QP: A moral panic competing with hysteria

While the prime minister was in the building, he was not at QP today, though his deputy was, fortunately. Michael Chong led off, and he worried that Canada voted against Israel at the UN General Assembly earlier in the day, insisting this was contrary to policy. Chrystia Freeland said that Canada stands with Israel, and with Jewish Canadians in the face of rising anti-Semitism. Chong tried again, and Freeland spoke of the worrying rise of authoritarianism in the world, which Canada is standing up against. Richard Martel would took off and listed a number of judicial appointments in New Brunswick which have a connection to Dominic LeBlanc, to which Freeland read a statement about their recent appointment process. Martel raised another appointment who is connected to the justice minister — which media reports show that he was cleared for — and Freeland assured him that the process put into place was transparent and sound. Martel raised another name, who he claimed was denied an appointment because she was married to a Conservatives candidate. Freeland disagreed with the question and reiterated that the process is open and has increased diversity on the bench. Alain Therrien led for the Bloc, and he demanded support for the Bloc’s bill on requiring knowledge of French for citizenship in Quebec, to which Freeland said that they agree that the state of French in Quebec and Montreal is fragile and that they all need to work together to preserve it. Mario Beaulieu asked the same again, and Freeland reiterated her response, and added an example that they fought for cultural exemptions under the New NAFTA. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, and in French, he lamented that it took so long for climate accountability legislation, to which Freeland praised their bill’s commitment to reach net zero emissions by 2050. Singh switched to English to repeat the question, to which Freeland asked in return whether they would support the bill.

Continue reading

QP: O’Toole with the follow-up

Wednesday, proto-Prime Minsters Questions Day, and all of the leaders were present. Erin O’Toole led off, with his script on the mini-lectern in front of him, and not only declared that Canada would not get vaccines until other countries do, and demanded the “real” vaccine plan. Justin Trudeau assured him that Canada has one of the most robust vaccine plans in the world. O’Toole was not mollified, and again demanded the plan, to which Trudeau gave some bland platitudes before he said they had a numerous plans for distribution in the works. O’Toole complained he wasn’t getting a real answer, wondered about American “emergency” approvals for drugs, and accused the government of not having a plan. Trudeau gave a weary sigh and noted that people don’t care about what they hear in QP, but that they wanted the government to get stuff done, and they were. O’Toole switched to French to complain that the government was been mean to Quebeckers by not applying the province’s Bill 101 to federal workplaces, and Trudeau assured him that they were committed to protecting the French language in Quebec. O’Toole then mischaracterised comments by MP Emmanuella Lambropoulos as being “contemptuous” of Quebeckers, and Trudeau assured him that she had apologised for the her remarks. Yves-François Blanchet picked up on this line and decried the decline of French, and Trudeau repeated that they respect French and were working to strengthen it. Blanchet ratcheted up his rhetoric for his follow-up, and Trudeau wondered why the Bloc was trying to start a fight over something the government agrees with. Jagmeet Singh was up next, and in French, he accused the government of doing less in the second wave than they did in the first to which Trudeau listed measures that they have taken to assist the provinces. Singh then switched to English to repeat the accusations, and Trudeau repeated his response. 

Continue reading

Roundup: Getting to COVID-zero

The pandemic continues to grow exponentially, and people are wringing their hands about what to do, the notion of getting to COVID-zero is circulating again, after certain jurisdictions – Australia, New Zealand, Slovakia – managed it. So here’s Dr. Isaac Bogoch to explain it.

We can barely get premiers to institute some reasonably tough measures as it is, which is going to make anything required to actually crush the virus almost impossible – especially if we’re relying on their political calculus that closing businesses is worse for them than the hundreds or thousands of deaths that will happen otherwise.

For a bit of a reality check on the feasibility of this, Chris Selley explains why some countries’ systems for locking down COVID wouldn’t work in Canada, either because they were draconian or we are too far behind the curve to make it happen.

Continue reading

Roundup: Ford ignored advice in favour of uncontrolled spread

Surprising nobody, we find that Doug Ford rejected advice from his public health officials in releasing his colour-coded guidelines, because it’s all about business over human lives. And while there have been calls for a while to try and determine just who is giving him advice, this reinforces the point that these remain political decisions, and that it is Ford and his Cabinet who are the ones to be held to account for what has been happening with infections in Ontario. The fact that Ford put his “red line” figure so far above public health advice, to a level where you are literally dealing with uncontrolled spread rather than trying to stamp it out early, should tell everyone that he is not taking this seriously.

https://twitter.com/jyangstar/status/1326702217051729920

https://twitter.com/jyangstar/status/1326703779232755712

We’ve also been finding out things like Ford refusing to spend COVID funds on things like schools and long-term care homes, and have instead been sitting on the funds to pad the books – and we have the province’s Financial Accountability Officer confirming this. This should be no surprise. I mean, look at the autism programme, where Ford promised more money and then spent none of it, and the wait lists continued to grow and parents and families continue to suffer, and the long-term consequences of not getting early intervention therapies are going to balloon for years. But Ford doesn’t care. He cares about looking like he’s fiscally prudent because every gods damned pundit in this country still thinks it’s 1995 and will always be 1995 – and Ford desperately seeks their validation.

https://twitter.com/TheHerleBurly/status/1326619298060754951

And this need for validation has been a big part of why we’re at the state we’re in here in Ontario. Because Ford didn’t go full-Trump early in the pandemic, or throw tantrums at Justin Trudeau, everyone suddenly started giving him praise. He sounded avuncular, and suddenly everyone assumed he was doing a good job when he wasn’t doing anything but sitting on the COVID money and delaying any meaningful action about, say, getting schools back up and running, or increasing lab capacity for testing, or the contact tracing abilities of public health units across the province. None of it. But people still showered him with praise for how well he was behaving, and for striking up an unlikely friendship with Chrystia Freeland. And yet here we are, where he and his Cabinet have repeatedly lied about what is going on with the pandemic, about their response, and even the direction of the case numbers. Hopefully this piece in the Star that clearly demonstrates that Ford rejected the advice in favour of waiting for uncontrolled spread (because gods forbid he close down businesses) will start to open people’s eyes, but my optimism for that is waning because of all of the other scandals and distractions that his government has created only serve to scatter the attention necessary to force his hand.

Continue reading

Roundup: A question of political accountability

An issue that I am getting tired of writing commenting on over, and over again, is this story about the supposed political vetting of judicial candidates. The reporters on the story fail to mention the crucial constitutional details underpinning the story, Erin O’Toole lies about what the justice minister has said in response to the constant allegations, and now the president of the Canadian Bar Association is writing to the government to express his concerns that this whole thing threatens public faith in the judiciary. And here I go again.

For the eleventieth time, let me reiterate that the prime minister is politically accountable for judicial appointments under our system of Responsible Government. That means that if another bad one gets through the selection process, he has to wear it politically if things come to light – kind of like what happened around now-former Justice Robin Camp (who you may remembered wondered why a sexual assault complainant didn’t keep her knees together). This is one of the reasons why once the candidates have made it through the initial non-partisan vetting process, that they are subjected to a political screen – to ensure that nobody is aware of any particular skeletons in these potential judges’ pasts that could come around to bite them in the future. Some of the confusion here is because one of the ways in which the government has been doing this vetting has been through their voter identification database, which has been interpreted as seeing if they are donors or had lawn signs – which is a false reading of what these databases do, which is to build voter profiles, and they consume vast amounts of data to do so (which is also why there are concerns that they are not subject to federal privacy laws). But this is being deliberately framed as looking for partisan manipulation. (This is not to suggest the motives of these reporters is partisan – only that they are looking to embarrass the government, and it wouldn’t matter which party is in charge).

I am more concerned by the fact that someone is leaking to the press, and the French press especially seems to be targeted about revelations concerning a particular staffer, which suggests to me some internecine fighting within the Liberal ranks that they are willing to do damage to themselves in order to hurt this staffer in particular. But why worry about motive or the fact that you are being played when you have a potentially embarrassing headline?

Continue reading

Roundup: O’Toole’s conversion to the labour movement

Conservative leader Erin O’Toole addressed the Canadian Club of Toronto yesterday, and the more I read of his speech, the more curious I become of just what it is he’s trying to say. For example, he spent part of the speech bemoaning the collapse of private sector union membership in the country, talking about how it was part of the balance between what was good for the economy and what was good for workers. That’s surprising considering that when he was in Cabinet, O’Toole supported anti-union legislation that the party put forward (under the guise of private members’ bills, naturally), and the party was having a field day before the last election trying to accuse the government of stacking their media bailout fund by allowing Unifor – the country’s largest private sector union – to have a seat at the table (given that Unifor also represents a lot of journalists). I’m sure the labour movement in this country has whiplash from this sudden reversal – though I would note that in his mouthing about the importance of unions the past couple of months, he is careful to distinguish between private and public sector unions, the latter he still continues to be evil. (And before anyone says those two anti-union bills were “about transparency,” you all know that’s a lie and can stop insulting our intelligence).

O’Toole argued that we have somehow completely de-industrialized as a country, which is news to the rest of us, and then went on an extended tirade about China, because he’s trying to frame this as a national security argument and not just populism hollowing out his party’s political ideology. He claimed that the Liberals were using the pandemic to launch a “risky experiment with our economy” around green energy, which is…not really true, and ignores how markets have moved to green tech with better economic outcomes for doing so. He also continued his protectionist bent, and made a few deeply curious statements like “Free markets alone won’t solve all our problems” (erm, his party is the one that rails about the evils of socialism, no? Is he proposing nationalizing industries? Or does he simply mean global trade when he talks about “free markets”?), and adding that that GDP growth is not the “be-all and end-all of politics” – which is odd because nobody has actually suggested that it is (but his predecessor was fond of attacking straw men as well). I’m also a bit puzzled by what exactly he’s getting at when he says “We need policies to shore up the core units of society — family, neighbourhood, nation. We need policies that build solidarity, not just wealth.” Some of this is thinly-veiled Thatcherism, but where it’s building in terms of his populist rhetoric I am a bit troubled.

And make no mistake – this is full-throated populism, particularly when he starts railing about political and business elites selling out the country (with mention about political correctness in there) – which he’s oddly making to an audience that is thought of as Canada’s business elites. But it’s also deeply hypocritical because of just who O’Toole is. He is the son of a GM executive (which he tries to obscure when he says his father “worked for GM” as though he were blue-collar), who went on to be an MPP. In fact, earlier in the week, O’Toole was tweeting about how he built himself up to leadership, conveniently omitting the huge leg-up he was given along the way. It’s like the “self-made” tech millionaires who got their start with loans from their millionaire fathers, and getting those fathers to buy their tech at their companies. More to the point, after O’Toole left the military, he was a Bay Street corporate lawyer, which is not exactly the image of the middle-class guy he’s painting himself as. When he rails about “elites,” he needs to look in the mirror because that’s exactly what he is. Of course, we’ve seen this story so many times in populist politics, where rich white guys turn themselves into the heroes for the “oppressed underclass” (of mostly straight white guys) who somehow believe that said rich white guy is a “man of the people.” And no doubt O’Toole is hoping he’ll dine out on this as well, but make no mistake, this speech was hypocrisy of the highest order.

Continue reading

QP: A minister for divination?

Justin Trudeau was in town and on another “virtual” tour while his deputy was in the Commons in his stead. Erin O’Toole led off with his script on a mini-lectern, and he tried to tease out a contradiction in the status of the pandemic early warning system, to which Chrystia Freeland slowly and calmly stated that it was the time to focus on the second wave, but post-mortems should come later as one should not change the plane’s engine after taking off. O’Toole was not mollified, and tried again, but Freeland was not dissuaded in her calm dismissal. O’Toole tried to delve into news reporting about Freeland disagreeing on closing borders earlier in the pandemic, and Freeland calmly walked through the history of the Canada-US border closure. O’Toole switched to French to decry the terrorist attack in France earlier this morning and accused the prime minister of not taking it seriously, to which Freeland corrected him and said that all Canadians are horrified by the attack and they show solidarity with France. O’Toole wondered what happened to the promised de-radicalisation centres, to which Freeland calmly stated that they never failed to step up and show leadership, and that Canada stands with France. Stéphane Bergeron led for the Bloc, even though Yves-François Blanchet was present, and he demanded an official apology for the October Crisis, to which Freeland reminded him of the period in question and of the family of the Quebec politician who was killed by extremists. Andréanne Larouche tried again, and Freeland gave a paean to democracy and the space for disagreements. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, and in French, he decried the situation in long-term care facilities but wondered where the national standards were, and Freeland slowly explained that they need to work with provinces and territories as the second wave has hit. Singh switched to English to decry that the worst problems were in for-profit homes, and made an allusion to the falsehood that the federal government owns some of these facilities. Freeland agreed that they can’t turn a blind eye to the conditions in long-term care facilities, and that the country needs to do better.

Continue reading

QP: A flaming clown show where seriousness goes to die

It being Wednesday, the prime minister was not only present, but ready to respond to all of the questions of the day — though the utility of those responses was the question. Erin O’Toole led off, scripts on mini-lectern, and he started in on the Baylis Medical story, asking the prime minister to ask Frank Baylis to change the name from the “Baylis Ventilator.” Justin Trudeau reminded him that people of all partisan stripes, including well known conservatives like a Rick Jamison also stepped up to partner with Baylis. In French, O’Toole tried to insist that the Baylis contract was padded, but Trudeau reiterated the response. O’Toole then lied about the story on judicial appointments, to which Trudeau insisted that they were chosen based on merit and diversity — including political diversity. O’Toole switched to English attempt being clever about judicial appointments, and Trudeau protested that it wasn’t true. O’Toole then demanded to know why Canadians would be at the “back of the line” on vaccine roll-outs, and again Trudeau stated that it simply wasn’t true, and listed their early actions on the pandemic. Yves-François Blanchet was up next, and demanded an official apology for the October Crisis in 1970, to which Trudeau reminded him of the Quebec politician who was assassinated by a terrorist cell. Blanchet insisted that raids were like those in the Soviet Union, but Trudeau reminded him that the premier of Quebec and the leader of the opposition in 1970 called on Ottawa go send in the troops. Jagmeet Singh was up next, and in French, stated that Stephen Harper cut healthcare funds which is why long-term care facilities were under-resourced — which is utterly false. Trudeau stated that the federal government worked with the provinces to help with their facilities when asked. Singh then blamed the government for deaths in care homes that he claims they own — another falsehood — and Trudeau gave a paean about propel deserving care in dignity.

Continue reading

Roundup: Flirting with unconstitutional legislation

The bill to mandate sexual assault training for judges was a bad idea from the start, when Rona Ambrose first tabled it years ago, and the current iteration that this government is putting forward is little better, especially now that MPs have decided they need to start amending it to add other things. While Ambrose’s initial bill was blatantly unconstitutional (that the Commons passed on a whim because of the political syllogism: Something needs to be done, this is something, therefore we must do this), and needed to be gutted in the Senate to make it acceptable, the current version was more or less acceptable (barring one or two possible issues), but it seems that MPs want to make it blatantly unconstitutional again.

Former Supreme Court of Canada executive legal officer Gib van Ert warned back in February that this bill would be an invitation to demand that judges take training in other areas than just sexual assault, and lo and behold, we are there, with demands for the “social context of systemic racism.”

https://twitter.com/btaplatt/status/1321246603781570560

van Ert makes the point that if judges need to be seen as independent, then bills like this, where politicians appear to be giving them marching orders, is a bad look and will undermine the justice system. But since when to populist impulses consider the consequences of their actions? They don’t.

Continue reading

QP: The Bloc let their motives be known

While he had initially stated that he would not be in QP today, things changed and prime minister Justin Trudeau did show up after all. Erin O’Toole led off in French with a script in front of him, accusing the prime minister letting the pandemic alert system get sidelined because he preferred Chinese data, to which Trudeau disputed it, saying that the funding was stable and they we investigating to know what happened with the system. O’Toole doubled down and accused the prime minister of ideologically preferring information out of China, and Trudeau disputed this more vigorously. O’Toole switched to English to accuse the government of ignoring warnings about Huawei, to which Trudeau insisted that they were aware of the reports and were working to keep Canadians safe. O’Toole tried again, for which Trudeau reiterated his response. O’Toole then moved onto a potential refinery closure in Newfoundland, accusing the government of doing nothing about it, to which Trudeau declared that they were engaged and listed consultations they have undertaken. Alain Therrien led off for the Bloc, and he returned to the accusations of the government consorting with an alleged Chinese gangster, to which Trudeau offered a curt no in response. Therrien listed more apparent meetings that the government had with this alleged gangster, and Trudeau reminded him that the Liberals’ fundraising activities were the most transparent of any party. Jagmeet Singh was up to lead for the NDP, and in French, he demanded a tax on “excessive profits” companies made in the pandemic, to which Trudeau recited his worn talking point that they raised the taxes on the one percent when they formed government and the NDP voted against it. Singh changed to English to name poor workers to put faces on the same question, and Trudeau responded that they recognised front-line workers and that was why they stepped up to supports for businesses, before repeating his line about raising taxes.

Continue reading