Tag Archives: Healthcare

QP: Justin Trudeau with a better LinkedIn account?

Posted on by

The PM was off to Mirabel for an aerospace announcement, while back in the House of Commons, Pierre Poilievre was absent, leaving it to Sandra Cobena to lead off, complaining about the deficit as a way to demand the government cut all gas taxes. Wayne Long got up to recite the growth rates and the fact that wages are outpacing inflation. Cobena listed supposed scandals, before demanding the gas tax cut again. Steven MacKinnon got up to demand a list of programmes the Conservatives want got cut which they consider “inflationary spending.” Andrew Lawton took over to list more examples of supposed waste, and MacKinnon congratulated him on the number of empty slogans in a single question. Lawton retorted on the record of hot air from a transport minister, and tried the same again with some emphasis on their mocking the space launch facility lease. David McGuinty took this one, and he praised sovereign space launch capabilities. Dominique Vien took over in French to raise the issue of costs of food on the prime minister’s plane, and McGuinty turned this around that when talking about planes, the prime minister was in Mirabel to announce the largest aerospace order in Canadian history. Vien demanded gas taxes cuts, to which Joël Lightbound listed tax cuts they have already made, along with other benefit programmes, and the trade surplus recorded in March.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she demanded a wage subsidy for firms affected by the new U.S. tariffs, and MacKinnon reminded her of the supports they announced this week before patting himself on the back for the record airplane order again. Normandin was not satisfied, and again demanded a wage subsidy, and MacKinnon repeated the same response, and added that the Bloc should have offered congratulations for the order. Gabriel Ste-Marie took over to ask the same again, and Lightbound repeated that they are always there to support workers.

Continue reading →

QP: The magic of balanced budgets

Posted on by

The PM was absent once again, off to Oakville to tout his plan to invest in the skilled trades, while back in the House of Commons, the Conservatives had a Supply Day where their motion was on denouncing the “sovereign wealth fund” plan. With that in mind, Pierre Poilievre was also absent, leaving it up to Melissa Lantsman to lead off, reciting the scripts about the so-called “credit card” budget and debt servicing charges, and wondered when the government would stop. Patty Hajdu wondered if their support for skilled trades was “inflationary spending” and quoted the building trades unions. Lantsman said the government debts were “killing” Canadians, and Hajdu again listed all of those skilled trades who were being supported by the government. Andrew Scheer took over, and he also read the same lines, added that the deficit was double Justin Trudeau’s, and said some nonsense about inflation. John Zerucelli got up to note that the Conservatives haven’t talked about workers, and then read some quotes from building trades unions. Scheer obliged and said that workers were tired of having no spending power, and quote a Globe and Mail editorial to make his point. Gregor Robertson got up to say the Conservatives never want to talk about affordable housing, and how those new tradespeople would help build it. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French, and he quoted another columnist who decried the lack of fiscal discipline in the spring update. Mélanie Joly said that she was flabbergasted that the Conservatives don’t take the tariff war seriously. Paul-Hus tried again, and Joly defended the social safety net for when Canadian need it.

Yves Perron led for the Bloc, and he decried that there was no support for more businesses affected by the tariff changes while oil companies were getting handouts. Julie Dabrusin praised their strategies for electric vehicles and clean energy—which wasn’t the question. Perron then worried that the was no added support for the media or pensioners unlike oil company. Joly was incredulous as those talking points, and said that she was just in contact with the Quebec finance minister. Patrick Bonin denounced the tax credit for enhanced oil recovery in the spring update, and Dabrusin got back up to praise the nature strategy in the update, which again was not the question.

Continue reading →

QP: “Half-measures” on gas taxes

Posted on by

While the PM was meeting with the president of Finland, Question Period got underway without him, in spite of the fact that he could have used it to take a victory lap after last night’s by-elections wins. Pierre Poilievre was also not present, leaving it up to Andrew Scheer to led off, and just like their Supply Day motion, he demand the government cut all gas taxes, not just the excise tax (even though the clean fuel standard is not a tax or a charge in any way). François-Philippe Champagne stood up go proclaim today’s “good news”—that the IMF projects Canada to have the second-fastest growing economy in the G7, and that they have already announced the suspension of the fuel excise tax. Scheer insisted this was just a half-measure, to which Tim Hodgson stood up to praise the excise tax pause along side their other affordability measures. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to make the same demand, and Champagne repeated his same response en français. Paul-Hus listed the other “taxes” they wanted cut, not all of which are taxes, and Joël Lightbound stood up to pat himself on the back for all of their affordability measures. John Barlow took over and returned to English to continue to decry just how much of a half-measure this was, to which Steven MacKinnon praised not only pause in the excise tax, but that it also applies to jet fuel on domestic flights. Barlow hit back on their hypocrisy over this given they used to decry how this would make the planet burn, but again demanded all taxes on gas be cut, which would increase consumption even More. Heath MacDonald praised how much this pause would help farmers.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she decried how much the allocation of funding for Francophone news was reduced after Corus got access to the regional fund. Marc Miller praised their supports for French-language media. Normandin said that the digital services tax could funded all of these outlets, and Miller reiterated that they were looking at more options. Martin Champoux repeated the same question once again, and Miller repeated his same response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The dumb mistake of not planning to run for a seat

Posted on by

We are less than a week away from the NDP leadership race, and once again, we’re hearing incredibly dumb things like the fact that the four candidates who don’t have a seat saying that they won’t be in any hurry to try and get one, never mind that there will soon be a vacancy in Beaches—East York (when Nate Erskine-Smith makes the jump to provincial politics), and it’s a progressive Toronto riding that should be something the NDP could hope to actually win if they tried.

I cannot stress enough that getting a seat at the earliest opportunity is critically important, and we have seen plenty of examples of what happens when a leader doesn’t get a seat. Jagmeet Singh refused for the first year, because he wanted to run in Brampton, and figured that he could just show up for caucus meetings on Wednesdays, and hold a scrum in the Foyer, and that would be just fine, but it wasn’t. He was quickly made irrelevant in the national public discourse, and it wasn’t until he could get a seat—swallowing his pride to run in Burnaby instead—and be in Question Period daily that he at all filtered into the national consciousness and was a relevant player. Likewise, Bonnie Crombie, Ontario Liberal leader, didn’t run for a seat at the earliest opportunity and was irrelevant by the time the election rolled around and just failed utterly. Having a seat matters, and it boggles the mind that nobody understands that.

Meanwhile, it has been noted that this is the first NDP leadership race in well over a generation where there is actual disagreement between the candidates, particularly with Avi Lewis and the rest. And I think it’s more than just different visions, but different tones where Lewis fails to grasp that his tone in the past cost the party seats in parts of the country. And I get that you have pollsters saying that the party shouldn’t discount the fact that there is an audience for Lewis’ message, but I would also point out that much of that message is geared toward extremely online American Democrat fans, where the policy proposals are largely irrelevant to the circumstances in this country, or at least broad swaths of it. It’s somewhat hilarious that there is an absolute blindness to this fact while they chase those votes, ignoring the readily available votes that could be on the table if they actually listened to the people who are supposed to make up their voter base.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-20T22:56:01.423Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack on the Zaporizhzhia region killed four, while power infrastructure was knocked out further north.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Do something about privatization!

Posted on by

If there is something I am getting mighty tired of, it’s the constant demands by certain healthcare groups that the federal government needs to stop in and “do something” about creeping provincial privatisation, and most especially Alberta’s proposed legislation on essentially creating a two-tiered system. Yesterday the demand came from community leaders in PEI who are afraid that Alberta will poach their doctors. To all of them, I ask just what exactly they think the federal government should do, and to be specific.

I am getting so tired of these."Ottawa must intervene!"How? Be specific. The Canada Health Act doesn't just the federal government swoop in and take over, or give them the power to stop a province doing something you don't like. At most, it lets them claw back funding on a dollar-for-dollar basis.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-17T14:20:41.917Z

The thing is, this is provincial jurisdiction. The federal government can’t just swoop in and overrule them. The Canada Health Act doesn’t work like that. It is a funding agreement that if provinces abide by the five conditions laid out, then they get federal dollars, and if they don’t, those dollars get clawed back. And every year, Health Canada provides a report on provincial compliance and that includes lists of clawbacks, which are dollar-for-dollar what people get charged inappropriately. But that’s the extent of their powers. And in spite of what certain people (and certain journalists most especially) may think, a funding agreement does not make it “shared jurisdiction.” It’s fully provincial jurisdiction, and the federal government has conditions on their funding. That’s it.

So, while the Canadian Health Coalition may keep having press conferences and rallies in Ottawa, it won’t do any good. Their call to action for the federal government on Alberta is basically 1) Conduct a compliance review for Alberta which, again, already happens every year; 2) Urge the Alberta government to “pause implementation” of their legislation; and 3) use the penalties available to them, which again, they already do. Wow. Do what you’re already doing and urge Alberta not do go ahead. Wow. So effective! Meanwhile, the place they’re not rallying day in and day out is in front of the Alberta legislature, and everywhere Danielle Smith goes, even though that’s where the pressure needs to be applied. The federal government is not the provinces’ daddy, and it can’t send bad premiers to bed with no dinner if they misbehave. That’s not how the constitution works, and people need to grow up and hold their own premiers to account.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack damaged port and energy infrastructure in Odesa. Russia claims to have taken villages in Sumy and Donetsk, which Ukraine has not confirmed. President Zelenskyy was in London to meet with Keir Starmer about continued support for Ukraine; he also met with the King while there.

Continue reading →

QP: Back to the housing jabs

Posted on by

The PM was absent, presumably on his way to Tumbler Ridge, BC, while Pierre Poilievre was also absent. That left it up to Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he led off by reiterating condolences for Tumbler Ridge, and asked for an update as to supports being provided. Steven MacKinnon read a statement about their own condolences, and said that at the invitation of the mayor, the prime minister would be there on Friday and that he also invited other party leaders to join him. Scheer thanked him, and then launched into his denunciation into the government’s housing record and demanded the government eliminate the GST on all new homes. Jennifer McKelvie responded with praise for the Building Canada Homes Act before the House currently. Scheer then denounced the state of the auto sector and demanded the government adopt the Conservatives’ plan of removing the tax on all Canadian-made vehicles. Joly first gave her condolences, before reminding him the subsidies are for Canadians. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to read the same script in l’autre langue officiel, and Joly reminded him that their auto strategy is about ensuring the sector is still viable in the decades to come. Paul-Hus then blamed increased immigration for making housing unattainable in Quebec City, and Caroline Desrochers read a statement praising their housing programmes. Paul-Hus tried again, and Desrochers read a script about how the Conservatives only have slogans.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she once again asked about the new pension software, and once again, Stephanie McLean read a statement saying that the project was under budget and that seven million seniors are getting their cheques on time, and to forward any names of anyone affected. Normandin was theatrically outraged that there are 85,000 people not getting payments and demanded a commission of inquiry. Patty Hajdu read a statement about the modernization and that any unresolved cases need to contact the government. Sébastien Lemire mocked the answer that the project was on budget, and got a warning from the Speaker. Hajdu offered him a briefing on the system and stated that the ability for people to apply online relieves the burden on the department.

Continue reading →

QP: Ignoring the point of a floating dollar

Posted on by

The PM was present today for the only time this week, as was Pierre Poilievre and the other leaders. Poilievre led off in French, and he worried that last week, Mark Carney said that food prices were high because of the low dollar, and he insisted that Carney needs to answer for that weak dollar. Carney said that the value of the dollar is rising, and that they are working to build big things. Poilievre insisted that Carney was only just answering in slogans and demanded an answer. Carney said that there is a lag in part because the Conservatives are obstructing their legislation. Poilievre switched so English to raise their Supply Day motion, and accused the government of “obstructing” said motion that would seek to deny anyone accused of serious crimes of claiming asylum (amongst other things), and Carney took this as an opportunity to talk about the Conservatives obstructing numerous bills. Poilievre said the government was obstructing their own bills, and then read their motion again. Carney insisted that they are “taking control” of immigration and that asylum claims are down, and there are also trying to tighten bail laws. Poilievre pointed again, this time to his scripts about subsidies for “American-made” EVs and wanted all Canadian-made vehicles to be made tax-free instead. Carney praised their auto strategy in collaboration with the provinces. Poilievre tried again with added bombast, and suggested he listen to the sector or the conservative premier of Ontario about the value of their auto strategy. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and raised the Davos speech, and wondered why, if the U.S. is not a reliable contract, that they would be pursuing the F-35 deal. Carney said that wasn’t in the speech, and that the government was making some expenditures to keep their options open. Blanchet talked around a little before getting to the issue of the Gordie Howe Bridge, and Carney repeated what he told the media earlier about what he told Trump about the facts of the bridge. Blanchet wondered why the government was not protecting the country and scrapping the F-35 contract. Carney said they were still weighing options, including what to will create jobs in Quebec. 

Continue reading →

QP: Admitting a poor choice of words

Posted on by

After a week away, they PM was back in the Chamber for QP, and so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, declaring that Mark Carney hasn’t been able to reduce a single tariff in his 28 trips abroad, but he did manage to find gains for Brookfield, including a deal that was signed days after his meeting with Trump, and he also noted that the European Space Agency is on a Brookfield-owned campus, and wondered why every time he goes abroad, Canadians get poorer and Brookfield gets richer. Carney dismissed this, saying that Poilievre should check his figures as Indonesia reduced their tariffs on Canadian goods, and that they got a $70 billion commitment of investment from the UAE. Poilievre then switched to English to declare how much he cares for workers after Carney made his “Who cares?” aside at the G20. Carney noted that since he became PM, Canada has secured the lowest tariff rate in the world, and that there are sectors for whom they are under pressure, and the he does care and they are enacting further supports. Poilievre gave another “who cares?” exhortation, and Carney took a swipe at Poilievre not getting elected before admitting that he made a poor choice of words on a serious issue, and rounded off with some back-patting about his trade deals. Poilievre insisted that Carney has made nothing but mistakes on trade, and raised that Stephen Harper got a softwood deal when he came into office, before going on another paean about how much the cares. Carney insisted that they care about Canadians, which is why they have a budget to “catalyze” investments, while the Conservatives voted against Canada’s future. Poilievre returned his first question on Carney not getting any wins on tariffs and the supposed gains for Brookfield. Carney repeated out that Indonesia is reducing its tariffs by 95 percent, that we have the best deal with the Americans, and the UAE wants to invest $70 billion in Canada. Poilievre again insisted this was about Brookfield, before pivoting to the MOU with Alberta and demanded to know what date construction would begin on a new pipeline. Carney said that this was about necessary conditions, not sufficient conditions, and that the government of BC and the First Nations need to agree.

Christine Normandin rose for the Bloc and immediately accused the Liberals of cheating, and said that Chrétien sped up citizenships to help sway the Quebec in 1995, and wondered if they would cheat again in a new referendum. Carney pointed out that they have more Liberals in their caucus than the Bloc, and they respect Quebeckers. Normandin repeated her accusations, and again demanded a fair fight in a future referendum. Carney said the Bloc dwell in the past while he is turned to the future. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe took over to make the same accusations, and Carney gave the same bland assurances around building for the future.

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: Questions about the “energy accord” with Alberta

Posted on by

The news broke early yesterday that Alberta and the federal government are getting close to striking an “energy accord” of some variety with a memorandum of understanding that could allow for a bitumen pipeline to the northwest coast of BC with “limited exemptions” to the tanker ban so long as conditions are met, including changes to industrial carbon pricing, carbon capture, and lowering or eliminating the emissions cap. There were also Sources™ who said that it would require a private sector proponent, buy-in from coastal First Nations, and environmental approvals, which could mean it won’t happen at all.

As the day went on and other outlets started to get their own sources to confirm the story, differing details emerged. While Tim Hodgson said in Question Period that the BC government would need to be on-side, his office later said that no, they’re not getting a veto as part of the MOU. And then there are the Liberals themselves, many of whom are deeply opposed and will point out that ending the tanker ban will risk billions in ongoing projects from First Nations in the region. And those First Nations are not going to give consent, which would seem to make this whole thing moot anyway, unless the plan is ultimately to run roughshod over their rights yet again.

So, while we await the details, where the devil will lie, I am once again going to point out that we shouldn’t count on any kind of “grand bargain” with the oil companies or Alberta as a condition because they won’t live up to it. They have proven time and again that they won’t, or that they will lie to claim that they will do all kinds of things to reduce their emissions and to decarbonise when they actually have no intention of doing so. Meanwhile, the market may ultimately prove to be the veto here, because it’s no longer the world from before 2014, and nothing the federal or provincial government will do is going to change that fact.

Ukraine Dispatch

The death toll from the attack on Ternopil early Wednesday has risen to 25, with more than 73 injured. The latest US “peace plan” proposal is just more of the same rehashed Russian propaganda. Ukraine also plans to seek $44 billion in damages from Russia for their carbon emissions as a result of the war.

Continue reading →