Tag Archives: Supreme Court

A grab-bag of Carney answers

Posted on by
Reply

Prime minister Mark Carney held a press conference yesterday to pat himself on the back for his government’s accomplishments over the spring sitting, but as with most of these exercises, the real interest was in his responses to questions, which he doesn’t do very often. So, what did we learn?

  • That big call with Trump this week with the extremely vague readout was mostly about Iran and NATO, and not about trade.
  • We’re still a long way away from any kind of trade deal with Trump.
  • The six upcoming by-elections will likely be spaced out.
  • We finally got more details on that condo purchase in Vancouver, which is 90 percent provincial funding/10 percent federal, and is intended as rent-to-own.
  • He will be going to Stampede, and plans to defend national unity, and is using Brexit as a cautionary tale (as well he should be).
  • We are sending aid to Venezuela after the earthquakes, and while it might be useful to have some kind of consular services there or in Iran, we’ll go through partners.

Shortly afterward, Pierre Poilievre gave his own press conference to decry the state of the Canadian economy and blame Carney for it, as though Trump wasn’t a factor, or that climate change isn’t affecting things like food prices. In fact, he pretty much admitted he’d accept a bad deal with Trump for the sake of getting a deal. So there’s that.

"It's all an illusion."

— Scott Robertson (@sarobertson.bsky.social) 2026-06-25T19:54:15.597Z

My Latest:

For National Magazine, I delve into the Supreme Court of Canada’s increasing caseload, and why the Chief Justice’s explanation of cleared backlogs doesn’t hold.

Continue reading →

Ginning up an faux inflation narrative

Posted on by
Reply

The inflation data for May was released yesterday, and unsurprisingly, the headline number ran high because of gasoline prices, entirely because of the situation that Trump created with Iran and the Strait of Hormuz. Looking into the data, it’s quite clear that core measures—which strip out volatile food and fuel prices—is right on the Bank of Canada’s target at 2.1 and 2.0 percent (there are two different core measures the Bank of Canada tracks). And yes, food price inflation continues to run hot, and the data shows pretty clearly that it’s supply disruptions—things like tomatoes coming from Mexico, where they planted fewer crops because of US tariffs, and then that smaller crop was affected by weather conditions (read: climate change). Constrained supply means higher prices. This is basic supply-and-demand.

Before Poilievre lights his hair on fire about inflation hitting 3.2% last month, this is pretty much entirely on gasoline prices because of Iran. Core measures remain at 2.1% and 2.0%. And he's going to decry the price of food and blame "Liberal inflation" as opposed to the truth:

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-06-22T13:30:56.569Z

Predictably, Pierre Poilievre came out and blamed “Liberal high taxes, waste, and deficits.” None of those have anything to do with inflation. Taxes (which the Liberals have cut consistently) are disinflationary. The size of the deficit has nothing to do with Trump’s foreign misadventures, or climate change affecting food-producing regions, and yet, Poilievre has a convenient target for everything. Who needs facts when you have a narrative, and a government who refuses to actually push back on any of this, and merely pats themselves on the back for OECD projections.

Just completely ignoring the relevant facts, because he has a narrative.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-06-22T18:21:00.215Z

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2069136495693418894

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-06-22T13:08:01.946Z

My Latest:

  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take takes issue with the Conservative private member’s bill to take the GST off of used cars, which is both bad policy and bad economics.
  • For National Magazine, I delve into Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision that allows a failed candidate the opportunity to sue the province’s chief electoral officer.
  • My (belated) weekend column on the government unnecessarily jamming complex bills through the Senate for no good reason at all.
  • For National Magazine, I contributed to this look at the next Supreme Court of Canada justice, Glenn Joyal.

Continue reading →

A privacy bill that takes away from the Privacy Commissioner

Posted on by
Reply

The federal government tabled long-overdue privacy reform legislation yesterday, which is intended to work in concert with their Digital Asbestos For All Strategy, and while there are some needed updates within it, there are also some concerning aspects. For example, there will be more powers to demand deletions from online searches (“right to be forgotten” powers), and while they are going to give the federal Privacy Commissioner more powers like he’s been begging for, they are going to restrict him to only public sector complaints and hive off private sector complaints to this new Digital Safety Commissioner. They’ve also decided to jump on the “surveillance pricing” hysteria, which both lets Avi Lewis claim a victory, but they have no details on how this will work, to say nothing of the fact that consumer protection is a provincial responsibility!

I have regularly butted heads with the Privacy Commissioners we've had over the past 20+ years, but sidelining an organization with decades of experience to empower an as yet unconstituted body is frankly shocking. #BillC34

— David TS Fraser (@privacylawyer.ca) 2026-06-15T21:41:45.003Z

It's worth noting that there's nothing new in #BillC36 that has anything to do with "surveillance pricing". The provision that the Minister pointed to in his presser has been in PIPEDA since 2001.

— David TS Fraser (@privacylawyer.ca) 2026-06-15T22:42:03.453Z

The fact that they are taking the new Digital Safety Commissioner that is being created as part of the Online Harms legislation, and loading him or her up with these enormous new powers is concerning, as is the fact that this commissioner will report to government and not to Parliament. I worry about creating a new regulator with so much scope of authority that it will need to build an enormous bureaucracy off the start, meaning it will be slow to start up, slow to react, and eventually start empire-building, particularly given how much online regulation it is being asked to do in addition to privacy work. We will have to see if the government bothers to offer a justification for this model (which they may not!) but I suspect we’ve got a long summer ahead of Evan Solomon exhorting the opposition to pass this while pretending it’s the solution to all of our problems.

A modernized privacy law should be something that gets broad support, but I think the creation of this new super-regulator that reports to the government and not parliament may be this bill's undoing. #BillC36

— David TS Fraser (@privacylawyer.ca) 2026-06-15T23:09:34.362Z

https://bsky.app/profile/joshtabish.bsky.social/post/3moeciabcks2u

My Latest:

  • For National Magazine, I delve into Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision on why all future Lieutenant Governors of New Brunswick needs to be bilingual.
  • My weekend column on how the Liberals have shamelessly reversed their policies so many times under Carney that they are virtually just Conservatives now.

Continue reading →

Expecting an online harms disaster

Posted on by

The federal government will be tabling their online harms legislation today, and it looks like it’s going to include some form of ban on social media for youth under the age of sixteen, which is going to be little more than an invitation to create mass online surveillance, because everyone will need to verify their ages and identities in order to access social media or adjacent sites. Meanwhile, that will do very little to actually deal with the harms, and it’s likely going to be unconstitutional in the first place.

here’s me from earlier on power & politics talking digital safety act (tldr: age appropriate design codes + duty to act responsibly > age bans)

— Supriya Dwivedi (@supriya.bsky.social) 2026-06-10T00:48:36.353Z

As we anticipate a social media ban to be proposed by the Canadian government tomorrow, it's worth noting in the Charter of Rights: "everyone" includes young people and "media of communication" includes social media.

— David TS Fraser (@privacylawyer.ca) 2026-06-09T21:59:05.964Z

This being said, the Liberals are already going past Helen Lovejoy and going directly to “children are dying,” which makes me suspect that they are going to try and use their majority to ram this through, in spite of what are likely to be massive problems with it, and the fact that the problems that they are having with their lawful access bill are likely to be magnified. Any kind of online age verification is bad news no matter how it’s dressed up, and this is going to be no different in the end. I do not have confidence that they will be able to pull this off without a lot of hand-waving and “just trust me,” and “surely these companies can figure out a way to do it” when that way is more mass surveillance and siphoning even more data.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-06-09T19:08:01.734Z

My Latest:

For National Magazine, I recap what Chief Justice Richard Wagner had to say during his annual press conference, particularly on defending judicial independence.

Continue reading →

Political blackmail under the guise of a unity speech

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre kicked off his supposed “unity campaign” in Calgary yesterday (as he skipped the installation of the Governor General to do so), and gave a speech which was little more than a remix of the same campaign speech he’s been giving for three years now. And not even a good remix, but a shitty extended dub mix that is mostly just a lot of electronic noise. In it was the usual litany of invented grievances that Albertans have been touting for years—pretending that the federal government is somehow interfering in their jurisdiction, or that Justin Trudeau’s environmental policies were somehow strangling the province’s resource sector and that the global oil price crash of 2014 didn’t happen (just like the oil price crash of 1981 didn’t happen, and all of their woes were the fault of Pierre Trudeau). It’s a tired mythology that is not true, but is so intrinsic to the core of the invented grievances that have dominated Alberta politics for more than four decades.

But what is particularly dangerous about this kind of tactic is that it hijacks a potential national unity crisis for partisan ends. It makes unity conditional on the conservatives, federally or provincially, getting their own way as though there aren’t political considerations in the rest of the country either. As Andrew Coyne puts it, this message posits that the rest of the country needs to “prove” that it’s worth saving, and if that means dismantling what little federalism we have in this country, then so be it. The notion that the only Canada worth having is their narrow vision of the country, which is exclusionary and frankly mean, is not a unity message. It’s little more than the same kind of blackmail that Danielle Smith and Jason Kenney before her were trying to use in leveraging separatist sentiment to hold a knife to their own throats to force concessions from the federal government because they think it worked for Quebec. (It did not, and Quebec’s economy has never actually recovered). It’s fundamentally undemocratic, and shows them to be little more than crybabies who can’t handle the fact that sometimes democracy means you lose at politics.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-06-08T19:08:01.492Z

My Latest:

  • My latest for National Magazine on Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision and the warning they gave to judges about how to do a credibility analysis.
  • My weekend column takes note of the way in which Poilievre’s rhetoric tends to catastrophize what is happening, along his tendency to rewrite history.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take on that Conservative MP trying to refuse his raise, and why that kind of populism is poisonous to democracy.

Continue reading →

Ceding the recession narrative

Posted on by

The is-it-or-isn’t-it recession talk continued apace over the weekend and on Monday, as Pierre Poilievre demanded an emergency debate on it (which the Speaker denied), while more economists continued to line up on the side of “it’s not a recession.” Even the senior deputy governor of the Bank of Canada appeared at committee and warned them not to take a single point of data when the economic indicators as a whole remain mixed.

Ignore all of those other economists, including the Senior Deputy Governor of the Bank of Canada. Andrew Scheer, who couldn't even complete his insurance certification, is going to school you on the recession.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-06-02T01:36:43.140Z

This being said, prime minister Mark Carney has been wholly silent on it since the data were released on Friday morning. He made two separate media appearances yesterday but took no questions at either one, and he has avoided Question Period yesterday and he’s avoiding it today, and it really starts to look like he’s ceding the ground to Poilievre, who keeps bellowing his ridiculous narratives while Carney, who is supposed to have the economic gravitas as a former central bank governor, remains absent. And there are important things we should probably be talking about with this data, such as the fact that in periods of slow growth, these indicators dipping below zero are less important than the overall picture, and that overreacting and panicking can lead to greater problems or damage in the longer term. But we’re not having this conversation because, again, Carney is ceding the field, and given that Poilievre seems to enjoy this unearned economic credibility, it’s frankly arrogant to think that his bogus narratives can’t gain traction because they absolutely can, and that will spell trouble overall.

My Latest:

  • For National Magazine, my dive into Friday’s pair of Supreme Court of Canada decisions on the exceptions for the Jordan timelines on trial lengths.
  • My weekend column points to things that Steven Guilbeault’s departure has highlighted as just how much this government is backsliding on its climate goals.

Continue reading →

The “dangerous bluff” of a referendum

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney made a housing announcement yesterday morning, when he was inevitably asked about the proposed Alberta referendum. Carney invoked his time in the UK and the experience with Brexit, that for people who think that this kind of referendum is just a way to send a message and that there are no consequences are playing a “dangerous bluff” that will have consequences. And yes, he would know, because he watched it happen and lived with the fallout. But will this actually help? Hard to say, but Conservatives have already been seeding the narrative that Carney created a lot of the post-Brexit economic damage with claims that he was “printing money” and fuelling inflation and so on, so the very people who need to hear the message have already been primed to ignore it. So that’s helpful.

Carney was also asked about the fourteen members of his caucus that sent him a letter about his environmental backsliding, and to this, Carney basically swatted the question away saying he has 160 other members of caucus who are just fine with his moves. This, however, starts to sound a wee bit arrogant for a party leader who has been patting himself on the back for listening to his caucus more than his predecessor did. You can pretty much guarantee that it’s not just these fourteen, but there are plenty more members of caucus who aren’t quite as willing to stick their necks out just yet but are similarly unhappy. They also learned a lot of lessons about pushing back against a leader when they started organising against Justin Trudeau in caucus, so the lessons are fresh, and Carney should remember that. As well, he’s betrayed the “Value(s)” he campaigned on and wrote a book about, so he’s already on thin ice with his voters on this issue. He may want to show a bit more contrition than this particular combative stance.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-05-25T13:08:03.361Z

My Latest:

  • My weekend column on Danielle Smith’s referendum, and why this is the culmination of decades of populism rotting the politics of the province.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take talks about the glut of senate bills hitting the Commons, and why MPs who complain about it have only themselves to blame.
  • For National Magazine, I looked at the appointment of the new advisory body for the next Supreme Court of Canada justice.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Referendum on a referendum reactions

Posted on by

It was a strange day in the wake of Alberta premier Danielle Smith put having a referendum about a future referendum, as everyone was offering reactions. Prime minister Mark Carney summoned a small press pool to the empty Library of Parliament in the Centre Block, undergoing renovations, to make the somewhat bizarre case that he is “renovating the country” and that Alberta is essential to that. (Huh?) Pierre Poilievre says that national unity is the prime minister’s job, before going on to repeat the invented grievances that the separatists are furiously masturbating over, while other Conservative MPs started tweeting variations of the same. A group of small-c conservatives launched a “Vote to Stay” campaign, and Jason Kenney is attaching himself to that while refusing to take any responsibility whatsoever for creating this situation when he invited the separatists into his “united” party (before they ate his face). Here is some assorted reaction quotes, while the Calgary Chamber of Commerce is denouncing the move as coming at the worst time for the economy in the province.

Takes no responsibility for creating this situation, and now wants to swoop in to play hero.Fuck that guy.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T17:20:14.040Z

Also, "Alberta Built Canada"? Because apparently we're going to engage in self-aggrandizing bullshit in the name of national unity? Speaking as an Albertan, my eyes rolled so far back in my head I saw black.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T17:20:14.041Z

Brexit lessons: – An insurgent populist right will be invigorated by a referendum, not vanquished- They don't care about Leave/separate as a real policy. They possibly don't even want it implemented. It's a vehicle for grievances, racism, and graft- Crypto and dark money will sink you

— Lauren Dobson-Hughes (@ldobsonhughes.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T14:09:20.929Z

Brexit lessons cont:- The pro movement will make dry, factual cases for support that don't resonate- The Leave/Cede side will make emotive, wildly untrue claims that are actually about tapping into grievances and identity- Dark money will sink you

— Lauren Dobson-Hughes (@ldobsonhughes.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T14:10:51.779Z

And Smith? She was busy casting blame about to everyone else for “causing” this to happen when she knows damn well this is her decision. She also told the separatists to focus on the referendum rather than trying to oust her, which just confirms once again that this is all about her own fortunes, and to hell with the rest of the province and the country as a whole. Smith also says she wants to try to amend the Constitution to “refine” Indigenous land rights, as though this isn’t their land that they agreed to share (and we’ve been screwing them over ever since).

Danielle Smith Is Holding A Referendum Whether You Whiny Losers Like It Or Notyoutu.be/N_q4WLMdUQQ

— Clare Blackwood (@clareblackwood.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T19:41:46.443Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-05-22T19:08:02.606Z

Supreme Court

Yesterday was both the final hearing for Justice Sheilah Martin before she retires, and also the final hearing in the iconic courtroom at the Supreme Court’s building before the Court decamps for their new digs this summer so that the building can undergo needed reparations. As someone who was there for the final sitting in Centre Block, being present for the last hearing at the SCC was also a little bittersweet.

You can watch the Chief Justice’s remarks, plus Justice Martin’s farewell speech, here.

Justice Martin makes remarks on her decision to retire in advance of the mandatory date, and asserts that her health is excellent. She then speaks about her time on the bench. #SCC

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T13:37:45.698Z

Justice Martin: “The joke is often that it’s like having eight spouses. And I will add: in an arranged marriage.” #SCC

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-05-22T13:41:48.569Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck a UN relief supply warehouse in Dnipro, destroying $1 million worth of aid. Ukrainian drones hit another Russian oil refinery, this time in Yaroslavl, some 700 kilometres away from the Ukrainian border.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stupid games with the Snowbirds

Posted on by

This story about the Snowbirds has ground down my patience with this government. A couple of weeks ago, Conservative MPs and Senators were in the middle of a meltdown over the fate of the aerial demonstration squadron, and we kept being assured that this was nothing, they were going to keep flying, that the Conservatives were misinterpreting the schedule because it only went up to fall, and future dates were typically released later, and there would be more to announce on the 19th, but their future was assured. And media outlets wrote whole stories based on these Conservative meltdowns which had no basis in fact.

And then the 19th comes around, and the defence minister announces that the squadron is being grounded at the end of the summer until the early 2030s until replacements can be acquired, which they are still negotiating (though some of the stories say the replacements are already on order, but they’re still negotiating, so I’m not sure how that works). So, the minister was not exactly being honest when he said that everything was fine, because once the squadron is grounded, it will have to be completely rebuilt once the new planes do arrive, and that could be in five years or it could be in ten (given the way procurements go in this country). When asked, Prime Minister Mark Carney shrugged and said it was a problem he inherited so not his fault, but guys—this is not what you were messaging two weeks ago. You need to own that.

As for the specifics, it seems that in spite of the Trudeau government’s attempt to prolong their lifespan until 2030, the airframes were showing too much wear for them to be safely extended, so they didn’t make it that far. But certain Conservative MPs going on political shows yesterday seem to think that because this money was spent, that the existing jets should keep flying regardless. (That’s not how airframes work!) But yes, Conservatives are correct in pointing out that the replacement process should have started much earlier under the Trudeau government, but no, signing a petition on the Conservative website is not going to change anything (other than, of course, to mine your data). Frankly, everyone has behaved absolutely abominably throughout this whole affair, and it’s one more reason why we can’t have nice things in this country.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-05-19T19:08:20.600Z

In case you missed it:

  • My story for National Magazine about Friday’s Supreme Court of Canada decision that creates a tort of intimate partner violence moving forward.
  • My long weekend column on the fact that this government is inept at internet policy, whether it’s lawful access of the massive surveillance needed to age-gate sites.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian missiles struck Chernihiv and Sumy regions, killing four, after previously striking Odesa and Dnipro, as well as Ukraine’s Danube port in Izmail. Ukraine, meanwhile, has struck a major oil refinery in Moscow, and their medium-range strikes are taking out logistics hubs supporting the front lines.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Closer to a deal with Danielle Smith

Posted on by

Prime minister Mark Carney met with Alberta premier Danielle Smith Friday morning in Ottawa, and by all accounts, they made progress on finalising the terms of the MOU that would see a west coast pipeline built, with Smith saying that their final sticking point is the industrial carbon price but she expects they will get to a “win-win” deal. I don’t actually believe it will be win-win because every deal so far has been an abject capitulation where Alberta gets to flout the rules, either with longer timelines than everyone else, or a weaker effective carbon price (because the province keeps instituting new credits that lower the price). Smith also keeps saying that this deal will help “quell separatism,” which is also bullshit because they don’t actually care policy (which you’ll see in a moment), and the fact that she is encouraging them is not exactly doing anything to quell the movement—quite the opposite, in fact. Everything she has done has encouraged them.

And then by mid-afternoon, the government released their consultation documents for their planned “streamlining” of environmental assessments, which pretty much involves gutting the systems worse than Stephen Harper did, puts unrealistic timelines on consultations (particularly for Indigenous communities which lack the resources to do the work in an expedited manner), and gives a whole lot of power to individual ministers to approve projects with fewer safeguards, which is ripe for abuse and corruption. None of this is good or positive, in spite of the whinging of certain industry executives because they simply don’t want to put in the work. Everything just feels like we’re going backward, and we’re back to “pollution is fine because we’re in a trade war,” as if there aren’t long-term costs and consequences.

Meanwhile, Richard Warnica of the Star went to Alberta and spent time with the separatists, and it’s a swamp of conspiracy theories and fabrications (which he performatively fact-checked a bunch of, and lo, it’s all false. All of it). It’s an absolutely disturbing read, but it also skirts some of the underlying issues—that this is a movement that is steeped in white and Christian nationalism (and these people were deliberately marginalised back in the seventies and eighties by the Lougheed and Getty governments), that has festered in a poisoned information ecosystem and a political ecosystem that has relied on scapegoating Ottawa for the past five decades rather than dealing with the reality of their situation (they’re price-takers for oil, and the fact that they’re a virtual one-party state has invited all manner of corruption in their system). So no, any regulatory changes that Mark Carney might push through won’t mollify them. Another pipeline will make no difference—the last one didn’t, and the province absolutely reneged on the “grand bargain” it was supposed to represent. This is a quasi-cult whose brains have rotted on social media and Fox News, and simply giving them everything they say they want won’t actually solve any problems. It will likely just make things even worse.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-05-08T19:08:04.965Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A three-day ceasefire and 1000 prisoner exchange has apparently been agreed to, while Russia plans a scaled-back Victory Day parade (because they have no tanks left and they are paranoid Ukraine will attack). Ukraine is running short of air defence missiles after the massive assault over the winter.

Continue reading →