Tag Archives: Public Service

Roundup: All smiles with the premiers

Posted on by
Reply

Mark Carney is meeting with the premiers today, after having them all over for dinner last night, and already everyone is having a big love-in, showing that they have a big united front as the country deals with the ongoing threats from the US and Trump administration. They’re all in agreement that these aren’t “normal times,” and David Eby and Danielle Smith played nice on the issue of Alberta looking to ram a pipeline through their territory (which appears to have Carney’s enthusiastic support, per Question Period on Tuesday), and I will admit that this is a big change from the latter Trudeau days, where nearly all of the premiers were lining up to take shots at the federal government.

However. Carney is letting them get away with all of their bullshit, particularly on the big things that the provinces need to be doing to Build Canada Strong™, whether that’s building housing, or taking care of their major infrastructure, or doing something about healthcare rather than letting the collapse continue. If you have a “Canada is broken” complaint, you can pretty much be guaranteed that it’s because of provincial underfunding, but the federal government is taking and will continue to take the blame, because the federal government refuses to call them out on it, and Carney is keeping this up. It’s all smiles and laughs, when it was the premiers who created the situation with immigration that the federal government had to step in with (to the long-term detriment of the country), and it’s the provinces who are exacerbating things like the affordability crisis. If Carney wants to fix things, that means leaning on the provinces to start doing their gods damned jobs.

With that in mind, I’m going to look askance as the territorial premiers want dual-use infrastructure funds to flow to them rather than have the federal government fund these projects directly, because we’ve never had provinces or territories take federal funds and spend it on other things before. And Gregor Robertson is calling on premiers to increase their spending on transitional housing, given the scale of need. Oh, you sweet summer child. The premiers don’t want to spend their own money on these things, even though it’s in their wheelhouse. They want you to spend federal dollars instead, because that’s how they’ve learned how to play this game. Just asking them to increase spending nicely isn’t going to do anything, but I can pretty much guarantee that the federal government won’t play hardball on this so that they don’t look like the bad guy, even though they’re going to take all of the blame. What a way to run a country.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-01-28T23:01:45.031Z

Ukraine Dispatch

More Russian drone and missile attacks on Kyiv and across the country overnight, and it could be as much as three weeks for some Ukrainians to get power back because of the attacks on infrastructure. Meanwhile, the US keeps stalling to give more time for Russia to keep up these attacks.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Donbas of Canada

Posted on by
2

The mask is off. US treasury secretary Scott Bessent was on a far-right TV show to mouth the faux grievances of Alberta, and is providing succour and support for the separatist loons in the province, making it abundantly clear that the US plans to do to Alberta what Putin did with the Donbas region in Ukraine. We’ve watched the Americans also make these promises to independence-minded politicians in Greenland, some of whom naively believe that the US will simply recognise their independence from Denmark and leave them be when that isn’t their plan at all. And you can bet that they’ll start making these same promises to the Parti Québécois if they form power in the province in the next election, because they would absolutely love to break up Canada so that they can absorb the pieces.

So far, the government is downplaying this, with François-Philippe Champagne saying he’ll “remind” Bessent that they are working with Alberta to develop their resources, which is frankly not nearly enough. The US is openly meeting with separatists—those separatist organisers are openly bragging about their “high-level” meetings in Washington—and one of the top members of Trump’s Cabinet is openly supporting them. At the bare minimum, the US ambassador needs to be summoned, and if he doesn’t properly explain and apologise, then he should be expelled in order to send a message that this kind of interference is absolutely unacceptable.

And then there’s the problem of those separatists who are taking it upon themselves to “negotiate” in Washington. You might think that someone like Danielle Smith might denounce them for these actions, but she has bent over backwards to ensure that they have the easiest ride possible to their referendum, because Smith thinks that she can leverage it for her benefit. And Carney has been utterly silent, believing that his bending the knee to Smith is what is going to solve the separatism issue, even though these people have no interest in actual policy resolutions and have made hating Ottawa (and anyone named Trudeau) their whole personality. This is going to need a much stronger hand, and a forceful pushback against this American interference before it can fester even more than it already has.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-01-23T23:56:01.434Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Kyiv and Kharkiv have come under Russian attack in the early hours of the morning. The constant attacks have worsened the power grid situation, as temperatures have been falling as low as -16ºC.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The domestic speech and the response

Posted on by
Reply

Back on Canadian soil, prime minister Mark Carney gave a speech to a domestic audience in advance of his Cabinet retreat, in which he used the location of the Plains of Abraham—where the retreat is being held, at the Citadelle in Quebec City—to praise the foundation of Canada (which the Bloc took exception to), our pluralism and shared values, and our choice to offer a vision of something different to the world. Oh, and he clapped back at Trump saying we live only because of the US. It might have been nice, but he kept veering off onto weird tangents about praising digital asbestos, or federal social programmes like pharmacare that he hasn’t done a single thing with in the past year and has outright stated he’s not interested in expanding. And if anything, the speech exposed a streak of hypocrisy—Canadian values, and pluralism, but we just signed a “strategic partnership” with a country genociding an ethnic minority. We’re going to create thousands of good-paying union jobs, but we just signed “strategic investments” with a country that employs slave labour. If you’re going to pat yourself on the back for your values, maybe try and at least pretend you’re trying to live up to them?

This Carney speech is giving me whiplash. Hooray for Canadian values! (But we’re also going to do deals with people who commit genocide and practice slave labour, and scapegoat immigrants).Hooray for our social programmes, but let’s do more digital asbestos!

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-22T19:04:50.878Z

Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre released his own statement in response to Carney’s speech at Davos. The gist of Poilievre’s remarks is that of course Carney isn’t doing enough, that we shouldn’t alienate the Americans and by that we should engage with allies in the country who will help us post-Trump, and that he plans to move a motion next week to pass his ridiculous Canadian Sovereignty Act bill at all stages. (Transcript here).

And make no mistake—that bill is ridiculous. The primary gist of it is to tear up any and all environmental regulation to build more pipelines (who cares about a market case of First Nations consent?), to incentivise the reinvestment of capital gains in Canada (which was a plan so complex that Jim Flaherty walked it back after trying to do it during the Harper years), paying provinces a “bonus” for eliminating any remaining trade barriers, and to require the government to stop letting innovators in this country sell their intellectual property to Americans (and good luck with that one). It’s stupid and unfeasible and will only create a tonne of new problems while solving absolutely none, but he somehow thinks this is genius.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-01-22T15:05:14.665Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian strikes hit locations in Zaporizhzhia, as well as Kryvyi Rih. At Davos, president Zelenskyy gave a speech highly critical of Europe’s indecisiveness and inability to organise enough to project any strength. (Transcript here).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Conspicuous silence from Poilievre

Posted on by
1

In the wake of prime minister Mark Carney’s big Davos speech, it has been noticed that there is a conspicuous silence coming from Pierre Poilievre, aside from the fact that he was tweeting misleading things about grocery prices, because his strategy is to keep hammering away at cost-of-living issues while the world is on fire. Apparently, his office was circulating a statement before the speech about how a trip to Davos was an “unneeded indulgence” that wasn’t going to resolve any tariffs, because of course, he doesn’t travel. That hasn’t stopped his various proxies from floating their own attack lines, either insisting that it’s nothing but an empty speech (not entirely untrue), or being utterly dismissive and saying that he needs to be back at the table with the Americans to resolve the tariff issues, as though there is a deal to be had with Trump and his mercurial whims where agreements aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. It’s clear there isn’t, and that is becoming an ever-more irrelevant attack line with each passing day.

Meanwhile, here is a look at some of the global reaction to the speech, but one of the comments that stands out is from Michael Kovrig, who has a warning about how some of Carney’s language is being used, particularly in the way he invokes Havel, and how it sets up a false equivalency between the American-dominated rules-based order with totalitarian communism, and why that could have repercussions.

In pundit reaction, Kevin Carmichael is impressed with Carney’s Davos speech, and finds the biggest lesson in it to be the reminder from Havel that we are not powerless. Seva Gunitsky parses the references to Thucydides and Havel in the speech, and how they apply to the American empire. Althia Raj weighs some of the positives and negatives of Carney’s Davos speech. Philippe Lagassé has questions about the government’s defence and intelligence priorities in the wake of Carney’s speech, because they are greatly affected. And Paul Wells strips the speech of its applause lines and contemplates the core of it, and what some of the inevitable critiques will be.

Ukraine Dispatch

Nearly 60 percent of Kyiv remains without power after attacks on its energy grid, making it their hardest winter yet. An executive of the state grid operator died while supervising repairs at a power facility, but they won’t say how. Ukraine’s new defence minister is planning a sweeping, data-drive overhaul of the military.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Once again, food prices are up because of climate change

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday was inflation data day, and it did tick upward, but for the reason that there was a base-year effect, meaning that because a year ago, the government instituted their stupid “GST holiday” as a gimmick to boost them in the polls, and that shakes out in the inflation data a year later because prices are that much higher a year later (and inflation is a year-over-year measure). But where this bites particularly hard is with food from restaurants, as that was one of the beneficiaries from the “holiday,” and that pushes up the food price index further, which is already high because of things like coffee and beef.

Enter Pierre Poilievre, who sees those higher numbers and starts to immediately caterwaul about them, without actually reading the rest of the data about why things like coffee and beef are climbing in price, and spoiler, it has a lot to do with climate change. “Adverse weather conditions” is generally things like droughts or extreme weather, most of which is climate-change related. Cattle inventories are low because the drought on the prairies meant that ranchers had to cull their herds because importing feed was expensive, and that means a lower supply and lower supply means higher prices (which is basic supply-and-demand). But Poilievre keeps trying to insist that this is about “hidden taxes” and that deficits are driving inflation, which is not the case. But will anyone on the government side correct him and his disinformation? Of course not.

It's too bad reading comprehension is so difficult for these jackasses.Food purchased from restaurants is up because of the base-year effect of last year's "GST holiday."Grocery pricers are up because the two main drivers were affected by drought.www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quo…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-19T15:14:03.719Z

From the 2025 annual CPI report, on food prices. "Adverse weather conditions" is mostly droughts, but also extreme weather driven by climate change.These price increases have fuck all to do with "taxes" or government deficits. www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily-quo…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-19T15:14:03.720Z

But will any member of the government actually point any of this out? Of course not. They will pat themselves on the back for the school food programme, or the Canada Child Benefit, but because they believe that "if you're explaining you're losing," they never explain, and the lies just fester.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-19T15:14:03.721Z

And here’s the kicker—Environment Canada is predicting that this will once again be among the four hottest years on record, and that is likely going to mean more droughts, possibly more extreme weather—because this does affect hurricane formation—and that’s again going to impact food-producing regions, which will raise prices even more. But Poilievre and the Conservatives refuse to believe this. They have openly scoffed in Question Period about this, and said stupid things like “paying a tax won’t change the weather,” as if that was what the point was. And then there’s Carney, gutting our environmental programmes left and right in the name of diversifying our economy, which will exacerbate things even further. So long as they all continue to play this ignorant little game, things will continue to get more expensive, and they will keep looking for more scapegoats rather than looking in the mirror.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched a combined drone and missile assault on Kyiv, cutting off power and water supplies in parts of the city. The night before, drone strikes cut power across five different regions. President Zelenskyy announced a new facet of their air defences system, working to transform the system with more interceptor drones.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Coastal First Nations aren’t budging

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney was in Prince Rupert, BC, to meet with the coastal First Nations, and by all accounts, it was a welcome and cordial meeting, and most of what they discussed were ongoing projects and conservation commitments in the region, along with the promises of renewed funding for ongoing projects in the area. This being said, nothing has changed on the part of these First Nations when it comes to their opposition to a pipeline in their territories or on lifting the tanker ban. The prime minister’s readout from the meeting talked glowingly about the commitments, but what was absent was any kind of commitment in writing to respecting their right to consent to projects in their territories.

Readout of Carney's meeting with Coastal First Nations.I don't see any commitment to respect their wishes if they don't grant consent to a pipeline through their territory.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-13T21:02:12.244Z

While this was happening, Pierre Poilievre decided to concern troll that there hadn’t been any meeting sooner, which wasn’t going to get things built faster. Of course, this concern is false because Poilievre has already declared that any consultation he will do will be perfunctory, and that he will ram through projects without any kind of consent (and a former Alberta minister was on Power & Politics to again insist that the obligation is consultation not consent, but that is dated with the adoption of UNDRIP which stipulates free, prior and informed consent).

Quite the concern troll given that Poilievre has flat-out said he'll build pipelines regardless of First Nations' objections.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-01-13T15:20:49.737Z

Meanwhile, when it comes to the Pathways project that Carney insists needs to move ahead if a pipeline is to move ahead (while the MOU also states that a pipeline needs to happen for Pathways to happen), this is your reminder that it’s a scam that will only happen if the government pays for it (and it’ll only remove about 12 percent of production emissions, to say nothing about downstream emissions).

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-01-13T15:08:05.432Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones have struck infrastructure in Kryvyi Rih, forcing power cuts, while the attacks overnight Tuesday consisted of nearly 300 drones, 18 ballistic missiles and seven cruise missiles, hitting eight regions and killing at least four people. Ukraine’s parliament rejected former prime minister Denys Shmyhal as the new energy minister.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/2010987717274861983

Continue reading →

Roundup: Naïve assumptions about the energy transition

Posted on by

There were a couple of longreads over the weekend that are worth your time when it comes to understanding where we are at with the current government. The first was a deep dive into Carney’s past climate “leadership,” from his time at central banks to the UN, and a pattern emerges throughout where much of this “leadership” was fairly surface-level. Scratch the surface, and you find a lot of on naïve assumptions around a market response to the clean energy transition, coupled with some arrogant beliefs that he was right and no one could tell him otherwise (as those companies he was touting were also heavily invested in fossil fuels). In the time since, we have all watched as Carney has systematically betrayed that former climate leadership, and continues to rely on a “just trust me” approach to that clean energy transition as he breaks his word with little regard.

The second longread was in the Globe & Mail about Tim Hodgson and his adjustment going from banker CEO to Cabinet minister, with his belief that government bureaucrats are essentially lazy and stupid, and needing to learn how to be politically sensitive to the realities that he has little patience for as he looks to secure deals as quickly as possible. Along the way, he is learning that things don’t work like that, and that there are plenty of other considerations that he continues to ignore, like obligations regarding First Nations. And how he continues to alienate the actual clean energy people in his own department, along with the part of the Liberal caucus that actually care about climate change, because hey, he needs to be Mr. Business. This is what “running government like a company” is bringing, and it comes with a hell of a lot of ideological blind spots, while they insist that they’re not being ideological.

As well, in year-enders, Carney has been criticising the Trudeau approach to climate change as “too much regulation, not enough action,” which goes back to his particular assumptions about the market and why the government wasn’t able to rely on carbon pricing alone to achieve its goals, Oh, and he’s still completely sold on the belief that carbon capture is the route to go, even though it only captures a fraction of the emissions from the production process (and none of the downstream uses), so the math doesn’t even work there. He also talks about “guardrails” in dealing with China, but considering there has been no hint of that with India, I’m not holding my breath.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-20T15:08:01.975Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Following more Russian airstrikes and bombings in the Odesa region, president Zelenskyy says that Russia is trying to cut off Ukraine’s Black Sea access. Russian forces have crossed the border in Sumy region and kidnapped 50 villagers. Ukraine has signed an agreement with Portugal go co-produce sea drones. Here is a look at a Ukrainian artist who is reflecting the war through his collection and work.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lessons learned for the NDP?

Posted on by

NDP interim leader Don Davies have his year-ender to The Canadian Press, talking about getting out to listen to Canadians, and reflect on the party’s devastating loss, and joking that the best part about being burnt to the ground is the ability to rebuild the foundation. And he’s not entirely wrong there, so long as he’s taking the right lessons. But in the same interview, he’s waxing poetic about pharamacare without actually seeming to understand what the issues are (i.e. the provinces), and totally ignoring the work that Trudeau did into building up the programme from the ground up (such as establishing the Canadian Drug Agency) so that provinces could sign on once they were ready, as PEI did (and NDP provinces refused to, particularly BC and John Horgan most especially).

On the same day, the NDP’s Renew and Renewal Report from the last campaign was also released, and it has a few interesting things to say. Once you get past the usual back-patting about how hard everyone worked and how it didn’t feel like it was doomed, and how the leader’s campaign went well, you start getting into some of the structural problems within the party that really do need addressing. Things like the sense that there is an allergy to fundraising in the party, and that nobody wants to actually do it, which doesn’t really help anyone (but also perpetuates the weirdness that bequests from the estates of dead people are one of the party’s top fundraising sources). And there was also a lot in there about the party not properly developing riding associations, and relying too heavily on the central party at the expense of those associations. And to be frank, this should have been a lesson the party internalized after they got nearly entirely wiped out from Quebec in 2015, because they didn’t build up their riding associations during the “Orange Wave,” but assumed that somehow those MPs would have incumbency advantage forever when they didn’t really establish grassroots after all of those accidental victories.

The other thing that is worth noting is that once again, it draws American examples for inspiration, and again it’s Zohran Mamdani. I suspect the reason for this is that too many people in the NDP’s brain trust are terminally online, and as with so many things, the American discourse pervades and they simply think that it can apply to Canada if you divide it by ten, even though we are very separate countries and that we are not just a maple cupcake version of Americana. I’m also going to note that the report said pretty much nothing about the NDP constantly trying to interfere in areas of provincial jurisdiction (particularly with their “bold progressive ideas”), because again, their American analogues don’t translate to Canada in the same way, but this was apparently an area of introspection they didn’t want to engage in. Alas.

This reminds me of something I've been wondering about. Given the various examples of the NDP being the government or official opposition at the provincial level, I'm not sure why federal New Democrats so often — or so recently? — look to the U.S. for inspiration.

— Aaron Wherry (@aaronwherry.bsky.social) 2025-12-19T21:14:07.891Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-19T14:24:03.406Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia launched another missile attack on Odesa, killing seven and wounding at least 15 late Friday. There was an exchange of bodies by both governments—1003 dead Ukrainian servicemen for the bodies of 26 Russians. Ukraine and Poland are working out a cooperation agreement around drones.

Continue reading →

Roundup: More bespoke agreements that undermine certainty

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney is set to sign an agreement with Doug Ford about “reducing the regulatory burden” for major projects in the province, again with the “one project, one review” line (which I have reservations about as I mentioned yesterday). Ford is keen to use this to develop the “Ring of Fire” region, in spite of the fact that a) there are much more accessible critical mineral projects that could be more easily developed, and b) they have yet to get most of the First Nations in the region to agree, mostly because they are looking for revenue-sharing agreements because they have been burned by proponents who promised them all kinds of things for previous developments and didn’t live up to their agreements. Funny that.

As Andrew Leach points out, this pattern of bespoke deals with provinces is going to wind up being a bigger problem than it winds up solving because there won’t be consistent rules across the country, and inconsistent rules and malleable agreements mean regulatory uncertainty, particularly because they are likely to change further as governments change on either level of government. Letting Alberta undermine federal standards as part of the MOU was a prime example of just that (not that Alberta plans to live up to their end of the agreement).

Meanwhile, here’s a callout about the things the oil and gas industry likes to promise before reneging because it will cost them too much money, such as with the methane regulations that were announced yesterday. Funny that.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-12-17T14:25:03.817Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia has attacked Zaporizhzhia, injuring at least 26 people. Ukraine reports that they control over 90 percent of Kupiansk, which Russia claimed to have conquered weeks ago. President Zelenskyy says that any territorial concessions would need to be put to a referendum (which would fail).

Continue reading →

Roundup: Methane regulations, and Alberta’s exceptions

Posted on by

There were some movements on the environment front today, as Mark Carney admitted to a Radio-Canada year-end interview that we’re not on track for either our 2030 or 2035 emissions targets (we knew 2030), but tried to make the case that they need to find climate solutions in the current economic climate, which seems to go against what they’re actually doing, by eliminating the consumer carbon levy, weakening or outright undermining the industrial carbon price, and weakening emissions to make it easier for the oil and gas sector to produce and export more, which isn’t going to bring in billions because there is a supply glut on the market that will keep depressing prices. Meanwhile, the costs of climate change continue to increase, and will get even more expensive the longer we delay action.

With this in mind, Julie Dabrusin announced new methane regulations with the aim to reduce them by 75 percent over 2014 levels by 2035, which is great—except if you’re Alberta. You see, part of the MOU with Alberta means that the methane regulations that Carney and Dabrusin keep patting themselves on the back for don’t have to reach their targets until 2040, which means weaker regulations and longer timelines so that they can pollute more for longer because the industry whinged and cried that it wasn’t fair they had to spend more money.

Meanwhile, the federal government has signed a “one project, one review” agreement with New Brunswick, which sounds fine in theory, but the thing that I keep getting hung up on in competencies. Everyone keeps saying they don’t need two reviews because it’s “duplication,” but each level is assessing different things, because each of them has specific competencies, such as species at risk (provincial), fish habitats or migratory birds (federal), site contamination (provincial—unless it crosses a border), and so on. And there were already provisions for joint review panels, so again, I’m not sure what this is all about other than reducing the actual oversight because it would seem to be ensuring that less rigorous assessments are done than with a joint review panel, particularly if the provincial assessors are supposed to be assessing federal areas of responsibility, which they may not have the expertise in.

Ukraine Dispatch

Europe has launched an international commission for war damages in the invasion of Ukraine. The Kremlin says a proposed Christmas ceasefire depends on the status of peace talks (which essentially means it’s not going to happen).

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/2000830874183712972

Continue reading →