Tag Archives: Trade

Roundup: Premiers concern trolling on the carbon levy

Posted on by

A number of premiers have been writing letters to the prime minister, imploring him not to increase the carbon price on April 1st, citing the cost-of-living challenges that people are having. Unmentioned, of course, is the fact that the rebates are also increasing, and they’re front-end loaded, meaning the higher rebates already come into effect as the carbon levy increases, so if you pause the increase, the rebates will have already increased, which is going to cause a problem down the road for the federal books.

Nevertheless, this is largely concern trolling from the premiers, and yes, that includes Newfoundland and Labrador premier Andrew Furey, whom everyone has been making a big deal of because he’s currently the last Liberal premier standing, and he too is making the call. “Oh, just hold off on the increase while rates are still high!” they say, but rest assured, it will never be a good time to raise the price, and it will stall climate action, while the premiers mouth that they still believe in fighting climate change so long as it doesn’t cost them anything or that they don’t have to take any action, or that they’ll solve it through magical technology that hasn’t been invented yet, and never will be, especially not without adequate price signals that the carbon levy provides as it increases. Also, we’ve been down this road before with the price of oil. When it rises, people buy more fuel-efficient vehicles, and when it comes down, they go right back to buying SUVs and ridiculously oversized pick-up trucks that drive on suburban roads and never haul anything (especially because the box sizes in newer models are tiny).

If I were advising the government (and clearly, I’m not), I would insist that they hold the line on the increases, make the point about the rebates as much as possible—especially as they are delivering more to those who need it the most—because they can’t afford to show any further weakness on this file if they want to have any credibility left. They shouldn’t have caved on the home heating oil (but should have come up with a better temporary rebate for those in that particular situation), and they most especially shouldn’t have made the announcement in front of every single Atlantic MP (which was the single dumbest thing they could have done, so of course they did it). Maintaining the credibility of the programme may be its best hope for staying put, particularly when compared to all other options.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles hit two apartment buildings in Kryvyi Rih on Tuesday, killing three people. Ukraine’s security service says it broke up the largest pro-Kremlin “informational sabotage” networks it has found to date. Russia says they fought off “incursions” coming from Ukraine in the Belgorod region, while Ukraine fired drones and missiles at a major refinery in Russia, inflicting serious damage.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A couple of notes on Campbell’s record

Posted on by

The weekend was full of conservatives and other right-leaning commenters chirping about Kim Campbell’s record after her (verifiably true) assessment that Pierre Poilievre is a “liar and a hate-monger” who doesn’t believe in the urgency of climate change. Some of them—such as a certain self-aggrandising independent MP—have been utterly dismissive of Campbell and her record, but most people don’t really understand what happened in 1993, and why the fact that the PCs went from a majority to two seats was hardly her doing.

The thing to remember about Brian Mulroney’s massive majorities was that he had managed to build a particular coalition of conservatives in the Prairies, and that he was won over Quebec, which is incredibly difficult for any conservative to do, and no doubt a lot of this was premised on the (somewhat hubristic) promise that he was going to finish the constitutional project that Pierre Trudeau wasn’t able to complete and bring Quebec “into the fold” (which is mostly hyperbolic nonsense anyway). By 1993, that coalition has collapsed, in part because of the failure of Mulroney’s constitutional projects, being Meech Lake and Charlottetown, the latter referendum failing.

Conservatives in Quebec has largely fallen away to the Bloc, which was formed in part by Mulroney’s old friend and confidante, Lucien Bouchard. To this day, the Dean of the House, Bloc MP Louis Plamondon, was first elected in 1984 as part of Mulroney’s PC landslide, and in 1990, crossed to the nascent Bloc. Meanwhile, the prairie conservatives had defected to the nascent Reform Party under the banner of so-called “Western alienation,” in part because of decisions that Mulroney had made, not only in areas of the constitutional reforms that failed, but also because of things like CF-18 maintenance contracts that were supposed to go to a Winnipeg firm were instead given to those in Montreal, and it exacerbated the existing grievances that the Pierre Trudeau’s National Energy Programme had inflamed (though he was largely blamed for things that were not his fault, like the collapse in world oil prices that the NEP didn’t cause, but were blamed for regardless).

Campbell inherited a PC party that had lost its voter coalition, thanks to Mulroney’s actions. The election went from three parties to five, with two very different regional parties at play. Trying to pin the blame for that collapse on Campbell is classic glass-cliff logic, where she was handed a bag of dogshit and when she didn’t perform a miracle, was given the blame for it. Did she make mistakes in that campaign? Indeed she did. Could she have resurrected the party’s fortunes with the voter coalition disbanded? Certainly not in the time allotted. For modern conservatives to say that her “record speaks for itself” don’t seem to understand what actually happened in the early 1990s, and instead are showing a particularly misogynistic streak in how they are choosing to attack her and her record.

Ukraine Dispatch:

One woman was killed in Russian shelling in the Kursk region on Sunday. Two people were killed, including a teenager, in Russian artillery attacks on the Dnipropetrovosk region on Saturday, and Russia claimed to have shot down a Ukrainian fighter jet. Here is a horrifying look at the rapes and torture that Russians have subjected Ukrainian prisoners to, particularly in occupied areas.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A stunt at committee everyone fell for

Posted on by

The Conservatives, and Michael Chong in particular, pulled a stunt yesterday where they tried to call for an emergency meeting at the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics committee to study the Winnipeg Lab documents. Liberal and NDP members on the committee said that this isn’t the right committee and this isn’t an emergency, and shut it down. This was the Conservatives’ plan, so that they could take to social media and scream and caterwaul about the “cover-up coalition,” and just like they planned, virtually every single pundit and media outlet did their bidding for them.

To wit, this is that particular committee’s mandate:

“Under Standing Order 108(3)(h), the Committee’s mandate is to study matters related to reports of the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada, and the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner pursuant to the Conflict of Interest Act (matters related to the Conflict of Interest Code for Members of the House of Commons are studied by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs). The Committee can also study any legislation or regulation or propose initiatives that relate to access to information and privacy and to ethical standards relating to public office holders.”

This study has absolutely nothing to do with it, and while there should be some kind of parliamentary scrutiny, it belongs most likely at the Health Committee, as PHAC would fall within their remit, and possibly Public Safety and National Security, but not Ethics. The NDP think this should go to the Canada-China Relations committee, but I also find that one to be a bit of a stretch (because I also think that committee is little more than a sideshow). But again, it was wholly appropriate for the Ethics committee to shut this down, because it was only meant to be a stunt.

It’s absolutely maddening to see how many media outlets and pundits walked right into this trap and let themselves get played. The CBC, for example, both-sided it, with the headline of “Conservatives accuse,” and the Liberals pointing out this was the wrong committee halfway down the piece. The Canadian Press both-sidesed it more concisely, and didn’t provide any context about the committee. The Globe and Mail, somewhat predictably, downplayed the Liberals and NDP pointing out that this was the wrong committee, gave over plenty of space to the Conservative argument that it should be without actually checking it against the statutory remit of the committee, and privileged Michael Chong’s comments, when he is not on the committee and was 100 percent pulling a stunt.

The thing is that this keeps happening—Conservatives have been regularly proposing studies on issues that committees have no remit over (such as trying to get the Public Accounts committee to go after the Trudeau Foundation), and then crying foul when they don’t play along, and then drive social media engagement off of the faked outrage. Rules matter. Parliamentary procedure matters. It’s not a “process story” you can dismiss, it’s bad faith actors playing the media, and the media going along with it when they should know better.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say they stopped a Russian advance near Avdiivka, but that Russian troops appear to be regrouping further south.

Continue reading →

Roundup: No, East Coast LNG isn’t going to happen

Posted on by

With the news out of Ukraine becoming more pressing, we’re once again seeing some bad faith takes in Canada about how we should be displacing Russian gas with our LNG, which is never going to happen. Ever. And people should know this, but they keep clinging to this fantasy because it sells to a particular base, but lying is lying, whether it’s to yourself or to your voters.

As always:

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian drone attack hit an apartment building in Odesa over the weekend, and the final tally shows twelve people were killed, including a baby. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is calling on Western allies to summon the political will to get them the aid they need (speaking mostly to the Americans for that one). Veterans across Ukraine have been disavowing medals in support of a gay soldier whose medal was rescinded by the church.

Continue reading →

QP: Demands to turn over documents

Posted on by

The prime minister was off in Winnipeg for a healthcare announcement with premier Wab Kinew, and his deputy was away in Toronto, while most of the other leaders were also absent. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, and after deploying a half-dozen slogans, he broached the ArriveCan issue and said that he was told that a court order would be required to get a court order for the production of documents, and wanted the government to turn them all over. Jean-Yves Duclos said that the Auditor General did good work in her damning report, and that they have taken steps and more would follow soon, and that they were being transparent and turning over all requested documents to the RCMP and elsewhere. Poilievre switched to English to repeat the allegation that the RCMP needs a production order for records and again demanded that the government simply turn over the documents to the RCMP and committees. Duclos cautioned that Poilievre sounded like he was calling into question the capabilities of the Auditor General. Poilievre repeated his claim and again demanded that all documents related to ArriveCan or GC Strategies be turned over. Dominic LeBlanc insisted that they have been cooperative. Poilievre then quoted Thomas Mulcair on the situation, Poilievre wondered why the NDP were keeping the government in power, but that wasn’t a question to government. LeBlanc got up anyway to insist that they have taken this situation seriously. Poilievre then quoted Sean Fraser, claiming he was attacking himself, and demanded the government start building homes. Soraya Martinez Ferrada got up to pat the government on the back for working with mayors, and said that unlike when Poilievre was minister, they were getting housing built.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he wanted an expanded investigation into GC Strategies. Duclos reminded him of the scope of urgency in the pandemic, but said it wasn’t an excuse for civil servants not to do their jobs properly. Therrien demanded a “clean sweep” at CBSA, to which Duclos agreed that there needed to be an investigation, several of which are ongoing.

Heather McPherson rose for the NDP, and raised the number of casualties in Gaza, but insisted that the government is keeping up with arms sales (which they haven’t), and called out Rob Oliphant’s leaked comments. Ahmed Hussen insisted that Canada was the first to start offering humanitarian aid. Daniel Blaikie wanted support for the party’s bill on amending EI benefits, and Randy Boissonnault said that the work to modernise the system is ongoing, and this particular issue of women on mat leave being laid off was before the courts.

Continue reading →

QP: Quoting the Criminal Code to one another

Posted on by

Neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present today, in spite of both being in Ottawa, though most of the other leaders were present. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, fresh from his press conference earlier this morning in Brampton, and he tied the Bloc to government legislation around bail conditions and conditional sentencing, blaming them for the rise in auto thefts (which is pretty specious at best), before asking the government to reverse those positions. Steven MacKinnon says that the Conservatives were pretending to care about auto theft like they pretended to care about grocery prices, and tried to connect Poilievre’s campaign chair, Jenni Byrne, with lobbying Loblaws. (She wasn’t the lobbyist, and they were only lobbying about beer and wine sales, for the record). Poilievre declared that he announced “common sense” solutions for ending auto thefts, most of which are unconstitutional. MacKinnon repeated the insinuations that Poilievre had made promises to Byrne, who is advising the caucus. Poilievre switched to English to again claim that “catch and release” bail was to blame for the rise in car thefts, and MacKinnon repeated his claim that the Conservatives were only pretending to care, and made the insinuations about Byrne in English. Poilievre insisted that Byrne’s advise was the slogan he repeated, and once again blamed the government for increasing car thefts and touted his “common sense” plan. Arif Virani reminded him that mandatory minimums for auto theft are already on the books, so he’s demanding a policy that already exists. Poilievre insisted that bail reform didn’t apply to auto theft so he should have read his own legation. Virani responded that he listens to police and noted that this isn’t an issue of individual crime but organised crime, and that the Conservatives are blocking measures to combat money laundering.

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and railed that Quebec is owed $470 million for asylum seekers, no less. Marc Miller said the money they have sent is not nothing and that they are working with the province. Therrien listed grievances related to immigration and asylum seekers, to which Miller accused them of being “armchair managers,” and cherry-picking statistics.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and took credit for Manulife walking back their decision to only fill certain prescriptions at Loblaws, and demanded the government stop working for Big Pharma. Mark Holland pointed to actions they have taken to lower drug prices across the board. Singh switched to French to complain that the government met with Loblaws lobbyists 60 times—which means nothing—and Holland repeated his response in French.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The muted federal response to Danielle Smith’s latest policy

Posted on by

As expected, there was a federal response to Danielle Smith’s draconian anti-queer/trans policy video, but it was mostly just words of condemnation. Marci Ien and Randy Boissonnault had a scrum about it, but basically said that because they don’t have any document from Smith—the legislature isn’t sitting, and Smith herself said later in the day that nothing would be formally in writing until autumn—they don’t know how best to respond to this, so in the meantime, they’re going to consult and come up with ideas at the Cabinet table as to what the federal government can do, but one supposes that something like a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada of this policy, along with those of Saskatchewan and New Brunswick, may be in the works. We’ll have to see, but it’ll take time, so for the moment, it’s a lot of words of affirmation.

Smith did hold a press conference, nearly twenty-four hours after her video was released, and in it, she kept repeating that she was trying to protect youth from “irreversible medical decisions,” which both conflates the purpose of any social transitioning that they may do beforehand, and buys holus-bolus into the moral panic that kids are being indoctrinated into being trans and then “mutilating and sterilizing” themselves, even though there are vanishingly few “top” surgeries for minors, and no “bottom” surgeries at all. But dubious and discredited reporting that echoes through the right-wing media ecosystem has convinced parents that it’s happening (thus the outsized concern for their “right” to know), along with the pre-existing notion that if they’re told, they can stop their kids from being queer or trans (in other words, de facto conversion therapy). But nobody wants to talk about this moral panic. (More analysis about Smith’s move here).

Meanwhile, Pierre Poilievre’s office has instructed his MPs to say nothing, especially to the media, and to report all requests to his office, and if they are to say something, it’s to emphasise “parental rights over decisions related to their children,” which a) is not actually a legal right in Canada, and b) has been the dog whistle for anti-queer and anti-trans rhetoric for a long time now. And of course, he wants them to stay quiet, but not because he’s worried about another homophobic eruption from someone like Cheryl Gallant, but rather he doesn’t want anyone coming across as too sympathetic because he needs to keep demonstrating to the far-right, reactionary crowd that he thinks is going to win him the election that he’s not too “woke” or small-l liberal, because that would doom their support. It’s little different than Smith keeping this up because she doesn’t want the leopards in her party (like the “Take Back Alberta” crowd) to eat her face like they did Jason Kenney. When you let your party get taken over or be entirely beholden to the crazies, you lose control, and that’s exactly what is happening here.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces say that seas drones were used to sink a small Russian warship in the Black Sea, while Russia claims that Patriot missiles fired from Ukraine brought down the plane that was totally carrying POWs and wasn’t a psy op (really). Ukraine’s army chief published a series of priorities and challenges are rumours of his rift with president Volodymyr Zelenskyy continue to circulate.

Continue reading →

QP: An exhausted slugging match over Ukraine

Posted on by

The prime minister was present today, while his deputy was away doing pre-budget consultations. All other leaders were present as well, and it was the day where they decided it was going to be all about them. Pierre Poilievre led off in French, rattled off his slogans, and then worried about the increase in auto thefts, as though that wasn’t a policing issue at the provincial and municipal level. Justin Trudeau noted that the previous government cut budgets for policing and that his government has re-invested, that they’re working with provinces, and that Poilievre’s slogans won’t do anything. Poilievre insisted that they got better results for fewer dollars, and again blamed federal policies for this rise. Trudeau read from a script that they will be holding a national summit on the issue, and that they are getting results from investing in border officers. Poilievre switched to English to repeat his first question with added rhetorical flourish, and Trudeau dismissed Poilievre’s “whipping out empty slogans,” and reiterated the success of CBSA stopping more stolen cars from leaving the country. Poilievre quoted from the press release the government put out, and blamed the federal government for the rise. Trudeau reminded him that in 2015, Harper slashed funding for the RCMP and CBSA, and that he had to clean up the mess, before he got drowned out by the applause on his own side. Poilievre taunted that Trudeau was “losing control of himself” by screaming and yelling, before dismissing the notion of the auto theft summit. Trudeau shrugged off the attacks, said that they included facts in the release and that they were “rolling up their sleeves” to work with partners rather than just making political attacks.

Yves-François Blanchet led for the Bloc, and raised the pause on the MAiD extension, and wanted Quebec to be able to move ahead. Trudeau trotted out the line of this being a “deeply personal issue” and said that they were trying to find the right balance, and that they would be open to suggestions. Blanchet wanted advance directives to be allowed, and Trudeau reiterated that they were continuing to consider this issue.

Jagmeet Singh rose for the NDP, and he tried to call out a Liberal MP for her remark about the housing crisis in Toronto, and wondered if the prime minister would listen to front line workers instead. Trudeau recited that they are working with partners and listed the actions they are taking. Singh switched to French to decry a woman being kicked out of her apartment and said that the government has the power to resolve the real estate crisis. (How? With a Green Lantern ring?) Trudeau repeated his same response in French.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Just what farm emissions are subject to the carbon levy?

Posted on by

While Pierre Poilievre continues to insist that the federal carbon levy is driving up food prices, he provides no proof of that other than his “common sense” reckon that the levy increases the price of everything.

It doesn’t really, but Poilievre likes to make you think it does. So, University of Alberta’s Andrew Leach has crunched the numbers, and lo, the carbon levy is exempt on very nearly all farm emissions, and contributes but a fraction to other expenses, like transportation. Of course, Poilievre is lying to make you angry, but it’s nice to have some receipts to know just exactly what the lies are.

Ukraine Dispatch:

The fallout of that Russian plane downing that allegedly carried Ukrainian POWs continues to reverberate, as Russia claims they gave Ukraine a 15-minute warning about said plane, which Ukraine denies; as well, Ukraine’s human rights commissioner says that he believes this is an information op because the list of supposed POWs provided included several names on it that had previously been swapped. Several Ukrainian state organisations are reporting that they are experiencing cyber-attacks. Russia is also claiming that Ukrainian drones are responsible for an attack on an oil refinery in Russia’s south.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Federal Court says Emergencies Act didn’t meet the threshold

Posted on by

The Federal Court ruled yesterday that the invocation of a public order emergency under the Emergencies Act didn’t actually meet the threshold for such a declaration. (Full decision here). As a result, some of the uses of emergency powers were overbroad, such as the curtailment of freedom of expression in clearing the occupation, or that the police just kind of made it up as they went along as they froze the bank accounts of the owners of trucks participating in the occupation (and really, only about 57 individuals were affected). The federal government declared immediately that they were going to appeal this decision, citing in part the fact that the public inquiry didn’t come to the same conclusion. While I have a full story coming out later today on this, it’s important to note that the ruling was fairly narrow and technical, rejected a number of the complainants that were part of it, and largely affects future invocations of the Act, having little effect on what happened (because we can’t turn back time).

Amidst the various reactions, revisionism certainly was on display among the talking heads over the course of the evening, who insisted that the government had more “surgical” tools they could have used instead of invoking the Act, erm, except no, they didn’t. The problem was that Doug Ford washed his hands of the whole thing, and eventually the federal government had no other option than to invoke the Act because nobody else was getting control of the situation. And the Conservatives? They are eating up this decision and spreading shitposts far and wide over their socials about how this was a condemnation of Trudeau, and how “divisive” he was, and so on. This feeds directly into their dystopian world-building where they are pretending that Trudeau is some kind of jackbooted dictator taking away people’s rights, when that’s explicitly not what happened here, or any reflection of our objective reality whatsoever. But they want to create the illusion that this is true for their believers, because when you can get them to stop believing in our objective reality, people are so much easier to manipulate.

In commentary, Emmett Macfarlane makes a reasoned case for disagreement with the decision which is well worth reading, while Paul Wells makes more of a case for this decision over the public inquiry, though I suspect he too falls a little into the trap of revisionism because the existing tools weren’t working precisely because Doug Ford refused to act.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missile strikes on Kyiv and Kharkiv have killed 18 people, which Russia claims are all hits on the military-industrial complex. It is more likely that Russia is probing Ukraine’s defences for weakness as they suffer from shortages because Western arms manufacturers are slow to produce new ammunition and equipment, and the US’ budget deadlock is not helping matters any. On the front lines, the reliability of drones used by Ukrainian troops is of varying quality because many of them are cheaply and hastily assembled.

Continue reading →