Tag Archives: Trade

Roundup: The imagined need for Cardy

Posted on by

I don’t really want to give the “Canadian Future Party” (formerly the “Centre Ice Conservatives”) too much air time and attention, but their interim leader, Dominic Cardy (formerly leader of the New Brunswick NDP who defected to that provinces’ Progressive Conservative Party but now sits as an independent after a falling out with Blaine Higgs) was making the media rounds yesterday, and he was mostly saying ridiculous things about the state of politics as they are today.

In order to try and claim the centrist high ground, Cardy rightly points to the fact that the Conservatives are moving to the far right in many areas (and many of his party’s organizers appear to be disaffected Conservatives), but he then tried to insist that they are going to be different from the Liberals by claiming that the Liberals are moving to the “extremes.” Reader, I howled with laughter. The Liberals have barely budged from their amorphous centrist position, moving ever-so-slightly to the left by actually implementing some of the programmes they’ve been trying to for a couple of decades, like child care, which has a hell of an economic case to recommend it when you look at the participation of women in the labour force and the economic returns that it brings. I’m not sure what “extremes” Cardy seems to be thinking of—the Liberals haven’t nationalized any industries; they haven’t abolished private property or beheaded any billionaires. Hell, they’ve barely raised the taxes on said billionaires, whose existence remains a policy failure in any just society. For all his talk about being an “economic disaster,” the country’s books are the strongest in the G7, the deficits that have been run outside of the height of COVID were rounding errors in the size of our economy, we had the lowest inflation spike of comparator economies, it returned to the control zone fastest, and we’ve achieved the soft landing of avoiding a recession after said inflationary spike. Cardy’s economic daydreams appear to be coming from some kind of fantasyland.

Selley is right—this isn’t an issue about ideologues, and Cardy’s going on about their policies being “evidence-based” is another one his weird fantasy daydreams. If we wanted a technocracy, we would install one, but governing is about making choices, and sometimes there are trade-offs to that policy. You can’t just keep shouting “evidence-based!” because sometimes the decisions you need to make will need some kind of an ideological grounding in order to weigh which trade-offs you’re willing to make. Nothing Cardy is offering here has even the hint of being serious, and people should recognize that fact.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile struck port infrastructure in Odesa on Wednesday night, while a drone attack killed two medics in Kharkiv region, and more energy infrastructure was hit in the Chernihiv region. Ukraine says they have pushed furtherinto the Kursk region, and are now claiming this is about creating a “buffer zone” to prevent shelling of Ukrainian territory from positions within Kursk. Here is a look at the use of drone warfare as part of the Kursk operation, such as using them to strike four airfields in surrounding regions.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Sutcliffe gets a federal no

Posted on by

With a bit of an apology to non-Ottawa residents, but our mayor, Mark Sutcliffe, is trying to blackmail the federal and provincial governments for more money, and insists that the city’s budget shortfall isn’t his fault. That’s a lie, and his low-tax austerity plan has bitten him in the ass, and he wants someone else to bail him out, but man, has he made some choices. There is plenty about the budget hole that is his fault, not the least of which is pandering to rural and suburban voters at the expense of downtown meaning that their property taxes stay low while downtown’s are high (under the rubric that multi-unit buildings put more strain on the system, rather than the cost of extending the system to ever-more-distant suburbs and exurbs). In fact, during the last city election, his main rival warned him that his plan had a massive budget hole in it and lo, they were proved right. Funny that.

Well, the federal government isn’t having any of it, and for good reason, not the least of which is that they are not in the mood to set the precedent that bailing out one city because of their poor choices, which will lead to every other city demanding the same, and no, the whole issue of payments for federal properties in lieu of property taxes are not justification. So, Sutcliffe is pretty much out of luck, because I’m pretty sure that Doug Ford is going to give him much the same response. Of course, this is likely just a PR move so that he can justify the tax increases that he should have instituted two years ago, but making the federal government your punching bag to justify doing your own job is pretty sad.

Ukraine Dispatch

In spite of Ukraine downing all 27 drones Russia launched overnight Thursday, Russians bombed a shopping mall in Kostiantynivka in the Donestsk region, killing at least 14 people. The UN says that July was the deadliest month for Ukrainian civilians since 2022. Russia has declared a federal emergency as a result of the Ukrainian incursion in Kursk. Ukrainian forces also raided Russian forces on the Kinburn Spit in the Black Sea, and hit an airfield with their drone attack on the Lipetsk region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Desperately latching onto a narrative

Posted on by

It’s not unexpected, but over the past fifty-two hours or so, we are getting the attempts to wedge the Canada Angle™ onto the Joe Biden/Kamala Harris handoff, and trying to somehow it to Justin Trudeau. When it comes from ignorant Americans, it’s a bit creepy and you want to tell them to worry about their own messes. When it comes from Canadians, it’s cringey and a little bit desperate.

Even if Justin Trudeau were to somehow miraculously decide it was time for him to step aside, say after a long walk along the beach during his vacation right now, there will be no automatic handoff to Chrystia Freeland. Even if she were still interested in the leadership at this point (and it’s not clear if she were, because I suspect that even she realizes that no matter how competent of a minister she is, she’s something of a charisma black hole), there is no internal process for leadership selection, and the process the party designed to bring us Trudeau needs months of voter sign-ups in order to build to a coronation for a new personality cult hermit crab to inherit the empty shell of a party brand. It’s not a quick pivot, and Trudeau would likely still need to remain in a leadership capacity until a handoff, months later, which gives his successor little runway. (As I wrote in my column, if this were a healthy Westminster democracy with caucus selection of leadership, this could have been handled weeks or months ago).

Aside from that fact, there is no consensus candidate to be that replacement that would allow for a handoff like with Harris, where the Americans’ interminable election process means that they had little time to find a replacement before their convention, and all of the major players decided to line up behind Harris. That wouldn’t happen here because there is no one that the party is going to rally around as a whole. There are frankly too many personalities who want that leadership, even if it’s a poisoned chalice by now, and I’m not sure how the dynamics of trying to convert from one cult of personality to another plays on the fly rather than after a complete crash and rebuild. In any case, this isn’t the US, it’s not even remotely the same as Biden/Harris, and the pundit class needs to cool their jets.

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian attack damaged a power facility in the Sumy region, resulting in more power cuts. Russians claim that a Ukrainian drone attack damaged a ferry and killed one person in port.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Senate criticisms that miss the mark

Posted on by

The Globe & Mail wrote an unnamed Editorial Board missive on Friday, about how the “Trudeau Senate” is not a better Senate overall. While long-time readers may not be surprised to know that I actually agree with this, I do not, however, endorse the thinking or methodology behind the Globe editorial, because it’s sloppy, lazy, and ultimately doesn’t understand the Senate and what it’s supposed to be, but that shouldn’t be a surprise given that the Elder Pundits have never actually understood the Senate or its function.

To wit: They start out with the concern trolling from that shoddy CBC article last week about how recent appointees to the Senate include former party donors, which I dismantled in my column last week, so I’m not going to repeat it here. Suffice to say, anyone who clutches their pearls at this misses the mark at the bigger danger of only appointing people completely divorced from politics. They misjudge what the rules changes recently passed mean (or that they were largely about changing the names of everything), and try to make them sound ominous when they don’t have a grasp on the internal dynamics. They raise the costs of the Senate, but compare it to a base year when the Senate was about twenty senators short, but they also seem to not understand that senators need to organise themselves internally, and that costs money for staff and infrastructure. And no, an “independent” senate should not be comprised of about 100 “loose fish” with a Speaker and a Government Leader, because that would be complete chaos.

The only genuine point they make is that the Senate is producing fewer substantive reports, which is true. And why? Because when there so many type-A people appointed who feel that they have earned this position because they applied for it (which again, is a Problem with how Trudeau’s process), the majority of them feel like they should be off doing their own projects, which has meant an absolute explosion in Senate public bills (which are their equivalent of private members’ bills), and you have a bunch of Senators doing things like commissioning polls, or trying to fly to international conferences and justifying it on their expenses (even when they were denied permission by Internal Economy) because they’re important Senators. Trudeau’s Senate is not a better Senate than the one he inherited—which had its problems!—but not for the reasons the Globe’s Elder Pundits imagine.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian missiles and drones struck the Kharkiv region, killing two and damaging energy facilities and rail infrastructure. Russia’s Black Sea Tuapse oil refinery was damaged by a Ukrainian drone attack. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is again calling for long-range weapons to protect the country after another drone attack on Kyiv, the fifth in two weeks.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1814560384864412036

Continue reading →

Roundup: The aftermath and the rhetoric

Posted on by

In the wake of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in the United States, there has been no shortage of reaction in this country, including Justin Trudeau actually calling Trump to send his regards, but the reaction that should raise the most eyebrows was from Pierre Poilievre, who says that he’s happy that the alleged shooter was killed. No call for justice, nothing about the rule of law or due process, just summary execution without a trial. That shouldn’t be a surprise considering he says that he wants to use the Notwithstanding Clause to take away the civil rights of the accused before they have even had a trial, but this is where this kind of rhetoric goes, and we need to be aware of that.

https://twitter.com/acoyne/status/1812525573954064727

While we’re being reassured in Canada that our security services are on the case, the debate over the rhetoric of political violence is ramping up even further in the US, given that they are a country where assassinations and attempted assassinations are far more common, as is gun culture (and a whole pop culture mythology that you solve your problems with guns). Of course, you have the far-right in that country insisting that this is Biden and the Democrats’ fault by pointing out (correctly!) that Trump is a threat to democracy (which he has himself stated that he’s going to be a “dictator on day one”), and so this is his fault. Never mind the normalized rhetoric on their side, where your candidates pose with automatic rifles and post ads of them firing at targets that they label with things like “socialism”—no, it’s only the Democrats’ rhetoric that is at stake, and there are going to be media outlets who will credulously play along with this, and treat normalized violent rhetoric from the right as a non-issue.

This all having been said, we don’t have enough conversations in this country about how much that violent rhetoric is seeping into this country unchallenged, where you have the so-called “convoy crowd” walking around with signs and t-shirts about Trudeau and a hangman’s noose, under the false (and frankly stupid) notion that he’s somehow a “traitor” to this country (or worse, that he’s some kind of communist dictator, as though he has nationalised the means of production in this country and abolished private property), but do we see the Conservatives condemn that rhetoric when they embrace that crowd? Nope. Harassment and attacks against MPs have increased dramatically over the past four years, but nobody wants to talk about it or draw attention to it, and that’s as much of a problem. We’re not as far removed from the violent strain on democracy as we’d like to think we are in this country, which is why we need to remain vigilant, and not pretend like we’re immune.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian forces claim to have taken control of the village of Urozhaine in the Donetsk region, while Ukraine says they are still fighting in the area. Two people are dead in a “double-tap” attack in the Kharkiv region, where the second missile hit after emergency crews responded to the first hit, which is a tactic Russia is increasingly employing.

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 →

Roundup: Getting Stuff Done?

Posted on by

While everyone concerned themselves last night with the ice hockey and the by-election, I thought there was an interesting tweet out that deserved a bit more consideration.

Usher is not wrong here. The early focus on “deliverology” fell to the wayside and the Liberals stopped measuring the number of promises that they had fulfilled, and which ones they could not fulfil or which ones they were abandoning (such as the promise around electoral reform, which was a dumb promise to have made, and where the committee process around it resulted in a hot garbage report that was functionally useless other than to prove it was a dumb promise to have made in the first place). But it’s also cultural. Paul Wells has observed that the Liberals are increasingly made up of the kinds of people who go to leadership conferences, but who haven’t really accomplished much else. Once upon a time, they were people who had built things and a record of professional accomplishment, but now it’s mostly people who just talk about doing things without actually doing them. And it’s a fair observation, but also points to a broader malaise in Canadian culture, where as a country we’re building fewer things while MBAs manage what we have, and wealth funds acquire companies and then strip them for parts until they’re forced to declare bankruptcy. You can’t pin that entirely on the Liberals, but Getting Stuff Done is proving a challenge for this government, and they should put some energy on doing that rather than just churning out some more communications pabulum.

And to make the point about Pwning for Pwning’s Sake, here’s Andrew Scheer wishing the country had fallen into a full-blown recession, because reasons.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian missiles struck Pokrovsk in the eastern Donetsk region, killing at least five people and wounding at least 41 others. A Russian missile also struck a storage facility in Odesa, injuring three. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that Ukraine has hit over 30 Russian oil refineries and depots thus far. Zelenskyy also ordered a purge of the country’s state guard after an assassination plot was uncovered. And today is the day that the EU begins membership talks with Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1805173797705728292

Continue reading →

Roundup: Provinces learned they can underfund disaster management

Posted on by

The House of Commons’ national defence committee tabled their report on disaster management earlier this week, and one of its recommendations is for a permanent civilian federal disaster management force that can be deployed for wildfires, floods, hurricanes, or other natural disasters—but they stopped short of recommending a Canadian FEMA, which may not be possible given that this is constitutionally largely an area of provincial jurisdiction, and would require some kind of provincial agreement to operate, and because this is Canada, the provinces would want some kind of say in its operations but wouldn’t want to pay for it, because of course.

One of the problems we’re dealing with as a country is that we’re dealing with the Canadian Forces being at their capacity and they are constantly being asked to deal with disaster management across the country because provincial capacity maxes out too soon. But why does provincial capacity max out? Because they keep cutting funds or under-investing, and creating these situations because they know that regardless of what happens, they can simply call up the federal government to ask them deploy the Canadian Forces, and even more to the point, that they can do it for free because the federal government won’t ask for reimbursement even though they are entitled to. And this has wound up teaching the premiers that there are pretty much no consequences for their under-investing or even cutting the funding for this kind of emergency management, so they are incentivized to rely on the Canadian Forces to do the work for them for free, and now we have reached the end of that being possible.

So, what is the solution? I am wary of the notion of building up a federal force because even if they can manage to get provincial agreements, staff it up (because you would be drawing from the same pool as the Canadian Forces, which has a recruitment and retention crisis), and even if they paid for all of it (which they shouldn’t), this will exacerbate the existing problem of provinces not funding or bolstering their existing forces that are their constitutional responsibility because there will still be a federal backstop. And if the federal government starts asking for reimbursement, either for the use of the Canadian Forces or this hypothetical future force, then the media will be aghast that the federal government is making the province pay in their time of need, completely ignoring that the provincial under-funding created the situation in the first place. We’re at a bit of a rock and hard place, because we have let federalism break down like this, and that’s not good for the country.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian guided bombs struck the Eastern settlement of Selydove, killing two. Ukrainian forces captured a Russian “barn” tank that has been modified to protect against drone attacks. Ukraine launched a drone attack that struck three Russian oil refineries overnight.

Continue reading →

QP: Last chance to get clips before the summer

Posted on by

It’s a sweltering, muggy Wednesday, and everyone hopes the final day before the House rises for the summer. The prime minister was present, while his deputy was not, and the other leaders al deigned to attend for on last go-around to gather some clips for the summer break. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and he lamented that the country is broken, and took a swipe at the Bloc, and demanded an election right now. Justin Trudeau said that if the leader opposite was really concerned about affordability, he would help pass their measures to help people rather than play petty partisan games. Poilievre worried that the government is threatening to “shut down” the Quebec forestry sector (not true), and Trudeau responded that unlike the Conservatives, Quebeckers know they need to protect the environment and the economy at the same time. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his assertion that everything  is broken and demanded an election, and Trudeau repeated his same assertion that the Conservatives should support their programmes. Poilievre expounded on just how much the country is a living hell thanks to his “whackonomics,” and Trudeau shot back that the Conservatives are only concerned with protecting the wealthiest, particularly over the capital gains changes. Poilievre claimed the Middle Class™ doesn’t exist anymore, and Trudeau reiterated that Poilievre only cares about himself. 

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and complained about anglophone mail carriers in Quebec, and Trudeau praised the government’s support for French, including in Quebec, and promised to follow up on it. Blanchet accused the government’s programmes of harming French, and Trudeau dismissed this as “identitarian” squabbling.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he accused the government of coddling CEOs, to which Trudeau patted himself on the back for raising taxes on the wealthiest, and took a shot at the Conservatives in the process. Singh tried again in French, and Trudeau listed the programmes they have delivered.

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 →