Tag Archives: Procurement

Roundup: A floor-crossing during the budget reveal

Posted on by

So, that was the “generational” budget, which is cutting away at the civil service, and claiming “efficiencies” in most government departments (though a few defence and security related departments, as well as Indigenous Services only faced a two percent cut), while there are plenty of those investments for resource projects. The “climate competitiveness” strategy is promising to remove the emissions cap if provinces and industry can get other things like methane emissions reductions and carbon capture implemented at scale, but considering the latter isn’t cost-effective without a sufficiently high carbon price, I’m guessing that’s going to wind up failing (and no, there is “grand bargain” because Alberta and the industry won’t respect it). The deficit is at $78 billion, which is actually smaller than Stephen Harper’s $55.6 billion deficit in 2009-10 if you adjust for today’s dollars.

Here are some highlight stories, starting with some key numbers:

  • A $2 billion “critical minerals sovereign fund” that can include equity stakes
  • A suite of new tax measures designed to help compete with the US
  • $73 billion for national defence by the end of the decade, but there are few details about how it will all happen..
  • Slashing temporary immigration numbers and freezing permanent resident intake (because that’ll help with labour shortages)
  • $150 million more for CBC, and “exploring” participation in Eurovision.
  • Using buying power to spur the development of data centres without actually funding those projects (because it’s likely a bubble).
  • Moving ahead with regulating stablecoins.
  • Oversight over open banking was moved from the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada to the Bank of Canada.
  • Ending investment transfer fees to encourage more banking competition.
  • $2.7 billion in cuts to foreign aid over four years (as the destruction of USAID has created a massive need for foreign aid, so well done there).
  • Research and Development tax incentives aren’t limited to Canadian-owned firms.
  • They lifted the tax on luxury yachts and on foreign-owned vacation homes.
  • Weakening the laws around greenwashing, because of course they are.
  • Establishing sovereign space-lift capabilities.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T21:31:12.741Z

The seemingly outsized cuts to Global Affairs Canada in Budget 2025 are hard to square with the government’s repeated call to expand and deepen Canada's international partnerships. Reinvesting in the military is welcome – but defence is just one tool of our international policy.

— Roland Paris (@rolandparis.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T22:00:30.407Z

https://bsky.app/profile/plagasse.bsky.social/post/3m4tnilpugk2j

We're cutting $s to low-income 18 year-olds to access education, but we still have half a billion a year to make student loans interest-free for early-career 20-somethings "to help with the rent" AS DUMB AS A BAG OF HAMMERS.

— Alex Usher (@alexusherhesa.bsky.social) 2025-11-04T23:47:10.318Z

Staring at Canada's own gender-based analysis of its budget. Give you one guess at the main beneficiary of all the major spending investments….

— Lauren Dobson-Hughes (@ldobsonhughes.bsky.social) 2025-11-05T01:09:27.537Z

In pundit reaction, Heather Scoffield has a quick overview of some of the tax and investment measures. Mike Moffatt is sorely disappointed in just how little there was for the housing crisis in the budget, particularly as it puts too much focus on reducing immigration. Justin Ling notes the corporate tax cuts, and the fact that the budget doesn’t acknowledge the short-term problems associated with Trump’s gangster economics. Kevin Carmichael considers this a hybrid of Harper and Trudeau’s budgets, which winds up missing the mark as a result. Paul Wells remarks on some of the political considerations in the budget that is geared to investment when business hasn’t been keen to do so, and that there is a whole lot of downside in the budget, some of which is the fact that our chronic weaknesses of low productivity and internal barriers are an even bigger problem than they were before. Susan Delacourt says the budget misses the mark, being too vague in where the cuts will come from, and does a poor job in telling its story.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-11-04T22:22:02.466Z

Floor-crossing

In amidst budget being delivered, Conservative MP Chris d’Entremont went on record with Politico that he was considering crossing the floor to the Liberals, and my immediate thought was that there was some residual bitterness because he was forbidden from running to be Speaker, and to be put forward as Deputy Speaker once Francis Scarpaleggia had been voted in. But he has also seemed dejected when I’ve seen him in the Chamber of late, never wearing a tie, not participating in anything. Once this was public, I heard from a source that there was screaming happening in the opposition lobby outside of the House of Commons. d’Entremont quickly resigned from caucus, and within an hour, had formally crossed to the Liberals, who were happy to have him, particularly because he’s an affable Red Tory, and it doesn’t hurt that this completes the Liberals’ sweep of Nova Scotia. The Conservatives later put out a bitter statement (and by contrast, when Leona Allslev crossed from the Liberals to the Conservatives, Justin Trudeau wished her well). This means that the Liberals only need two more votes or abstentions to get their budget through, so we’ll see what that looks like in the days ahead.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A new pipeline study—to what end?

Posted on by

Ontario premier Doug Ford announced that his government would be launching a study about a potential new west-east pipeline, that could either head to existing refineries in Sarnia, or ports along the Great Lakes, Hudson Bay or James Bay. This sounds a lot like it’s going to be a waste of time and money because contrary to what Danielle Smith likes to think, the oil and gas industry has been irrevocably altered since 2014-15, and there is very little demand for these options. Enbridge isn’t going to want to strand its existing pipeline network running through the US, in spite of the arguments about energy security to build a (longer, more expensive) line on Canadian soil, and using northern ports makes no sense as they are only good for a few months of the year when demand its lower.

Energy economist Andrew Leach released a new paper yesterday that takes a look at the case for whether we need another pipeline, and it puts a lot of this in perspective. The oil market has changed since the major price drop in 2014, and American demand has fallen down a lot. While there might be a case for another pipeline to the Pacific, the timelines involved mean running the risk of stranding assets as global demand falls off. Keystone XL, if revived, is likely simply to be used for re-export at the Gulf Coast, while the eastern Canadian market is already well served, and would likely mean more transportation costs, and Alberta would see bigger discounts as compared to world prices. Danielle Smith says that the industry can double production, but that’s not what industry is saying, and more pipelines run the risk of eroding the value of oil, particularly as the rise of electric vehicles and heat pumps push down demand.

One of the other points that the paper makes is that for as much handwringing as there is about how long it takes projects, most of the delays that people point to were regulatory shortfalls and not structural delays. When proponents try to cut corners, or not do proper Indigenous consultations, that is what leads to court challenges and delays, not the actual regulatory system itself, but that’s an inconvenient narrative for certain players. These are things we need to be more cognisant of, and call bullshit on, as the drumbeat for “just one more pipeline” or even “a pipeline in every direction” get more intense.

effinbirds.com/post/7808260…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-30T14:05:46.292Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched sustained drone and missile attacks on Ukraine’s power infrastructure early Thursday, and killed at least three people. Two others were killed in a bomb strike on a thermal power plant in Sloviansk. Ukrainian forces are bolstering their defences in Pokrovsk as Russian forces have entered the city.

Continue reading →

QP: Executive bonuses vs sacrifices

Posted on by

The Nation’s Capital was under a rainfall warning as MPs gathered in the West Block for QP, with the PM still in South Korea. Pierre Poilievre was absent, leaving it to Andrew Scheer to lead off, and he declared that elites have never had it so good while people are being asked to make sacrifices. To illustrate, he noted that CMHC paid out $30 million in executive bonuses rather than providing down payments for young Canadians. Rechie Valdez responded by reading the good news about cutting the GST on houses for first-time homebuyers, along with other housing programmes. Scheer insisted that if flushing billions through big bureaucracies worked, they would not be in this situation, and again went to the notion that they are just funding big bonuses while youth have nothing left to give. Patty Hajdu praised the investments they have been making in skills training for youth. Jasraj Hallan took over to peevishly push the same narrative that “insiders” are getting rich while youth are being asked to sacrifice, and Valdez got back up to mouth the falsehood that Poilievre only built six houses as he was minister responsible. Hallan got back up to proclaim that the only people who have it good now are the prime minister and his elitist insiders. Hajdu got back up to talk about her meeting with her PEI counterpart to deliver for Canadians. Luc Berthold then took over to deliver the same script in French, and this time Joël Lightbound delivered the indignant response that the the Conservatives just vote against help for Canadians. Berthold raised a news story about pregnant women cutting back on protein, and Lightbound repeated that it was astounding that the Conservatives vote against programmes that people need.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and raised the anniversary of the 1995 referendum, and decried the federal Clarity Act preventing a democratic decision (which his not true), and asked it to be repealed. Steven Guilbeault said that Quebec elected twice as many Liberals as Bloc, and that they don’t want another referendum, but rather to build the country with their upcoming budget. Normandin again dared the government to repeal the Clarity Act, and Guilbeault again insisted that nobody is talking about another referendum. Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe took over to again make the same demand, and Guilbeault noted it was interesting that the Quebec government was tabling legislation with no Indigenous consultation, which is not reconciliation. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Predictable threats over passing the budget

Posted on by

The whole thing about Government House Leader Steve MacKinnon openly going on media to decry that they don’t have enough votes to pass the budget is turning into a very tiresome bit of melodrama in Parliament, now that every party is trying to mug for the camera on it. The Conservatives say they want a hard cap on the deficit (which is far below what they promised in their own election campaign), plus the destruction of environmental programmes like the industrial carbon price under the bullshit excuse that it’s causing food price inflation. The Bloc say they want to negotiate, but presented a list of “non-negotiables” which are both expensive and foolhardy, like a bunch of transfers with no strings attached (because premiers have never taken that money and spent it on other things or delivered tax cuts instead. Looking at one Jean Charest most especially). And the NDP say they want to see the budget first, but are making noises about how they don’t want austerity.

And so, the threats are now in place—or blackmail, as some have termed it. MacKinnon’s new line in Question Period has been about how he hopes the opposition doesn’t send Canadians to a Christmas election, which is not exactly subtle. Andrew Scheer rushed out to the Foyer after QP to breathlessly decry that the Liberals are trying to engineer an election with their budget, which is overplaying things just a little, especially considering that the Conservatives, as official opposition, would never vote for the budget in any case, even if their demands were actually reasonable (which they’re not). That leaves either the Bloc to swallow themselves whole in accepting anything less than their unreasonable “non-negotiables,” or the NDP to pretty much debase themselves by once again propping up the Liberals, even though they have absolutely no choice because they have no leader and the party’s coffers are completely bare and they can’t even mortgage their office building for a second time to pay for an election as they have no way of currently paying off the last one. The government knows this. They are also not looking like they want to get into bed with the NDP yet again, after they pretty much derailed the government’s agenda in the last parliament with the supply-and-confidence agreement that the NDP couldn’t be bothered to live up to their own end of. Nobody wants an election (and you have a bunch of Liberals being a bit theatrical about this), and it’s not going to happen, but instead, we’re going to have to live through this dog-and-pony show for the next five weeks or so. Gods help us.

effinbirds.com/post/7810072…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-29T13:25:05.419Z

Meanwhile, it looks like the budget leaks are starting early, as Senior Sources™ are talking about cuts to the civil service that go beyond attrition, and more aggressive capital cost write-downs. As well, François-Philippe Champange and Rechie Valdez said that there will still be some funding for women’s organisations and for security at Pride events, but this still means cuts to other programmes. Tim Hodgson announced millions for clean tech projects, including four carbon capture projects. (Here is the updated tally of budget promises to date).

Ukraine Dispatch

Putin claims that Russian troops have encircled the cities of Pokrovsk and Kupiansk, which Ukrainian officials vigorously deny. They are, however, struggling in Pokrovsk, which is strategically valuable.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Terminating talks (but there is no deal to be had)

Posted on by

The day was largely dominated by the fallout of Trump’s declaration that he was terminating negotiations with Canada in the wake of that Reagan ad after the Reagan Foundation—which is being run by a Trump loyalist—falsely claimed that the material was misleading and that it was used without permission. It was neither misleading, nor is permission required for presidential speeches (transcript here). Doug Ford had insisted that he was going to keep airing them, and Wab Kinew egged him on while David Eby said that BC was preparing similar ads of their own. But then Ford had a conversation with Mark Carney and decided to back down on the ads as of Monday (which means they will still run over the weekend, during the first two games of the World Series).

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3m3wzidltvs24

Meanwhile, Trump’s loyalists are on American TV badmouthing Canada, saying that we’re not collegial and difficult to work with, when what they mean is that we haven’t unilaterally capitulated to them like everyone else has, which is a problem for them. The point has also been made that while there seems to be a strategy at play to try and energize the Reaganite Republicans against the MAGA Republicans, this is ultimately a losing strategy because the Reaganites have long-since capitulated and have no energy or will to have that fight, so Canadians trying to make that their strategy seems self-defeating in the long run.

The thing is, there is no deal to be had with Trump, and never has been. This was never about ads—it was about finding an excuse to end the negotiations, because this was never about a trade deal, but about trying to dictate terms of our economic capitulation. Trump ending negotiations just rips that band-aid off—we need to stop pretending that there is an achievable end-goal here, or that we can somehow get a better deal when there are no deals to be had—only capitulation. Carney needs to send the signal to Canadian industry that we can’t count on things returning to status quo, and wasting our time trying to get to that outcome because it won’t happen, and everyone is better off spending their energy and capital transitioning to whatever is next.

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3m3wxv2byos24

Trump is posting on Truth Social that he's terminating negotiations with Canada over a "fake" ad criticizing tariffs (that was run by Ontario, and which isn't fake.)It's all theatre. There was never a deal to be gotten. Trump just wants to claim victory. #giftlink www.thestar.com/opinion/cont…

— Justin Ling (@justinling.ca) 2025-10-24T12:12:12.132Z

I broke things down further here.I'm starting to think we're wrong to even say that Trump's trade negotiations are getting "deals." They're not deals. They're the terms of other countries' economic capitulation. #giftlinkCanada is lucky not to have signed!www.thestar.com/opinion/cont…

— Justin Ling (@justinling.ca) 2025-10-24T12:23:27.974Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims to have taken control of three more villages—one in Kharkiv, one in Donetsk, and one in Dnipropetrovsk regions. President Zelenskyy was at a coalition of the willing meeting in London, calling for deep-strike weapons, and saying that Ukraine will need to find a way to produce more of its own air defences.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More than just the CRA in the Auditor General’s gaze

Posted on by

It was Auditor General Day yesterday, and boy were there some doozies. Pretty much all of the media attention was focused on the CRA audit, and the finding that call centres pretty much didn’t answer the phones, and when they did, they only gave correct information about seventeen percent of the time in the calls the Auditor General’s office made—yikes! The government is quibbling with the methodology, because of course they are, but also calling the report “constructive criticism” instead of “scathing,” and because these are the Liberals, François-Philippe Champagne thundered that the “good news” was that they had already started their one-hundred-day action plan to fix things without waiting for the report. (No, seriously—he declared this to be “good news” in Question Period). That said, when pressed about whether inadequate staffing was a problem, and what the coming civil service cuts were going to mean, the Secretary of State, Wayne Long, had no answer for it, which you would think is a pretty important detail considering just how embarrassing this is for the government. He also had no answers as to why things deteriorated this badly under the Liberal watch, and just kept saying that he was appointed on May 13th. Come on.

But there were plenty of other reports that were also not good:

  • There are plenty of cybersecurity vulnerabilities, not the least of which is because Shared Services Canada still can’t do their jobs properly since they were established under Harper.
  • Military housing is tremendously inadequate and much of it in a state of disrepair, and housing for single members is needed most especially.
  • Military recruitment is a gong show, and they couldn’t even ask why twelve out of every thirteen applicants abandoned their application.
  • There are still barriers to ending the remaining boil water advisories on First Nations reserves, even though they’ve been at this for a decade, and half of previous AG recommendations still haven’t been implemented.

The good news is that most of the legacy media outlets actually sent reporters to do reporting on these reports rather than just relying on CP wire copy, but really, only the CRA story got attention in QP and on the evening talking head shows, which is too bad because there was plenty more to talk about. But that’s indicative of the state of media these days.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-21T14:08:04.164Z

Ukraine Dispatch

There was a Russian attack on Kyiv overnight. Ukraine struck a Russian chemical plant with its newly acquired Storm Shadow missiles, which was a key supplier of gun powder and rocket fuel.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Fixing CPC nomination races?

Posted on by

Word has been obtained by the Globe and Mail that the Conservative Party plans to change their nomination processes after riding associations have been making their objections known to the central party about the way those races were handled in the lead-up to the election. You may recall that there were a number of sudden disqualifications, or where would-be candidates had spent months fundraising and selling memberships only for someone else to be parachuted into the riding as candidate in their place, leading to a few of them deciding to help the Liberal in the riding instead because of such a betrayal by their party.

While it sounds good that the party is hearing these complaints and planning to make changes, we’ll see what changes they end up implementing, because this is something that all parties are failing on. Grassroots nomination races are supposed to be the place where the local party members can most influence the party by selecting who they want on the ballot, but it’s also a place where they should be able to hold the incumbent accountable for their actions (or inaction), and replace them on the ballot if they so choose. But increasingly, parties have been protecting incumbents under the dubious rhetoric that they’re too busy in Ottawa to run in an open nomination, or that it somehow prevents mischief when sometimes that means thwarting the will of a local membership base that is dissatisfied.

If the Conservatives re-commit to transparent, open nominations, that’s a good thing for democracy, which is something that the Liberals most especially right now are failing at (thanks especially to rules that Trudeau pushed through when he revamped the party’s constitution to centralise power under the dubious excuse of needing to be more “nimble.”) But I also don’t hold out too much hope that these rules will be the grassroots rules we should have, because too many party leaders have come to depend on being able to put a thumb on the scales of nomination races to get their preferred candidates into caucus, even though that has created more problems in the long run than it solved.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-18T14:08:03.467Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian forces attacked a coal mine in southeastern Ukraine on Sunday, but there were no fatalities. It turns out that during that meeting at the White House last week, Trump was back to using Russian propaganda and demanding Ukraine surrender the entire Donbas region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Pipeline necromancy in the discussions

Posted on by

With the prime minister back in Canada, a couple of additional things were made known about the meeting with Trump, and one of them was the fact that the “energy” portion of their conversation involved Mark Carney floating the possibility of reviving the Keystone XL pipeline. For those of you unaware, this is entirely an American decision—all of the infrastructure on the Canadian side of the border is pretty much in place, and this project was never in contention. The Trudeau government supported it, but the resistance was on the American side of the border, not only from environmental concerns, but also because there were conspiracy theories developing in places like Nebraska that this was a secret ploy to drain their aquifers. No, seriously. Nevertheless, this is something that the proponent abandoned after Biden rescinded the permits (even though part of the network was built and renamed), so it would need someone to pick it up again.

Meanwhile, US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick spoke virtually at a Eurasia Group event in Toronto, and said that there will be no tariff-free auto deal with Canada, that the most we can hope for is a relationship around auto parts, and that Canada needs to get used to coming in second place to the US. Lutnick also expressed a desire to replace the New NAFTA with bilateral deals rather than a trilateral agreement with Mexico. When Carney later addressed the same event virtually, he said that the government will come to some bilateral agreements with the US, and spoke of “granular discussions” around steel and aluminium tariffs, but didn’t address these comments, just as he didn’t address the reports of Lutnick’s remarks during QP.

It’s hard to know what to make of any of this. After insisting that there was a “rupture” in our trade relationship, this is yet one more proposal to deepen integration and reliance on the American market…but it’s also probably the most viable pipeline for Alberta (though there are proposals to optimise the capacity of the Trans Mountain Expansion that would increase its maximum capacity for west coast exports—not that it’s anywhere near capacity at the moment). On the other hand, if they want to pay for our oil, and also pay their own tariffs to do so, then why not take their money? None of this is going to stop Danielle Smith or the Conservatives from demanding that Carney rip up all of the government’s environmental legislation so that they can crank up production with no consequences (even though there are absolutely environmental consequences that are getting more and more expensive each year), and this isn’t going to create that many jobs in the sector, even if production is increased, given that they are increasingly relying on automation and have been since the last price crash in 2014. But everything is stupid all the time, so this is no exception.

effinbirds.com/post/7804636…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-08T13:25:07.008Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Ukrainian forces are inflicting heavy losses on the Russians in a counter-offensive in the Donetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Telling on themselves about bail

Posted on by

After Question Period today, there will be a vote on the Conservatives’ latest Supply Day motion, which is for the House of Commons to pass their blatantly unconstitutional “jail not bail” bill at all stages. This is going to be an increasingly common tactic as they have loaded up the Order Paper with a number of these kinds of private members’ bills, and they are using the rhetoric that the government is somehow “obstructing” their legislation, even though most of those bills would ordinarily never see the light of day because there is a lottery system for private members’ legislation to come up for debate, with no guarantee of passage in either chamber (because the Senate can and will sit on private members’ bills long enough for them to die on the Order Paper if they’re particularly egregious). But most people don’t understand the legislative process, or that opposition MPs can’t just bring stuff up for debate at any point in time, so this is just more rage-baiting over through use of scary crime stories to make the point about how the Liberals are “soft on crime,” and so on. It would be great if legacy media could call out this bullshit, but they won’t.

At the same time, the Conservatives calling it “Liberal bail” is telling on themselves. The law of bail stems from the pre-Charter right to the presumption of innocence, which is a cornerstone of our entire legal system. The specific law of bail has been honed through decades of Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence, and the last time the Liberal government made any major bail reform legislation, it was to codify that Supreme Court jurisprudence, and to actually increase the onus for cases of domestic violence. None of this made things easier for bail, but the Conservatives haven’t stopped demanding that legislation be repealed (and only once in a while will a Liberal minister or parliamentary secretary actually call that out). This is about undermining important Charter rights, but do the Conservatives care? Of course not. They want to look tough and decisive, no matter who gets hurt in the process.

Meanwhile, much to my surprise, Poilievre says he won’t support the (really bad) omnibus border bill, C-2, so long as it contains privacy-violating sections like enhanced lawful access, which is a surprise, because the Conservatives have been champions of it for years (much as the Liberals used to be opposed to it). So, the world really is upside down now. Unless this is some kind of tactic or ploy, which I also would not be surprised by, but at the moment it looks like they’re on a “the Liberals are the real threats to your freedom” kick, which to be fair, this legislation is not helping the Liberals’ case.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched their largest aerial assault against Lviv and surrounding regions early Sunday, killing at least five. Earlier in the weekend, Russia attacked a passenger train at a station in Sumy, killing one and injuring approximately thirty others.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Streamlining defence procurement?

Posted on by

The government announced the creation of a new agency yesterday morning—the Defence Investment Agency, which has a dual purpose of streamlining defence procurement contracts by putting them into a single office to avoid duplicating approvals, but to also encourage domestic defence industrial capacity in order to ensure there is more domestic production rather than just being able to buy new kit faster. Part of this will involve working more closely with allies in the UK, Australia and France, among others, in order to shift more procurement dollars away from the Americans.

Some of this may be easier said than done, because they are folding in the same risk-averse bureaucrats into this agency, which means that they will still need to encourage culture change around these processes, and that could be a problem because many of those existing bureaucrats will have scars from botched procurements in the past, where things went awry because of haste, sole-sourcing, or other political machinations that were intended to maximise Canadian industrial benefits and turned into boondoggles. The general instinct in Canadian bureaucracy is that after every scandal, they put in all kinds of new rules and reporting structures to prevent it from happening again, but those new rules and structures keep piling on without any proper rationalization, and soon you have your civil servants spending all of their time doing compliance checks rather than their jobs, but funnily enough, this never seems to get the attention it deserves when we talk about reforming the civil service or when finding places where cuts can be made. And I fully expect that there is going to be an early scandal or two in this procurement body that will shape the future of how it operates.

Meanwhile, Carney hand-picked its CEO, and wouldn’t you know it, he slotted in a banker friend from Goldman Sachs and RBC to head it up. I’m sure that there will be plenty of justification about how this is supposed to get past the culture of risk-aversion or something, but I find there is a whiff of cronyism that is likely to get worse the closer we get to the eventual byelections for all of those soon-to-be retiring former Cabinet ministers that Carney is finding new diplomatic posts for. Things are getting awfully clubby in Carney’s bro-culture PMO, and this looks like a signal that there’s more of this to come.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-02T14:05:15.840Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine has brought home 185 service personnel and twenty civilians in the latest prisoner swap. President Zelenskyy is currently in Copenhagen to meet with European leaders.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1973658861148979359

Continue reading →