Tag Archives: Infrastructure

QP: Appealing to the NDP Whip?

Posted on by

While the prime minister was away, none of the other leaders were present either, though the deputy PM was attending virtually. Luc Berthold led off, and he decried Motion 11 on extending sitting hours, and wondered if the NDP were be whipped on the vote (which…isn’t really a question to the government, as much as they’re trying to be clever about there allegedly being a coalition). Kevin Lamoureux insisted this was simply about more hours for debate, which surely nobody could object to. (Note that there are things that can be objected to, but neither side will be reasonable in the discussion). Berthold then listed off some torqued versions of this government’s ethical lapses, and wondered if someone on the other side would say enough was enough, and Lamoureux dismissed this as mere personal attacks. Berthold demanded that the RCMP re-open the investigation into the Aga Khan vacation—never mind that they already concluded that there was no evidence—and Lamoureux dismissed it again as personal attacks instead of focusing on things that matter. James Bezan took over in English to demand an RCMP investigation, and Lamoureux insisted that this was simply character assassination. Bezan tried to pretend he was a prosecutor who had obtained a witness box confession, and Lamoureux deployed the “three leaders ago” quip.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he praised the police action over the weekend with the “bike rally” and how they didn’t need the Emergencies Act, and he wondered if it was necessary at all months ago. Marco Mendicino also praised the police’s actions, and said that the invoked the Emergencies Act at the time because it was needed. Therrien spun a version of events during the occupation that presumed more federal powers than exist, and Mendicino repeated that they needed the Act that time.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and in French, and he lamented that federal COVID sickness benefits were expiring, and Karina Gould appeared by video to say that they extended EI sickness benefits, which was not the same thing. Daniel Blaikie took over to add some sanctimony to the question, and demanded the benefits be extended, and Gould listed actions they have taken around sick days (for federally-regulated sectors) and EI modernisation.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Dubious procedural moves and political theatre

Posted on by

We are now on or about day sixty-four of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the big news is that Russia is cutting off natural gas to Poland and Bulgaria, ostensibly because they refuse to pay in rubles as Russia demands. The real reason is, of course, blackmail over support for Ukraine, as well as an attempt to divide Europe, but that doesn’t seem to be happening.

Closer to home, there is some procedural bullshit going down, and I’m unimpressed. The government has put forward an omnibus motion that would give them the power to start implementing late-night sittings right away, rather than in the few weeks before the break, and even more curious is the notion that they would give ministers the ability to adjourn the Commons for the summer with no notice, and a simple vote call. The late-night sittings—with the added language that those sittings can’t be obstructed with dilatory motions—makes a certain amount of sense in that the procedural warfare that plagued them last year has made a comeback, and they haven’t even managed to pass the budget implementation bill from December, which is not good. This is in a sense make-up time for all of the time wasted on dilatory motions—actions have consequences. But that ability for a minister to pull the plug for summer at any point really sticks in my craw, and I’m not mollified by Mark Holland insisting that this is only intended for use during the final week. It feels to me a lot like the ability to give themselves a nuclear option to hold over the other parties, including the NDP, if they don’t want to play ball in getting bills through. If Holland really wants this only for the final week, the motion should be drafted to say so.

At the same time, Holland also announced that they were going to move ahead with creating a special security-cleared committee for those Winnipeg Lab documents, whether or not the Conservatives agree to join in. But…this feels like theatre at this point, because the Conservatives stopped boycotting NSICOP, and that’s exactly the kind of thing that committee exists to deal with. And the government already turned over the unredacted documents to NSICOP, so what really is the point here? Aside from political theatre? Why can’t we have grown-ups in charge?

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lower-tier leadership candidates

Posted on by

It is now on or about day fifty-five of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and it looks like the fighting in the eastern part of the country, around the Donbas region, has intensified as has been signalled for a couple of weeks now. At the same time, more missile attacks have hit western cities in the country like Lviv, which has mostly been out of the fighting, so that is keeping everyone on edge, particularly given that Lviv is hosting a lot of the people who have fled from other parts of the country.

Other news from Ukraine over the long weekend:

  • Thus far, the invasion has damaged about 30 percent of the country’s infrastructure, at a cost of about $100 billion.
  • There were further attacks on Kyiv over the weekend, possibly in retaliation for the sinking of the Moskva
  • Ukrainian fighters in Mariupol are defying Russia’s surrender-or-die orders
  • Here is a look at the situation LGBTQ+ Ukrainians find themselves in during the war.

Closer to home, Power & Politics interviewed Conservative leadership candidate Roman Baber yesterday, and it was…painful. He is not a serious person. At all. He kept speaking in facile talking points about “restoring democracy,” as though we didn’t just have free and fair elections, based on his nonsense reading of public health restrictions and what happened during the Ottawa occupation, with a dose of facile catch-phrases about “cancel culture.” And, bless her, Vassy Kapelos did gently try to push back against some of what he said, but wow. I would be very surprised if he manages to get his $300,000 in fundraising and all of his signatures to become a verified contestant because he offers nothing original, and even if this about trying to rebuild his profile after being booted from the caucus provincially, it’s a very difficult way to go about it, with not much in the way of reward.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A confidence agreement in the works?

Posted on by

We are now on day twenty-seven of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and Ukraine has refused to surrender the strategic port city of Mariupol to the Russians. As well, Russian shelling destroyed a shopping centre in Kyiv killing eight, which is escalating the attacks facing the capital. Also of note was a possible leak of Russian casualty figures, citing 9,861 killed and 16,153 injured over the course of the invasion, which contradicts Russian propaganda figures to date, and which could turn up the pressure on Putin by the Russian people.

Back in Canada, news started spreading over the evening that the Liberals and NPD had reached a tentative agreement to a supply-and-confidence agreement that would see the NDP agree to support the next four Liberal budgets so that they can stay in power until 2025 in relative stability, and in return, the Liberals will make “real progress” on national pharmacare and dental care. I’m a little confused why those would be the conditions, given that they’re wholly dependent upon the provincial governments signing on, and while the current federal government put a framework in place for national pharmacare, thus far only PEI has signed on (and I haven’t seen the NDP publicly haranguing John Horgan to sign on either). And while people ask why they can’t do what they did with early learning and child care, part of that answer is that the reason why provincial governments are gun-shy about these programmes is they are concerned that if they set them up, a future federal government will cut funding and leave them holding the bag for very expensive programmes. While Quebec has shown that child care will pay for itself once more women are in the workforce and paying taxes, I’m not sure the calculation is quite the same for the other two, or will at least take much longer for the fiscal benefits to work their way through the system. So could the government come to the table with a lot more money—maybe. But that doesn’t eliminate the trepidation that once 2025 hits that their fears won’t come true. There are also reports that the deal could include more for housing, reconciliation, and some form of wealth taxes, so we’ll see what gets announced this morning.

The Conservatives, meanwhile, are touting this as evidence of a “coalition” and that it’s “backdoor socialism,” which doesn’t make sense. It’s not a coalition because there are no Cabinet seats for the NDP, and these kinds of confidence agreements are easily broken (see: British Columbia and the deal with the Greens, which Horgan’s NDP tore up when the polls looked good enough to get a majority, which he did). It’s not socialism because they’re not going around nationalising the means of production. They’re still going to wail and gnash their teeth, and pretend that this is somehow illegitimate when it’s one hundred percent within how hung parliaments work under our system, but I’m not going to say it will last the full four years. It will however alter the narrative of the Conservatives’ leadership contest, and could be read either as Trudeau giving himself enough runway to make a few more accomplishments before turning it over to a successor, or for him to try and build the case for re-election. Either way, it’s fairly unprecedented at the federal level in this country, and could make for interesting days ahead.

Continue reading →

QP: Trying to make “Justinflation” happen

Posted on by

The Liberal benches were again about two-thirds full, and the prime minister was in attendance, so that was something? While Erin O’Toole gave a lengthy speech in the Chamber earlier, he was nowhere to be seen. That left it up to Gérard Deltell to lead off, and he moaned about inflation and worries in the US about persistent inflation—which is not Canada’s situation. Justin Trudeau said the biggest thing that they could do was end the pandemic, which would end the supply chain disruptions that were increasing costs. Deltell cited the “not thinking about monetary policy” quip and demanded limited spending—erm, which is fiscal policy—and Trudeau repeated that they needed to end the pandemic. Deltell selectively quoted a  countries with lower inflation than us, and Trudeau noted that this was a global issue because of supply chains. Michael Barrett got up after and took a page from Pierre Poilievre’s playbook in confusing land and housing stock to rail about inflation, and Trudeau noted that the question ignored the pandemic, and the way to end it was by vaccination, which Conservatives didn’t seem to get. Barrett countered that his riding has one the highest vaccination rates in the country and gave more wrong talking points about inflation, and Trudeau suggested that Barrett’s constituents help convince his Conservative colleagues to get vaccinated).

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried that they softwood lumber tariffs were doubled after the Three Amigos summit and wondered what they talked about. Trudeau listed off items discussed including softwood and PEI potatoes. Blanchet made a jab at the potatoes, and mused that Quebec would be better able to negotiate on their own, but Trudeau insisted that they were defending the sector like they did aluminium (another Quebec export).

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and demanded immediate action on the housing crisis, but Trudeau disputed his characterisation and listed measures in the Speech from the Throne. Singh switched to French to repeat the question, and got the same answer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Nothing unexpected in the Speech from the Throne

Posted on by

In amidst all of the pomp and ceremony, there was very little that was unexpected out of yesterday’s Speech from the Throne, where Governor General Mary May Simon read the government’s planned agenda, talking about the fact that the pandemic is not yet over, and making high-level promises around climate action, reconciliation, and a nod to the rising cost of living. In a little over half an hour, it was over, and MPs returned to the House of Commons.

Two media narratives largely dominated the coverage the rest of the day: 1) this is basically the election platform, which erm, hello, is pretty much the point, and putting something shiny and new in there while in a hung parliament would be difficult and asking for trouble; and 2) daring the opposition parties to bring down the government, which they won’t do, but reporters will ask leading – if not goading – questions all the same. And because of the requisite chest-thumping that goes along with a hung parliament, we saw both the Conservatives and NDP talking tough about not supporting it (well, the NDP said that the Liberals shouldn’t take their votes for granted even though they pretty much can because the NDP are in no shape to back up their words), and the Bloc essentially acknowledging that they would support it because of course they will. Nobody is going to bring the government down over this and go to another election (because no, there is no other possible government formation possible with the current composition of the Chamber), so the Liberals will pass this, and their fall fiscal update, and one or two of the bills on their priority wish list before they rise for the holidays, and the Conservatives and the NDP will huff and puff about it, but that’s about as much as will happen.

Once the speech was over, the Conservatives immediately launched into a renewed round of procedural shenanigans once they got back to the House of Commons, and before Erin O’Toole read his response to the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne. First it was a point of privilege on the unresolved issue from the previous parliament on the Winnipeg Lab documents, in spite of the fact that the committee that wanted them doesn’t exist and the order they made also no longer exists. Then they went after the Clerk and the scurrilous allegations of partisanship (which, according to everyone I’ve spoken to – including Senate Conservatives – is ridiculous and office politics run amok in the House of Commons’ administration). The Speaker tried to cut that off, insisting that it should be dealt with at BoIE, especially as the Clerk cannot defend himself in the Commons, but they kept going after it, which is poor form and a signal that they want blood and they don’t care if they hurt the Clerk in the process. And after that, it was the vaccine mandate and the use of the Board of Internal Economy, demanding a vote on it – erm, which would just expose those who object to said mandate and tar those who object to the procedural use of the BoIE with the same brush, which seems politically foolish to me, but what do I know? (Affirming the vaccine mandate is part of the Liberals’ omnibus motion that would also restore hybrid sittings, for what it’s worth).

Continue reading →

Roundup: COVID is not done with Parliament

Posted on by

There was sad news over the weekend that Senator Josée Forest-Niesing passed away from COVID. Forest-Niesing had been recently discharged from hospital after being in for nearly a month after complications – while she was double-vaxxed, she suffered from an auto-immune lung condition that both made her extremely vulnerable, and the vaccines less effective, which is why we need more people to be vaccinated, so that it can’t spread to vulnerable people.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives announced that their MP Richard Lehoux tested positive (in spite of being fully vaxxed), which raises questions because Conservatives were all in town for caucus last week, and it’s very possible that this may have been a spreader event, as there are questions about the actual vaccination status of all Conservative MPs, (and I have some serious doubts about the veracity of some of the medical exemptions that are being claimed, especially as they are being claimed by those expressing anti-vax or vaccine-hesitant views).

The worst part of all of this is that this just gives the Liberals more ammunition to demand hybrid sittings, which need to end immediately, both for the health of our parliamentary democracy, as well as the health of our interpretation staff who are suffering injuries that we would not ask anyone else to endure so that MPs could stay at home while other essential workers have to be on the front lines – and Parliament is essential, and the government has been sending the absolute wrong signal in keeping MPs at home – the Liberals most especially if we have a repeat of last session, where Mark Gerretson would be the only MP in the Chamber and the rest of those benches were empty. There are ways to keep Parliament safe, especially now that everyone is doubly vaccinated (so they assure us) and can wear masks indoors at all times. It’s not difficult, and it keeps the business of the nation going. Let’s do this the right way.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another day, another position on gun control

Posted on by

Another day, and Erin O’Toole has yet another position on gun control. In the face of more questions on just where he stands, O’Toole now says that he’ll keep the existing prohibitions in place – but remains cagey on just what those are, never mind that his platform says he’ll repeal them. Also, never mind that his own candidates are saying they’ll repeal the measures the current government put into place.

What is fascinating as well is to watch certain small-c conservative columnists report on this about-face, saying things like this might save O’Toole’s campaign, rather than, oh, this is yet another example of him swallowing himself whole, reversing his positions when it suits him, saying one thing to one group and another thing to another group if he thinks he can get away with it, and generally being a naked opportunist. And these tend to be the same talking heads who spend days if the Liberals “flip-flop” on a position. I expect we’ll see a few more days of questions to O’Toole on his changing positions, and whether they change again in another day or two.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford’s vaccine certification falsehoods

Posted on by

Ontario’s science table released some dire modelling yesterday that showed that unless vaccination rates reach over 85 percent, we may need yet another lockdown to prevent the healthcare system from becoming overwhelmed – yet again. Thus far, only 76 percent of people over the age of 12 are fully vaccinated, so we have a way to go if we don’t want things to get dire, once more.

With this in mind, Doug Ford begrudgingly agreed to finally roll out vaccine certificates (not calling them “passports”) as of September 22, with the app coming a month later, but as with anything Ford and his band of incompetent murderclowns do, it’s half-assed and largely inadequate. In this case, they’ll require these certificates to enter non-essential businesses like indoor dining and theatres, but at the same time, they won’t require staff at these places to be fully vaccinated, because that makes so much sense. And most gallingly, Ford tried to claim that he has to do it because the federal government won’t – which is, frankly, bullshit because this is firmly within provincial jurisdiction, and after provinces grudgingly allowed the federal government access to their records for international travel purposes, many of them either refused to allow the same data to be used domestically (including Ford up until yesterday), or stated that they were moving ahead with their own certification so no need to bother with a federal one (thinking especially of Quebec).

Here’s Justin Ling with receipts about why this is bullshit, including when Ford’s flacks tried to “prove” that they wanted national vaccine certification, when it was in fact for international travel, and they’re content to lie to us to try and shift the blame when the anti-vaxxer crowd starts protesting (and yes, they did immediately after).

And because it was too spot-on, here’s Brittlestar’s take.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The jobs numbers are in

Posted on by

It was jobs day at Statistics Canada yesterday, and the June figures showed that there was a big recovery in part-time employment, largely in accommodation and food services, as well as retail trade – signs that the economy is starting to open back up across the country, and this was before we had any re-opening in Ontario, showing that there is still definitely room to grow. There were also more people looking for work, which meant the unemployment rate was a little higher than it might have been otherwise.

Of course, this was entirely being spun in entirely disingenuous ways by Pierre Poilievre, who has made an artform of lying with statistics. He called a press conference to decry that there was still a loss in full-time employment (never mind that full-time employment has held far steadier during the pandemic than part-time work, particularly because a lot of that part-time works is in the service industry that couldn’t operate during the mockdown/lockdowns). He decried the unemployment figure, but deliberately ignored that every country calculates their rate differently, and didn’t mention that if we calculated our rate the way the Americans do, there is a marginal difference between them.

But more to the point, he has spent the past couple of months trying to build this narrative that a job recovery projection in the budget was a promise to have fully restored the million jobs lost from the start of the pandemic by this point. Never mind that we had a third wave that was far deeper and longer than could have been anticipated when those projections were made (and you can thank murderclown premiers for reopening too soon before the second wave had subsided, and then waited too long to impose new measures once again), or that projections are not really promises. Yes, there is still more work to do in order to recover the employment we had pre-pandemic and to do the work of removing barriers so that women and minorities can better participate. But there’s no need to lie with statistics to make a point or as a means of trying to hold the government to account for its actions (or inaction) during this pandemic.

Continue reading →