Tag Archives: Keystone XL

Roundup: Threats over Keystone XL threats

Posted on by

Back from the Victoria Day long weekend, prime minister Justin Trudeau started off his daily presser by announcing that the government had agreed to extend the partial border closure with the US for another thirty days, before he started talking about how the government was working to expand the eligibility for the Canada Emergency Business Accounts so that more small businesses and entrepreneurs could apply for them. He also made a plea to employers to rehire their workers and use the wage subsidy programme, which is why it’s in place, but I guess we’ll see what kind of uptake that will get. In response to questions, Trudeau said that they were trying working to create a national framework around things like testing and contact tracing before the borders could re-open, but this being areas of provincial jurisdiction, it requires that kind of cooperation. On the subject of the resumption of Parliament, Trudeau was dismissive, citing concerns over MPs who may not be able or willing to head to Ottawa (as though accommodations can’t be made). When asked about the comments by Joe Biden in the US that he would cancel the permits for Keystone XL, Trudeau reminded everyone that he supported the project even before he was prime minister.

On the Keystone XL file, Alberta has recently put a $1.5 billion financial stake, alogn with $6 billion in loan guarantees, in completing said pipeline (after they pleaded poverty on keeping teaching assistants on the payroll and refusing other forms of pandemic aid in order to force them into federal coffers), so they’re threatening legal action, and Jason Kenney is promising to file a trade action if Biden is a) elected, and b) revokes the authorizations. But it also many not be that easy, and Alberta could be on the hook for major losses if this comes to pass.

Good reads:

  • Here’s a deeper look into the commercial rent subsidy programme, where the details are still being negotiated with the provinces before it is finalized.
  • The National Post tried to get a picture of Ontario’s preparations for economic re-opening, and there seem to be a lot more questions than answers.
  • The President of the CMHC says that this pandemic could raise household debt levels and cause a drag on GDP growth. (You don’t say).
  • The Royal Canadian Navy is relying on US Navy drones to help locate the wreckage of the Cyclone helicopter that crashed off the coast of Greece.
  • Here is a look at the challenges of running election campaigns in a time of pandemic (but the piece omits that Saskatchewan needs to have an election this fall).
  • The UK has released a preliminary post-Brexit tariff list, which gives Canada a start in terms of what kind of trade deal we will have to work out by the end of the year.
  • A Toronto attack from three months ago has been reclassified as an incel terrorist attack, which is the first time that incels have been branded as such.
  • Apparently Andrew Scheer discontinued his process to revoke his American citizenship, given he was no longer going to be prime minister.
  • Rona Ambrose has joined the board of directors of a vape company.
  • The leader of the Quebec wing of the Green Party is accusing Elizabeth May of having consolidated power through her “parliamentary leader” role.
  • New Brunswick’s legislature is adapting to in-person sittings by having some MLAs sitting in the visitor galleries to maintain physical distancing.
  • Max Fawcett notes the curious silence from the usual “ethical oil” types about the news that Saudi Arabia is investing in the Alberta oil sands as others pull out.
  • Susan Delacourt delves into how closely the Canadian and American governments have had to work to keep the border closed, in spite of their divergent approaches.
  • My column delves into the Procedure and House Affairs committee report on virtual sittings and finds the fix is in to make virtual elements permanent post-pandemic.

Odds and ends:

https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily/status/1262505806664290305

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

Roundup: Shelters and masks

Posted on by

Because it was a Saturday presser, prime minister Justin Trudeau appeared in jeans and without a tie, belying the more casual nature of the day at a time when days blend into one another. He had a couple of messages – that the government had invested another $40 million in shelters for women facing domestic violence (a particular consideration at a time when people are forced to stay home), and another $10 million for Indigenous women facing violence. He also pointed to $157 million in funds for the homeless, and that the communities where these funds were needed have been identified so funds were now flowing. On the subject of masks and medical devices, Trudeau stated that millions of more masks were expected in the next 48 hours (from the time of said announcement), and that the government had leased a warehouse in China to help coordinate the acquisition of these masks and supplies while they charter flights to carry them to Canada. Trudeau also noted that he would be speaking to his American counterpart in the coming days about the issue of masks and so on.

For her own presser, Dr. Theresa Tam reiterated yet again that these models that reporters keep demanding are not crystal balls, that they are not real numbers, that they aren’t predictions, and that they are highly sensitive to what is happening right now. But that hasn’t stopped the framing by reporters that these are hard data, and that they are indicative of anything in particular. And while here is an attempt to nuance the models Ontario released on Friday, but it’s one print article when TV reporters and headlines are framing it as disaster porn (and getting self-righteous about it).

Continue reading →

QP: Blockades and Teck

Posted on by

With protests going on outside of Parliament Hill, and a whole lot of performative bluster going on over the cancellation of the Teck Frontier mine inside the House of Commons, all of the leaders were present for the theatrics that were to come. Andrew Scheer led off, mini-lectern on desk, and in French, he read some condemnation about Trudeau’s alleged weakness and demanded to know how a future blockade would be handled. Scheer turned to English and started immediately getting breathy as he railed that there was a playbook for future radical activists, to which Trudeau reminded him that by cherry-picking only the Wet’suwet’en who agreed with him, Scheer demonstrated that he didn’t understand reconciliation. Scheer then pivoted to the Teck cancellation, and tried to make a connection to Trudeau allegedly breaking the law over SNC-Lavalin’s activities but his point got a bit lost after that. Trudeau reminded him that the message from Teck’s CEO was that you can’t have projects if you don’t have a credible plan on climate change. Scheer got increasingly breathy as he read condemnation, to which Trudeau stated that the opposition has refused to understand that the world is changing, and that global investors have indicated that they need to see strong action on climate change. Scheer then listed a number of falsehoods about Teck Frontier meeting requirements, for which Trudeau quoted Teck’s CEO’s support for climate pricing and regulations, and accused the Conservatives’ polarization for putting the economy at risk. Yves-François Blanchet was up for the Bloc, and wondered why there wasn’t action on getting the barricades removed. Trudeau stated that even though the RCMP withdrew from the affected area and the barricades didn’t come down, they had to escalate the situation. Blanchet worried things would get worse, and Trudeau reiterated his previous points. Jagmeet Singh was up next in French, putting the blame personally on Trudeau for not bringing down the barricades peacefully, to which Trudeau stated that they came to the table in good faith but other parties involved did not. Singh repeated the question in English, and Trudeau reiterated that when there was no reciprocal openness to dialogue from the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs, they changed their posture.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Kenney’s Washington mistruths

Posted on by

Apparently the lure of trying to wade into American politics was too strong for Jason Kenney to resist over the weekend, and he joined Doug Ford in taking swipes at Democratic Party hopefuls over the Keystone XL issue, before telling a Washington audience that Justin Trudeau’s former principal secretary, Gerald Butts, had conspired with the Obama administration to kill the Keystone XL pipeline – which is funny, because it was during the Harper government, and Trudeau has been on the record of being fully supportive of Keystone XL the whole time. Kenney’s Mini-Me, Scott Moe, insisted that this fable was “absolutely correct,” which is a lie in and of itself. And of course, people brought their receipts.

Of course, Kenney has nothing to fall on but lies about the state of the oil industry in order to keep the attention off of himself and his government’s failings in trying to manage the shifting economy – and his convenient target is always Justin Trudeau, whom he needs to keep his voters angry at as a means of distraction. That said, his audience laps it up, and that has pretty much eliminated any sense of shame that Kenney had left. There was a piece in this weekend’s tablet edition of Maclean’s that interviewed so-called “Wexit” supporters, and they all repeated the same memes and lies that Kenney and company peddle, along with a healthy amount of self-delusion, that Kenney also stokes by way of his rank dishonesty. He is continuing to play with fire, as he feels he’s clever enough to put it out and be declared a hero before it gets too big, and trying to do it from Washington is not only a sign of hubris, but possibly of his own desperation.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Don’t bug the LG. Ever.

Posted on by

In a move that is as brazen as it is utterly galling, Jason Kenney’s government legislated the province’s elections commissioner out of existence, after he levied tens of thousands of dollars in fines over the UCP leadership shenanigans. To make it all the more gob-smacking, Kenney and the minister in charge of the bill claimed that this wasn’t politically motivated, which earns a “Sure, Jan.” But even more appalling was the response from opposition leader Rachel Notley, for which I am about to suffer a rage-induced stroke.

https://twitter.com/Jantafrench/status/1196555704200351744

No. No, no, no, no, no. No. You DO NOT involve the lieutenant governor in this. She does not have discretion to accept or reject bills. She is not the “boss” of Jason Kenney. She cannot reject bills on the advice of the opposition, or her own recognizance for that matter. Her job is to accept the advice of the first minister who commands the confidence of the legislature, which Kenney does – even if the bill is unconstitutional. Her job is to act as a constitutional fire extinguisher, and we are a long way from there. Here’s Philippe Lagassé with more:

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1196608180488482818

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1196609606220500992

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1196610409521930240

https://twitter.com/PhilippeLagasse/status/1196612302348464130

I’m going to add an additional point about this being an appalling lack of basic civic literacy from the leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition in the province, but it implicates the entire media ecosystem as a whole, particularly when they ignorantly act as though a vice-regal has discretion about things like government formation, as exemplified with the stories of the hung parliaments in BC and New Brunswick, and even when shows like Power & Politics wrongly said that Trudeau “asked permission” from Her Excellency, Julie Payette, to “form a government” when they were the incumbent and already had a government and didn’t need to form one, let alone the fact that her job is not to grant permission. But stories like that plant the idea in people’s minds that she or any other vice-regal has personal discretion and can decide who will or will not form a government and apparently allow or disallow legislation, much like the pervasive idea that you can write to the Queen and she’ll do something about whatever it is you’re complaining about. That’s not how the system works. This shouldn’t be rocket science, but apparently these very basics are not being understood by those who are supposed to know these things because it’s their jobs to.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Bashing a fictional plan

Posted on by

In the days ahead, you are likely to hear federal Conservatives start echoing Jason Kenney’s current justification for killing the province’s carbon price based on a report by the Fraser Institute. The problem? Well, the modelling that they used is based on a work of fiction, and not the plan that was actually implemented, and since the federal carbon price is closely based on the Alberta model, they will have roughly similar effects. But hey, why fight with facts when you can use fiction and straw men?

And for the record, here is the EcoFiscal commission explaining how the Fraser Institute got it all wrong.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Musings from a non-committee member

Posted on by

It was another day of clutched pearls as Liberal MP Francis Drouin, who moved the motion at the stunt committee meeting on Wednesday to adjourn until the planned meeting next week, spoke to CBC about the fact that he thinks that they’ve heard enough and it’s time to move to the next phase of the committee. The problem? That Drouin isn’t actually a member of said committee, so his opinion doesn’t really matter. That he was at the committee on Wednesday is largely because his riding is not far from Ottawa, and that tends to be what happens when emergency meetings get called – most of the regular members don’t end up showing up because of travel times and commitments (or in this case, it’s the middle of March Break, and some of them have families with kids that they don’t see nearly enough). Now, if the Liberals meet on Tuesday, and put a bunch of ringers on the committee when they decide to go in camera to talk next steps for witnesses and timetables, and they decide they’ve had enough, well then, yes, we will have something to complain about. But that hasn’t happened yet, there isn’t any indication about that happening, so let’s all just calm down. Drouin is entitled to his own opinions, but he won’t be making any decisions here.

Should the justice committee opt to end the investigation, here are options that Jody Wilson-Raybould could use to “speak her truth” some more (though given how tactical her silence has been, I wouldn’t hold my breath). I also suspect that after their dire warnings yesterday, the opposition are going to start procedural shenanigans in order to try and force the government to carry on the hearings, but we’ll see how that unfolds.

In related news, it turns out that SNC-Lavalin also tried to recruit the Quebec justice minister to lobby for a DPA on their behalf. As well, a luxury condo in Toronto owned by the Gaddafi family, redecorated at SNC-Lavalin’s expense, has been sitting empty since 2009.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A diminishing vision of a regulator

Posted on by

The Supreme Court of Canada returned their reference decision on the constitutionality of the proposed national securities regulator yesterday, and it was a unanimous green light – because this is a voluntary system, it’s constitutional. You may recall that a previous attempt to create such a national regulator to be imposed by the federal government was found to be unconstitutional, and lo, it didn’t happen. When the previous Conservative government constructed this new voluntary model, Quebec appealed to the SCC, and as we can see, didn’t win the day. And even with this decision, Quebec still says they’re still going to stick with their provincial regulator, thank you very much, and that’s that.

There are a few things to think about in this decision, and in the system as it’s being designed. One of them is that part of the mechanism that makes it acceptable to the Supreme Court is that the regulatory authority is being delegated to a council of ministers, but that may come with more challenges. Because the wait for this decision essentially stalled the work of the new regulatory body, it remains to be seen as to how long it will take to get the new system up and running.

While Andrew Coyne makes the point that this system really makes no sense because it’s not able to deal with the issue of systemic risk, it may be worse than that. I wrote about this proposal for Law Times back in the spring, and even proponents of the national regulator had started to sour on the concept because the proposed system as it was being built essentially let provinces maintain their own particular carve-outs, which increases the complexity and reduces the uniformity of the system across the country. Even more alarming, according to one lawyer I spoke with, is the fact that this sets up a system that is unaccountable, that makes up and enforces its own rules and is self-funding, which seems to go against most good governance norms. So we’ll see where this goes, but the final result certainly looks to be far less than what was initially promised.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A quixotic UN quest

Posted on by

It’s time for the United Nations General Assembly, and while prime minister Justin Trudeau won’t be making an address at the Assembly this year, he did give a speech yesterday about Nelson Mandela, and how other should follow his legacy, and later in the day, announced a $20 million contribution to a global infrastructure hub.

The other thing that everyone is talking about is Canada’s (possibly quixotic) quest for that temporary Security Council seat in 2020, which means a lot of schmoozing and diplomatic niceties during the General Assembly – and it’s going to be an uphill battle, for which Canada has so far…deployed a logo. Add to that, the government hasn’t really articulated why exactly this is important to our foreign policy other than to stick it to the Harper years when they decided that they wouldn’t bother going for the seat again in a fit of pique.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044218706937696257

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044218710519623685

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044218714202214400

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044284604310478848

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044287893554946048

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044288949806481408

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1044291455454404608

Meanwhile, this session of the General Assembly will see the adoption of the Global Compact on Refugees, which Canada had a hand in crafting.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Absurd procedural objections abound

Posted on by

There are times when I don’t get the way that the opposition is trying to do its job – and I don’t mean the epic levels of disingenuousness and mendaciousness by which Question Period is operating these days. Rather, it’s the procedural objections to the way in which the government plans to handle Bill C-59, being the major national security bill that they’ve tabled. They’ve stated that they want the bill to head to committee before Second Reading, which is unusual, but still procedurally sound because it means that it will allow for a wider variety of amendments to be proposed and adopted, as a vote at Second Reading means that the bill is “locked” at its principles, and changes made at that point tend to be fairly technical. One would think that proactively taking this move would generally be appreciated, because it’s a recognition that it’s a tough subject that they want to get as much input on as possible, and are open to a wider degree of changes than usual. But no.

Instead, the opposition are now crying foul because they say that the government is trying to “fast track” it by doing his – not necessarily true, given that it can stay at committee for a long time, and they haven’t invoked any time allocation – that they’re trying to “evade” second reading debate (which, again, is absurd given the procedural move of allowing a greater scope of amendments), and that they’re avoiding the possibility that the Speaker could break up the bill because it’s an omnibus bill. But part of the problem with that is that omnibus bills aren’t bad per se – they’re bad when they’re used abusively to ram through a multitude of unrelated things with little debate. In this case, all of the constituent changes in the bill, which affect several other existing pieces of legislation, are all part of the same national security framework. It makes more sense to make the changes at once with a single piece of legislation rather than piecemeal bills that may create legislative traffic jams that would require coordinating amendments in order to ensure that all of the changes don’t butt up against one another. It’s hardly an abuse of omnibus legislation in this case, and they should know that.

What the government is doing is procedurally sound, and I can’t count the number of times that the NDP have demanded that bills go to committee before second reading debate on a whole host of issues (and it happened a lot under the previous regime). This government is doing that move on a major piece of legislation proactively, and they’re being accused of evasion. It’s enough to make a person scream.

Continue reading →