Roundup: Moving the majority motion

Government House Leader Steven announced yesterday that he will be moving a motion in the House of Commons today regarding changing the committee make-up for the remainder of this parliament in order to reflect the government’s new majority status, which feels a little bit like jumping the gun. While he does need to give notice of the motion, it won’t be debated until next week sometime at the earliest (because Thursday is a Supply Day for one of the Opposition Parties, and I doubt he would debate this motion on a Friday), but there’s no way the government can vote on it yet. Why? Because the three new MPs haven’t been sworn in yet, and it’s generally a three-to-four-week process for Elections Canada to fully certify the results and report back to the Commons so that the swearing-in can happen, and well, it’s only been a week-and-a-half.

I do find it interesting that they have decided to go the route of adding MPs to the committees to make them twelve members instead of ten, which may be a mistake on the government’s part. Yes, removing a Conservative instead of adding a Liberal to each committee might have seen them howl more, but the things is, we actually barely have enough MPs to go around when it comes to staffing committees properly (remember, this is the reason why official party status is twelve MPs—so that they can have coverage on every standing committee). During Trudeau’s majority parliament, committees were down to ten MPs, which meant that parliamentary secretaries didn’t have to be voting members, which is better for all because they couldn’t essentially be putting their thumbs on the scales on the government’s behalf, but when they were back to minority parliaments, committee memberships went back up to 12 in order to accommodate more opposition members, thus meaning parliamentary secretaries were back to voting members. It looks like Carney and MacKinnon have no problem with this, even though they should—it’s bad form for the independence of committees, but they don’t actually care about that.

It also looks like MacKinnon is doing this now and not later is a power move. I had previously suspected that this move wouldn’t be fully implemented until autumn because the last four sitting weeks before summer would have the committees slammed to get things passed before the break, but now they’re going to mess up their ability to work until the Procedure and House Affairs Committee can produce their report on the new committee memberships because the Conservatives decided to play stupid games on the Ethics committee and force a vote on making François-Philippe Champagne appear before them to answer theatrical questions about his non-existent conflict of interest with the Alto high speed rail project. By pushing this motion and vote to as soon as the government can make it, once the new MPs are sworn-in, it gives them a chance to try and head off the committee before Champagne appears for the sole purpose of having the Conservatives (and probably Bloc) call him corrupt on camera so that they can get clicks on their social media channels. Just ridiculous, and even more ridiculous that MacKinnon has to get in on the dick-swinging in the process.

Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-21T19:08:01.767Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims to have captured 80 settlements and 1700 square kilometres since the start of the year, while Ukraine has recaptured some of that territory back. As Ukraine is about to resume pumping oil through the Druzhba pipeline to Hungary, now that repairs are completed, it looks like Ukrainian drone attacks have reduced Russian oil export capacity by 300,000 to 400,000 barrels per day.

Continue reading

Roundup: The thing about windfall taxes

In the discussion over “pausing” the excise tax on gasoline and diesel, and the Conservatives’ demands that all other fuel charges be scrapped (including the clean fuel standard which is not a charge or a tax), versus the NDP’s call for a price cap and windfall tax, there hasn’t been a lot of discussion about what those will mean.

Enter economist Kevin Milligan, who has a good thread explaining the problem with windfall taxes, and why those advocating for them have a lot more explaining to do when it comes to just how they see them being implemented.

Adam asks a fair question here that has been bandied about. Let me offer two arguments against a windfall tax that I would wager FIN officials would make when advising cabinet on what to do. I'll also offer my own assessment of the two arguments.1/

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:15:37.601Z

Why would FIN argue against an oil/gas windfall tax?FIN Arg #1: Ideally we set taxes in advance and then let firms and people make their choices based on those taxes. Changing taxes <i>ex post</i> risks upsetting investors who would view this as a mark of an unstable unserious country.

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:17:39.157Z

My response: Yes, ideally we set taxes ex ante and let firms/people decide what to do. Changing that ex post is like reneging. All true. But I do think FIN overindexes on this argument. Every time we change taxes we literally 'renege' on the status quo./3

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:19:52.099Z

If you took the 'no tax changes ex post' argument completely as sacrosanct, it essentially argues for no tax changes ever. That's silly.I also note the "no ex post changes because we're not a banana republic" argument only gets hauled out when it's a tax *increase*. Why not symmetric? Hmmm…/4

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:21:48.449Z

Why would FIN argue against an oil/gas windfall tax?FIN Arg #2: How do you define a "windfall"? What is this year's profit? What is last year's profit? You realize these are accounting numbers, subject to lots of choice variables for shifting between tax years, right? /5

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:24:09.737Z

Fin Arg #2 cont'd: The concern is that you'd end up with a lot of accounting gaming and not as much revenue as you'd think. A lot of time/effort/dollars spent on creating the tax law to minimize gaming. A lot of time/effort/dollars spent by firms avoiding a windfall tax law./6

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:25:51.216Z

My take on accounting and windfall taxes:I recall reading historical precedents around WW2 (?) that outlined how much effort it was relative to the revenue. I recall that being persuasive. (Don't have the source at my fingertips….)But I take the windfall tax accounting issue seriously./7

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:28:08.463Z

So, my advice to those who advocate for a windfall tax? The thing you could do to overcome government resistance is to look seriously at the accounting issues involved.Chanting slogans is one thing. Overcoming implementation barriers is maybe less fun, but necessary to gettin stuff done./end

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:31:43.152Z

It only boils down to 'let the rich have their way' if you assume that windfall tax advocates aren't capable of getting their accounting shit together. Why be so defeatist?I outlined a path for advocates. If the response is 'gee that sounds hard' that's not my prob.bsky.app/profile/open…

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:40:14.904Z

I'm not here to blow sunshine and tell you that hard things are easy. Hard things are hard. If you're determined you can do them. But if you don't want to do the work then I'm not going to take the proposal seriously.

Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:42:31.333Z

It’s clear that Avi Lewis hasn’t actually thought any of this through. He was on Power & Politics last night and kept trying to handwave away the questions about this plan, and it just kept boiling down to “oil companies bad.” I do think it’s a problem that we’re not seizing on this opportunity to make long-term investments to get off of our dependence on fossil fuels like the French did with their transition to nuclear in the seventies and eighties (because so much European power relied on Middle Eastern fossil fuels up until the oil embargo in the seventies), but nobody seems to want to have that conversation, and Carney has been pretty adamant that he thinks there is a future in the fossil fuel sector. It’s too bad we have no grown-ups who can have a serious conversation about this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia fired missiles into Kyiv early this morning, killing thirteen so far including twelve-year-old child and wounding several others. This was after more missile and drone attacks were made through the day, which included hitting an apartment building in Odesa. Ukraine’s army has been introducing new drone infantry capabilities, which has resulted in retaking more territory from Russian occupation.

Continue reading

Roundup: No introspection for Poilievre

Pierre Poilievre tried to change the channel yesterday in order to sound the alarm about property rights in BC, ginning up outrage about the Cowichan land title decision by the BC Supreme Court (which is a superior court), and the false claim this puts all property rights at risk in the province. It’s not true, of course, and the federal government is appealing that decision (which the Cowichan leadership have stated point-blank has nothing to do with private property), but well, the media had no interest in asking him about that. Instead, it was all about his own leadership in the wake of yet another defection by an MP.

Some of the own-goals are just amazing.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-09T15:24:00.893Z

Rest assured, Poilievre is not reflecting on his leadership, because he assures us he got such a high mark from his leadership review and such a great result in the last election. Surely that means that he’s blameless. Instead, he’s going to start insisting that floor-crossers run in byelections, which is a position he never used to hold, and to insist on recall petitions, both of which are antithetical to how a Westminster parliamentary system operates. People vote for the candidate, not the party, which means the MP gets to make their own decision. If you think that means that their votes somehow don’t count, then the technical term for that is “sore-loser.” (Also, people do not choose “majority” or “minority” parliament on their ballots).

Pierre Poilievre’s Personal Assistant Explains Why Everyone Is Leaving Himyoutu.be/PhpH36ZZX1I

Clare Blackwood (@clareblackwood.bsky.social) 2026-04-09T20:42:58.342Z

Meanwhile, Mark Carney had to answer his own questions about Gladu’s views, and he insists that they talked about it and that she’ll vote with the party, which would have been nice to hear from the horse’s mouth yesterday. Carney also continues to insist that the Liberals are still the party of the Charter, which is getting harder to believe all the time. Gladu herself had to answer questions about her views at a media availability at the party’s convention, and she did nuance some of her positions, and fair enough, but this should have been part of the discussion yesterday and not a day-and-a-half later.

Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-09T19:08:02.208Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Putin has declared a 32-hour ceasefire for Orthodox Easter (but we’ll see if he actually honours it). Russia turned over1000 bodies it claims are from the Ukrainian military, while Ukraine turned over 41 dead Russians.

Continue reading

Roundup: Danielle Smith’s Soviet-style political neutrality

Yesterday was Trans Day of Visibility, and because of the times we live in, it was treated as an excuse to attack trans rights. In the US, the US Supreme Court struck down Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy in an 8-1 ruling, under the ludicrous rubric that banning “talk therapy” was impacting free speech (even though talk therapy should be classed as medical services, as the dissenting judge pointed out). And in Idaho, the governor signed a bill to make it a felony for a trans person to use a public washroom that is not their assigned sex at birth.

Back in Canada, Alberta premier Danielle Smith tabled a bill that purports to “remove politics and ideology” from schools, which among other things, means ensuring there are no Pride flags ever raised at Alberta schools. (Noted is that the current ban on informing parents if a student joins a GSA is not being changed). There are a lot of questions around what this is supposed to mean, and whether it’s only in classrooms, or if teachers are allowed to post opinions online, or anything like that, but it’s a weird and troubling decision by Smith to pursue this particular line of attack, and especially because it’s going to create a system of surveillance and denunciations, which is starting to sound pretty Soviet for a self-professed “libertarian” like Smith.

This can be taken is so many dangerous directions. And once something like this is enshrined in legislation, it creates a culture of surveillance where educators are going to live in fear of being secretly recorded and reported (look at what's happening in the U.S.!!)

Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2026-03-31T21:14:57.962Z

The bill seeks to "bar school divisions or employees from making statements on “political, social or ideological matters” outside the school division’s purview."Curious if the government will think a teacher talking about being LGBTQ2S+ issues at all is "outside the school division's purview."

Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2026-03-31T21:07:49.094Z

"Nicolaides also wouldn’t say whether the flag limitation would apply to stickers or magnets or other imagery teachers might have in their classrooms, except to say they can’t have ideological symbols."In a similar vein, could teachers get in trouble having, say, a Pride flag sticker on desk?

Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2026-03-31T21:09:05.569Z

For a government who loves free speech, this seems a massive affront to freedom of expression for teachers and school staff on like, a very basic level.Very curious what the unions will say about all of this …

Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2026-03-31T21:10:49.732Z

This in and of itself is a problem—it treats straight, white men as the default norm, and everyone else as “political,” and when you are effacing queer and trans people in the dame of “neutrality,” that is very, very political and is not neutral in the slightest. And Smith is going to keep getting away with this kind of thing because nobody is protesting around the clock or organizing a general strike to stop her.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian drones struck the Russian oil terminal at Ust-Luga for the fifth time in ten days. European diplomats were in Bucha to commemorate the 2022 massacre by Russian forces there. President Zelenskyy is hoping the Americans can convince Russia to enter into an “Easter truce” (and good luck with that).

Continue reading

Roundup: Big problems with student visas

Yesterday was Auditor General Report Day, and there were three on offer—the replacement for the Phoenix pay system, recruitment problems with the RCMP, and problems with the student visa system.

In short:

  1. The Phoenix replacement, Dayforce, is taking lessons learned from the problems of Phoenix, but in terms of simplifying pay rules, there has been no progress with the unions (which is not a surprise).
  2. The RCMP recruitment process is so bad partly because the RCMP hasn’t done enough workforce planning, their application process times keep getting longer, and they aren’t filling training classes. (Of course, the real problem is the force is horribly broken and needs to be dismantled and replaced).
  3. The student visa issue has been beset by problems with anti-fraud controls, and there has been a lack of resources to investigate cases. Additionally, the planned reductions in visa numbers wound up being way worse than intended (but that’s hardly a surprise when they get the message that they’re not wanted).

The thing that gets me in particular about the student visa issue is that the provinces are getting off scot-free here. I know the AG has no mandate to investigate provinces, but so many of the problems with this programme started with the provinces, who have not been held accountable for them, whether it’s because they cut university funding, which made them reliant on the higher tuition of foreign students, or the fact that several provinces, most especially Ontario, let these fraudulent strip mall colleges flourish, which were in turn used to be a source of cheap labour, and the federal government, which doesn’t have the mandate or capacity to investigate these colleges, is left taking all of the blame. No, the department is not blameless, as the audit shows, but the wider problem is not addressed by this, and continues to go without any accountability.

PBO candidate

The nominee for the new Parliamentary Budget Officer, Annette Ryan, appeared at the finance committee, where the Conservatives outright declared that they will not vote for her because they claim that the interim PBO, Jason Jacques, was “silenced” for calling the government out, and that he should get the job. Except that he disqualified himself, and he was not fired, nor did he “expose” anything. He made an ass of himself on camera, but that’s what the Conservatives want, and they are now spreading lies to make that point. Just unbelievable.

This is pathetic.Jacques wasn't fired. He didn't "expose" anything. His term expired, and he disqualified himself from the permanent post because he decided he wanted to play for the cameras. But that's why Poilievre wants him on the job, because for him, Parliament is a clip factory.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-24T00:46:12.483Z

Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-23T13:08:04.927Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy is warning of an imminent “massive attack” against the country. He also says that he has “irrefutable proof” that Russia is providing intelligence to Iran.

Continue reading

Roundup: Longest Ballot Committee is back at it

The losers at the Longest Ballot Committee are back at it, this time targeting the by-election in Terrebonne, because of course they are. Despite the fact that their supposed protest has not garnered them any actual traction to their cause, which tracks, because their means of protest is pretty divorced from the results they’re trying to achieve, which is to convince people that what we really need is proportional representation. Flooding the ballot with names nobody will vote for doesn’t scream “We need PR,” but what do I know? And then, their “longest ballot” turned into the shortest ballot in Battle River—Crowfoot, when it simply became a write-in ballot because it was easier for Elections Canada at that point (even though those ballots take more time to verify).

This being said, we could have had measures to help blunt their attempts when the House of Commons was trying to pass changes to the Canada Elections Act in the previous parliament, and the Chief Electoral Officer had suggestions for how to thwart these losers, but none of it got implemented. Why? The Conservatives, led mostly by the antics of Michael Cooper. The Conservatives decided to fuck around with that bill instead of treating it seriously for a myriad of reasons, some of which included the fact that one of the proposals was to move the “fixed” election date a week later to avoid Diwali, but it also would have put a bunch of MPs (mostly Conservatives) over the line for their pensions, and the Conservatives (and Bloc and NDP) decided that this was a ploy by the Liberals to get their MPs those pensions (again, even though it was mostly the Conservatives who would benefit).

Cooper then spent his time on dilatory motions, such as “reasoned amendments” at second reading to prolong debate, and then once at committee, it was all manner of silly buggers, like “Change the fixed election date to three weeks from now so that the election is before Jagmeet Singh’s pension comes to pass,” and on and on it went, until we had the prorogation for Trudeau’s announced resignation, and the election call once the leadership had passed, before prorogation ended. That meant the bill died, and no changes were made to blunt the losers at the Longest Ballot Committee from doing this over, and over again, no matter that the Conservatives complained when Poilievre was targeted. And so, here we are, with them going at it yet again.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia made a rare daytime drone attack on Kyiv, that included targeting the city’s independence monument. Russia claims to have taken a dozen settlements over the past two weeks, which Ukraine is disputing (as they push Russian lines back).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/2033471908142789046

Continue reading

QP: Demanding a strategic oil reserve

The PM was on his way to Yellowknife, and Pierre Poilievre was elsewhere, in advance of his own trip to the US, leaving it up to Melissa Lantsman to lead off. She complained that there is no strategic oil reserve, and demanded the government adopt their plan to create one, to which Tim Hodgson explained how the IEA works, which is that net importers have reserves while net exporters don’t. Lantsman shot back that just because you don’t need one it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t, before she demanded the government scrap environmental laws to pump more oil. Hodgson responded that the Conservatives apparently can’t take a lesson from the Alberta government in working together to build. Gérard took over in French to demand the same oil reserve, to which Steven MacKinnon repeated Hodgson’s first response in French. Deltell accused the government of having “contempt” for Canadian energy, before he pivoted to food price inflation, and this time MacKinnon reminded him that he voted against all help for Canadians who needed it. Chris Warkentin took over, and in English, he too read the script on food price inflation with the falsehoods about “hidden taxes.” Wayne Long took a swipe about Poilievre going to Europe for no reason while Carney was in the Asia Pacific to sign trade deals including uranium. Warkentin tried again and Julie Dabrusin reminded him that the industrial carbon price has zero effect on food prices.

"A ten-year record of shutting down our oil and gas sector"

Aaron Wherry (@aaronwherry.bsky.social) 2026-03-12T18:23:43.134Z

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2032270268270531048

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she worried about the government not informing the public about Canadian personnel at a military base in Kuwait being targeted by Iran. Anita Anand said that Canada is not participating in the conflict, but could not say more for security reasons. Normandin tried again, and Anand again stated that all Canadian Armed Forces personnel in the region are safe and sound, and then made a pitch for international law. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay tried this yet again, and Anand repeated her same answer.

Continue reading

Roundup: Credulous takes on private members’ bills

There have been a few stories over the past few days that have raised my ire, so I’m going to take a few minutes to point a few things out. One of them is this CBC story yesterday about Jenny Kwan’s private member’s bill, and that as many as sixteen Liberals are considering supporting it. My beef: the sub-hed on the story reading “Vote would mark first time some in caucus split from government line under Carney.” Split from the government line? It’s a private member’s bill. Those are free votes by default. That’s the whole point of them. CBC should know better, and frankly, I really don’t like it when the media tries to play party whip while at the same time wishing that MPs were more independent.

The other story yesterday was about Conservative MP Dan Albas’ private member’s bill, which purports to empower Canada Post to deliver alcohol across provincial lines. Most of the stories in various outlets talked about how Dominic LeBlanc appeared to support the bill in Question Period, which he actually did not. What LeBlanc said was that this is an area of provincial regulation (which only the Star’s story mentions), but that he would bring it up when he meets with his provincial counterparts in a few weeks because he thinks it’s a good idea. And more to the point, this bill is a gimmick, which Albas and Pierre Poilievre insist overrides provincial regulation, but it actually doesn’t because, and just puts Canada Post in a bind. It would be great if any story could point that fact out, or talked to a lawyer, but nope, they focused on LeBlanc’s answer in QP, and even then couldn’t get the nuance right.

The third is a story from CBC on Monday, which was very concerned that a lot of bills are passing “on division,” meaning without a vote. The problem was the initial sub-hed on the story which stated “Half the bills passed in the House this session have cleared 3rd reading without a head count or consensus,” which is wrong, because “on division” is consensus you don’t need a vote—the “or consensus” was later dropped from the sub-hed. Of course, the real reason is that the Conservatives don’t want to go to an election, so they’re not going to force a vote and have Andrew Scheer and Scott Reid hide behind the curtains again to ensure that the math is right and that they won’t accidentally do something stupid with the vote counts given how everything is so close, but the person you reached as your source for your explainer is Peter Van Loan? Possibly the worst Government House Leader in decades (which is saying a lot)? It came across as amateurish, and like CBC’s parliamentary bureau has a hard time understanding how parliament works, which is not a good look.

When your parliamentary bureau doesn't understand parliament, dumb things happen.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-03-09T13:50:45.982Z

Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-03-10T21:22:01.632Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia dropped three guided bombs on Sloviansk in the east, and hit Kharkiv and Dnipro with drones, injuring another twenty people. Ukrainian forces have pushed Russian invaders out of Dnipropetrovsk region, while Russia claims to be making gains in Donbas. Ukraine hit a missile plant in Bryansk region in Russia.

Continue reading

Roundup: Conflating failed with fraudulent

The Conservatives went ahead with their Supply Day motion of scapegoating asylum claimants for the strain on the healthcare system, and so many of their claims are based on falsehoods. The claim that a failed claimant is “bogus” of “fraudulent” is not true, and plenty of claimants rejected by the IRB win their appeal in Federal Court. The numbers of actually fraudulent claims are very small, and even rejected claimants may be rejected on technical grounds. Trying to conflate everyone as “bogus” or “fraudulent” is more of the MAGA mindset that they’re trying to tap into, because this is who the party has become. It’s too bad the government is too invested in their own attempts to scapegoat newcomers for problems that the premiers mostly created and refuse to fix, because they should be absolutely savaging the Conservatives on this, and they can’t—and won’t.

Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-02-24T22:22:02.270Z

Ukraine Anniversary

Yesterday was the fourth anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which was supposed to be a “three-day war.” There were a number of speeches and a moment of silence in the House of Commons to mark the occasion, so it didn’t go unnoticed. Prime minister Mark Carney announced that Canada will extend Operation Unifier to keep training Ukrainian troops for another three years, as well as donating another 400 armoured vehicles, and extending more sanctions. (Not announced were any resources or a competent federal policing agency to enforce those sanctions).

Four years have passed since Russia's full scale invasion of Ukraine. Russia was supposed to win in three days. Instead, Ukraine reinvented modern warfare, built a drone industry, and can destroy a thousand Russian soldiers in a day. Ukraine can win.

Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T09:58:52.954Z

Prime minister Carney's statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:30:17.057Z

Conservative statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:26:12.386Z

NDP statement on the 4th anniversary of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-02-24T15:26:12.387Z

https://twitter.com/SenGagne/status/2026324346189283440

Ukraine Dispatch

European leaders were in Kyiv to show support on the anniversary of the start of the war. Here is a look at how the attacks on energy infrastructure is dragging down Ukraine’s economy, and here is a look at how drone warfare has changed the nature of the conflict over the past four years.

https://twitter.com/FedorovMykhailo/status/2026404778884932075

Continue reading

Roundup: Dollarama Trumpism back on blast

I regret to inform you that Pierre Poilieve is back on his MAGA-lite™ bullshit, and he’s going after DEI in order to “bring back merit.” It’s Dollarama Trumpism where they think that they can harness the “good parts only” energy of authoritarian populism without the overt racism—but they’re still going to wink to that racism. And it’s been pretty relentless, whether it’s deciding to target “DEI” or “wokeness,” the recent decision to go hard after immigration—sorry, “Liberal immigration policy” *wink*— or birthright citizenship. I’m not sure who they think they’re fooling, other than maybe that segment of the party’s base that Poilievre wants to keep on-side ahead of his leadership review.

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3m3bgx3sgek2d

The thing with insisting you want to focus on “merit” is that we have empirical proof that “merit” is only ever applied to straight white men who don’t have to fairly compete with women or minorities. They can’t get a fair shake because of ingrained prejudices, but if they get their positions entirely based on merit, they are dismissed as “DEI hires.” (It’s even more hilarious when women in the Conservative caucus insist that they got their positions due to merit, but any women in the Liberal Cabinet are just “DEI hires.”) All of this is entirely well-founded, but they have decided that they’d rather wink to racists and claim that they’re doing it to avoid “bloated bureaucracies” and “checkboxes” when it really just boils down to racism/misogyny/homophobia, every single time, but they insist on lying to themselves about it.

Hits harder than any legacy media outlet.

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-10-15T14:37:40.489Z

Meanwhile, Poilievre is ramping up his “get out of the way” bullshit, and has his caucus not only repeat it to absurd lengths, but also try to force it into situations that don’t make any sense. For example, one Conservative MP was on Power & Politics and trying to insist that if government “got out of the way” that we would have spent the past decade building critical mineral mines and pipelines to tidewater and that would have given us leverage over Trump. And while David Cochrane pushed back on this, none of it makes any sense because you would think that American dependence on our oil/aluminium/steel/softwood lumber/electricity would already give us leverage, but that doesn’t actually matter with Trump. Nobody was in a rush to build pipelines to tidewater because the Americans were a captive market. We weren’t in a rush to build critical mineral mines because the market was being well-supplied by China, and nobody builds mines overnight. And frankly, putting aside the fact that these projects were in fact advancing, this notion that governments should just abandon all environmental regulation, property rights, or Indigenous rights and title for the sake of letting industry loose, so that they could line their own pockets while forcing the environmental and social devastation in their wake onto governments to take care of—at a time when CO2emissions are spiking because of wildfires—is frankly just incompetence and lunacy.

I mean, who cares about things like the environment, or property rights, or the rights of Indigenous people whose land these projects are on? We should just let it all burn and watch the dollars flow in (to the pockets of a few select rich people).

Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-10-16T02:31:38.710Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks hit power infrastructure in seven regions across Ukraine. Russian drones are getting more precise, and are increasingly targeting Ukraine’s rail infrastructure.

Continue reading