Tag Archives: Pierre Poilievre

Roundup: The Speaker hypothetical

Posted on by
Reply

It looks like NDP interim leader Don Davies may have been done dirty by CTV News over the weekend as their headline suggested that his “party ‘open’ to Speaker of the House role in exchange for resources.” While the text of the story presents this as a proposal that no one has actually discussed, the fact that this is the headline from an interview on CTV Question Period makes it sound like this was somehow being floated. It was not.

Instead, in the interview, he was asked about his scenario as a hypothetical for him to weigh in on, given that it could give the Liberals one more vote in order to be an effective majority, and he said he’d be open to it, as the discussion around official party status was now closed (which was not what he was telling the Star a week ago, but perhaps those illusions have since been shattered) but he’s still trying to get additional resources, never mind that it’s not like his party needs them for caucus management or committee research or anything like that.

This is an object lesson in why politicians don’t like to answer hypothetical questions—because they get blown up like this, and to be frank, it feels like that kind of question is borderline, if not outright, irresponsible. And sure, Davies could have simply said “I’m not going to answer hypotheticals like that,” and probably will going forward, but asking these kinds of hypotheticals also doesn’t get you very useful answers in journalism either, and so you’ve built an entire story around this this hypothetical scenario that is outright delusional. Nobody came out ahead here, especially the readers, so I fail to see the point.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-12T23:56:01.838Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Odesa suffered further attacks on Saturday, leading to a major blackout.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More defection talk swirling

Posted on by
Reply

A day later, the Ma floor-crossing is being dissected with more questions about what this means for Poilievre’s leadership of the Conservative party now that he’s lost two MPs to floor-crossings and one to a very suspicious resignation. We have learned that Tim Hodgson played a part in Ma’s decision, and that their wives are friends (and it is worth noting they are from neighbouring ridings). And now you have Conservatives telling the National Post of all places that they expect another couple of defections because Poilievre is so unable to read the room in his own caucus. Oh, and there’s also a whole side note about how Ma was apparently the “secret Santa” for Jamil Jivani and Jivani didn’t get his gift.

Listen, let's not rule out that drawing Jamil Jivani's name in Secret Santa might have been what actually prompted the floor crossing.

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇨🇦 (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-12-12T23:52:46.988Z

Government House Leader Steve MacKinnon proclaimed that he knows more disgruntled Conservatives and hinted that there yet may be another floor-crossing, and this has everyone wringing their hands about “backroom deals,” and saying dumb things like “Canadians didn’t elect a majority,” and that cobbling one together is somehow illegitimate. Poilievre himself is making this particular argument. But that’s not how elections work. We elect 338 individual MPs. Not parties. Canadians can’t select “majority” or “minority” on their ballots. In fact, parties have become political shorthand for how MPs sort themselves into configurations to achieve confidence in the Chamber, but at its core, we elect individual MPs, and they get to make their own decision including who they sit with, and on how to determine how a government is given confidence, and yes, that can include so-called “backroom deals” and floor-crossings, and if voters don’t like it, they can punish them in the next election. That’s how parliamentary democracy works.

If there is another defection or two, and it puts the Liberals into a majority, the most dramatic effect will not be just the fact that every confidence vote isn’t going to rely on Andrew Scheer and Scott Reid hiding behind the curtains to count abstentions, but rather that it will force the committees to be rebalanced, at which point the Conservatives and Bloc will no longer be able to team up to obstruct all business, as they have been doing. That will be a material change for the ability of this Parliament to get things done, and maybe finally break the dysfunction and deadlock that has plagued it since 2019.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-12T14:24:02.995Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia attacked two Ukrainian ports, damaging three Turkish vessels, one of them carrying food supplies. Russia also attacked energy facilities in Odesa region. Ukraine, meanwhile, hit two Russian oil rigs in the Caspian Sea, the Yaroslavl oil refinery, and two Russian vessels carrying military equipment. President Zelenskyy visited Kupiansk, as Ukrainian forces are encircling the Russians in the area, weeks after Russia claimed to have captured it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: MOU motion down in flames

Posted on by
Reply

As expected, the Conservatives’ Supply Day motion to try and force a vote on some of the language from the Alberta MOU went down in flames as the Liberals were wise to their bullshit, and didn’t play ball. They made it clear that the language was deliberately provocative in what it excluded, so Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives scrambled to try and amend their own motion, so that it included a bunch of other things, except one thing—any mention of the carbon price (without which, the Pathways carbon capture project can’t operate because it’s not fiscally viable). And so that’s what the Liberals hung their arguments on—that this wasn’t the full MOU, and it didn’t include the carbon price, or methane regulations, or anything else, so they weren’t going to vote for it. And nobody did.

The Conservatives could have probably done more damage to the Liberals if they tried to force a vote on the entire MOU, to really suss out the divisions in the caucus about it, but they couldn’t actually do that, because the MOU has the carbon price as part of it, and if the Conservatives voted to support the full MOU including the carbon price, they would be hypocrites because every day in Question Period, they falsely blame said carbon price for food price inflation (when in reality, the industrial carbon price’s impact on food is statistically zero). Their attempt at being clever blew up in their faces, because they’re not clever. They’re not the slightest bit intelligent. Of course, that isn’t going to stop them from shouting for the next eight weeks that “The Liberals voted against their own MOU! They don’t want to build a pipeline!” Of course, it’s not true because the Conservatives ensured that they weren’t voting on the actual contents of the MOU, but it’s not going to matter. They’re going to record videos of them claiming the Liberals voted against their own plans, and spread them across social media, but well, it’s not like we can expect the Conservatives—and Poilievre and Andrew Scheer in particular—to actually be honest for once.

Speaking of honesty, Tim Hodgson took to the microphone in the Foyer during the day to denounce the Conservatives’ stunt, but in the process declared that “caucus is united” behind the full MOU, when he knows full well that they are not. If the point of the day was to make the Conservatives look like the clowns, well, Hodgson didn’t exactly do his part. Then again, Hodgson is one of the worst performers on the front bench and he has absolutely zero political skills, so I’m not sure why anyone would be surprised here.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-09T22:22:02.273Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s top general says they are advancing their “entire front line” and moving into the town of Myrnohrad, which Ukraine denies, and says that Russia is paying a heavy cost for modest advances. Likewise, Ukraine still holds out in parts of Pokrovsk, and it has not fallen. President Zelensky has been rallying European allies as he says that any “peace” deal will not include ceding land to Russia. Ukraine is rolling out more restrictions on power usage as they repair their infrastructure from Russian attacks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Being too clever about the MOU’s language

Posted on by
Reply

Today is the Conservatives’ big Supply Day, where they are bringing forward their motion that cherry-picks two phrases from the MOU with Alberta, and hopes to jam the Liberals with it. Pierre Poilievre may claim that the language is “lifted directly from the MOU,” so the Liberals should put up or shut up, but of course, he’s being too cute by half. It’s not language directly lifted from the MOU. The MOU states a “private sector constructed and financed pipelines, with Indigenous Peoples co-ownership and economic benefit, with at least one million barrels a day of low emission Alberta bitumen with a route that increases export access to Asian markets as a priority” whereas the motion simply says “pipelines enabling the export of at least one million barrels a day of low-emission Alberta bitumen from a strategic deepwater port on the British Columbia coast to reach Asian markets,” and adds “respecting the duty to consult Indigenous people.” One of these things is not like the other.

— Kady O'Malley (@kadyo.bsky.social) 2025-12-08T22:44:00.568Z

"low emissions Albertan bitumen"Charlatans always always think other people are stupid.

— Emmett Macfarlane 🇨🇦 (@emmettmacfarlane.com) 2025-12-09T00:21:28.775Z

Liberal MP Corey Hogan, the party’s sole Calgary MP, called out these shenanigans, both in a media scrum and on his Twitter, where he points out entirely why the Conservatives haver phrased it this way—to either make the Liberals look like they’re ignoring Indigenous consultation and consent, or to make it look like they’re not serious about building it, and in either case, it sends a signal to someone that will cause doubt and will inevitably delay any decisions. And the government indicated last night that they’re going to vote against it, citing that the Conservatives are not using the full language from the MOU. This in turn will set up weeks of Conservatives screaming that they knew the Liberals were lying the whole time and never had any intention of building a pipeline.

The thing we need to remember in all of this is not the shenanigans, or the Conservatives thinking they’re too clever, or any of that—rather, it’s that they think they can ram through these projects without Indigenous consent. Sure, they’ll talk about “meaningful consultation,” but consultation is not consent, and in their press releases, consent is never mentioned, nor is even consultations. That’s not realistic, nor even legal in the current framework. Of course, they also think a new pipeline will “unblock the trillions of dollars of privatesector energy investment to produce more oil and gas, build profitable pipelines and ship a million barrels of oil to Asia a day at world prices.” My dudes—this is a post-2014 world. It’s not going to be trillions of dollars, and world oil prices are tanking because of a supply glut. All of this is fantasyland.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-08T14:08:03.419Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians have attacked Sumy for the second night in a row, cutting off power in the region. Here is a look at those remaining in Kostiantynivka, as Russians approach.

Continue reading →

QP: Admitting a poor choice of words

Posted on by

After a week away, they PM was back in the Chamber for QP, and so were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, declaring that Mark Carney hasn’t been able to reduce a single tariff in his 28 trips abroad, but he did manage to find gains for Brookfield, including a deal that was signed days after his meeting with Trump, and he also noted that the European Space Agency is on a Brookfield-owned campus, and wondered why every time he goes abroad, Canadians get poorer and Brookfield gets richer. Carney dismissed this, saying that Poilievre should check his figures as Indonesia reduced their tariffs on Canadian goods, and that they got a $70 billion commitment of investment from the UAE. Poilievre then switched to English to declare how much he cares for workers after Carney made his “Who cares?” aside at the G20. Carney noted that since he became PM, Canada has secured the lowest tariff rate in the world, and that there are sectors for whom they are under pressure, and the he does care and they are enacting further supports. Poilievre gave another “who cares?” exhortation, and Carney took a swipe at Poilievre not getting elected before admitting that he made a poor choice of words on a serious issue, and rounded off with some back-patting about his trade deals. Poilievre insisted that Carney has made nothing but mistakes on trade, and raised that Stephen Harper got a softwood deal when he came into office, before going on another paean about how much the cares. Carney insisted that they care about Canadians, which is why they have a budget to “catalyze” investments, while the Conservatives voted against Canada’s future. Poilievre returned his first question on Carney not getting any wins on tariffs and the supposed gains for Brookfield. Carney repeated out that Indonesia is reducing its tariffs by 95 percent, that we have the best deal with the Americans, and the UAE wants to invest $70 billion in Canada. Poilievre again insisted this was about Brookfield, before pivoting to the MOU with Alberta and demanded to know what date construction would begin on a new pipeline. Carney said that this was about necessary conditions, not sufficient conditions, and that the government of BC and the First Nations need to agree.

Christine Normandin rose for the Bloc and immediately accused the Liberals of cheating, and said that Chrétien sped up citizenships to help sway the Quebec in 1995, and wondered if they would cheat again in a new referendum. Carney pointed out that they have more Liberals in their caucus than the Bloc, and they respect Quebeckers. Normandin repeated her accusations, and again demanded a fair fight in a future referendum. Carney said the Bloc dwell in the past while he is turned to the future. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe took over to make the same accusations, and Carney gave the same bland assurances around building for the future.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The second tranche of PONIs

Posted on by

Yesterday was the day that Mark Carney announced the second tranche of PONIs to be referred to the Major Projects Office, which consisted of six existing projects and one “concept,” which I’m pretty unsure how it was supposed to work. Three of those projects are mines—Sisson Mine for tungsten in New Brunswick, Crawford Nickel project in Ontario, and the Nouveau Monde Graphite phase 2 project in Quebec. Those very much align with the desire to make Canada a more trustworthy supplier of critical minerals than China (though pat of the problem is that they have a near-monopoly on refining and processing). A hydro project for Iqaluit was on the list, as was a transmission line between northwestern BC and the Yukon, and an LNG Project on the BC coast that has some Indigenous partnerships (but  not every First Nation in the area is in favour, and there are concerns about its ownership structure). As for that “concept,” it is referred to as the Northwest Critical Conservation Corridor, also between northwest B.C. and Yukon., and it could include critical minerals and clean power transmission developments in the area. Again, I’m not sure how that works with no actual project or proponent.

In some of these cases, as in the first tranche of projects, some of them are fairly well developed and along the process, while in others, they’ve been discussed forever and have some Indigenous buy-in, but shovels have never been in the ground (like the Sisson Mine). It again raises questions about what the MPO is supposed to do here, but its head, Dawn Farrell, was talking about ensuring that these processes happen in parallel and not sequentially, and would also do things like security financing, guaranteeing pricing, and ensuring a supply of skilled labour, which seems like an awful lot of things for them to try and control for.

And then there’s Alberta and its imaginary pipeline, which Danielle Smith insists she’s still working on, so she’s supportive of these projects, because she is still “negotiating” for that pipeline to the northwest BC coast that neither the province nor the affected First Nations want, while there is a growing supply glut in the market. I’m pretty sure another pipeline won’t save her province’s finances, but she’s going to keep trying.

Ukraine Dispatch

Kyiv was under another “massive” attack early this morning, and at least eleven people have been wounded. President Zelenskyy visited troops near the front lines in Zaporizhzhia.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre refuses self-reflection

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre held a press conference yesterday, where he debuted a new slogan about the “credit card budget,” as though that were clever (it’s really not), and had several of his MPs all read the same scripts about so-called “Liberal inflation,” even though inflation doesn’t work that way, and the current affordability crisis is the result of policies that have been baked in for several decades now. But where things got testy was in the media availability after, where Poilievre was taking shots at media outlets (including false accusations about corrections), and him “quoting” things Chris d’Entremont said about the Liberals in the Chamber, which might have been more damning if they simply weren’t the very same scripts that every Conservative MP reads unthinkingly. (d’Entremont later, correctly, dismissed this as just “spinning.”)

But what took the cake was when Poilievre was asked whether he was reflecting on his leadership style after the two losses to his caucus over the last week, and he said plainly “No,” and then babbled on about being the only leader fighting for affordability. (Also not true, because the only thing he’s fighting for is trickle-down economics, which created the affordability mess we’re in). But seriously, Poilievre is incapable of self-reflection, and he keeps proving that over and over again. He’s the same campus conservative he was when he was seventeen, and nothing will ever change or dissuade him from that, nor his childish, argumentative style, his need for chants and slogans, or his jejune beliefs in how monetary policy works. He is incapable of understanding complexity, and it shows. The fact that his leadership style is being referred to as a frat house is just as indicative of this fact. No self-reflection, no personal growth, and it’s a wonder why people who aren’t already Kool-Aid drinkers in the party don’t connect with him.

Meanwhile, the NDP are puffing out their chests and telling the Toronto Star that they’re getting ready for an election if the budget doesn’t pass, which I will call bullshit. They’re not getting ready for an election. The party is $23 million in debt, they’ve already mortgaged the office building they own in downtown Ottawa, and they have no more resources to draw on. This is them trying to look like they’re tough and relevant when they will see to it in one way or another that there is no election because in no way can the fight one, even if it’s to try and reclaim five seats in order to return to official party status. This is posturing, and nobody should be under any impression otherwise.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-12T23:01:55.085Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukrainian civilians are being evacuated from settlements in the Zaporizhzhia region as fighting intensifies in the area, while forces in the area say that they have stopped the Russian advance. Here is more about the situation in Pokrovsk. Ukraine’s justice and energy ministers submitted their resignations as a result of the energy kickback scheme allegations.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Not being a trained seal

Posted on by

Liberal MP Nate Erskine-Smith put out a video on his YouTube channel where he gives an honest assessment of the budget, including places where it fails to live up to the hype. As a backbench MP, this is not only his right, but his obligation, but boy howdy, a bunch of partisans from all stripes are losing their gods damned minds over this. A backbencher who doesn’t just lobotomise himself to read the scripts handed to him by his leader’s office? The nerve!

It's possible that Erskine-Smith has normalized dissent sufficiently — at least from him — that he can do stuff like this without it becoming a huge deal.www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jtC…

— Aaron Wherry (@aaronwherry.bsky.social) 2025-11-10T23:00:21.434Z

I was particularly struck by the partisan talking heads on Power & Politics last night who kept going on and on about how politics is a “team sport,” and that as a “member of the government,” he needs to be on-side. Erm, except he’s not a member of the government. Government=Cabinet, and while he is on the government side of the aisle, he is not a member. This is not be just being pedantic—it’s the very nature of how our parliamentary system works. Every member of Parliament, no matter which side of the aisle you’re on, are supposed to hold the government to account, and to keep them in check. Yes, that means government-side backbenchers too. That’s the whole raison d’être of Parliament, but everyone has become so used to the us-versus-them aspect that they have lost sight of that, and it really doesn’t help that Canada has largely lost the culture of backbenchers holding their own side to account because they are so desperate to get into Cabinet, or at least become a parliamentary secretary, that they are generally one ministerial screw-up away from a promotion, so they keep their mouths shut and stand up and clap and read their scripts like a good boy or girl, and that’s something that is fundamentally wrong with how the Canadian parliament operates.

Brad Lavigne and Kate Harrison telling Nate Erskine-Smith that he needs to be a trained seal is some bullshit.Backbenchers have an obligation to hold government to account as much as opposition MPs do. Learn how a Westminster system works, FFS. #PnPCBC

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-10T23:05:20.204Z

The UK, where you have a Chamber of 650 MPs, and a smaller Cabinet (though generally a larger number of junior ministers), generally means you have a lot of backbenchers who know they’ll never get into Cabinet, so they feel empowered to stand up to their own side. Some of them are former ministers who are still serving their constituents, and will let the current government know where they are going wrong. (There are some fantastic videos of Theresa May doing just this, and some videos of her absolutely savaging her successor, Boris Johnson, in PMQs). This is a culture we need to develop here. Of course, adding another hundred or so MPs to our chamber would help (and would really help us have enough bodies for committees without having parliamentary secretaries on them).

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-10T23:08:02.225Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Fighting continues in Pokrovosk, Dobropillia, and towns surrounding. Here is a look at life in Kherson, where Russians hunt civilians with drones on a daily basis. The anti-corruption bureau says it has found a $100 million kickback scheme in the state nuclear power company.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Running the party like a frat house

Posted on by

With the House of Commons not sitting this week, one can expect the drama of the Conservative ranks to continue to reverberate this week, seeing as the government’s big budget roll-out has been ringing a little bit flat, in part because they already announced everything ahead of time, but also the fact that it’s missing the mark in some key places. Regardless, MP Chris d’Entremont is now speaking to media a bit more now that he’s crossed the floor, and it’s revealing.

d’Entremont told the CBC over the weekend that he hadn’t been 100 percent on board with crossing the floor until his remarks were published in Politico, and Andrew Scheer and Chris Warkentin barged into his office to yell at him and call him a snake, which was the point he knew it was time to go. And frankly, that’s not a surprise, but my dudes, this did not work for Erin O’Toole when he was in the dying days of his leadership, so why do you think that bullying your caucus is going to work for you? And for Poilievre’s office to respond by saying that d’Entremont is a “liar” for “wilfully deceiving his voters, friends and colleagues” is rich coming from known liars like Poilievre and Scheer. And d’Entremont also said that it wasn’t just Poilievre, but his entire leadership team who are running the party like a frat house, which sounds about right because there are no adults in the room.

I will add that something that has come up a couple of times online but not in the media was the fact that d’Entremont has been a pro-life voter throughout his political career and time in Parliament, which was something that would have mattered in the Trudeau years, but looks like Carney has dumped (possibly because he is more devoutly Catholic than Trudeau was). That wasn’t to say that certain pro-life Liberals weren’t still in Trudeau’s caucus, likely under some kind of promise extracted from them not to vote in certain ways on those issues, but there has been no discussion as to whether any similar promise was extracted from d’Entremont, or if being resolutely pro-choice is no longer a requirement for the Liberal caucus.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-09T15:08:04.404Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Over the weekend, Russia targeted the power sub-stations to two nuclear power plants, killing seven, along with other strikes on cities like Dnipro. Ukrainian strikes have apparently disrupted power and heat in two Russian cities near the border.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Heavy-handed caucus management

Posted on by

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch

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

Continue reading →