Tag Archives: Jagmeet Singh

Roundup: The WE Imbroglio worsens

Posted on by

Because the Liberals’ capacity for self-harm wasn’t apparent enough already, it seems that they decided to find yet another rake to step on as the WE Imbroglio continues to unfold, and we learned that two of Bill Morneau’s children have done work for WE – one of them as a salaried employee, and no, Morneau also did not recuse himself from any Cabinet discussions or decisions when it came to awarding WE the student service grant contract. Because of course he didn’t.

Within the Liberal ranks, so far only Nathaniel Erskine-Smith – already considered a “maverick” – has come out to say that he’s not keen on what has transpired, which makes me wonder how many other Liberal MPs feel similarly but just aren’t saying out of a sense of loyalty or because they would rather close ranks at a time like this. Of course, if we had a properly functioning Westminster democracy in this country, the caucus could get together and say “You know what – the leader keeps hurting the party with these self-inflicted wounds, so maybe it’s time we find a new leader,” and within a few days, they could have voted out Trudeau and voted on a replacement from within the caucus ranks, and then it would be off to Rideau Hall to swear in a new prime minister, who hopefully wouldn’t be a prone to stepping on those rakes. But we don’t have a properly functioning system because the Liberals and the pundit class back in 1919 decided it was somehow “more democratic” to give the party membership the ability to decide on the leadership, and suddenly the accountability of that leader to his or her caucus was annihilated. Now we have leaders who have centralized all power and authority and who are accountable to no one, so that when they cause trouble for their parties, the caucus is now stuck. (It would also help in keeping the party from becoming a personality cult of the current leader because that leader is easily replaced, but again, that’s no where we’re at in this country, and we are paying the price for it.

As for the Conservatives, they decided that they needed to up the stakes and send a letter to the RCMP to demand a criminal investigation of this contract, under the flimsiest of pretences. It’s ludicrous, of course, but what it allows them to do is to insinuate that the RMCP are investigating when they likely aren’t because they’re not public about what they are and are not investigating, and they can spend the summer asking Trudeau “have the RCMP contacted you yet?” and posting those clips all over their social media channels. We’ve seen this particular play before, and it wasn’t great the first time, and this iteration won’t have improved either. I suspect there is also an element of “lock her up!” as part of their calculation for this, because they know that there is an element of their base that will respond to this bit of red meat, and they can’t help themselves, no matter how corrosive this is to our political discourse, or the long-term the damage that it causes.

Meanwhile, Susan Delacourt hears from Erskine-Smith and other unnamed Liberals who are balking at how closed-off to caucus Trudeau has been, and how that breeds these kinds of problems. Chris Selley marvels at Trudeau’s trilogy of scandals, and the ways in which they are continually minimized.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An unequivocal no to interfering in an extradition

Posted on by

For his daily presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau once again praised the wage subsidy, and highlighted yet another business who had used it to great effect – part of his ongoing campaign to convince more businesses to take it up and re-hire their employees as the economic restart continues to ramp up. By way of announcements, he spoke of new resources being made available for people and businesses who had questions about the re-opening, and then spoke about a $100 million investment in the Merit Functional Foods plant in Winnipeg as part of the “Protein Supercluster,” and creating more plant-based foods in Canada. Trudeau also spoke about a $94 million investment that Minister Karina Gould would be announcing at the SheDecides Conference, which would go toward the health, and sexual and reproductive rights of vulnerable women around the world.

During the Q&A, he was asked about the situation of temporary foreign workers from Mexico, to which he said that they were working with source countries and business owners to ensure that there were proper protections in place, and warned that there would be consequences for those employers that failed their workers, as three have now died in Canada. On the subject of airlines’ pleas to reopen international travel, Trudeau said that they needed to be very careful about reopening it, otherwise we would see a new spike in cases as they are experiencing in some other countries who opened sooner and not as carefully as most of Canada has. And then there were a raft of questions on the fraught questions of the arbitrary detentions of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, the extradition of Meng Wanzhou, and Chinese officials sniping at Trudeau to stop making “irresponsible” comments that link the case, even though they themselves have done so.

If there was anything newsworthy out of that was the fact that when asked if Trudeau would consider making a deal to halt the extradition in exchange for releasing the Two Michaels, Trudeau gave an unequivocal no, that he would not make any deal that would undermine our judicial system. When presented with the notion that Kovrig’s family sought a legal opinion to say that the minister could indeed interfere, Trudeau again poured cold water on that suggestion, again citing the need to keep our judicial independence in place. It’s worth remembering that Trudeau was part of a G7 announcement about governments making a commitment not to pay ransoms in order to protect their citizens from being the targets of kidnappings around the world, and hostage diplomacy is just that. (And for all of the smartasses over social media who said “He already interfered with the judiciary with SNC-Lavalin,” he did not interfere with the judiciary – the charge was that he tried to interfere with the prosecution, which was not the same thing, and I remain unconvinced that it was what actually happened, no matter some of the unsavoury things that did happen with the deferred prosecution agreement legislation).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Wilson-Raybould tries to rehabilitate her image

Posted on by

There were a couple items of note that came up over the weekend, and the first was an op-ed penned by Jody Wilson-Raybould, which called for action in reforming the criminal justice system as a way of addressing systemic racism, but more curiously, offered an insistence that she tried to, but was blocked by “the centre” from doing so. I have questions. The notion that she was prevented from fulfilling one of the tasks assigned to her in her mandate letter by the PMO makes no sense whatsoever, which makes me wonder if the real issue here isn’t one of process.

Why I raise this question was the fact that there was a bunch of reporting about behind-the-scenes clashes between Wilson-Raybould and Carolyn Bennett on Indigenous self-government legislation, and Wilson-Raybould was insistent that they bulldoze ahead using criteria that she insisted on, as she felt that she was the expert in these matters, while Bennett was instead insistent that they continue to consult with Indigenous communities (because let’s face it – every time the government tries any kind of reform of existing laws concerning Indigenous people, it is immediately met with unhappy voices who tell the government to start over with consultations). It seems plausible to me that Wilson-Raybould was attempting to pursue criminal justice reforms in a manner that PMO or PCO raised concerns about. Backing up this theory are the fact that she was unable to manage her own bills as she presented them – for example, there was much fanfare over a bill to fully repeal laws that targeted gay men, but that bill was abandoned and folded into a larger bill, and that larger bill was also abandoned and folded into yet another larger bill before it was passed. She also insisted on specific provisions in the Medical Assistance in Dying legislation which everyone warned her the courts would strike down, and lo and behold, they did, and yet she was insistent. She was insistent upon random alcohol screening legislation that was almost certainly unconstitutional, and would actually make it more likely that police would use it to target Black, Indigenous or other visible minority drivers, and yet she stuck firm. She also convinced the prime minister to have Cabinet vote against the genetic discrimination legislation that came from the Senate, and went so far as to call up provinces that previously had no problem with the bill and beg them to oppose it, even after every single MP in the Chamber outside of Cabinet voted for it. After that passed, said she was going to immediately refer it to the Supreme Court of Canada (and then didn’t, but the Quebec government challenged it after she prompted them to, and that is now before the Supreme Court). So weighing all of these things, I’m sure you can understand why I might be dubious about her claims.

The other item of interest was a revisiting of Jagmeet Singh calling the Bloc House Leader a racist, and beyond people like Gilles Duceppe accusing Singh of “cheap politics,” looking at what happened through a procedural lens, you’ll find that what the Bloc objected to was introducing the motion – not the motion itself. Why? Because the usual practice is to give 48 hours’ notice for any motion so that the Commons isn’t blindsided, hence why introducing a motion without that notice period requires unanimous consent. Singh, as has become usual, introduced the motion as a performative gesture without going through the usual motions, and it’s more than plausible that the Bloc objected on procedural grounds than substantive ones, only to be rewarded by being labelled racists (never mind the fact that their support for Quebec’s Bill 21 on face-coverings may lend more substance to the charge than against it). Nevertheless, had Singh followed proper procedure, which exists for a reason, he may have had better success. Even more to the point, if he hadn’t been so quick to sign away resuming regular sittings, he could have used one of his allotted Supply Days to bring forward such a motion and have a full, formal vote on it after a full day’s debate on the subject. But he gave away that opportunity for the sake of a promise by the prime minister to talk to the premiers about sick leave rather than getting any substantive measure out of it, so he had only himself to blame ultimately.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Questions on a dubious nomination

Posted on by

For the second time in what could very well be the start of a series of media events that look suspiciously like campaign stops, prime minister Justin Trudeau was at a café and bistro in Chelsea, Quebec, near Ottawa, to tout the wage subsidy – a programme whose uptake has been hampered by the poor timing of its rollout by the government. He made a minor announcement about $15.8 million for youth green jobs in the natural resources sector, recounted his call with the premiers the night before during which his offer of $14 billion remained on the table for their safe reopening plans, and then capped it off with a plea for people to follow public health guidelines for Father’s Day.

It was during the Q&A that he expressed his “disappointment” with China over the decision to lay espionage charges against the Two Michaels being held as virtual hostages in retaliation for the arrest of Meng Wanzhou on an extradition warrant. Trudeau insisted that he continued to advocate for their release and that stuff was happening behind the scenes, but he didn’t elaborate further. He also was badgered repeatedly about the revelation that his former MP, Marwan Tabbara, was the subject of at least one sexual harassment investigation where claims were substantiated. Trudeau would only say that he was aware of the investigations and that they have a rigorous process in place where outside professionals are brought in to deal with situations when they arise, but that he couldn’t say anything more because said process was also deeply confidential by nature.

While everyone one social media spent the whole day going “I guess zero tolerance doesn’t mean zero tolerance,” ignoring the fact that it’s actually a poor idea to turf everyone at the first sign of trouble (seriously – this recent practice of kicking people out of caucus is inherently destructive and also prevents future use of social controls to keep these MPs and senators in line). I suspect that Trudeau realized that a performative “zero tolerance” policy was more trouble than it was worth and he ensured there was some nuance in how the policy was applied, and this was a case thereof, but now he also has to endure the taunts of “hypocrite!” as his explanations for the apparent change of position remain non-existent in the face of repeated questions. That said, the fact that it appears that Tabbara’s nomination took some six months to be decided upon by the green-light committee is pretty suspicious, and I would suspect they were weighing considerations, such as how much of a fundraiser he is for the party in addition to his being an incumbent. (Remember that protected nominations are antithetical to how our system is supposed to work, and that it’s proven that parties have been manipulating their nomination processes to the detriment of democracy). It would be great if Trudeau could be more frank or candid about things like Tabbara’s nomination and why he was green-lit again when the party clearly had no problem ousting other sitting MPs with little explanation (though in the case of Eva Nassif, it sounds like she was trying to meddle in other nominations for her own ends, if The Hill Times’ sources were to be believed). Then again, the party also somehow managed to be behind on getting all of their nominations in place in advance of the election when they had four gods damned years to do so, so I’m not sure what to suggest other than perhaps Trudeau’s decision to centralize yet more of his party’s power in his office as leader is going to come around bite him in the ass.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Developing an app

Posted on by

The day’s presser began with prime minister Justin Trudeau congratulating the winners of the UN Security Council seats, and gave an articulation of why it was important to Canada to try, and a promise that he would keep working to these laudable foreign development goals, even if we weren’t at the table. From there, he announced that the Canadian Digital Service, in cooperation with BlackBerry and Shopify, had been creating a mobile app to assist with contact tracing that was soon to be tested in Ontario, and this was a system that would collect no personal or location data – that it had a database of anonymized identifier numbers that could be triggered if someone tests positive – and that unlike other contact tracing apps, this one simply needed to be installed on the phone and it would run in the background, and not need to be open, which would drain the battery. (And Trudeau got really into it, because he is a geek about these kinds of things). Closing off, he spoke about new applications for the cultural industry and funds for national museums.

During the Q&A, Trudeau said that the late start to the Security Council race hurt us (and he’s not wrong there – many countries need the full eight to ten years to make a successful bid), for what it’s worth. He also made some fairly vague promises around trying to rein in the RCMP when it comes to their use of force, particularly against Black and Indigenous people. He also refused to condemn Jagmeet Singh’s outburst on Wednesday, saying it wasn’t for him to judge how a racialised leader perceived what happened.

On a completely different note, I was pleased to hear that the MPs in charge of the Centre Block renovations have decided to keep the existing footprint of the original Commons chamber, and didn’t take up the options to either expand into the lobbies behind or completely move the West wall and expand outward from there. They also say that the renovated Chamber could accommodate up to 420 MPs, but it also sounds like they may be leaning toward using benches, which would be terrific because desks are an Americanism, and simply encourage MPs to be doing work other than paying attention to the debates (and we’ve all seen the piles of Xmas cards that start showing up in the fall). I am less keen on the talk about physical distancing as part of the renovations, because they won’t be done for a decade, and we are likely to be over this pandemic by then, and we can work with the existing chamber and set-up perfectly well if we really wanted to.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Singh gets named and ejected

Posted on by

For his daily presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau announced something that was definitely not a reversal of previous assertions, stating that at fiscal “snapshot” would be released on July 8th – not an economic update, because it’s still too volatile to make any kind of projections, but a “snapshot” was just fine. And he had to explain that one was not like the other several times. He also announced new Health Canada approvals for manufacturers of testing materials and ventilators, and that they had extended a Fish and Seafood Opportunities Fund, and that Parks Canada would be gradually reopening camp sites, because some masochists in the country apparently can’t wait to go camping. During the Q&A, Trudeau pushed back over the Bloc’s assertion that he is “acting like a king,” saying that when opposition leaders complain that the prime minister acts like it’s a dictatorship when they don’t get their way undermines the strength of our democracy – and he’s not entirely wrong there, but the fact that he has been reluctant to fully recall parliament and hiding behind a deal he made with the NDP to keep it that way doesn’t do him any favours.

The coming confidence vote on the Estimates wasn’t going to the drama that some thought it might because the NDP had pretty much already pledged support after Jagmeet Singh walked back his tough talk on the CERB extension (for which he is still undeservedly taking credit), and lo, the Estimates did pass. But the drama wound up being with Jagmeet Singh, who had tried to move a unanimous motion about systemic racism in the RCMP, which was blocked by the Bloc, to which Singh called the Bloc’s House Leader a racist, and when called on it, admitted that he did so and refused to apologise for it. This created some drama, the Speaker had to be recalled (because the Commons had already resolved into Committee of the Whole), and Singh was named and forced to leave for unparliamentary behaviour. Normally when this happens – which is extremely rarely – said MP would head out to the microphone stand in the Foyer to say their piece, which is precisely why Speakers are reluctant to name MPs. Because of the pandemic, Singh couldn’t do that, and instead called a 5 PM press conference – guaranteed coverage on the 5 o’clock political shows – and repeated his calling the Bloc House Leader a racist, but in such a way that immediately a lot of voices started chirping that he made it sound like he was taking license to call anyone who disagrees with him a racist (which isn’t helpful guys, and you know it).

Of course, this also got the whole anti-civility gang on social media riled up, and yelling about why Singh became the story and not the Bloc. But that’s the thing about decorum – Singh made himself the spectacle, so that’s where the attention became, rather than him calling a press conference after the motion was denied and calling the Bloc to account at that point. (The Bloc, incidentally, defended their move by saying that the public safety committee was already studying the issue and that they should wait for their report). But seriously, decorum rules exist for a reason in Parliament, and it’s fairly inherent in the name, which is derived from the Old French parlement, meaning speaking or conference. Not becoming the spectacle would have probably put more pressure on the Bloc, but that isn’t how this played out, and because Singh repeated his accusation of racism at the press conference, where he doesn’t have parliamentary immunity, this could turn into a lawsuit, which will become an even bigger distraction from the point he was trying to make.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The safety of being in fourth place

Posted on by

Ah, the safety of being the third and fourth parties in the House of Commons, where nothing you say really matters! Case in point with both Yves-François Blanchet and Jagmeet Singh, who spent yesterday lambasting prime minister Justin Trudeau for not badmouthing Donald Trump in public – Blanchet calling Trudeau “spineless,” and Singh condemning Trudeau’s silence. Because there’s nothing like demanding that the leader of our country insult the thin-skinned and erratic leader of our closest neighbour and trading partner, whom we rely on for economic security and military protection. Yeah, poking that bear will have no consequences whatsoever! One expects this kind of thing from Blanchet, who never has to worry about ever being in power, but for Singh, it seems to further prove that he has no interest in even pretending like he has a shot at forming a government, so he’s going to simply grandstand (badly) and look as unserious as he possibly can. And it’s more than just these kinds of declarations – it’s the demands that pretend that massive systemic change can happen with the snap of a finger, or that the federal government can just reach into provincial jurisdiction willy-nilly and using the incantation Canada Health Act as though it’s a justification or a blueprint for a federal role that accidentally forgot the part where you need to negotiate with the provinces first, and assumes that they’ll gladly sign onto whatever programme is being offered to them with all of the strings attached. Real life doesn’t work like that – but apparently you don’t need to worry about real life when you’re the fourth party.

Shameless self-promotion alert:

I’ll be appearing (virtually) before the Procedure and House Affairs committee this morning to talk about “hybrid” sittings and remote voting for MPs. (Spoiler: I’m against them). The fun starts at 11 AM Eastern.

Continue reading →

Roundup: That 21-second pause

Posted on by

Sometimes the news out of prime minister Justin Trudeau’s daily pressers is unexpected, and yesterday was no exception. After first acknowledging that he would be speaking more on the situation with anti-Black racism in the House of Commons later, Trudeau turned to the subject of the government’s efforts to procure more personal protective equipment and the industry retooling to supply it domestically in Canada. But none of this was the actual news. It was during the Q&A that, after a question on Hong Kong (Trudeau: We are very concerned because there are 300,000 Canadian citizens there), he was put on the spot about what Donald Trump is doing in the US, and what Trudeau’s silence in not denouncing it says. And then Trudeau paused. Gathering his thoughts, for twenty-one seconds, there was uncertainty as to what was going on in his mind, when he finally spoke about the “horror and consternation” of what was going on in the US – but he was very diplomatic and not calling out Trump on anything specifically. There is a relationship to manage there, especially during this global pandemic. When asked about Israel, Trudeau reiterated the support for a two-state solution and that he is “concerned” about annexation plans into Palestinian territory and that he told both prime ministers of that country (because there are now two) about it personally. He was also was asked about the MMIW Inquiry report and its finding of “genocide,” and Trudeau prevaricated somewhat, using the term “cultural genocide” before talking about the need to do better and work on the road to reconciliation, but wasn’t going to allow himself to be drawn into using other language.

A short while later in the Commons, Trudeau stood to give his speech on racism, and made sure that he had MP Greg Fergus and minister Ahmed Hussen in the frame behind him – because it’s always about optics. Nevertheless, he stated that he didn’t want to be another white politician lecturing about racism, and said that not being perfect is not an excuse for not doing anything, before he listed actions his government had taken in engaging the Black community, for what it’s worth.

Andrew Scheer gave a far more predictably milquetoast denunciation of racism, name-checking convenient names for his narrative along the way, like Lincoln Alexander and John Ware. But in his denunciation of racism – including anti-Asian racism and anti-Semitism along the way in light of a recently vandalized synagogue, he kept going on about peaceful protests over riots, and the importance of freedom, singling out economic and religious freedom. There was zero awareness from Scheer about structural racism, or self-awareness in how his party’s “tough-on-crime” fetishism contributes to over-policing at the heart of these protests.

Yves-François Blanchet was less equivocal than Scheer, going on about the anthropology of there being no such thing as race and that racism was about othering – but then stated that the Canadian and Quebec governments “weren’t racist” (erm, you do know what Bill 21 in Quebec was all about, right?) before saying that there may be “traces” that create systemic barriers. And then this shifted to a demand to process the claims of certain asylum seekers (because there’s nothing like the reliance on low-wage and untrained labour that is a direct beacon to the systemic barriers that these very minorities face) before citing that peaceful protests were legitimate and violent ones were not.

Jagmeet Singh kept saying that the government needs to make concrete action instead of making “pretty speeches,” and that the prime minister has the power to do things beyond words, demanding things like ending racial profiling, ending the over-policing of Black and Indigenous bodies, subsequent over-incarceration of Black and Indigenous people, and the need for race-based data. But as Singh can’t even grandstand properly, when he was up to question Trudeau several minutes later in the special committee, he seemed to indicate that things like ending racial profiling could be done with the snap of a finger, and when he demanded that boil water advisories be lifted in First Nations communities, Trudeau reminded him that they are on schedule for doing just that.

Elizabeth May closed out the speeches by naming as many Black and Indigenous deaths at the hands of police that she could recall, before talking about the cyclical nature of these kinds of denunciations every few months, acknowledging her white privilege, denounced Trump, and called on the government to root out white supremacist groups as a terrorist threat, particularly within police forces in Canada.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Manufacturing allegations of inaction

Posted on by

For his daily presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau led off with the fact that the Canadian Forces’ report on the conditions in Quebec long-term care facilities would be released later in the day (and it was), before moving onto the news that some 45,000 postings were up on the federal Job Bank for students, along with a renewed plea for employers to access the wage subsidy. During the Q&A, there were constant questions about what the federal government was going to do about long-term care, to which Trudeau kept reiterating that it was provincial jurisdiction but that the federal government was going to be at the table for the discussion on long-term solutions, which generally means the provinces will want federal dollars to pay for it. When asked about the upcoming G7 meeting and Donald Trump’s insistence it be held in-person, Trudeau said that in-person meetings are preferable to virtual ones, but it remained to be seen if this meeting would meet safety concerns – which is also a bit ironic considering that he insisted on carrying on fairly useless “virtual” committee meetings and pretending it’s parliamentary work, even though Parliament as a whole works best in-person.

As for the long-term care discussion, Jagmeet Singh started off the day by railing that Trudeau was using jurisdiction as an excuse for “not showing leadership,” which is either grossly ignorant for a someone with a law degree, or it’s a deeply cynical political tactic to mislead the public into believing that Trudeau is simply choosing not to act when in fact his hands are tied. Singh also went off on his spiel about how the federal government should shut down privatized long-term care delivery, which again ignores jurisdictional issues, and more to the point, conveniently ignores that many of these same problems are also found in the publicly run facilities, which belies that it’s a broader cultural problem than simply just cutting care for the sake of profit margins. And as for his reasons for going along with the government’s plans to keep the Commons in a neutered capacity, well, it seems he also doesn’t have any grasp about what his own job as an MP is.

Speaking of those neutered committee hearings, the first “hybrid” special meeting was held yesterday, where big video screens were installed in the Commons chamber so that MPs could participate there by Zoom while a handful of MPs were still in the Chamber. The problem with this is that it adds a gloss of “legitimacy” to the farcical nature of these committee meetings, and Trudeau will disingenuously talk about how they’re carrying on the “important work of Parliament” by letting MPs ask all these questions, while committing the lie of omission that the crucial work of studying the Estimates isn’t getting done. Oops. But everyone is instead wrapped up in the novelty of it all and the pretense that there is parliamentary business being done – which there really isn’t – and the Liberals have apparently judged correctly that only the appearance of accountability matters.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Selling out parliament for a press release

Posted on by

If there was any more sign of crass politicking than Jagmeet Singh starting the day by declaring that he would only agree to the government’s plans regarding continued special committee hearings in lieu of actual parliamentary sittings if the government ensured there was access to two weeks of paid sick leave available to Canadians, I’m not sure what else it could be. To predicate kneecapping the House of Commons in exchange for something you can count as a win is…quite something. Not quite the petulance of Andrew Scheer’s short-lived declaration that he would only wear a non-medical mask if regular House of Commons sittings resumed, but certainly brash.

To that end, Justin Trudeau held his daily presser and, in reference to the hipster jamboree at Toronto’s Trinity Bellwoods park on Saturday that social media spent the rest of the weekend litigating, said that the variety of local rules can be confusing but people should pay attention to what their jurisdiction’s rules are, and to keep physical distancing. Then then announced that the commercial rent assistance programme was now accepting applications, and outlined that half of the provinces would accept applications on that day, listed the provinces that would accept applications Tuesday instead, and that those with ten or more tenants were to apply Wednesday. Trudeau then said that he had spoken to Singh, and assured him that he was in discussions with the provinces to ensure that people got access to those ten paid sick days per year, but in the Q&A, gave the credit to BC premier John Horgan. That didn’t stop Singh from putting out a self-congratulatory press release immediately, as though this were a done deal and not negotiations that were ongoing because it’s mostly provincial jurisdiction. Trudeau also defended his party’s use of the wage subsidy, but because he can’t answer these questions like a real human being, it was mostly a lot of platitudes and verbal pabulum.

In the wake of this, a bunch of my Twitter critics felt like Trudeau’s discussions with the province on this sick day policy was some kind of an own to my constant reminders that this is provincial jurisdiction, which is bizarre because nothing has been agreed to. Trudeau can’t force the provinces to do anything, and even pointed out that the mechanism to make this happen is complicated – particularly if the provinces are going to expect the federal government to pony up for those paid days instead of forcing employers to pay for it themselves. But again, this isn’t something Trudeau himself can do on his own – he can try to get the provinces on board, but that’s not always a winning proposition. Look at the dog’s breakfast that the commercial rent subsidy managed to be, which is because it’s what the provinces could agree to, while Trudeau takes the blame. And even if the provinces get on board with this paid sick leave, it’ll still be months before that comes to fruition, but hey, Singh got a press release out of it, so he can declare victory to his base.

Continue reading →