Tag Archives: NDP Leadership

Roundup: Ahistorical expectations about project timelines

Posted on by

A couple of quick notes for the weekend. First is that for all of the projects referred to the Major Projects Office, none have actually officially been designated a PONI (Project of National Importance), so my calling the referred projects as such is admittedly premature. But that also means that none of them have the special rules that trigger the Henry VIII Clause from the legislation, which again, leads to the same question that Althia Raj asked in her most recent column about why the rush to ram that bill through Parliament with almost no debate and little stakeholder input if they haven’t bothered to use it, nearly six months later.

The other note is that the talk about timelines remain ahistorical and nothing but wishful thinking. “We used to build big things. We built a railway in four years.” Erm, not really. This is likely a reason why most of the projects that have been referred to the MPO so far have been in the works for years is for the very reason that they’re much further along. This is likely going to be one of the death knells of Danielle Smith’s pipeline plan, which is that it’s starting from zero, and there is no way, even with the magic wand of the Henry VIII clause, that they can make it go from concept to shovels in two years.

They didn't go from "Shall we build a railway?" to a railway in four years.The CPR was a Confederation promise before 1867. Construction began in 1881.Or, actually, in 1875, when they started a section in Manitoba and northern Ontario. Which hooked up to other rails built on their own earlier.

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2025-09-14T23:17:30.293Z

There were planning, scandal, false starts, re-awarding of the contract. And not a lot of attention to, you know, Indigenous people's rights.Or working conditions, which were eventually the subject of Heritage Minute you might recall. www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE3I…

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2025-09-14T23:20:55.646Z

What's the right length of time to plan and build a new high-speed rail line in 2025? I don't know.But they didn't do the entire CPR from concept to completion in four years, and I don't think we want a dead temporary foreign worker for every mile of track.

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2025-09-14T23:23:15.475Z

And then there’s Poilievre’s completely nonsense demanding that government “get out of the way,” or Ontario’s Stephen Lecce talking about the problems with federal regulations killing projects when that also relies on a very selective reading of history and what happened. Northern Gateway started planning before Harper took over, and over his nine years in power, Mr. “Get government out of the way” couldn’t get it past the finish line either (in part because they couldn’t even be arsed to live up to their own consultation process with First Nations). Nothing Poilievre is saying is true, so We The Media need to stop treating it like it’s credible.

Ukraine Dispatch

The attack on Kyiv early Friday killed six and injured dozens, along with more strikes on energy facilities. Ukraine hit the oil port at Novorossiyk the same day, suspending oil exports. Ukraine is now mass-producing interceptor drones to bolster their air defences.

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: Poilievre’s second backtrack attempt

Posted on by

Still under fire for his comments about Justin Trudeau and the “despicable” leadership at the RCMP, Pierre Poilievre has been forced to backtrack a second time. The first was his tactic of issuing clarifications only to media outlets and not his social media or party channels, and that didn’t mollify people, so this time he held a media availability and insisted that he didn’t say what we all heard him say, and then sent his MPs out to do media to also overly parse what his language was, and to try and spin it to say something other than what we all heard him say, and to insist that what we all heard him say was out of context. (It was not). He is now claiming that he didn’t say Trudeau should be jailed—only that he “clearly” broke a law that would impose jailtime (even though it was not clear he broke said law), and that clearly isn’t the same thing. Kind of like how they’re not scapegoating immigrants, they’re just criticising Liberal immigration policy (wink).

Meanwhile, members of his caucus are getting restive, and while they all made a big show of publicly supporting him, several have been quietly talking to media outlets about their dissatisfaction. While some are saying they’re undecided if they want to vote for him continuing in the leadership review, I also suspect that there are very few Conservatives in the caucus who have the spine or the intestinal fortitude to actually vote against him, no matter how inappropriate the comment, because there are precious few MPs in any party who would dare stand against their leader and face the wrath of having their nomination papers go unsigned.

Carney Speech

Prime minister Mark Carney gave a speech last night that was intended as a kind of pre-budget positioning, but also a kind of victory lap to pat themselves on the back for all of the work they’ve been doing since the election. Carney promised that the budget was going to unleash all kinds of private sector investment, but I also feel like we’ve been hearing that refrain for the past two decades and not a lot of it has really materialized. He said he wants to double non-US exports over the next decade. He spoke about “betting big,” and getting back to a culture of doing big things, but the thing about that kind of talk is that it ignores the people who were impacted by that, most particularly Indigenous people who were displaced or exploited in the process. He said that this is going to take more than a few months and can’t happen overnight, but he also talked about “sacrifices,” particularly as he talks about cutting government spending.

My problem with this particular rhetoric is that he never quite makes it clear who will be making those sacrifices, and you can be damn sure it’s not CEOs or rich white dudes. In fact, you can pretty much set your watch by the fact that the “sacrifices” are going to be on the backs of women’s programmes, queer/trans people and other minority groups whose funding is going to be slashed to nothing, it’s going to be the poor who will find that programming designed to assist them will be gone (but hey, they’ll get their benefits thanks to automatic filing, whenever that actually happens). We’ve seen this happen time and again, and the cycle of time is coming around once again, and Carney is making no move to stop it and finding a new path.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-22T22:02:55.404Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The fairly massive attack early Wednesday targeted several cities and killed six, including two children, as a kindergarten was struck. Russia claims it took two more villages in Donetsk region. Sweden has signed a letter of intent about supplying 150 Gripen fighter jets to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pipeline necromancy in the discussions

Posted on by

With the prime minister back in Canada, a couple of additional things were made known about the meeting with Trump, and one of them was the fact that the “energy” portion of their conversation involved Mark Carney floating the possibility of reviving the Keystone XL pipeline. For those of you unaware, this is entirely an American decision—all of the infrastructure on the Canadian side of the border is pretty much in place, and this project was never in contention. The Trudeau government supported it, but the resistance was on the American side of the border, not only from environmental concerns, but also because there were conspiracy theories developing in places like Nebraska that this was a secret ploy to drain their aquifers. No, seriously. Nevertheless, this is something that the proponent abandoned after Biden rescinded the permits (even though part of the network was built and renamed), so it would need someone to pick it up again.

Meanwhile, US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick spoke virtually at a Eurasia Group event in Toronto, and said that there will be no tariff-free auto deal with Canada, that the most we can hope for is a relationship around auto parts, and that Canada needs to get used to coming in second place to the US. Lutnick also expressed a desire to replace the New NAFTA with bilateral deals rather than a trilateral agreement with Mexico. When Carney later addressed the same event virtually, he said that the government will come to some bilateral agreements with the US, and spoke of “granular discussions” around steel and aluminium tariffs, but didn’t address these comments, just as he didn’t address the reports of Lutnick’s remarks during QP.

It’s hard to know what to make of any of this. After insisting that there was a “rupture” in our trade relationship, this is yet one more proposal to deepen integration and reliance on the American market…but it’s also probably the most viable pipeline for Alberta (though there are proposals to optimise the capacity of the Trans Mountain Expansion that would increase its maximum capacity for west coast exports—not that it’s anywhere near capacity at the moment). On the other hand, if they want to pay for our oil, and also pay their own tariffs to do so, then why not take their money? None of this is going to stop Danielle Smith or the Conservatives from demanding that Carney rip up all of the government’s environmental legislation so that they can crank up production with no consequences (even though there are absolutely environmental consequences that are getting more and more expensive each year), and this isn’t going to create that many jobs in the sector, even if production is increased, given that they are increasingly relying on automation and have been since the last price crash in 2014. But everything is stupid all the time, so this is no exception.

effinbirds.com/post/7804636…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-08T13:25:07.008Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces are inflicting heavy losses on the Russians in a counter-offensive in the Donetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Managing the expectations from Washington

Posted on by

Monday was a weird day of expectations management as prime minister Mark Carney headed to Washington for a “working lunch” with Trump to happen today. There were murmurs from Senior Government Sources™ that there could be some kind of relief for some—but not all—of the steel and aluminium tariffs, but those were heavily caveated and is not going to be any kind of comprehensive tariff deal, because Trump loves his tariffs. (And there is no deal to be had). Oh, and while all of this expectations management was going on, Trump declared new 25 percent tariffs on medium and heavy-duty trucks. Because of course.

Amidst this, Pierre Poilievre released a peevish open-letter to Carney that demanded “no more losing” when it comes to dealing with Trump, and a list of things he wants “wins” on, whether it’s tariffs or softwood lumber, or what have you. Because remember, under this framing, Trump is the rational actor and Carney is the one who is the inept negotiator who simply can’t get anything done. Reality of course, is entirely the opposite, that you can’t really negotiate with Trump because he has no logical basis or consistency for his “deals,” and anything he agrees to isn’t worth the paper its written on (if it’s even written down, as some “deals” were nothing more than blank pages with a signature on it).

To that end, Andrew Scheer went on Power & Politics looking to pick a fight with David Cochrane about this, and when Cochrane pointed out that yes indeed, Trump’s tariffs are both affecting our economy and we still do have the best deal of anyone with Trump, that Scheer twisted this into “agreeing” that Carney’s ineptitude has cratered the economy and soured any deal with Trump, because Scheer is a liar and a braying doofus. But this is what everyone has to deal with when it comes to the level of rhetoric and sheer sophistry coming from the Conservatives these days, which is not exactly conducive to informed debate.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-06T22:08:02.378Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine’s forces say that Russian sabotage groups are active in the city of Pokrovsk, which Russians have been trying to capture for months. Ukraine’s long-range drones have struck a Russian ammunition plant, a key oil terminal, and an important weapons depot.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Telling on themselves about bail

Posted on by

After Question Period today, there will be a vote on the Conservatives’ latest Supply Day motion, which is for the House of Commons to pass their blatantly unconstitutional “jail not bail” bill at all stages. This is going to be an increasingly common tactic as they have loaded up the Order Paper with a number of these kinds of private members’ bills, and they are using the rhetoric that the government is somehow “obstructing” their legislation, even though most of those bills would ordinarily never see the light of day because there is a lottery system for private members’ legislation to come up for debate, with no guarantee of passage in either chamber (because the Senate can and will sit on private members’ bills long enough for them to die on the Order Paper if they’re particularly egregious). But most people don’t understand the legislative process, or that opposition MPs can’t just bring stuff up for debate at any point in time, so this is just more rage-baiting over through use of scary crime stories to make the point about how the Liberals are “soft on crime,” and so on. It would be great if legacy media could call out this bullshit, but they won’t.

At the same time, the Conservatives calling it “Liberal bail” is telling on themselves. The law of bail stems from the pre-Charter right to the presumption of innocence, which is a cornerstone of our entire legal system. The specific law of bail has been honed through decades of Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence, and the last time the Liberal government made any major bail reform legislation, it was to codify that Supreme Court jurisprudence, and to actually increase the onus for cases of domestic violence. None of this made things easier for bail, but the Conservatives haven’t stopped demanding that legislation be repealed (and only once in a while will a Liberal minister or parliamentary secretary actually call that out). This is about undermining important Charter rights, but do the Conservatives care? Of course not. They want to look tough and decisive, no matter who gets hurt in the process.

Meanwhile, much to my surprise, Poilievre says he won’t support the (really bad) omnibus border bill, C-2, so long as it contains privacy-violating sections like enhanced lawful access, which is a surprise, because the Conservatives have been champions of it for years (much as the Liberals used to be opposed to it). So, the world really is upside down now. Unless this is some kind of tactic or ploy, which I also would not be surprised by, but at the moment it looks like they’re on a “the Liberals are the real threats to your freedom” kick, which to be fair, this legislation is not helping the Liberals’ case.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched their largest aerial assault against Lviv and surrounding regions early Sunday, killing at least five. Earlier in the weekend, Russia attacked a passenger train at a station in Sumy, killing one and injuring approximately thirty others.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An eight-day sitting?

Posted on by

I don’t follow provincial legislatures too much, but this headline caught my eye—that the Nova Scotia legislature had just wrapped up an eight-day sitting, which absolutely rankles me as someone who cares (perhaps a little too) deeply about parliamentary democracy. While on the one hand, it’s not uncommon for provincial legislatures to have shorter sessions that we see in Ottawa, and for them not to have the same kind of fixed schedule that we do, eight days is frankly insulting.

What is perhaps even worse from this story is the fact that the Houston government rammed through a bunch of omnibus legislation, when clearly, they had the time and the ability to actually debate legislation on their own. Even more problematic is the fact that these omnibus bills included poison pills to try and trap the opposition parties into supporting disparate things. The one example was protections for renters, which the NDP supported, being in the same bill that imposed heavy fines or jail time on protesters on Crown land, effectively criminalising certain kinds of dissent, which they could not support (especially as these protests involve protests on logging roads). I’m sure Tim Houston thought that this was clever, when it’s just abusive. This is not how the parliamentary process is supposed to work. This is certainly a problem in most Westminster legislatures, and there are now mechanisms in the federal Parliament that can break apart omnibus bills in certain circumstances, and perhaps the province needs to adopt some of these measures on their own because that should be out of bounds.

Part of what irritates me about this is that Houston is doing this while he’s trying to sell himself to Canadians as this reasonable, progressive conservative who’s not tied to the federal party, and that he’s this kind of anti-Poilievre figure. I’ve certainly heard from people who used to sit in that legislature that he has a reputation for bullying, but even beyond that, these kinds of tactics demonstrate a kind of contempt for elected office, and for elected officials to be doing their jobs, which includes scrutinizing legislation properly, and holding government to account. A rushed eight-day sitting where you ram through omnibus bills is clearly not how a legislature is supposed to operate, and the people in the province should be raising a bigger racket about this—especially in Nova Scotia, which was where Responsible Government was first achieved in the colonies.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia targeted Ukraine’s natural gas facilities in an early morning attack on Friday, with much of the targets to being facilities in Kharkiv. A Russian drone also killed a French photojournalist on the front lines in Eastern Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Forcing a pipeline project

Posted on by

Believing herself clever, Alberta premier Danielle Smith is trying to lay a trap for prime minister Mark Carney, but it’s a really obvious trap and Admiral Ackbar can see it from a mile off. Because she is apparently now a socialist, Smith has decided that the provincial government will take the lead on proposing a pipeline to the northern coast of BC, with the “advice” of three pipeline companies, but none of them will actually be the proponent as this goes to the Major Projects Office. Smith claims that she is trying to get around the “chicken and egg” problem of not having any interested proponents in such a pipeline, and hopes that she can get it off the ground so that a private company will take it over, but remember that it’s not 2014, and there doesn’t seem to be a whole lot of market demand. (Oh, and she wants to use digital asbestos to help map the route, which is even more hilariously sad).

This is very much a dare to everyone to oppose her. BC premier David Eby has called this out as a stunt because it’s not a real project, with no real proponent, and no buyers lining up for any of the product. The Indigenous rights and title-holders in the area are not interested in the project, and are opposed to a bitumen pipeline going through their territory and off their coast, because this would also require lifting the tanker ban because Smith wants to ship bitumen through it, which is a “persistent” product unlike LNG. Carney has previously said that if the province and First Nations are opposed to the project, it won’t go ahead, but he has also given himself the power to override pretty much any objection, or the tanker ban, or any of it, if he really wants to. But a refusal is largely what Smith is counting on, so that she can once again play the victim, and blame the federal government for a lack of market interest.

In a sense, the province wasting millions of dollars on this for the sake of grievance theatre is not new. Jason Kenney sunk $1.3 billion into the dead Keystone XL project in an attempt to revive American interest in it, even going so far as to proposed to fund its construction if the proponent wouldn’t to try and challenge the Biden veto. This feels like more of the same, where she is sinking money she doesn’t have into a losing prospect in an empty gesture in order to secure her political future by playacting as the great defender of Alberta and its ossifying industry. But there are going to be epic tantrums, and she’s going to try and use the threat of separatism to try and get her way (because she thinks it worked for Quebec and doesn’t understand how much it devastated the economy in that province), and we’ll see if Carney is actually prepared to handle it, because so far, he’s telling a lot of people what they want to hear, and those messages are starting to collide.

Ukraine Dispatch

The Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant is now going the longest it’s been without external power for cooling reactors, increasing concern. This after Russia also attacked the area near Chornobyl, which also briefly cut its external power supply.

Continue reading →

Roundup: New hate crime legislation tabled

Posted on by

The government tabled new hate crime legislation yesterday, and while I’m not going to delve too deeply into it here because I’m writing something more substantial about it for another outlet, I wanted to make a couple of observations, starting with the complaints of every reporter in the room during the press conference, which was that they didn’t have copies available at the time, nor did they have press releases available, so everyone was essentially flying blind. Part of this is a function of parliamentary privilege—no one can see the bill until it has been tabled in the House of Commons (or it violates the privileges of MPs), and upon first reading it can be ordered printed, which is why there is a delay on seeing the bill. This isn’t the first time it’s happened, and you would think that some of the more senior reporters would know this, but of course not. It was also the fact that they had the press release immediately after it was tabled, but that was in part a function of the clock (the minister had a flight to catch). But the inability to at least furnish press releases was a legitimate complaint, and the minister’s staff (or the department) should have known better.

This being said, much is being made about the fact that certain symbols are being criminalized if used in the context of promoting hate, and some of the reporters in the room just could not wrap their heads around that context. “But what if someone is wearing a t-shirt?” “What if they have Nazi memorabilia in their house?” The minister was not going to engage in hypotheticals, but the fact that there is context to these offences was a little too abstract.

Some of the reactions were expected, such as the concerns that this is going to impact legitimate protest even though the government has tried to make a clear delineation in the language of the bill that intention to intimidate because of hate is the target, and yes, there are specific legal tests about this. Of course, one of the biggest problems is that we already have laws for most of these offences, but police simply don’t enforce them, and that could be the case after this bill passes as well. Or it could wind up that this bill provides more clarity for police and prosecutors than the existing jurisprudence, but that remains to be seen.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims it has taken control over two more village in Donetsk region, while president Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces have inflicted heavy losses on Russians on the frontline counteroffensive near two cities in the same region. Russian jets violated Estonia’s airspace as part of their latest test of NATO resolve.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A pause after malicious compliance

Posted on by

Not unexpectedly, the Alberta government is pausing its book ban in large part because of the malicious compliance by the Edmonton Public School Board and others, where they weaponized the bans to show how ridiculous they are, particularly in targeting things like Ayn Rand, which Danielle Smith thinks should be “compulsory reading,” because of course she does. And yes, Margaret Atwood got involved, because one of the books that got picked for the ban was The Handmaid’s Tale, and Smith and company were roundly ridiculed by everyone. As they should be.

But as the government decides that they’re going to either come up with a more targeted criteria, or just take these school boards by the hand and essentially do it for them, nobody is actually talking about how this all started with a moral panic about queer or trans books, and that this is what the outcome is going to be once Smith and her ministers come up with the “targeted” list. And frankly, it’s disappointing to see that Naheed Nenshi is not calling this out either, instead giving credence to the moral panic by saying that this was about the UCP igniting a culture war that backfired on them, and “Instead of just saying, ‘Hey, we found a couple of troubling comic books with some troubling images, let’s take those off of shelves,’ they wrote a ministerial order.” Those “troubling images” are overreactions or taken out of context, but more to the point, they’re queer and trans materials. That cannot be toned down or ignored in the broader scheme because this is where fascism always starts. And no, this isn’t just Smith being a MAGA adherent because a lot of these particular tactics have a more tangible origin point in Orbán’s Hungary, where Americans like Ron DeSantis then adapted them for his own use, and far-right groups took their cues from the US shared their lists with members of the UCP to show their “concerns.” Nothing was an accident. Let’s not pussyfoot around this.

I don't think this has necessarily been intentional by anyone in media, but I am fascinated by the way the narrative around the Alberta book bans has shifted away from the censorship of LGBTQ2S+ stories into being much more "Look, they're even banning Game of Thrones!!"

— Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2025-09-02T17:18:21.140Z

In other Alberta news, their bans on students changing names or pronouns in schools, and ban on trans women in sport have also taken effect, so Egale Canada is part of a lawsuit that has been launched to challenge these laws, which will inevitably result in Smith invoking the Notwithstanding Clause, because of course she will, but she’s going to insist that she’s the reasonable one in the room while she’s doing it.

1/ Egale Canada and Skipping Stone have filed a constitutional challenge against the Government of Alberta’s Education Amendment Act, 2024 (formerly Bill 27), which places unconstitutional restrictions on the use of names and pronouns in schools across Alberta.

— Egale Canada (@egalecanada.bsky.social) 2025-09-02T21:21:32.679Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-09-02T21:22:03.302Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia has launched air attacks on Kyiv overnight. There were fresh attacks on Ukrainian power facilities over the weekend, and Ukraine has vowed retaliation. Ukraine is also seeing a new troop buildup along certain parts of the front lines. As the school year starts in Ukraine, many more schools have been moved underground as a result of the war. The former Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada was gunned down on Saturday in a political assassination.

Continue reading →