Tag Archives: Pensions

Roundup: Forgiveness over permission, C-5 edition

Posted on by

With hours left on the clock before the House of Commons would vote on Bill C-5, per the terms of the Closure motion passed earlier in the week, the Speaker agreed with an NDP motion that yes, the bill was indeed abusive omnibus legislation and agreed to split it into two parts to separate it for the final vote. It was a bit late to do so, because there was no ability to only advance one half and not the other, and it wasn’t going to matter much either considering that the Conservatives were going to vote in favour of it (because they absolutely want this Henry VIII clause on the books if they should form government in the next five years). And so, the first half of the bill, on the federal trade barriers, got near-unanimous support with only Elizabeht May voting against it, and the second half on major projects—and that Henry VIII clause—had the Bloc, the NDP, Elizabeth May and Liberal Nathaniel Erskine-Smith vote against it, not that those numbers made any kind of difference.

After the bill passed, Carney called a press conference in the Foyer, and had every Indigenous MP in the caucus as his backdrop (with a few others dropping in), and he insisted that it simply wasn’t communicated effectively how much Indigenous participation would be required for these projects, and that they would respect UNDRIP, and yes they would hold consultations with rights-holders over the summer to ensure that implementation of this legislation would be done “the right way.” Oh, and he totally swears that he’s not going to put a Henry VIII clause in any other bills—really! But all of those assurances left a sour taste.

It very much seems that Carney has taken the route of asking for forgiveness rather than permission, which is a really strange way to go about building trust with those rights-holders, especially when your MPs refused to let them speak at committee or have any participation in the legislative process. And you will forgive me if I don’t believe that they won’t ever use that Henry VIII clause to bulldoze over UNDRIP obligations on a project, because they gave themselves those powers for a reason. And if they think that they got away with asking for forgiveness rather than permission worked this time, who’s to say they won’t try that again when they do use those powers? Let’s not kid ourselves.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-06-20T22:56:10.284Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Drone attacks from Russia in the early hours of Thursday hit apartment buildings in Kharkiv and Odesa. There was another POW swap, and again, numbers were not disclosed. President Zelenskyy says that Ukraine is developing interceptor drones to deal with the Russian drones, whose numbers have increased in the past weeks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The kids are back

Posted on by

Parliament is back today, after nearly six months away, and first order of business is to elect a new Speaker, and there are eight MPs on the list. Fergus is not going to get it, because he proved to be an unsuitable choice, and I doubt that either the Liberals or any of the other opposition parties will want d’Entremont in as an opposition Speaker, because frankly it won’t be worth it. (The rare occasion where the opposition still held the Speaker was when it was Liberal Peter Milliken during the early Harper years, because Milliken was so well-liked, and nobody has managed to live up to his legacy). If you ask me, it should go to Alexandra Mendès, who has the most experience in the Chair, and who has proven herself to be completely no-nonsense when she’s in it, but MPs have time and again decided that they weren’t looking for experience or being no-nonsense. It was the Conservatives who wanted Anthony Rota in the chair last Parliament because he was a genial idiot and was more concerned with being everyone’s friend than in really enforcing decorum and they knew he would go easy on them, while Fergus was a novel choice instead of experienced. It was only after Fergus had one too many oopses that the Bloc decided that maybe it was time for a woman in the Chair again, and were ready to back Mendès if they managed to oust Fergus. Can they get enough votes this time? Stay tuned to find out.

Meanwhile, the Liberals held their first caucus meeting, which meant the inevitable question on the (garbage) Reform Act, and wouldn’t you know it, the Liberals voted against it, which made every pundit in this country cry out about how cowardly they were, while you had journalists writing up garbage copy with things like “they won’t be able to vote out” the leader without this, which is not only wrong, but dangerously wrong. (The CBC story with that particular line did edit it out on the next pass, but yes, I was absolutely livid).

"Liberal MPs decided against adopting the Reform Act during their caucus meeting Sunday, which means they won't be able to vote out the newly-elected leader if they sour on him down the line."No. That is absolutely wrong. Could a single fucking journalist in this country learn some basic civics?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-25T21:21:03.151Z

MPs have always had the ability to vote out a leader. A simple non-confidence vote in caucus is all it takes. You don’t need the stupid Act and its rules because it actually makes it harder by erecting a bunch of thresholds that are absolutely unnecessary. The problem, however, is for decade we had a pundit class who kept insisting that MPs were “powerless,” and we enforced a learned helplessness among them, and then Michel Chong came in with his ridiculous Act in order to look like the democratic hero when he actually just made things worse, and now it’s an intractable frame that everyone insists on using even though it’s false, creates wrong expectations, and is now self-reinforcing because when they vote against it, they’re being explicitly told that they are giving away powers that they might otherwise have, which is bullshit. “But if MPs have the power, then why didn’t they vote out Trudeau?” Because those MPs couldn’t organise a tea party for themselves if their lives depended on it. They had woken up to the problem and were trying to do something, but they were being meek and modest, and trying to convince Trudeau to do the right thing rather than vote him out and embarrass him. Obviously, it didn’t work, and Freeland was the one who needed to make the dramatic move, which goes even more to prove that the Act is useless. The state of civics in this country is intolerably bad, and our pundit class and journalists keep making it worse.

Ukraine Dispatch

The assaults on Kyiv continued over the weekend, with dozens of drones and missiles attacking overnight Saturday, injuring 15, while Sunday saw one of the largest attacks since the start of the war, with 367 drones and missiles fired (which included areas other than Kyiv), killing at least 12 people. Russia also claims to have captured two more settlements in Donetsk and one in Sumy. Another 307 prisoners were swapped by each side on Saturday, in spite of the massive Russian attacks, and another 303 each on Sunday, bringing it to a total of 1000 each side.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A single mandate letter for Cabinet

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney released his “mandate letter,” singular, yesterday following the “Cabinet planning forum,” which is how he’s re-branded a retreat—because nothing says Canada’s New Government™ like renaming everything. And the thing is, it’s not much of a mandate letter at all­, but rather a press release that lists seven priorities that essentially tasks ministers to figure out how their files fit into these priorities and do them, which are sufficiently broad that makes it hard to actually hold anyone to account, which was supposed to be the whole reason why Justin Trudeau made the mandate letters public in the first place (though his too were full of repetitive boilerplate language and values statements, but they did at least have some specific items for each minister).

Note: Apologies for this being late/incomplete, but I’ve been really sick the last couple of days, but I at least wanted to put something out before all of the links went stale.

In case you missed it:

  • My National Magazine profile of new justice minister Sean Fraser.
  • My weekend column that points to the big decisions that Mark Carney is going to have to make about the Senate.
  • My column demonstrates why we’re not really headed toward a two-party system in Canada, because it’s largely based on a false premise.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take on Carney’s creeping presidentialism with those “decision notes” he’s been signing for the cameras.

Ukraine Dispatch

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1925153620225310721

Continue reading →

Roundup: Cabinet Shuttle Day today

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau will be shuffling his Cabinet today, and you can bet that there are a whole lot of competing narratives about it. On the one hand, many of these appointments are necessary, because you currently have a few ministers who are doing double or triple duty with complex files, and they need to have some of the load taken off so that government can still operate smoothly, despite the political crisis around Trudeau’s political future. On the other hand, there is a sense that this is Trudeau buying time, that he’s trying to secure dissenting voices’ support, and that these carrots he’s been dangling can bear some fruit among a caucus who is turning against him. Then again, making the shuffle means he loses that last bit of leverage with backbenchers who are calling for his ouster, so we’ll see which narrative winds up winning.

The buzz is that David McGuinty will be getting public safety, which may be a good fit because he may be in a position to implement the recommendations made from the NSICOP reports that he helped author as chair of the committee (but it is also a loss for the said committee with his departure, and the loss of Senator Francis Lankin as the other longest-serving member). It also sounds like Nathaniel Erskine-Smith will get housing, on the proviso that he will run again in the next election after previously saying he was going to bow out, but I also suspect that this will be tough because he can no longer be the maverick truth-teller he was in the backbenches, and will have to follow the PMO line (though he may also prove an effective communicator on the file to counter Poilievre’s bullshit). There is also talk that Rachel Bendayan, Terry Duguid and Darren Fisher will also be getting positions.

Amidst this, the Globe and Mail is reporting on contradictory rumours about Trudeau’s thoughts on his political future—one source saying he’s ready to go and is figuring out his exit plan, another source saying that he’s determined to stay put, with a third source saying he was ready to go but that Dominic LeBlanc and Marc Miller talked him out of it, and that Katie Telford is ensuring that he hears from supporters and not dissenters. It remains a chaotic mess, but one can only hope that the first source is correct, and that he is trying to figure out an exit strategy, because his remaining in office is untenable.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile killed three and wounded three more in Kharkiv, while another missile hit a residence in Kryvyi Rih, injuring five. Russia also carried out a massive cyberattack on Ukrainian government registries.

This has been clear for many months. If Putin wants to negotiate, he can stop fighting anytime. And negotiate. He is the obstacle to peace, not Zelensky, and has been since the beginning of the war. Still not heard Trump explain what leverage he will use to make him stop

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2024-12-19T11:01:48.050Z

Continue reading →

QP: Using Crombie and Joly as cudgels

Posted on by

The prime minister was present and ready to take all questions, while his deputy found better things to do. All of the other leaders were present today, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, as is his usual wont, and claimed the PM was weak, lost control of the border, his spending, and his own party, and used Bonnie Crombie’s words as proof (even though it’s not the same party). Justin Trudeau said that his caucus was unified about the GST “holiday,” and claimed Conservatives wanted to vote for it and that Poilievre gagged them. Poilievre repeated the “lost control” slogan to apply it to food insecurity, and wanted assurances from the Economic Statement next week. Trudeau said it would come in due course, and that the government was helping people while Poilievre was jostling for his own political interests. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question while adding in the claim that Mélanie Joly launched her leadership campaign in the New York Times. Trudeau said that the Liberals are allowed to have different opinions while Poilievre just muzzles his MPs. Poilievre went on about the Joly story, and said Trudeau needs to get the hint that his party doesn’t want him any more. Trudeau gave a paean about Canadians pulling together when they face threats but Poilievre can’t help himself. Poilievre said that Trudeau was giving Canadian jobs to Trump, and listed “taxes” as proof, while Trudeau said that Canadians see through Poilievre’s shallow games, and that he wants them to struggle because he thinks it helps his prospects.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and demanded the federal government respect the unanimous motion in the Quebec National Assembly to get rid of the religious exemption for hate crimes, and Trudeau hit back that if they cared about it, they would do something about the Conservative filibuster so that said bill could come up for debate. Blanchet repeated the demand, and Trudeau again repeated his point about the Bloc not helping to end the filibuster.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and demanded permanent GST exemptions for “daily essentials,” and Trudeau patted himself on their GST “holiday.” Singh recited his new line about the Conservatives being “boot-lickers for billionaires” and the Speaker had to interject before Singh repeated his demand in French. Trudeau repeated his same self-congratulatory response.

Continue reading →

QP: Today’s slogan of “border disorder”

Posted on by

Following all of the speculation and accusation about the dinner at Mar-a-Lago, the prime minister was finally present today, along with his deputy, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he said that regardless if you take the Trump’s threats seriously or believe them to be a negotiation tactic, he claimed Trudeau has “lost control” of everything and demanded an election. Justin Trudeau said that they had a good discussion that talked about the good work they can do together, and added a jab about voting against the tax “holiday.” Poilievre claimed that Trudeau’s “destructive” policies were a gift to Trump, and Trudeau again chided Poilievre from voting against the GST “holiday,” as well as programmes like dental care or school food. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and this time, Trudeau cautioned about taking too seriously the erroneous talking points the Americans have weaponised, and that it wasn’t responsible leadership. Poilievre said that his job was not to cover for Trudeau “breaking” things, and listed a bunch of non sequiturs, and Trudeau said that they were stepping up for Canadians, and again listed the things the Conservatives voted against. Poilievre dismissed the programmes, and railed about the carbon levy. Trudeau recited that the carbon rebates puts more money back in the pockets of eight out of ten Canadians.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he demanded a budgeted, detailed plan about the border. Trudeau said that they shared their immigration plan several weeks ago, and that they would continue to reduce the number of irregular migrants thanks to significant investments in staffing levels at the border. Blanchet said that they need a plan for the future, not the past, and listed other files he is concerned about, and wanted a Quebec representative in any future negotiations. Trudeau assured him that they did talk about trade, steel and aluminium, as well as softwood lumber on Friday, and that they will stand up for jobs.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised that Conservatives fired thousands of CBSA officers when they were in power, and wanted them all rehired, more hires on top of that, and their mandate expanded. Trudeau said that he agrees that the Conservatives only know how to cut, and listed other programmes they want to cut as well. Singh repeated the same in French, and closed with accusing Trudeau of coming back from the meeting empty-handed. Trudeau repeated that they have reinvested in the border, and have reduced the number of irregular arrivals.

Continue reading →

QP: Revisionist history about CEBA

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, and neither were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he raised the Auditor General’s report, and the $3.5 billion that was given to businesses that didn’t qualify for the CEBA loan programme, and the fact that the government subcontracted out its administration, claiming this was a loss of control and corruption. Rechie Valdez, in English, retorted that during COVID, Poilievre said that they don’t believe in these kinds of supports, while the government stood up for small businesses. Poilievre said that this report shows that he was right all along, and Arif Virani, in French, listed the help they have given businesses, including the carbon levy rebates (finally) being returned to them and the GST “holiday” (which most businesses are not really thrilled about). Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, and Valdez cited Conservative MPs who wrote her office to advocate for the loan programme. Poilievre said his members champion constituents who are eligible for the programme, not those who weren’t, and pivoted to another report on food insecurity, and misleadingly blamed the carbon levy. Jenna Sudds praised the work of food banks and cited from the report that praised government efforts for seniors. Poilievre cited the faux talking point about food price increases in Canada versus the U.S., and demanded once again to kill the carbon levy, and Karina Gould cited the ways he has voted against Canadians, that they gave him an opposition day to make his case and he turned it down, which was a sign of his own weak leaders.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and raised the Auditor General’s report that they are not tracking the data for support for seniors, and used this to demand more aid for them. Steven MacKinnon retorted that the Bloc have voted against seniors at every opportunity. Therrien again demanded more aid for seniors, and MacKinnon again listed programmes that the Bloc voted against, calling it “shocking.”

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and in French, worried about the Trump tariffs and accused Trudeau of coming home empty-handed. Dominic LeBlanc agreed the tariffs would be destructive, which his why they spoke to their American counterparts about the integration of the economy. Blake Desjarlais repeated the same in English, and LeBlanc responded much the same way.

Continue reading →

QP: Undignified exchanges on the GST “holiday”

Posted on by

Neither the PM nor his deputy were present today, nor were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre was present, and led off in French, and he declared Justin Trudeau to be “weak,” blamed him for Roxham Road, the rise in foreign students and the claim that 500,000 people were “lost,” and demanded to know what he would do to secure the border. Jean-Yves Duclos noted that the relationship with the U.S. is the most important, and praised the changes to the Safe Third Country Agreement. Poilievre accused the government of losing control of the border and that premiers were sending more provincial police to the borders. Duclos took the opportunity to raise Poilievre not having his security clearance. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question, with slightly more faux menace, and this time, Marc Miller noted that hundreds of thousands of people come to this country and then leave, who are called tourists and that anyone who doesn’t leave will face consequences, before saying that Poilievre and Tim Uppal have been telling people they won’t be deported because he’ll give them all visas. Poilievre stumblingly called this a “hallucination,” and Miller said he would tweet out the video, before saying that Poilievre needs to “grow a pair” and get his security clearance. Poilievre called this “erratic behaviour” and demanded an election, to which Karina Gould called him all talk and no walk.

Marc Miller just said that Poilievre needs to “grow a pair” and get his security clearance. Speaker Fergus asks him to withdraw those words, and Miller obliges. #QP

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-11-28T19:50:40.348Z

https://twitter.com/MarcMillerVM/status/1862269731329262017

 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and claimed the government was finally listening to the Bloc and  adding resource to the border (Duclos: The prime minster had a good call with the premiers), and on a follow-up, Mélanie Joly noted that she spoke with François Legault this morning, as well as a number of influential American senators.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP to demand that the “rebate” cheques be expanded to more people. Soraya Martinez Ferrada thanked the NDP for their support on the GST holiday, unlike the “grinches” on the other side. Laurel Collins took over in English to also demand the rebate be expanded, and this time, Ferrada praised in French their (wholly inadequate) disability benefit and took the jab at the NDP for not supporting workers.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Falling over each other to defend Trump’s position

Posted on by

The first day of fallout from Trump’s tariff threats was full of more panicked flailing, and performative attempts at toughness. Danielle Smith, Scott Moe, and BC’s opposition leader John Rustad fell all over themselves to demand Trudeau address Trump’s border concerns (because boot-licking is how you really own the Libs, apparently). Pierre Poilievre took to the microphone to debut his latest slogan of demanding a Canada First™ plan, which basically involved all of the things that he’s already been calling for—most especially cutting taxes, killing the carbon levy and eliminating environmental regulations—plus more handwavey demands to increase defence spending (which he’s never committed to), and an even more authoritarian crackdown on drugs than he had previously been planning under the guise that Trump was somehow right about fentanyl coming over the border. He also full-on invented the claim that this announcement caught Trudeau’s government off-guard (never mind that they’ve been spending the past year re-engaging with American lawmakers at all levels for this very contingency). Best of all was that he insisted that the prime minister needs to put partisanship aside, and then launched into a screed of partisan invective, and said that putting partisanship aside means doing what he wants. If this was an attempt to show that he’s an adult in the face of trouble and that he has the ability to be a statesman, well, this was not it—just more of the same peevishness that he always displays.

Meanwhile, Justin Trudeau will be holding a virtual meeting with the premiers later today. One of the Bank of Canada’s deputy governors made the unsurprising observation that those tariffs would have economic repercussion on both sides of the border. The Logic has a look at the impact on Canadian business, plus a reality check on fentanyl seizures going into the US and irregular border crossings, and the legalities of Trump’s declaration.

https://twitter.com/tylermeredith/status/1861533934724563237

I probably shouldn’t be surprised at the number of people with a platform in this country who insisted that Trump must be right, and it must be our fault that he’s doing this, but seriously? Capitulate and boot-lick at the first opportunity? He doesn’t have a point. If anything, there is a bigger problem with American drugs, guns, and migrants coming into our borders, and we aren’t threatening massive tariffs until the Americans secure their border, because that would be insane, and yet, supposedly intelligent and successful people in this country suddenly think the reverse must be true. We live in the stupidest of times.

https://twitter.com/JosephPolitano/status/1861207325651943487

Continue reading →

QP: Swagger around the Trump election

Posted on by

In the wake of the U.S. election results, the prime minister was present today to answer all questions, while his deputy was away. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and claimed that Trudeau had previously caved to Trump on softwood lumber and claimed he would do so again. Justin Trudeau dismissed this and noted how they successfully renegotiated NAFTA, and stood up to other tariffs. Poilievre’s tried this again in English, and Trudeau repeated his same points with the added note that Poilievre wouldn’t get his security clearance. Poilievre went on about what is “dumb” and claimed the carbon levy was driving jobs and investment in the U.S., and Trudeau said that they were going to grow the economy together, and said that that government takes defence and security seriously, and pointed to the defence cuts under the Conservatives and his refusal to get His clearance. Poilievre patted himself on the back for the Conservatives “crushing the Taliban and ISIS,” claimed Trudeau couldn’t shoot down a Chinese weather balloon. Trudeau accused Poilievre of talking down the Canadian Forces, and called him out for not committing to their two percent NATO timeline. Poilievre returned to French to claim that Trudeau has destroyed the economy, and Trudeau listed ways in which they have stood up for Canadian workers and took defence seriously, before one more swipe at the security clearance. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and worried about the crush of Americans heading for the border to avoid Trump. Trudeau noted that they have been making preparations before some economic back-patting. Blanchet felt that was too vague, and Trudeau again offered some bland assurances that they are protecting the border, and the steps taken to better distribute refugees around the country.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and worried about the American tariffs would raise prices in Canada. (Huh? How?) Trudeau listed the workers they stood up for workers the last time and will do so again. Singh said was “cold comfort” before repeating the question in French, and Trudeau, related his same back-patting.

Continue reading →