Tag Archives: Telecom

QP: Conspicuous silence about India

Posted on by

The first day back after a busy constituency week, and the PM was absent, though his deputy was present. Most of the other leaders were also away, but Pierre Poilievre was there, and he once again began in French to lament mortgage costs in Quebec, and complained that Trudeau was too worried about his own survival, before demanding an election. Chrystia Freeland said that she was glad the Conservatives were thinking about the economy, and she praised the fact that inflation has been tamed, which the Conservatives don’t want to talk about. Poilievre needed that Trudeau is facing a backbench revolt and demanded an election, to which Karina Gould noted that the Conservatives were trying to avoid another vote in the Chamber that they would lose. Poilievre switched to English to lament that people lined up in Cloverdale, BC, for “ugly potato day,” and used this to demand an election. Freeland noted that Poilievre was crying crocodile tears because he voted against their school food programme. Poilievre gave a more emphatic version of the same, and Freeland noted that the Conservatives were damning themselves by their intransigence, and described the launch of their school food programme in Manitoba on Friday. Poilievre was incredulous as this, accused the prime minister of being in the “fetal position” under his desk, and demanded an election. Freeland dismissed this as the Conservatives losing the plot, and their concerns about inflation Missed that his has been back in the target range for nine months.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he demanded the government support the Bloc’s OAS enrichment bill. Steve MacKinnon said the Bloc have never voted in the interests of seniors, so this was disingenuous. Therrien then turned to the Supply Management bill in the Senate, and lamented that the prime minister was not pressuring senators, and Jean-Yves Duclos noted the government’s support for system all along.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, worried about foreign interference from India, and wondered if the PM had personally urged Poilievre to get his security clearance. Dominic LeBlanc said that they extended the offer, and that they are working to keep Canadians safe. Singh tried again in French and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Impossible to extrapolate

Posted on by

As with so many elections these days, it brings out the electoral reform fetishists, and they get self-righteous and say dumb things all over social media, and this week’s general election in the UK is no different. And lo, those fetishists are again making pronouncements about things like “voters’ wishes” because they’re trying to find a grand narrative that confirms their priors, and I fear I may lose my gods damned mind over this.

Once again, let us remember what this election is—650 separate and simultaneous elections, each one for a specific seat. So yes, the voters’ wishes are reflected because they chose who filled each seat. As well, I will once again remind you that the so-called “popular vote” is a logical fallacy because there is too much variation between each electoral contest to make any kind of grand aggregate that is meaningful—particularly in the UK, where the smaller countries have regional parties that England doesn’t, and yes, that does distort the “national picture” (as what happens in Canada with the Bloc). And no, every vote that is cast does not deserve their own seat. That’s not democracy, and it’s actually sore loserism if you believe that your vote doesn’t count if the person or party you prefer doesn’t win.

This is the other aspect of these fetishists spouting off and producing their own graphs of how they claim that Parliament “should” look if they had a PR system, erm, except they seem to always insist that it would be pure-PR (which is almost entirely unlikely), and it discounts that voting behaviour would change, but so would party formation under a system that no longer rewards big-tent brokerage in favour of post-election negotiation for coalitions. In no possible way can you extrapolate a vote like Thursday’s and come up with what a Parliament “should” look like, but that won’t stop the fetishists from trying.

Oh, and if one of these fetishists also tries to bring up lines about how the current single-member plurality system is “bad for democracy,” I’m not sure that PR is having a great run right now, as it legitimizes far-right and extremist parties that is almost impossible under SMP, and that legitimacy afforded to them is allowing them to grow across Europe. The situation in the Netherlands is also cause for concern, given that the far-right parties there have taken months to try to cobble together some sort of working coalition and may prove completely unworkable or ungovernable, and that’s not good for anyone.

Ukraine Dispatch

The Russian advance toward Toretsk in the Donetsk region means that time is running out for any Ukrainian citizens that want to flee. While Ukraine managed to destroy all 32 Russian drones launched Friday night, early Saturday morning was another story—drones hit an energy facility in Sumy, and hits on Selydove and Komar killed eight combined. Meanwhile, the head of Ukraine’s navy says that Russia has  nearly re-based all of its combat-read warships from occupied Crimea, because of the number of successful Ukrainian strikes on the region.

Continue reading →

QP: Not taking yes for an answer on Hogue

Posted on by

The prime minister was off in Quebec City to meet with the premier of that province, but his deputy was present, having just made the formal announcement of the Ways and Means motion on the capital gains changes that they want to use as a political wedge. Most of the other leaders were away, and Pierre Paul-Hus led off in French, and raised the NSICOP report, and demanded to know the names of who was implicated. Dominic LeBlanc noted that he was surprised by the question because Andrew Scheer had sent a letter asking to send this to the Hogue Commission, and there was a Bloc motion on the same thing, and the government was going to support it. Paul-Hus wanted it clear whether the prime minister would reveal the names to Justice Hogue, and let her deal with it, and LeBlanc repeated that they were going to support the Bloc motion. Jasraj Hallan took over in English to ramp up the rhetoric, launching accusations, and LeBlanc reiterated that they agree the Commission is well-placed, and already has access to the documents in question. Hallan torqued his rhetoric even further, and LeBlanc again said they would support the Bloc motion, and LeBlanc said that he asked the deputy RCMP commissioner what would happen if he stood up and read off those names, and was told he would be criminally charged, which he would not do. Hallan switched topics to claim there was some secret carbon price report that the PBO couldn’t release (there was no report), and Steven Guilbeault recited his lines about the PBP report saying that eight out of ten households got more money back than they spent.

Alain  Therrien led for the Bloc, and patted himself on the back for their motion, claiming they were being the adults in the room. LeBlanc repeated that they would support the motion. Therrien demanded further reassurance that they would turn over any additional documents and LeBlanc assured him they were.

Jagmeet Singh conflated a number of incidents with the NSICOP report revelations, and Dominic LeBlanc gave some back-patting on the only government actually taking action. Singh repeated the conflation in French, and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: The demand to name names

Posted on by

The day was largely marked with the discourse around that NSICOP report, and the demand that the government name names, even though that’s never going to happen because intelligence is not evidence, there may be ongoing investigations that it might jeopardise, and the possibility of reputational damage for someone who may be unwittingly involved is great—all things the RCMP pointed to in their own release on the subject. The chair of NSICOP said that any next steps are up to the RCMP, but that hasn’t stopped reporters from asking salacious questions about whether they can trust their fellow caucus-members (because remember, reputational damage).

With all of this in mind, I went back to the report, and looked for more than just that one paragraph that every media outlet highlighted. It noted that much of that witting assistance was in relation to India, which is not a “hostile power” last time I checked, even if we have particular issues with them (such as their decision to assassinate someone on our soil). I have no doubt that some MPs would see no problem in trying to “forge closer ties” with India. The other thing that I noted was that, at least in relationship with the Chinese government is that there was an expectation of a quid pro quo relationship, that engaging with them would benefit the political player in question in the hopes that the PRC would mobilise their influence networks in favour of that candidate in the riding. I suspect that in several of these cases, the MPs in question wouldn’t think of it as foreign interference, but that they’re being so clever in leveraging diaspora politics to their advantage, and believing that they can somehow outwit Chinese agents to do it. Likewise with instances of blind eyes being turned to money flowing into ridings, particularly from the Indian government—that they think they can leverage that government to their advantage and not that they’re being played, and why I don’t think that certain media outlets and political figures screaming “name the traitors!” is doing much for the level of discourse. The report did make mention of Chinese and Indian influence in at least two Conservative leadership races, but no details provided as to how or the vectors that took shape as (money, membership sign-ups under the promise of repayment, or so on). There was also mention of one former MP who had wittingly provided information while maintaining a relationship with a foreign intelligence officer, but this was being conflated with the other allegations, which is not helpful in the slightest.

As for what’s next, it would seem to me that the real question here is why certain party leaders continue to be wilfully blind as to the full details of the report, and how they continue to refuse to accept classified briefings. The notion that it would “muzzle” them is bullshit—it would mean they can’t talk about certain specific details, but it would give them a more complete picture of what is happening and if their own MPs are implicated, which would allow them to take internal party action, even if they can’t publicize the details.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces downed 22 out of 27 Russian drones overnight Wednesday, and an industrial facility in Poltava suffered damage. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with the emir of Qatar in advance of the peace summit in Switzerland.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1798300991407940083

Continue reading →

QP: Sophistry on the carbon levy

Posted on by

Fresh from his trip to Philadelphia, the prime minister was present for QP today, while his deputy was off to Toronto. All of the other leaders were present, and Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and blamed the prime minister and the Bloc for debt, taxes and inflation, and raise a Food Banks of Canada report that cites half of people saying they are in worse situations than before, with more use by young people, and blamed the prime minister of feeding the “obese government” when people can’t feed themselves. Justin Trudeau said Poilievre’s outrage would be more credible if he didn’t oppose things like their school food programme, and praised dental care. Poilievre said that the school food programme has created zero meals and only created red tape. Trudeau said that the Conservatives are trying to score points on the backs of the challenges Canadians are facing, and patted himself on the back some more for their programmes. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his food bank report/“obese government” lines, and Trudeau repeated that Poilievre lacked credibility for voting against school food and things like dental care. Poilievre wondered aloud if the government’s programmes were working, why so many people we lined up at food banks. Trudeau said that he vote on the school food programme was coming up after QP, and Poilievre would have a chance to show his support. Poilievre wondered why all of those government programmes were showing for naught, and Trudeau sang the praises of dental care and seniors getting the help they need.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, worried about the decline of French in Western Canada, and turned this into another swipe at Francis Drouin and his outburst at committee. Trudeau said that the Bloc don’t really care about francophones outside of Quebec, and disputed that the only way to protect French is with separation, but by investing. Blanchet railed that he wasn’t allowed to talk about French outside of Quebec during the last English debate in the election, and Trudeau shot back that he always defends the French fact in Canada.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and railed about greedy CEOs, and how the government hasn’t lowered prices (which is not what anyone promised), to which Trudeau cited the StatsCan data showing cellphone fees decreasing, and praised their bill empowering the Competition Bureau. Singh repeated the question in French, and got much the same response. 

Continue reading →

QP: Gas tax holidays and make-up jabs

Posted on by

For Monday-on-a-Tuesday QP, the prime minister was off in Philadelphia, but his deputy was present, as were most of the other leaders. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, rattled off some slogans, and accused the Bloc and government of scheming to raise gas taxes when other countries have cut their taxes, and mentioned his demand to cut fuel taxes over the summer. Chrystia Freeland said that she was glad he raised inflation because it allows her to mention this morning’s inflation figures, which showed another decrease thanks to their responsible management. Poilievre switched to English to insist that the government shouldn’t pat themselves on the back because inflation is still 35 percent above target, and repeats the demand to cut gas taxes. Freeland noted that he doesn’t even know that the target is between one and three percent. Poilievre returned to French to insist the target was two percent, and then lambasted the government for not locking in longer-term treasury bonds, meaning higher government interest payments. Freeland insisted he was incompetent, and Poilievre returned to English to call her incompetent, and repeat his lines about treasury bonds. Freeland suggested he was grouchy because he doesn’t like that inflation is at a three-year low. Poilievre switched to a demand to support their motion on banning all hard drugs for all times. Freeland pointed out that Poilievre was wearing more make-up than she was—got a warning from the Speaker—and after withdrawing the remark pointed out that Poilievre was phoney to the core, and that he didn’t really care about the economy or people dying from opioids, but only wants to score partisan points.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and lamented a lack of government interest in the Francophonie. Freeland says that the situation of French in Quebec is not a joke, and they are taking it seriously. Normandin took a swipe at Francis Drouin and the Liberals sticking by him, and Freeland repeated her statement of support for the French language. 

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, raised the pending arrest International a criminal Court warrants for senior Hamas and Israeli officials and demanded to know if the government would support it. Freeland said that they respect the independence of the ICC, condemn Hamas, and doesn’t believe you can draw an equivalence of Hamas’ actions with Israel’s. Singh insisted that it wasn’t the question, and repeated it in French, but got the same answer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Watering down a non-binding motion

Posted on by

Much of the sitting day was consumed with a great deal of nonsense, some of it procedural, as the NDP moved a Supply Day motion that, among other things, called for the immediate recognition of Palestinian statehood. This was supposed to have been debated on the previous Friday that the House sat, before they decided to suspend because of the death of Brian Mulroney, and it got picked up today.

From the start of the debate, Mélanie Joly corrected pointed out that you don’t change foreign policy with an opposition motion (and one could argue that matters of foreign policy should perhaps be confidence measures), but behind the scenes, Liberals spent the day trying to negotiate amendments to the motion in order to find some shared language that more of them could support, because this was going to divide the Liberal caucus one way or the other (and one suspects that the NDP was fully trying to create some mischief and sow some discord, if only to try and claim a self-righteous position in the matter of Gaza). And at the very last minute, they did come up with an amendment that softened the NDP’s motion a lot, including the removal of the call for an immediate declaration of statehood, but it all went sideways at that point, as the amendment was moved before French translation had been provided, and there were howls of protest from both sides as MPs felt blindsided by them. Andrew Scheer got all huffy saying that the amendments were out of order because they essentially changed the fundamental nature of the motion, but the Deputy Speaker eventually decided that since the NDP, who moved the original motion, didn’t object, then the motion could be considered in order. There were then subsequent votes to adopt the motion, and when that passed, to vote on the amended motion as a whole, and it too passed.

In the aftermath, the NDP declared victory, and Jagmeet Singh crowed about what they “forced” the government to do. Erm, except it’s a non-binding motion and nobody is forced to do anything, and pretty much everything in the amended motion were things the government was doing already. Of course, the NDP watering down their motion in order to claim a hollow, moral victory is pretty much 100 percent in keeping with how they roll, particularly lately, while the Liberals dodged yet another bullet on this particular file where they cannot win no matter what they do.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian defences shot down 17 out of 22 Russian drones yesterday, but there was still damage to Kryvyi Rih from those that got through. Ukrainians continued to target Russian refineries, as drone warfare remains one of Ukraine’s best weapons against Russia. Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials are alarmed that Putin’s talk about creating a “buffer zone” inside of Ukraine means a likely escalation in the conflict.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Online harms bill finally tabled

Posted on by

The long-awaited online harms bill was tabled yesterday, to much fanfare. The bill would create obligations for web giants to build in certain safety features, and creates a new Digital Safety Commission to oversee this, along with an ombudsman to help people navigate the process if they have been victimised and need content taken down. There are prescriptive processes that give companies 24 hours to remove certain content if flagged (most of it is child sexual exploitation or the sharing of intimate images), but there are very narrow criteria. There are also new Criminal Code provisions around making hate speech a standalone offence instead of an aggravating factor, and restores the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal’s ability to be an avenue for redress for hate speech for those who don’t want to go through the criminal route, albeit with a tighter definition and more ability to dismiss vexatious complaints than the previous system.

To that end, here are five things the bill does, a list of recent examples of online harms inflicted upon youth in recent years, while the mother of Amanda Todd is calling on Parliament to pass the bill swiftly so that other youth are protected.

As for opposition reaction, the Conservatives have point-blank called this censorship, which seems to be opening themselves up to charges that they don’t care about the safety of children and youth online. The Bloc say they’re going to read it over before supporting, while the NDP, seeing this on the Order Paper, tried to give one last attempt to sound tough about the government not introducing this sooner, so that they can launch another data-mining petition.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces downed nine out of 14 Russian drones and three guided missiles overnight on Monday. Ukrainian forces had to fall back from the village of Lastochkyne near Avdiivka, as Russian forces continue to press ahead while Ukrainian forces suffer from a lack of ammunition. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that the Black Sea corridor, which is getting grain to countries in need, is in jeopardy without more US aid.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1762133928406626660

Continue reading →

QP: Getting partisan about gendered violence

Posted on by

The prime minister was off attending the big auto theft summit several blocks away from the West Block, while his deputy was similarly absent, as were all other leaders. Andrew Scheer led off in English, read some specious statistics about auto theft, and demanded more tough policies. Jennifer O’Connell countered with the fact that five years under the Harper government saw even higher auto theft rates than now. Scheer volleyed that those were the first five years with the problem they inherited, before giving a misleading statement about carbon prices and grocery prices. François-Philippe Champagne deployed his “take no lessons” line and gave a swipe about Jenni Byrne. Scheer returned with the number of former Liberal staffers who lobby for Loblaws, and gave an “it’s the carbon tax, stupid.” The Speaker warned him, before Champagne extolled his efforts to get new grocers into Canada. Gérard Deltell took over in French, and accused the government of prioritising photo ops over building housing. Champagne said that the only thing the Conservatives are good at is insulting  mayors. Deltell noted the decrease in housing stocks under the Liberals and demanded action. Champagne said that he has nothing to learn about videos and photo ops from the Conservatives, as they don’t solve problems.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc, and she wanted the government to let Quebec proceed with advanced request for MAiD, to which Jean-Yves Duclos noted that as the former minster of health, he wanted to recognise Quebec’s movement and said that they would work together. DeBellefeuille repeated the demand for the Criminal Code changes, and Duclos said that they need to protect the most vulnerable, and promised to look closely at this.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the Bloc, and demanded support for their “grocery prices” bill, and in response, Champagne stated that they have moved forward with competition reform and took most of the NDP’s recommendations. Lindsay Mathyssen repeated the demand in English, to which Champagne repeated the same response in English.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Official silence around Lewis’ most recent nuttery

Posted on by

There has been some attention paid lately to the fact that Leslyn Lewis is promoting a House of Commons e-petition that calls on Canada to withdraw from the UN, in the name of our “sovereignty.” Which is ridiculous, because the UN doesn’t impact on anyone’s sovereignty (which is partially why it’s such an ineffective body), but not unexpected. Lewis has peddled many a conspiracy theory around the WHO, or the World Economic Forum (which is a particular conspiracy theory that leans heavily into antisemitism), and has not only not received any rebuke from her party, but they actively encourage some of these same conspiracy theories—particularly those around the World Economic Forum (and then turn around and wonder about the rise in antisemitism. Gosh).

This largely went unmentioned in legacy media for a few days (but hey, a lot of people are still on vacation), but I do find the absolute silence from the Conservatives to be interesting. Some of their former staffers have tried to offer a bit of polish to this, but you can’t actually polish this. (And no, she’s not even data-mining on this kind of petition because it’s through the House of Commons’ portal, not her own or a party website). The simple fact of it is that the Conservatives are more than willing to engage in this kind of nuttery because they think that these are accessible voters in the next election, because these have tended to be people who didn’t used to vote, but then Maxime Bernier offered them something to vote for, and they flocked to his banner, and now Poilievre wants them under his, so he’s willing to entertain this dangerous nonsense and to keep shifting the Overton window in order to try and win those votes, even though it’s almost certainly a fool’s errand because they can see how hollow he really is. Nevertheless, he won’t stop trying, and we can expect more of this kind of nuttery going forward, because that’s who they are these days.

Ukraine Dispatch:

While there has been little movement on the front lines, long-range attacks back-and-forth carry on, with the Russians having acquired ballistic missiles from North Korea, while Ukraine has launched drone attacks both against military targets in occupied Crimea and the around the Russia city of Belgorod. A Ukrainian parliamentary committee is debating changing the rules around mobilisation, and increasing sanctions for draft evasion.

Continue reading →