Tag Archives: Ukraine

Roundup: Moving the majority motion

Posted on by

Government House Leader Steven announced yesterday that he will be moving a motion in the House of Commons today regarding changing the committee make-up for the remainder of this parliament in order to reflect the government’s new majority status, which feels a little bit like jumping the gun. While he does need to give notice of the motion, it won’t be debated until next week sometime at the earliest (because Thursday is a Supply Day for one of the Opposition Parties, and I doubt he would debate this motion on a Friday), but there’s no way the government can vote on it yet. Why? Because the three new MPs haven’t been sworn in yet, and it’s generally a three-to-four-week process for Elections Canada to fully certify the results and report back to the Commons so that the swearing-in can happen, and well, it’s only been a week-and-a-half.

I do find it interesting that they have decided to go the route of adding MPs to the committees to make them twelve members instead of ten, which may be a mistake on the government’s part. Yes, removing a Conservative instead of adding a Liberal to each committee might have seen them howl more, but the things is, we actually barely have enough MPs to go around when it comes to staffing committees properly (remember, this is the reason why official party status is twelve MPs—so that they can have coverage on every standing committee). During Trudeau’s majority parliament, committees were down to ten MPs, which meant that parliamentary secretaries didn’t have to be voting members, which is better for all because they couldn’t essentially be putting their thumbs on the scales on the government’s behalf, but when they were back to minority parliaments, committee memberships went back up to 12 in order to accommodate more opposition members, thus meaning parliamentary secretaries were back to voting members. It looks like Carney and MacKinnon have no problem with this, even though they should—it’s bad form for the independence of committees, but they don’t actually care about that.

It also looks like MacKinnon is doing this now and not later is a power move. I had previously suspected that this move wouldn’t be fully implemented until autumn because the last four sitting weeks before summer would have the committees slammed to get things passed before the break, but now they’re going to mess up their ability to work until the Procedure and House Affairs Committee can produce their report on the new committee memberships because the Conservatives decided to play stupid games on the Ethics committee and force a vote on making François-Philippe Champagne appear before them to answer theatrical questions about his non-existent conflict of interest with the Alto high speed rail project. By pushing this motion and vote to as soon as the government can make it, once the new MPs are sworn-in, it gives them a chance to try and head off the committee before Champagne appears for the sole purpose of having the Conservatives (and probably Bloc) call him corrupt on camera so that they can get clicks on their social media channels. Just ridiculous, and even more ridiculous that MacKinnon has to get in on the dick-swinging in the process.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-21T19:08:01.767Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia claims to have captured 80 settlements and 1700 square kilometres since the start of the year, while Ukraine has recaptured some of that territory back. As Ukraine is about to resume pumping oil through the Druzhba pipeline to Hungary, now that repairs are completed, it looks like Ukrainian drone attacks have reduced Russian oil export capacity by 300,000 to 400,000 barrels per day.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Undeserved back-patting for recruitment figures

Posted on by

Defence minister David McGuinty held a press conference yesterday to tout that the recruiting numbers in the military are way up, and this was a sign that the government is on track with their goals to recapitalise the military. But sure, there are still several trades that they are short in, and sure, they’re still quite a bit below the targets set in 2017, but it’s a start, right?

There are a few things at play here that deserve to be teased out. One of them is that people are saying this has to do with the pay raise, but I’m sceptical because the biggest problem with recruitment has long been the military’s poor intake process, which has been overly cumbersome, has dragged out the security screening process, and as they are admitting now, they don’t have enough beds in basic training to accommodate the increase in numbers. That’s pretty much entirely on the military’s internal processes and has precious little to do with the federal government’s handling of the file in any capacity, which makes it very hard for them to pat themselves on the back for it. (One might almost call that “stolen valour”). Over the past several years, the military’s internal delays were so bad that people who wanted to serve wound up walking away because it took too long, and they found jobs elsewhere. Again, it wasn’t an issue about pay, or military housing, it was that the Forces couldn’t get their own internal bureaucracy in line, and that again is on them.

There is another conversation that nobody is having here around this, which is the correlation between the job market and military recruitment. One of the other reasons recruitment has been poor for three decades now is because the job markets changed in the country, particularly in traditionally economically-depressed regions like the east coast, which used to see high recruitment numbers. What changed? Direct flights to Fort McMurray. The promise of oil sands cash for little education, and things like two-weeks-on/two-weeks-off shifts and living in camps meant good money for people from the region, so there wasn’t any need to sign up to the military to find stable employment. And now that is starting to shift back—there are no longer jobs aplenty in Fort Mac as the oil and gas sector has radically increased automation and productivity, and there are no longer unlimited jobs for high school dropouts that get six figure salaries. That is shifting the calculation around the country, and I suspect it is going to be one of the bigger drivers of recruitment more than anything the government has done around pay or base housing.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-20T19:15:34.667Z

Ukraine Dispatch

The death toll from a shooting spree in Kyiv has reached seven; the police chief has already tendered his resignation for it.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Carney’s Forward Guidance

Posted on by

On Sunday morning, prime minister Mark Carney released a ten-minute piece on his YouTube channel called “Forward Guidance,” because he’s still doing his central banker shtick, and it was a direct-to-camera (with three other cameras intercutting) discussion about the place we find ourselves in. Most of this was not new, repeating the same lines from past speeches including the one at Davos, while promising to never sugarcoat things—but he kind of did. I also have to question why this had to be over YouTube and not a speech in the House of Commons, which is why there is allotted time every day for ministers to make statements if they so choose. This could have been done there.

Carney pointed to a “statue” of Isaac Brock that Mike Myers gave him, but by statue he meant two-inch figurine, and that led him to launch into a whole War of 1812 narrative about the people who built this country, which, okay, sure, but you’re not doing much to show you’re not just the second coming of Stephen Harper. When he talked about the building of big things in the post-war period, this is again where things got a bit sugar-coated because there was still complexity to these old projects, and usually practices that would be unacceptable today for good reason. (I also noted that he mentioned universities being built in this period, without mention of the fact that provincial governments are in the process of dismantling our university systems). He also spoke about protecting social programmes (except for letting the funding of a bunch of groups who deliver services lapse), and he mentions pharmacare like it’s not limited to two types of drugs in a handful of provinces. And further sugar-coating was essentially by omission—the fact that so many Canadian businesses have become apathetic to growth or increasing productivity because they have taken the lesson that all they need to do is become rent-seekers.

Predictably, Pierre Poilievre decided he was going to have something to say about this, and that it was all just an illusion because nothing has actually been built yet (because you can build things overnight). He railed about Carney just enriching “well-connected elites,” but Poilievre’s whole scheme is to double down on trickle-down economics, which by definition enriches a small group of elites because the money does not, in fact, trickle down. Melissa Lantsman put out her own rebuttal that included the incredulous and false claim that the Liberals have cost the economy a trillion dollars in the past decade, which is completely fiscally illiterate, but that’s how the Conservatives roll.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-19T23:08:01.392Z

Ukraine Dispatch

There was a massive overnight attack Saturday on Chernihiv which killed a sixteen-year-old boy, and wounded others. Ukraine is continuing its own drone strikes on Russian oil facilities in Samara, occupied Crimea, and the Baltic Sea.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The 44th Charter anniversary

Posted on by

Yesterday was the 44th anniversary of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and it comes at a time when the Charter is increasingly under attack by provincial governments who have realised that the prohibition against using the Notwithstanding Clause has worn off, and that the public no longer cares about it—at least not enough to actually punish a government that does it, mostly because it’s right-wing governments using the Clause to punish minorities, and there isn’t enough political will to care about trans and gender diverse youth, or the rights of visible minorities in Quebec.

While everyone waits for the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in the Law 21 case out of Quebec, there is some using about ways that the federal government could try and introduce some kinds of guardrails against its use federally, but that immediately had the Bloc Québécois howling, and the brand new Quebec premier striking a combative tone, until she got reassurances from Carney and a text message apology from the federal justice minister, which strikes me as far too much appeasement. And then you have people calling for the constitutional power of disallowance if a province invokes the Clause, but that’s extremely dangerous. Disallowance is a constitutional dead letter—it existed mostly as a way of ensuring provinces would stay within their constitutional lanes, and that function has been taken up by the Supreme Court of Canada’s reference function. Disallowance would essentially be a declaration of war, which is a very bad thing for any federal government.

So, what can we do about provinces who abuse the power? The same way you effect any political change—you organize, and you protest, and you get out the vote. But that’s hard, and people don’t want to do that, even though that’s the way politics works. There is no easy way to curb the abuse of these powers other than the public letting it be known that it’s unacceptable, and that’s hard work. But it’s the only way to ensure that you not only get change, but that said change is actually durable. Make premiers afraid of you. It’s the only way we’re going to fix what’s wrong with this country.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-17T13:13:12.555Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russian drones hit the Danube port of Izmail once again, and at least one drone strayed into Romanian territory as a result. Ukrainian drones made hits at oil facilities in the Black Sea port of Tuapse and Krasnodar.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Another lunchtime speech praising trickle-down economics

Posted on by

Pierre Poilievre was back at the Canadian Club in Toronto for another lunchtime speech on how he is going to fix the economy to make life more affordable, and—stop me if you’ve heard this one before—it involves doubling down on trickle-down economics. In fact, while the speech made all of his greatest hits (destroy environmental legislation, cut taxes, cut bureaucracy in the most hand-wavey way possible), along with his latest genius plan of building a stockpile of oil and critical minerals that will supposedly give us “leverage” with future negotiations. Again, this is stupid because you’re not going to convince Trump, with his love of tariffs, to abandon that with a “strategic reserve.” Get real.

Actual quote from Poilievre's speech today:"If you asked a neutral and objective AI bot to go into all of the policies on the books of the government of Canada, what would you find has actually changed in the last year?"There is no such thing as a "neutral and objective" bot. Absolute clown show.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-16T20:24:29.511Z

And because this is Poilievre, he is continuing to double-down on his peevish insistence that he is somehow a better economist than Carney because he watched a bunch of crypto bros on YouTube. In fact, he dismissed Carney as having the “illusion of knowledge,” and claimed that all of Carney’s economic ideas have been wrong for years, which is a ridiculous thing to say. This while he keeps going on and on about “money-printing,” which nobody is engaging in, but again, this is one of the key things that crypto bros will say drives inflation (hence why Poilievre parroted their lines about Bitcoin being a way to opt out of inflation), and nobody will call this out. (Okay, David Cochrane has tried to call it out, and Poilievre and Andrew Scheer just obfuscate and prevaricate, but absolutely nobody else challenges this absolutely bullshit claim, including the government). It’s amazing how much we let him get away with saying that is completely untrue—and he knows it.

Meanwhile, Conservatives back in Ottawa were complaining to the press that François-Philippe Champagne won’t appear at the ethics committee to answer about his recusing himself on the Alto high-speed rail project because his spouse is a vice-president there, even though the Ethics Commissioner said that there is no actual conflict because Alto reports to a different line minister. This is just theatre, because the Conservatives want clips of themselves calling Champagne corrupt in committee, and surprise, surprise, the Liberals have no interest in exposing him to this. So, the Conservatives are now crying foul in advance of committees being rejigged to reflect the majority, and saying that this is proof the Liberals are going to avoid accountability. But witch-hunts and media stunts are not accountability, and this is just so stupid.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-16T19:08:03.789Z

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia spent all Thursday hammering Ukraine with 700 drones and dozens of missiles, which killed sixteen people and wounded more than a hundred others. One of those strikes was on the Black Sea port of Tuapse, which it an oil tanker.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The thing about windfall taxes

Posted on by

In the discussion over “pausing” the excise tax on gasoline and diesel, and the Conservatives’ demands that all other fuel charges be scrapped (including the clean fuel standard which is not a charge or a tax), versus the NDP’s call for a price cap and windfall tax, there hasn’t been a lot of discussion about what those will mean.

Enter economist Kevin Milligan, who has a good thread explaining the problem with windfall taxes, and why those advocating for them have a lot more explaining to do when it comes to just how they see them being implemented.

Adam asks a fair question here that has been bandied about. Let me offer two arguments against a windfall tax that I would wager FIN officials would make when advising cabinet on what to do. I'll also offer my own assessment of the two arguments.1/

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:15:37.601Z

Why would FIN argue against an oil/gas windfall tax?FIN Arg #1: Ideally we set taxes in advance and then let firms and people make their choices based on those taxes. Changing taxes <i>ex post</i> risks upsetting investors who would view this as a mark of an unstable unserious country.

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:17:39.157Z

My response: Yes, ideally we set taxes ex ante and let firms/people decide what to do. Changing that ex post is like reneging. All true. But I do think FIN overindexes on this argument. Every time we change taxes we literally 'renege' on the status quo./3

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:19:52.099Z

If you took the 'no tax changes ex post' argument completely as sacrosanct, it essentially argues for no tax changes ever. That's silly.I also note the "no ex post changes because we're not a banana republic" argument only gets hauled out when it's a tax *increase*. Why not symmetric? Hmmm…/4

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:21:48.449Z

Why would FIN argue against an oil/gas windfall tax?FIN Arg #2: How do you define a "windfall"? What is this year's profit? What is last year's profit? You realize these are accounting numbers, subject to lots of choice variables for shifting between tax years, right? /5

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:24:09.737Z

Fin Arg #2 cont'd: The concern is that you'd end up with a lot of accounting gaming and not as much revenue as you'd think. A lot of time/effort/dollars spent on creating the tax law to minimize gaming. A lot of time/effort/dollars spent by firms avoiding a windfall tax law./6

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:25:51.216Z

My take on accounting and windfall taxes:I recall reading historical precedents around WW2 (?) that outlined how much effort it was relative to the revenue. I recall that being persuasive. (Don't have the source at my fingertips….)But I take the windfall tax accounting issue seriously./7

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:28:08.463Z

So, my advice to those who advocate for a windfall tax? The thing you could do to overcome government resistance is to look seriously at the accounting issues involved.Chanting slogans is one thing. Overcoming implementation barriers is maybe less fun, but necessary to gettin stuff done./end

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:31:43.152Z

It only boils down to 'let the rich have their way' if you assume that windfall tax advocates aren't capable of getting their accounting shit together. Why be so defeatist?I outlined a path for advocates. If the response is 'gee that sounds hard' that's not my prob.bsky.app/profile/open…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:40:14.904Z

I'm not here to blow sunshine and tell you that hard things are easy. Hard things are hard. If you're determined you can do them. But if you don't want to do the work then I'm not going to take the proposal seriously.

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-15T15:42:31.333Z

It’s clear that Avi Lewis hasn’t actually thought any of this through. He was on Power & Politics last night and kept trying to handwave away the questions about this plan, and it just kept boiling down to “oil companies bad.” I do think it’s a problem that we’re not seizing on this opportunity to make long-term investments to get off of our dependence on fossil fuels like the French did with their transition to nuclear in the seventies and eighties (because so much European power relied on Middle Eastern fossil fuels up until the oil embargo in the seventies), but nobody seems to want to have that conversation, and Carney has been pretty adamant that he thinks there is a future in the fossil fuel sector. It’s too bad we have no grown-ups who can have a serious conversation about this.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia fired missiles into Kyiv early this morning, killing thirteen so far including twelve-year-old child and wounding several others. This was after more missile and drone attacks were made through the day, which included hitting an apartment building in Odesa. Ukraine’s army has been introducing new drone infantry capabilities, which has resulted in retaking more territory from Russian occupation.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Embracing dumb populist measures

Posted on by

Apparently, everyone is getting in on the dumb populist moves when it comes to gasoline prices—prime minister Mark Carney included. In the morning, Carney announced that he was going to suspend the excise tax on fuel (10¢/litre for gasoline, 4¢/litre for diesel) until Labour Day in order to help with the rising cost of gasoline thanks to the Iran conflict, and gearing it to the summer travel season. This is not quite what the Conservatives have been demanding, which is to remove the excise tax, the GST and the clean fuel standard (which they deliberately misconstrue as a tax when it’s not even a charge). In both cases, it’s crass populism that is bad economics. If prices are rising due to external factors, credible economists will tell you the best thing to do is increase transfers to lower-income households because they need it most. Just cutting fuel prices at the time when they’re rising because of a global shortage encourages people to buy more, which exacerbates the shortage. And yes, we produce most of the gas we consume in this country, but not all parts of the country do, and the east coast in particular will be more vulnerable to the global shortage, and this could be very bad. This is certainly not the technocratic government that we were promised under Carney.

Hmm. Around the world I see oil/gas price caps, subsidizing demand for things in short supply.We have seen this before. Doesn't end well!

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T16:52:07.899Z

Blake provides some solid technocratic economist advice.But in the age of slopulism there just doesn't seem to be any appetite for policy that delays gratification even minimally. bsky.app/profile/blak…

— Kevin Milligan (@kevinmilligan.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T16:57:34.839Z

Yeah, that's bad. Dumb populism.Think about it this way: If you had a pot of cash to hand out, who would you send it to? I'm guessing you wouldn't say: “Folks who drive a lot are obviously the neediest; that's who deserves my cash.. Also, I would love to subsidize reliance on foreign oil.”

— Justin Wolfers (@justinwolfers.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T23:23:40.959Z

Pierre Poilievre, meanwhile, has decided that his latest line of attack is to claim that Carney has been “badly educated” in economics, which is…hilarious. Poilievre has no economics training, but because he watches crypto bros on YouTube, he thinks he’s got a better economics understanding that someone with degrees from Harvard and Oxford, and was the governor of the central bank for two G7 countries. And when called out on it, he and Andrew Scheer are doubling down on it. The Dunning-Kruger Effect here is just blinding.

Tonda MacCharles: Pierre Poilievre called you badly educated in economicsMark Carney: Did he? Wow.

— Scott Robertson (@sarobertson.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T14:44:59.393Z

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2044206811390325191

Not to be outdone, Avi Lewis has his own plan for gas prices, which is to cap them and then charge windfall taxes on oil companies. Capping prices during a shortage will have the same effect as discounting prices, because the supply problem is not changed, and windfall taxes are tricky beasts because those companies will demand all kinds of government support the moment there is any kind of downturn.

It's mindless populism all the way down.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T21:54:32.368Z

https://twitter.com/andrew_leach/status/2044145727388139992

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-14T13:08:04.657Z

Ukraine Dispatch

A Russian missile strike on Dnipro killed at least five civilians. Ukraine has signed a deal with Norway for Norway to produce Ukrainian drones.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A by-election sweep

Posted on by

The Liberals managed to win all three by-elections last night—University–Rosedale and Scarborough Southwest were handy victories, but Terrebonne was more of a squeaker but the Liberals pulled out in the end. A number of TV outlets held by-election specials just so that they could declare a “majority government” for Mark Carney (even though that’s not a real thing—government is government, meaning Cabinet, and it doesn’t change based on the composition of parliament, so it would be a majority parliament). Things won’t change right away—it’ll be a few weeks before the results are certified and they can take their seats, but the writing is now on the wall, which I’ll write more about in a longer piece.

This is a time to come together so we can build a Canada strong for all.My statement on today's by-elections in University—Rosedale, Scarborough Southwest, and Terrebonne.

— Mark Carney (@mark-carney.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T04:29:06.436Z

Pierre Poilievre marked the occasion with a tantrum post, while his MPs are assuring journalists that no, they’re not planning on forcing him out, and they have all been making loud and obsequious declarations of loyalty over social media in the wake of those floor-crossings, just to drive home the point. He also has no intention of resigning, because that would require some introspection and he is clinically incapable of doing so.

He's totally not mad, you guys. So very not mad.

— Dale Smith (@journodale.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T03:42:21.056Z

Pierre Poilievre’s Personal Assistant Explains Why He’s Totally Not Mad About Carney’s Majorityyoutu.be/fkduTKAuLn8

— Clare Blackwood (@clareblackwood.bsky.social) 2026-04-14T01:49:05.787Z

Avi Lewis’ first day

On the first sitting day back since his leadership win, Avi Lewis was in Ottawa with a fresh demand for government in order to make it look like he’s springing into action—to force government to ban so-called surveillance pricing, even though it’s not really a thing in Canada, at least not in stores (online is a different story), but it was his demand. But in his first press conference, he got chippy with the journalists who wanted to ask about other issues of the day, and in particular to ask his foreign affairs critic, Heather McPherson, about the blockade in Iran, and he refused to let her answer. So that wasn’t good, and I’m amazed that there wasn’t an experienced comms person on hand to stop him from making such an ass of himself on his first time out. I also noted that Lewis said he would be in Ottawa “from time to time,” which is another mistake. Jagmeet Singh tried only showing up on Wednesdays for his first year, and it nearly buried him. So much for learning lessons from past failures.

— Effin' Birds (@effinbirds.com) 2026-04-13T19:08:01.694Z

Ukraine Dispatch

One person was killed in the Donetsk region on Sunday in spite of the supposed “Easter ceasefire.” Russian drones attacked the port of Izmail overnight, damaging a Panama-flagged vessel.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A decisive defeat for Orbán

Posted on by

There was a pretty momentous occasion in Hungary as Viktor Orbán and his party were thrown out of power after 16 years, with an election marked by extremely high turnout, a population that was fed up with his corruption and self-dealing, and an opposition that was united around a figure that did the work at the grassroots level to create a movement that could get around the kinds of structures and barriers that Orbán put into place over his years in power, where he and his cronies took over the media, the civil service, the judiciary, and the bureaucracy. This means that Péter Magyar has a massive job ahead of him to try and undo the years and years of corruption. Anne Applebaum has a good rundown of the situation here.

There was much celebration among European leaders (quotes here), and it was worthwhile noting just how many far-right, authoritarian and populist leaders lined up support for Orbán in advance of the election, including JD Vance. This is part of what makes this defeat significant—so many of those far-right and authoritarian populist parties and leaders looked to Orbán for their inspiration, most especially among Republicans in the US. Things like the “Don’t say gay” bills all originated from Hungary. And we cannot ignore that Orbán’s influence extended to Conservatives in this country, both through Stephen Harper whitewashing him through his IDU social club, and the fact that Orbán’s “Danube Institute” sponsored visits by Conservative MPs.

There is going to be a lot to dig into about how his opposition was able to defeat him in spite of his putting in so many structural barriers, and that will be relevant here in places like Alberta, where Danielle Smith likes to use the Orbán playbook. Suffice to say, it is a positive sign that leaders like this can be overcome, provided that the opposition can come together in the right way to ensure it happens.

Ukraine Dispatch

Russia did not honour their “Orthodox Easter ceasefire.” Try to look surprised! There was, however, a POW-swap over the weekend, where each side exchanged 175 prisoners.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The benefit of the doubt for Gladu

Posted on by

The Liberal convention is happening this weekend in Montreal, and it’s in part a way that prime minister Mark Carney is putting his stamp on the party now that he’s been leader for a year. It’s a different kind of convention—claimed to be the largest policy convention in the party’s history, and there are no American Democrats giving keynote speeches for the party faithful to fangirl over for a change—the keynote was Canadian Rick Hansen, which again, is a marked shift from years past.

Of course, so much of the oxygen is being taken up by the recent floor-crossers, Marilyn Gladu most especially, and while you have news stories talking about a “mixed reaction,” there is nevertheless a sense that pervades the quotes across news stories that delegates are Carney fans, and that they’re giving him the benefit of the doubt for welcoming them into the party, particularly if it gets them to a majority parliament that will being some stability. Chris d’Entremont and Matt Jeneroux have made comments of their own about feeling secure in their decisions, while progressive Liberals like Karina Gould and Stephen Guilbeault are couching their reservations about Gladu into an optimism that she knew what she was signing up for when she crossed over. For her part, Gladu is also talking about how she hopes this move will benefit her riding, though governments aren’t really supposed to favour only ridings they hold (even though it happens, especially provincially).

As for policy, it has been noticed that there isn’t much talk about Trump, even though he continues to dominate the political airwaves and is giving Carney much of his raison d’être for what he’s doing. There are policy resolutions on banning social media for minors, or limiting use of chatbots (but nobody seems to understand the massive problems associated with age verification).

Ukraine Dispatch

President Zelenskyy says that they are facing pressure both military as spring arrives, but also diplomatically as allies want them to stop hitting Russian oil and gas facilities as prices are so high. Farmers in Ukraine are now being hit by high fertilizer prices thanks to the Iran conflict.

Continue reading →