Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Roundup: A promise to waste millions of dollars

Posted on by

There are a lot of stupid, performative things being said right now, particularly in those three provincial elections, but one of the dumbest yesterday was courtesy of incumbent New Brunswick premier Blaine Higgs, who promised that if re-elected, he will mount a new legal challenge of the federal carbon levy. And to make that worse, several Conservative MPs picked that up and declared during Question Period that the challenge was already underway (it’s not), as though it were a devastating argument for their demands to “axe the tax” or to call an election.

Higgs’ promise is premised entirely on bullshit. There is no basis for him to mount a new challenge because nothing about the programme has changed since the Supreme Court of Canada already ruled that it’s constitutional and within the powers of the federal government, particularly because of the existential challenge that climate change poses to Canadians. The fact that the price is increasing or that we have been though a bout of higher inflation—which has already stabilised and returned to target, and for which the carbon levy did not actually cause any of said inflation because that’s not how inflation works—don’t change any of the legal bases or arguments around the levy. And because the Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled, any lower court that Higgs tries to mount a new challenge in is going to tell him to go pound sand.

Higgs is essentially promising to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, because you know that when the courts tell him to go pound sand, they’ll also tell him to reimburse the legal costs of the federal government because they wasted everyone’s time and money in bringing such a frivolous suit in the first place. But there is a political calculus, particularly on the right, where they are prepared to waste millions of dollars in doomed legal challenges because they think that it’s good electoral calculus to show that you’re fighting. Federally, Conservatives have made this argument a number of times when the government didn’t pursue doomed appeals and just made changes, and no doubt Higgs figures that this will work the same way for him. But then again, I guess they’re not bothered by the cognitive dissonance of “we need to balance the budget” and “we need to waste millions of dollars on a doomed legal crusade,” because that might require introspection or self-awareness, both of which are in incredibly short supply in politics these days.

Pretty much all of #cdnpoli. It's really hard to be optimistic about any of it right now.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2024-10-01T14:21:44.377Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Six civilians were killed and more wounded when Russian artillery struck a bus stop in Kherson. Russian troops have also reached the centre of Vuhledar, a Ukrainian bastion in the strategic high ground of the Donbas region, which is significant because of where it borders and the supply routes it controls. Ukraine is also investigating an apparent shooting of sixteen POWS by Russian troops.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Angry over an invented grievance

Posted on by

Two new Senate appointments were made over the weekend, both from Alberta, which naturally resulted in a mountain of utter bullshit, because neither were from the so-called “senators in waiting” that Alberta periodically “elects” as a stunt in order to invent a grievance against the federal government. There was also more of this nonsense hand-wringing that one of the two is a habitual Liberal donor and held roles as an organiser in the party in the past, but hasn’t for well over a decade. Nevertheless, clueless journalists and bad faith opposition members decry this as “partisan,” even though there is no actual Liberal caucus in the Senate for them to sit with, nor any Liberal whip to direct their votes (even though that has only ever really been illusory in the Senate).

The whole “Senate consultative elections” schtick in Alberta has only ever been a stunt—even when Stephen Harper appointed those who won them, because he was trying to make a point about reforming the Senate through the backdoor without actually doing constitutional changes. The logic of how they’re “just consultations” and that they are still appointed and don’t have any additional legitimacy within the Senate was laid bare during the Supreme Court hearings when Justice Cromwell asked the person making the argument “So why isn’t a consultative auction just as legitimate?” and they didn’t have an answer. But really, the whole thing was just to invent one more reason to make people mad at the federal government, at a time when there was a political impetus to stoke such regional divisions and resentments because that always helped them score political points, and lo, it’s still working for them decades later as they continue to get angry about something they just invented for the sole purpose of making them angry. It’s predictable, and it’s childish, and we should expect provincial governments like Alberta’s to behave like adults (but good luck with that these days).

Of course, where would we be without the conservative columnists in this country, making pronouncements about this without actually understanding a gods damned thing about it. “Not representative of Albertan thinking”? What exactly is “Albertan thinking?” If the insinuation is that their appointment is somehow illegitimate because they’re not conservatives, then I have news for you because the Senate is often a place where political outliers in a province can gain representation, such as Liberals in Alberta, particularly during the “bad old partisan days” where they may be shut out of the province electorally but could still have representation in the Senate and be present in caucus to provide that representation. That doesn’t happen anymore thanks to Trudeau’s short-sighted decision to boot all of the senators from his caucus, which is also why Ivison’s comments about Trudeau “renouncing” his reforms are such utter nonsense, because if Trudeau had renounced them, he would invite senators back into his caucus. He won’t (even though he should), but hey, Ivison needs to think of something from his perch in Costa Rica, and reinforcing a bullshit narrative is about the best it’s going to be.

Ukraine Dispatch

It was a bloody day in Ukraine as Russian missiles struck a military academy and a hospital, killing over fifty people and wounding more than 200. In the hours since, Russia has since launched missiles and drones against Kyiv and Lviv. This as children are returning to school, and in Kharkiv, those schools are now underground because of constant bombardment. Meanwhile, president Zelenskyy continues to call on Western countries who haven’t yet allowed their weapons to be used for long-range strikes inside Russia to not only allow them, but to supply further weapons so that Ukraine can make crucial hits. It also looks like a major government shake-up is on the way after a wave of resignations.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Poilievre wants an October election. (Good luck with that!)

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre called a press conference in Ottawa yesterday, and demanded that Jagmeet Singh end the Supply and Confidence agreement with the government, and that a “carbon tax election” be held by October, which is never going to happen. Even if the NDP withdrew support (which they won’t, because their war chests are low and they think they can still extract things from this government that they can take credit for), the government could continue to survive on an issue-by-issue basis, particularly with the support of the Bloc, who also don’t want an election to happen. Not to mention, the Commons doesn’t return until the 19th, and there are no confidence votes coming up anytime soon that would allow the government to fall—certainly not anywhere close for an October election. Not to mention, with three provinces also holding elections this fall, trying to force a federal election in the middle of them is also a really dumb idea.

Poilievre, the whole while, was doing his best Trump imitation by name-calling (“Sellout Singh” has been a repeated phrase), misogyny (claiming that Chrystia Freeland can’t even work a calculator), whined about a declinist narrative of Canada and how it’s never been as bad as it is today, and then offered some more slogans, before he started badgering and hectoring journalists asking him questions. “But he’s nothing like Trump,” the Elder Pundits will keep declaring, never mind that he employs Trump’s tactics, along with a number of other pages from the Authoritarian Playbook, all the gods damned time.

During one of his responses, Poilievre said that he wants to cut immigration so that it’s below the rate of housing starts, and so on—and this is a dog-whistle. I have my weekend column coming out soon on this very topic, that this kind of rhetoric is directly appealing to the racists on social media who have come out of the woodwork to blame “mass migration” for all of the country’s woes, and this deserves to be called out, and not shuffled under the rug by the Elder Pundits yet again, who refuse to see that no, there is no “good parts only” version of authoritarian populism.

Programming Note: I’m taking the full long weekend off from blogging, so I’ll see you early next week.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine downed two missiles and sixty drones in another overnight attack, while Russian shelling killed a civilian in Kostintynivka yesterday. There are concerns that targeting energy infrastructure will eventually lead to an incident involving a nuclear power plant. Ukrainian forces say that one of their “new” F-16s crashed during a Russian missile barrage, and that the pilot is dead. In Kursk, Russian forces are still not responding to the incursion, Putin washing his hands of the matter, and not pulling troops from other areas of the front-line in Ukraine.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Local media takes on Poilievre

Posted on by

It was a banner day for local media yesterday, as the local news in Sudbury absolutely roasted the Conservatives for trying to send them media lines about how the Liberals’ Ontario caucus is holding their retreat in the “lavish” Sudbury Holiday Inn. No, seriously, that’s the line they’ve been trying to spin. (It’s the “Rome of the North,” remember?) Of course, Poilievre himself has held a top-dollar fundraiser at an expensive restaurant in Sudbury just a few weeks ago, and the Sudbury news did point out the cost of the Conservatives’ previous caucus retreat in Quebec City, but yeah, the attempt at outrage politics is that bad.

Meanwhile, the editor of the local paper in Niagara-on-the-Lake recently tried to ask Poilievre about government supports for local media, and then wrote a lengthy editorial dismantling the completely obvious lies that Poilievre told him in response, in part because he treats people like they’re idiots as he lies to them. It’s nice to see local media like this hold him to account, and are doing it better than some of the national outlets, who are very studiously both-sidesing everything Poilievre says and not calling him out on the clear and obvious lies, possibly because they don’t want to be on the receiving end of his vitriol the way CBC and The Canadian Press have been in recent months.

Speaking of media, I absolutely cannot believe that CTV actually posted a story trying to find a Canada Angle™ to US president Joe Biden’s pledge to impose term limits on judges in that country. Like, seriously, you do not need to Canada Angle™ every single gods damned story that comes out of the US. We’re a different country. We have a different laws and different structures, and we’re doing things better than they are in most cases as it is already. We don’t have an ideological Supreme Court, and we don’t have judges on that court hanging onto their positions literally until they die, and to even try and Canada Angle™ this is just amateurish. We have plenty of under-reported news stories in this country as is. We don’t need to import American stories while we’re at it.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine says it downed all 29 Russian drones overnight on Thursdsay, however, a guided bomb struck the Kharkiv region, killing two and injuring twelve. There has been heavy fighting in the eastern front, as Russia is advancing toward the city of Pokrovsk. Russia says it will beef up border defences as Ukraine has taken control of the town of Sudzha, the administrative centre for the Kursk region, where they plan to start delivering humanitarian aid to residents. The push into Kursk has exposed Russia’s vulnerabilities, and some analysts believe could change the course of the war. In case you were wondering, Canada has okayed any of our donated heavy equipment to be used in Russian territory.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1824012366792560682

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ministers don’t control committees

Posted on by

In a bid to try and extend the Status of Women committee imbroglio story for another day, The Canadian Press tried to draw the Minister for Gender Equality and Youth, Marci Ien, into the fray to comment on what happened. Ien, who isn’t an idiot, refused, which was the right thing to do. Why? Because as a minister, she has no authority over committees, nor should she, because that’s how Parliament works.

Parliament exists to hold the government, meaning Cabinet, to account. Committees are tasked with holding ministers to account over specific subject matter areas, which is one of the reasons why ministers must come before their respective committees as part of the Estimates cycle (because one of the primary means by which Parliament holds the government to account is by controlling the public purse). Hence, the Status of Women committee is tasked with holding Ien to account for her department, and in fact, they should be doing a whole lot more of that accountability work because frankly, this government’s record on doing gender-based-analysis-plus (GBA+) is actually terrible, and most of the time consists of them just saying “GBA+” and not actually doing the work. A functioning committee would be addressing this, and even though Anita Vandenbeld wrote in her op-ed this week that the committee was functional and worked by consensus, this is a major issue that they have not been tackling like they should, not that this is a surprise. It is absolutely not Ien’s place to comment on what happened at that committee, and it would in fact be a major breach of decorum if she did.

It shouldn’t surprise me that a reporter couldn’t make this distinction for herself before writing the story, but honestly, this is basic parliamentarianism. It should be embarrassing for them to even make this basic error and not understanding the roles between ministers and committees, but this is also the state of political journalism, where actual knowledge of the system has become a rarity among those who are supposed to cover it.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian guided bomb killed two when it hit a schoolyard in the Sumy region. Ukrainian forces have confirmed that they have breached Russia’s Kursk region, sending Russians into disarray and panic, and have launched a massive drone attack further into Russia. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy calls this proof of Ukraine’s ability to surprise on the battlefield.

https://twitter.com/TheStudyofWar/status/1821336708916347359

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another committee demand

Posted on by

The Conservatives are demanding yet more “emergency” committee hearings, but because it’s a committee they don’t control, they are getting in front of the cameras to make performative demands. Case in point, yesterday Andrew Scheer called a press conference to demand that the NDP and Bloc agree to recall the public safety committee to examine how a suspected terrorist was able to immigrate and obtain citizenship when he may have been videotaped dismembering a prisoner in 2015.

Of course, the Conservatives’ case and rationale is largely hyperbolic, and their blaming the current government for crime rates is both specious and done entirely in bad faith. But then again, Scheer is a lying liar who lies constantly, so he’ll say anything to get attention, and that’s all this is really about—attention. The Conservatives need to get fresh clips for their socials, and summer committee meetings are precisely the kind of thing that they think makes them look good, so that’s why they have been trying to run committees over the summer, and claiming that the other parties want to be “on vacation” rather than doing work in their constituencies. (This becomes one of those areas where you could accuse the Conservatives of projection in that they treat constituency time as “vacation” or a “break” rather than simply doing other kinds of work in the riding).

This is just one more demand for a dog-and-pony show. I’m not sure what exactly a parliamentary committee could do here.

In case you missed them:

  • For National Magazine, I look at BCCLA’s fight to try to see secret documents to hold CSIS to account for possibly improper spying on environmental groups.
  • Also for National Magazine, I delve into the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on annuities the Crown owes for several Ontario First Nations for treaty breaches.
  • My weekend column conducts a thought experiment on how the Liberals could possibly hold a leadership contest under their current rules anytime soon.
  • My Loonie Politics Quick Take looks at the performative hairshirt parsimony on display as people lose their minds over the purchase of the diplomatic condo.
  • My column goes through some of Poilievre and company’s recent deceitful claims when it comes to drug decriminalisation and safer supply.
  • My feature story in Xtra looks at queer diplomacy in Canada, and how we’ve made great strides in the past decade, but we still have a lot more to do.
  • My weekend column on Jagmeet Singh’s continued announcements that are either economically illiterate, or entirely the domain of the provinces.

Ukraine Dispatch

Ukraine says that their forces downed four Russian missiles and 15 drones overnight. Nevertheless, a missile did strike the Kharkiv region, killing one and injuring twelve. The first group of F-16 fighters are now in Ukraine, and ready to be deployed.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1820400963833958849

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1820799395371110697

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lies about legalisation

Posted on by

For months now, Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives have been claiming that the Liberals “legalised” hard drugs in BC, which is false, and have been trying to build up a particular lie that they are planning to do so across the country. Again, to repeat, this is a lie, and the limited decriminalisation that happened in BC was done reluctantly, but only after the province, the provincial police force, and municipal authorities all wanted to give it a go as a way of reducing mortality from the toxic drug crisis. They’ve had limited success, but have started rolling back some of those measures which had nothing to do with decriminalisation, mainly being open drug use, because it’s spooking voters. And I get that, but it has nothing to do with decriminalisation and everything to do with the toxic supply. Drug users have taken the notion that if they use openly, then someone may save them with Naloxone if they overdose in public. It’s not just happening in BC, but everywhere across the country now—I see it on the streets in Ottawa all the time, and there is no decriminalisation happening.

Nevertheless, this week Poilievre claims he has “proof” that there is a national decriminalisation plan—which he and his MPs use “legalise” with interchangeably, even though they are absolutely not the same thing. The problem? That the very text he’s highlighting doesn’t say that there is a national decriminalisation plan, only that the federal government is willing to work with willing jurisdictions using the tools at their disposal, that can include decriminalisation. It doesn’t matter that they apparently have no reading comprehension ability—they’ve just highlighted a couple of words and made a false declaration.

And now Poilievre and his MPs are blanketing their social channels with this blatant lie, because they want to make people angry and afraid. The truth doesn’t matter. It never did. They’re going to keep lying, because it works, and because nobody, least of all legacy media, is going to call them on it.

Ukraine Dispatch

While both sides have traded drone assaults, the Russians claim to have taken over two villages—one in Kharkiv region, the other in Luhansk. Russians are moving in on the town of Pokrovsk in the east, which serves as a logistics hub for Ukraine. The Czech Republic says that artillery deliveries to Ukraine are going to accelerate. And Ukraine is closing in on a deal to restructure $20 billion of its debt.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1815394403675988039

Continue reading →

Roundup: Elections Canada’s helpful suggestions

Posted on by

Amidst the (possibly overblown) hysteria that party nomination contests are a possible vector for foreign interference, Elections Canada has come along with a series of “helpful” proposals to parties in order to reduce the vulnerabilities. They insist they don’t want to actually manage these contests (which is good, because that would be an enormous expansion of the organisation, which I’m not sure we really want), but nevertheless they could play some kind of role around financial oversight of these contests, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing.

Their suggestions include limiting votes to Canadian citizens, or at least permanent residents, which I think is reasonable, because much like I think it’s good that parties let people join by age 14 so that they can learn about and participate in grassroots organisation before they’re able to vote, bringing in permanent residents before they can also vote could help foster better civic engagement (well, if parties hadn’t decimated their grassroots as they centralised power in their leaders’ offices). Other suggestions include published nomination rules and processes (which parties will hate because they have become used to the ability to tip the scales at the behest of the leader and his or her cult of personality), publishing fuller results such as number of ballots cast and vote distribution, requiring all contestants file a financial return, and banning the sale of party memberships in bulk (the Liberals no longer have paid memberships, while the Conservatives are more expansive rules around this, for the better).

Some of these are quite reasonable, but I have my doubts that parties will do more than theatrically take them under advisement, because they simply don’t want to. They’ve spent so much time and energy in order to minimise their grassroots in favour of the leader and his or her office that they have eliminated most of the checks and balances that are supposed to keep them from getting too big for their own britches (and the Liberals have been the absolutely worst with this, with the 2016 changes to their party constitution). Will they start to re-impose these minor changes in order to hold themselves accountable? I’m not going to hold my breath.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck a playground in the southern city of Mykolaiv, killing three. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was invited to attend Cabinet in Westminster, where he reiterated the need reduce restrictions on long-range missiles so that they can strike sites in Russia where they are being attacked from.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1814328171543580848

Continue reading →

Roundup: Straying far out of their lane

Posted on by

After their big song and dance about wanting the federal government to stay in their own lane, the premiers decided to start weighing in on defence spending—an explicitly federal jurisdiction—yesterday, trying to insist that Canada should meet its NATO spending target sooner than the outlined plan. I’m really not sure how this is exactly the premiers staying in their own lane if they expect the prime minister to stay in his, but they certainly made no shortage of ridiculous excuses for their demands, such as this being about trade with the Americans and so on, but come on. Justin Trudeau did write a letter in response to Tim Houston and Doug Ford, saying the federal government is only trying to help the provinces improve the lives of Canadians, and that maybe they should sign on rather than be obstructionist.

Also from the meeting, Manitoba and Newfoundland and Labrador expressed an interest in resettling some the asylum seekers who landed in Quebec, but that hasn’t stopped Doug Ford from demanding more money for resettlement, nor has it stopped David Eby and Danielle Smith from demanding money for “newcomers,” when the specific issue is just what obligation the federal government has for asylum seekers before their refugee claim is approved, at which point they genuinely become a federal responsibility. This isn’t about helping to settle economic migrants or other mainstream immigrants, which aren’t the federal government’s sole responsibility, but they want to pretend that it is because they want to whinge for more money when what they’re trying to conflate has nothing to do with the actual obligations of the federal government. Again, it’s not really that tough to understand, but these premiers are going to be obtuse and engage in sophistry along the way.

Meanwhile, because several of the premiers are talking equalisation again, I cannot stress enough how badly the CBC described the programme in their article today. Provinces do not write cheques for equalisation. Not province transfers money to another province. It is paid for out of the federal treasury from the income taxes collected from all Canadians, and distributed to those provinces who fall below the threshold of fiscal capacity to have equal programming. Even more to the point, while not raised in the CBC piece, fiscal capacity has nothing to do with whether or not a province is running a deficit, because that would be absolutely absurd and no province would run a surplus if they thought they could get equalisation dollars if they didn’t. Regardless, this was extremely sloppy journalism from the CBC and reads to me like the reporter just relayed how one of the premiers described how the programme works rather than actually looking it up or asking someone who has a clue (and that’s not any of the premiers). Hermes wept…

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia and Ukraine exchanged 95 prisoners of war each yesterday.

https://twitter.com/zelenskyyua/status/1813524697964823028

Continue reading →

Roundup: Oh noes! Diplomatic residences!

Posted on by

The absolute worst instincts in Canadian politics—and Canadian political journalism—are being indulged, being that of hairshirt parsimony. This time it’s about the decision by Global Affairs to purchase a new condo in New York for the consul general, because the current residence is no longer fit for purpose, and it’s cheaper to buy a new one than to refurbish the existing residence, and the new unit is expected to come with additional savings in terms of other maintenance costs. But lo, it’s worth about CAD$9 million, so immediately we need to frame this as being “luxurious” and “elite” while Canadians can’t find places to live.

It’s a diplomatic residence in New York. Real estate is expensive there, but it’s important to have a residence where our diplomats can entertain, because that’s what diplomacy is and diplomacy costs money. Nevertheless, there is a pervasive (and poisonous) attitude in the Canadian discourse that the Elder Pundits nevertheless reinforce is that spending money on this kind of thing is terrible, and there is an absolute attitude (which was more prevalent during the Conservative years) that Ritz Crackers and ginger ale is good enough for a church social, so it’s good enough for diplomats, which makes us as much of a laughingstock internationally as the prime minister’s (former) decrepit plane did, and they only just retired that one. And it’s why the media keeps indulging astroturfers like the “CTF” who phone them up to complain that the embassy in Tokyo wasn’t furnished by IKEA. (No, seriously). It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Of course, when I tweeted about this, all everyone complained about was Bob Fife which largely misses the point, other than the fact that he is one of the voices of the Elder Pundits, who must enforce the set narratives. Others went back as far so the Duffy Diaries to suggest that Fife is grinding some kind of axe with Tom Clark because he spilled that Duffy was leaking information to the press and Duffy complained to Fife (then the bureau chief) and the president of CTV about it, but that doesn’t make any sense either because Fife is amoral, and only cares about the scoops, not about the ramifications. (Seriously, did you see him get misty-eyed when he told Vassy Kapelos that he doesn’t like being called “Fife the Knife”?) What’s more concerning is that Andrew Scheer started going around saying that this purchase is furthering “Liberal insiders,” which is patent bullshit, but every story was going to reprint that because both-sides.

Ukraine Dispatch

Six people were killed and thirteen injured in a Russian missile attack on the town of Myrnohrad in the Donetsk region. Reuters profiles president Volodymyr Zelenskyy and how the war has changed him.

Continue reading →