Tag Archives: Tough on Crime

Roundup: On Trudeau’s feeling re-energized

Posted on by

The CBC’s Aaron Wherry has a longread out right now about Justin Trudeau’s time in office, and the sense that he’s feeling re-invigorated and is almost certainly going to run for a fourth election, likely in 2025, which some of us (myself included) have not been so sure about. But there is a lot of observation from insiders and observers that he does seem to have the fight back (indeed, I heard from some people in the know of the funk he found himself in at one particular point), and that it’s not necessarily Pierre Poilievre’s presence that is doing it, but that he has a sense of unfinished business, of promises yet to be fulfilled.

To that end, the piece notes that Cabinet and caucus have been told to focus on four Cs: competence, confidence, contrast and campaign-readiness (in that order), of which the first is going to be incredibly important when it comes to trying to dispel this notion that “everything feels broken,” particularly when there is a pervasive sense that government can’t even get the little things right (though I would note that some of the “little things” are more complex than they may appear on the surface, and a lot of what people are complaining about is not the job of the federal government to fix, no matter that they may try to claim some kind of policy ownership, such as investing in housing when those funds are the only policy lever they have available). And yeah, some of it is their own fault (see: judicial appointments), where they decided on processes that hampered them more than it helped them, and absolutely their inability to communicate their way out of a wet paper bag is one hundred percent one of their biggest own-goal problems, which they seem resolutely unwilling to do anything about.

I know there is also a lot of talk about the “smell of death” on this government, and I will probably write something longer about that elsewhere, but nevertheless, it was interesting to read Wherry’s piece and put some of it into the context of these conversations that are being had around the pundit sphere. There are a lot of things to consider about this government, and little of it can fit into some of these fairly facile narratives.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 327:

There was a fresh round of Russian attacks on civilian infrastructure across Ukraine on Saturday, and one missile struck a nine-story building in Dnipro, killing at least twelve people, while another 30 to 40 people are still missing and could be trapped under rubble. The missile—the kind used to strike warships—may have been aimed at a nearby power station. This as Ukrainian officials continue to insist that the battle for Soledar is not lost, and this certainly takes the attention away from that. CBC also heard from a Russian conscript who was at the site of the Makiivka counter-attack, which struck Russian barracks.

https://twitter.com/gerashchenko_en/status/1614351103637991424

Continue reading →

Roundup: On tight camera shots in the Commons

Posted on by

One of the particular sub-plots of the interminable Speaker election south of the border is the discussion around camera angles on C-SPAN, and how suddenly they’re dynamic during this process. There’s a good explainer here about how the usual rules around tight shots are relaxed because this is considered a special event and not usual proceedings, and it normally only takes two or three hours and not three or four days, but that’s why suddenly they get to be much more dynamic about what they’re seeing.

This problem of camera angles is a familiar one here in Canada, where the directive, since about day two of televised proceedings in the House of Commons, has also been on tight shots, with no wide shots or reactions. This is at the behest of MPs themselves, who came up with these rules, in part because they’re convenient for them, but if you watch the very first televised Question Period, you’ll see wide shots and reactions, and it’s much more dynamic and engaging, and it’s something we should see more of. MPs, however, don’t want that. They like being able to fill camera shots (and frequently play musical chairs to do so, most especially on Fridays), because they don’t like to show how empty the Chamber is during non-QP debates, or on Fridays. They don’t like camera operators and CPAC producers to have the latitude of choosing shots in real-time, so they don’t allow it. It’s really too bad, because it could make for better viewing. That said, it’s also one of the reasons why I attend QP in person—so that I can see the full picture of what’s happening in the Chamber and not just the tight shots that obscure more than they illuminate.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 317:

While the Russians are proposing a truce over Orthodox Christmas, the Ukrainians reject it, saying that this is simply a cover to bring in more ammunition and troops to try and halt Ukrainian advances in the Donbas region. Meanwhile, American analysts suspect that one of Putin’s allies is trying to gain access to salt and gypsum mines near Bakhmut, which is why they are trying so hard to take it over.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The passing of Jim Carr

Posted on by

Just before Question Period was about to start yesterday, the news broke that Liberal MP Jim Carr, who had been dealing with cancer for the past three years, had died. Proceedings were cancelled for the day, and tributes have been pouring in.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 293:

It appears that Russia has burned through so much ammunition that they are now using decade-old stockpiles with high failure rates. Ukrainian forces say they have repelled Russian advances against four settlements in eastern Donetsk, and on eight settlements in Luhansk. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy met virtually with G7 leaders about the need for modern tanks, artillery, shells, and natural gas to help their situation.

Continue reading →

QP: We created two independent panels!

Posted on by

Both the prime minister and his deputy were in the House together for the first QP in weeks, which is always nice to see. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, he asked if any public servants, security officials, or police inform the prime minister of Beijing’s alleged interference in elections. Justin Trudeau said that while security and police take foreign interference very seriously, he could assure Canadians that in the 2019 and 2021 elections, there was no foreign interference that could have changed any of the results in any significant way. Poilievre found the answer to be tricksy, and in English, wanted to know if there was any interference period. Trudeau pointed out that there is always some level of interference, be it cyber or disinformation, but they had assurances this was not an issue and that the elections were free and fair. Poilievre still was not satisfied, and asked again. Trudeau reiterated that they had the panel of top civil servants and national security who monitored both 2019 and 2021 and found no interference. Poilievre tried again, more slowly, if there were any briefings about alleged interference, period. Trudeau stated that he had no briefings, period, around foreign-funded candidates. Poilievre insisted this was a denial of an absurdity, and repeated yet again if he had any intelligence of any interference of any kind from Beijing during either election. Trudeau reiterated that the report from the non-partisan panel that there was no interference that impacted those elections.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the NDP, and raised that the RCMP was now investigating, and if democracy was at stake, the prime minister needed to know which alleged eleven candidates were in question. Trudeau repeated that all of the reports stated anything about any interference or funding directly or indirectly from China. Blanchet was not mollified and worried that Trudeau was somehow isolating China for the sake of grandstanding. Trudeau once again cited that China does try to interfere, which is why we work with allies to protect ourselves. 

Jagmeet Singh led for the NDP, and worried about conservative premiers trying to privatise healthcare, and demanded the prime minister do something about that. Trudeau noted that on some days the NDP demand he send more money to premiers and today he was telling them not to, but any future transfers would be subject to the Canada Health Act. Singh switched to French and sounded concern about Quebec hospitals in particular, and Trudeau reiterated that they were working with provinces to deliver “real results.”

Continue reading →

QP: Being happy-clappy about dental care

Posted on by

While the PM was off at James Smith Cree Nation today, his deputy was present for the first time in a week. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he misquoted Tiff Macklem’s testimony at committee about the relationship between government deficits and inflation, and tried to wedge this into his facile narrative about blaming the government for it, and demanded the government reverse their deficits. Chrystia Freeland responded with the good news that this week, Canadians can start applying for the new dental claim benefit for children under twelve. Poilivre repeated his mendacious Macklem misquote and added in a quote from an insurance company that says they won’t accept heat pumps as primary sources of heat because they can’t be counted on to not freeze pipes, and demanded the government cancel their plan to “triple” the carbon price (which is not tripling). Freeland responded with her happy-clappy good news talking point about dental care, which was not the question, and then added in the country’s Aaa credit rating. Poilievre then worried about Canadians not being able to heat their homes in the winter and again demanded the government cancel the carbon price (which won’t do anything for affordability because the increases largely have to do with the world price of oil). Jonathan Wilkinson got up this time to note their affordability measures like doubling the GST credit, and pointed out that in spite of what the Conservatives say, the carbon price rebates benefit eight out of ten families and the Conservatives campaigned on a carbon price themselves. Poilievre then misquoted the PBO’s report on carbon prices, dropped his “triple, triple, triple” ear worm, and demanded the government cancel their planned carbon price increases. This time, Sean Fraser got up to declare that Poilievre’s questions were irrational, with his newfound opposition to heat pumps, when they are important to people who live in his part of the country, and pointed out that the cost of inaction is too great to ignore. Poilievre then pivoted to the recently announced Indo-Pacific Strategy, and a statement about challenging China for their abusive behaviours, and raised the wave of protests around that country, and he demanded that the government tell Beijing to let the protests go ahead. Maninder Sidhu got up to read a script about following the events closely, and that protesters should be able to do so peacefully.

Claude DeBellefeuille led for the Bloc, and she worried about the allegations of Chinese interference in the 2019 election, and in the absences of something more concrete from the government, wondered if the Global a news story was “fake news.” Marco Mendincino stood up to reminder her that they had an independent panel in both elections that declared that there was no interference. DeBellefeuille used this as an opportunity to make the case for a return to the per-vote subsidy as “protection” against this kind of interference, and this time Dominic LeBlanc got up to reiterate the same points.

Rachel Blaney for the NDP, and blamed Loblaws for rising food prices and demanded they pay their “fair share.” Freeland recited her well-worn talking points about corporations paying more in taxes, their Recovery Dividend, and their luxury taxes. Daniel Blaikie took over in French to repeat the same question, and Freeland recited the French version of her same talking points.

Continue reading →

QP: Directly quoting selectively from the PBO

Posted on by

The prime minister was present once again, while his deputy was busy testifying at the public inquiry. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he worried about deficits causing inflation (which they’re not), and demanded a course correction. Justin Trudeau reminded him that they were there for Canadians during the pandemic in order to ensure it was less severe than other places on the world, and that our economy bounced back faster, and insisted that the Conservatives only want to cut. Poilievre switched to English to denounce alleged comments from Seamus O’Regan, and demanded they cut the carbon price. Trudeau dismissed the concern as twisting the words of minister, and pointed to the PBO report on the carbon price and how it helps eight out of ten families. Poilievre picked up that report and cited several numbers out of context to “prove” his talking points. Trudeau, looking rather pleased, insisted that Poilievre did not look at the section about the rebates, and called him out about not caring about climate change. Poilievre insisted that the rebates were “tiny” and didn’t cover costs—and was called out by the Speaker for using the report as a prop—and Poilievre went on a tear about how the price is ineffective and hurts people. Trudeau disputed that the rebates were tiny, and noted the other benefits they have delivered, noting that Poilievre is only playing rhetorical games. Poilievre tried to bring up the cost of the hotel for the Queen’s funeral and insisted that the report proved that people are being hit hard. Trudeau countered that the report shows that the rebates compensate most families more than they pay, because fighting climate change is important while Poilievre only wants to nickel-and-dime them.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he returned to the alleged contradictions in the reports about the Xi Jinping confrontation and demanded a return to the per-vote subsidy to prevent foreign funding. Trudeau clapped back that the Bloc only want the subsidy because they can’t raise money on their own. Therrien was incensed, and insisted that China was exploiting this vulnerability, and Trudeau countered that political financing is robust and transparent, and pointed out that the media are invited to his fundraising events, and encouraged other parties to do the same.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and decried the crisis in emergency rooms and demanded the federal government show up. Trudeau took exception to the insinuation he doesn’t care about children, and pointed out that they have transferred billions to provinces and are sitting down with provinces. Singh switched to French to repeat the question and got the same response.

Continue reading →

QP: A lacklustre showdown on Chinese interference allegations

Posted on by

The prime minister was present for the first time in over a week, but curiously, not every leader was. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, as he usually does, and he quoted the prime minister in saying that state actors from elsewhere act aggressively toward our institutions and democracy, and he wondered what kinds of aggressive games they are playing. Trudeau said that whether it’s Russian disinformation on Ukraine, or Chinese interference in the diaspora or the media, or the Iranian government putting pressure on Canadians of Iranian origin, they always remain vigilance. Poilievre switched to English to wonder if the prime minister was briefed on any Chinese interference activities in the country. Trudeau remarked that he is regularly briefed by intelligence and security experts on threats to Canada, whether it’s cyber threats or interference in diaspora communities or online disinformation, there are a range of threats out there that our security agencies are vigilant against. Poilievre wondered what specific interference was referring to when he raised concerns with Xi Jinping, and Trudeau said that there are consistent engagements by Chinese officials into Canadian communities, such as the reports on the illicit “police station,” which they continue to be concerned about. Poilievre then changed topics to the carbon price, worrying about heating costs doubling in some communities and deployed his “triple, triple, triple” ear worm, concern trolled that the implementation of the federal price in three more Atlantic provinces was just delaying damage, and demanded the price be scrapped entirely. Trudeau reminded him that the price returns more money to most households, so it not only took climate action but it helped them as well, then called out the misinformation and disinformation that was being spread. Poilievre insisted that the PBO—whom he pointed out that the PM appointed—indicated otherwise (he didn’t), and demanded it be scrapped. Trudeau countered that the PBO did indeed prove that most households get more money back,  and decried the disinformation. 

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he returned to the allegations of Chinese interference in elections, and wanted clarity and the names of those allegedly funded. Trudeau took a script to insist that they had a non-partisan committee to assess threats to electoral integrity and they established that there was no compromise in either 2019 or 2021, as well as the Chief Electoral Officer didn’t see any interference, and he worried about creating false concerns. Therrien insisted he was confused, and wondered if the PM went after Xi Jinping on the basis of a newspaper article alone, and Trudeau insisted that every briefing that he has had about security or intelligence and those monitoring elections, that the integrity of elections were not called into question.

Jagmeet Singh got up, and in French, made up an allegation that wages were being blamed for inflation (they’re not), and demanded that corporate greed be tackled. Trudeau recited the well-worn talking points about raising taxes on the one percent and lowering them on the Middle Class™, stopped sending child benefit cheques to millionaires, and they raised corporate taxes and instituted their recovery dividend. Singh switched to English to decry rising interest rates, insisted that he was respecting the Bank of Canada but demanded the government do more about inflation using fiscal policy instead of monetary policy (which was entirely economically illiterate). Trudeau recited that they stepped up with supports like the doubled GST credit, the rental supports, or dental care for children (as Peter Julian kept shouting “Thanks to the NDP!”)

Continue reading →

QP: Concern about Atlantic Canada’s incoming federal carbon price

Posted on by

Though the prime minister was in town, while his deputy was not, neither were present in QP, either in person or virtually. Pierre Poileivre led off in French, and he led off with a complete misquote about what the prime minister said about interest rates, blamed the government for the Bank of Canada’s rate hikes, and demand the government stop its so-called “inflationary policies” that he said were pushing people to bankruptcy. Randy Boissonnault noted that there is an affordability crisis world-wide, which was why the government has a plan, and exhorted the Conservatives to support the budget bill when it was up for a vote after QP. Poilievre switched to English to decry that three Atlantic Canadian provinces will be subject to the federal carbon price backstop on July 1st, insisted that 40 percent of them are already living in energy poverty, and deployed his “triple, triple, triple” ear worm to demand that the government scrap its carbon price. Steven Guilbeault noted that there is no increase in carbon prices before July 1st, not during the winter, and that those three provinces will start receiving their climate rebates before that happened. Poilievre declared that the carbon price hasn’t worked because no province that has imposed it has met their targets (not entirely true), lamented the low ranking of our climate action, falsely claimed that 60 percent of people pay more in carbon prices than they get back, and again demanded the price be scrapped. Guilbeault recited that it was a fact that eight of ten households will get more back than they pay, and demanded the Conservatives release their own climate plan. Andrew Scheer got up to take over, and repeated same list of the falsehoods about the carbon price, demanded the government accept the science, and dropped the “not an environmental plan but a tax plan” point (take a drink!) Guilbeault got up to poke back, citing that the Conservatives don’t believe in science, and offered up the proof that when they were in government, their minister of science didn’t even believe in evolution, and it was a fact that emissions did decline in 2019 and 2020. Scheer stood back up and got breathier as he listed a number of false talking points about the carbon price and the environmental record of the government, and decried that three more provinces would be subjected to the federal price. Guilbeault recited that they have a great climate plan, unlike the Conservatives, because they had to play catch-up after ten years of Conservative inaction.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he accused the government of being reckless with their response to the news reports about alleged foreign interference in the 2019 election from China. Pam Damoff got up and read that the talking points about this being a serious issue and they ensured the election was free and fair. Therrien insisted that the issue was not the integrity of that election, it was the lack of transparency from the government on this. Damoff read that they established the independent panel and insisted that they have their eyes wide open, which is why they passed laws to close loopholes on foreign funding.

Alexandre Boulerice rose for the NDP, and he recited the party’s angry talking points about grocery chain CEOs. Randy Boissonnault recited that the issue of food price inflation is global but they have tasked the Competition Bureau with ensuring there was no price gouging. Blake Desjarlais took over in English to cite the reports that Loblaws was firing the unionised workers in their Edmonton warehouse—which is not a federal issue—and Andy Fillmore repeated Boissonnault’s talking points in English. 

Continue reading →

QP: Claims that carbon prices are the problem

Posted on by

While the prime minster returned from his trip abroad in the wee hours, neither he nor his deputy were present for QP today. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he lamented that Canada is 58 out of 63 countries when it comes to reducing GHG emissions, that the current government has missed every emissions reduction target (not really true and the government Poilievre was a member of sabotaged any effort at reductions), then complained that the government was carrying on with their plan to “triple” the carbon price (it triples by 2030), and demanded a better way to fight climate change. Jonathan Wilkinson reminded him that Canada has one of the most detailed plans to fight climate change and that we will hit our targets to reduce emissions by 2030, while still ensuring that life is affordable. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his needling, and dismissed the carbon price as a “tax” that is being “triple, triple, tripled” (it’s not a tax and it’s not tripling anytime soon), and demanded the government get rid of the price. Wilkinson repeated that they have made enormous progress, started from a place where the Conservatives spent a decade doing nothing. After the Speaker interrupted and gently chided MPs to stop shouting, Wilkinson started his answer over again, ending on his reminder that eight out of ten people get more money back than they pay in carbon prices, and raised the announcement made earlier in the morning to help more people transition to heat pumps. Poilievre falsely claimed that by focusing on technology and not “taxes” that the Conservatives reduced emissions (blatantly untrue, unless he is referring to emissions intensity in the oil sands, which didn’t see the intensity reductions that they like to claim), and then repeated his claim that the carbon price is the real problem. Wilkinson needled Poilievre in return, saying that his lament about taxes is ironic considering that Poilievre spent his entire working life being paid by the taxpayer where as Wilkinson spent twenty years in the clean tech sector, and then stated that the carbon price is not the whole climate plan, it’s part of a plan that also includes regulation and investment, and ended that fighting climate change can generate prosperity if you know what you’re doing. Poilievre got back up to repeat his same talking points about missed targets and was concerned about Atlantic Canadians facing a doubled heating bill (which has precious little to do with carbon prices), and Lawrence MacAulay stood up, somewhat surprisingly, to decry that they had a prime example of climate devastation with Hurricane Fiona, and that they need to continue to address climate change like the government is doing. Poilievre fell back on the canard that the carbon price has failed to reduce emissions, and dismissed the plan to help people transition to heat pumps. This time Ginette Petitpas Taylor got up, and was “stunned” by the comments from the other side, given that she saw the devastation of Hurricane Fiona, pointed to a school in PEI whose roof was blown off completely, which is why the government has a plan.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he worried about the confrontation with Xi Jinping and the allegations of Chinese interference in the 2019 election and the fact that the prime minister later said he wasn’t briefed on the matter, insinuating that the prime minister wasn’t honest with the media about the briefing. Marco Mendicino said that they had independent panels who determined there was no foreign interference, and they already passed interference legislation. Therrien worried that the confrontation was diplomatic incompetence or that the government is hiding something and wondered which it was. Mendicino praised national security agencies for their work and wanted support for their cyber-security legislation. 

Peter Julian rose for the NDP, and in French, he drained about corporate profits and accused the government of blaming workers’ wages instead of corporate greed for inflation (which is nonsense). Randy Boissonneault listed ways that the government is making big businesses pay their fair share. Heather McPherson repeated the question in English, and Andy Fillmore read the English response of the same response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Backseat driving healthcare talks

Posted on by

I occasionally find myself amused by some of the backseat driving/armchair quarterbacking that happens in Canadian politics, and there was no more perfect example that Jagmeet Singh putting out a press release yesterday declaring that if he were prime minister, he would have sat down with the provinces and not left until he was satisfied that they have all the resources they need. On the one hand it’s kind of hilarious because most of the time, Singh can barely recognise that provincial jurisdiction actually exists, or he seems to think that a Green Lantern Ring and sufficient political will would actually solve federalism. On the other, I can’t decide if that means that he thinks he’s got amazing powers of negotiation, or if he’s declaring himself a chump who will fall for the provinces’ strong-arm tactics.

Imagine for just a moment what Singh means when he says he won’t leave the table until he gives the provinces what they need. It sounds an awful lot like he’s going to give them a blank cheque and then pat himself on the back for having fixed healthcare. Meanwhile, the provinces take that money, put a paltry amount back into the system, continue on with privatizing as much as they possibly can (look at what Danielle Smith is up to in Alberta now that she’s fired the entire board of Alberta Health Services), reduce their own share of the funding because of the increased federal dollars, and then give tax breaks in the hopes of getting re-elected. And we know this because all of this has happened before, and all of it will happen again if this funding doesn’t come with some pretty strict conditions and strings. And the sooner more people start calling the premiers on their bullshit, the faster we can get to a deal where they accept strings that will actually do something meaningful with those increased federal dollars.

Ukraine Dispatch, Day 269:

Ukraine’s electricity grid operator is warning people that blackouts can last for several hours as Russians continue to pound the country’s electrical systems. Russians are also continuing their push toward Bakhmut with renewed intensity. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy appeared at the Halifax Security Forum by video to ask NATO countries to assist with a ten-part peace plan, and that he hoped Canada would show leadership on one of those items.

https://twitter.com/kiraincongress/status/1593694607459717124

Continue reading →