Tag Archives: Terrorism

Senate QP: The Beatles or the Rolling Stones?

Posted on by

Things got underway early for a marathon day of debate on Bill C-5, but before that could start, Routine Proceedings and Senate Question Period had to take place, which promises to be the last sitting day of the spring, and also Senator Marc Gold’s last sitting day as Government Leader in the Senate. Some of the statements made were farewells to Senators whose terms are expiring in the coming months, another statement was about the two people who lost their lives in the recent landslide near Banff.

Back in the Senate for #SenQP, early today ahead of marathon hearings on Bill C-5.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-06-26T13:07:16.620Z

Senators Housakos led off, asking about the opioid crisis, calling the government’s response flawed and reactive and wondered why there wasn’t a national strategy to deal with it. Senator Gold noted the tragedy of these deaths, and that the government is setting up a plan to tighten the border, and noted recent statistics that use has fallen. Housakos decried the failure of the government, and wanted a more effective response that would achieve results. Gold noted that the government is working with provinces to protect people.

Continue reading →

Senate QP: Questions about NATO math

Posted on by

I haven’t been able to attend Senate Question Period in years as the move to a separate building, and a shift of their usual timing to coincide with Commons QP have kept me away, as has the fact that they pretty much always rise at the same time as the Commons, which never used to be the practice, and for which I write a peevish column at the start of every summer. This year, however, they are sitting later to pass Bill C-5, so I am actually able to take it in. It’s been a long time since I’ve been here.

Taking in #SenQP for the first time in *years*.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-06-25T18:04:29.258Z

After statements and routine proceedings, things got underway in earnest as  Senator Housakos led off, and he raised the PBO saying that he has received little information on the NATO two percent announcement, and that they have now agreed to the five percent goal at this week’s summit, And wondered how they could take this credibly. Senator Gold lamented that there was underfunding over decades, and that this was because of a changing world, but also noted that only 3.5 percent of that was over a decade, while the other 1.5 percent was for other things. Housakos again questioned the credibility of the numbers, and Gold returned to the boilerplate assurances they are doing what they can, but also noted that DND hasn’t been able to spend their current allocations.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The Speaker imposes the last of the Supply Days

Posted on by

Yesterday began with the government’s attempt to let the opposition parties have their remaining Supply Days (aka “opposition days”) that remain in the supply cycle before the Estimates votes next week, and even though the Conservatives had indicated they were going to move a confidence motion that would force Jagmeet Singh to eat his words about the Liberals, being one giant dare. But when the Government House Leader Karina Gould moved the motion that would let this happen, that would give them a chance to move this confidence motion, the Conservatives decided against it in order to continue the privilege filibuster.

Later in the day, Speaker Greg Fergus decided to step in, given that the ability for the parties to work this out for themselves had clearly failed. To that end, he has imposed that the Supply Days will run Thursday, Monday and Tuesday for the Conservatives, with the Friday for the NDP, and that because Tuesday is the last day of the Supply Cycle, the Estimates votes will happen then. This ensures that the parties get their allotted days (the Bloc already had theirs before the privilege filibuster began), and the Conservatives will have their chances to try and embarrass the other opposition parties into voting non-confidence, the NDP won’t oblige them, and the NDP’s motion will likely be something related to abortion in their own attempt to embarrass the Conservatives, because nobody can be mature about any of this.

I will say that I’m a little surprised that Fergus made this move, because he very well could have used this as something of a “learning opportunity” for the parties—that because they refused to come to a deal about these days that they would lose them because they didn’t use them. But that actually would have been the bigger surprise, because Fergus isn’t exactly a very strong-willed Speaker. As for the Conservatives, one suspects that they turned down the motion in order to push the envelope, so that they could cry foul and try and challenge Fergus if they did lose those days, and send out more fundraising emails that he’s being partisan (which is against the rules), and to try and play the victim. Andrew Scheer was already trying to denounce these moves, but nothing he says has any semblance of truth, so that’s no surprise. Nevertheless, there won’t be a crisis of Supply, government departments won’t shut down, and Canadian journalists won’t get the opportunity to excitedly write about a “U.S.-style government shutdown.”

Ukraine Dispatch

Another Russian drone attack on Trenopil has left it without electricity. And while president Zelenskyy is hoping for quick NATO membership as an avenue to ending the war, NATO members are unlikely to take him up on it.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1863186805463437571

Continue reading →

Roundup: A $7 million ad buy to tell on themselves

Posted on by

Over the past several days, the Alberta government has been on a very strange campaign where they are in essence, telling on themselves by lying about the forthcoming federal emissions cap. How so, you ask? They keep insisting that this is a production cap on the energy sector, which is not what it is intended to be, particularly because the sector has been saying that they fully plan to be net-zero by 2050, and that these kinds of rules, while disliked by economists, would essentially force these companies to put their money where their mouths are. And, well, they have certainly been admitting that all of those promises to meet those targets through things like carbon capture have been pretty much all talk.

When Danielle Smith and her ministers tried to justify their ad campaign, well, things got even worse for them.

Meanwhile, the Alberta government bought the front pages of newspapers across the Postmedia chain at a cost of $7 million in order to decry this same policy, and in another telling lie, claim that it would increase grocery prices, because that’s the anxiety that they want to hit on in order to really stick it to the federal Liberals. But again, the problem here is that the driver of those higher grocery prices is climate change, and in particular, recurring droughts in food-producing regions, including in Canada, with a few flash floods or hurricanes along the way that also damage crops or livestock.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack on the southern city of Mykolaiv has killed one and injured at least sixteen. A drone attack was also launched against Kyiv. The town of Kupiansk in the Kharkiv region, and three surrounding settlements, were ordered evacuated. Russians claim to have taken the village of Levadne in the Zaporizhzhia region over the weekend.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A double standard on barring speeches

Posted on by

There was a story in the Star yesterday that I hadn’t actually noticed happening, which is that Liberal MP Yvan Baker has been barred from speaking in the House of Commons until he apologises for saying that the “Putin wing” had taken over the Conservative Party on March 20th. Baker says he has no intention of apologising for what he considers to be the truth, and the Speaker, as usual, makes little tut-tut noises about what Baker said, never mind that there is a giant double-standard at play.

If Fergus is concerned about MPs alleging that their colleagues “stand four-square behind dictators,” it’s funny that the consequences only seem to apply to Baker. After all, Conservatives on a frequent basis have said that Trudeau is in the pocket of dictators, and that he allowed foreign interference on their behalf because it benefitted his party. (There is absolutely no public evidence of this). And most egregious was that Conservative MP Rachael Thomas has said on the floor of the Commons that Justin Trudeau is a “dictator,” and she faced absolutely no censure for saying it, which makes it really hard to see why Baker is being singled out for being hyperbolic—the point was about which elements of the party’s base that Poilievre is pandering to as opposed to saying that Poilievre is under Putin’s sway—when nobody else is. (I will note that Conservative MP Mark Strahl was barred from speaking for several weeks because he refused to withdraw the remarks that someone was lying, which is a big no-no under the rules of Parliament—rules which are now being absolutely abused—but he did eventually do so).

What is perhaps the most galling in all of his was the statement that Andrew Scheer gave to the Star, in which he says “Liberals should not whine and complain because they were caught spreading disinformation and lies to divide Canadians and cover for their own total failures on Ukraine.” Erm, serial liar and promoter of conspiracy theories Andrew Scheer is lecturing Liberals on the subject, when he faces zero consequences for lying in the House of Commons on a daily basis. We already knew he had absolutely no sense of shame, but it definitely extends to a complete lack of self-awareness as well. Just utterly ridiculous.

Ukraine Dispatch

It was another bloody weekend in Ukraine which saw waves of drone attacks targeting Kyiv last night, the pounding of Zaporizhzhia with guided bombs earlier, the death of a top judge after an attack on Kharkiv, and an attack on a hospital in Sumy that killed ten. President Zelenskyy says that the front lines are “very, very difficult” as autumn descends on the conflict.

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: Sanctions theatre, Hamas edition

Posted on by

Yesterday, foreign affairs minister Mélanie Joly announced that Canada would be sanctioning senior leaders of Hamas…which is already a listed terrorist organization. The whole exercise appears to be little more than sanctions theatre, according to Jessica Davis, who does this for a living. Nothing Joly announced is likely to make any difference compared to what is already on the books, meaning this is likely just a hollow gesture to make it looks like the government is doing something without actually doing anything. Of course, if they really wanted to do something, they could properly resource the RCMP’s sanctions enforcement regime and their counter terrorism financing abilities (or better yet, disband the RCMP and start up a dedicated federal policing force that can specialise in this kind of work).

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian attack overnight on a village in the Kharkiv region killed a two-month old baby. The Donetsk region’s governor says that his province is pounded by 2500 Russian strikes daily, while Avdiivka, a short distance away, has been the focus of Russian attention for months now. Ukrainian special forces say they blew up a drilling platform in the Black Sea that Russians were using to support their drone operations. As the shake-up of the Ukrainian military approaches, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy wants a dedicated branch devoted to drones.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1754881455702897018

Continue reading →

Roundup: MPP pay freezes serve no one

Posted on by

There was a piece in the Star yesterday about how MPPs in Ontario have had their salaries frozen since 2008, with no plans to lift it anytime soon. This is the kind of thing that populist rhetoric engenders, and it’s terrible for the state of our politics. While nobody is in politics to get rich, particularly in Canada, we are pretty miserly about what we want to pay our elected officials, and every time there is some kind of economic downturn, we immediately demand that they either freeze or cut their salaries to “set an example” (which is ridiculous because I have yet to see any senior executives in the private sector freeze or cut their pay in response to bad economic times—they get further bonuses, especially if they manage to reduce payroll during said tough times).

It cannot be understated that we underpay our elected officials, particularly at the provincial and federal levels, for jobs that are fairly 24/7 in most instances—especially in the era of social media where they are expected to perform at all hours of the day and night, and where they can’t go to the store without being expected to be “on” and engaging with their constituents. And in a lot of cases, people take a pay cut to become an elected official, particularly if they are doctors or lawyers. We say we want to attract the best, but the longer this kind of thing goes on, the more it will only attract those who are already wealthy and can live with the pay cut. Oh, and Ontario killed their pensions for MPPs decades ago, so on top of being underpaid, they don’t get a pension out of it either, which just makes it all the worse proposition for someone.

Nevertheless, we already have the astroturfers at the so-called “Canadian Taxpayers Federation” griping that Toronto City Council and the mayor are getting a modest pay rise this year, and because legacy media laps up everything they put out, this feeds the hairshirt parsimony and cheap outrage that makes us look as petty and parochial as our worst instincts tend to be. (Tall poppy syndrome is absolutely one of our national neuroses). This isn’t good for democracy, but nobody wants to make that case, which is why we’re in the situation we’re in.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles hit an apartment building and a medical centre in Kharkiv early Wednesday; Russia claims it was precision-targeting a building housing “foreign fighters” that included French mercenaries. Ukrainian forces also downed19 out of 20 drones targeting Odesa. The fighting has intensified near Bakhmut, as Russian forces are making more offensive assaults.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1747574419994648962

Continue reading →

Roundup: Opening the Canadian Drug Agency

Posted on by

There was an announcement yesterday that went under the radar of what appears to be every major news organization, which is that the Canadian Drug Agency is now fully operational. This has been in the works for a couple of years now, first as in a transitional form while the government consulted with the provinces and territories on what shape this would take, and it has now emerged from transition status into a full office.

Why is this important? Because this is the kind of actual policy work that is going to contribute to future national pharmacare in this country, not the ridiculous legislation that the NDP are insisting upon, under the mistaken belief that this is something that provinces can join one-by-one like with healthcare. It’s not—if national pharmacare is to work, it needs to be all or nothing, because it won’t be economically feasible otherwise. That means you need the premiers at the table from the start, and they all need to negotiate the national formulary together, not just let Ottawa decide and join up if they feel like it.

So, while Jagmeet Singh and Don Davies put on this dog and pony show about the pharmaracare legislation that hasn’t happened yet, and say boneheaded things like “The Liberals are on the side of Big Pharma,” the government has been putting in the actual work, and not the performative part, for what it’s worth.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A shortage of artillery shells is forcing Ukraine to scale back some operations, while the Russians are changing their tactics in their bid to overtake Avdiivka. Ukraine’s military chief is now saying that the war isn’t at a stalemate as he previously asserted (to which president Volodymyr Zelenskyy contradicted him). Said military chief found bugs in one of his offices, and hints that more devices have been found. He has also been critical of Zelenskyy’s decision to fire all regional military draft officers in a corruption crackdown.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Exploring a national emergency response agency

Posted on by

Something that caught my eye over the weekend was an interview that Harjit Sajjan had with The Canadian Press over the weekend about building up some kind of national emergency response agency, so that we don’t have to constantly rely on the military for each event as we have been. It would likely be a network of local and regional agencies, but have some kind of federal coordinating role, but we do have some models domestically to draw on, such as the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre. The issue there is that it’s only geared toward one kind of event, whereas floods and hurricanes or tornadoes require different responses.

To that end, Sajjan is looking at different models and how different countries manage their agencies, so he’s not immediately jumping on an American FEMA model, but if there is one particular note of caution to sound it’s that we can’t rely on the premiers not ballsing this up or making ridiculous demands because none of them want to spend money on this kind of thing if they think they can get away with forcing the federal government to spend instead, while at the same time not willing to cede any jurisdictional sovereignty so that the federal government can actually do anything other than just give them money that they totally promise will be spent on this and not on tax cuts (really, we promise this time, for reals!)

There’s a reason we’ve come to rely on the military for this kind of work, which is that provinces don’t want to spend the money, and the federal government has so far refused to make provinces reimburse the Forces for doing the work (because they would be massacred in the headlines if they did), and provinces know that. It doesn’t help that the NDP think that this is really the only kind of thing that the military should be doing either. But something has to give, and let’s hope the federal government, of whichever stripe is in power if this gets off the ground, doesn’t simply roll over for the premiers’ usual nonsense on this.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians launched a massive drone attack on early Sunday aimed at the southern and western Ukraine, while Ukraine launched a drone attack against a Russian airbase in Russia’s Rostov province. As Russia presses to try and capture Avdiivka, Associated Press has seen drone footage in the area that shows at least 150 bodies in Russian uniforms littering the treeline.

Continue reading →