Tag Archives: Housing

Roundup: The PBO’s new NATO numbers

Posted on by

The PBO is at it again, and he released a report yesterday on his particular calculations about how Canada could get to our stated NATO goals of 2 percent of GDP by 2032-33, and that we would need to double defence spending to get there, and what that looks like if the government remains committed to its deficit and debt-to-GDP ratio targets. Fair enough, but there are a number of capital commitments in the works that include new submarines, and one has a pretty good bet that these costs will only increase as time goes by, for what it’s worth.

While this is all well and good, there was some particular language in the report that should raise some eyebrows, because Yves Giroux is talking about how other economic forecasts are “erroneous” and he is insisting therefore that his aren’t, which is…a choice. In his previous report on defence spending, Giroux went on a whole tangent about how the OECD figures used as the baseline weren’t correct and his numbers were, but NATO uses those OECD figures for their purposes, not the PBO’s. For the sake of an apples-to-apples comparison, you would think that he would use the same denominator as NATO does, but of course not. Giroux has a particular sense of hubris around his figures, and we all know what happened when he got them wrong with his first report on the carbon levy and then he tried to prevaricate and rationalize them away, and insisted there wouldn’t be any real changes when lo, there were some pretty significant ones.

While we’re on the topic, the 2 percent figure remains a bad one because the denominator—Canada’s GDP is much larger than many NATO members’, making that figure incredibly hard to reach, particularly as the economy grows, and the fact that any country could exceed that target if their economy crashed. Not saying we don’t need to spend more, because we do (and I would not expect the Conservatives to meet the target either as they pledge to cut significantly should they form government next), but we also need to keep some perspective.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces shot down 33 out of 62 drones plus one missile overnight, which killed at least four in various regions of the country, while Russia claims they downed 25 Ukrainian drones, as North Korea’s foreign minister travelled to Moscow. Last evening, a guided bombs struck a high rise in Kharkiv, killing a child. Russians claim to have taken the village of Kruhliakivka in the Kharkiv region.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1851612628021318115

Continue reading →

QP: Call an election/Get your security clearance ad nauseam

Posted on by

Wednesday, and what sounds like a less exciting caucus meeting for the Liberals, in spite of the talk going around. The PM was present and ready to take all of the questions today, while his deputy was absent. Not all of the other leaders were present, unusually, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, recited his talking points about the supposed “promise” in Canada that was “broken,” and wanted the government to adopt his plan to cut the GST on new homes under $1million. Justin Trudeau noted that the problem with any of Poilievre’s proposals is that they come with cuts, and in this case, it would cut $9 billion in transfers to Quebec to build affordable housing. Poilievre insisted that the government only builds bureaucracy and not homes, and again wanted them to adopt his GST cut. Trudeau listed investments the government is making, while Poilievre only offers cuts. Poilievre switched to English to give a paean to a very white, middle-class “Canadian promise,” which he claims the government broke and demanded they adopt his GST cut plan. Trudeau gave a longer soliloquy about the Conservatives only offering cuts and not help for people. Poilievre insisted that the current plans only build bureaucracy and that his plan was “common sense.” Trudeau noted that one of the fundamental responsibilities of any prime minister is to keep Canadians safe, but since Poilievre refuses a security briefing to keep his own caucus safe, he instructed security services to find a way to offer himself a briefing. Poilievre accused this of being a “tin-pot conspiracy,” before returning to the insistence that his plan was just common sense. Trudeau again repeated that Poilievre only offers cuts, and that he asked security services to figure out a briefing. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and accused the government of abandoning seniors by turning down the Bloc’s OAS bill. Trudeau listed ways in which they are helping seniors, which the Bloc opposed. Therrien took some swipes at the NDP before repeating his demand, and Trudeau linked the Bloc to the Conservatives in voting against measures to help seniors.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised Alberta turning over the administration of some hospitals to Covenant who refuses to provide abortions, and wanted Trudeau to do something. Trudeau noted that they have clawed back transfers to provinces who don’t provide services, and raised their motion to penalise pregnancy support charities that don’t offer the full suite of supports or options. Singh flubbed his attempt at a clip of “It’s her body her choice, not her body Conservative Party’s choice,” before switching to French to complain about housing transfers. Trudeau focused on the abortion aspect, and failed about the anti-choice MPs in the Conservative ranks.

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre vs Fraser on GST cuts

Posted on by

Both the PM and his deputy were present today, and as a result, so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he claimed the PM had “copied and pasting” his idea of cutting the GST on rentals, and then patted himself on the back and quoted Mike Moffatt in praising his current plan to cut GST on new houses under $1 million, and wanted the government to adopt it. Justin Trudeau recited the false talking point that Poilievre had only built six affordable units when he was “minister” before saying they wouldn’t sign onto a programme of cuts. Poilievre insisted his plan would build by cutting bureaucracy, and Trudeau pointed out that cutting the Accelerator Fund would mean cutting investment in social housing in Quebec. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and Trudeau noted that the fine print of Poilievre’s plan is to cut affordable housing programmes. Poilievre then recited some particular misleading talking points another the two housing programmes he plans to cut, and Trudeau gave a half-hearted defence of those programmes, getting back to his “fine print” talking points. Poilievre repeated his policy pledge in order to get a clean clip, and Trudeau returned to his same “check the fine print” talking point.

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1851331074929918416

Yves-François Blanchet led for the NDP, and in his most ominous tone, brought up that the government didn’t pass their two bills, and tried to sound as though those bills were the most common sense plan for Quebeckers. Trudeau said that they have supported Supply Management and they hoped the Senate would pass it, before listing measures they have taken to help seniors. Blanchet then threw some shade at the Conservatives for their privilege filibuster which prevented any confidence motions that could bring down the government, and Trudeau noted that they could all see who was in the Chamber to play petty politics versus those there to help Canadians.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he complained about Rogers rising fees and said that the Conservatives don’t care because their leader gets “big cheques” from Edward Rogers, before some disruption, before demanding the government force Rogers to lower fees or ban them from federal contracts. Trudeau gave some blame talking points about hold the telcos to account. Singh switched to French to raise the recent documentary that cited Alain Rayes’ comments on the anti-abortionists in the Conservatives before demanding the federal government increase access (which is provincial jurisdiction). Trudeau threw a verbal grenade across the aisle about Quebec Conservatives who are not saying anything about the anti-abortionists in their caucus.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The same government, not a new one

Posted on by

The final results of the BC election started rolling in as the absentee ballots were counted, and lo, it looks like the NDP managed to flip one seat in the final tally, making it a 47-44-2 tally NDP/Conservative/Greens. And while that’s all well and good, the way in which major media outlets described this was a gods damned tragedy, and I was about to lose my mind.

No, the NDP are not going to “form government,” because they are already the government. Only the legislature changes. No, the Lieutenant-Governor didn’t ask Eby to form government, her statement explicitly said “David Evy advised me that he is prepared to continue as premier.” Because she doesn’t sit around waiting to make a decision—she acts on advice, and he never resigned, so he is not forming anything. He will be shuffling his Cabinet, but it’s the same government that carries over to another legislature. That’s it, and it’s a really big problem when neither the national wire service of the national public broadcaster couldn’t actually read what she wrote, and instead wrote their copy based on a falsehood and changed her words to suit their wrong meaning.

Additionally, because I am going to get pedantic here, there is also no such thing as a “majority government” or a “minority government.” Government—meaning Cabinet—is government. What changes is whether they control a majority or minority of the legislature. The legislature is not government. What matters is whether the same government is able to maintain the confidence of the chamber, which is much easier to do when you have a majority of the seats. The fact that Eby has managed to secure a razor-thin majority of those seats means that he has essentially ensured that he can maintain that confidence (though the Speaker issue could remain tricky). But my gods, could our media outlets have a modicum of civic literacy? It’s not only embarrassing that they don’t, but it’s outright dangerous for democracy going forward.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian air attacks killed four in Kyiv and four in Kharkiv, where they also shattered a historic building and celebrated landmark. Critical infrastructure was also damaged in two regions in the north of Ukraine, leading to more power outages.

Continue reading →

QP: Proud of their new housing policy

Posted on by

The PM was ostensibly in town but not present for Question Period, though his deputy was in his stead. All of the other leaders were absent, including Pierre Poilievre, even though he had just launched another policy position on housing. That left Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he raised the plan from said press conference on cutting GST on new house under $1 million, and asked the government to adopt it. Sean Fraser said that it was great that they took inspiration from the policy to remove the GST on purpose-built rentals, but the Conservative plan to pay for this policy, buy cutting other programmes including to existing low-income housing, was irresponsible. Scheer insisted that the current plan was only paying for bureaucracy and photo ops, and demanded again the policy be adopted. Fraser scoffed that their plan was to do less for housing and spend money on a snitch-line for people who don’t like their neighbours’ housing plans. Scheer repeated his “bureaucracy and photo ops” talking points, and claimed housing starts were down. Fraser retorted that housing starts were in fact up, and tens of thousands over when the Conservatives were last in charge, before reiterating that the Conservative plan is to cut housing supports. Luc Berthold took over in French to demand the government match their pledge to cut GST, and this time, Chrystia Freeland responded that at Poilievre’s rare press conference, he accidentally told the truth and said that they would cut two programmes to pay for this, and listed what those might be. Berthold tried again, decrying how long it took people to afford a home, and this time, Soraya Martinez Ferrada gave her own version of the Conservatives will only cut, and that the programmes the would cut included social housing in Quebec.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and worried about an influx of migrants from the U.S. if Trump wins and asked if the government had a plan. Marc Miller repsonded with a single “oui.” Therrien gave another soliloquy that asked the very same thing. Miller repeated that they do have a plan, and that they have always managed the border with the U.S.

Jenny Kwan rose for the NDP, demanded federal action on abortion access, as though the federal government controlled it. Mark Holland got up and gave a rant about the conservatives and that no man should control a woman’s reproductive freedom. Rachel Blaney gave another round of the same, and Patty Hajdu gave her own rant about not standing for attacks on reproductive rights.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pushing back against PMO

Posted on by

There was an op-ed in the Star over the weekend from former Cabinet minister Lloyd Axworthy, in which he lamented the increasing centralization of power under the PMO, and that under Trudeau, ministers have become “infantilised,” particularly after seeing testimony at the Foreign Interference inquiry where chiefs of staff were keeping ministers in the dark about certain files. It’s a valid complaint, but not one unique to the Trudeau PMO, as Canadian academics have been making it since the previous Trudeau government, and was particularly egregious in the Harper government where everything flowed through the PMO—most especially message control—and ministers were rarely without approved talking points on their files.

I will also note that the current Trudeau did make an attempt to return to a system of “government by Cabinet,” and while certain ministers were free and capable to run their files, there was not an equitable distribution of talent in Cabinet as much as there was of gender, ethnicity and geography, so PMO did need to step in for some ministers. But there is also an inescapable reality that governing has also become more difficult than in the days of the first Trudeau government, and power is distributed much more horizontally because most issues require the cooperation of several ministries, and that requires a lot more central coordination from PMO or PCO. This being said, the real sin of the current government is that everything requires the sign-off from his chief of staff, which creates bottlenecks in decision-making, and that has been a continual problem.

In response to the Axworthy op-ed were a couple of tweets from Catherine McKenna about her experience—that PMO would say something, and she would push back if it didn’t come from Trudeau directly. It shows that a minister in charge of their file and who has the spine enough to stand their ground can do so, but not every minister is capable, and it’s something we need more ministers to learn how to do, because that’s how they will actually manage to own their own files.

Ukraine Dispatch

Two civilians were killed in a Russian attack on the southern Kherson region, while Russians have been making air attacks against Kharkiv and Kyiv. Ukraine continue to target ethanol plants in Russia with drones. A high-level South Korean delegation will be briefing the NATO Council about the North Korean troops now fighting on Russia’s behalf.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No backbench rebellion…for now

Posted on by

As far as backbench revolts go, this one was a bit of a damp squib, or to put it another way, Wells’ First Rule has once again borne out in practice—For any given situation, Canadian politics will tend toward the least exciting possible outcome. Purportedly, Trudeau addressed caucus and got emotional talking about the toll has taken on him, including his children constantly seeing the “Fuck Trudeau” flags and so on, but nevertheless there was a frank airing of grievances from some MPs, though nobody had a copy of that memorandum calling on him to step down that had names attached (oh, the bravery!). In the end, it looks like it was only 24 backbench MPs who had signed onto this (not that anyone could see the names), which is not 40, and makes it easier for them to be dismissed (though still, that number could very well grow). Nevertheless, there was a commitment for everyone to reflect more about what was said, and a few voices have said that they want Trudeau to give some indication by Monday if he plans to stick around or to call it a day (though I can’t imagine that he would want to make any such decision on their timetable).

While the message coming out of caucus was that they have never been stronger or more united, that sounds an awful lot like the “We’ve never been more united” speech just before or after someone crosses the floor. Others, like Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, said that the palace intrigue needs to stop and that the knives need to turn outward rather than inward—a reference that the real enemy is Pierre Poilievre, and not Trudeau, though again, nobody is saying that this matter is done with, particularly given that everyone needs to reflect on what happened.

This having been said, I think it’s fair to question the organizational abilities of those leading this backbench revolt, because a lot of what has come out in public has been pretty shambolic, as is the fact that there seems to be absolutely no plan for the day after if Trudeau did take their message and decide to start planning his exit. I think in part that’s because there has been no heir apparent, or nobody for anyone to rally around as a focal point for who could replace Trudeau, and that may have as much to do with the fact that a good many MPs were political operatives or even staffers who were around during the Chrétien-Martin wars, and remain traumatized by them, and the fact that Trudeau had very consciously focused on rooting out those camps when he took over the party. We’ll see what happens over the next week or two, but just because nothing happened today doesn’t mean that the tide isn’t shifting.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians have captured two villages in the Donetsk region in the east, and are currently storming four more settlements in the Donbas region, but those attacks are currently being repelled. The Americans have now corroborated that as many as 3000 North Korean troops are now in Russia, training for a possible deployment to Ukraine. Here is a look at how fire trucks in Nikopol now have anti-drone jammers mounted on them because Russians have been targeting them.

Continue reading →

QP: Free-wheeling, chaotic, and from an alternate reality

Posted on by

In the wake of that big caucus meeting where little seemed to happen, the prime minister was present for QP—his proto-PMQ day in fact, while his deputy left for Washington. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he needled about 24 Liberal backbenchers signing the document, the Bloc supporting them, and demanded an election. Trudeau got up, for much applause from his caucus, the Conservatives got up with what was supposed to be sarcastic applause but just looked like more applause, and after it died down, Trudeau insisted (in English) that they were totally united and they were focused on delivering for Canadians. Poilievre noted that the question was in French, claimed that backbenchers leaking to journalists from the washroom at caucus, and again demanded an election. Trudeau, in French, trotted out his lines about confident governments investing in people and not resorting to austerity. Poilievre, still in French, listed slogans, claimed immigration was “out of control,” and demanded an election. Trudeau noted Poilievre only offers cuts and empty slogans and not investments in people and the green future. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his slogans, his concern trolling over the 24 backbenchers, lied about the privilege issue, and demanded an election. Trudeau recited his line about while the opposition is focused on politics, he is focused on Canadians. Poilievre again mocked the dissident Liberals, and Trudeau hit back with the Conservatives’ hanging out with white nationalists and Poilievre’s lack of a security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the allegations at a particular school in Quebec, and Trudeau noted that’s a provincial issue but they would defend rights and freedoms for all Canadians. Blanchet wondered if Trudeau was saying “forced religious education” and corporal punishment was freedom of expression. Trudeau reiterated that this was a provincial matter.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, declared that he knew the prime minister was distracted, and demanded he take action on food prices. Trudeau noted that they have taken action, whether it is with competition reform or a school food programme, before he took a swipe at the NDP for backing away from the carbon rebates. Singh wondered if Trudeau has even been to a grocery store, and was shouted down before the Speaker intervened. When he started again, he read the same line again (proving it was a scripted applause line to be clipped) before switching to French worry about rents. Trudeau, in English, noted he had recently been to a grocery store with the Speaker in his riding, and then turned to French to praise their housing investments.

Continue reading →

QP: Concern trolling about caucus matters

Posted on by

The prime minister was present today for the first time in more than a week, as was his deputy, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led of in French, and he needled the fact that as many of forty Liberal backbenchers are pushing back against him, and concern trolled about their freedom of expression. Speaker Fergus noted that this wasn’t under the administrative responsibilities of the government, but Justin Trudeau got up to speak anyway, and gave a paean about the things they are delivering for Canadians. Poilievre tried to bring the Bloc in on this, but kept it as a question about caucus, but Trudeau again got up to pat himself on the back for pharmacare. Poilievre turned to English to repeat his concern trolling about caucus, and got another warning from Fergus. Trudeau again got up in spite of this and said that Poilievre only wants to score political points and not talk about what the government is delivering for Canadians. Poilievre claimed that these backbenchers were talking to Conservatives to ask this in QP—obvious bullshit—and Trudeau didn’t get up this time. Poilievre listed a lot of non sequitur statistics to demand an election, and Trudeau told that Poilievre’s only solution for tough times is cuts to programmes and services people rely on.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he demanded support for their two bills, on OAS and Supply Management. Trudeau said that they will always protect Supply Management, before listing all the times the Bloc voted against help for seniors. Blanchet called this a “manipulation of the facts,” and demanded support for those bills in order to break the deadlock in Parliament. Trudeau listed ways in which they have been there for seniors.

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP, listed the false statistic of people being $200 away from insolvency (which has been debunked numerous times), and demanded action on forcing corporations to control food prices. Trudeau noted ways they have acted, and threw in a jab at the Conservatives. Lori Idlout got up to note the failure of the agreement on First Nations child and family welfare last week, and demanded immediate action on this. Trudeau noted that they are looking at ways to move forward.

Continue reading →

QP: Conspicuous silence about India

Posted on by

The first day back after a busy constituency week, and the PM was absent, though his deputy was present. Most of the other leaders were also away, but Pierre Poilievre was there, and he once again began in French to lament mortgage costs in Quebec, and complained that Trudeau was too worried about his own survival, before demanding an election. Chrystia Freeland said that she was glad the Conservatives were thinking about the economy, and she praised the fact that inflation has been tamed, which the Conservatives don’t want to talk about. Poilievre needed that Trudeau is facing a backbench revolt and demanded an election, to which Karina Gould noted that the Conservatives were trying to avoid another vote in the Chamber that they would lose. Poilievre switched to English to lament that people lined up in Cloverdale, BC, for “ugly potato day,” and used this to demand an election. Freeland noted that Poilievre was crying crocodile tears because he voted against their school food programme. Poilievre gave a more emphatic version of the same, and Freeland noted that the Conservatives were damning themselves by their intransigence, and described the launch of their school food programme in Manitoba on Friday. Poilievre was incredulous as this, accused the prime minister of being in the “fetal position” under his desk, and demanded an election. Freeland dismissed this as the Conservatives losing the plot, and their concerns about inflation Missed that his has been back in the target range for nine months.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he demanded the government support the Bloc’s OAS enrichment bill. Steve MacKinnon said the Bloc have never voted in the interests of seniors, so this was disingenuous. Therrien then turned to the Supply Management bill in the Senate, and lamented that the prime minister was not pressuring senators, and Jean-Yves Duclos noted the government’s support for system all along.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, worried about foreign interference from India, and wondered if the PM had personally urged Poilievre to get his security clearance. Dominic LeBlanc said that they extended the offer, and that they are working to keep Canadians safe. Singh tried again in French and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →