Tag Archives: Housing

Roundup post: No other orders of government

Posted on by

The Conservatives put out a statement yesterday about a Statistics Canada report on dwelling units, and blamed the federal government for the lack of creation, never mind that the federal government isn’t actually responsible for housing, and has very few levers at their disposal, and the levers they do have they are pretty much maxed out in terms of what they’re able to do. But reading this particular statement, you wouldn’t know that we have provincial and municipal governments who are responsible for housing, and who have the policy levers to do something about it, whether it’s zoning, or density rules, or building codes, or direct financial levers. Thos are all at their disposal, but Pierre Poilievre would have you believe that none of those exist.

The sad irony of course is that the moment that the Conservatives next form government, they will immediately insist that these issues aren’t their problem, that the provinces should be dealing with this, and they will play stupid games with funding (which Paul Wells noted last week, Poilievre’s planned incentives are rounding errors for city budgets).

And yes, my reply column is full of chuds who insist that Trudeau created this situation with immigration, again ignoring the role that provinces played in demanding more arrivals to fill labour shortages while simultaneously doing nothing about housing or social services (their responsibilities), and that there is a counterfactual in terms of what would have happened to the economy in terms of inflation and controlling it if we hadn’t brought in as many new immigrants as we did. The answer is that things probably would have been a whole lot worse for us as a whole, and we can’t ignore that while trying to look for blame for the current situation.

Ukraine Dispatch

A top Ukrainian commander says that they now control as much as a thousand square kilometres of territory in Kursk, while Putin vows a “worthy response.” There are concerns by Ukraine’s state security service that Russia is trying to falsely accuse them of war crimes as part of the operation. Here is a good look at the Kursk operation, its goals and the future options that will need to be weighed in terms of what Ukraine does next.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Vandenbeld’s side—and a warning

Posted on by

Liberal MP Anita Vandenbeld penned an op-ed over on National Newswatch to explain her side of what happened at the Status of Women committee last week, which has led to her and her staff being targeted and harassed off-line (because this is one of the tactics that Conservatives also employ and pretend they don’t, even though they know full well that they send their flying monkeys at the people they single out over social media). It’s an illuminating read that has a lot more of the backstory about how this committee was operating under its previous chair, some of the procedural elements of what happened that got lost in the noise around the witnesses walking out (never mind that they were set up from the start), and some of the rationale behind why this is happening. Don’t get me wrong—I think she still made a mistake in trying to make the public pivot to the abortion study motion, but the rest of the piece is a good insight into the problems at hand.

“Following Trumps playbook, since becoming Conservative Party Leader, Pierre Poilievre has put out a narrative that Parliament is broken, and the institutions are rigged. The Status of Women committee was living proof that this narrative was not true. And so Poilievre had to destroy it.”

This is one of the most important points as to why things are happening the way they are, beyond the clip-harvesting exercises. It’s one of the primary reasons why the Conservatives have been going hard after Speaker Fergus, why they are abusing privilege in demanding reams of unredacted documents and demanding that the Law Clerk do necessary redactions and not trained civil servants, why they try to tie arm’s-length agencies to the government or prime minister personally. It’s all out of the same authoritarian populism playbook.

But while she pointed out, I feel the need to call out Power & Politics’ abysmal coverage of this issue yesterday, with the guest host (reading from a script on a teleprompter) saying that Vandenbeld’s “behaviour” led to her being harassed, and in the discussion with the Power Panel that followed, was dismissive of the “minutiae of parliamentary procedure” when that was one of the key cruxes of what happened. Procedure was quite deliberately abused, and it led to this confrontation. And the panellists themselves being dismissive of the overall problem, and giving the tired lines of “only five people in the country care about this,” or “I’m shocked that there’s politics in politics!” as though what has been happening is normal. It’s not. Institutions are being deliberately undermined and that is a very serious problem, and it would be great if the gods damned pundit class in this country could actually arse itself to care about that fact rather than just fixating on the horse race numbers for once.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine says that it downed two Russian missiles and four drones overnight, but that shelling killed four people in the Donetsk region, and that homes in the Kyiv region were damaged by a drone attack the night before. There are unconfirmed reports of a Ukrainian force in the Kursk region of Russia, but Ukraine won’t confirm or deny.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A predictable lack of self-awareness of her rhetoric

Posted on by

As day follows night, it was not only predictable but absolutely inevitable that Danielle Smith would immediately start parroting Republican talking points to condemn the rhetoric of her political rivals for the increase in political violence in the wake of the assassination attempt on Donald Trump. And because this is Danielle Smith, there is absolutely zero self-awareness of her own history of violent political rhetoric and encouraging it among the more swivel-eyed elements of her political base in reference to her rivals.

In fact, here are some examples of how Smith’s past rhetoric has put lives in danger, which, again, she refuses to take absolutely any responsibility for. No, it’s the “progressive left” with their “cancel culture” that is creating this violent rhetoric.

Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre says he worries about the safety of his family, but rejects any notion that he has to tone down his own political rhetoric, where he accuses the prime minister of selling out the country to foreign powers, or offering succour to the “convoy” crowd and their flags denoting their desire to have sex with the prime minister, while refusing to condemn their violent rhetoric (such as images or actual nooses that they carry as part of their grievance cosplay). It should be little wonder then why Canadian intelligence services worry that threats to politicians are increasing because those people see that there’s no consequences for them doing so. Indeed, this comes at the same time as the former Army reservist who crashed into the gates of Rideau Hall with a truck full of guns got out on statutory release. It was a short sentence (he was sentenced to less than half of the maximum), and seems to be no worse for wear from it. It certainly gives all of the impression that we’re not taking it seriously.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s navy says that the last Russian patrol ship has left Russian-occupied Crimea to be re-based elsewhere, thanks to Ukraine’s campaign of naval drones causing significant damage to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukraine still needs another 25 Patriot missile defence systems, and more F-16s in order to protect the country from further Russian strikes.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another far-right defeat

Posted on by

The news out of France this weekend was that the far-right was not the victors in their legislative elections, but rather that the left-wing alliance came in with the highest seats, followed by Emmanuel Macron’s centrists, denying the far-right the victory they had been hoping for. This isn’t great for Macron in that his prime minister has resigned and he will have a hard time getting his agenda through the National Assembly, but nevertheless, his gamble did somewhat pay off in that he thwarted the far right from making any further advances. This, along with the fact that Labour won a resounding victory in the UK days earlier, has plenty of people talking about how hopefully the US and Canada will be next to reject the far-right. I am not wholly mollified.

The US remains the big question mark, particularly given all of the attention on president Biden’s fitness to carry on for another term, and we cannot get too complacent here in Canada. While our own far-right is still marginal, the bigger danger remains that the Conservatives continue to try and court those far-right actors and are increasingly taking pages out of the authoritarian playbook. Nevertheless, the Elder Pundits in this country insist that there’s nothing to see here, that things can’t be that bad under Poilievre, or that the concerns of women or LGBTQ+ people are mere exaggerations. They’re not, and we can’t let our guard down at this critical juncture.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian forces shot down three out of six missiles fired by Russia over the central regions of the country. Russian drones hit an energy facility in the Sumy region on Saturday. Ukrainian drones hit a munitions depot inside Russian territory, causing a massive explosion. Russians claim that Ukrainians were thwarted trying to hijack one of their strategic bombers, but there is no verification of that claim.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Provinces learned they can underfund disaster management

Posted on by

The House of Commons’ national defence committee tabled their report on disaster management earlier this week, and one of its recommendations is for a permanent civilian federal disaster management force that can be deployed for wildfires, floods, hurricanes, or other natural disasters—but they stopped short of recommending a Canadian FEMA, which may not be possible given that this is constitutionally largely an area of provincial jurisdiction, and would require some kind of provincial agreement to operate, and because this is Canada, the provinces would want some kind of say in its operations but wouldn’t want to pay for it, because of course.

One of the problems we’re dealing with as a country is that we’re dealing with the Canadian Forces being at their capacity and they are constantly being asked to deal with disaster management across the country because provincial capacity maxes out too soon. But why does provincial capacity max out? Because they keep cutting funds or under-investing, and creating these situations because they know that regardless of what happens, they can simply call up the federal government to ask them deploy the Canadian Forces, and even more to the point, that they can do it for free because the federal government won’t ask for reimbursement even though they are entitled to. And this has wound up teaching the premiers that there are pretty much no consequences for their under-investing or even cutting the funding for this kind of emergency management, so they are incentivized to rely on the Canadian Forces to do the work for them for free, and now we have reached the end of that being possible.

So, what is the solution? I am wary of the notion of building up a federal force because even if they can manage to get provincial agreements, staff it up (because you would be drawing from the same pool as the Canadian Forces, which has a recruitment and retention crisis), and even if they paid for all of it (which they shouldn’t), this will exacerbate the existing problem of provinces not funding or bolstering their existing forces that are their constitutional responsibility because there will still be a federal backstop. And if the federal government starts asking for reimbursement, either for the use of the Canadian Forces or this hypothetical future force, then the media will be aghast that the federal government is making the province pay in their time of need, completely ignoring that the provincial under-funding created the situation in the first place. We’re at a bit of a rock and hard place, because we have let federalism break down like this, and that’s not good for the country.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian guided bombs struck the Eastern settlement of Selydove, killing two. Ukrainian forces captured a Russian “barn” tank that has been modified to protect against drone attacks. Ukraine launched a drone attack that struck three Russian oil refineries overnight.

Continue reading →

QP: Last chance to get clips before the summer

Posted on by

It’s a sweltering, muggy Wednesday, and everyone hopes the final day before the House rises for the summer. The prime minister was present, while his deputy was not, and the other leaders al deigned to attend for on last go-around to gather some clips for the summer break. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he lamented that the country is broken, and took a swipe at the Bloc, and demanded an election right now. Justin Trudeau said that if the leader opposite was really concerned about affordability, he would help pass their measures to help people rather than play petty partisan games. Poilievre worried that the government is threatening to “shut down” the Quebec forestry sector (not true), and Trudeau responded that unlike the Conservatives, Quebeckers know they need to protect the environment and the economy at the same time. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his assertion that everything  is broken and demanded an election, and Trudeau repeated his same assertion that the Conservatives should support their programmes. Poilievre expounded on just how much the country is a living hell thanks to his “whackonomics,” and Trudeau shot back that the Conservatives are only concerned with protecting the wealthiest, particularly over the capital gains changes. Poilievre claimed the Middle Class™ doesn’t exist anymore, and Trudeau reiterated that Poilievre only cares about himself. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and complained about anglophone mail carriers in Quebec, and Trudeau praised the government’s support for French, including in Quebec, and promised to follow up on it. Blanchet accused the government’s programmes of harming French, and Trudeau dismissed this as “identitarian” squabbling.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he accused the government of coddling CEOs, to which Trudeau patted himself on the back for raising taxes on the wealthiest, and took a shot at the Conservatives in the process. Singh tried again in French, and Trudeau listed the programmes they have delivered.

Continue reading →

QP: Harvesting carbon and capital gains clips

Posted on by

As the final sitting week of the spring begins, with a heat wave starting, neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, but most of the other leaders were. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he worried about Bloc having concerns about the capital gains changes, and that their hoped-for amendments wouldn’t happen next week when it comes into force. Anita Anand praised the plan the government put forward for the economy, which the Conservatives don’t have. Poilievre kept needling the Bloc, claiming they were taking Quebeckers’ money and giving it to Ottawa. Jean-Yves Duclos asked Poilievre to explain why people who make half a million in capital gains should pay less tax than a nurse making $50,000 in a year. Poilievre switched to English to worry about the so-called “cover up” of the costs of the carbon levy, claiming it costs the economy $30 billion per year, and wondered what else they were hiding about their other tax hikes. Steven Guilbeault pointed out the reductions in emissions while the Conservatives want to let the planet burn. Poilievre tried the same again, insisting the carbon levy won’t change the weather or stop a single forest fire, to which Jonathan Wilkinson wondered if Poilievre was a climate denier. Poilievre turned back to the capital gains changes, and cited the “Food Professor” about it (seriously?!), and Anita Anand praised…housing starts. Come on!

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he worried that the government would discredit the Hogue Commission if she didn’t come to the same conclusion as the government. Dominic LeBlanc said that he was pleased that Justice Hogue had agreed to look into this. Therrien railed that the prime minister has slept on the foreign interference file for months, and LeBlanc insisted that they have taken this seriously since the get-go.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he railed that progress on the Truth and Reconciliation calls to action were taking too long to be implemented. Patty Hajdu insisted that they have been working, and that she just stood with the National Chief to announce funding for a Northern Ontario hospital. Singh repeated the question in French, and got much the same response.

Continue reading →

QP: Boutique exemptions from capital gains changes

Posted on by

The prime minister was absent for the second Wednesday in a row, off to the G7 meeting in Italy, but fortunately, his deputy was there today in his stead (not that she was going to answer all of the questions like he would). The PM’s absence meant that certain other leaders weren’t going to bother to show up, but Pierre Poilievre was there, and he led off in French, and he started off by calling out the Bloc for voting for the capital gains changes yesterday, and Chrystia Freeland said that this was about tax fairness for working people, and that this will unlock $3 billion for the province of Quebec in new revenue, while the Conservatives don’t like investments by the government. Poilievre insisted that this takes money away from doctors, forcing them to move elsewhere (not really true, and that’s the province’s responsibility to pay them properly), taking more swipes at the Bloc along the way. Freeland said that Quebeckers understand the importance of fairness, and that it’s important for a nurse not to pay higher taxes than the ultra-rich, and that they understand the government needs revenue to invest in healthcare. Poilievre switched to English to claim that Canada’s growth is the worst in the G7, and that housing costs have doubled, blaming the taxation of the federal government, and accused them of “taxing away” doctors, homebuilders and entrepreneurs. Freeland said that we all learned yesterday that the Conservatives chose a side, and it wasn’t the side of teachers or welders, and that they were always on the side of those at the very top. Poilievre insisted that the welders she mentions start small businesses and incorporate, and that this was going to tax them (not really true), which would also kill housing. Freeland suggested that they get things right, because this is about a two-thirds inclusion rate, not a two-thirds tax rate, and accused him of faking his support for workers. Poilievre insisted they were taxing farmers in a food crises, taxing home builders in a housing crisis, taxing away doctors in a healthcare crisis, and taxing small businesses in an economic growth crisis, and this was all economic vandalism. Freeland noted the average salary in Poilievre’s riding and that most couldn’t dream of making $250,000 per year, and yet he was standing with the ultra-rich.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and claimed that the capital gains increases would hurt Quebeckers, and proposed an amendments around home owners who were not speculators. Freeland thanked the Bloc for their vote, and recited her points about generational fairness. Therrien insisted that their concern was for the savings of self-employed people, and Freeland repeated the lines about fairness and funding investments, which would benefit Quebec to the tune of $3 billion.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and railed about the costs of rent (which is provincial jurisdiction) and demanded the government guarantee housing. Soraya Martinez Ferrada said that they were working with non-profits and municipalities to build more affordable housing. Bonita Zarrillo also accused the government of raising rents, and again Martinez Ferrada repeated her back-patting in English.

Continue reading →

QP: Hosing the field with doomsday disinformation on capital gains

Posted on by

The prime minister present today, as was his deputy, for one of the few remaining times this spring. All of the other leaders were present as well today. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and worried that the prime minister’s watch has seen the wealthiest double their incomes while youth can’t afford a home. Justin Trudeau said that they are rising the capital gains exemption in order to fund the housing and programmes that younger people need. Poilievre insisted that Trudeau’s own numbers show that the wealthy got wealthier, and that his tax increases only punish the poor and middle class. Trudeau insisted that this was just the Conservatives going to bat for the wealthy. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and got much the same reply from Trudeau, who added that if it didn’t have real-world impacts, it would be funny to watch the Conservatives tie themselves into rhetorical knots. Poilievre railed that everyone was paying higher taxes thanks to Trudeau, linking the carbon levy in that, and Trudeau trotted out the lines about the carbon rebates, and helping people who need it. Poilievre trotted out an illiterate and innumerate line about the capital gains changes, getting it completely wrong, and Trudeau took this as an opportunity to take shots at the Conservatives choosing to vote against youth and the Middle Class™.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, read a headline about the RCMP saying they don’t have the legislative tools to fight hate speech, and demanded support for their bill to remove the religious exemption from hate speech. Trudeau listed measures they have taken, such as the Online Harms bill and the legislation to criminalise Holocaust denial. Blanchet considered this wasted breath, and raised rhetoric being shouted on the streets of Montreal, to which Trudeau insisted they were trying to fight hate speech and calls for violence.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP and clumsily insisted that the government did nothing on taxing the wealthy for eight years, to which Trudeau reminded him that the first thing they did in office was raise taxes on the one percent and lower it on the Middle Class™, and that the NDP voted against that. Singh repeated the question in French, and got the same answer.

Continue reading →

QP: Not taking yes for an answer on Hogue

Posted on by

The prime minister was off in Quebec City to meet with the premier of that province, but his deputy was present, having just made the formal announcement of the Ways and Means motion on the capital gains changes that they want to use as a political wedge. Most of the other leaders were away, and Pierre Paul-Hus led off in French, and raised the NSICOP report, and demanded to know the names of who was implicated. Dominic LeBlanc noted that he was surprised by the question because Andrew Scheer had sent a letter asking to send this to the Hogue Commission, and there was a Bloc motion on the same thing, and the government was going to support it. Paul-Hus wanted it clear whether the prime minister would reveal the names to Justice Hogue, and let her deal with it, and LeBlanc repeated that they were going to support the Bloc motion. Jasraj Hallan took over in English to ramp up the rhetoric, launching accusations, and LeBlanc reiterated that they agree the Commission is well-placed, and already has access to the documents in question. Hallan torqued his rhetoric even further, and LeBlanc again said they would support the Bloc motion, and LeBlanc said that he asked the deputy RCMP commissioner what would happen if he stood up and read off those names, and was told he would be criminally charged, which he would not do. Hallan switched topics to claim there was some secret carbon price report that the PBO couldn’t release (there was no report), and Steven Guilbeault recited his lines about the PBP report saying that eight out of ten households got more money back than they spent.

Alain  Therrien led for the Bloc, and patted himself on the back for their motion, claiming they were being the adults in the room. LeBlanc repeated that they would support the motion. Therrien demanded further reassurance that they would turn over any additional documents and LeBlanc assured him they were.

Jagmeet Singh conflated a number of incidents with the NSICOP report revelations, and Dominic LeBlanc gave some back-patting on the only government actually taking action. Singh repeated the conflation in French, and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →