Tag Archives: Media Bailout

QP: Zombie statistics to justify gas tax whinging

Posted on by
Reply

The PM was in town but not at QP for reasons unknown, while Pierre Poilievre was off in Toronto giving another speech to the Canadian Club. That left it up to Luc Berthold to lead off in French, dredging up the false zombie statistic about the number of Canadians who are a mere $200 away from insolvency (guys, that stat doesn’t say what you think it says, and it’s never been accurate), before whining that the government voted down their Supply Day motion on removing all gas taxes (even though the clean fuel standard is not a tax, or even a charge). Steven MacKinnon listed all of the supports for Canadians that the Conservatives voted against, before noting that wages in Canada have been rising at 4.7 percent year-over-year, while that figure is just 3.5 percent in the U.S. Berthold complained that gas is twenty percent cheaper in the U.S. than in Canada, called the government’s policies inflationary, and again made a plea for the government to cut all gas taxes. MacKinnon reminded him that in February (the last month for which there are statistics), inflation was at 1.8%, which is within the Bank of Canada’s target band. Melissa Lantsman took over in English to repeat the same first question, and Tim Hodgson got up to remind her that they already cut gas taxes by 28¢/litre with the consumer carbon levy, and have the enhanced GST credit and income tax cut. Lantsman also complained that their Supply Day motion was voted down, and again all gas taxes be cut, and Hogson noted that while this government cut gas taxes by 28¢/litre, the Americans have not cut theirs at all. Shuvaloy Majumdar took over and made the same plea to cut gas taxes, and this time Sean Fraser got up to expound on the two visions of Canada, where the Conservatives’ was to cut taxes for the wealthy while the Liberals are building a strong economy. Majumdar repeated the falsehood about $200 from insolvency, and Patty Hajdu got up to proclaim how much families are saving thanks to the current government.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she raised the issue of the added aluminium tariffs, to which Dominic LeBlanc appreciated her concern, and he assured her that they were working on the issue, and that he has raised it with this American counterparts. Normandin worried about businesses suffering from this, and LeBlanc repeated his assurances. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay took over to ask the same again (because they need more clips), and LeBlanc repeated the same assurances yet again.

Continue reading →

QP: “Half-measures” on gas taxes

Posted on by

While the PM was meeting with the president of Finland, Question Period got underway without him, in spite of the fact that he could have used it to take a victory lap after last night’s by-elections wins. Pierre Poilievre was also not present, leaving it up to Andrew Scheer to led off, and just like their Supply Day motion, he demand the government cut all gas taxes, not just the excise tax (even though the clean fuel standard is not a tax or a charge in any way). François-Philippe Champagne stood up go proclaim today’s “good news”—that the IMF projects Canada to have the second-fastest growing economy in the G7, and that they have already announced the suspension of the fuel excise tax. Scheer insisted this was just a half-measure, to which Tim Hodgson stood up to praise the excise tax pause along side their other affordability measures. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to make the same demand, and Champagne repeated his same response en français. Paul-Hus listed the other “taxes” they wanted cut, not all of which are taxes, and Joël Lightbound stood up to pat himself on the back for all of their affordability measures. John Barlow took over and returned to English to continue to decry just how much of a half-measure this was, to which Steven MacKinnon praised not only pause in the excise tax, but that it also applies to jet fuel on domestic flights. Barlow hit back on their hypocrisy over this given they used to decry how this would make the planet burn, but again demanded all taxes on gas be cut, which would increase consumption even More. Heath MacDonald praised how much this pause would help farmers.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and she decried how much the allocation of funding for Francophone news was reduced after Corus got access to the regional fund. Marc Miller praised their supports for French-language media. Normandin said that the digital services tax could funded all of these outlets, and Miller reiterated that they were looking at more options. Martin Champoux repeated the same question once again, and Miller repeated his same response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sutcliffe gets a federal no

Posted on by

With a bit of an apology to non-Ottawa residents, but our mayor, Mark Sutcliffe, is trying to blackmail the federal and provincial governments for more money, and insists that the city’s budget shortfall isn’t his fault. That’s a lie, and his low-tax austerity plan has bitten him in the ass, and he wants someone else to bail him out, but man, has he made some choices. There is plenty about the budget hole that is his fault, not the least of which is pandering to rural and suburban voters at the expense of downtown meaning that their property taxes stay low while downtown’s are high (under the rubric that multi-unit buildings put more strain on the system, rather than the cost of extending the system to ever-more-distant suburbs and exurbs). In fact, during the last city election, his main rival warned him that his plan had a massive budget hole in it and lo, they were proved right. Funny that.

Well, the federal government isn’t having any of it, and for good reason, not the least of which is that they are not in the mood to set the precedent that bailing out one city because of their poor choices, which will lead to every other city demanding the same, and no, the whole issue of payments for federal properties in lieu of property taxes are not justification. So, Sutcliffe is pretty much out of luck, because I’m pretty sure that Doug Ford is going to give him much the same response. Of course, this is likely just a PR move so that he can justify the tax increases that he should have instituted two years ago, but making the federal government your punching bag to justify doing your own job is pretty sad.

Ukraine Dispatch

In spite of Ukraine downing all 27 drones Russia launched overnight Thursday, Russians bombed a shopping mall in Kostiantynivka in the Donestsk region, killing at least 14 people. The UN says that July was the deadliest month for Ukrainian civilians since 2022. Russia has declared a federal emergency as a result of the Ukrainian incursion in Kursk. Ukrainian forces also raided Russian forces on the Kinburn Spit in the Black Sea, and hit an airfield with their drone attack on the Lipetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Google joins the bully tactics

Posted on by

Following Facebook’s particular tantrum over the online news bill, and their announcement that they will remove Canadian news links from their site, and end some of their media fellowship programmes, Google has stated that they will do the same, and lo, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. It’s absolutely a bully tactic, but so far the government is holding firm. It has been pointed out that when these web giants tried this in Australia, they lasted four days before they returned to the table, so we’ll see how long this lasts.

This having been established, a couple of things: Despite the media narrative, the bill is not a “link tax.” Links are nowhere in the spirit or the text of the bill. These companies were not supposed to be paying for hosting links on their sites, but rather, this was supposed to be an exercise in trying to rebalance the marketplace. Facebook and Google have so distorted the advertising market and destroyed it for media companies that this was supposed to be a way of essentially trying to compensate the public good of journalism for how they distorted the ad market. What the law is supposed to do, once it’s in force, is create transparent conditions for those negotiations to take place, with the oversight of the CRTC as an arm’s-length regulator. Again, this is not paying for links. There is no prescribed tariff rate for these links, but it was about addressing a market failure in a way that is as arm’s-length from government as possible. But web giants don’t like transparency (the deals they signed with media companies previously were all secret), and they don’t like to be held accountable. And the distance from government is also why the government didn’t just tax them and redistribute those revenues—never mind that web giants are expert at evading taxes, and the howls of government funding journalism from those revenues would be worse than the existing funds that the government already provides print journalism (which, again, they tried to keep as arm’s-length as possible through advisory boards making the qualification determinations).

I’m less inclined to be angry at the government, because they were largely being responsive to what the news industry was asking of them, even though that is tainted by the self-interest of certain zombie media giants. We should, however, absolutely be angry that these web giants are throwing their weight around and bullying sovereign governments like this, and it makes the case even more that these companies have become too big and need to be broken up. The fact that they are beating up on Canada won’t endear them to other jurisdictions, like the EU, but that’s in part why they’re doing it—they don’t want other countries to do what Canada is attempting here. But this may very well be a case that they are overplaying their hands, and those other countries or jurisdictions they are trying to scare off won’t be deterred.

Meanwhile, the opposition parties are having another normal one about this. Cripes.

Ukraine Dispatch:

No news from the front-lines of the counter-offensive, but emergency workers in the four districts surrounding the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant are conducting drills in preparation for the event of a nuclear incident or leak involving the plant, as they are convinced Russia will stage. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with Greta Thunberg to discuss the ecological impacts of war, including of the burst dam. Zelenskyy also met with former US vice president Mike Pence, for that matter. Human Rights Watch says that they have evidence that Ukraine has also been using illegal landmines as part of their operations.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Unserious knee-jerk suggestions

Posted on by

As expected, some of the sillier suggestions for avoiding future SNC-Lavalin-type Affairs have started cropping up, and yesterday, Policy Options hosted one from the head of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. His suggestions? Splitting the role of Attorney General and Justice Minister, and to ban omnibus bills.

On the former, it’s clear that he didn’t actually read the McLellan report beyond the headlines, because he would have seen – as Paul Wells pointed out so ably in his own piece – that the guidelines that McLellan puts forward in the report would have prevented this whole sordid affair before it got off the ground. (Side note: It may not have prevented Jody Wilson-Raybould from being shuffled, given the lack of competence she had demonstrated in the role overall, and Scott Brison was going to retire regardless, so that likely would have happened, but the fallout may not have gone quite the same way). There is no reason given in the Policy Options piece for rejecting McLellan’s advice – just that the whole Affair has damaged the public confidence. So that gets a failing grade.

As for the suggestion to ban omnibus bills, he doesn’t quite grasp the magnitude of the suggestion. He claims, not incorrectly, that they exist for the sake of efficiency, but that efficiency is largely because there are many pieces of legislation every year, where if you introduced individual bills for each component – such as around technical changes in a budget implementation bill – Parliament would grind to a halt. There is a time and a place for omnibus bills – the difference is when they are being used abusively. The Conservatives stuffing changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act into a budget implementation bill? That’s abusive. The Deferred Prosecution Agreement provisions being put into the budget bill? It’s borderline, but it wasn’t hidden or snuck through – it was in plain sight, the committees in both Houses each saw it and dealt with them (albeit less effectively on the Commons side), and the Commons has new rules to deal with splitting up votes on omnibus bills. Ironically, if the DPA legislation had been put forward as a separate bill, it likely would have languished until swallowed up by an omnibus justice bill, as happened to several other criminal justice reform bills over the course of the last parliament (speaking of Wilson-Raybould’s ability to manage her own bills). But the suggestion to simply ban all omnibus bills is unserious and jejune, and a perfect example of the kind of knee-jerk suggestions we’re going to see plenty of in the days ahead.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Attacking his own plan

Posted on by

Andrew Scheer’s sudden denunciation of the planned clean fuel regulations got some reaction yesterday, partly from the government, and partly from economists who deal with this kind of thing for a living. Scheer’s labelling it a “secret fuel tax” is more than a little odd, because it’s exactly the kind of thing he’s proposing by removing the transparent federal carbon price and replacing it with more costly regulations, which would get passed onto consumers in a hidden way without any of the rebates that the current federal backstop programme provides – in other words, doing exactly what he’s accusing the Liberals of doing. The government noted that Scheer’s 4¢/litre figure are just a guess because the regulations haven’t been finalised yet (though some economists say it’s about right based on current projections), but again, it needs to be driven home that this is exactly the kind of thing that Scheer himself is proposing, but without the added “technology is magic” sheen attached.

To that end, here’s economist Andrew Leach’s mock open letter to Scheer.

Meanwhile, Heather Scoffield points out that this latest attack by Scheer risks boxing him in, and attacks his credibility on the climate file.

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1148609609424429057

Continue reading →

QP: Condemning Kenney’s threats

Posted on by

Justin Trudeau was present for the first time in almost two weeks today, while Andrew Scheer was again absent. Lisa Raitt led off, worrying about the amendments to Bill C-69 from the Senate, and raising the letter from Jason Kenney and company threatening national unity if they don’t pass. Trudeau stated that they welcome the suggestions from the “independent” Senate, but said that a premier threatening national unity if he doesn’t get his own way needs to be condemned. Raitt said that Trudeau thought he was above the premiers, and Trudeau stated that he meets with premiers unlike Harper, but returned to his condemnation of the threats to national unity. Raitt worried that Trudeau was bringing on a constitutional crisis, and Trudeau reminded her that one of those amendments would make Indigenous consultations optional, which was not the way to move forward. Alain Rayes took over in French, and he demanded respect for premiers. Trudeau reiterated in French that he has worked with premiers, but Conservative premiers who threaten national unity needs to be condemned. Rayes claimed that the PM was attacking premiers at every opportunity, and Trudeau reiterated his response. Jagmeet Singh was up next, and he repeated his demand from yesterday to impose a price cap on cell phone companies, to which Trudeau picked up a script to list measures that the government has taken which means lower bills in regions where there is more competition. Singh repeated the demand in French, and Trudeau read the French version of his script in response. Singh then painted himself as brave enough to stand up to telecom companies, and repeated his demand, to which Trudeau extemporaneously assured him that the government was making investments to improve connectivity, including in rural areas. For his final question, Singh quoted a news story where a Liberal MP’s law firm may have been involved in a money laundering transaction, to which Trudeau read from a script about the task force they set up to deal with money laundering.

https://twitter.com/davidakin/status/1138511571515301888

Continue reading →

QP: Praise for our own leader’s plan

Posted on by

With Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh at the D-Day anniversary ceremonies, and Andrew Scheer elsewhere, it was up to Candice Bergen to lament the increased inspections of pork going into China, to which Marie-Claude Bibeau stated that they were encouraging all industry members to be extremely vigilant in their exports. Bergen demanded to know why a new ambassador had been appointed, to which Mélanie Joly noted that Canada is working with allies to call for the release of the detained Canadians. Bergen decried the deteriorating relationship, and Joly assured her this was a priority file. Luc Berthold took over in French to rail about the pork industry being impacted, and Bibeau repeated her earlier answer. Berthold demanded an ambassador and a WTO complaint, and Bibeau said that she agreed there was no issue with quality of Canadian exports, and that our representative at the WTO did raise the issue. Peter Julian was up next for the NDP, and he read some outrage about the KPMG client tax settlement, and Marc Garneau read that settlements are entered into in an independent process but the government was asking for more transparency going forward. Ruth Ellen Brosseau read her own repeat of the question in French, got Garneau to read the French version of his answer. Brosseau then read TVA was announcing layoffs and blaming competition from web giants, to which Pablo Rodriguez stood up to say that the Conservatives didn’t address the issue for ten years but they were working on legislation. Julian got up to read in English that web giants be made to pay their fair share, and Rodriguez again blamed the Conservatives for inaction.

Continue reading →

QP: Claiming a piece of the report

Posted on by

Shortly after the final report on the MMIW Inquiry was delivered, the prime minister got on a plane for Vancouver, leaving QP behind. Andrew Scheer led off, and raising the MMIW Inquiry report, wanted more action on human trafficking. Seamus O’Regan stood up and recited their thanks for the report and stated that they would work on a national action plan in response. Scheer the switched to French to lament attacks on the free press, per their Supply Day motion, and wanted the government to stop stacking the deck. Pablo Rodriguez stated that the Conservatives devoted a full day toward attacking journalists, and that the government would support them. Scheer turned to English to whinge about Unifor being on the advisory panel, and Rodriguez stated that they needed to hear from employers and employees in the sector. Alain Rayes took over to ask again in French, and Rodriguez repeated response, and then they went a second round of other same. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, and he returned to the MMIW Inquiry report, and tried to make it about him by asking the prime minister to join him in responding to it in a list of areas. O’Regan reiterated his previous response with an added list of steps they have already started taking, and when Singh asked again in French, O’Regan read the French version of his script. Singh then turned to a demand that the government adopt his climate change plan, and Jonathan Wilkinson read that the NDP’s plan simply adopted most of what the government said doing already. Singh tried again in English, deploying the “New Deal” terminology, and got the same response from Wilkinson.

Continue reading →