Tag Archives: Public Service

Roundup: Poilievre’s second backtrack attempt

Posted on by

Still under fire for his comments about Justin Trudeau and the “despicable” leadership at the RCMP, Pierre Poilievre has been forced to backtrack a second time. The first was his tactic of issuing clarifications only to media outlets and not his social media or party channels, and that didn’t mollify people, so this time he held a media availability and insisted that he didn’t say what we all heard him say, and then sent his MPs out to do media to also overly parse what his language was, and to try and spin it to say something other than what we all heard him say, and to insist that what we all heard him say was out of context. (It was not). He is now claiming that he didn’t say Trudeau should be jailed—only that he “clearly” broke a law that would impose jailtime (even though it was not clear he broke said law), and that clearly isn’t the same thing. Kind of like how they’re not scapegoating immigrants, they’re just criticising Liberal immigration policy (wink).

Meanwhile, members of his caucus are getting restive, and while they all made a big show of publicly supporting him, several have been quietly talking to media outlets about their dissatisfaction. While some are saying they’re undecided if they want to vote for him continuing in the leadership review, I also suspect that there are very few Conservatives in the caucus who have the spine or the intestinal fortitude to actually vote against him, no matter how inappropriate the comment, because there are precious few MPs in any party who would dare stand against their leader and face the wrath of having their nomination papers go unsigned.

Carney Speech

Prime minister Mark Carney gave a speech last night that was intended as a kind of pre-budget positioning, but also a kind of victory lap to pat themselves on the back for all of the work they’ve been doing since the election. Carney promised that the budget was going to unleash all kinds of private sector investment, but I also feel like we’ve been hearing that refrain for the past two decades and not a lot of it has really materialized. He said he wants to double non-US exports over the next decade. He spoke about “betting big,” and getting back to a culture of doing big things, but the thing about that kind of talk is that it ignores the people who were impacted by that, most particularly Indigenous people who were displaced or exploited in the process. He said that this is going to take more than a few months and can’t happen overnight, but he also talked about “sacrifices,” particularly as he talks about cutting government spending.

My problem with this particular rhetoric is that he never quite makes it clear who will be making those sacrifices, and you can be damn sure it’s not CEOs or rich white dudes. In fact, you can pretty much set your watch by the fact that the “sacrifices” are going to be on the backs of women’s programmes, queer/trans people and other minority groups whose funding is going to be slashed to nothing, it’s going to be the poor who will find that programming designed to assist them will be gone (but hey, they’ll get their benefits thanks to automatic filing, whenever that actually happens). We’ve seen this happen time and again, and the cycle of time is coming around once again, and Carney is making no move to stop it and finding a new path.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-22T22:02:55.404Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The fairly massive attack early Wednesday targeted several cities and killed six, including two children, as a kindergarten was struck. Russia claims it took two more villages in Donetsk region. Sweden has signed a letter of intent about supplying 150 Gripen fighter jets to Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The weird fixation on east coast LNG

Posted on by

There was another report about Europeans looking for Canadian LNG, this time in The Logic in a conversation with the German ambassador. What it did not really mention was the actual business case—only that the “long timelines” involved was a reason why former prime minister Justin Trudeau said that there wasn’t a business case for it. The thrust of the piece is that demand maybe longer than just short-term because even rapid electrification will still require some gas, however there is a boatload of context about this that journalists who have this weird fetish for LNG never actually touch on.

First of all, this discussion is only about east coast LNG, not west coast, where the conditions are different, and where there a whole bunch of potential projects that are fully permitted, and have all of their approvals in place, but aren’t moving ahead because the market isn’t showing demand (and by demand, we mean signing long-term contracts to buy the product). While this was also the case on the east coast, it’s complicated by the lack of ready supply of natural gas to liquify. Neither Quebec nor New Brunswick are about to start fracking for the sake of domestic supply, and the costs to bring a pipeline from western Canada to New Brunswick for export purposes is a lot to consider when we think about what is “long term.” That means supply is likely to becoming from the US, and that in turn will drive up local prices because they’re competing with the theoretical export terminal. To add to that, the “long term” we need to keep in mind is that these kinds of plants need to be operating for a good forty years or so to get their money’s worth. Is anyone in Europe thinking about the infrastructure necessary on that kind of time scale? Unlikely, and unlikely at that time scale for the kinds of prices that Canada would be offering, which are higher than they could get elsewhere.

What do they mean by "long-term"? Because these kinds of projects need a 40-year lifespan or so to actually get their money's worth, by which time we'll be well past net-zero goals.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-09-25T13:37:04.762Z

This is why these stories never actually make sense, because those journalists never actually talk to an energy economist about it, or if they do, it goes right out the other ear while they maintain this weird fixation on LNG. I’m not quite sure what it’s in service of—have they simply absorbed the propaganda of the oil and gas industry, who say dumb and wrong things like how our fossil fuels are the “cleanest” (they absolutely are not), or worse, that it will displace coal (the final emissions profile is not that much lower than coal, and as David Cochrane is the only journalist to push back on this talking point, there is no guarantee that they wouldn’t just use Canadian LNG in addition to coal rather than displacing it)? Or is this some kind of sad attempt at playing gotcha with Trudeau and the business case line? Because certain journalists are relentless in badgering and hectoring European leaders about this, and it’s just weird, and just completely ignorant of the facts on the ground.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack on Chernihiv meant power cuts for 70,000 people. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte says that members can target Russian planes that enter their airspace as necessary. And president Zelenskyy says he is ready to leave office once the war is over.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A digital asbestos task force

Posted on by

Everyone’s favourite bullshit Cabinet minister, Evan Solomon, is putting together a task force to determine the next steps in the government’s digital asbestos strategy. While we wait to see just who is going to be on this task force, because that will say volumes, it’s almost inevitable at this point that this is mostly going to wind up being more hype, because Solomon has guzzled it all down, while prime minister Mark Carney has also bought into it as the cure for Canada’s flagging productivity and other problems (rather than the obvious fact that corporate Canada is lazy). We’ve all heard everything Solomon has said so far. I’m not optimistic at all.

It's gonna be so much more hype. We are so boned.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-09-24T15:21:05.227Z

I’m also extremely sceptical about Solomon insisting that they’re going to take the lessons from the Privacy Commissioner’s investigation into TikTok and its privacy violations in order to shape the new digital asbestos laws, because that would be too much intervention for what Solomon has been preaching about “light touches.” Part of the problem with the TikTok violations are that this is their business model, and while they insist that they are trying to keep children off the platform, they put more effort into hoovering up private data for marketing purposes than they did in using those very same tools they developed to keep kids off the platform, as it was hoovering up their data at an alarming rate. So much of what makes up digital asbestos is similar business models about siphoning that personal data, as well as using techniques to keep users engaged on that platform, hallucinations and all, and not caring about it sending them on delusional spirals that craters their mental health. They don’t care because it’s the business model, and that’s why I can’t trust Solomon to actually regulate—because he has bought into the hype around that model, and if he regulates, the tech bros will cry and whine that they can’t operate in those rules, and he’ll kill the industry, and gods forbid, we couldn’t have that.

Evan fucking Solomon says they'll take the lessons from the TikTok privacy report in order to shape new digital asbestos laws. www.thestar.com/politics/fed…

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-09-25T03:13:46.890Z

Meanwhile at the UN, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is warning about the destructive arms race happening right now with digital asbestos and drones, and is calling for international rules about limiting its spread. But of course, I can just hear someone like Solomon insisting that we don’t want too many rules, because that will “stifle innovation,” and so on. Absolutely nobody is taking any of this seriously (and no, we’re not talking about Skynet), and we’re heading for some serious problems in the very near future as a result.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine has attacked the petrochemical complex in Salavat for the second time in a week, further reducing Russia’s refining capacity.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Asking for declaratory powers, not limits

Posted on by

There is a bunch of confusion and/or bad faith arguing going on around just what the federal government said in their factum to the upcoming Supreme Court of Canada hearing on the challenge of Quebec’s Law 21, which they claim is “state secularism” but is really just wholesale discrimination and racism. The reporting hasn’t been great—in fact, the National Post’s is downright misleading—because they keep describing this like it’s a reference question to the Court, which it isn’t, but rather, the argument that they’re putting forward during the existing challenge, and something that they feel the Court should address (which is how factums tend to work).

What their argument consists of is that the Court should be able to declare when a law that is protected by the Notwithstanding Clause is actually unconstitutional. They can’t strike it down, but they can weigh in and say “Yeah, this contravenes Charter rights.” They also want the Courts to be able to do this when something has been ongoing in its use of the Clause (which only lasts for five years before it needs to be renewed in legislation), and to rule on whether it may result in the “irreparable impairment” of rights, because they argue that repeated use of the Clause amounts to “indirectly amending the Constitution.” This is also not coming out of nowhere—the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal just recently ruled that they have this right when it comes to the challenge around the province’s attack on trans youth, saying that invoking the Clause should not be the last word.

Why is this important? Because the point of the five-year time-limit on the Clause is that it allows that government to be voted out before it can be renewed. Having the courts weigh in and say “Yeah, this is discrimination,” even if they can’t strike down the law, is powerful information for voters to have. And it’s absolutely democratic. But you have conservative thinkers who are trying to say that this will cause a “constitutional crisis,” or a national unity crisis if it offends Quebec or Alberta, is frankly absurd. It’s trying to give cover for attacks on minority rights and abuse of the Clause, and they should be honest about those intentions rather than trying to sow confusion and undermining the Court.

Ukraine Dispatch

An overnight Russian attack on the Kirovohrad region has partially cut power and disrupted railway operations. A top Russian commander claims they are advancing on all fronts, in contravention to Ukrainian reports. Ukraine’s anti-corruption agencies say they need more resources to crack down on the “shadow economy.”

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1968289157341647326

Continue reading →

Roundup: Questions about Carney’s lack of political judgment

Posted on by

It was announced early in the morning that the Christo-fascist that prime minister Mark Carney invited to address the Cabinet retreat couldn’t make it after all, but don’t worry—they fully planned to continue to engage with him. No, seriously. The mind absolutely boggles, and I can scarcely believe that there wasn’t a revolt in the room from members of Cabinet who absolutely should know better. And then there was François-Philippe Champagne, who insisted that it was important to hear from “different perspectives.” What Christo-fascist perspective is so important to hear about? Removing the rights of women, or LGBTQ+ people? Re-segregating the United States? The destruction of the separation of church and state? Which of these issues, pray tell, did Cabinet most need to hear all about from the guy who wrote the 900-page playbook that Trump’s acolytes are following? Honest to Zeus, does a single person in that Cabinet have any political judgment whatsoever?

The Christo-fascist couldn't attend the Cabinet retreat after all, but don't worry, Carney's office says they will continue to engage with him.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-09-04T13:12:41.573Z

And then there are Carney’s defenders online, who insisted over and over again that Carney needs to “know your enemy,” and that it was important to get a sense of their “motivations and goals.” As though the 900-page manifesto doesn’t spell any of that out? And to be perfectly frank, does nobody remember the homily about the Nazi bar? This should not be difficult, but apparently Carney is not only demonstrating a lack of political judgment, but a lack of judgment period, and his defenders will praise him up and down and insist that this is just very clever strategy. It’s not. Stop pretending that making nice with fascists is at all acceptable.

The Carney stans are having another normal one in my replies, justifying consorting with Christo-fascists, I see.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-09-04T15:25:19.693Z

EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS WHO THEY ARE.Stop pretending there is a valid reason to make nice with fascists.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-09-04T15:15:13.455Z

https://bsky.app/profile/alwayslate.bsky.social/post/3lxzwrjhyyc2c

Meanwhile, Carney and several ministers will be making a series of “sector-based” announcements this morning, which could include things like measures to help sectors affected by tariffs, or the EV mandates. At the retreat yesterday, Champagne was using the corporate euphemisms of “adjustments” to the civil service in service of their austerity plans, but what struck me was his language about how they were trying to “rebuild Canada.” Erm, rebuild from what? You were part of the government for the past ten years, and it’s not like there was a smoking crater left in Trudeau’s wake. Champagne believed in that spending, whether through COVID or in implementing new social programmes that were helping with the cost of living. So again, I ask—what exactly are we rebuilding from?

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile strike hit a de-mining operation near Chernihiv, killing two. Ukraine’s top military commander is looking for increased use of interceptor drones. Twenty-six countries have pledged to provide security guarantees if there is a cease-fire (which Putin is not interested in). Here is a look at some of the people who are evacuating ruined cities in the country’s east after holding out in the hopes that the war would end.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney invites a Christo-fascist to address Cabinet

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney held a presser on his way into the Cabinet Retreat Planning Forum (because corporate-speak), and said that he spoke with Trump on Monday but not to expect any “white smoke” on tariffs, even though the Clerk of the Privy Council is currently in Washington right now (because there is no deal to be had, and I wish he’d stop pretending there was). The thing is, there was no readout from his office about this call, which is really not good for transparency.

Carney also used the term “austerity” when talking about his plans to rein in spending, but he was also talking about “efficiencies,” which is a magical term that politicians like to claim they’ll find. How did that work out for Doug Ford? He won’t say just what spending he plans to rein in, of course, but the neat trick in politics is that everyone expects that spending on everyone else is going to be cut, but not the things that they rely on, because that’s necessary and everyone else is waste or fat, until suddenly their programmes are cut and they feel it intensely. Meanwhile, Carney remains incoherent about cutting spending in order to invest, which ignores the fact that austerity comes with its own costs, and they can be significant over time, and some of the damage it causes can take decades to recover from, if it can be recovered at all.

The more troubling aspect, however, was that Carney invited the head of the Christo-fascist Heritage Foundation, which authored Project 2025, to address Cabinet because he knows what Trump’s agenda is. Erm, excuse me? I mean, if they wanted to read the playbook, they could do that, but what utility does it serve to invite a far-right authoritarian to your meeting? So that he can tell you that you need to be more fascist to get on with Trump? Really? Talk about an utter lack of judgment.

I can't decide which is worse: either our government doesn't understand that these guys are Nazis, or they think it's a good idea to invite Nazis to their cabinet retreat.

— Kate Heartfield (@kateheartfield.com) 2025-09-03T23:12:27.419Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-09-02T14:08:03.486Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The attacks on Ukraine early Wednesday morning consisted of over more than 500 drones and dozens of missiles, targeting energy and transport infrastructure, demonstrating yet again that Russia has no interest in ending the war. Russia claims that they have captured half of the city of Kupiansk, which Ukraine denies.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Kenney’s omitted immigration changes

Posted on by

The Conservatives are full-on throwing everything they can at the wall to see what sticks, and yesterday it was the moral panic over immigration figures. Pierre Poilievre put out a press release decrying that permits issued had blown past the proposed caps, and that the system is “facing collapse,” which I’m pretty sure is bullshit, before promising to propose “fixes” in the fall, which you can already be assured will mostly be comprised of dog-whistles. (And remember, the problem is less with immigration numbers than it is with premiers who are not doing their jobs with regards to building housing of properly funding healthcare).

Enter Jason Kenney, who went on an extended rant about how he “fixed” the system when he was minister, and how Trudeau and company broke it, but this is also revisionist history. He talks about the sweeping reforms he brought in in 2010, and how everyone praised it, but he omitted that he blunted most of those reforms before they could be implemented. You see, in 2010, it was a hung parliament and the Conservatives couldn’t push through draconian immigration legislation, so they needed to work with the opposition (most notably Olivia Chow as the NDP’s immigration critic), and they passed a bill that had plenty of safeguards in place. In 2011, there was an election where they got a majority, and before the 2010 bill could be fully implemented (because the coming-into-force provisions were going to take as long as a year), Kenney rammed through a new bill that curtailed most of those safeguards, and used tales of international migration cartels, and human smuggling rings that would bring people into the country to collect social assistance, which those cartels would then collect, and so on. Yes, there were problems with high rates of claims from certain countries, but like most things, Kenney was less than honest and building his scaremongering case, while also doing the thing where he played economic migrants against asylum seekers, and made “good immigrants versus bad asylum claimants” arguments to justify his legislation.

https://twitter.com/jkenney/status/1960088637925961993

The other thing that Kenney is blatantly ignoring is that the world is not the same world as it was in 2010, and the migration situation is vastly different than it was back then. So yes, the current government is facing different challenges, but I wouldn’t expect Kenney to be honest about well, pretty much anything, because that’s who Jason Kenney is.

effinbirds.com/post/7790141…

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-08-24T20:02:02.229Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine has been stepping up drone attacks on Russian oil refineries and fuel terminals, squeezing their war economy.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Minister shocked at decades-old endemic problem

Posted on by

Things with the Air Canada labour dispute threatened to veer into farce yesterday as things did not go as the government had hoped. Early in the morning, the Canadian Industrial Relations Board declared that the ongoing strike action by the flight attendants was now an illegal strike—but they didn’t refer it to the courts for enforcement, even though union leaders said that they were willing to go to jail for it (but there is no criminal offence here, merely administrative monetary penalties). And then, gallingly, the minister declared that she was shocked—shocked!—to learn about the allegations of unpaid labour, and ordered a probe of the situation, promising to close any loopholes in the law, but she can’t have been shocked. This has been an ongoing issue for decades. In the last parliament, both the Conservatives and the NDP put forward private members’ bills about this. The NDP in particular made a bunch of members’ statements and questions in QP about the issue, but Hajdu is only now learning about it? Come. On.

https://bsky.app/profile/lyleskinner.bsky.social/post/3lwoofl4ahs2v

Air Canada, meanwhile, is cancelling more flights, because they didn’t think that the union would not obey the back-to-work order (that has no enforcement mechanism). The union is trying to get an injunction because they argue that the order is abusing Section 107’s powers (and they are very likely right about that). And then Air Canada insisted that they won’t negotiate until the planes are flying again…but then talks resumed with a mediator by night, so we’ll see where this is at by morning.

Meanwhile, the broader problem of the moral hazard of continued government intervention, particularly the use of Section 107 (which doesn’t require a legislative process, or anything other than an email or phone call), has other unions on edge that this is going to permanently imbalance labour relations, because employers can simply declare an impasse and wait for the government to intervene. While I do think that these Quebec unions in the CP story are not differentiating between provincial and federal legislation enough (Section 107 is a federal power that applies only to federally-regulated workplaces), but we also know that many provincial governments are not exactly worrying about rights these days, which includes labour rights. Next steps remain the courts, who are likely to strike down these uses of Section 107 as being abusive.

Ukraine Dispatch

The toll from those strikes on Kharkiv and elsewhere early Monday have climbed to at least ten dead and 23 wounded. A Russian general was seriously wounded on the front lines.

At the conclusion of the meeting at the White House, Trump has agreed to European security guarantees (for now, anyway) after Ukraine offered to buy $100 billion in weapons from the US, and  now Trump wants to set up a meeting between Putin and Zelenskyy (not that it will change anything as Putin doesn’t want to end the war). AP has a timeline of the changes in the front lines from February 2022 until now.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Consulting on the housing crisis

Posted on by

The federal government published a consultation document yesterday which seeks input on how the future Build Canada Homes entity is going to be structured, and how to can support the industry to accelerate the number of homes being built, particularly while using more Canadian materials to do so (given as well that there is an impetus to use more softwood lumber domestically as the Americans keep increasing countervailing duties). Getting the structure and the implementation right is important, and that could include how much autonomy it’s given (as in, if it’s a standalone agency, that tends to be more arm’s-length and free of ministerial direction than if it’s a unit within the infrastructure department). But this being said, the government needs to start acting fast because housing starts are cratering, particularly in the biggest cities, and a whole lot of those job losses reported in the July data last week were from the construction sector.

Meanwhile, Ontario’s housing start data is getting worse, even after they added a whole bunch of new things into their calculations to make the numbers look better, such as student dorms and long-term care beds (which yes, the Ontario government counts as “housing.”) But this is the Ford government, who won’t do the things that are necessary to get houses built in this province, and instead keep signalling that they want other levels of government to do something before they do anything, when they are the ones who have the primary levers and can exercise them, like enforcing gentle density rules, changing building codes to allow for European-style apartments and elevators, and other obstacles to building the kind of housing we need. Ford has plenty of power to do something about housing (besides arranging sweetheart deals for developer friends of his), but he simply refuses to.

The ON government has added student beds, LTC beds, and "additional units" to their BFF housing start figures, although it's unclear where these numbers originate.This causes the #s to go WAY up, in some communities. But 1 student bed does not replace a single-family home.

— Dr. Mike P. Moffatt (@mikepmoffatt.bsky.social) 2025-08-11T11:18:11.000Z

Ukraine Dispatch

We’re already into ridiculous territory ahead of Friday’s talks between Trump and Putin, as Trump says Russia will have to cede some land too. Which land exactly?

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 →