Tag Archives: Trade

Roundup: Displacing and dispersing Ukrainians into Russia?

Posted on by

We are now on day thirty of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and while Kyiv remains safe, there are reports that as many as 400,000 Ukrainians have been forcibly relocated into Russia, where they are being dispersed to economically depressed regions in that country. The Russians are claiming that these relocations are voluntary, but Ukrainian officials worry they may be used as hostages. Meanwhile, president Volodymyr Zelenskyy addressed the NATO summit happening in Brussels and asked for aircraft and tanks, but was mostly only promised more of the same kinds of aid that they have been receiving to date.

Closer to home, there are now two more prospective entrants into the Conservative leadership race—former floor-crosser-turned-deputy leader Leona Alleslev, who has launched a website and who has volunteers getting the necessary signatures required to launch a bid; as well, a failed candidate named Joel Etienne from York Centre, who has also put up a website and is collecting signatures. One of the other leadership candidates, Marc Dalton, seems to have enough self-awareness that he knows he’s a long-shot candidate, but seems to be pinning his hopes on the vagaries of preferential ballots as his salvation. Oh, and he still hasn’t lined up his entrance fee yet, so that’s probably a sign about his chances.

As these entrants keep lining up, Candice Bergen is warning them not to call those in the race that they disagree with as “not Conservative” because that’s “identity politics,” and they don’t want to wedge, divide and polarize, because that’s what they accuse the Liberals of doing—which is kind of hilarious when you think about it. They’ve explicitly framed this contest as one for the “soul of the party,” and the contest is going to entirely be about whether they find a leader who can appeal to enough of the moderate Canadians in the suburbs who can deliver them an election victory, or whether they retrench into their “values” and electoral consequences be damned because they’re acting like Conservatives and not Liberals. And when you set up the contest as one about what constitutes those “values,” with a purity test or two thrown up around them, who is and is not a Conservative is going to be a bigger sticking point in this race the longer it goes on.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A strategic turning point?

Posted on by

We are in day seventeen of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the bombardment and shelling has intensified not only in Mariupol, but some other cities that have thus far been unaffected. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says that they have achieved a strategic turning point, that they have lasted four times longer than Russia planned for them to, and asked his people for strength and patience. There are also concerns that Russians are targeting ports and grain silos, which could have a major impact on food supplies in the region as the crisis grows. In the meantime, the BBC has a chilling report out of Kharkiv, and it’s a bit grisly because of the number of Russian corpses just lying there.

https://twitter.com/sommervilletv/status/1502000265490227206

Justin Trudeau concluded his European trip, and announced yet more sanctions against Russian oligarchs including Roman Abramovich, who has interests in a steel company that has operations in Canada, so these sanctions could affect its operations.

Closer to home, Anita Anand addressed the Ottawa Conference on Security and Defence yesterday, and spoke about a “robust package” to modernise NORAD, and said that they have not forgotten about the threats posed by China while the world is focused on Ukraine. At the same conference, a senior CSIS official spoke about the vulnerability posed by cyberspace, which is why they are focusing on protecting critical infrastructure from cyber-attacks.

Continue reading →

QP: Bland assurances about Arctic sovereignty

Posted on by

For Thursday, neither the prime minister nor his deputy were present, nor were most of the the other leaders, save one. Luc Berthold led off, with a script but without a mini-lectern, and in French, he worried about the disinformation circulating about the invasion of Ukraine, but wedged this into a question about expelling the Russian ambassador. Anita Anand rose, not to answer but to recognise the presence of Ukraine’s chargé d’affaires in the gallery, which was against the rules—which the Speaker reminded her of—before Anand made a bland statement. Berthold worried about the state of our military’s readiness should Putin carry on, and Anand assured him that of course we are ready and that nothing has been neglected, before she read out what new lethal aid was provided to Ukraine this morning. Raquel Dancho took over in English to again demand to know what meetings she has had to prepare for Russian threats of retaliation. Anand assured her that they were prepared for any eventuality, and mentioned working with American counterparts to modernise NORAD as a priority. Dancho worried that we did not have sufficient military assets in the Arctic, and wanted further reassurances, and Anand repeated her reassurances before saying that we need to be non-provocative and rational in this situation. Berthold took back over to repeat the question about what we are doing about deterrence to keep Russia from invading the Arctic. Anand repeated that we would work with the US, and stated that the Coast Guard would defend us.

Christine Normandin led for the Bloc, and worried that the government’s emergency travel documents for Ukrainian refugees would take too long, and Anand read that what was announced today would reduce red tape and would hasten passage for Ukrainians, and there was no limit to how many were would take in. Normandin stated the need for an emergency airlift operation, and Anand spoke about more measures for these refugees but did not commit to an airlift.

Jagmeet Singh led for the NDP, in person, and demanded more sanctions against more Russian oligarchs, to which Anand, after some hesitation, listed those already under sanction and said that they were working with allies to impose yet more sanctions. Singh repeated the question in French, and Anand repeated her response in French.

Continue reading →

QP: Support for Ukraine, but what about “ethical oil”?

Posted on by

While the prime minister was around, and would give a press conference after QP, and make a statement in the Chamber later in the evening, he was not present for QP itself, though his deputy was. Candice Bergen led off, saying that many of the country’s actions were too little too late and demanded the expulsion of the Russian ambassador and to recall ours from Moscow—because they believe diplomacy is a cookie for good behaviour. Chrystia Freeland rose to say that Canadians were united, and that this was about freedom versus tyranny, but didn’t address Bergen’s demand. Bergen said she agreed with the sentiments, and wanted visa-free travel for Ukrainians to Canada, and Freeland rose to address the previous question and noted that there were Russian officials who stood against the regime and she urged those officials in Canada not to be complicit, and said all options were on the table. Bergen demanded that the country end its “dependence” on Russian oil—of which, vanishingly little actually flows into this county—and to send Canadian oil to Europe. Freeland noted that the sanctions on Russia are having an effect, and hurting their oil exports was one way. Luc Berthold took over in French to demand the expulsion of the Russian ambassador, and Freeland took the opportunity to repeat her initial statement about unity in French. Berthold then repeated the demand for visa-free travel, and Freeland recounted news from her own family in Ukraine who decided to stay and fight, and that Canada would support them as well as those fleeing.

https://twitter.com/ChrisGNardi/status/1498407964440514562

Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he gave a paean to the bravery of Ukrainian people, and pledged Bloc support to the government’s actions, and wondered what else they could do to help. Freeland recited her talking points about sanctions hurting “Fortress Russia.” Therrien asked if they can waive visas or take other actions, and Freeland noted that they have already started to welcome Ukrainians, including those currently in Canada and unable to return home.

Alexandre Boulerice led for the NDP by video, and after a false start, and demanded Canada do more to help Ukrainian refugees, to which Freeland assured him they were already doing so in a united fashion. Jenny Kwan took over in English to make the same demand, and Freeland spoke of her pride in the brave resistance of Ukrainians, and said that of course they were helping Ukrainian refugees with more details coming soon.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Emergency orders lifted before the Senate votes were cast

Posted on by

By late afternoon, yesterday, prime minister Justin Trudeau ended the emergency orders, at a time when the Senate had not yet voted to confirm them. This, of course, led to numerous cries from opponents that they had helped to end it (declaring victory for pushing on an open door), and accusations that Trudeau knew he would lose the Senate vote so pulled the plug beforehand. And then there were the questions about what changed between Monday and yesterday that made it okay to lift the restrictions, of which the official line is “advice from law enforcement,” but one also suspects was that they might have felt it inappropriate to lift it before it had even been brought to a vote, but conversely didn’t want to keep the orders for too much longer after that. I’m not sure. Suffice to say, it’s over, and all of the cries of “tyranny!” and “Trudeau is doing this to increase his own power!” seem pretty stupid right about now.

Speaking of the Senate, they were progressing through a second full day of speeches with no end—or vote—in sight, when the order was lifted and they simply adjourned debate. This is something of an indictment on how the Senate handled this matter in terms of their schedule. They should have recalled the Chamber as soon as the Act was invoked and the emergency orders declared, so that they could receive them on the same day as the House of Commons and debate them concurrently, as it’s not a piece of legislation that has to pass one Chamber before the other, but they didn’t, and their planned Friday recall was cancelled by the police action, further delaying the debate. And then some of the same problems that the House of Commons saw presented themselves in the Senate as well—that absolutely everyone wanted to have their own speech on the record, no matter that having something new to say diminished with each passing speech, but this is what the “new” Senate is becoming—a debating society rather than a deliberative legislative body. And while sure, there were some good speeches, there were also some doozies that repeated the same falsehoods and info ops that the occupation organizers were counting on, so well done everyone.

Meanwhile, Matt Gurney calls for more information as to what constituted the continued use of powers in advance of their being lifted. Andrew Coyne puts the nine days of the emergency orders into perspective versus how it has been portrayed by bad faith actors across social media and certain political parties.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Proposing to ignore the virus

Posted on by

In the wake of the demands by extremist-led “protests” to lift all vaccine mandates around the country, nowhere as this demand been capitulated to as fast as in Saskatchewan and Alberta, where both provinces are pretty much eliminating their mandates as soon as possible, with no consultation, and while their hospitals are still full. Federally, the Conservatives are making the same demand for this capitulation, and they’re using a bunch of specious arguments, like listing countries that are lifting their restrictions already, never mind that in most of those countries, they have better healthcare capacity than we do, and they are further along in their omicron waves than we are. Fortunately, Ontario is not rushing to join them for a change, so that’s one small favour.

What is more concerning, however, is this talking point about “learning to live with COVID,” but in abandoning all public health measures, including mask mandates, they’re not actually planning to live with COVID—they’re planning to ignore it, to let it rip, to capitulate to the virus as much as they are eager to capitulate to the extremists claiming to protest. Learning to live with the virus would mean adequate and sustainable precautions, better focus on indoor ventilation, ongoing mask mandates in indoor spaces, and so on—and the ongoing insistence on vaccination, because that’s what will save us in the long run. But that’s not what they’re proposing, because they are so keen to return to the old normal, never mind that said world no longer exists by any measure. And it’s not “following the science” to take the notion that we need to just let the virus rip at this point—it’s being intellectually dishonest and pandering to selfish instincts.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Lightbound goes rogue

Posted on by

It was something of a spectacle yesterday to watch Liberal backbencher Joël Lightbound call a press conference to denounce his party’s handling of the pandemic, and to call for a roadmap to end public health measures—never mind that the vast majority of those measures are provincial in nature—and to deploy the farcical Conservative talking points about how “divisive” the prime minister has been about vaccine mandates. (Full transcript here). Some of it made little sense—this virus doesn’t operate on timetables, mandates were deemed necessary because carrots weren’t working anymore and governments needed to employ more sticks to drive up vaccination rates because we still need more people to get fully vaccinated if we want to have any hope of achieving some level of herd immunity, and yes, there are some deeply selfish people who refuse to get vaccinated, and we should absolutely call them out on that fact. (And to the point about complaints of the prime minister’s alleged name-calling around the grifter convoy, he clocked them for what they were, and if a few credulous numpties attaching themselves to this band of grifters, extremists and conspiracy theorists gets offended, they should take a hard look at the company they keep).

This being said, we need to ensure that there is room for MPs to dissent, and the Liberals have been better than most about that in their current incarnation. They have a handful of MPs who routinely go rogue, though generally in not so spectacular a fashion as Lightbound did yesterday. This being said, the comparisons to Jane Philpott and Jody Wilson-Raybould have been circulating, but I don’t find the circumstances remotely similar. Wilson-Raybould had begun a media campaign against the prime minister, and the revelation of the recordings she made of private phone calls was a signal that she was unlikely to be trusted again, which is a huge problem. Philpott, on the other hand, was naively trying to run her own media campaign, cleverly trying to dole out tidbits to various outlets in a coordinated strategy, while she was also found to be taking notes in caucus (which is forbidden—they take away your phones and materials because caucus confidentially needs to be enforced), and again, that led to issues of trust because her media strategy was in the open. That is not the case here, and Lightbound says he continues to have confidence in the government, but felt the need to speak out. While he resigned his position as the party’s Quebec caucus chair, we’ll see if he retains his post as industry committee chair, or if he gets sent off to scrutiny of regulations to cool his heels for a while.

Meanwhile, Althia Raj wishes that we saw more MPs going rogue like Lightbound, while Paul Wells delves deeper into Lightbound, the dynamics at play, and the problem that this government has in its inability to communicate or manage issues.

Continue reading →

QP: In the shadow of O’Toole’s demise

Posted on by

In the wake of the vote ousting Erin O’Toole as Conservative leader, he was absent from the Chamber, as one would very well expect. As well, because Justin Trudeau was still in COVID isolation, he would be answering everything by video. Candice Bergen led off, with her script in front of her, and she demanded that the prime minister bring resolution with the grifter occupation and let them know that they are being heard. Trudeau, by video, first thanked O’Toole for his service, before reminding them that there was an election where vaccine mandates were an issue. Bergen repeated that these grifters need to feel like they’re being heard (you do know that their demand is to overturn democracy, right?), and Trudeau recited that they are engaged in encouraging people to get vaccinated. Bergen worried about the supply chains as a result of this vaccine mandate, and Trudeau reminded her that the mandates have not impacted the supply chain, but COVID has, which is why they need to be vaccinated. Gérard Deltell took over in French and said a bunch of nonsense about the PBO blaming government spending on inflation, which Trudeau disputed given that COVID has ultimately been the cause. Deltell gave a somber recitation about food inflation and insisted that this was not a global problem but because of government spending—a complete falsehood—and Trudeau reiterated that this is a global issue, while they are there to help families.

Yves-François Blanchet, the only leader in person today, rose for the Bloc, and he too paid brief tribute to O’Toole, before worrying about the grifter occupation and wanted concrete action to end it. Trudeau reminded him that politicians do not direct police forces, but they would provide all resources necessary for law enforcement. Blanchet that Trudeau wasn’t taking action and wanted a timeline, and Trudeau noted that he did tell them that they had been heard and that it was time to leave, and that they would continue to work with law enforcement agencies.

Jagmeet Singh appeared by video, and he wondered why the laws to protect healthcare workers are not being enforced—because he just heard that governments don’t direct police, right? Trudeau recited about how they passed that law and that healthcare workers deserve a safe workplace. Singh then made a brief thanks to O’Toole for his service before repeating his question in French, and Trudeau repeated his response.

Continue reading →

Roundup: O’Toole tells challengers to bring it on

Posted on by

It’s all coming undone. Erin O’Toole’s grip on the leadership of his party is even more tenuous, as a third of the caucus has now signed a letter calling for a vote on a leadership review. While “sources” insisted that Garnett Genuis was one of the ringleaders of this group, in part over anger for the way in which the conversion therapy bill vote was handled, Genuis denies this and says this is an attempt by O’Toole to smear him. Others sources say this is because the party is angry that the Conservatives allowed too many bills to pass unopposed before the end of the year, but we’ll see what other narratives emerge as more MPs start leaking.

https://twitter.com/BobBenzen/status/1488308784703414272

O’Toole responded late in the evening, essentially saying bring on the vote, apparently confident that the other two-thirds of caucus will be with him, but that’s a pretty risky gamble to be making when he’s this weakened, and there is blood in the water. Also, the fact that O’Toole tried to bring up Derek Sloan is very curious considering that he initially protected Sloan when there was a move to expel him from the party after he made racist comments about Dr. Theresa Tam, only to turn against him once O’Toole had secured the leadership thanks to using Sloan’s voters to his advantage. It’s like he doesn’t think anyone can see his blatant opportunism staring them in the face. Oh, and the notion that Andrew Scheer wants to be interim leader is just the chef’s kiss in all of this—one presumes he misses Stornoway and the perquisites that come with it. Scheer is denying it (but it’s not like he’s a paragon of truth either)

Meanwhile, Paul Wells relays more of what he’s hearing from his Conservatives about O’Toole’s likely chances (not good), and fits it into the broader pattern of the party and its predecessor’s leaders going back three-quarters of a century.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Why Canadian MPs resist security clearances

Posted on by

Talk of reforming NSICOP into a full-fledged parliamentary committee is circulating, and it’s all just as well. While I have a full column on this coming out later today, I wanted to post this thread from professor Saideman to set some of the context for that, and to explain part of why we’re in the state we are in Canada when it comes to these things.

https://twitter.com/smsaideman/status/1483076151417389057

Continue reading →