Tag Archives: Mark Carney

Roundup: Heavy-handed caucus management

Posted on by

The Ways and Means motion on the budget survived its second confidence vote, on the Bloc’s amendment, as no other party supported it (unsurprisingly). But outside of that, the drama inside the Conservative caucus room continues to spill out into the open as the party tries to deflect scrutiny. Leaks are talking about ten to fifteen very unhappy members, though nothing to indicate they’re going to cross the floor or leave caucus. At least not in the immediate future. Nevertheless, it is probably not lost on anyone that Andrew Scheer and Chris Warkentin storming into Chris d’Entremont’s office to yell at him when he let it be known he was contemplating crossing the floor is probably not great caucus management.

To that end, Scheer huffed and puffed his way out to the Foyer after Question Period yesterday to claim that it’s the Liberals who are harassing Conservatives, and it was that “harassment” that drove Matt Jeneroux to tender his resignation when there are accounts about how he was meeting with senior Liberals and was allegedly “eighty percent there” in terms of being convinced to cross over before this all blew up. Of course, nothing Scheer says is remotely believable, and his trying to claim that the Liberals are manufacturing this to “distract” from their budget is beyond risible considering just how complete and total their sales job on said budget is. The fact that Scheer is resorting to that kind of a dismissal is a sign of just how completely out of his depth he is here.

Scheer says Liberals are trying to “undemocratically” get a majority through backroom deals and accuse Liberals of harassing Conservatives to cross the floor. (Sure, Jan)

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-07T17:16:03.099Z

Scheer claims Jeneroux was pressured into resigning because Liberals were harassing him. He’s actually claiming that.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-07T17:18:59.423Z

What gets me is that no one in that caucus seems to have learned a single gods damned lesson after Erin O’Toole’s final days. For those of you who memory-holed the whole incident in trying to rehabilitate O’Toole’s image while trying to turn him into a statesman, in the dying days of his leadership, he weaponized the (garbage) Reform Act to kick out any member of caucus who dared to question him, and that member of caucus was Senator Batters, which was a big mistake because she has some pretty deep networks. Within days, the vote in caucus on O’Toole’s leadership was organised and he lost decisively. And despite this object lesson, Poilievre and Scheer are trying to use a heavy-hand and threats to enforce loyalty? Seriously? The other thing that seems to be emerging is a rift between the eastern and western flanks of the party, as eastern Tories are much more progressive and even-tempered than the Reform-rooted Conservatives, who are increasingly turning MAGA, and Poilievre needs to get a handle on this and start mending some fences before this blows up in his face.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-07T14:24:04.975Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The fighting continues in Pokrovsk, while Ukrainian forces are stepping up their assault on Russian forces in Dobropillia to ease the pressure on Pokrovsk. Ukrainian soldiers fighting with drones are being rewarded with points for confirmed hits and kills, leading to ethical concerns about the gamification of war. Ukraine says that 1400 Africans from dozens of countries have signed up to fight for Russia as mercenaries, but mostly are just used in “meat assaults.”

Continue reading →

Roundup: Red flags around the “grand bargain”

Posted on by

The more I read about the budget’s “climate competitiveness,” the more I find myself questioning just what is on offer from Mark Carney. There is an attempt to build this so-called “grand bargain” that failed the last time it was tried, where approving the Trans-Mountain Expansion was supposed to help fund the green transition and provide the social licence for doing things like the tanker ban on the northwest coast of BC, and yet here we are, where the oil and gas sector and by extension, the provincial government of Alberta, have not lived up to their end of the bargain at all. The companies that insisted they were going to meet their 2025 Net-Zero targets suddenly started to complain that it was too hard, and when the greenwashing legislation kicked in, suddenly all of those Net-Zero pledges vanished, as though they were never real to begin with.

That’s why I’m particularly unimpressed that one of the promises in the budget is to water down the greenwashing legislation, which sounds an awful lot like Carney is looking for the industry to lie to him once more about all of the reductions that they’re totally going to make in the future—really! You just need to let them have a free hand with even fewer environmental regulations in the meantime. As well, the fact that Carney is pinning his hopes on so-called “decarbonized” oil production with the Pathways project is even looking like he’s going to lose a tonne of money trying to get it to scale up, because hey, he’s offering a bunch of tax credits for them to operate, which is a de facto subsidy for oil operations. But it’s extremely expensive, and all of those oil companies want even more taxpayer money to make it work, while they pocket their profits, naturally. Nevertheless, it looks an awful lot like Carney is going to capitulate to that sector and remove the emissions cap on a bunch of half-hearted greenwashed promises and pretend that he still cares about the environment.

Speaking of the tanker ban, BC premier David Eby and the coastal First Nations are organising a pushback against any move by the federal government to lift it in order to push a pipeline through the region, while Danielle Smith puts ever more pressure on the federal government to approve that project (even though there’s no proponent, or route, or even just a line on a map). Will it be enough to dissuade Carney? At the pace he’s going, I’m not taking any bets.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-05T14:25:06.884Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The fighting continues in the streets of Pokrovsk, which is the kind of fighting that can’t be done with the same kind of drone warfare that the rest of the front line has become accustomed to.

Continue reading →

QP: Continually invoking the so-called “Food Professor”

Posted on by

Post-budget, the PM was finally present for the first time in two weeks, as were all of the other leaders, ready to put on a show. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he declared that never has any budget forced Canadians to pay more for so little, decried the size of the deficit. Mark Carney insisted that Canada still has the best position in the G7, and that this was about building for the future. Poilievre decried that the cost to service the debt meant less money for doctors, and Carney retorted that debt servicing charges were less than they were under Harper. Poilievre repeated his first question in English, and threw in a couple of added slogans. Carney declared that 75 percent of the measures in the budget are to protect are sovereignty while the rest are for help for the cost of living, such as their tax cut. Poilievre insisted that the industrial carbon price was threatening “food sovereignty,” and quoted the so-called “Food Professor” to make his point. Carney patted himself on the back for killing the consumer carbon levy, that farms all fell below the industrial carbon price cut-off, and that the Climate Institute calculated that the impact of the industrial carbon price on inflation is zero. Poilievre tried to tie this to steel production and food prices, and Carney repeated that the effect of the industrial carbon price on food inflation is zero. Poilievre then switched to Friday’s Supreme Court decision, falsely characterised it, and demanded the government invoke the Notwithstanding Clause. Carney said that they would come up with new legislative measures in response. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, to lament that their priorities were not in the budget, and Carney responded that clean electricity tax credits was a good measure. Blanchet insisted that a tax credit was just creative accounting, and Carney insisted that Hydro-Quebec would be the biggest beneficiary, and that carbon capture was needed for the oil Quebec uses. Blanchet decried that the budget was just austerity, and Carney insisted this was about investing and that this was a growth budget.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Setting up tomorrow’s budget

Posted on by

Tomorrow is budget day, so that’s pretty much all anyone is going to talk about today, as François-Philippe Champagne gets his budget shoes (in that peculiar tradition), while the melodrama over whether or not it will pass continues to swirl. To get you up to speed, here are set-ups from both CBC and The Canadian Press, which are all about the promises, and the set-up of austerity and sacrifices to make these “generational investments,” as though there aren’t trade-offs that come with austerity that are very long-lasting. And Carney is saying that he’s convinced this is the right budget for the moment, and that this is “not a game,” so he’s serious, you guys.

But we still have obligatory melodrama, which is a whole lot of “who is going to support it?” because this is a minority parliament, but guys. Stop pretending that the Conservatives would ever support it in a million years because they won’t. They’re the official opposition. They are never, ever going to support it for that very reason. Constantly asking them and getting them to lay out unrealistic conditions is not helping anyone, and just muddies the water from where any pressure needs to be applied, which is of course, the Bloc and the NDP. And the Bloc have already laid out wholly unrealistic “non-negotiable” demands, which leaves the NDP. And they can’t oppose it because they’re broke, they have no leader, and they are going to have to swallow themselves on this one, because they have no choice.

The budget will pass. The only possible way it’s not would be by accident because Don Davies is too big for his britches, and no one else can count properly. It won’t happen. You can cut out the artificial drama.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-02T21:02:19.947Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks overnight Saturday left the Donetsk region without power and killed at least two. That said, Ukraine is still holding Pokrovsk, in spite of the recent Russian advance. Ukraine has hit one of Russia’s key Black Sea oil ports.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Any excuse to delegitimise the Court

Posted on by

There was a big eruption yesterday after the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the mandatory minimum sentence for possession or accessing child sexual abuse materials, but nearly all of the outrage is based on the headline and not actually reading the decision, because of course it is. Who wants to actually read when you can just rage? While I would suggest you read my story on the decision (go ahead, I’ll wait), the highlights remain that the Court strongly denounced this kind of activity, that the two accused in this instance did receive sentences that met the mandatory minimum, but that the decision focused on the scope of the mandatory minimum. Essentially, it is a challenge to Parliament—if you make laws overly broad, they are vulnerable to being struck down because you risk giving a grossly disproportionate sentence to someone on certain sets of facts, so maybe craft better laws.

That of course didn’t stop the demands for the Notwithstanding Clause to come from Pierre Poilievre, Danielle Smith, Doug Ford, and Scott Moe, who charmingly added that this kind of decision is why Parliament alone should make laws. None of them bothered to actually read the decision. None of them actually thought about what it said, and why using blunt instruments can do more harm than good in certain cases. More than that, there was an immediate need to delegitimise the Court on manufactured outrage rather than accept that the Court still has to safeguard rights when Parliament doesn’t do its job properly. Oh, but wait—these are all premiers and leaders who are less interested in rights than they are in targeting and scapegoating minorities for their own political ends, so of course they want to keep the courts at bay.

Watch out! Kenney's decided to start stroking his rage-boner again!

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-01T02:43:07.978Z

We are at a place in this country right now where rights are under attack by populist leaders, be it Alberta, Quebec, Saskatchewan, or Ontario (though Ford is more likely to back down when actually confronted). They like to use language like “the will of the people,” which means that it becomes open season on minorities, which is antithetical to a liberal democracy like ours, and they don’t want any checks on that, which is why they take every opportunity to delegitimize the Court. This particular situation was just too easy for them to weaponise, and so they went with it, to hell with the facts. There is an outcome they want, and that is unchecked power.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-31T22:56:01.799Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Russia has deployed some 170,000 troops to try and claim Pokrovsk, but Ukraine is slowly whittling them away. To that end, special forces troops have been landed at the city. Meanwhile, Ukraine reports that they have successfully struck 160 Russian oil and energy facilities this year.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1984173351720440022

Continue reading →

QP: Executive bonuses vs sacrifices

Posted on by

The Nation’s Capital was under a rainfall warning as MPs gathered in the West Block for QP, with the PM still in South Korea. Pierre Poilievre was absent, leaving it to Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he declared that elites have never had it so good while people are being asked to make sacrifices. To illustrate, he noted that CMHC paid out $30 million in executive bonuses rather than providing down payments for young Canadians. Rechie Valdez responded by reading the good news about cutting the GST on houses for first-time homebuyers, along with other housing programmes. Scheer insisted that if flushing billions through big bureaucracies worked, they would not be in this situation, and again went to the notion that they are just funding big bonuses while youth have nothing left to give. Patty Hajdu praised the investments they have been making in skills training for youth. Jasraj Hallan took over to peevishly push the same narrative that “insiders” are getting rich while youth are being asked to sacrifice, and Valdez got back up to mouth the falsehood that Poilievre only built six houses as he was minister responsible. Hallan got back up to proclaim that the only people who have it good now are the prime minister and his elitist insiders. Hajdu got back up to talk about her meeting with her PEI counterpart to deliver for Canadians. Luc Berthold then took over to deliver the same script in French, and this time Joël Lightbound delivered the indignant response that the the Conservatives just vote against help for Canadians. Berthold raised a news story about pregnant women cutting back on protein, and Lightbound repeated that it was astounding that the Conservatives vote against programmes that people need.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and raised the anniversary of the 1995 referendum, and decried the federal Clarity Act preventing a democratic decision (which his not true), and asked it to be repealed. Steven Guilbeault said that Quebec elected twice as many Liberals as Bloc, and that they don’t want another referendum, but rather to build the country with their upcoming budget. Normandin again dared the government to repeal the Clarity Act, and Guilbeault again insisted that nobody is talking about another referendum. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe took over to again make the same demand, and Guilbeault noted it was interesting that the Quebec government was tabling legislation with no Indigenous consultation, which is not reconciliation. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Predictable threats over passing the budget

Posted on by

The whole thing about Government House Leader Steve MacKinnon openly going on media to decry that they don’t have enough votes to pass the budget is turning into a very tiresome bit of melodrama in Parliament, now that every party is trying to mug for the camera on it. The Conservatives say they want a hard cap on the deficit (which is far below what they promised in their own election campaign), plus the destruction of environmental programmes like the industrial carbon price under the bullshit excuse that it’s causing food price inflation. The Bloc say they want to negotiate, but presented a list of “non-negotiables” which are both expensive and foolhardy, like a bunch of transfers with no strings attached (because premiers have never taken that money and spent it on other things or delivered tax cuts instead. Looking at one Jean Charest most especially). And the NDP say they want to see the budget first, but are making noises about how they don’t want austerity.

And so, the threats are now in place—or blackmail, as some have termed it. MacKinnon’s new line in Question Period has been about how he hopes the opposition doesn’t send Canadians to a Christmas election, which is not exactly subtle. Andrew Scheer rushed out to the Foyer after QP to breathlessly decry that the Liberals are trying to engineer an election with their budget, which is overplaying things just a little, especially considering that the Conservatives, as official opposition, would never vote for the budget in any case, even if their demands were actually reasonable (which they’re not). That leaves either the Bloc to swallow themselves whole in accepting anything less than their unreasonable “non-negotiables,” or the NDP to pretty much debase themselves by once again propping up the Liberals, even though they have absolutely no choice because they have no leader and the party’s coffers are completely bare and they can’t even mortgage their office building for a second time to pay for an election as they have no way of currently paying off the last one. The government knows this. They are also not looking like they want to get into bed with the NDP yet again, after they pretty much derailed the government’s agenda in the last parliament with the supply-and-confidence agreement that the NDP couldn’t be bothered to live up to their own end of. Nobody wants an election (and you have a bunch of Liberals being a bit theatrical about this), and it’s not going to happen, but instead, we’re going to have to live through this dog-and-pony show for the next five weeks or so. Gods help us.

effinbirds.com/post/7810072…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-29T13:25:05.419Z

Meanwhile, it looks like the budget leaks are starting early, as Senior Sources™ are talking about cuts to the civil service that go beyond attrition, and more aggressive capital cost write-downs. As well, François-Philippe Champange and Rechie Valdez said that there will still be some funding for women’s organisations and for security at Pride events, but this still means cuts to other programmes. Tim Hodgson announced millions for clean tech projects, including four carbon capture projects. (Here is the updated tally of budget promises to date).

Ukraine Dispatch

Putin claims that Russian troops have encircled the cities of Pokrovsk and Kupiansk, which Ukrainian officials vigorously deny. They are, however, struggling in Pokrovsk, which is strategically valuable.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Alberta uses Notwithstanding Clause against teachers

Posted on by

The Alberta legislature sat until about 2 AM on Tuesday morning to pass their bill to end the teacher’s strike with the invocation of the Notwithstanding Clause, with time allocation limiting debate at each stage of the bill to a mere hour apiece, which makes this an affront to both parliamentary democracy, and the very notion of rights in the province given that Danielle Smith has decided there is little to fear from her tramping over them. Oh, and while the legislature was sitting until 2 AM, Smith herself was in an airport lounge on her way to Saudi Arabia.

There are too many disingenuous arguments made to justify invoking the Clause for me to rebut here, but suffice to say, merely saying that the Clause is part of the constitution therefore that justifies its use is horseshit, or that the Supreme Court of Canada invented a right to strike, therefore the Clause is justified to pushback against judicial activism is also motivated reasoning. Even more than that, Smith’s government is claiming they can’t meet the teachers’ demands because they’re too expensive is also risible—they’re the richest province in the country, but they made the choice to double down on resource royalties (whose value has been plunging) in order to cut taxes once again. This is self-inflicted, ideological, and one has to wonder when Albertans are going to wake up that their government is quite literally undermining the entire public sector in the province quite deliberately.

https://bsky.app/profile/lindsaytedds.bsky.social/post/3m4azh342fk27

Populations on whom Canadian governments have used or threatened to use the notwithstanding clause, allowing them to override Charter rights: – trans and nonbinary kids- religious minorities – homeless people – teachersedmontonjournal.com/news/politic…

— Anna Mehler Paperny (@mehlerpaperny.bsky.social) 2025-10-28T00:33:22.757Z

We’ll see what the next steps are in terms of responses, given that the teachers’ union has decided against work-to-rule, but for the moment, say goodbye to extra-curricular activities as teachers exempt themselves from them. There is talk of mass protest from other labour unions in the province, and a general strike is always a possibility. But can I just take a moment to say that those of you who are bringing out the “No Queens” stuff already to please just not. We live in a constitutional monarchy and we have a Queen, and aping American protests is lazy and gauche. Find a different slogan.

Guys. Come on.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-10-28T12:56:29.934Z

effinbirds.com/post/7810977…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-28T21:22:02.896Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that he won’t cede land in any future peace talks, just in case you were wondering.

https://twitter.com/KI_Insight/status/1983180684031349128

Continue reading →

Roundup: An “explainer” that ignores provincial culpability

Posted on by

The Star had a supposed explainer piece on bail reforms over the weekend, which talked a lot about over-incarceration, and poorly explained stats about certain offenders being out on bail with no context as to the charges they were facing prior to the alleged second offence, but absolutely nothing about the actual problems that the system faces, which is the continued and pervasive under-funding of courts by provinces, and Ontario most especially. It’s absolutely maddening how an explainer piece can lack that whole entire and most vital piece of the supposed puzzle. (It’s not a puzzle).

Part of the problem is who the reporter spoke to, being the “balanced” choices of the Toronto Police Association and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. The CCLA is just fine, because they provided a lot of relevant points about lack of data that means we don’t actually have any proper information on reoffences on bail, or anything like that (because—wait for it!—provinces have refused to fund that data collection). But police associations, by and large, are not credible sources. (Police associations, by and large, exist to protect bad apples within police forces, and remain a huge problem when it comes to reforming police services). There was nobody from the broader legal community interviewed for this piece, neither Crown nor defence counsel, who could have explained the resourcing issues. Am I biased because I write for legal publications? A little, but the perspective from my piece on bail reform differs vastly from the “explainer” in the Star for that very reason.

This is one of the most quintessential policy issues of our times where provincial underfunding is having an outsized impact on the system in question, this being the justice system, and it keeps getting ignored by the vast majority of legacy media, while the federal minister is behaving naively when he says that his provincial counterparts say they understand the problems in the system. But the problem is them, and their governments not funding the system. They like to complain that the problem is the Criminal Code, or that judges are being too lenient, but no, the problem is the provincial funding, and no changes to the Criminal Code will ever change that. And for yet another legacy media publication to ignore this, and let the provinces off the hook yet again, is beyond irresponsible.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-25T21:10:02.092Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian attacks on Kyiv and Dnipropetrovsk killed four and wounded at least twenty early Saturday, while attacks early Sunday wounded at least 29 in Kyiv.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Jivani’s tour for disaffected young men

Posted on by

Something that has gone largely unnoticed has been Conservative MP Jamil Jivani’s campus tours, modelled after the late fascist Charlie Kirk’s campus tours that were deemed essential to youth outreach for Trump’s MAGA movement. There has been some acknowledgement that under Poilievre, the Conservatives have been attracting a lot of disaffected young men, but as Jivani’s little campus tour is showing, this is much more explicitly about disaffected young white men, who are tired of being confronted about the concept of toxic masculinity, who don’t think that they can speak freely, and who can’t find jobs.

If anything, there is some bitter irony in Jivani cultivating this particular demographic because he has been beating the anti-DEI drum that Poilievre has appropriated from the MAGA cult, but part of this tour is about getting these young white men to present themselves as the real victims. To suggest that they need special policies to address their needs is pretty hard to square with the whole cry about “merit” that is supposed to replace DEI. If they need special programs, then they are not able to get ahead by merit alone, no? Of course, we know that the real reason why they want to eliminate DEI is precisely because they can’t compete based on merit, so they want to return to a system that systemically discriminates against those who are deserving but can’t get a fair shake.

This of course gets to the real issue in play—that these rallies are attracting groups who are Diagolon-aligned, and whose talk about “remigration” is code for ethnic cleansing. Sure, Jivani can tell them that it’s “complicated,” but this is not a group that believes in nuance. The fact that Jivani can’t denounce that kind of rhetoric but instead tries to mollify it is an indictment about where the Conservative party is headed in this country. Someone remarked that this is no longer the party of Stephen Harper. Unfortunately, it’s becoming the party of Donald Trump, whether they want to believe it or not, and that’s a very terrifying prospect for where things could be headed in this country, because there is no “good parts only” version that they think they can achieve.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-23T21:27:02.365Z

Ukraine Dispatch

An attack on Kyiv overnight Wednesday wounded nine people. Two Ukrainian journalists were killed by a Russian drone in Kramatorsk, while an investigation has been launched into Russian soldiers killing five civilians in a village in the Donetsk region.

Continue reading →