving ahead with high-speed rail was “ignoring the caretaker convention,” (and because this is Ivison, the words “in this country” are used loosely as he is currently filing from Costa Rica). I get that Ivison wants to dump on Trudeau for making a big, flashy announcement as he’s on his way out the door, but the thing is, the caretaker convention doesn’t apply. The only time that the convention does apply is when Parliament is dissolved for an election (and Philippe Lagassé can explain this all to you here).

Part of the problem is that legacy media in this country does not know how to deal with the current political situation, where Trudeau has signalled his intention to resign, but remains in power until his successor is chosen. This is perfectly legitimate in a Westminster system like ours, especially as Trudeau won a series of confidence votes before Parliament rose for the winter break, and before his advice to the Governor General to prorogue. Since then, virtually every single pundit and editorial writer has been wringing their hands, writing things like “lame-duck,” or “leaderless,” or “vacuum,” when none of this is actually true, and it breaks their brains that the government is capable of operating and responding to Trump and his predations without Parliament currently sitting, as though Parliament would have anything in particular to do in this current situation other than take-note debates or unanimous consent motions. Trudeau is personally able to exercise the full suite of his powers as prime minister right up until the moment he does officially resign and turn the keys over to his successor. This is neither illegitimate nor illegal, and the long-time observers of our political scene should know that.

What is particularly galling is that long-time Ottawa columnists don’t understand these very basics. Ivison used to be the Post’s Ottawa bureau chief, for fuck’s sake. He should have a basic understanding of the difference between prorogation and dissolution, and when the caretaker convention should apply. He’s been writing about Canadian politics since the birth of the Post, and was writing about UK politics before that. This is basic civics. And it’s not just him, even though he is today’s object lesson. We have a real problem when the people we are supposed to turn to for help in putting the news into context can’t be arsed to get the basic facts right, so long as they get to grind their ideological axes.

Ukraine Dispatch

Tens of thousands of people in Odesa remain without power after successive Russian attacks, while Russia claims to have taken back a “huge” chunk of Kursk region in Russia. The EU has been coming up with a plan to manufacture and send more arms to Ukraine.

Continue reading →