Tag Archives: Pierre Poilievre

Roundup: A big defence commitment?

Posted on by

Yesterday, at Fort York in Toronto, prime minister Mark Carney announced that Canada would meet its NATO commitment of two percent of GDP by the end of next fiscal year instead of by 2030, in part through use of greater pay, more funds for sustainment, support for the defence industry, and some good ol’ creative accounting. Carney prefaced this by making a very real point about the changing nature of America’s place in the world: “The United States is beginning to monetize its hegemony, charging for access to its markets and reducing its relative contribution to our collective security.”

One of the big question marks has to do with the status of the Coast Guard, and how it gets folded into the calculation around defence spending—there were mixed messages on whether it stays under Department of Fisheries and Oceans, of if it will be moved into Department of National Defence (though there is also an argument for it to go to Public Safety), and the question of whether or not to arm those ships is a fraught one because of the training requirements for armaments. It sounds like there will be things like CSE’s cyber-capability being counted as part of this calculation as well, which again, seems to be more fudging numbers that we typically accused other nations of doing while we were more “pure” in terms of what we counted toward our spending commitments, and that seems to be going away.

I would add that while we get a bunch of competing narratives around the target, whether it’s the Conservatives’ memory-holing the fact that they cut defence spending to below one percent of GDP (in order to achieve a false balance on the books in time for the 2015 election), or the notion that we are nothing more than freeloaders in NATO, we should keep reminding people that even with lower per-capita defence spending, we have been punching above our weight taking on the tough missions in NATO (Kandahar, leading a multi-country brigade in Latvia) where as other allies who have met their two percent targets don’t contribute (looking at you, Greece). A poor metric of spending is not a good indicator of contribution, but it has created a whole false narrative that we should be correcting, but that’s too much work for the pundit class, who are more interested in hand-wringing and calling Justin Trudeau names than they are in looking at our actual contributions. (Here’s a timeline of the spending target melodrama).

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia made another massive overnight attack against Ukraine, launching 479 drones and twenty missiles of various types, targeting the western and central parts of the county. Another prisoner swap did go ahead yesterday.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1932086386145841186

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: The new ambassador doesn’t get it

Posted on by

The new US ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, has been making the media rounds, and is just one more in a long line of American politicians who just can’t understand why Canadians are so upset with the Americans. (It’s a complete mystery!) Surely, we must be happy that we could have the “lowest tariffs of any country,” instead of, oh, the free trade that allowed for integrated supply chains between both countries. Why wouldn’t we be happy with that? And in a preview for an interview to be aired over the weekend, he says there are easier ways to send messages to Trump than to bring over the King.

*sighs*

Having the King open the next session of Parliament is not only about sending a message to Trump. Yes, that is part of it, and you can bet that it’s actually going to be something he pays more attention to than a phone call because his attention span only lasts as long as the next person who talks to him, so what good is a phone call in that regard? Also? This is as much about domestic reassurance as it is a message to Trump. As Trump has threatened us, we had a bunch of people wrongly believe that the King needed to act unilaterally and say something that might cause a diplomatic incident, and others actually believed that he personally invited Trump on the second state visit when no, that was at the behest of the UK prime minister, Keir Starmer. And no, he can’t say anything unilaterally, because that goes against what constitutional monarchy stands for, and why there was the Glorious Revolution in 1688. If anyone is to blame for Charles not speaking up on Canada’s behalf earlier, it was Justin Trudeau’s, because he very much liked to ignore the Crown as much as he possibly could (probably because it pulled the focus away from him).

Oh, and Hoekstra keeps saying that the “51st state” stuff is over, and that Trump isn’t saying it, and they have more important things to worry about. But he said it just two weeks ago, and do you actually think that anything is really over for Trump? He’s incredibly angry with his past self for signing the New NAFTA. And I get that Hoekstra needs to play this particular role, but come on. Demonstrate that you’ve paid the slightest bit of attention to Canada since you were named ambassador, and read the room.

https://bsky.app/profile/effinbirds.com/post/3lps2mm7mmf26

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia is claiming to have taken a settlement between Pokrovsk and Kostiantynivka in Donetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Platforms, budgets, and estimates

Posted on by

The news that there won’t be a spring budget meant a day of wailing and gnashing of teeth, much of it misunderstanding about what the budget actually is and does. Pierre Poilievre summoned the media outside of West Block to decry that Mark Carney “has no plan” because there isn’t a budget, and his MPs have been tweeting up a storm to insist that “Carney lied” by not having a budget, but this, as usual, is little more than low-rent disinformation that treats voters like idiots because they don’t know the parliamentary budgetary cycle.

Budgets by their very nature are political documents. They provide guideposts for spending plans, but we just had an election and the Liberals have a reasonably comprehensive platform document, so that can provide the broad strokes for spending plans in the same way that a budget document does. The thing we are missing is an updated chart of what the current debt/deficit projections look like, and what the growth projections are, but again, the growth projections are merely an amalgamation of private sector forecasts and are no longer based on Department of Finance projections, and we’re in a moment of profound economic uncertainty because of Trump’s trade war, so they could very well go up in smoke next week, and wouldn’t be of much use to anyone. There is also the practical reality that the election was three weeks ago, and the Department of Finance wouldn’t have time to prepare a budget document, even based on the projections from the platform document, nor have it ready before the Commons rises for the summer. And if anyone thinks they want to sit in Ottawa’s hot and muggy summer climate, well, no they actually do not. That’s just political posturing (or sheer ignorance of what summer is like here).

I did also want to point you to this thread which corrects something from this The Canadian Press explainer about the budget document, budget implementation acts, and the Estimates. The estimates are the actual spending documents about how much the government plans to spend. A budget implementation act is legislation that enacts things like tax changes from the budget document, which are proper omnibus bills, but in recent years have become abusive omnibus bills as governments will stuff extraneous things into the budget document in order to include them in the omnibus BIA for the sake of expediency. It abuses process and shouldn’t be allowed (including with the fig leaf of “it was in the budget document!”) but this is also was six years of unrelenting procedural warfare has wrought—if you can’t pass bills because the opposition parties want to play games, then you shove everything into an abusive BIA, and the cycle perpetuates, which isn’t good for anyone (which is also a reminder that actions have consequences). Suffice to say, there will be an Estimates Bill passed in the four weeks that Parliament is back, so it’s not like there isn’t anything from government on spending plans.

Programming Note: I am taking the full long weekend off, because I’m utterly exhausted. See you on Wednesday.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims that they have taken two more settlements in Eastern Ukraine, which Ukraine disputes. President Zelenskyy is in Türkiye for the “peace talks” that aren’t actually going to happen because he called Putin’s bluff.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lots of new faces, but a few questionable choices

Posted on by

The Cabinet shuffle proceeded apace yesterday morning, and Mark Carney put together a Cabinet of 28 ministers and ten secretaries of state (as opposed to ministers of state, meaning they are subordinate to ministers). Some of the big names stayed in—Dominic LeBlanc, François-Philippe Champagne, Chrystia Freeland, while Anita Anand and Mélanie Joly swapped roles. Sean Fraser is back in Cabinet as justice minister, but Nathaniel Erskine Smith is out, and everyone was all over the fact that he was the mildest bit sore about it considering that he decided to run again for the sake of taking on the housing portfolio, and he probably would have been better staying there than giving it to former Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson, who has been accused of being asleep at the wheel as housing prices in Vancouver skyrocketed and their housing crisis accelerated on his watch. There is gender parity in the Cabinet itself, but not the secretaries of state, but there are a number of indigenous ministers, including Mandy Gull-Masty as the first Indigenous minster of Indigenous Services. Carney says that this new Cabinet will work with “urgency and determination” to bring about the greatest economic transformation since the Second World War, but those are a lot of expectations. (Photo gallery here).

I’m genuinely pissed Nate Erskine Smith is out at housing — and all together from Cabinet. It’s a terrible call. Whatever you think of Robertson — not much, for me — NES was a perfect fit for housing. He knew what he was doing. He could communicate it well. Own goal.

— David Moscrop (@davidmoscrop.com) 2025-05-13T20:04:24.898Z

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lp2tf65jnc2j

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lp3n3fhvk22h

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lp3n3fii3s2h

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lp3n3fij322h

I am going to spend a minute to rail about the fact that Evan Solomon was named minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Transformation, because there is something so absolutely grubby about it. Solomon is forever ethically tainted from the manner of his departure at CBC, but Carney was one of the people he brokered art sales for, and the two are good friends. So Carney found him a safe seat in a city that Solomon hasn’t lived in for over a decade, and then slid him into Cabinet in a bullshit made-up portfolio (that a bunch of the Canadian tech sector are projecting their hopes and dreams on), while at the same time Carney pats himself on the back for how “pared down” this Cabinet is. Pared down except for this made-up portfolio for his friend (and a few other questionable decisions, like a secretary of state for “nature.”) This is exactly the kind of thing that makes people cynical, and that’s even before we get to the problematic nature of the state of AI, the fascism of tech bros, and gullible people believing that this technology will solve all kinds of problems when there is little proof that plagiarism machines can actually do so. This whole thing just gives a complete sinking feeling about the judgment involved.

So was including Evan fucking Solomon.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-13T21:19:59.501Z

I thought this was supposed to be a pared-down, gimmick-free cabinet.Canadian digital policy is about to take three enormous steps backwards, as Mark Carney confirms what’s I’ve suspected since I read his leadership platform: he’s 100% on board the AI hype train.

— Blayne Haggart (@bhaggart.bsky.social) 2025-05-13T16:13:15.407Z

As was expected, Pierre Poilievre responded to the shuffle, and while he made a few contrite remarks off the top about working together for the country and not “reflexively opposing” everything, he then turned to gratuitous swipes about the people chosen, and implored Carney to “steal his ideas,” even though they were incoherent, and his platform was made up of fantasy math. Frankly I’m not seeing much of a change in tone, nor do I actually expect there to be a real one, because that’s not who Poilievre is, and him trying to show his softer side is going to be impossible for him to maintain.

In other reaction, here is The Logic’s analysis about what this Cabinet says about Carney’s economic plans for the country. My colleague Mel Woods at Xtra notes that Rechie Valdez is the new point person on LGBTQ+ issues, and it remains to be seen what that is going to look like in an age where you have provinces like Saskatchewan and Alberta who are legislating attacks on trans youth, while we look at what is happening south of the border. Susan Delacourt remarks on how Carney is carefully trying to construct distance from Trudeau with this Cabinet, but some of the Trudeau-era impulses remain. Justin Ling is much more critical of some of the choices made in this shuffle (and some of them were a choice).

Ukraine Dispatch

Continuing to call Putin’s bluff, president Zelenskyy is prepared to head to Istanbul for “peace talks.” And if Putin doesn’t show, the EU is prepared to tighten sanctions even more, which is going to really squeeze the Russian economy, which is in worse shape than they like to claim.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sore from moving those goalposts

Posted on by

I have to wonder if the Conservatives and their proxies are exhausted from shifting goal posts over the past couple of days, and whether they remembered to lift from the knees and not from their backs, because hoo boy, the commentary coming out of the Carney meeting at the Oval Office has been something to behold. The common cry is that Carney promised on the campaign trail that he would be tough with Trump, and yet in the meeting, he engaged in flattery and didn’t object to things Trump said that were objectively wrong or offensive to Canadians. “He said the relationship was over and now he’s saying this is the beginning of a beautiful friendship!” has been a common refrain. Give me a break.

Can you imagine what they would have said if Carney went to the meeting and was combative with Trump, and put himself in a position for JD Vance to start piling on and creating the conditions for another Zelenskyy moment? Those same Conservatives would have howled that Carney was endangering the relationship with our closes trading partner. And the thing about the relationship is being mischaracterised (mendaciously)—Carney said that the old relationship of deeper ties and close cooperation was over. And that is objectively true. He also said this is the start of a new relationship with the US, which is also true—we can’t carry on like the old relationship is still there, and he has to start somewhere with the new one, and he’s managed to do so in a way that has placated Trump for the time being, which is an incredibly hard thing to do given his mercurial nature, and it may not last. But he had to sit there and say things that Trump thought was flattering (but really weren’t if you actually listened), and he did correct a number of Trump’s insane rants (like saying they don’t do much business with Canada when we’re their top export destination). But “getting tough” with Trump has to be done carefully given his volatile nature, and doing performance art isn’t the way to do it. Trying to insist that Carney was somehow misrepresenting himself or the task at hand in an election need to go give their heads a shake.

Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre says he’s going to spend the summer “listening and learning,” but well, this is someone who has spent his entire adult life confirming his priors, so I don’t expect much in the way of introspection as to the reasons the campaign failed—particularly as Andrew Scheer was on Power & Politics saying they need to make “refinements” on their strategy, which sounds an awful lot like they plan on fighting the last war rather than actually learning  a single lesson. This being said, it sounds like Poilievre has reached out to Doug Ford’s office to try and mend some fences, so maybe they learned something? Maybe? We’ll see.

Unfortunately…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-07T13:28:07.303Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s “three-day ceasefire” went into effect this morning, but there are reports that guided bombs were still launched against Sumy in the early hours of the morning (but we all know how well Russia lives by its agreements). Ukrainian drones kept interfering with airports around Moscow for a third straight day as foreign leaders were arriving for Victory Day festivities in Red Square.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Greetings, Exalted One

Posted on by

In a very real sense, the day was pretty anticlimactic given the build-up. Prime minister Mark Carney arrived at the White House, didn’t succumb to an intimidation handshake, and when they got to the Oval Office, Trump rambled and dissembled, and Carney got in a word or two edgewise that was both obsequious flattery, but also deep shade, saying that Trump was a “transformational” leader and got the world re-engaged in defence issues. (Yes, he has, but for reasons other than those Trump believes. When the topic of annexation came up, Carney phrased it in the language of real estate in that some things are not for sale—the White House, Buckingham Palace, and Canada—and while Trump said “never say never,” Carney kept mouthing “never.” But that was about it. There was no pile-on by JD Vance, no attempt at humiliation, though Trump gratuitously insulted both Justin Trudeau and Chrystia Freeland (who is still in Carney’s Cabinet).

https://bsky.app/profile/lsaffs.bsky.social/post/3lojcqx6ptk24

One of the things that was notable was that Trump insisted that the New NAFTA isn’t dead, which is funny since he’s stomped all over it and broken it so many times that it’s not worth the paper it’s written on, but there you have it. Carney says this is the first step of many, and he’s keeping expectations super low, talking about controlling the things we can control (which obviously excludes Trump himself). He also insists that he pushed back on the annexation talk in private, not that I’m sure it’ll have any effect. The Canadian Press fact-checks some of Trump’s nonsense here. Some more reaction quotes from the day here.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-05-06T21:22:13.862Z

Conservative caucus

The other news was that the Conservatives held a day-long caucus retreat, and they voted to once again abide by the (garbage) Reform Act provisions that claim to let them topple a leader (even though they don’t actually need the Act’s provisions to do so, and the Act merely reinforces a pattern of learned helplessness among MPs who have surrendered their power), and they decided that Andrew Scheer will be the parliamentary leader in Poilievre’s absence until he can get himself a seat. Why Scheer? Because he’s a) loyal to Poilievre, b) is in no danger of trying to keep the leadership himself as a former failed leader, and c) the party doesn’t have to worry about a Rona Ambrose-kind of leader who proves popular and sane, and whom the public would demand to be made leader permanently. Yes, that’s a sad reflection of where the party is at, as is the fact that they don’t really seem to want to learn the right lessons from their election loss. (More reaction from caucus here.) Oh, and Poilievre did finally call Bruce Fanjoy to congratulate him on winning in Carleton, so that only took a week.

*Sigh* No, the (garbage) Reform Act doesn't give MPs or caucus more powers. They have all the power they need to depose a leader if they really wanted to. The Act's provisions actually constrain MPs' powers. #PnPCBC

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-06T21:53:41.456Z

https://twitter.com/TabathaSouthey/status/1919898954335916144

Ukraine Dispatch

Russians launched drones overnight at Kyiv, killing two people. This after a missile attack on the city of Sumy killed three people. Drones from Ukraine shut down Moscow’s airports in advance of their Victory Day in WWII celebrations, and Russia’s unilateral 72-hour “ceasefire.” Ukraine’s army chief says that they have stalled Russia’s attack on Pokrovsk, which is a logistics hub in Donetsk region. Russia and Ukraine have exchanged 205 prisoners of war each.

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1919779056641265687

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1919672711413973378

Continue reading →

Roundup: The changing votes of the 905

Posted on by

There was an interesting piece in the Star over the weekend, where a bunch of their reporters went out into the 905 belt around Toronto, in order to talk to newcomer communities who have been increasingly switching their votes from the Liberals to the Conservatives, and managed to capture a few of those ridings this time around (and costing the Liberals their majority). But while we shouldn’t always assume that immigrant and newcomer communities will be Liberals, even though there has been this particular trope that they have been told to vote Liberal because Pierre Trudeau really opened up immigration into this country back in the seventies, I do think that trope is overused and misses some of the other points, like the fact that they often pick up on dog-whistling by Conservatives, or that their ways of trying to engage with newcomer communities can be ham-fisted (such as the famous example of Jason Kenney going to every ethno-cultural buffet event and saying things like “I hear you guys hate the gays too. You should vote for us!” And no, that didn’t wind up being successful, even though a mythology was built up around it that doesn’t reflect voter turnout).

What I found instead in this Star piece was that in many of these communities, they were blaming the federal Liberals and Justin Trudeau for things that are squarely within provincial jurisdiction—like housing, or the uptick in crime that that has been hammered away at in those areas. No, none of the reporters made this distinction in the story, and we find ourselves back in the place where nobody in this country wants to hold the premiers to account for their failures. (For their corruption, yes, to an extent, but not their failures to do their jobs). Pierre Poilievre has successfully weaponised the incompetence of the premiers against the federal Liberals and Trudeau in particular, which Trudeau let him get away with time and again because he refused to call the premiers out. But the even bigger irony is that these are regions that have increasingly been voting for Doug Ford, who has been the cause of, or done nothing about, the very problems they are raising as to why they switched their votes.

I would also note that there are some other fairly disturbing undertones in some of the responses from these voters—far-right talking points like “mass immigration,” for example, or the fact that they appear to be pulling up the ladder behind them. They immigrated this country and bought houses in these suburbs, but immigrants who came in behind them and can’t find affordable housing are the problem? Do you see the issue here? I think this is a warning sign we should be paying more attention to, but again, if the premiers did their fucking jobs, we wouldn’t be seeing some of these issues able to take root within these newcomer communities.

Ukraine Dispatch

An overnight drone attack on Kyiv has injured at least 11, as Russia is calling for a ceasefire in advance of celebrations to mark the anniversary of VE Day. The mayor of the Russian port city of Novorossiisk has called a state of emergency after an alleged Ukrainian drone attack. Ukraine says that they shot down a Russian Su-30 fighter jet with a missile fired from one of their maritime drones.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The King is coming!

Posted on by

Mark Carney gave his first post-election news conference yesterday, and he ensured that it was something of a news tsunami, but also that the tone and tenor of his government is vastly different from that of his predecessor. (Well, his predecessor post-2017ish. For the first couple of years, Trudeau was still trying pretty hard to hold to the things he campaigned on in a promise to be a generational change). This included some timelines for the next few weeks, and it’s a lot. So with that in mind, Carney goes to Washington on Tuesday to meet with Trump, the new Cabinet will be sworn in on the week of the 12th, Parliament will be recalled on the 26th for the election of a new Speaker, and then the 27th will be the Speech From the Throne, and it will be delivered by the King, for the first time since 1977 (and the first time a monarch has opened our parliament since 1957). In addition, he says we have the biggest reorientation of our economy to accomplish since the Second World War, and he’s going to balance the operating budget within three years with no cuts to services (indeed, the rollout of full dental care is continuing on schedule), and he’s not going to enter into any kind of formal arrangement with the NDP as there is no point in doing so. Here are five of the priorities outlined by Carney.

https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily/status/1918325678144884794

There will, of course, be a bunch of grumbling about the King arriving to deliver the Speech, but the thing we need to get out of the way is that he’s the King of Canada, not the King of the UK (or England, which hasn’t had a separate Crown since 1707) as far as we’re concerned, and so he’s not a “foreign monarch.” Canada has had a separate Crown from the UK since the Statute of Westminster in 1931, and even before that, the Crown in Canada manifested in very different ways from the UK since Princess Louise was the Chatelaine of Rideau Hall. (I have more on this in the Crown chapter of my book). The fact that we are bringing out the King to play a bigger role as our sovereignty is threatened is a reflection of just how different we are from the US, and why we will never be part of them, and because Trump idolises the royals, this becomes a thumb in his eye. We cannot forget that.

The other major development yesterday was that Conservative MP Damien Kurek has offered up his seat to Pierre Poilievre, so that he can return to the House of Commons, and surprising nobody, it’s one of the most conservative (and indeed, whitest) ridings in the country, where he got 81.8 percent of the vote in Monday’s election. While Carney said he would call the by-election at the earliest opportunity, Kurek can’t actually resign until a certain point because of rules in place, after which it’s a five-week campaign, and so that means it probably won’t happen until early July, so Poilievre will be out of the Chamber for the entire spring sitting (which is only slated to be about four weeks long). Kurek was six months away from qualifying for an MP pension, so one imagines that the party will work to compensate him in some way.

Ukraine Dispatch

A mass drone attack late Friday hit an apartment block in Kharkiv, injuring 46 people. The US State Department has approved the sale of $310 worth of training and sustainment for Ukraine’s F-16 fighter jets.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Danielle Smith’s weapon of mass distraction

Posted on by

Alberta premier Danielle Smith continues to be in increasing hot water—and oh, look, her justice minister is related by marriage to someone at the centre of the healthcare procurement scandal—so she has decided to go full-bore into her weapon of mass distraction, which is to attack the federal government and to try and call out Mark Carney for…reasons. She’s asking Carney for a “reset” of relations with Alberta (translation: Give me everything I want), because of course she is. One of the things she announced was a new court challenge of the clean electricity regulations, because of course she is. Nothing like making the lawyers a bunch more money.

https://twitter.com/maxfawcett/status/1917945085674791322

Throughout this, Smith insists she’s not stoking separatism *cough* and that these are just “hypotheticals” about the group of loons in the province itching to trigger a plebiscite by starting to gather signatures (before the bill has even passed), but the fact that she is lowering the threshold for just this eventually is a sign that she knows she’s doing it deliberately. And hey, she even says that there’s no appetite in the province for their own separate pension plan after all (because she got spanked by the reality that she couldn’t raid the majority of the CPP on the way out), so that must mean she’s serious about not stoking separatism, right? Does she think we’re all stupid and can’t see through her transparent bullshit?

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lo4edxbfjs2l

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lo4eimwtas2l

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lo4ekdqy2s2l

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lo4en275nc2l

Of course, because Scott Moe can’t help himself, he said that he’s a “true Canadian” but wouldn’t stop a public vote on separation if they triggered a plebiscite under provincial legislation. So…as premier he’s willing to also drive out investment and opportunity from companies that have no interest in dealing with this kind of nonsense? Wow, that’s some smart politicking!

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian drone attack late Thursday set houses ablaze in Zaporizhzhia and injured 14, but didn’t cause any deaths.

Continue reading →