Tag Archives: Public Health

QP: Closing those “police stations”

Posted on by

The prime minister was present today, while his deputy was not, and most of the leaders were present, save Pierre Poilievre. In other words, it was the reverse of yesterday’s attendance. Pierre Paul-Hus led off in French, and he noted that those two Chinese “police stations” in the Montreal area were still operating and wanted the government to account for this. Trudeau said that the RCMP were following up on these, before reading a statement in both languages about the situation in Alberta. Paul-Hus needled that the opposition parties all voted for their Supply Day motion yesterday, before returning to the demand to shut down those stations. Trudeau reminded him that police operate independently, before he read a list of actions taken to date. Melissa Lantsman took over in English, and demanded the government bring in a foreign agent registry, to which Trudeau accused her of being disingenuous because she knows that they are consulting on best way to do it. Lantsman raised those “police stations,” and Trudeau read a statement that the RCMP are currently investigating these two alleged stations. She reiterated her points more angrily, and Trudeau noted that in 2015 when they took office, they took actions that the previous government refused to, such as creating NSICOP and the election oversight panels.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he accused McKinsey of meddling in Canadian affairs because of the “century initiative” and tried to spin a conspiracy theory around it. Trudeau noted that they are protecting French and Quebec already has the power to select its own immigrants. Blanchet railed more about this alleged conspiracy, and Trudeau insisted that they get the uniqueness of Quebec, and reiterate that Quebec sets their own immigration levels.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded a public inquiry for the sake of diasporic communities who face threats. Trudeau noted the appointment of David Johnston who may yet recommend a public inquiry. Singh repeated the question in French, and got the same response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: It’s Coronation Day

Posted on by

It’s Coronation Day, and Justin Trudeau will have arrived in the wee hours, having taken a red-eye across the Atlantic to get there. Trudeau was absent from the meeting with other Commonwealth leaders, where he could have been doing something productive like organising to help advance LGBTQ+ rights within those countries (as I suggested in my Xtra column). Nevertheless, it was bad form for him not to be there, especially as he could have moved his party convention to another weekend once the coronation date was announced.

Most of the official delegation gathered for a photo, sans-Trudeau. Not in the delegation but part of the day’s festivities is Canadian Marion Portelance, who will be playing cello at the post-Coronation concert, and it’s believed the cello she’s using was once owned and played by the King.

And because it’s her big day as a royal correspondent, our friend Patricia Treble has stories out on pretty much every platform:

  • For the Globe and Mail, a visual guide of the event and the regalia used in it.
  • For The Line, she delves into the Kremlinology of who is and is not showing up for the big event.
  • For the Star, some coronation history and some of the fascinating events that have happened during them.
  • In The Walrus, traces the indifference Canadians feel for the King to the apathy to the Crown exhibited by governments.
  • On her Substack, showcases some of the coronation scenes in London.

Ukraine Dispatch:

The leader of Russia’s mercenary Wagner Group says they’re pulling out of Bakhmut in days because they lack ammunition, and are dying in vain. (Ukraine believes they are simply reinforcing their positions). There is still shelling happening in the Kherson region, while the Russian-installed “governor” of the Zaporizhzhia region is ordering an evacuation of villages close to the front line. Meanwhile, new analysis is showing that the drone that struck the Kremlin likely launched from within Russia.

Continue reading →

QP: Was there a briefing two years ago?

Posted on by

While the prime minister was present today, his deputy was off to Washington DC, but the other party leaders were all present today, so a show was to be had. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, railed that it had been two years since the allegation about threats to Michael Chong’s family, demanded to know when he knew, and why the diplomat in the story was not yet expelled. Justin Trudeau took exception to the characterisation, said that the information he received after yesterday’s story was that measures were taken to protect measures when they are in the spotlight of foreign actors, and that he reached out to Michael Chong directly. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the same allegations, and Trudeau reiterated his same response. Poilievre repeated the key elements of the story more slowly, and demanded that the diplomat in question be expelled. Trudeau again took exception to the characterisation of what happened, said that those kinds of accusations were unworthy of members of this House. Poilievre insisted that the government knew about the threats to years ago—with no proof that this made its way up the chain—and Trudeau repeated that this wasn’t true, and that where is action to take, it is taken. Poilievre insisted that Trudeau was only interested in his political reputation, and demanded the diplomatic immunity of that “agent” be taken away. Trudeau once again said this wasn’t true, and that nobody would simply sit on a threat to a colleague.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, said he didn’t see anything false in the Conservatives’ questions, and tried to turn this into a question on the Trudeau Foundation, and Trudeau insisted that political interference is not allowed and legal processes will go forward as necessary. Blanchet tried again to wedge on the Foundation, and Trudeau recited that he hasn’t had any involvement for a decade.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he too accused the prime minister of doing nothing on the alleged Chong briefing for two years, and demanded to know why Chong wasn’t informed at the time. Trudeau said it would be outrageous if someone sat on a threat for two years, and that is not what happened. Singh switched to French, and railed that the prime minister should have known at the time, and demanded a public inquiry. Trudeau insisted that they did act starting in 2015 with a G7 mechanism with allies to fight interference, plus the election monitoring panel, and the creation of NSICOP and NSIRA.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Questions on regulatory efficacy

Posted on by

The Environment Commissioner released a series of reports yesterday, and I have some questions about a couple of them. His first report looks into the plan to plant two billion trees and states that it won’t be achievable unless there are big changes, citing that last year’s targets weren’t met, and that the agreements with provinces and territories around this are still being worked out. While I did notice that his graph about the plans for planting these trees does backload much of it because it will take time to grow enough saplings to plant, I’m not sure that one year’s data is enough to declare imminent failure. Maybe I’m just being optimistic.

One of his reports also criticises that the government can’t track which regulations reduce how many emissions, which makes it hard to assess their efficacy. I’m just not sure how a government would go about doing so, because there are so many overlapping measures including the carbon price, and emissions have started to bend, so that we’re slowly dropping below pre-pandemic and 2005 levels, particularly as the economy is growing, which is a good sign that measures are working overall, but there is more to do. And while I appreciate what he’s trying to say, I’m just not sure how someone goes about calculating how much the inventory changed for each regulatory measure. He did also talk about how many missed targets there were, but didn’t differentiate between which stripe of government was in power, and how the previous government set targets that they deemed “aspirational,” meaning that they did nothing to attempt to meet them, while the current government’s targets are for 2030, and they could very well still meet them if they continue their current trajectory. I’m sure he doesn’t want to get into that difference as part of his role as non-partisan quasi-Officer of Parliament (he is not a standalone officer but is part of the Auditor General’s office), but it is relevant to the state of the discussion.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces had a misfire, and accidentally bombed their own city of Belgorod, near the Ukrainian border. Oops. Meanwhile, the head of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, visited president Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Kyiv, and declared that Ukraine’s future is in NATO (but that can’t happen under NATO rules so long as they have Russians occupying their territory). Ukraine has trained eight storm brigades worth 40,000 troops for the upcoming counteroffensive. Treason charges are being laid against several Ukrainian servicemen for giving away information to Russian force during an unauthorised mission, and those Russians damaged a Ukrainian airfield as a result.

https://twitter.com/euromaidanpress/status/1649030309109813248

https://twitter.com/minpres/status/1649093237632647179

Continue reading →

QP: Interminable questions about Trudeau’s Xmas vacation

Posted on by

Both the prime minister and his deputy were present, together, for the first time in probably two months, which should have been notable, but ended up not being as a result of today’s news cycle. Pierre Poilieve led off in French, cited a poll that said many Canadians had to cancel summer vacation plans, and then raised that CBC story about the prime minister’s Christmas vacation where he stayed at the villa of someone who donated to the Trudeau Foundation. (Note that this link is entirely specious), and asked if the prime minister paid for his lodgings at the villa. Justin Trudeau noted that he has been friends with that family for 50 years and that they worked with the Ethics Commissioner to ensure that all rules were followed, and if Poilievre was really preoccupied by the cost of living, he would support the budget. Poilievre switched to English to reiterate the question, with some added smarm, and Trudeau repeated his response with a couple of added attempted jabs. Poilievre insisted that nothing was free and demanded to know who much was paid for the accommodation, to which Trudeau noted that Poilievre seems to have struggle with the concept of friendship, and that this family friendship goes back fifty years, before he pivoted to Poilievre running to American billionaires in order to attack the local news that Canadians rely on. Poilievre insisted that this was about power and influence, and took a swipe at the Aga Khan, before Trudeau hit back that there were security considerations before chiding Poilievre for not voting to support Canadians. Poilievre took more swipes, including at the Queen’s funeral (which he termed “a vacation”) before deploying his tired “this prime minister is out of touch while Canadians are out of money” line. Trudeau said that if Poilievre cared about Canadians as he did about partisan attacks, he would support their plans for things like child care and dental care.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and he took his own swing at the vacation story, and Trudeau insisted that the Ethics Commissioner cleared everything. Blanchet tried to pivot to that dubious Chinese donation to the Trudeau Foundation, and Trudeau stated bluntly he hasn’t had anything to do with the Foundation for ten years.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he demanded help for workers instead of CEOs. Trudeau recited his lines from a script about the grocery rebate and the help they are delivering. Singh repeated the question in French, and Trudeau repeated his response extemporaneously.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The dog and pony show around Telford at committee

Posted on by

After weeks of haranguing, filibusters, and Question Period clown shows, the prime minister’s chief of staff, Katie Telford, appeared at the Procedure and House Affairs committee. Shortly before she appeared, documents were tabled to show some dates of briefings the prime minister had with his National Security and Intelligence Advisor, but there weren’t many specifics, and in her testimony, Telford didn’t fill in any of those blanks. And nearly two-and-a-half hours were spent with Telford largely telling MPs that she couldn’t confirm or deny anything, except when the Liberals asked her to pat herself on the back for all of the actions the government has thus far taken around taking foreign interference seriously.

And of course, the Conservatives spent the time putting on a show for the camera, whether it was Larry Brock playing prosecutor—in spite of committee chair Bardish Chagger repeatedly warning him that this was a committee and not a court room—or Rachael Thomas’ rehearsed Disappointment Speech at the end. It was nothing but a dog and pony show.

This never should have happened. Telford never should have been summoned. We’ve once again damaged the fundamental precepts of parliamentary democracy and Responsible Government for the sake of some cheap theatre and clips for social media. Our Parliament should be a much more serious place, but this was just one more incidence of MPs debasing themselves and the institution for the sake of scoring a few cheap points.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles struck the eastern city of Sloviansk, hitting residential buildings and killing at least nine people and wounding over 21.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1646844031190614017

Continue reading →

Roundup: It wasn’t just social housing

Posted on by

A speech by NDP MP Daniel Blaikie is making the rounds in which he blames the rising housing unaffordability on the federal government vacating the social housing space in 1993, and that this is all the consequence of that. As economist Mike Moffatt explains, this isn’t actually true. But that’s one of the issues with the NDP—they have singular narratives that they must fit things into, whether it’s true or not, and singular policy prescriptions to go along with them. (Yes, other parties do this to, to greater or lesser extents).

Anyway, here’s Moffatt on the more complicated picture. (Full thread here, select portions below).

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642488918435155970

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642489599900495872

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642490391969636355

https://twitter.com/MikePMoffatt/status/1642491809065574401

Ukraine Dispatch:

Wagner Group mercenaries are again claiming victory in Bakhmut, not for the first time, while Ukrainian forces again insist they remain in control of the territory. Russians shelled the eastern city of Kostiantynivka, killing six civilians and wounding eight others. Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials are outlining plans for what to do with Crimea once they have recaptured it, and those plans include dismantling the bridge to Russia. Here is a look at the Canadian training programme for Ukrainian soldiers in teaching them how to check for booby-traps and mines in captured territory.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1642087035715420160

Continue reading →

Roundup: Evading a direct question with fiery rhetoric

Posted on by

Yesterday’s press conference with the prime minister and US president was the first opportunity to ask Justin Trudeau about the allegations made against MP Han Dong, and whether he believed them. Trudeau said that he accepts that Dong left caucus to fight the allegations, prompted people to watch Dong’s speech in the House of Commons, and then went on a tear about how any foreign interference was unnecessary, and it was why the G7 meeting at Charlevoix set up the Rapid Response Mechanism to deal with it in elections. And it sounded like the kind of answer he should have been giving three weeks ago when he was simply flailing, until you stopped to realise that he didn’t actually answer the question, but sidestepped it with the rhetoric. So that’s a choice.

Meanwhile, here is an interesting deep dive thread into what the Globe and Mail published on Thursday night, and the subtle shade they were throwing at Global about the decision not to print allegations they could not confirm without seeing the transcript of the alleged call or listen to audio. I still think it’s interesting that this seems to confirm that the same source appears to be shopping leaks to both outlets.

Stephanie Carvin answers some questions about the kinds of warrants that could be in play as it appears that CSIS was monitoring the calls of the Chinese consulate.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1639255538021339136

Former national security analyst Dennis Molinaro gives a good gut-check about the kinds of intelligence we’re dealing with, and why none of it can be taken as conclusive, particularly as much of it is time and context specific, which may be why it wasn’t acted upon at the time.

https://twitter.com/dennismolin11/status/1639402944708632576

And finally, while some are hoping that a public inquiry might stop the leaks, I wouldn’t be so sure. The leaks are intended to cause damage, but to the government in particular, and that’s partly why they are being shopped to the journalists that they are. That they are causing damage to the intelligence service and institutions seems to be considered collateral damage, particularly if the op-ed from last week is indicative of a narcissistic personality who thinks they know better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces attacked stretches along the northern and southern fronts in the Donbas region, as their assault on Bakhmut has flagged. Ukrainian forces are using three Soviet-era helicopters to pummel Russian forces on the front lines from afar. Slovakia has delivered the first four of 13 MiG-29 fighters to Ukraine. The UN’s human rights monitors have seen cases of abuses and killing of prisoners of war on both sides of the conflict (though disproportionately more on the Russian side).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1639257619071213568

Continue reading →

Roundup: Few answers at committee

Posted on by

The Procedure and House Affairs committee met yesterday for an emergency meeting around these recent allegations of Chinese interference in the last election, and it wasn’t the most illuminating exercise—not just because MPs constant attempts at point-scoring, but because most of the national security agencies couldn’t answer very many questions, because answering questions can jeopardise sources or investigations. And we got the same cautions that virtually every media outlet is ignoring, which is that intelligence is not evidence, and much of it is out of context or incomplete, which is why everything needs to be taken with a grain of salt and not repeated credulously the way absolutely everyone is.

We did learn a couple of things. The first is that the RCMP were the ones who opted not to proceed with any investigations or charges around interference when presented with information about it. The second is that the prime minister is being briefed constantly about these kinds of threats, and that the problem is getting worse instead of better.

And then there were all of the calls for a national public inquiry, which the NDP insisted they were going to try and look tough in demanding. Not to be outdone, Poilievre not only demanded an inquiry, but said that all recognised party leaders had to have a say in who would chair it, otherwise it would just be another “Liberal crony” (which was again used as a smear against Morris Rosenberg). The prime minister’s national security advisor said that a public inquiry wouldn’t get many more answers because of the nature of the secret information, and all of that would still be kept out of the public eye, which is a good point. Incidentally, the opposition parties cannot demand a public inquiry—it doesn’t work like that. They can’t force a vote in the House of Commons, or anything like that, so this is once again, mostly just performance.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Despite the warnings that the Ukrainians may not be able to hold Bakhmut for much longer, they nevertheless held positions for another day, while Russian forces are also gearing up for a renewed offensive in the Zaporizhzhia region.

Continue reading →

QP: Crossing a line around MAiD access allegations

Posted on by

The prime minister was allegedly in town, but didn’t show up for QP today, while his deputy was out of town, and most of the other leaders were absent as well, save Pierre Poilievre. And he led off QP in French, worrying about how much mortgage costs have risen, rent increases, and blaming this on “inflationist policies” of the government (which is completely contrary to economic data). Pascale St-Onge, who is apparently now the designated French responder during the leaders’ round when Trudeau is away, gave the back-patting that Canadians know the government is there for them when times are tough. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the same question, demanding that the prime minister take responsibility for pricing working-class youth out of a home. Ahmed Hussen praised their measures such as the rent-to-own programme, the tax-free savings account for first-time buyers, and that the Conservatives voted against these kinds of measures. Poilievre insisted that they voted against inflationary policies, and complained about how much housing prices have gone up in markets like Toronto, demanding the federal government take responsibility for this failure (never mind that these are clearly municipality and provincial responsibilities). Randy Boissonnault reminded him that mothers who took CERB and parents who take their kids to the dentist don’t create inflation, and that the Conservatives dealt in nonsense economics. Poilievre insisted that the government created that inflation, and blamed government spending for inflating the housing market (which is lunacy), and Hussen got back up to demand that Poilievre take responsibility for voting against housing supports. Poilievre took on a tone of faux gravitas and drew a specious link between people at food banks and asking for Medical Assistance in Dying because poverty has them depressed, and accused the government of being more in favour of them accessing MAiD for depression rather than helping them (which is frankly outrageous, particularly since the expansion of MAiD for mental illness is explicitly not about simple depression, no matter what its opponents will falsely claim). Carolyn Bennett tried to dispute this and point out that the eligibility criteria screens out suicidal behaviour, but she was shouted down and the Speaker didn’t allow her to start again from the top.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc and demanded the resignation of Amira Elghawaby, because of course he did. Hussen read that she already clarified and apologised for her past comments and invited Therrien to read that statement. Therrien insisted that the position itself was a problem and that it was only about demonising Quebec, and demanded the position be abolished. Hussen got up to talk about his attending the memorial for the Quebec City mosque shooting and how many people attended it, before reiterating that she already clarified and apologised for her past comments.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and he yelled about use of consultants as privatisation and decried that they were being too cheap with public servants at the bargaining table. Mona Fortier recited some pabulum about good jobs for Canadians. Gord Johns read the English version of the same question with added sanctimony, wanting a full investigation into government outsourcing. Helena Jaczek said that she looked forward to answering their questions at committee. 

Continue reading →