Tag Archives: The King

Roundup: Ahistorical expectations about project timelines

Posted on by

A couple of quick notes for the weekend. First is that for all of the projects referred to the Major Projects Office, none have actually officially been designated a PONI (Project of National Importance), so my calling the referred projects as such is admittedly premature. But that also means that none of them have the special rules that trigger the Henry VIII Clause from the legislation, which again, leads to the same question that Althia Raj asked in her most recent column about why the rush to ram that bill through Parliament with almost no debate and little stakeholder input if they haven’t bothered to use it, nearly six months later.

The other note is that the talk about timelines remain ahistorical and nothing but wishful thinking. “We used to build big things. We built a railway in four years.” Erm, not really. This is likely a reason why most of the projects that have been referred to the MPO so far have been in the works for years is for the very reason that they’re much further along. This is likely going to be one of the death knells of Danielle Smith’s pipeline plan, which is that it’s starting from zero, and there is no way, even with the magic wand of the Henry VIII clause, that they can make it go from concept to shovels in two years.

They didn't go from "Shall we build a railway?" to a railway in four years.The CPR was a Confederation promise before 1867. Construction began in 1881.Or, actually, in 1875, when they started a section in Manitoba and northern Ontario. Which hooked up to other rails built on their own earlier.

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2025-09-14T23:17:30.293Z

There were planning, scandal, false starts, re-awarding of the contract. And not a lot of attention to, you know, Indigenous people's rights.Or working conditions, which were eventually the subject of Heritage Minute you might recall. www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE3I…

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2025-09-14T23:20:55.646Z

What's the right length of time to plan and build a new high-speed rail line in 2025? I don't know.But they didn't do the entire CPR from concept to completion in four years, and I don't think we want a dead temporary foreign worker for every mile of track.

— David Reevely (@davidreevely.bsky.social) 2025-09-14T23:23:15.475Z

And then there’s Poilievre’s completely nonsense demanding that government “get out of the way,” or Ontario’s Stephen Lecce talking about the problems with federal regulations killing projects when that also relies on a very selective reading of history and what happened. Northern Gateway started planning before Harper took over, and over his nine years in power, Mr. “Get government out of the way” couldn’t get it past the finish line either (in part because they couldn’t even be arsed to live up to their own consultation process with First Nations). Nothing Poilievre is saying is true, so We The Media need to stop treating it like it’s credible.

Ukraine Dispatch

The attack on Kyiv early Friday killed six and injured dozens, along with more strikes on energy facilities. Ukraine hit the oil port at Novorossiyk the same day, suspending oil exports. Ukraine is now mass-producing interceptor drones to bolster their air defences.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Any excuse to delegitimise the Court

Posted on by

There was a big eruption yesterday after the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the mandatory minimum sentence for possession or accessing child sexual abuse materials, but nearly all of the outrage is based on the headline and not actually reading the decision, because of course it is. Who wants to actually read when you can just rage? While I would suggest you read my story on the decision (go ahead, I’ll wait), the highlights remain that the Court strongly denounced this kind of activity, that the two accused in this instance did receive sentences that met the mandatory minimum, but that the decision focused on the scope of the mandatory minimum. Essentially, it is a challenge to Parliament—if you make laws overly broad, they are vulnerable to being struck down because you risk giving a grossly disproportionate sentence to someone on certain sets of facts, so maybe craft better laws.

That of course didn’t stop the demands for the Notwithstanding Clause to come from Pierre Poilievre, Danielle Smith, Doug Ford, and Scott Moe, who charmingly added that this kind of decision is why Parliament alone should make laws. None of them bothered to actually read the decision. None of them actually thought about what it said, and why using blunt instruments can do more harm than good in certain cases. More than that, there was an immediate need to delegitimise the Court on manufactured outrage rather than accept that the Court still has to safeguard rights when Parliament doesn’t do its job properly. Oh, but wait—these are all premiers and leaders who are less interested in rights than they are in targeting and scapegoating minorities for their own political ends, so of course they want to keep the courts at bay.

Watch out! Kenney's decided to start stroking his rage-boner again!

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-11-01T02:43:07.978Z

We are at a place in this country right now where rights are under attack by populist leaders, be it Alberta, Quebec, Saskatchewan, or Ontario (though Ford is more likely to back down when actually confronted). They like to use language like “the will of the people,” which means that it becomes open season on minorities, which is antithetical to a liberal democracy like ours, and they don’t want any checks on that, which is why they take every opportunity to delegitimize the Court. This particular situation was just too easy for them to weaponise, and so they went with it, to hell with the facts. There is an outcome they want, and that is unchecked power.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-10-31T22:56:01.799Z

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that Russia has deployed some 170,000 troops to try and claim Pokrovsk, but Ukraine is slowly whittling them away. To that end, special forces troops have been landed at the city. Meanwhile, Ukraine reports that they have successfully struck 160 Russian oil and energy facilities this year.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1984173351720440022

Continue reading →

Roundup: The rules Poilievre defended are no longer good enough

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre decided he needed some more media attention yesterday, so he called a press conference in Ottawa, and declared that following the public disclosure of prime minister Mark Carney’s ethics filings, that none of this was good enough, that Carney needed to cash out all of his investments instead of putting them into a blind trust, and that nothing was good enough because he’ll be constantly managing conflicts (even though the point of the ethics screen is that he isn’t managing conflicts, his chief of staff and the Clerk of the Privy Council manage the conflict so that he’s not involved). Perish the thought that this special set of rules for Carney will only serve to keep other accomplished individuals away from political life.

Of course, the whole episode is rife with hypocrisy. These are the conflict-of-interest laws that the Harper government put into place, of which Poilievre was not only a part of, but defended them, particularly when questions arose around Nigel Wright and his assets when he was Harper’s chief of staff, and Poilievre personally swore up and down at committee that these rules were amazing and that the blind trust was blind, and so on. Of course, now that it’s convenient, his tune has changed, but that didn’t stop the CBC from pulling out the footage from the archives.

Meanwhile, Poilievre also told reporters that the country needs “more people leaving than coming,” which is not even a dog-whistle at this point but a bullhorn. If this is pandering to the far-right elements of the riding he’s trying to win, well, it is likely to backfire on his attempts to continue wooing other newcomer communities, particularly the Sikh and Punjabi communities he spent so much time wooing in the leadup to the last election. Immigration numbers have already flatlined, and it’s going to cause problems down the road, sooner than later. For Poilievre to say this as the mass deportations south of the border pick up speed shows he’s not only incapable of thinking through the implications of the things he says, but he’s fine with mouthing the words of fascists, and that’s a real problem.

(Incidentally, Poilievre once again said he opposes Alberta separation but says that they have “legitimate grievances,” and repeated his same bullshit line about the Ottawa telling Alberta to “pay up and shut up.” They pay the same income tax as the rest of us, and have the same representation in Parliament).

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones killed two people in the Kherson region. President Zelenskyy is proposing a major government reshuffle that includes a new prime minister, while the current one is to be shuffled to defence. Trump’s “ultimatum” to Putin to reach a ceasefire in 50 days is just license for him to keep firing drones and missiles at Ukraine for another 50 days, and probably longer.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A lost vote for the sake of point-scoring

Posted on by

The opposition shenanigans manifested during one of the very first votes of the new Parliament, where the government was not able to defeat the Conservative amendment to the Address in Reply to the Speech From the Throne. Said amendment urged the government to table a spring budget, but it’s not binding, and it looks like Mark Carney and the rest of Cabinet will take it under advisement and leave it at that (because you can’t produce a budget within two weeks’ notice, and the Conservatives know that very well).

What gets me is that you have the Conservatives (and others) going “what does it say when the government loses their first vote?” when it says nothing at all. If anything, it says that in a minority parliament, the opposition parties will do everything they can to embarrass the government, just as they have in previous parliaments, and given the current configuration of parties, this is really just a continuation of the constant juvenile bullshit we’ve seen over and over again that resulted in a paralyzed House of Commons last fall. Nothing really changed, and we’re going to see more that very same thing because we have the same insistence on juvenile point-scoring from the opposition, and we have the same Liberal government that is both inept at communicating their way out of a wet paper bag, and who are tactically incompetent because they think that they will somehow come out looking sympathetic to the procedural warfare and gamesmanship when they absolutely won’t because legacy media will simply not actually call anyone’s bullshit, but just both-sides the whole thing, and the Liberals will always lose in that framing. And I suppose what it says about the government is that they haven’t learned a single gods damned lesson from their near-death experience, and Carney’s complete political inexperience isn’t doing them any favours here either.

Meanwhile, the government introduced their big omnibus border bill, and it has a lot of troubling elements, from lowering thresholds for electronic data collection by law enforcement that won’t always require a warrant, and gives Canada Post more authority to open mail they deem suspicious. It also changes particular thresholds for asylum claims, and gives the government powers to simply stop claims or immigration processes with no explanation or apparent avenues for appeal. There are some positives, such as more resources for financial crimes, but in the grand scheme of things, I’m not sure it balances the negatives. The government claims they found the right balance that respects Charter rights, but I am dubious, and I suspect that law enforcement convinced them that they need these rights-violating powers and used Trump’s threats as a justification to get what they want.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian rocket attack killed at least four and injured at least 25 in Sumy. The city of Sumy remains under threat as Russians advance in that region. Ukraine detonated explosives on the concrete piers supporting the bridge linking Russia to Crimea, forcing its closure.

https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1929871991034568954

Continue reading →

Roundup: More provincial buck-passing, FCM edition

Posted on by

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities had their big conference in Ottawa over the past couple of days, and there were a host of mayors and councillors on the Hill to meet with MPs. Yesterday afternoon, Mark Carney addressed their conference to basically give the same speech he’s been giving for the past couple of weeks about things like “moving to delay to delivery,” and so on. But I did find it interesting that as part of this address to the FCM, he essentially told them that he’ll be too busy with nation-building projects to reform municipal funding structures.

It’s kind of funny, but at the same time, I have to ask how that’s actually his job, or the job of the federal government at all. Cities are creatures of provincial legislation. If you want to reform their funding structures, the provinces need to sit down and hammer that out, unless you want to start amending the constitution, and I’m pretty sure that nobody wants to open that particular Pandora’s Box (which, incidentally, was not a box but a jar). We could let cities collect their own income or sales taxes, or other forms of financing that would be better than simply property taxes, but provinces refuse, and in some cases, have specifically legislated against it. And we’ve known for decades now that cities have funding challenges that they need something to be done about, but have provinces responded? Of course not. They simply demand the federal government send them more money.

With this in mind, Toronto mayor Olivia Chow was also here for the FCM meeting, and she says she is encouraged by Carney’s sense of urgency on tackling the housing crisis, but again, she too is here calling for the federal government to directly intervene with money. One thing she has proposed is for necessary infrastructure to build more housing, for the federal government to basically pay the municipality’s one-third share (so they essentially pay two-thirds and the province pay the other third), and it’s just so infuriating. The federal government is not the purse for every other jurisdiction. Provinces have the very same revenue-generating tools as the federal government does, but they refuse to use them because they would rather beg for money and let the federal government be the bad guy with their taxes than the province. This kind of absolute immaturity is just exhausting, and it’s one of the reasons why things just aren’t getting done in this country.

Or ever, if we're being honest.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-30T13:30:00.766Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia’s massive drone attack overnight Thursday injured two people in Kharkiv, and hit a town that sits on the border with Romania, which is a NATO member.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Budget complaints vs Estimates votes

Posted on by

The talk about the lack of a spring budget is reaching histrionics in the House of Commons, while the Conservatives nevertheless agreed to the unanimous consent motion to conduct the study of the Estimates in a rushed manner within the House of Commons as committee of the whole instead of splitting departmental spending off to relevant committees, because it will take too long to establish said committees before these votes need to be taken. And the Estimates are the actual money votes—a budget is a political document, so if the Conservatives are that concerned about where the government plans to spend, well, that’s entirely in these Estimates. The information is entirely there for them.

At the same time, we’ve heard these very same Conservatives (and some of their mouthpieces in the media) decry that there is no reduced spending within these Estimates. And of course not—these are based on last year’s budget and statutory obligations, so there wouldn’t have been any time to book any particular savings in the four weeks since the election. Not to mention that if you want to do a proper programme review in order to achieve smart savings, those take time—up to two years, which would have a better chance of achieving lasting savings. The Conservatives were masters of achieving paper savings in their last couple of budgets when they were in power, as they were so eager to get to a faux balanced budget that they booked a tonne of savings that not only didn’t materialise, but in many cases wound up costing them more (Shared Services, Phoenix) because the act of cutting the spending before the enterprise transformation was complete wound up costing more money in the end. It would seem that nobody learned a single gods named lesson from that exercise.

Meanwhile, Conservatives and their proxies keep insisting that they would rather sit into July so that they can get a budget, and let me once again say that no, they actually do not. There is almost nothing pleasant about an Ottawa summer, and if any of those MPs think they want to be sweltering in Parliament with jacket-and-tie dress codes with a humidex of 39ºC, no, they actually do not. This is performative nonsense, and everyone needs to grow the hell up.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-05-28T13:25:16.198Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Three people were injured in a Russian attack on Svitlovodsk yesterday. President Zelenskyy warned that Russia is massing 50,000 troops outside of Sumy region, which appears to be preparations for a summer offensive. Ukrainian drones hit several Russian weapons production facilities overnight. Russia is now proposing new peace talks in Istanbul (again)—but of course, this is one more deception. If they actually want peace, they can simply pack up and go home.

Continue reading →

QP: New faces, same dynamics

Posted on by

A new Parliament, a new and untested Speaker, a new and untested prime minister, and an old familiar smirking face filling in for the leader of the opposition, at least until the party leader can win a new seat. Will anything actually change with all of these new faces, or have the dynamics entrenched themselves? We are about to find out.

Andrew Scheer led off in English, welcoming Mark Carney to his first Question Period, and complained that the government “secretly” dropped counter tariffs (it wasn’t secret), and wondered how he would make up the fiscal shortfall. Carney first thanked his constituents and the Speaker, and gave the line that the tariffs have maximum effect on the U.S. while minimal effect on Canadians. Scheer chirped that he didn’t take long to not answer questions, before demanding a budget before summer vacation. Carney suggested that Poilievre’s plan did not include a budget, and said that new legislation would be on the way to build the economy. Scheer recited a bunch of bullshit about the Liberals damaging the economy, and demanded the government repeal the old Bill C-69. Carney recited some lines about building the economy and a major project office. Pierre Paul-Hus took over in French to demand a budget, and Carney insisted in French that he has a daring and ambitious plan to bring together the Canadian economy into one economy and not thirteen. Paul-Hus repeated the demand, and Carney insisted that they would act immediately to cut taxes on the Middle Class™ and reduce or remove GST on new housing. Paul-Hus then turned to the false claim that that the counter-tariffs were removed in secret, and Carney responded that he must be referring to the Conservative platform with its $20 billion deficit.

Yves-François Blanchet rose for the Bloc, and he called the King a “foreign monarch” before wondering why there was no mention of trade in the Speech from the Throne. Carney said that if he had been there, he would have heard about the global trade system. Blanchet called the Speech “centralising” and railed against the “one economy” talking points, likening provinces to branches of a bank headquartered in Toronto. Carney said this is a crisis and a time for unity, which is why the premiers are meeting this weekend in Saskatoon. Blanchet pivoted to the climate crisis, and noted that there was “nothing” about it in the Speech. Carney said that the climate crisis does exist, which is why we need to become an energy “superpower” in clean and conventional energy, and it would come up at the G7 meeting.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The King and the Speech from the Throne

Posted on by

The King delivered the Speech from the Throne yesterday, and it went about as well as expected. His French was strong, and the introduction that he wrote himself (or that his office wrote) included language about reconciliation, Canadian identity, and the parts of the country that he takes with him. The bulk of the speech was pretty predictable Mark Carney points, but it was weird hearing the King read out how much the tax cut is expected to save families. (Here are five key messages, the focus on joining ReArm Europe, and some deeper analysis).

https://bsky.app/profile/jrobson.bsky.social/post/3lq5yh6k44k2u

The responses to the speech were, frankly, rote and predictable. Pierre Poilievre complained that it didn’t spell out implementation, which no Speech does, and then demanded a whole bunch of non sequitur legislation be repealed, because he said so. The Bloc, naturally, claimed that Carney wants to centralize power and ignore Quebec’s interests. And Don Davies of the NDP said there wasn’t anything about workers in there, and called the King “foreign.” Does every opposition party in this country have to be so gods damned lazy? Is it really so difficult to actually come up with a new answer about something (while also not making up absolute bullshit, holus-bolus?)

Every bill he lists he has lied about what it actually does. Every. Single. Bill.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-27T17:30:33.538Z

https://bsky.app/profile/emmettmacfarlane.com/post/3lq67lfvxic2k

Meanwhile, whether by coincidence or by design, shortly after the Kiing and Queen departed Canada, Trump declared that the price tag for Canada to join the so-called “Golden Dome” is $61 billion, but free if they become the 51st state. You know, after the new US ambassador to Canada said that the “51st state” talk was over and that we need to “move on.” Yeah, that was really going to happen.

Old enough to remember this from the new U.S. ambassador to Canada:“From my standpoint, from the president’s standpoint, 51st state’s not coming backs.”(Ten days ago.)www.nytimes.com/2025/05/17/w…

— Brian Finucane (@bcfinucane.bsky.social) 2025-05-27T21:50:20.627Z

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2025-05-27T14:08:17.858Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The number of Russian drones attacking Ukraine fell to about 60 overnight Tuesday, but there were still several injuries.

Continue reading →

Roundup: King home on Canadian soil

Posted on by

Following the Speaker’s election in the morning, the King and Queen of Canada arrived home on Canadian soil, to begin their all-too-brief visit. Stops were made at Lansdowne Park, both for a walkabout and for the King to meet local producers at the farmer’s market, being as this is one of his interests, and from there, they headed to Rideau Hall for a tree-planting, followed by audiences with the Governor General, the prime minister, leaders of the Assembly of First Nations, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, and the Métis National Council, as well as provincial lieutenant-governors and territorial commissioners. And then an early night, as the royal couple try to remain on UK time. (Write-ups from The Canadian Press, the CBC, the Star, and the Ottawa Citizen, with a few photos here).

Home on Canadian soil. #MapleCrown

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-26T17:37:48.786Z

The Sovereign’s Flag for Canada flying over Rideau Hall, denoting that King Charles III is in residence

— Patricia Treble (@patriciatreble.bsky.social) 2025-05-26T23:23:58.610Z

Today will make the first official use of the modified Canadian Royal Standard of the sovereign. It was changed following the death of EIIR and will remain the same for each future reign. It is an expression of Canadian sovereignty and is drawn from the Arms of Canada.

— (@rberthelsen.bsky.social) 2025-05-26T11:30:03.223Z

I have to say that there was a pretty big reception at every event—the airport at the arrival, at Lansdowne Park, and at Rideau Hall, and while the weather (mostly) cooperated, I do think that there is always an outpouring of affection at these events that takes some people by surprise, because we spend the week ahead of the event running stories about how “indifferent” everyone is to the monarchy, or interview the usual suspects (republicans, separatists, people who can’t read their bloody history or civics textbooks and know what a constitutional monarch actually is), and paint a dour picture and lo, the people turn out and are enthusiastic, even though we were constantly told that people weren’t going to warm up to Charles, or that he wasn’t going to live up to his mother. We’re not seeing that, which is nice to see for a change.

https://twitter.com/RoyalFamily/status/1927145761646485658

This all being said, there was one bit of a hiccough, where Rideau Hall put out a tweet that talked about the “meaningful bond between our nations,” with emojis for the Union Jack and the Canadian Flag, after Mary Simon earlier put out a statement welcoming the King of Canada home. I have my suspicions that her social media team are, well, the b-team after Julie Payette chased the good staff out of Rideau Hall, but some on, guys. Your moment to showcase the King of Canada is here, and you treat him like a foreign curiosity? For. Fuck. Sakes. (Yes, Rideau Hall deleted the tweet and sent out a revised one a short while later, but come on!).

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-26T21:54:54.426Z

Ukraine Dispatch

There were more Russian attacks against Kyiv and other targets, with injuries reported in Odesa. The governor of Sumy region says that four more settlements have been captured by Russian force.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The kids are back

Posted on by

Parliament is back today, after nearly six months away, and first order of business is to elect a new Speaker, and there are eight MPs on the list. Fergus is not going to get it, because he proved to be an unsuitable choice, and I doubt that either the Liberals or any of the other opposition parties will want d’Entremont in as an opposition Speaker, because frankly it won’t be worth it. (The rare occasion where the opposition still held the Speaker was when it was Liberal Peter Milliken during the early Harper years, because Milliken was so well-liked, and nobody has managed to live up to his legacy). If you ask me, it should go to Alexandra Mendès, who has the most experience in the Chair, and who has proven herself to be completely no-nonsense when she’s in it, but MPs have time and again decided that they weren’t looking for experience or being no-nonsense. It was the Conservatives who wanted Anthony Rota in the chair last Parliament because he was a genial idiot and was more concerned with being everyone’s friend than in really enforcing decorum and they knew he would go easy on them, while Fergus was a novel choice instead of experienced. It was only after Fergus had one too many oopses that the Bloc decided that maybe it was time for a woman in the Chair again, and were ready to back Mendès if they managed to oust Fergus. Can they get enough votes this time? Stay tuned to find out.

Meanwhile, the Liberals held their first caucus meeting, which meant the inevitable question on the (garbage) Reform Act, and wouldn’t you know it, the Liberals voted against it, which made every pundit in this country cry out about how cowardly they were, while you had journalists writing up garbage copy with things like “they won’t be able to vote out” the leader without this, which is not only wrong, but dangerously wrong. (The CBC story with that particular line did edit it out on the next pass, but yes, I was absolutely livid).

"Liberal MPs decided against adopting the Reform Act during their caucus meeting Sunday, which means they won't be able to vote out the newly-elected leader if they sour on him down the line."No. That is absolutely wrong. Could a single fucking journalist in this country learn some basic civics?

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2025-05-25T21:21:03.151Z

MPs have always had the ability to vote out a leader. A simple non-confidence vote in caucus is all it takes. You don’t need the stupid Act and its rules because it actually makes it harder by erecting a bunch of thresholds that are absolutely unnecessary. The problem, however, is for decade we had a pundit class who kept insisting that MPs were “powerless,” and we enforced a learned helplessness among them, and then Michel Chong came in with his ridiculous Act in order to look like the democratic hero when he actually just made things worse, and now it’s an intractable frame that everyone insists on using even though it’s false, creates wrong expectations, and is now self-reinforcing because when they vote against it, they’re being explicitly told that they are giving away powers that they might otherwise have, which is bullshit. “But if MPs have the power, then why didn’t they vote out Trudeau?” Because those MPs couldn’t organise a tea party for themselves if their lives depended on it. They had woken up to the problem and were trying to do something, but they were being meek and modest, and trying to convince Trudeau to do the right thing rather than vote him out and embarrass him. Obviously, it didn’t work, and Freeland was the one who needed to make the dramatic move, which goes even more to prove that the Act is useless. The state of civics in this country is intolerably bad, and our pundit class and journalists keep making it worse.

Ukraine Dispatch

The assaults on Kyiv continued over the weekend, with dozens of drones and missiles attacking overnight Saturday, injuring 15, while Sunday saw one of the largest attacks since the start of the war, with 367 drones and missiles fired (which included areas other than Kyiv), killing at least 12 people. Russia also claims to have captured two more settlements in Donetsk and one in Sumy. Another 307 prisoners were swapped by each side on Saturday, in spite of the massive Russian attacks, and another 303 each on Sunday, bringing it to a total of 1000 each side.

Continue reading →