Tag Archives: Iran

A grab-bag of Carney answers

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney held a press conference yesterday to pat himself on the back for his government’s accomplishments over the spring sitting, but as with most of these exercises, the real interest was in his responses to questions, which he doesn’t do very often. So, what did we learn?

  • That big call with Trump this week with the extremely vague readout was mostly about Iran and NATO, and not about trade.
  • We’re still a long way away from any kind of trade deal with Trump.
  • The six upcoming by-elections will likely be spaced out.
  • We finally got more details on that condo purchase in Vancouver, which is 90 percent provincial funding/10 percent federal, and is intended as rent-to-own.
  • He will be going to Stampede, and plans to defend national unity, and is using Brexit as a cautionary tale (as well he should be).
  • We are sending aid to Venezuela after the earthquakes, and while it might be useful to have some kind of consular services there or in Iran, we’ll go through partners.

Shortly afterward, Pierre Poilievre gave his own press conference to decry the state of the Canadian economy and blame Carney for it, as though Trump wasn’t a factor, or that climate change isn’t affecting things like food prices. In fact, he pretty much admitted he’d accept a bad deal with Trump for the sake of getting a deal. So there’s that.

"It's all an illusion."

— Scott Robertson (@sarobertson.bsky.social) 2026-06-25T19:54:15.597Z

My Latest:

For National Magazine, I delve into the Supreme Court of Canada’s increasing caseload, and why the Chief Justice’s explanation of cleared backlogs doesn’t hold.

Continue reading →

Ginning up an faux inflation narrative

Posted on by

The inflation data for May was released yesterday, and unsurprisingly, the headline number ran high because of gasoline prices, entirely because of the situation that Trump created with Iran and the Strait of Hormuz. Looking into the data, it’s quite clear that core measures—which strip out volatile food and fuel prices—is right on the Bank of Canada’s target at 2.1 and 2.0 percent (there are two different core measures the Bank of Canada tracks). And yes, food price inflation continues to run hot, and the data shows pretty clearly that it’s supply disruptions—things like tomatoes coming from Mexico, where they planted fewer crops because of US tariffs, and then that smaller crop was affected by weather conditions (read: climate change). Constrained supply means higher prices. This is basic supply-and-demand.

Before Poilievre lights his hair on fire about inflation hitting 3.2% last month, this is pretty much entirely on gasoline prices because of Iran. Core measures remain at 2.1% and 2.0%. And he's going to decry the price of food and blame "Liberal inflation" as opposed to the truth:

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-06-22T13:30:56.569Z

Predictably, Pierre Poilievre came out and blamed “Liberal high taxes, waste, and deficits.” None of those have anything to do with inflation. Taxes (which the Liberals have cut consistently) are disinflationary. The size of the deficit has nothing to do with Trump’s foreign misadventures, or climate change affecting food-producing regions, and yet, Poilievre has a convenient target for everything. Who needs facts when you have a narrative, and a government who refuses to actually push back on any of this, and merely pats themselves on the back for OECD projections.

Just completely ignoring the relevant facts, because he has a narrative.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-06-22T18:21:00.215Z

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2069126743831830583

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2069136495693418894

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-06-22T13:08:01.946Z

My Latest:

  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take takes issue with the Conservative private member’s bill to take the GST off of used cars, which is both bad policy and bad economics.
  • For National Magazine, I delve into Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision that allows a failed candidate the opportunity to sue the province’s chief electoral officer.
  • My (belated) weekend column on the government unnecessarily jamming complex bills through the Senate for no good reason at all.
  • For National Magazine, I contributed to this look at the next Supreme Court of Canada justice, Glenn Joyal.

Continue reading →

The arrogant “tinfoil hat” dismissal

Posted on by

The House of Commons rose for the summer yesterday afternoon, after a particularly busy few months. Government House Leader Stephen MacKinnon took to the Foyer yesterday to pat himself on the back for passing twenty-one bills in the sitting, which is a lot, particularly after the record of the last few years when unrelenting procedural warfare meant that only one or two non-money bills (by which I mean either budget implementation or Estimates) got passed. This is thanks to the government having secured a working majority in the Commons, allowing them to use time allocation on a regular basis to move bills along—perhaps a little too often. Yes, things were being slow-walked but the solution is not to time allocate everything, which only creates distrust and bad will, but well, the Liberals have become arrogant since getting the majority. So if Ruby Sahota and Gary Anandasangaree are slowly morphing into Vic Toews given their rhetoric on lawful access, well, MacKinnon is morphing into Peter Van Loan, who time allocated absolutely everything when he was House Leader. (And suddenly I am having flashbacks of Peter Julian standing up to say “Here we go again…” with every time allocation motion).

An absolutely shameful statement by Steven MacKinnon. Every organization with a long track record of expert commentary on the rule of law in Canada condemned the bill. "Liberals dismiss ‘tinfoil hat’ privacy fears as lawful access bill passes"globalnews.ca/news/1191195…

— David TS Fraser (@privacylawyer.ca) 2026-06-19T01:15:29.519Z

What was beyond the pale, however, was the fact that MacKinnon over the past couple of days has decided to start casting concerns about the lawful access bill—which they rammed through with some absolute procedural fuckery—as being “tinfoil hat” conspiracy theories. Sorry, but no—the level of metadata they are demanding that companies track and retain is legitimately invasive, as are the requirements that telecom companies install equipment that will turn your phones into tracking devices (but only with judicial authorization…on a very low threshold to obtain it). The Supreme Court has twice ruled that lawful access is unconstitutional, but this government went and bowled ahead anyway, and think that they can dismiss any legitimate criticism as some kind of mental illness. (And no, the amendments they hastily passed before passage do not address any of the core concerns with the legislation).

Every privacy expert in this country is raising the alarm, and no, the fact that every police organization in the country wants these surveillance powers is not reassuring. It is, in fact, the opposite of that. We already have big problems in this country with cops who use the police database as a dating registry—do we really need to give them the ability to stalk any woman that they choose? What about the allegations of police in Toronto passing along information to organised crime? Do we need to give those cops the ability to track any phone so that they can pass along that information to organised crime as well? This is not far-fetched or out of the realm of possibility—these kinds of things are already happening. This government used to care about these kinds of things, but that has gone out the window with Carney in charge.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-06-18T13:08:10.185Z

Continue reading →

QP: Call it “Soliloquy Period”

Posted on by

For the final QP of the spring sitting, the PM was once again absent—back from France, but off again to Vancouver to watch a World Cup match. Priorities. Pierre Poilievre was present for the first time this week, and he led off in French, to read a soliloquy about our woeful economic situation, and demanded the prime minister defend it. Steven MacKinnon got up to pat himself on the back for delivering 21 pieces of legislation and the supposed biggest criminal justice reform ever. (Really?) Poilievre launched into the old tactic of the question being for the prime minister and that he wasn’t answering, and after being cautioned by the Speaker, Poilievre asked when the recession would end. François-Philippe Champagne go up to say that he was surprised that Poilievre didn’t thank the PM for the success at the G7. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, framing intact, and MacKinnon repeated his same response as before. Poilievre declare that they plan to spend the summer fighting the “Liberal recession” and he launched into a his demand that the prime minister standup to defend it. Champagne got back up and patted himself on the back for increased investment, and recited a couple of slogans along the way. Poilievre accused this of being a “hallucination” and railed about the shrinking economy, and again demanded the PM stand up. Patty Hajdu took this as an insult to people in the skilled trades (erm, really?). Poilievre launched into another soliloquy about the supposed “recession” we are not actually in. Tim Hodgson listed the conservative premiers who are interested in working with the government. 

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she accused the prime minister of betraying the environment and Quebec culture, undoing a generation of struggle. MacKinnon got up to praise their “generational investment” and that the government is investing hundreds of millions in culture, and got a swipe about high-speed rail in there as well. Normandin called out the constant concessions to Trump, and the lack of respect shown to Parliament. Miller was incredulous that the Bloc were talking about betrayal when they want to destroy the country. Mario Simard took over, and repeated the same points. Joël Lightbound listed things that the Bloc were voting against.

Continue reading →

QP: Poilievre makes common cause with the PQ leader

Posted on by

The PM was present today, fresh from the Pride flag raising on the Hill, and Pierre Poilievre was present as well. He led off in French, worrying that in the midst of the “worst recession in the G7,” he lamented that the government planned to spent $90 billion on the high-speed rail that would “destroy farms in Quebec.” Mark Carney listed the jobs that this was expected to create. Poilievre dismissed these as “jobs for Liberal friends,” and again lamented the projected cost of the project. Carney praised that this would be the biggest infrastructure project in the country’s history, and we need to build. Poilievre switched to English to worry about the rise in bankruptcies and worried the government’s spreading was making it worse. Carney praised the number for jobs created in the past month. Poilievre countered with even more cherry-picked dismal numbers, and Carney dismissed this as Poilievre not believing in Canada. Poilievre insisted it was his patriotic duty to fight for the people who are suffering, and that he would make no lessons on patriotism from a guy who stashes his funds in a tax haven. The Speaker noted that there wasn’t a question, and so they moved onto the next one, and Poilievre cited delinquency rates, and blamed the PM for driving the country into recession, to which Carney insisted they are growing a stronger and more independent economy.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she accused the government of abandoning Quebec culture in the face of tech giants and Donald Trump, in exchange for absolute nothing. Carney responded that the question is why the Bloc keeps voting against investments in Quebec culture. Normandin listed the cancellation of policies and the abandonment of the flight against climate change, and that he is deregulating things like pesticides, all for the benefit of American corporations. Carney shrugged this off by listing things the Bloc voted against. Martin Champoux also accused Carney of abandoning Quebec culture for bargaining chips, and Carney said it was sad that the Bloc didn’t read the previous budget and the investments for culture therein.

Continue reading →

QP: Unsuccessfully trying to goad the PM

Posted on by

Fresh from his trip to Armenia and his announcement of Louise Arbour as the next Governor General, the PM was present for QP today. Pierre Poilievre also showed up, and he led off in French, and he immediately started taking swipes at the immigration minister, and demanded that the prime minister fire her. Mark Carney ignored the question, and praised Arbour as the next GG in French. Poilievre raised the visa for the Iranian official who got on a plane to Canada, and again demanded he fire her. Carney stated that Iranian officials are not allowed in Canada, and that they are taking steps to ensure it doesn’t happen. Poilievre repeated the question/demand in English, and Carney repeated his same answer in English, before reciting his Farge-esque line about taking back control of the immigration system. Poilievre listed a bunch of misleading statistics about Iranian officials already in Canada, and again demanded the firing, and Carney rattled off the number of investigations, cancelled visas, and removals. Poilievre then switched to the Cowichan decision, recited some misleading nonsense, and claimed the government wasn’t defending homeowners. Carney said that they respect private property rights, which is why they appealed the decision, and then noted that it was Red Dress day. Poilievre claimed this was just an illusion, and cited the government’s litigation directives on Indigenous rights, and again claimed the government was not defending rights. Carney hit back that the only illusion was whether this makeover of Poilievre’s would work more than his previous attempts, and then repeated his same response. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and demanded to know why the government wasn’t not implementing wage subsidies for businesses in peril from tariffs. Carney said that he wanted to thank the member across the way for his support for the new measures announced. Blanchet was not satisfied, and tried again. Carney pointed out that the new measures will flow immediately, and it also goes to small businesses. Blanchet was still not mollified, and said that these small businesses could not go deeper into debt and demanded a wage subsidy again. Carney responded with praise from Quebec business groups for the new support measures. 

Continue reading →

QP: On what date remains a terrible question

Posted on by

The PM was wrapping up his meetings in Armenia and preparing to head home, while Pierre Poilievre was also away. That left it up to Melissa Lantsman to lead off, with the usual lines about “credit card” spending, and costs. Wayne Long stood up to praise the government’s efforts. Lantsman repeated the script with added disdain, and Evan Solomon took this one, to raise the trade war, and wondered what the Conservatives would cut. Tim Uppal took over and demanded to know when a pipeline would start construction. Mélanie Joly also pointed that there was a trade war going on. Uppal tried again, and Tim Hodgson suggested they spend time talking to proponents instead of just getting social media clips. Luc Berthold took over and read the “credit card” lines in French, and Joly repeated that we are in a trade war. Berthold ranted some absolute nonsense about “printing debt,” and Joly suggested he take a math lesson and recited the talking points about our position in the G7.

Oral questions. Questions orales. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-04T18:19:17.092Z

Lantsman blames high gas prices on government spending. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-04T18:20:58.026Z

Joly: We are in a trade war. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-04T18:24:39.790Z

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she called the government’s tariff support announcement this morning to be insufficient, particularly for small and medium-sized businesses. Joly praised the terms they are offering for the loans to help those firms. Normandin said that while the Bloc will cooperate with this measures, they government needs to do more, especially with a wage subsidy. Joly said that they will do more, because the government stands with the industry. Gabriel Ste-Marie gave his own question on the increased tariffs, and demanded more immediate support. Dominic LeBlanc said that he was touch with industry stakeholders. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: A stolen voter list

Posted on by

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 →

QP: The magic of balanced budgets

Posted on by

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

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

Continue reading →

Roundup: Two committees move behind closed doors

Posted on by

There is a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth happening by the Conservatives because debate in two committees was moved behind closed doors now that the Liberals are able to exert majority control of them. The cry is that they’re shutting down “public debate,” but I’m dubious. Members of the government won’t say why this was necessary, but I’m not ready to pull the fire alarm just yet.

Why? Because the two committees in question have been in the throes of attempted witch hunt studies that the Conservatives have been trying to orchestrate (with the gleeful assistance of the Bloc, who are happy to embarrass the government any day of the week). In the ethics committee, it’s been the wrangling over trying to insinuate that François-Philippe Champagne was in a conflict of interest because the Alto high speed rail project was included in the budget when he has since put up an ethics screen because his spouse is now an executive on the project. The thing is, the Ethics Commissioner already said that there is no conflict because Alto reports to a different line minister, but Champagne put up the screen out of an abundance of caution. He did agree to appear after a filibuster, but this may be the Liberals trying to get out of it, and not unsurprisingly. The Conservatives have been trying to engineer this meeting so that they can harvest a bunch of clips of them calling Champagne corrupt and him prevaricating or looking obstinate.

The other committee is health, where the Conservatives are trying to manufacture another “boondoggle” around the PrescribeIT project, which as I understand it, was created at the behest of the provinces, who then decided not to take it up once it was developed. Oh, but there was outsourcing! And? They haven’t been able to make any particular allegation other than it cost money, and this is somehow entirely the federal government’s fault for trying to accommodate provinces who, to this day, refuse to come together on common standards for electronic health records, which has been a persistent problem for two decades now. Suffice to say, I’m not convinced that moving procedural wrangling in camera is a sign that democracy is under threat, and there was a whole lot of this very same thing when the Conservatives had a majority on committees (and they turned those committees into branch plants of ministers’ offices). They may try to cast themselves as heroes for inventing scandals, but I remain unconvinced that this is a danger to parliamentary democracy just yet.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-29T13:08:02.607Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s attack on Odesa early Wednesday hit residential buildings and a hospital. Ukraine says its new long-range drones hit a Russian oil pumping station 1500 km away from the border. Here is a look at the interceptor drone programme to stop Russia’s Shahed drones, and how the interception rate is now up to 90 percent.

Continue reading →