Tag Archives: Pensions

Roundup: Picking a fight over the CPP

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau decided to get into a new federal-provincial scrap yesterday by releasing an open letter to Alberta premier Danielle Smith on the issue of her proposal to withdrew from the Canada Pension Plan and create their own provincial one. Trudeau said that he would fight for the stability of pensions in the country, and that his Cabinet would ensure that people are aware of the risks of Smith’s plan—which is wise enough considering that the whole thing is premised on fantasy math that everyone knows is not ever going to fly, and that Smith’s whole pitch is premised on that fantasy math (and that without it, the whole thing falls flat). But this is also the same federal government that is unable to have a frank conversation about absolutely anything, so it’s hard to imagine that they would start now, on this particular file, and would instead just trot out a bunch of feel-good pabulum about the current system, which is not going to help absolutely anyone, and it certainly won’t counter Smith’s lies and fantasy math, but this government can’t help themselves.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1714644819807809638

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1714645765002510598

Smith naturally responded saying that Trudeau’s comments were unhelpful and if he wanted to be constructive, he should have shown up with a number of what the actual withdrawal figure would be. And it’s true that Trudeau’s letter had no figures in it at all, whether that’s because he relied on the platitudes about the stability of the existing system, or because he’s waiting to have a watertight analysis from his departments, and that’s going to need more time. The cynic in me says it’s the former, but it may be the latter, because there may be a serious effort happening to come to a realistic figure—which of course would raise the question of why Trudeau would release his letter today and not wait until that was in hand? In any case, Smith wants this fight with Ottawa, and the whole premise of this fight and the fantasy math is to use it as a cudgel to threaten the rest of Canada so that she can demand they back off on environmental legislation and regulation (which, again, she has been consistently lying about and the government hasn’t come up with a half-decent counter to). Given the state of play, I’m not confident this will wind up in anything but a giant clusterfuck.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1714691053083582798

Ukraine Dispatch:

The death toll rose after a Russian missile strike on an apartment building in Zaporizhzhia, while Ukrainian forces have been making some progress around Robotyne in the south. Near Kharkiv, a farm worker was killed when his tractor hit a mine.

Continue reading →

QP: The first attempt to publicly undermine Speaker Fergus

Posted on by

The prime minister and his deputy were in town but away, hosting CARICOM meetings instead, while the other leaders were all present. Speaker Fergus wanted to make a statement about decorum before things got underway, Pierre Poilievre decided to throw a tantrum because he started right now, and had Andrew Scheer fight on his behalf. There was a back-and-forth on the rules and consultation with the Table Officers, and Fergus trying to assert his authority as the Conservatives tried to undermine him publicly. Eventually, Fergus did get to his speech, and faced attempts by the Conservatives to interrupted him with points of order, and eventually he got to the point about excessive and loud heckling, while recognising that there is a place for witty comments as a feature of our system; the use of “provocative” terms that lead to tense exchanges, such as calling one another racists or shouting obscenities; and the tendency to the make personal attacks, including coming up with fake titles, or drawing attention to absences. He promised to use what tools he has to limit those attacks, reinforcing that he has the authority to preserve order and decorum. That would include refusing to recognise a member, or to name a member.

Poilievre finally led off in French, and he decried “inflationary deficits” with a couple of bespoke mentions of Quebeckers. François-Philippe Champagne trotted out the “take no lessons” line and decried the cuts the Conservatives would make cuts to services. Poilievre switched to English to worry about the “middle-class homeless,” and demanded an end to deficits, to which Anita Anand recited the points about the country’s Aaa credit rating and that the government invests in Canadians. Poilievre shrugged off the “incompetent ratings agencies” before worrying about homeless seniors with a specious connection to deficits. Mark Holland said that cuts to social programmes like Poilievre was peddling would make people worse off in the long-run. Poilievre boasted that the previous government balanced the budget will increasing healthcare (false), and Anand got back up to insist that they won’t balance the budget on the backs of Canadians. Poilievre retorted that the government runs massive deficits on the backs of people before turning to the hospital in Gaza, and demanded that they denounce terrorists for inflicting it. Karina Gould said that their hearts were broken for the innocent Palestinians affected and that they have denounced terrorism while they stand with Israel.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he demanded Canada work with allies to get humanitarian aid to Gaza. Gould insisted that they were calling for a humanitarian corridor and to protect the lives of civilians. Blanchet was incredulous that Trudeau had not apparently spoken to Joe Biden since the attack in Israel, and Gould reiterated that they are in contact with allies and stakeholders. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and mocked Champagne’s inability to get answers on how the grocery chains were lowering prices, and wanted support for a motion to call them to committee. Champagne insisted that his summoning those CEOs was unprecedented. Singh got back up ask the question in French—because he needs clips in both languages—and Champagne says that he wrote to the chair of the committee to ask him to summon the CEOs, so he was glad the NDP was on board.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Openly pursuing creeping illiberalism

Posted on by

You may have heard mention of a lavish trip that Conservative MPs took to London courtesy of a Hungarian think tank, but as you might expect from Canadian legacy media, the focus remains on the costs of the trip, and the stupid little partisan games in trying to get the ethics committee to look into it. What isn’t being mentioned is the fact that the think tank, the Danube Institute, is closely tied to the Orbán regime, and that is a worrying problem because of what it signals about right-wing parties in North America cosying up to Orbán.

Why this matters is because Orbán is undermining the rule of law and public institutions in Hungary, and is praising greater illiberalism. By cosying up to Orbán while has-beens like Stephen Harper try to sanitise his image through his IDU social club is because it creates a permission structure for right-wing parties like the Conservatives to start normalising the same illiberalism, pretending that this is all standard stuff for small-c conservative parties these days. The “don’t say gay” legislation in the US all came from Orbán’s playbook, and that is crossing over into Canada as well, with Conservatives openly winking and nodding to it, while you have conservative premiers invoking the notwithstanding clause to take away the rights of gender-diverse youth. This is the canary in the coal mine.

On the subject of creeping illiberalism, Conservatives (and MP Rachael Harder in particular) tried to get the public accounts committee to haul the CBC executives before them to “explain” why they don’t use the term “terrorist” when referring to Hamas, never mind that this is a practice shared by other news organisations like the BBC and The Associated Press. This kind of attempted intimidation is absolutely out of order, and represents political interference in the public broadcaster, which would be bad enough it Harder wasn’t the one always screaming about so-called “government censorship” with the Online Streaming Act and the Online News Act, as though that were a credible problem. It’s not, but it also seems to be both projection and an admission, that they want to control the news and programming, while accusing the Liberals of doing so (even though they absolutely are not). This is extremely dangerous for our democracy, and we should absolutely beware what they are trying to get away with.

Ukraine Dispatch:

While the attacks on Avdiivka continue, Russians struck an apartment building in Zaporizhzhia and killed two people. Ukraine has claimed responsibility for an attack on two Russian airfield in occupied areas using longer-range ballistic missiles quietly provided by the Americans, which is an unusual admission for them, but also signals that they can now hit Russian supply lines in more protected areas.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Notes on the Alberta pension proposal

Posted on by

There was a brief return to the discourse over the proposed Alberta Pension Plan over the weekend after a Colby Cosh column managed to get the criticisms of the plan right. So, I’ll let Trevor Tombe to the talking.

As always, try to remember how the CPP actually works:

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukraine says that they shot down 30 out of 40 drones in an overnight attack on Saturday, and 16 out of 30 dronesovernight on Sunday, when a grain storage warehouse in Uman was hit. In turn, Russia claims to have shot down six Ukrainian drones and two missiles over occupied Crimea on Sunday. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the country will be partnering with western arms manufacturers to start localising production in Ukraine, with a focus on air defence and de-mining.

Continue reading →

QP: Return of the carbon price mendacity

Posted on by

While the prime minister was away at an EV battery plan announcement in Quebec, his deputy off in Toronto, and other leaders were also absent. Chris d’Entrement was again in the big chair for the day, even though one would think they would rotate Alexandra Mendès in there as well. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, accused the prime minister of looking like “a clown” around the world, called Rota a “Liberal Speaker,” railed that it took him five days to say anything, and then repeated it in English in the same question. Karina Gould said that everyone agreed it was the Speaker who was responsible and he resigned. Poilievre then accused the prime minister of creating “the middle-class hungry” and demanded they cut the carbon price. Anita Anand stood up to wonder if the Conservatives would support their bill on cutting the GST on rentals and increasing competition. Poilievre then called out Atlantic Liberal MPs who say that they have concerns about the carbon price while at home but not while in Ottawa. Randy Boissonnault accused the Conservatives of looking to cut programmes and let the planet burn. Poilievre rambled about the supposed “NDP coalition” before demanding they vote for their Supply Day motion to cut the carbon price. Boissonnault repeated his same response about the Conservatives only looking to slash and burn. Poilievre then returned to French to call out the Bloc leader for voting to increase the carbon price (which is not entirely true). Pascale St-Onge insisted that what doesn’t make sense is a party that doesn’t have a climate plan.

Yves-François Blanchet got up and wondered why the Conservatives wouldn’t axe subsidies, before wondering why the prime minister still hasn’t called president Zelenskyy or Jewish leaders. Gould said that calls were made, and that the prime minister apologised to everyone harmed. Blanchet insisted that the headlines would have been different if the prime minister had apologised immediately (which would have given Rota cover), and Gould repeated that calls were made and apologies were made through diplomatic channels from the beginning.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he demanded that the government end all new fossil fuel projects and move the net-zero date up to 2045. St-Onge insisted that they have brought emissions down since 2018, and that they would do more. Boulerice the worried the chaos caused by changing insurers for civil servants, and Anita Anand insisted that they were working with the leadership and Canada Life to ensure the situation was rectified.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Exit Rota, and the curious process for his replacement

Posted on by

House of Commons Speaker Anthony Rota announced his intention to resign yesterday, the effective date to be the end of sitting today, with the added caveat that he won’t preside over any further debates in the meantime (which is just as well considering how much of a hash that was on Monday). The timing of what comes next was somewhat up in the air—it would have sounded like the initial plan was for the election for Rota’s replacement would be on Thursday, but because that voting needs to be done in-person (it’s a secret ranked ballot—MPs can’t use their voting app for that), there were concerns about MPs who weren’t in town this week, and so on. That meant that the vote would have to be on Tuesday (because the Commons isn’t sitting on Monday), leaving two more days with no Speaker, and under the Constitution, they could not sit until they had a new one.

It was at this point that the House Leaders came up with a creative solution, that may be dubiously constitutional—they passed a motion by unanimous consent that declared that the Dean of the House, Bloc MP Louis Plamondon, is to be “deemed elected” and will act as interim Speaker until the election on Tuesday. Which is…interesting. I’m not sure why they wouldn’t just swallow the loss of two sitting days (which could be a blessed relief considering how overheated things are right now over this whole debacle). There is also the question of Rota’s status once he has given up the office, and whether the Liberal caucus will want him back in their ranks considering what has happened, and the fact that the Conservatives would love nothing more than to call them all “Nazi sympathizers” or some other such epithet as a result. I’ve heard that Rota told a local radio station that he didn’t plan to run again in the next election, so perhaps he may need to consider getting an earlier start to those retirement plans.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives are now pushing for some kind of committee study to “get to the bottom of what happened,” which is ridiculous because we know what happened—Rota didn’t do his job to politically vet his guest in the gallery. The notion that PMO should have vetted him is outrageous because it’s an assault on parliamentary sovereignty and the independence of the Speaker. It’s also little more than an attempt to set up yet another partisan circus where they can perform for the cameras, and gather a bunch more clips for future shitposts, because that’s what this parliament has become—little more than a clip factory. There’s nothing to study. We know what happened, and the fact that the Conservatives are deliberately conflating security screenings and political vetting is being done solely to score points, and they all know it. Hopefully the other opposition parties are smart enough not to fall for this (but I suspect they won’t be, because he have no serious MPs left).

https://twitter.com/dgardner/status/1706822083127234564

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian drone strikes against Odessa have not only damaged warehouses, but also have suspended service of a ferry that runs between Ukraine and Romania. Ukrainian forces are claiming success around villages near Bakhmut. Russian state television claimed to show a video conference attended by that the Black Sea fleet commander that the Ukrainians say they killed.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1706716260627616064

Continue reading →

QP: More mendacity in the wake of Rota’s resignation

Posted on by

At long last, and about 27 hours too late, Speaker Anthony Rota announced his intention to resign, but would make it official at the end of the sitting day tomorrow and that he would vacate the chair in the interim, leaving Deputy Speaker Chris d’Entremont to preside in his place.

The prime minister, meanwhile, was on his way to Toronto, as was his deputy, albeit for separate events. Every other leader was present, however.  Pierre Poilievre led off in French, noted f nation, and demanded that Trudeau take responsibility for not vetting all of the guests in the Chamber, which is an outrageous overreach, as PMO has no business doing so. Karina Gould noted that the Speaker is independent and that he took responsibility. Poilievre demanded to know why Justin Trudeau was hiding and not standing up for this, and got warned by the Deputy Speaker. Gould repeated that the Speaker resigned for his actions that he took alone. Poilievre switched to English to claim that the “Liberal Speaker” took the fall, and again claimed that PMO should have engaged in a massive overreach. Gould repeated that the Speaker took responsibility. Poilievre listed all of the things that Trudeau claims he’s not responsible for, like inflation, and claimed he didn’t take responsibility for things he did, to which Gould accused Poilievre of being irresponsible in politicising the issue. Poilievre made another dig at Trudeau’s absence, and demanded he take responsibility for this diplomatic embarrassment. The Deputy Speaker warned Poilievre again about pointing to absences, and Gould tried to turn the tables saying that she has barely heard a word of support for Ukraine from Poilievre, and there was much uproar and cries of shame.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he asked if the prime minster intended to apologise on behalf of Canada for Rota’s incident. Gould repeated that Rota took responsibility for his actions. Blanchet again demanded an apology, including one specifically to president Zelenskyy. Gould recited that as the granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, the incident hurt her personally, and that the Speaker did the right thing.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he lambasted the industry minister for summoning food producers to only stabilise and now lower prices (a sign that he doesn’t really know how inflation works), to which François-Philippe Champagne patted himself on the back for summoning those CEOs and those of the grocery oligopolies, and their bill on increasing competition. Singh then worried about people living in a campground in Halifax who can’t get any other housing and winter approaches, and blamed the prime minister. Sean Fraser said that Halifax is currently debating their rules to build more homes, and the government was pleased to work with them on that.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The credible intelligence gets a lot weightier

Posted on by

At the UN General Assembly, prime minister Justin Trudeau reiterated what he said about credible intelligence pointing to Indian agents responsible for the murder of Sikh activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil, and said that he is calling on India to help with the investigation. But what we have since learned is that the credible intelligence includes both human sources and signals intelligence from Five Eyes allies that includes Indian diplomats’ communications, and that is certainly lending a lot more heft to these allegations—on top of the fact that the director of CSIS and the National Security Advisory made trips to India to deal with government sources there, and sources are saying that behind closed doors, the Indian government isn’t denying the existence of this intelligence. That’s a pretty big deal, particularly as members of the Pundit Class in this country are trying to insinuate that this is really about Trudeau ginning up controversy to create a distraction (which doesn’t follow this government’s pattern at all).

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1705084748823961930

In the meantime, India has stopped processing travel visas from Canada under the transparently ludicrous excuse that their facilities face security threats, which affects a lot of people here hoping to visit family. Trudeau didn’t say if he would respond in kind, but it seems unlikely if he is serious about saying he’s not trying to provoke or escalate this with India, but to actually get to the bottom of this. (The fact that India doesn’t want to cooperate in public does appear to be something of a tell).

Zelenskyy Visit

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy landed in Ottawa last night. He will be visiting Governor General Mary May Simon this morning, followed by a visit to Parliament Hill, where he will be greeted my parliamentarians in advance of an address to Parliament that will take place around 1 PM Eastern.

https://twitter.com/journo_dale/status/1705081288808403189

Ukraine Dispatch:

While president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Washington, Russian forces pounded more Ukrainian cities, with more deaths being reported in the southern city of Kherson. There has been more shelling of Kherson early this morning. Here is a look at the Ukrainian soldiers fighting their way back to reclaiming Bakhmut.

Continue reading →

Roundup: You’re not going to get a royal recommendation

Posted on by

Another day, and another warning from the Speaker that a private member’s bill is going to need a royal recommendation before the final vote, and it won’t get it, so be prepared to waste everyone’s time on a doomed bill that won’t go anywhere. This is becoming increasingly routine in this parliament, where MPs keep advancing these bills that have no hope of passage up for debate, apparently because they want to be seen talking about the issue, and maybe shaming the government for not supporting it, as with this particular bill on enhancing OAS and GIS benefits for seniors between 65 and 74 (ignoring that they are enriched for seniors over 75 because many of them have exhausted their savings by that point).

But seriously—a private member’s bill cannot spend money. Only a government bill can do so, because they’re the government, and they need that expenditure approved by Parliament. This is fundamental to how parliamentary democracy works. These clear delineations in roles exists for a reason, and the role of MPs who are not in Cabinet is to hold Cabinet to account, and the primary way to do that is through the power of the public purse. You cannot hold them to account if you too are spending public money with abandon because you have at that point blurred the responsibilities and the lines of accountability. This shouldn’t be difficult for MPs to learn and grasp, but unfortunately, they have picked up a lot of bad habits and wrong-headed beliefs over the past number of years, and it’s becoming quite obvious that they either refuse to learn how the Chamber and the institution work, or they simply don’t care and would rather waste everyone’s time.

Ukraine Dispatch:

The Ukrainian commander in the ruins of Bakhmut says that Russian Wagner Group mercenaries have stepped up their attacks in recent days, while Russia is denying claims that Ukrainian forces have made advancements in Bakhmut over the past couple of days. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the spring counter-offensive is being delayed because they need more western weapons. This while the UK has opted to send newer cruise missiles to Ukraine, who have the longest range of any of their arsenal to date. Zelenskyy also says he has approved a plan to reform criminal and law enforcement systems, which is a requirement for future EU membership.

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1656535955338063873

Continue reading →

QP: Ignoring the Mass Casualty report

Posted on by

The prime minister was away in Truro, Nova Scotia, for the release of the Mass Casualty Commission report, while his deputy was on the west coast getting a head start on selling her budget to the public. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he accused the government censoring debate on a bill that would censor what people can watch online—which is a complete fabrication, because closure is not censorship, and Bill C-11 is about making web giants pay into CanCon funds and has nothing to do with censorship—saying that the bill would give “woke” Ottawa control over Quebeckers’ media, called out the Bloc for supporting the bill, and instead that only the Conservatives stand against censorship. Greg Fergus got up and insisted there is a consensus in Quebec that artists deserve to be paid, and only the Conservatives are offside. Poilievre insisted there was no culture without freedom of expansion, accused the government disinformation, said that Margaret Atwood opposes the bill (note: she did not understand what was in it, but was taken in by misinformation), he called the CRTC a “woke agency” (which is risible), said they could use algorithms to censor debate (false), and insisted that Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four was not an instruction manual. Fergus insisted that these were just the same talking points of Big Tech, and that the Conservatives won’t stand against them. Poilievre insisted that the bill would shut down any voices they don’t like, and demanded to know why the prime minister was shutting down debate. Fergus insisted that web giants are not paying their fair share, and wondered why the opposition was against that. Poilievre tried to insist this was about free speech, and tried to use a prop before he got warned about it by the Speaker. Mark Holland got up this time, and used his sanctimonious tone to admonish the Conservatives for pretending that anyone in the Chamber doesn’t believe in free speech, and that they have the free speech enough to go around the country spreading misinformation. Poilievre insisted that he would keep beating the government in debate, before switching to the topic of carbon prices, and the Parliamentary Budget Officer’s report on carbon prices and insisting it “proved” the Liberals were wrong (never mind they cherry pick figures and butcher the statistics and distributional effects). Terry Duguid recited the good news talking points about rebate in return. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he raised the money for countering foreign interference in the budget, and demanded a public inquiry. Maninder Sidhu read talking points about those line items. Therrien insisted that this was proof that they already had concluded what David Johnston would find and demanded a public inquiry, and this time, Mark Holland got up to sing Johnston’s praise.

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and he raised the conclusion of Mass Casualty Commission report and demanded immediate funds for victims of domestic violence. Pam Damoff recited that they will examine the report and come back with actions in due course. Alexandre Boulerice took over in French, and demanded the government copy Joe Biden’s green industrial policy. Seamus O’Regan insisted that the projects will be built either by union jobs or paid prevailing union wages, which was proof they were on the right track.

Continue reading →