Tag Archives: Privacy

Roundup: Unclear goals means poor accountability

Posted on by
2

The Parliamentary Budget Officer released his report on the plans for Build Canada Homes yesterday, and the headline conclusion is that the $13 billion fund will only produce some 26,000 new housing units, which is not a lot. He also tracks the declining funding in other existing housing programmes, that BCH doesn’t really make up for, though the government’s response that has been that his report merely assumes that funding agreements coming to an end won’t be renewed, and that they could be three or four years down the road when they do expire, so fair enough.

New PBO report out today, that finds that in the first 5 years of the Build Canada Homes program, it's will have $7.3 billion of spending on an accrual basis ($13 billion on a cash basis) and lead to fewer than 26,000 homes being built.Read here: www.pbo-dpb.ca/en/pu…

— Dr. Mike P. Moffatt (@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social) 2025-12-02T15:11:25.000Z

The fed reaction to PBO's housing report makes clear what I said at a conference last week: The gov't has no long-term plan, no targets, no KPIs, no accountability metrics. 5 years from now we won't know if BCH worked, because there's no benchmarks.www.cbc.ca/news/poli…

— Dr. Mike P. Moffatt (@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social) 2025-12-02T20:12:57.000Z

That said, Mike Moffatt makes the point that the report highlights the lack of long-term planning, and metrics by which BCH can be held to account. Sure, it’s supposed to “catalyse” investment from the private sector, and do things like make federal lands available for development, but it’s fair to point out that the lack of planning makes it hard to tell just what they’re planning to do, and how that funding will be applied. Gregor Robertson insists that this is just the initial investment, that more will come in future years, and so on, but again, you would think they would have a better grasp on the plan and what it’s supposed to entail. I know it’s been a few months, but clear goals would really help set the direction they are supposed to be headed in. This government has thus-far relied on a lot of hand-waving regarding their plans, and this is very much an example of what that looks like and why it’s not very helpful for evaluating what they’re supposed to be doing.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-02T22:22:02.159Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine continues to deny Russia’s claim that they control Pokrovsk. Ukrainian soldiers on the front lines don’t believe in the current “peace deal,” saying Russia will simply invade again in the future.

Russian propaganda in full force for the Witkoff visit: Putin is claiming to have captured Ukrainian cities that he doesn't control, and having himself photographed in military uniformkyivindependent.com/putin-claims…

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-12-02T12:18:09.879Z

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1995802755034734819

Continue reading →

Roundup: An eight-day sitting?

Posted on by

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

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

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

Ukraine Dispatch

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

Continue reading →

Roundup: NSICOP vs lawful access

Posted on by

Yesterday, the CBC’s national security reporter filed a story about the NSICOP report into lawful access, which was frankly a poor piece of journalism. The story merely quoted from the report without any outside comment, but more than that, the focus and entire framing of the story was more on the frustrations of police and CSIS that they don’t have lawful access tools—and by lawful access, we mean the ability of police or intelligence services to access your digital online history and movements, usually without a judicial warrant. This is very bad. In fact, it’s so bad that the Supreme Court of Canada has twice ruled that it’s unconstitutional, and that police can’t even get your ISP information without a warrant because it offers too much access to the “digital breadcrumbs” of your online life that it can and will violate your privacy.

This is not mentioned in the CBC story. The report talks extensively about the Supreme Court’s definition of privacy and why it’s important, and why it’s important to try and find pathways for information that still require a judicial warrant, and so on. But how was this reported in the story? A single sentence: “It dives into one of the most controversial issues in national security: balancing the individual right to privacy while safeguarding public safety.” If that’s not soft-pedalling one of the major problems underpinning this whole report, I’m not sure what is. And then the story goes back to enumerating the complaints about how hard it is to access that data.

I do think that the NSICOP report’s findings are a problematic in places because it essentially wants Parliament to thread that needle in a way that makes it sound easy.

In the Committee’s view, the primary way the government could facilitate and enable national security investigations while at the same time protecting Canadians’ right to privacy would be to modernize lawful access legislation, based on clearly articulated principles that reaffirm the requirement for a legitimate need for exceptional, targeted and judicially authorized access emphasize privacy and cybersecurity protections, and define transparency and oversight mechanisms. In light of the complexity of the lawful access challenge, the Committee suggests that the government implement an incremental approach to allow for meaningful engagement with stakeholders and a diversity of input.

I also question the wisdom of encouraging a comprehensive data-sharing agreement with the US, given that they are no longer a functional democracy and it’s probably a very bad thing if their authorities have easy access to Canadians’ data for their own purposes. And these are real problems that Parliament needs to confront, in both the (terrible) omnibus border bill C-2, which has lawful access provisions in it, or how it and the cyber-security bill, C-8, can try and force companies to put in backdoors to their encryption (which at least the NSICOP report says is a bad idea). This is a very problematic area of law, but that CBC story did absolute injustice to it, and most especially about the absolute importance of privacy rights, and why we shouldn’t make it easy for police to access our data whenever they claim it’s necessary (especially because CSIS has a history of not being candid with the courts about why they need information or warrants).

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine has hit Russian oil infrastructure in both the Bryansk and Samara regions, which is widening the fuel crisis in that country. Under the theory that Trump repeats whatever the last person he was speaking to says, he was saying that Ukraine can win the war and reclaim their territory with NATO help.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Freeland out—for good this time

Posted on by

It was nine months to the day since Chrystia Freeland first resigned from Cabinet, previously under Justin Trudeau, when he told her that he planned to replace her as finance minister with Mark Carney, but would she mind first delivering the fall economic update that had a bigger-than-promised deficit number in it? Carney had not said yes to the position at the time, and things went downhill from there. This time, Freeland says she’s leaving to take up new opportunities—in this case, a position of special envoy related to the reconstruction of Ukraine. Her roles got split up, as the transport portfolio was given to Steve MacKinnon, and the internal trade to Dominic LeBlanc.

https://twitter.com/cafreeland/status/1967994021227401685

I do think that this move solidifies a few narratives that have been floating around, one of which is that Carney is consolidating loyalists. Freeland supporters were pretty much entirely frozen out of Cabinet and other senior roles, and Freeland herself was made a minister as a gesture of unity in the party, but six months later, she’s out. That’s fairly problematic on its face. As well, it’s one more woman out of a senior role, and one who had influence behind the scenes, which again consolidates the bro atmosphere in the PMO, which is not good, and will cause plenty of problems going forward as the blind spots start to grow. For the moment, Freeland is keeping her seat, but will eventually resign it once she has consulted with her riding association and so on. With rumours that Carney plans to offer diplomatic posts to at least two other former ministers, he could be looking to free up a handful of fairly safe seats that he can put more friends or loyalists into (like he did with Evan Solomon).

Alberta carbon price

Danielle Smith is making changes to her province’s industrial carbon price, exempting companies from paying it if they invest in their own emissions reduction projects. You know, which the carbon price incentivised them to do so that they didn’t have to pay as much, because that’s the whole gods damned point of carbon pricing. Absolutely unbelievable stupidity on display here.

About that ovation

There has been a lot of talk about how the House of Commons gave a standing ovation about Charlie Kirk on Monday. That’s not exactly true, and has been torqued by people who may or may not be acting in good faith. The ovation had more to do with standing against political violence rather than Kirk himself. That said, of course it was Rachael Thomas who got up to praise a fascist like Kirk, because this is who Thomas is. She has been marinating in the fever swamps of the American far-right discourse for years, and imports it into Canadian politics all the time, including the very careful creation of an alternate dystopian reality where Justin Trudeau is a “dictator,” and the Liberals are busy censoring tweets on the Internet and are generally being authoritarians, in all defiance of the logic and reality. Thomas absolutely deserves to be called out for venerating a fascist, but I think everyone needs to calm down about the applause that happened afterward because it’s pretty clear the context was about the broader message.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-09-16T21:22:02.480Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy is calling for a combined European air defence system given that Russia’s attacks are now extending beyond just Ukraine. Here is a look at the struggle for Ukrainian authorities to identify their war dead.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A narrower, more revealing book ban

Posted on by

Alberta’s amended book ban was announced on Wednesday, and lo, it is now being confined to graphic novels that depict supposed sexually explicit images, and wouldn’t you just know it, we’re back to the original four books that triggered this whole thing, three of those four titles being queer or trans-related. And nobody will actually say that out loud—not the premier, not the education minister, and wouldn’t you know it, not legacy media either.

To be clear, this move brings us back to the very pointed targeting of LGBTQ2S+ graphic novels that got us here in the first place.Books that were on the government's radar thanks to far-right advocacy groups like Action4Canada.

— Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2025-09-08T21:18:06.510Z

The Canadian Press didn’t mention anything about queer or trans materials, and they got quotes from Action4Canada, calling them a “parents advocacy group” instead of a far-right Christian nationalist organization, which they absolutely are. CBC’s reporting kept focusing on “explicit images of sexual acts,” and their televised coverage made zero mention of queer or trans materials, though the print story at least did quote the Fyrefly Institute for Gender and Sexual Diversity, who expressed concern that this could “disproportionately affect 2SLGBTQ+ representation,” but didn’t specify that three of the four main targeted books were queer or trans, which again, is important context to have. Neither of their coverage actually mentioned that if you look at the images that the government sent to the media about the offending images (which the government did actually provide), pretty much none of them were “explicit images of sexual acts” either, even if there was some nudity or allusions to sexual acts that were not graphic or explicit. I also have to wonder why neither the Alberta NDP (and Naheed Nenshi especially), or the Alberta Teachers’ Association could call this out for what it is.

There is a large portion of people who only really started to care about the Alberta book ban stuff when it was Margaret Atwood being pulled from shelves.I hope those same people are willing to stand up and defend queer and trans comics artists too, and call this what it is

— Mel Woods (@melwoods.me) 2025-09-08T21:41:10.098Z

Meanwhile, Maclean’s published a profile of six Alberta separatism supporters in an attempt to humanize them and show how they’re just ordinary people with real concerns. Those concerns? Vaccines, believing climate change is a scam designed to punish Alberta, immigration, and the general grievance addiction that social media addicts on the right have become dependent upon. They couldn’t even be bothered to correct the one gullible woman who believes that the National Energy Program is still running and siphoning the province’s wealth. No discussion about the fact that Alberta separatism is fuelled largely by Christian nationalism and white supremacy, which is really important context to have when you’re trying to humanize these people. It’s astonishingly bad journalism, but, well, that’s Maclean’s these days (just inhabiting the corpse of a once-great magazine).

https://bsky.app/profile/daveberta.bsky.social/post/3lygl7xvz7s22

In fact the #Alberta economy was impacted more because the world oil price dropped while the NEP was in place and actually continued to drop after the NEP was cancelled.#ABpoli

— True Oak (@trueoak.bsky.social) 2025-07-17T17:40:34.155Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Things have been escalating, as last night, a number of Russian drones entered Polish airspace and were downed by NATO air defences (Thread here). And the day before that, glide bombs struck in Yarova, where elderly villages were lining up for their pension cheques. And the day before that was the largest barrage of the war to date, with 805 drones and 13 missiles, and government buildings in Kyiv were hit for the first time. And Trump still isn’t doing anything while Putin mocks him.

Since January 20, Russian air raids in Ukraine have intensified dramatically

— Anne Applebaum (@anneapplebaum.bsky.social) 2025-09-09T20:08:04.868Z

https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1965345997044744662

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trying to make Churchill happen. (It’s not going to happen)

Posted on by

In light of news that the new Major Projects Office is due to be launched this week, and comments that prime minister Mark Carney and others have been making about the possibility of an LNG terminal at the Port of Churchill, Manitoba, it behoves me to once again bring up energy economist Andrew Leach, who has a giant reality check for everyone saying this is going to be a thing. It’s not—unless we want to spent billions of taxpayer dollars on a money-losing exercise, that is. Which is not what this whole drive toward expanding resource extraction is supposed to be about.

That said, I think that Leach is ultimately correct here—that Carney and his brain trust have spent too long reading the Conservatives’ talking points about resource development and have believed them to be true, which they obviously are not. But when you have legacy media in this country just completely uncritically regurgitating the talking points from the Conservatives and Danielle Smith, and reporters and political talk show hosts just uncritically mocking the “no business case” line about why we don’t have LNG terminals on the east coast without talking to a gods damned energy economist about why that didn’t happen, well, of course it becomes easy for someone like Carney to just uncritically believe this nonsense, because that’s all that’s being presented. Justin Trudeau and his Cabinet couldn’t actually articulate why there was no business case (because “if you’re explaining, you’re losing,” so they never explained anything), and trusted the media to do it for them, which media wasn’t going to do, and could barely be arsed to even both-sides that particular issue. And this is where we are today, and Carney is going to be forced to take the loss on this one, because Liberals refuse to take Conservatives to task for their bullshit.

Speaking of, Pierre Poilievre was in Charlottetown, PEI, to decry that the incoming clean fuel regulations are “Carney’s Carbon Tax 2.0,” even though Trudeau’s government put through those regulations years ago, they’re not a tax, and associated costs are not going into government coffers, but simply businesses passing along the costs of reducing their emissions. It’s the same brand of dishonest bullshit that he trades in, and even some Conservatives are getting tired of it, telling the National Post that he’s become a caricature of himself. So, way to go there.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-08-27T22:01:25.944Z

Ukraine Dispatch

There was a massive Russian drone and missile attack on energy infrastructure across six regions of Ukraine in the early morning hours, looking in part to exacerbate an existing has shortage. Russia also says that they object to the European proposals around security guarantees, which is not a shock at all.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A committee of handwringing over ferries

Posted on by

On Friday, the Commons transport committee met to wring their hands and express their dismay at BC Ferries’ decision to buy new ships from a Chinese firm, and lo, there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Chrystia Freeland expressed her dismay. Gregor Robertson expressed his disappointment. The representative of the Canada Infrastructure Bank pointed out that they don’t make any decisions on procurement, and that their loan was secured before that decision was made. And the head of BC Ferries pointed out, once again, that no Canadian shipyard bid on these ships, if they did, it would take them a decade to deliver them (at least), and that the Chinese bid was $1.2 billion cheaper than any of the others.

That of course didn’t stop opposition MPs from doing the performative song and dance. Conservative Dan Albas demanded the government cancel the loan—which the government can’t do because the Infrastructure Bank is arm’s length. And now they want all documents and emails released, which is going to tell them yet again that no Canadian shipyards bid on this contract.

1) This procurement is entirely provincial jurisdiction2) The Infrastructure Bank operates at arm's length and ministers can't cancel any loans it gives3) NO CANADIAN SHIPYARDS BID ON THIS CONTRACT!Is the federal government going to dictate that one of them build these ferries? Seriously?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-08-05T13:50:03.050Z

Perhaps most galling of all was Bloc MP Xavier Barsalou-Duval wanted an apology from the government and from the Canada Infrastructure Bank because it’s “unacceptable” that the government plans to invest in foreign infrastructure when our own steel industry is facing tariffs from Trump—but the federal government isn’t investing. BC Ferries, a provincial Crown Corporation is, and the loan from the Infrastructure Bank is a fully repayable loan. You would think the Bloc of all people would rather the federal government respect a decision by a provincial body, but apparently that only matters if it’s in Quebec.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-08-04T13:08:04.388Z

In case you missed it:

  • My weekend column on the false choice between emissions caps and prosperity, as the costs of climate change are already being felt in significant ways.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take points out that Poilievre and the Conservatives had a chance to deal with the Longest Ballot nuisances, but chose stupid games instead.
  • My column which responds to what was in that weekend CBC story on the “radically overhauled” Senate and the problems with some of the arguments made.
  • My long weekend column looks at the current issue with contracts for freelance interpreters in Parliament, and why it’s exacerbating an existing crisis.
  • My column asks if it’s time to revive the Economic Council of Canada as we did with the Law Commission, given the uncertain times we live in.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims to have captured another village in the Dniporpetrovsk region. On Monday, Ukraine destroyed one Russian military jet and damaged four others stationed in occupied Crimea. Ukrainian officials say that Indian components have been found in Russian drones. Two days after Ukraine’s parliament voted to restore anti-corruption agencies’ independence, they announced that they had uncovered a major graft scheme involving drone procurements.

https://twitter.com/Denys_Shmyhal/status/1952763302699729187

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lowering expectations even further

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney spent the morning with the premiers in Muskoka as part of their meeting, and proceeded to lower expectations even further than they already are. The message of the day was that he’s only going to take the “best deal” in negotiations with the US, and that matters more than the August 1st deadline, which is already beyond the “deadline” that was agreed to in Kananaskis, and so long as talks are ongoing, retaliation measures continue to also be pushed back so that American bullying can continue unabated. But the kind of deal he wants isn’t going to be available, because this is Trump, and we’re just not going to get a deal that “preserves, reinforces and stabilises” the trade relationship, because Trump does not want that, nor do we want to keep tying ourselves to a failing autocratic regime whose economy is increasingly defined by the chaos of its leader.

We also learned that he stayed at Doug Ford’s cottage the night before, and that they stayed up talking past midnight, and Ford just gushed like a schoolgirl about Carney’s business background, and said that he would hand the keys of a business over to the prime minister (and said “business” about fifty more times), all of which was a little bit unseemly. We know that Ford continues to fancy himself a “businessman” because he inherited part of his father’s label business, but this constant fawning over anyone with a business background is a little bit unbecoming, particularly if you pay any bit of attention to what happens.

Meanwhile, Ford also signed an MOU with Danielle Smith and Scott Moe about building pipelines to Ontario and James Bay (which is never going to happen because it’s too shallow for tanker traffic), amidst the usual nonsense about federal environmental laws that they are trying to be rid of. There are no proponents for these pipelines, because there is no economic case for them. And if Carney is true to his word and says there’s no PONIs without Indigenous buy-in or consent, well, the pipeline Smith wants to the northwest coast of BC won’t happen because the First Nations in the area do not want one. Nevertheless, I think Andrew Leach is right in that they’re stacking up a wish list they’ll never meet in order to keep blaming the federal government, because that’s what they do best.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine lost one of their French Mirage fighters due to equipment failure, but the pilot was able to safely eject. There were protests in Kyiv because president Zelenskyy signed a law that rolled back the independence of two anti-corruption bodies and placed them under executive control, which was seen largely as his first major unforced error, and give ammunition to Putin supporters.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1947576960110014850

Continue reading →

Roundup: The G6-plus-one, day two

Posted on by

The remainder of the G7 Summit was odd with Trump’s early departure, in part because of how much space he took up at the event, and his subsequent absence case a long shadow. A number of leaders had come specifically to meet with him on the second day, including Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and with Trump gone, it made the trip seem less worthwhile for their broader goals. There was talk that a statement about support for Ukraine was scrapped because the Americans wanted the language to be watered down to useless—but Mark Carney’s office later retracted that claim, so it’s hard to say what actually happened there. Carney did, however, pledge another $4.3 billion for Ukraine and to help bring about more sanctions on Russia and their “shadow fleet,” so that’s not nothing. As for Trump, while on his way home, he was back to threats, insisting Canada will be paying tariffs unless we become a US state, and he increased the price for participation in the “golden dome,” with a number he pulled directly out of his ass.

As for the outcomes of the summit, there was an agreement on an increased use of AI (really?!) plus a “common vision” for quantum technologies. The Rapid Response Mechanism on disinformation and threats to democracy will update its reports to include transnational repression; there was also a pledge to do more to tackle migrant smuggling. There was agreement to coordinate efforts to manage the impacts of wildfires—but nothing about tackling climate change that is causing those fires. There was also talk about “economic corridors” for critical minerals, and enforcing standardised markets in order to combat Chinese dominance in that tech space.

Regarding the other meetings on the sidelines, Carney had his meeting with Narendra Modi and did raise transnational repression during his remarks, for all the good it did. The pair agreed to re-establish proper diplomatic relations and to re-appoint new high commissioners for each country, but we’ll see if India’s next representative is also tied to repression. Carney also had a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who was supportive of the plans to reach the NATO two-percent spending target this year (right before the summit where the plan is to increase it again). As for designated protest sites, they were largely quiet on the second day. (More highlights from the day here).

https://twitter.com/supriyadwivedi/status/1935050251351495064

Ukraine Dispatch

The attack on Kyiv early Tuesday morning was even deadlier than first anticipated, with 440 drones and 32 missiles fired, killing at least 18 people and wounding 151 others; Odesa was also hit. (Photos).

Continue reading →

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 →