Tag Archives: Housing

Roundup: A stolen voter list

Posted on by
Reply

There is a wild story happening in Alberta right now, where a separatist group got their hands on a copy of a voters list and made it public and searchable, which is a) illegal; and b) dangerous, particularly to people who are being threatened, stalked, or in hiding from abusive ex-partners, or so on. A judge ordered it taken down, Elections Alberta and the police are involved, but this is so, so messy. It appears that the list came from the already dubious “Republican Party of Alberta,” which was stood up in the interests of getting certain separatist personalities elected into the legislature, and the thing about voter lists is that they are salted with fake names in order to be traceable.

And then comes this twist—a month ago, journalist Jen Gerson warned Elections Alberta about this after receiving a tip from a source, and Elections Alberta said it was credible, but then did nothing because the list could have come from public sources, even though it would have been easy enough to check for the salted names. But they didn’t. And then a month later, this injunction comes down with the investigation, after all of this personal information has been on the internet and accessed by who knows how many people, putting some lives in real jeopardy as a result.

The thing is, we’ve been dealing with issues related to voters lists and privacy legislation federally, when the government tacked on these provisions to Bill C-4 (ostensibly about the GST cut on new homes and ending the consumer carbon levy), and it was basically a move to bigfoot provincial privacy commissioners over how parties protect this data, and simply insist that parties have a policy—nothing about minimum safeguards or any of that. Just a policy. These provisions got zero study in the Commons, because of course they didn’t, and it took a group of senators to try and force changes, and the only amendment they could pass was a sunset clause to push parties to get actual privacy protections in place, and then MPs rejected that amendment (and senators did not insist on it). Now, the government is revisiting these provisions somewhat in Bill C-25, but this whole debacle just underscores how important it is for parties to have proper safeguards, and to have serious teeth when it comes to enforcing them, because as stated above, lives are at stake when this information gets into the wrong hands.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones attacked Odesa again early Thursday, wounding at least 18 people. Ukrainian drones struck Russian oil infrastructure in Tuapse (again), Perm, and Orenburg.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The 2026 Spring Economic Statement

Posted on by
Reply

It was the Spring Economic Update yesterday, and this was less of a mini-budget than in previous years, but still had a few new elements. Overall, yes the deficit is lower than anticipated because growth was greater than projected, but in true Liberal fashion, Mark Carney and the government added new spending measures that took up some of that room, both with some previously announced measures like the “pause” on the excise fuel tax, and new measures like $6 billion in incentives for skilled trades workers.

Some highlights:

  • That $6 billion for skilled trade workers includes support during training and a completion bonus (as half of those who start apprenticeships don’t finish)
  • There is a shift toward attracting more foreign investment.
  • There will be a small break in CPP deductions for the next year.
  • Canada is making progress on diversifying to non-US export markets.
  • There is money for sports, the Financial Crimes Agency is finally getting its implementation legislation, and crypto ATMs are being banned.
  • The Defence Investment Agency is getting more structure and oversight, and there is also more funding for military trades.
  • They plan to resurrect the ability for Canada Post to search and seize mail.
  • There are new tax credits for enhanced oil recovery (because Carney has full-on decided he no longer cares about the environment.)
  • There are promises for $4.3 billion in First Nations education, Inuit food security, and Indigenous child welfare.
  • More odds and ends here.

In pundit reaction, David Reevely considers this to be Carney buying time until his big projects can start to pay off. Lindsay Tedds delves into the issues surrounding the so-called “Sovereign Wealth Fund.” Kevin Carmichael gives some thought to the deficit position, as well as the choices that Carney is making with what they are putting additional resources into. Susan Delacourt ponders the juggling act of the government both trying to build long-term, while still looking for tangible effects in the here-and-now. Paul Wells looks at the context of some of the numbers presented, and the government’s “fiscal prudence” back-patting.

Housing items in today's federal economic statement. Delighted to see they're planning to move on reforms to make it easier to build multiplexes! This is aligned with one of our recommendations from our January report.

— Dr. Mike P. Moffatt (@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social) 2026-04-28T21:46:33.000Z

Well, this isn't even remotely true (as @lindsaytedds.bsky.social and I discussed in my latest episode).

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-29T02:20:59.692Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-28T19:08:02.092Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine says that it shot down over 33,000 Russian drones last month, which is a new monthly record. Ukrainian drones have been causing fires at Russia’s Tuapse roil refinery. Ukraine is now trading diplomatic blows with Israel over ships carrying stolen grain docking in Israeli ports.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Overplaying the ethics committee report

Posted on by
Reply

The Commons committee on access to information, privacy and ethics released their latest report yesterday, reviewing the Conflict of Interest Act, and it was, well, a doozy. This is one of those kinds of reports that was always going to be a problem because it’s so highly partisan, and the fact that the committee reflects a minority parliament made this even more so. Reading through it, it was quickly obvious that this was mostly an exercise in the Conservatives (and Bloc) looking to score points based on Mark Carney’s past, and trying to suggest a whole bunch of new rules that would essentially target him personally, which goes against pretty much every principle of good governance. Remember that bad facts make bad case law, and well, this is terrible all around.

It was also quite striking just who the majority on the committee was listening to, which was mostly “Democracy Watch’s” Duff Conacher, whose only credibility is that he branded himself a one-man watchdog who answers media requests, so he gets phoned all the time and provides quotes on too many stories. He’s also lost pretty much every court battle he’s ever waged, and thinks that he should be the only arbiter of parliamentary ethics in this country. They also listed to disgraced “journalist” Sam Cooper (who is so credulous he once believed that a clip from a Hong Kong film was secretly obtained proof of a Canadian official being compromised by Chinese agents), who pretty much was only there to back up Conacher. Experts who warned the majority that they were creating more problems than they were trying to solve were largely ignored, because they didn’t fit the narrative. Unsurprisingly, the Liberals had a nine-page dissent at the end of the report that called these kinds of things out, for all the good it will do.

Why? Because looking at the reporting of the report’s contents and recommendations, it was framed in such a way that the committee agreed to these points when in fact it was only the Conservative and Bloc members of the committee and not the Liberals, which then distorts the report because it makes it sound like it was more unanimous than it was. Mention of the Liberal dissent was waaaaaaay down in the copy, and doesn’t really spell out that this was the Conservatives and Bloc trying to use the committee to attack Carney and the Liberals, which is pretty relevant information when you’ve got a report of this nature. And while I don’t want to give the reporter on this piece a hard time, you can’t really consider what the main body of the report says as what the committee believed—only what the opposition members believed.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-23T19:08:02.093Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The Russian strike on Dnipro early Thursday killed three people and injured another ten. Ukraine is boasting that their new interceptor drones can be controlled over thousands of kilometres.

Continue reading →

QP: A trio of bad faith assertions

Posted on by

The PM was in town but otherwise preoccupied, while Pierre Poilievre was also absent, which led Melissa Lantsman to stand up and lament the lack of investment building in the country. Tim Hodgson stood up, suggested she stop the clickbait, and then listed major projects approved in each province. Lantsman dismissed this as nothing actually built (because it can happen overnight), before lamenting the food inflation numbers and demanded the government bring down the cost of government. François-Philippe Champagne got up to list the “good news” of IMF projections, and high Canadian Forces recruitment. Lantsman went on a tear about affordability, to which Patty Hajdu accused the Conservatives of sticking “spokes in the wheels” of Canadians. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to slam Carney’s video and the lack of pipelines built of new trade deals. Dominic LeBlanc thanked him for his support of C-5 and noted the projects that are getting underway. Paul-Hus lamented food prices, and Champagne reiterated his “good news” talking points en français. Paul-Hus then mischaracterised the deal with China and falsely claimed Carney had promised a trade deal by now, and LeBlanc got back up to remind them that they are working to improve the situation, which included diversifying trade with other reliable partners and building major projects.

In advance of today's #QP and the inevitable wailing and gnashing of teeth about food price inflation, here is what StatsCan said the biggest driver was last month.Spoiler: It's still climate. www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quo…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-20T15:07:22.716Z

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she also raised Carney’s video and the lack of a deal with the U.S. as they keep imposing new tariffs. LeBlanc repeated his line about diversifying trade partners and building national projects while understanding the importance of steel and aluminium at home. Normandin demanded ties with the U.S. be strengthened and not discarded (which nobody is actually proposing), and Champagne got back up to note that he was in Washington last week and they are still talking, while pointing to the importance of diversifying trade. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay lamented that Carney is not consulting enough on his files, to which LeBlanc disputed the premise of the question. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: The thing about windfall taxes

Posted on by

In the discussion over “pausing” the excise tax on gasoline and diesel, and the Conservatives’ demands that all other fuel charges be scrapped (including the clean fuel standard which is not a charge or a tax), versus the NDP’s call for a price cap and windfall tax, there hasn’t been a lot of discussion about what those will mean.

Enter economist Kevin Milligan, who has a good thread explaining the problem with windfall taxes, and why those advocating for them have a lot more explaining to do when it comes to just how they see them being implemented.

Adam asks a fair question here that has been bandied about. Let me offer two arguments against a windfall tax that I would wager FIN officials would make when advising cabinet on what to do. I'll also offer my own assessment of the two arguments.1/

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:15:37.601Z

Why would FIN argue against an oil/gas windfall tax?FIN Arg #1: Ideally we set taxes in advance and then let firms and people make their choices based on those taxes. Changing taxes <i>ex post</i> risks upsetting investors who would view this as a mark of an unstable unserious country.

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:17:39.157Z

My response: Yes, ideally we set taxes ex ante and let firms/people decide what to do. Changing that ex post is like reneging. All true. But I do think FIN overindexes on this argument. Every time we change taxes we literally 'renege' on the status quo./3

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:19:52.099Z

If you took the 'no tax changes ex post' argument completely as sacrosanct, it essentially argues for no tax changes ever. That's silly.I also note the "no ex post changes because we're not a banana republic" argument only gets hauled out when it's a tax *increase*. Why not symmetric? Hmmm…/4

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:21:48.449Z

Why would FIN argue against an oil/gas windfall tax?FIN Arg #2: How do you define a "windfall"? What is this year's profit? What is last year's profit? You realize these are accounting numbers, subject to lots of choice variables for shifting between tax years, right? /5

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:24:09.737Z

Fin Arg #2 cont'd: The concern is that you'd end up with a lot of accounting gaming and not as much revenue as you'd think. A lot of time/effort/dollars spent on creating the tax law to minimize gaming. A lot of time/effort/dollars spent by firms avoiding a windfall tax law./6

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:25:51.216Z

My take on accounting and windfall taxes:I recall reading historical precedents around WW2 (?) that outlined how much effort it was relative to the revenue. I recall that being persuasive. (Don't have the source at my fingertips….)But I take the windfall tax accounting issue seriously./7

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:28:08.463Z

So, my advice to those who advocate for a windfall tax? The thing you could do to overcome government resistance is to look seriously at the accounting issues involved.Chanting slogans is one thing. Overcoming implementation barriers is maybe less fun, but necessary to gettin stuff done./end

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:31:43.152Z

It only boils down to 'let the rich have their way' if you assume that windfall tax advocates aren't capable of getting their accounting shit together. Why be so defeatist?I outlined a path for advocates. If the response is 'gee that sounds hard' that's not my prob.bsky.app/profile/open…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:40:14.904Z

I'm not here to blow sunshine and tell you that hard things are easy. Hard things are hard. If you're determined you can do them. But if you don't want to do the work then I'm not going to take the proposal seriously.

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:42:31.333Z

It’s clear that Avi Lewis hasn’t actually thought any of this through. He was on Power & Politics last night and kept trying to handwave away the questions about this plan, and it just kept boiling down to “oil companies bad.” I do think it’s a problem that we’re not seizing on this opportunity to make long-term investments to get off of our dependence on fossil fuels like the French did with their transition to nuclear in the seventies and eighties (because so much European power relied on Middle Eastern fossil fuels up until the oil embargo in the seventies), but nobody seems to want to have that conversation, and Carney has been pretty adamant that he thinks there is a future in the fossil fuel sector. It’s too bad we have no grown-ups who can have a serious conversation about this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia fired missiles into Kyiv early this morning, killing thirteen so far including twelve-year-old child and wounding several others. This was after more missile and drone attacks were made through the day, which included hitting an apartment building in Odesa. Ukraine’s army has been introducing new drone infantry capabilities, which has resulted in retaking more territory from Russian occupation.

Continue reading →

QP: Chirping about excise taxes

Posted on by

The PM was finally present today, sure to make a victory lap before taking off again. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he listed the supposed taxes on fuel (not all of which are taxes), and he took credit for Mark Carney taking off the excise tax, and invited him to remove all others. Carney praised the government’s “comprehensive” plan for affordability which is not just the excise tax, but their other tax cuts. Poilievre decried the effect on the working class, lied about “printing money,” and returned to his demand about removing other taxes. Carney noted that he is the federal prime minister and the biggest taxes on Gasoline are provincial, before he noted that inflation is on target and salaries are rising at twice the rate of inflation. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his first question, and this time, Carney repeated his response and added that Poilievre’s plan would substantially raise the deficit. Poilievre repeated his lie about money printing, and Carney raised his record as a central bank governor and repeated his point about inflation and wages rising faster. Poilievre kept going about the lie about “money-printing,” and tried to claim economic superiority, and Carney retorted that he feels like he is in the presence of students before praising the IMF’s latest projections for the Canadian economy. Poilievre shrugged this off as “Liberal arrogance,” and repeated his demand to cut all gas taxes. Carney said that to learn a lesson, you needs to have ears to hear, and that some on the opposition benches were listening, before he praised the increase in wages. 

John-Paul Danko just got warned by the Speaker for chirping about Poilievre’s education. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T18:26:55.427Z

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he raised the recent White House changes to steel and aluminium tariffs, and wondered what the response was. Carney assured him that they are working on it, and engaging stakeholders to build a strong Quebec and Canada. Blanchet carried on worrying about these changes, and Carney insisted that negotiations are ongoing, but we are still starting off with the best agreement in the world with the U.S. Blanchet carried on with the worries about companies in this situation and Carney notes that since his election, tariffs have come down, and they are still working toward more progress, before patting himself on the back for the Terrebonne victory.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A mere reminder to respect international law

Posted on by

Well, that kind of felt like a close one, as Trump made genocidal threats against Iran, and then backed down at the very last minute for a two-week ceasefire (negotiated by Pakistan?!) that would seem to effectively hand over control of the Strait of Hormuz to Iran’s control in exchange for extortion payments? Maybe? There are a lot of competing narratives, nut none of them are any good, and the most that Mark Carney could muster himself to do was to say that “all parties” must respect International Law. Well then.

Meanwhile, you had Americans on social media imploring the rest of the world to Do Something about Trump, when he’s their president and they have all of the tools to remove him at their disposal if they were to so choose, and they could have spent the day protesting in the streets nation-wide, and made it really uncomfortable for their government, but nope. It’s not even learned helplessness—it’s an absolute refusal to both understand their own civics, and take responsibility for their actions.

Trump expects the rest of the world to clean up his mess in Iran, while American voters expect the rest of the world to clean up the mess they made in electing Trump.Just perfect. Chef's kiss.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-07T16:03:58.527Z

Back home, Mark Carney says he’s looking at ways to “cushion the blow” of high gas prices as a result of this conflict, while he keeps having to answer questions about why gasoline prices are so high when we produce our own at home. He never seems to want to explain why we are bound to the world price (i.e. so that we can export into the global market), and also never gets around to saying that the last time the federal government proposed price controls on oil and gas, well, Alberta has an absolute meltdown that they still harbour zombie resentment toward today (even though they blamed the NEP for the collapse in prices when it was, in fact, a global oil price shock, but it was more convenient to blame Pierre Trudeau and it stuck).

In case you missed it:

  • For National Magazine, I delve into whether there is any basis for the Chief Justice to recuse himself if the Supreme Court hears the Emergencies Act appeal.
  • My weekend column looks at a recent push by some senators to start using the tools at their disposal to break up omnibus budget bills.
  • My column notes that Poilievre treats “cutting wasteful spending” as the very same kind of magical money tree that the NDP does when it comes to wealth taxes.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take finds it a problem that Poilievre is evaluating the effectiveness of his shadow cabinet based on their social media presence.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians attacked two busses in Dnipropetrovsk, killing eight people and injuring more than two dozen others. Ukraine has regained more territory along the frontlines in the east and southeast parts of the country. There is a looming shortage of the miniature jet engines that Ukraine’s deep-strike drones require.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pushing ahead for a constitutional amendment

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith has decided that she’s not taking no for an answer when it comes to her demand for more say in the appointment of superior court judges in the provinces, and is putting forward a motion for a constitutional amendment to demand such a power, and is patterning it off of a similar motion from Quebec.

Feb 19 Ms Smith announces a referendum to initiate a process to amend s 96 of the Constitution (appointment of judges).And then today she announces, w/out waiting for that vote, that the Leg will be asked to adopt a motion on the same issue.Doesn't she trust voters?www.alberta.ca/release.cfm?…

— NigelBankes (@nigelb.bsky.social) 2026-03-31T00:31:00.468Z

Here's the text:

— NigelBankes (@nigelb.bsky.social) 2026-03-31T02:02:39.364Z

Smith will try and spin this (since it only refers to AB) as an amendment that only applies to AB and thus does not engage the 7/50 formula. Good luck with that.Also makes me wonder whether she spoke to Ontario and SK before hanging them out to dry (given the joint letter the other week).

— NigelBankes (@nigelb.bsky.social) 2026-03-31T02:06:19.965Z

Of course, along the way, she is making arguments for this that have no basis in reality. Alberta already appoints provincial court judges and justices of the peace, and she has invented whole cloth this notion that somehow federally-appointed judges are being parachuted into the province from outside. No—the people named to the bench are already lawyers within the province. The provincial judicial advisory committee selects from local candidates who apply, and has members of the local legal community vet them for suitability. There is no federal imposition happening here, other than the fact that it’s not Smith who gets to choose for her own ideological reasons.

This is ridiculous.1) Good luck opening that Pandora's Box.2) Alberta already appoints provincial court judges, which handle the bulk of criminal cases.3) The premise here is utterly false. Federally-appointed judges aren't parachuted in. They come from the province and communities they serve.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-31T02:08:27.386Z

OF course, this all in service of inventing a new grievance that has never existed before, because she needs to find new things to get the population riled up about. And you can bet that this is going to include more dramatics and histrionics about the fact that she is not being allowed to influence the next Supreme Court of Canada appointment, which is for a western seat on the Court (but is unlikely to be from Alberta given that Justice Moreau is already from Alberta, and there hasn’t been a Saskatchewan judge on the Court in quite a while now). But needing to invent new things to be mad about is her hobby, because if she didn’t, then people might turn their attention to her government’s incompetence and corruption.

It's just lies all the way down with Danielle Smith.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-31T02:08:27.387Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-30T22:08:01.849Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks near Poltava killed one and injured three, while artillery strikes killed another person in Nikopol. Air defence units being formed by private companies are now in operation, which is meant to help take the burden off of the front-line units. President Zelenskyy says that security accords with Gulf countries are either signed or nearly so.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trying to deflect on forced labour

Posted on by

There was a lot of talk about newly-minted Liberal MP Michael Ma’s performance at the industry committee, where he questioned a witness about whether she had personally witnessed forced labour in China, in a tactic to try and dismiss her in favour of a witness who was pro-trade in Chinese EVs. Ma later apologised, and there was apparently some confusion over just which region in China he was referring to, but still, it made for a poor clip from committee (and of the CBC reporter chasing him on the Hill), and bad clips would seem to be a cardinal sin in Parliament these days.

This being said, there would seem to me to be a tension in all of this that very few people want to actually discuss, which is the fact that Carney’s “strategic partnerships” that he’s been patting himself on the back for post-Davos speech involve countries that involve forced labour—China and Qatar—while at the same time praising all of the “good, union jobs” that those partnerships will create back home in Canada. This while the Liberals still insist that they opposed forced labour in all of its forms, and that they have strong rules about eliminated forced labour from supply chains. There is a fundamental disconnect that they seem incapable of bridging coherently, because they simply ignore the dissonance, or in Ma’s case, his attempt to throw confusion around it just wound up making him look like an ass.

This is why I wrote my column earlier in the week about the Canadian Ombud for Responsible Enterprise, whose office was designed to look for forced labour in supply chains and call it out, and the fact that Carney has left the office vacant for the past year and will almost certainly smother it in its sleep and scrap the office in the name of budget cuts—so that there is no embarrassment caused over these “strategic partnerships” with forced-labour countries in the name of being “pragmatic” in the post-rupture world of global trade. Ma just gave the government a black eye over this, so we’ll see if they can handle themselves any better in the face of these embarrassing contradictions.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims to have taken a village in eastern Ukraine, while Ukraine reclaimed a village in the Dnipropetrovsk region. President Zelenskyy arrived for an unannounced visit to Saudi Arabia, one of the countries Ukraine is supplying drone expertise.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Hallucinating an immigration application

Posted on by

There were a couple of immigration stories of note yesterday, the first of which was the revelation that a post-doc researcher at McMaster University—who has a PhD from the Sorbonne—had her permanent residency application rejected because it looks like the immigration department used generative digital asbestos to process the claim and it hallucinated a bunch of things about her job. Worse, while there was a disclaimer about the use of said digital asbestos, it said that a human verified it, which someone clearly did not. This is outrageous, and exactly the kind of thing that some of us were warning about when Mark Carney and Evan Solomon crowed about how great this digital asbestos was going to be for the productivity and efficiency of the civil service. Clearly that’s not the case, and now they not only need to redo her application, but it demonstrates what most of us knew was going to happen—that the humans were going to start cutting corners and not verifying the work because there is a belief in the infallibility of these programmes. This is scandalous and worthy of a resignation if we actually believed in that anymore.

The other story was that justice minister Sean Fraser says that when he was immigration minister, he would have handled things differently with the student visas, but there is one thing that is buried in the piece that everyone is going to overlook:

However, he also said the federal government was negotiating as part of “a good-faith relationship with the provinces who were requesting additional access to immigration programs at the time.”

He said those negotiations failed, leading to the federal government placing a cap in January 2024.

The provinces are very much to blame, but they keep avoiding responsibility. They were screaming for more immigrants and temporary foreign workers. They allowed these strip mall colleges to run rampant—Ontario most especially. Not one of them did anything at all about building more housing, or not keeping their healthcare system from collapsing, and not one of them stopped from the blame pile-on with the federal government. I keep making this point because nobody wants to listen—we have a problem with the provinces, and nobody wants to acknowledge it so that we can start holding the premiers accountable.

Could Carney possibly stop using Nigel Farage's framing? Why is it so hard to learn the lesson of not giving the far-right any ammunition? FFS.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-26T03:14:49.967Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks on Kharkiv killed two, and damaged Danube port infrastructure in Izamil. It has been calculated that Russia has lost some 40 percent of its oil export capacity thanks to Ukrainian attacks.

Continue reading →