The first QP of the new session is now officially a hybrid one, with a smaller number of MPs in the Chamber while the rest were on Zoom — a parliamentary abomination. Candice Bergen led off, and she demanded rapid testing options, to which Justin Trudeau took up a script to list what the federal government has done to support testing and procurement. Bergen accused a Trudeau of lacking any plans in his Throne Speech and called the last five weeks a waste of time. Trudeau asserted that the pandemic was the greatest challenge in a generation and it exposed problems in our society that they need to address. Bergen listed there people she claimed the Speech “left behind,” and Trudeau listed the measures that are helping Canadians. Gérard Deltell repeated the Québec premier’s claim that the Speech interfered in provincial jurisdiction, to which Trudeau reminded him that the premier didn’t mind when the federal government deployed the army to help Québec’s long-term care facilities. Deltell tried again, and Trudeau reminded him that they need to work together during the crisis to restart the economy. Alain Therrien was up for the NDP to carry on the accusation of interference and to demand more health transfers, to which Trudeau reminded him that they already increased transfers and more billions went out for the Safe Restart Agreement. Therrien tried again, and got the same answer. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, and in French demanded a plan for the second wave, to which Trudeau stated that they were working with the provinces to accelerate the testing process, and that they were helping seniors, families, students, and small businesses. Singh repeated his question in English, and Trudeau repeated his answer in English.
Tag Archives: Trade
Roundup: A difference in Supreme Courts
There’s been a fair amount of chatter the past couple of days about how everyone on both sides of the border seemed to know who US Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg was, but most Canadians would have no idea who any members of our own Supreme Court are. While some blame this on American “media saturation,” I think it’s more than that (though media saturation is a factor). Rather, the partisan jockeying around the composition of the American Supreme Court means that there is far more investment in who is on the bench and what their ideological leanings are, coupled with a willingness on the part of that Court’s justices to become media figures.
The Supreme Court of Canada is largely devoid of the partisan balancing act of its American counterpart, and Canada’s relative lack of particularly conservative schools of legal thought means that we have a much more homogenous legal community, which finds for less polarization on the top court – though the McLachlin era of many unanimous decisions has largely come to an end and dissents are more frequent – which is not such a bad thing. This isn’t to say that our court isn’t political, because it is – it is very much a political actor in the Charter era – but it is generally not partisan in that regard. As for the willingness for celebrity, most Canadian Supreme Court justices eschew the limelight, and very rarely grant interviews (not the case in the US), though the new Chief Justice, Richard Wagner, is a little more open with media and has taken to holding a year-ending press conference every June, which has not happened before now. Nevertheless, those are some of the reasons why Canada’s court and its personalities are not media spectacles like they are in the US, and that’s really not such a bad thing.
Meanwhile, here’s a look at how the Supreme Court of Canada is adapting to ensure in-person sittings for the duration of the pandemic.
First, we’ve spread out. We've spaced our bench out over two rows to maximize distance between judges, and installed Plexiglas barriers between them. The total number of people allowed in the courtroom will be limited to ensure that everyone can keep 2m apart. pic.twitter.com/uwHnlh4ZW3
— Supreme Court of Canada (@SCC_eng) September 21, 2020
Third, everyone will have to follow public health recommendations on COVID-19 while in the building. That means keeping 2m apart as much as possible, sanitizing hands when entering the building and courtroom, and wearing a mask when moving around the building and courtroom. pic.twitter.com/BIW8sAs66k
— Supreme Court of Canada (@SCC_eng) September 21, 2020
Roundup: The Energy East distraction
After wide reporting that Jason Kenney’s poll numbers have been tanking and that he’s currently tied with the provincial NDP, it was predetermined that Kenney was going to have to start coming up with something new to blame the federal government about in order to whip his voter base into a new round of irrational anger. He also, apparently needed to provide some cover to his friend Erin O’Toole after O’Toole’s meeting with the Quebec premier, and so Kenney’s distraction of choice was going to be Energy East, and blaming the federal government for its demise. Of course, that’s not true at all, and energy economist Andrew Leach has the receipts.
The Premier, for one, should feel free to develop shipper support for a project and submit that project for regulatory approval. Without the repurposing of existing gas pipeline assets owned by TC Energy, he'll find his project to be more prohibitively expensive than Energy East. https://t.co/ZqAu7HhT5j
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 15, 2020
If TC hadn't cancelled EE, would Alberta have taken on shipping commitments on KXL in addition to their 100k bbl/d commitment to EE? Not likely. Neither would other shippers. Shippers preferred XL, and TC had to pick one. They picked XL and AB and others backed it. https://t.co/8BntmTYViM
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 16, 2020
Why would having to account for upstream and downstream emissions lead TC Energy to cancel Energy East and revive Keystone XL when they had to account for upstream and downstream emissions as part of their application for Keystone XL? That makes exactly zero sense as a narrative. https://t.co/8BntmTYViM
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 16, 2020
Imagine you are an oil sands shipper. You have a choice between a pipeline to the largest heavy oil refining complex in the world or a more expensive pipeline to a port with one refinery that can't process much heavy crude. It's almost as if shippers might prefer making money.
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 16, 2020
Take @jkenney at face value and assume that TC cancelled EE – which cost them billions that they could not recover from prospective shippers – because they were unwilling to report upstream and downstream GHG impacts from EE. How bad does JK think the GHG report would have been?
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 16, 2020
Top 6 countries from which we imported crude in 2019: US (75.4%), Saudi Arabia (15.5%), Nigeria (3.5%), Norway (3.5%), Colombia (1%), UK (1%).
Aren't 5/6 of those (accounting for 85% of our crude oil imports) democracies? https://t.co/ohI8e4bauz
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 16, 2020
It's almost as if the Premier of Alberta is trying to distract people from something. Here, look at this shiny thing. pic.twitter.com/oRP1aUo9sk
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 16, 2020
Roundup: Giving Legault the farm
Erin O’Toole paid a visit to Quebec premier François Legault yesterday, and immediately promised to give away the farm to Legault if he were to become prime minister – capitulating on Bill 21 and letting Legault expand it (in spite of the Conservatives insisting that they are all about religious freedom), signing over the language rights of federal industries in the province, and promising more provincial transfers with no strings attached, all in the name of “provincial autonomy.” At the same time, O’Toole danced around the question of pipelines, which Legault opposes and O’Toole is in favour of shoving down the throat of a province in spite of his talk of “autonomy,” so his record of policy incoherence continues unabated. (As an aside, it seems to me that giving Quebec everything it demands wouldn’t actually win O’Toole Bloc votes, but rather empower the Bloc to say that they were so effective that they got everything the demanded).
This exchange with Legault made some waves in Alberta, where the visions of Energy East continue to evade reality. So while Rachel Notley tries to score points against O’Toole, and her UCP opponents try to score their own points, here’s energy economist Andrew Leach calling out both sides on how wrong they are.
Energy East is not going to happen not matter who is PM. There isn't enough incremental transportation demand for barrels on top of Line 3, KXL and TMX. This was why EE was cancelled: so that AB and others would shift take-or-pay commitments to KXL when you were in office. https://t.co/KkU2K8UKGL
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 14, 2020
Erin O'Toole's meeting with BC Premier Horgan will be much more interesting for AB. How will his "provincial autonomy" pledge coincide with BC opposition to pipelines, LNG, etc. Energy East is a pipe (ha!) dream.
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 14, 2020
In case you want more background:https://t.co/wvH44NFxiW
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 14, 2020
Bill C-69 was first read in the house in February of 2018, months after TC Energy cancelled Energy East in October of 2017. But, if we assume a time machine, this sequence of events makes perfect sense. https://t.co/PkrYWpWjwm
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) September 14, 2020
On the subject of Alberta’s oil patch, here is Leach laying out why the province over its past six premiers have engaged in a $26.4 billion boondoggle around building a refinery in the province and assuming all of the risk from their private sector partner, and will almost certainly wind up losing a hell of a lot of taxpayers’ money in the process. For everyone who insists that the province doesn’t subsidize the oil and gas sector, this is proof enough that such a claim is false, and it should enrage everyone in the province that their trust has been betrayed in such a way.
Roundup: O’Toole hears the siren song of cheap outrage
He’s barely a week into the job as Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, and Erin O’Toole is already starting to beak off about official residences, and my head is on the verge of exploding. When asked about the CBC story that Stornoway – the official residence of the Leader of the Opposition – is due to get $170,000 in needed repairs before O’Toole and family move in, O’Toole started going off about how he only wanted the very minimum of work done and that he doesn’t even want furniture in his kids’ bedrooms because he wants to use the furniture that their grandfather built in Nova Scotia, and I was both outraged and exasperated.
Let me be clear – the National Capital Commission needs to put work into upkeep of these heritage residences or else they will start to degrade. Everyone was so afraid of necessary upkeep at 24 Sussex for so long that it has literally become a crumbling shitpile, and nobody can decide what to do with it now. Stornoway managed to avoid that fate because when Preston Manning refused to move in, the NCC was able to do the heavy-duty renovations that the residence needed to bring it back up to spec, but 24 Sussex has never had that opportunity, and look where it got us. Nevertheless, this persistent politicization of official residences and casting them as “personal benefits” for political leaders is outrageous to the point of being offensive. These are not personal benefits – they are official residences who belong to the Queen in Right of Canada. And you can bet that a lot of journalists and Liberal partisans on Twitter dug up everything O’Toole said about 24 Sussex and the renovations to Harrington Lake to paint him a hypocrite, but dear sweet Rhea, mother of Zeus, this is such self-defeating behaviour. Stop it.
I will also add lay a certain amount of blame for this on the media, because the impulse is always to write these stories as cheap outrage. The CBC headline is quintessential cheap outrage: “Stornoway getting $170K in taxpayer-funded repairs before Erin O’Toole moves in.” This is the kind of thing that gets Canadians’ hairshirt parsimony and tall poppy syndrome riled up, and suddenly it’s a scandal – no matter how reasonable the costs, or necessary the work. And that’s exactly why 24 Sussex is a crumbling shitpile, and why our government aircraft are so old that they have to constantly refuel, and why the avionics on some of them are so old that they are banned from several major airports. It’s embarrassing, but cheap outrage is like crack to so many journalists’ brains that they can’t help themselves, and we collectively set ourselves back another decade on doing what needs to be done. We need to do better, and stop going for the cheap dopamine hits that these stories give because it’s self-destructive.
Roundup: Trudeau backs Payette
While making his media rounds, mostly on Vancouver stations yesterday, prime minister Justin Trudeau was asked about the situation in Rideau Hall, and whether there would be any chance he’ll replace Her Excellency Julie Payette anytime soon, especially given that there is currently a workplace investigation after more than twenty current and former employees have come forward with claims of bullying and harassment, not to mention the revelations about how her habits – especially her attempts to evade her own police protection – have cost additional millions of dollars unnecessarily. Trudeau responded that we currently have an “excellent” Governor General, and that the country is currently dealing with a health crisis and didn’t need a constitutional crisis to go with it.
It was a bit of a slow boil, but rest assured, dear reader, my head did explode.
The more I think about this, the angrier I’m getting. https://t.co/OZqVpWz3aL pic.twitter.com/yu5xHwIsnN
— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) September 2, 2020
Payette has not been an “excellent” GG. Far from it. She is a brilliant and accomplished woman, but is wholly unsuited for the role that is largely ceremonial, and where the exercise of her powers is 99.95% automatic. A big part of her job is to act as patron to a number of Canadian organizations – something she balked at (and for which I have argued we should start getting actual members of the royal family involved instead), in some cases causing problems for those organizations. She has tried to take an active hand in things like Order of Canada nominations, where she is supposed to act, again, in a ceremonial capacity. Her insertion of her own talk about the “space-time continuum” in the last Speech from the Throne was a problem. And this is on top of the problems having the dubious honour of overseeing the most toxic workplace in official Ottawa.
The notion that there would be a “constitutional crisis” is also completely insane. It is literally a matter of advising the Queen to name a new GG to replace Payette – that’s it. Trudeau is not in the midst of a confidence crisis in his government. There is no question as to the legitimacy of his advice to the Queen for such a replacement. There would be no crisis. Trying to pretend otherwise is disingenuous, plain and simple.
But Trudeau can’t acknowledge any of this, because that would mean owning the fact that he once again screwed up in not doing the actual work of due diligence required with the appointment – having disbanded the vice-regal appointments committee – and that it was a bad appointment. Beyond that, there is some speculation in certain circles here that Trudeau is not put out by the fact that Payette won’t do her job, because it allows him to step in and do more of the ceremonial stuff, which he’s not supposed to do as head of government, but something he has nevertheless tried to do more of. That’s a problem, and one that I suspect we can’t solve so long as Trudeau remains in office. (Chrystia Freeland, on the other hand, seems far less taken with Payette, and has moved to distance herself, so there’s that).
Roundup: Warning signs ignored by the RCMP
Monday morning was kicked off by a very good story over on Global about a lawsuit launched by former employees in the RCMP’s intelligence unit regarding the bullying of alleged spy Cameron Ortis, who awaits trial for allegedly stealing state secrets with the intent to sell them. The suit alleges that Ortis was bullying out anyone from his office that he didn’t like in order to install friends and people who would be pliant. While the government says they are going “look into” the matter – the fact that this was raised long before Ortis’ arrest and apparently ignored by the RCMP’s management is concerning.
Meanwhile, here’s former CSIS analyst Jessica Davis putting these allegations into perspective – and painting a worrying picture of our national security institutions in the process.
https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1300398113430085636
https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1300398115690811393
https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1300398117515296770
https://twitter.com/JessMarinDavis/status/1300399739284881408
Roundup: The O’Toole victory post-mortems
Now that Erin O’Toole has been “decisively” declared the winner of the Conservative leadership contest, all of the analysis has churned out. While O’Toole avoided the media (he’ll have a press conference today instead) and got to work with meetings to solidify his transition to leader, including changes to senior staff, but had a call with the PM, wherein O’Toole was sure to point out in his readout that he raised “western alienation” as a concern he wanted addressed in the Throne Speech – sending a signal to his base on day one.
Here’s O’Toole’s version of the call with the PM.
I’ll be curious to see if PMO releases their own readout (which is usually about seven hours after the call took place). pic.twitter.com/J2lK7OoQDb— Dale Smith (@journo_dale) August 24, 2020
Here is a reminder of the things that O’Toole promised during his leadership campaign – and caution, a lot of those promises are premised on some eye-popping economic illiteracy. Here are five ridings whose results help tell the story of O’Toole’s rise using the rules of the campaign (you can find the full riding-by-riding breakdown here). Here’s an analysis of who the power players are in O’Toole’s Conservative Party. Here’s a look into Leslyn Lewis’ campaign and what it signals, but I would put a word of caution for those who insist that this is some kind of turning point for a party that tends to favour old straight white men at all levels – I did notice over the past few months that whenever certain Conservative voters would harass female academics on social media and were called out for it, they would insist they weren’t sexist because they were voting for “a black woman to become prime minister.” I have a sneaking suspicion that Lewis has given a certain amount of cover to these kinds of people, which isn’t really a sign of progress.
Meanwhile, Susan Delacourt lists the things O’Toole will need to address before the party will be ready for an election, which means biding their time. Heather Scoffield sees an opportunity for O’Toole to exploit when it comes to fiscal policy. Aaron Wherry wonders how O’Toole will differentiate himself as leader given the party’s approach to issues. Éric Grenier crunches the numbers to show how the social conservative vote benefitted O’Toole over Peter MacKay. And Paul Wells takes stock of O’Toole, finding him to be little more than a warmed-over Scheer in an era where the political centre in the country has shifted from where the Conservatives believe it to be, which will mean that O’Toole will need to think bigger than he currently seems to have an interest in.
Roundup: An apology on the second attempt
It was prime minister Justin Trudeau’s first presser since the WE Imbroglio blew up over the revelations of his family being paid speakers for the charity, and there was a definite note of contrition this time. After hinting that the government would extend the wage subsidy until December with details coming later in the week, a mention of his call earlier in the morning with Donald Trump that touched on tariffs, Black Lives Matter, and China, and a promise on further updates on the Safe Restart Plan with the provinces to come later in the week, Trudeau turned to his mea culpa on the Imbroglio. “I made a mistake in not recusing myself from discussions, and I’m sincerely sorry about not having done that,” Trudeau said. He praised how the government got creative with designing programmes during the pandemic, and how they had worked with a range of partners to make it happen, but he was sorry that he didn’t remove himself from the discussions with WE, and that he was frustrated that youth would have to wait longer to do their party to serve because of the mistakes he made. (I would argue that WE’s plans raised a lot of red flags too, for what it’s worth). When asked if he would appear before committee to discuss what happened, Trudeau was non-committal, but in a hung parliament, he doesn’t have the votes to shield himself this time.
During the Q&A, he said that he pointed out to Trump about the disruptions to the aluminium supply chains and hoped that they wouldn’t see tariffs that would only slow down the economic recovery; he also mentioned that there were ongoing discussions around the border, but the rest of the time was spent reiterating, over and over, that he didn’t have the details on what his family members had been paid by WE and that he should have, and that he did seem to have some reflection that he needed to be careful on this file because of his past activity with the charity but that he didn’t go far enough and should have removed himself entirely from the conversation. Later in the day, Bill Morneau sent out his own apology for his own failure to recuse himself given his daughters’ activities with WE.
My statement on the administration of the Canada Student Service Grant: pic.twitter.com/kPbjp8kiaU
— Bill Morneau (@Bill_Morneau) July 13, 2020
For what it’s worth, there seems to be some kind of learning curve because it only took the second try for Trudeau to give an apology rather than stick to talking points aimed at deflection until the conclusion of the Ethics Commissioner’s report, at which point there would be either an apology or admission of some kind of wrongdoing and a promise to do better next time. This time, we managed to skip weeks of such failed damage control, so that’s something, I guess.
Meanwhile, Susan Delacourt finds herself wanting when it comes to Trudeau’s explanation for how the whole thing went down, and hopes that he’s saving it for his discussion with the Ethics Commissioner. Matt Gurney gives credit where credit is due for Trudeau learning enough to make a rapid admission and apology rather than dragging things out for months. Paul Wells is unimpressed with the apology and wants a full accounting of what happened, particularly as it is increasingly evident that things were wrong with the WE contract outside of the apparent conflict of interest, and how those decisions were made need to be aired.
Good reads:
- Ruh-roh! It looks like the federal government wasn’t enforcing the rules around temporary foreign workers, which allowed outbreaks to occur on farms.
- Here is some number-crunching on the PM’s daily pressers in the first phase of the pandemic and lockdown, including on his choice of verbs and phrases.
- The RCMP have charged a Quebec man with calling for Justin Trudeau’s death and the eradication of Muslims.
- Former Liberal MPs who lost their seats in the last election are waiting to hear about nomination contests so they can be ready to run again.
- Leona Alleslev has resigned as deputy leader of the Conservatives to more vocally back Peter MacKay, who says that no promises were made for her support.
- Maclean’s has a profile of Conservative leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis.
- Jason Kenney is accusing the federal government of preventing Apple from fixing the province’s contact tracing app, which requires iPhones to be unlocked to work.
- Kady O’Malley’s Process Nerd column looks at the options for calling prime minister Trudeau to committee to testify on the WE Imbroglio.
- Heather Scoffield is frustrated by the vague answers being given on the extension and amendments to the wage subsidy programme.
- Colby Cosh recounts how Alberta has abolished its last vestiges of prohibition, by allowing liquor sales in Mormon-centric towns that were still “dry.”
Odds and ends:
For the CBA’s National Magazine, I wrote about Friday’s Supreme Court decision on genetic privacy, and what the broader implications of the ruling are.
Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.
Roundup: Pearl-clutching about the deficit
For the first time this week, prime minister Justin Trudeau held a presser, wherein he praised the agreement with the First Nations on moving ahead with transferring control over child welfare, mentioned the virtual Cabinet retreat that was held over the previous two days, and mentioned that new pandemic modelling was on the way, noting that there are still hot-spots around the country. And then it was the takeaway message of the day – a mere couple of hours away from the fiscal “snapshot” being delivered, Trudeau made the case that they chose to support Canadians rather than leaving them to fend for themselves, and that the cost of doing nothing would have been far greater on both healthcare and the economy. He reiterated that this was not the time for austerity, but that they have been building a “bridges” to a stronger, more resilient Canada, and drove home the point that the federal government took on debt so that ordinary Canadians wouldn’t have to. He pointed to the low debt-to-GDP ratio, and that historically low interest rates mean manageable borrowing costs. And with one final word on Bob Rae being appointed to the UN, he took questions, one of the first of which determined that he didn’t recuse himself when the WE Charity sole-source contract came before Cabinet, which is something the Ethics Commissioner is looking at. He spoke about the necessity of childcare, that Bill Blair has been engaged on the subject or the RCMP and police brutality as part of the broader Cabinet workplan on combatting systemic racism, that they were following the recommendations of the Auditor General on CBSA, and then reiterated again that with historically low debt-servicing costs, it was easier for the federal government to take it on in order to prevent Canadian households from having to do so. When asked about the relationship with Donald Trump, Trudeau once again reiterated that they have concerns about the possibility of new tariffs, and that it will only hurt American industry because they need Canadian aluminium as they can’t produce enough of their own.
And then the fiscal “snapshot.” While Bill Morneau’s pabulum-heavy speech was pretty much all self-congratulation and a recap of measures they’ve taken, the accompanying documents did show a $343 billion deficit projected for this year (though it has been speculated that this was an outer bound limit designed for them to come under), and that the total debt by the end of this fiscal year could be $1.2 trillion – numbers everyone clutched their pearls about while ignoring that the debt-servicing costs continue to decrease even though the size of the debt has increased. There was mention that the wage subsidy is going to be extended, but with modifications on the way “sooner than later,” but there wasn’t much indication about the broader recovery plan thus far.
The difference between a recession and a depression, most likely. https://t.co/F9XZM5RMoc
— Kevin Carmichael (@CarmichaelKevin) July 8, 2020
Of course, the obsessions among all of the media coverage was the deficit and debt figures, because our reporting narratives remain firmly affixed in the mid-1990s, and no one can break free of them – not to mention the hyperbolic mentions about how this was the biggest deficit since the Second World War (never mind that this is a virtually unprecedented global pandemic we’re facing with a demand-side shock that people can’t seem to wrap their heads around). And because the framing devices remain in the 1990s, headlines obsessed that there wasn’t a plan to curb spending – because of course we know how the epidemiology of this pandemic is going to play out until we get a vaccine at some point in the future. But perspective? You need to turn to the economists on Twitter for that.
https://twitter.com/kevinmilligan/status/1280933038394875905
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1280946657106878464
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1280948115911045120
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1280935717359644672
https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1280992891343527936