Tag Archives: RCMP

Roundup: Declaring war on the budget for no reason

Posted on by

The Conservatives have declared war on the budget, and have begun a campaign of procedural warfare over it. It began on Friday, with the abuse of remote voting, where they abandoned the Chamber for a vote and instead all voted remotely, after which they claimed there was a “technical problem” and each of them requested that their vote be verified, thus slowing down the process immensely. (Seriously, end remote voting. It’s anathema to our system).

Yesterday they announced that they had a campaign of hundreds of amendments and other tactics at their disposal unless their demands were met—balancing the budget, and ending increases to “all carbon taxes,” meaning the federal carbon price and the clean fuel standard (which is not a carbon price, and may never see an increase in the price at the pumps if the minister has his way). Their justification for this—that these deficits are inflationary and driving up interest rates—is illiterate nonsense, and the kinds of misinformation/disinformation that we have come to expect from them. And yet, we have a bunch of pundits who insist this is “good politics.” I’m not sure how, but here we are.

More than anything, one has to wonder why they are going nuclear over this. These kinds of tactics are generally reserved for when the government crosses a line, does something that attacks Parliament, or seriously undermines Parliament or democracy. Using them for bullshit theatre continues this pattern of all tactics, no strategy that the NDP became famous for during their stint as official opposition, and it’s just abusing Parliament more than anything the government is doing. I simply cannot fathom how they feel this is going to help them, rather than simply looking like they are wasting everyone’s time.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian forces appear to have blown up a dam on the Dnipro River near Kherson, which could lead to mass flooding. Ukrainian forces appear to be attempting to punch through Russian lines in the south-eastern part of the country, which could be a sign that the counter-offensive is underway. Russians also launched yet another early-morning attack on Kyiv, where air defences have shot down at least 20 missiles so far.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No single point of failure

Posted on by

It was another big day at the Procedure and House Affairs committee as both the National Security and Intelligence Advisor, Jody Thomas, appeared, as did Bill Blair, both on the subject of what they knew about the “threats” against Michael Chong and his family. What we got was a bit more of the corroboration from the Johnston report that the process of pushing intelligence up to senior levels hasn’t been working, which is why these things weren’t noticed or acted upon earlier. Blair in particular offered more clarity about the issue with the top-secret emails and how it’s being misconstrued that he didn’t have passwords to it. No, it’s that he doesn’t have access to that system period, and CSIS prepares a package from him and brings it to him physically. He did also take a bit of a swipe at CSIS, saying that the Chong information was determined to be something that they didn’t think the minister needed to know, which is a bit petty.

What stood out for me the most was Thomas saying that there wasn’t one single point of failure here, or one link in the chain, but a flaw in the process, which is consistent with what Johnston put in his report. This is why I can’t believe that anyone who says that the report is some kind of cover-up has actually read the report because it’s quite clearly pointing to these appalling failures on the part of senior levels of government, and that is on the government to have done something about. They are responsible, and they need to fully own it in order to make the necessary changes.

I would also add that while this testimony was good to have, I still don’t see how this relates to Chong’s privileges supposedly being breached, and what remedies should be applied. There seems to be an effort to make this into a bigger issue around foreign interference, and not on the specific issue of Chong, and what the House of Commons should do if his privileges as an MP were specifically breached,  and I’m not seeing much of that.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians fired over 30 missiles and drones against Ukraine overnight, and all appear to have been shot down. The Russians also claim that they destroyed Ukraine’s “last warship” in a strike on Odessa, but Ukraine won’t talk about whether it’s true or not. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Moldova for the NATO meeting, calling for security guarantees if Ukraine can’t get NATO membership until the war is over. The European Court of Human Rights also ruled against Ukraine in denying same-sex marriage licences, which is going to need to be part of Ukraine’s hoped-for European integration.

https://twitter.com/internewsua/status/1664252937156059140

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1664311594858299402

Continue reading →

Roundup: Johnston carries on with the job

Posted on by

As expected, all of the opposition parties voted for the NDP’s motion to call on David Johnston to step aside and for the government to call a public inquiry, and it passed. It’s a non-binding motion, and so it doesn’t have much weight, and Johnston put out a reply shortly thereafter saying that his mandate comes from government and not Parliament, so he’s going to keep doing his job. (Of note, only government and not Parliament can call a public inquiry as well, so the notion that Johnston is “not independent” because his mandate comes from government is stupid, illogical, and made in bad faith). The NDP motion also ignores one other crucial bit of reality, which is that there is almost zero chance that there would be a suitable replacement who would actually want to subject themselves to ongoing character assassination and harassment, whom every party leader can also agree to because they have no conflicts of interest, real or invented (and there are a hell of a lot of invented ones at play).

I will note that David Cochrane put these questions to Jagmeet Singh on Power & Politics last night, and Singh just flailed and kept repeating his talking points about the “appearance of bias,” and accusing Johnston’s lawyer of being biased because she has been a Liberal donor (never mind that she doesn’t actually make any decisions here), and kept saying that he wasn’t casting aspersions on Johnston when he obviously was by repeating the false accusations of bias.

Meanwhile, here’s Jessica Davis on how untenable this situation has become, which is why Johnston unfortunately remains the best-placed person to finish the job (click through for the whole thread).

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians have kept up their air attacks on Kyiv, and at least three people were killed overnight as a result. Russians are claiming that Ukrainians shelled one of their towns, and that their drones struck two oil refineries (the veracity of said claims remains untested).

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1663786012164734977

Continue reading →

Roundup: Arguing over an appearance already scheduled

Posted on by

It’s not even a sitting week, and yet we were treated to another instalment of the parliamentary clown show that has infected our House of Commons. The Procedure and House Affairs committee held an emergency meeting to demand that David Johnston appear before them to explain his reasons for not recommending a public inquiry. But the moment they got there, the chair said that Johnston was already scheduled to appear at the committee on June 6th, and that this had been arranged previously, and it just confirmed that this insistence he appear right away was just really, really bad theatre.

And then it went downhill from there, as MPs spent the next four hours debating a motion for Johnston to appear even sooner than the 6th, for no less than three hours, alone, because remember, they need to put on a bit song and dance about how they’re so serious! about all of these allegations. As I said, bad theatre. And then, the Liberals and NDP decided to try and be clever about this, and include a recommendation in the motion that all party leaders go through the security clearance process in order to read the full report and all of its classified evidence used to compile it. Well, that didn’t go over very well, and in the end, the Conservatives voted against their own motion because they didn’t want to be called out for refusing to actually read the full documents.

Spending four hours to try and sound tougher about a pre-scheduled meeting, to give themselves the last word, is just one more reason why our Parliament is no longer a serious institution. It’s appalling that they have wasted everyone’s time and resource like this, because Michael Cooper needed to make himself look like a tough guy. Inexcusable.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Wagner Group mercenaries are preparing to turn over control of their positions in Bakhmut to Russian soldiers, while Ukraine says that Wagner is only turning over positions on the outskirts of the city, and that they have drawn Russian forces into the city, where they are inflicting high casualties and weakening Russian defensive lines elsewhere. A prisoner swap took place for 106 Ukrainian soldiers, some of them captured in the fighting in Bakhmut. Russian control of one of the dams along the Dnipro river is causing flooding because they haven’t been working to level the water flow with the other dams in the network.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Johnston says no public inquiry

Posted on by

It was David Johnston Day, as his first report was delivered, and he did not recommend a public inquiry for very good reasons—particularly that it could not be necessarily public given the nature of the information, and that it would be window dressing at this stage of the game, considering he had already done a lot of the heavy lifting, and planned to do public hearings as part of his final report. You can read the full report here, but here are the five key takeaways. There was plenty of scathing material in there, particularly to the system of information dissemination within government, but also to the way media stories torqued partial information into falsehoods (the Han Dong allegations were discredited in the report). There is a problem with information culture within government, and while this government has done a lot to fix some things, they are not adapting fast enough to the changing environment, and that is on them. (Check out some of the threads linked below as well).

https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1661045080705187842

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1661080153122848781

https://twitter.com/stephaniecarvin/status/1661211717924188161

Johnston’s decision was necessarily a no-win scenario, and everyone is unhappy, but nobody has exactly explained how a public inquiry was going to restore trust in the democratic system—particularly as it comes under attack by bad faith actors who spent the day trying to discredit Johnston and his report (never mind that he did address the alleged conflicts and consulted with a former Supreme Court of Canada justice before accepting the job), and that no matter who would lead either the Special Rapporteur process or a theoretical public inquiry, there would be the same bad faith attacks because they don’t actually want to restore faith in the process. They want people to distrust because they cynically hope to leverage that in the next election. Pierre Poilievre in particular has refused to strike any kind of statesmanlike tone and refuses to be briefed because he knows that the moment he actually knows the intelligence and can’t talk about it, he can’t outright lie and make accusations with wild abandon, and that’s his entire shtick. But this is a fairly classic Canadian problem, where MPs don’t want to know the actual secret information, because then they’d have to stop talking, which they don’t want to do. Remember, ours is no longer a serious Parliament.

There is a conversation to be had about the role media is playing in undermining the faith in democracy, but you can rest assured there will be no self-reflection around it. Rather, there will be self-justification and rationalization, and sniping that Johnston expects us to take the intelligence he’s seen at face value, which is ironic considering that the media outlets reporting on these leaks are expecting us to do the very same thing, even though there are agendas at play within that reporting.

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1661050997936996356

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1661051520018706432

In pundit reaction, Justin Ling gives a fairly balanced summation of the report with some insightful commentary. Susan Delacourt is sceptical of Johnston’s assertion that politicians and media can play their parts in restoring faith in democracy. Andrew Coyne is unhappy with the notion that we are expected to just trust Johnston (ignoring the contradiction made above), and while he credits Johnston with inviting NSICOP and NSIRA to review his findings, the same secrecy problem remains. Matt Gurney despairs at the picture of incompetence the report paints.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Following his return to Ukraine after meetings at the G7 in Hiroshima, Japan, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visted marines on the front lines in the country’s east. Over the weekend, the Russians claimed they overran Bakhmut over the weekend, which Ukraine denies, particularly as they have been reclaiming territory surrounding it. Russians are also claiming Ukrainian “sabotage groups” are crossing the border into the Belgorod region, but it sounds like these may be disaffected Russians, as Ukrainans deny involvement. Russians later claim to have “crushed” these groups.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1660291196030271490

https://twitter.com/defencehq/status/1660884230174560256

Continue reading →

QP: Freeland finally takes the budget questions

Posted on by

The prime minister was making a stop in Alberta to survey the wildfire situation before heading off to South Korea, but his deputy was present for a change, as were most of the other leaders. Before things got underway, the Speaker asked MPs to listen during Members’ Statements rather than talking amongst one another so that they don’t inadvertently laugh during sad statements, or anything like that.

Pierre Poilievre led off in English, and tried point to contradictions in things Chrystia Freeland said, and demanded they stop “inflationary” taxes and deficits. (Taxes actually fight inflation). Freeland got up to accuse the Conservatives of talking down the economy, and praised the country’s Aaa credit rating. Poilievre repeated the question in French, and Freeland said it’s important to understand the data, and listed items to show how well Canada is doing among the G7. Poilievre said that the prime minister had fled the country rather than defend the budgets and tried to call out Freeland as well. Freeland noted that she was with G7 finance ministers in Japan, and said that if Conservatives think that they shouldn’t go to these meetings, they should say so. Poilievre returned to English to mock the “important meetings with important people” rather than common people, and accused her again of fuelling inflation. Freeland took exception to the notion that government travel was somehow elitist. Poilievre hammered away at this, to which Freeland reminded him that he lives in Stornaway with a chef and driver and has only lived on taxpayer dollars his entire life.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and railed that the prime minister called by-elections rather than a public inquiry into foreign interference. Marco Mendicino recited the well-worn pabulum about measures they have taken and waiting for David Johnston. Therrien tried again, and this time Dominic LeBlanc says that he shares the concerns about protecting by-elections, and said that they have implemented measures.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he blamed the government for Stellantis blackmailing them over a battery plant, and Freeland insisted that the government always fights for workers and jobs by things like the New NAFTA, the EV tax credit incentives in the US, and the Volkswagen plant. Singh switched to French to complain about rising rents in Quebec. Ahmed Hussen recited his housing benefit talking points in English.

Continue reading →

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: Belligerent framing around incompetence or dishonesty

Posted on by

While both the prime minister and his deputy were in town, neither were present for QP today—very unusually for a Wednesday, where Trudeau normally is present and takes all questions if he’s in town. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and said that two years ago, CSIS prepared the briefing about threats to Michael Chong, but the prime minister said he wasn’t made aware, though a former head of CSIS said that it should have been, and wondered how the prime minister couldn’t have known. Marco Mendicino said that Poilievre knows full well that the government takes threats to MPs seriously, and that they offered a briefing when they were made aware. Poilievre said that it was impossible to believe that the PM wouldn’t have received this kind of information, and said that he either didn’t know and is incompetent, or he did and is dishonest. Mendicino insisted that the government has been taking the protection of MPs seriously. Poilievre switched to English and tried calling Mendicino incompetent—and got a warning from the Speaker—and railed that Trudeau didn’t answer when Trudeau wasn’t there (but that’s the point—to get a clip for a future shitpost). Mendicino responded that partisan rhetoric doesn’t help Chong. Poilievre repeated his insistence that Trudeau must be either incompetent in not knowing about the allegations or dishonest in saying he didn’t, to which Mendicino repeated that Chong was briefed, and that they have issued fresh instructions to CSIS about this matter. Poilievre then railed that the diplomat named by the Globe and Mail story had not yet been expelled, and Mendicino accused Poilievre of making up laws around diplomatic immunity while the government has provided new powers to intelligence agencies to disrupt interference, before patting himself on the back for the creation of NSICOP and NSIRA.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and accused the prime minister of maligning CSIS, and trie to ask whether more people knew of these allegations including Morris Rosenberg and David Johnston. Mendicino recited the pabulum about how anointing Johnston was necessary for fighting foreign interference. Blanchet went on a wandering path about the prime minister’s brother and it somehow disqualifying him from appointing a public inquiry. Mark Holland insisted that the Foundation is independent and gives scholarships, and any questions should be directed to them.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and in French, asked when he knew about the threats against Chong. Mendicino recited that they rely on independent civil servants and have taken measures. Singh switched to English and insisted that wasn’t really his question, and said that he wrote a letter to the prime minister about calling party leaders together in order to discuss the challenge. Mendicino said that the threat landscape has changed and they are taking steps to deal with it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: You can’t replace committee travel with Zoom

Posted on by

Another day, another story where I roll my eyes and sigh because nobody can seem to grasp some pretty fundamental points. To wit: Scandal and pearl-clutching because the Senate’s audit committee is planning a trip to Westminster to consult with their counterparts there. Someone fetch a fainting couch for all of the zeros attached to the costs of the trip! And of course, we couldn’t have cheap outrage without getting a quote from the so-called Canadian Taxpayers Federation, whose continued existence depends on being the go-to source for media when they need a cheap outrage quote.

Some context to this story—the Senate’s audit committee has been a long and hard-fought battle to come into existence because the previous Leader of the Government in the Senate, Senator Peter Harder, was trying to steer the nascent committee in a direction that would see it be completely staffed by outsiders, which is a particular affront to Parliamentary privilege and the status of the Senate as a self-governing body in and of itself. Eventually the current composition—a mix of senators and outsider, with senators in the majority—was adopted, years after it should have been, and very much in the model that the House of Lords employs. (Note that this model had first been championed by the late Senator Elaine McCoy, and we could have saved years of fighting had people just listened to her). And because this has to do with a parliamentary body, you can’t just get advice from any audit firm in Canada, as the CTF seems to think—you need best practices from those who have dealt with the particular issues that a parliamentary body has. Of course, none of this context is in the story, because nobody pays attention to the Senate unless it’s for a cheap outrage story like this one. Of course.

Meanwhile, the most galling part of the piece is the suggestion that all of this should be done over Zoom, both out of a concern for cost and carbon emissions. And honestly, this type of suggestion needs to have a stake driven through it. This kind of work relies on human interaction, and relationship-building, and that doesn’t happen and cannot happen over Zoom. This is one of the biggest problems with hybrid sittings (which, mercifully, the Senate has ended), but which MPs refuse to believe, and apparently a few senators do too—parliament is a face-to-face institution. It cannot effectively operate remotely. The pandemic was a short-term (ish) problem that required a solution, and while this was not the best one, it was a solution that nevertheless has emboldened people to think that Parliament is a job you can do from home. It’s absolutely not, and this kind of committee travel is no exception. You cannot replace the kinds of interactions that make this travel essential over Zoom, and we need to stop thinking of Zoom as the solution to problems that aren’t actually problems.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia launched another overnight round of attacks on Kyiv, this time with drones, but all were shot down. The commander of Ukraine’s ground forces says it’s important that they maintain their hold on Bakhmut in advance of the counter-offensive (not the least of which because it’s degrading Russia’s forces significantly). The EU is hoping to increase production of ammunition in order to help Ukraine’s efforts. And here is one Ukrainian farmer’s novel way of de-mining his fields using parts from old Russian tanks.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1653390767329558530

https://twitter.com/war_mapper/status/1653169425749508100

Continue reading →