Tag Archives: Ukraine

Roundup: The demand to name names

Posted on by

The day was largely marked with the discourse around that NSICOP report, and the demand that the government name names, even though that’s never going to happen because intelligence is not evidence, there may be ongoing investigations that it might jeopardise, and the possibility of reputational damage for someone who may be unwittingly involved is great—all things the RCMP pointed to in their own release on the subject. The chair of NSICOP said that any next steps are up to the RCMP, but that hasn’t stopped reporters from asking salacious questions about whether they can trust their fellow caucus-members (because remember, reputational damage).

With all of this in mind, I went back to the report, and looked for more than just that one paragraph that every media outlet highlighted. It noted that much of that witting assistance was in relation to India, which is not a “hostile power” last time I checked, even if we have particular issues with them (such as their decision to assassinate someone on our soil). I have no doubt that some MPs would see no problem in trying to “forge closer ties” with India. The other thing that I noted was that, at least in relationship with the Chinese government is that there was an expectation of a quid pro quo relationship, that engaging with them would benefit the political player in question in the hopes that the PRC would mobilise their influence networks in favour of that candidate in the riding. I suspect that in several of these cases, the MPs in question wouldn’t think of it as foreign interference, but that they’re being so clever in leveraging diaspora politics to their advantage, and believing that they can somehow outwit Chinese agents to do it. Likewise with instances of blind eyes being turned to money flowing into ridings, particularly from the Indian government—that they think they can leverage that government to their advantage and not that they’re being played, and why I don’t think that certain media outlets and political figures screaming “name the traitors!” is doing much for the level of discourse. The report did make mention of Chinese and Indian influence in at least two Conservative leadership races, but no details provided as to how or the vectors that took shape as (money, membership sign-ups under the promise of repayment, or so on). There was also mention of one former MP who had wittingly provided information while maintaining a relationship with a foreign intelligence officer, but this was being conflated with the other allegations, which is not helpful in the slightest.

As for what’s next, it would seem to me that the real question here is why certain party leaders continue to be wilfully blind as to the full details of the report, and how they continue to refuse to accept classified briefings. The notion that it would “muzzle” them is bullshit—it would mean they can’t talk about certain specific details, but it would give them a more complete picture of what is happening and if their own MPs are implicated, which would allow them to take internal party action, even if they can’t publicize the details.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces downed 22 out of 27 Russian drones overnight Wednesday, and an industrial facility in Poltava suffered damage. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with the emir of Qatar in advance of the peace summit in Switzerland.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1798300991407940083

Continue reading →

Roundup: Putting words in the Auditor General’s mouth

Posted on by

It was an Auditor General’s Report Day in the Nation’s Capital, and these reports were far more salacious than many in the past, which is in part why they dominated Question Period. The AG looked at three issues—contracts awarded to McKinsey and Company, the allegations around governance at Sustainable Development Technology Canada, and combatting cybercrime, and each report has a lot of things to say.

  1. Many of the contracts awarded to McKinsey were done sole-source with poor justification, going all the way back to 2011. And for context, these are contracts sought and awarded by the civil service, and not the political direction of the government; also, while there was a huge focus on McKinsey, they are less than one percent of these kinds of external contracts.
  2. There were governance problems at SDTC, including conflicts of interest in awarding funds, but there has been a lot of reporting in The Logic that suggests that some of this has been overblown, such as the fact that everyone on SDTC’s roster was given funds during the pandemic including operations that directors had ties to, so there couldn’t have been preferential treatment. Nevertheless, the government announced today that they are essentially pulling the plug on the organisation and folding it into the National Research Council.
  3. Cybercrime incidents have a poor record of being followed up on when reported to the wrong agency, and that many were dropped and the complainants were not told they reported to the wrong agency, meaning that a lot of files got lost along the way. The government is working on a single-window solution for reporting cyber-incidents, but that hasn’t happened yet.

On the first two, the Conservatives made up a huge fiction about these being contracts to “Liberal insiders,” or “friends of the government,” or “cronies,” or the like, when the reports said absolutely nothing of the sort. In fact, the reports quite clearly state that there was no political direction or involvement in these contracts, which means that these allegations by the Conservatives are not only false, but potentially libellous, but they want to create an air of corruption around the government. In addition, they seem desperate to avoid any scent of involvement themselves, when the McKinsey contract problems date back to when Harper was in government, and SDTC was set up by the Conservatives, including its governance structure, which proved problematic. In either case, the cries of corruption and trying to invoke the ghost of Sponsorship are little more than cheap lies, but that’s what the Conservatives do best these days, it seems, so none of it is surprising.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A pair of Russian missiles struck civilian infrastructure in Dnipro, injuring eight including two children. Ukrainian officials say that the decision to allow Ukraine to strike into Russian territory will disrupt their advances and help defend the Kharkiv region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The PBO immolates what little credibility he had left

Posted on by

It looks like the Parliamentary Budget Officer, Yves Giroux, decided to extend his “winning” streak and cover himself in glory at the Commons’ finance committee yesterday, and once again immolated what credibility he has left. Defending his report, claiming he had access to a confidential report from Environment Canada that he was “gagged” from releasing (which the Conservatives jumped on and launched a thousand shitposts about, because committees are now only about content generation), lamented that the government doesn’t publish more climate modelling of their own, and how he hates how his reports are politicised, even though he’s been at this job for years and knows full well that PBO reports are always politicised, because that’s why MPs like them—so that they can both wield those reports as a cudgel, while hiding behind the shield of the PBO’s non-partisan “credibility” to keep the government from attacking it.

https://twitter.com/LindsayTedds/status/1797780078203671008

https://twitter.com/prairiecentrist/status/1797691621708054916

While this Tony Keller column lays out four major problems with the original carbon price report that the PBO produced—which again, Giroux continues to not really apologise for—energy economist Andrew Leach has some additional comments, driving home both how shallow the analysis is, and the fact that it’s not replicable because the PBO studiously refuses to explain his methodology, relying on “trust us, that’s our job.” But as we saw on P&P and again at finance committee, he complained that the government should be doing this kind of modelling work when it’s literally his one statutorily legislated job to do.

And to be helpful, Jennifer Robson provides some unsolicited advice on how the PBO could make his methodologies more transparent, if he actually wanted to do that (which I doubt, because so many of his reports rely on his pulling a novel methodology out of his ass, according to the many economists I’ve interviewed in the past). But that’s also part of the point about why he has no credibility left, and why he should start drafting that resignation letter.

https://twitter.com/lindsaytedds/status/1797817128483254759

Ukraine Dispatch:

A civilian was killed in a Russian strike on a recreation facility in Kharkiv. Here’s a look at what to expect from Ukraine’s peace summit to be held in Switzerland next week.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Stop talking about what they’re talking about

Posted on by

The one thing everyone was talking about this weekend was Conservative MP Arnold Viersen going on Nate Erskine-Smith’s podcast and just blatantly laying out his anti-abortion (and anti-gay) agenda, and then a) claiming he was ambushed, and b) putting out the vaguest statement ever to walk back his comments and defend The Leader’s position (which is less clear than he likes to pretend).

But as this is happening, we see the country’s Elder Pundits sighing and saying “There the Liberals go again, always talking about abortion,” and “wow, they’re really desperate to pull this card again, especially so early,” when the Conservatives are the ones who keep bringing it up, time after time, but the Elder Pundits keep telling everyone to just ignore it, because that will apparently make it go away. It’s not going away, and they are increasingly emboldened about these kinds of issues because the authoritarians and wannabe-authoritarians are using these very issues to oppress, and to create wedges that they can leverage, but calling that out is a little uncouth. While yes, I do think that backbench suck-up questions on abortion every day in Question Period for a week is overkill, but again, the Conservatives are the ones who keep bringing it up and who keep insisting that they’re going to re-open these issues, and if the leader says they won’t, I don’t feel inclined to believe him because he has lied about every single issue under the sun (which again, the Elder Pundits of this land continue to studiously ignore). Maybe we need to stop ignoring what is right in front of us, Elder Pundits be damned.

As a bonus, here’s a story about Viersen and what a homophobic/transphobic person he really is (on top of his continued bullshit about trying to block porn). He’s not alone in the party on this front. We should be paying attention but the Elder Pundits keep telling us not to. It’s really tiresome.

https://twitter.com/HannahHodson28/status/1796928863265521767

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile hit residences in Balakliia near Kharkiv, injuring 13. Russians have also continued pounding energy facilities across Ukraine, prompting a fresh plea for more air defences. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy headed to the Asia security summit in Singapore to drum up support for the upcoming peace conference, and to call out China for pressuring countries not to attend.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A choice to be dickish about pensions

Posted on by

Over the past few days, the NDP have put on a big song and dance about the bill to update the Elections Act, which they had a hand in drafting with the government as a part of the Supply and Confidence Agreement. They now claim that they were blindsided by the provision to move the “fixed” election date by one week so that it doesn’t clash with Dwivali, because the knock-on effect is that it will qualify a number of MPs for their pensions in that extra week because they’ll have had their six years of service then. So they are now moving an amendment to the bill to return the election date to its original schedule, because who cares about Dwivali, right?

This is actually a new low for the NDP, who are trying to play populist politics but are doing it very, very badly. And if the intention is for this to come off as mean-spirited at the expense of Hindus, Jains and Sikhs who are celebrating and can’t vote of campaign on that day, well, who cares? As I believe Emilie Nicholas pointed out on Power & Politics, if the bill is to eliminate barriers to voting, why would the NDP then put up a new barrier for Hindus, Jains and Sikhs, so that they can try and outdo the astroturf charlatans in the Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation? Because that’s the only group not actually is going to derive any joy from this. And media framing this as tAxPaYeR dOlLaRs is complicit in this kind of base thinking.

Frankly, we shouldn’t begrudge MPs their pensions because they put their lives on hold for years to serve the public in this way. (Whether they serve effectively is another story). We underpay them for the work they are doing (well, the work they are supposed to be doing—the current crop is not exactly doing themselves any favours), and to make these MPs lose out on the pensions they’ve earned because they are a few days shy of the cutoff is actually kind of cruel, and is the sort of thing that makes people rethink ever wanting to run for office, and to come out of it at the end with nothing for the time they put into public service when they could have made much more money and gotten a pension in the private sector. Instead of being gracious enough, every opposition party now wants to be dickish about it, which is pretty much fitting for the moment we’re in.

Ukraine Dispatch:

A Russian missile attack overnight destroyed a power facility in Kyiv and damaged the electricity grid. Ukraine struck an oil terminal in Kavkaz in Russia thanks to missiles fired from their navy. Both Germany and the US have now said that Ukraine can use their weapons to strike inside of Russian territory, so long as it’s for the defence of Kharkiv. A prisoner swap with Russia took place on Friday, exchanging 75 people on each side. Ukraine has had four thousand prisoners apply to join the army in exchange for parole. And the factory in Ukraine that makes Oreo cookies is back online after two years of rebuilding after being damaged by the Russians.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1796518606832017524

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1796445849683419207

 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Anecdotes about emigration

Posted on by

It was a CBC story that caught the attention of Pierre Poilievre, and which his deputy leader brought up in Question Period, being one centred around census data showing a growing number of Canadians who are relocating to the US, and which tries to focus the attention on those who insist that they’re moving because Justin Trudeau has been so terrible. But this is also a story from a particular usual suspect, so it’s thinly sourced and written by a certain usual suspect who had a habit of this kind of sloppy work (and no, it’s not because he has any particular political agenda—it’s because he thinks he’s being edgy and that he’s tackling “big” things, even though he’s been relatively terrible about it.

To be clear, the story has no breakdown in the data to show much of anything useful about just who is moving, particularly from certain age groups and demographics, nor where they are moving to. This could be a case of retiring Boomers heading to Arizona and Florida and saying farewell to Canadian winters for good, but we don’t know. It does point out that a third of those who emigrate to the US were themselves Americans by birth returning home, and less than a third are immigrants to Canada from elsewhere who have since decided to move to the US, but for some of them, that could have been their plan all along. One of the profiled couples are fairly young and say that housing prices are an issue, but given how restrictive their immigration policies are, it’s hard to see how that many people are able to move just because housing is cheaper. This could also be a largely Ontario-driven phenomenon, but again, we have no breakdown in the data.

This is a big issue, but there is no attempt to get more clarity in the data. Instead, the focus is on getting anecdotes about how they hate Trudeau and want to move because of it, which is both an attempt to make this a federal story instead of a provincial housing one (and the usual suspect writing this piece has a history of doing that), but also because he thinks it’s going to get attention to the piece, and that’s exactly what it did, no matter how thin those anecdotes are, and the plural of anecdotes is not data. We shouldn’t need to remind a reporter at the gods damned public broadcaster of this fact, but things are off the rails there, and this is the kind of bullshit we get as a result.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russian missiles hit three sites in Kharkiv overnight, as Ukrainian forces work to shoot down seven missiles and 32 drones. While Russians continue aerial attacks on Kharkiv, they have also increased their troop concentration in the region, looking like they will make a push toward the city. Word is coming out that president Joe Biden has quietly given the okay for Ukraine to use American-made and supplied weapons to strike military targets inside of Russia.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1796418752411840609

Continue reading →

Roundup: The PBO immolates his credibility

Posted on by

In their need to constantly frame issues as both-sides, The Canadian Press inadvertently downplayed the severity of what happened with the notice that the Parliamentary Budget Officer quietly put on his website to say that they got some of their analysis on the federal carbon levy wrong. The CP story focused it on a Liberal MP writing the PBO to get him to broadcast the correction, rather than framing the story as the PBO made an error, and giving the briefest of mentions to the MP and his open letter, because that letter shouldn’t have been the story.

The story, as it turns out, is not only that the PBO made the mistake in his analysis, it’s that he is steadfastly refusing to take any responsibility for it, never mind that this particular report has been politically charged and is at the centre of much of the debate over the carbon levy. Putting aside that the report itself was not very well done (the distributional analysis was undermined by his insistence on including average figures and that the calculation on the impact of the price were done in the absence of any kind of counterfactual, and in a binary price/no price way that is in itself inherently misleading, the fact that the PBO didn’t advertise that there was a problem with the report, didn’t include any kind of correction (he’s planning a fully re-done report in the fall), and he’s saying thing that don’t logically follow, such as it’s too complex to recalculate like this…but the outcome from the error is unlikely to change the outcome of that portion of the report (this being the impact on the broader economy, which the Conservatives misleadingly cherry-pick to “prove” households are worse off). So, in addition to refusing to take responsibility, he won’t pick a lane.

But it gets worse. Yves Giroux went on Power & Politics to discuss this incident, and immolated his credibility as he not only continued to refuse to take any responsibility, but tried to prevaricate, and make excuses with a wall of bafflegab, but he also started arguing that his “small office” shouldn’t be responsible for the climate-related economic modelling that MPs are demanding, that the government should be doing it, but his one job is literally doing this kind of analysis to provide an independent analysis from the government’s. Of course, Giroux has always had a problem sticking within the bounds of his legislated mandate, and has preferred to act like a talking head pundit and opining on all kinds of things the government is doing, while still insisting that he’s independent and hence more credible than the government as a result. And I’m not too surprised that Giroux is trying to avoid taking any responsibility, being that he is a career civil servant for whom responsibility is something to be avoided, but in refusing to do so, he has tainted his office. There can’t be trust about his numbers going forward, and as was pointed out, especially if he’s going to be costing election platform promises (which he’s done a pretty shite job of so far, such as sticking his letterhead on Andrew Scheer’s handwaving), but that was something the PBO never should have done in the first place. This should be a resignation-worthy offence, but so should it have been when he decided he wanted to be a television pundit. But we’ll see if he can finally accept responsibility and do the right thing here and step down.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Four people were injured in a Russian missile attack on Kharkiv early Thursday morning. NATO’s secretary general is proposing a way to help Trump-proof military aid for Ukraine, but there will be obstacles that include Hungary’s objections. Reuters has a lengthy look at the front lines in Donetsk.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Responding to events isn’t a desperation move

Posted on by

If you’ve been paying attention to Question Period over the past several days, you may have noticed that the Liberals haven’t been asking endless questions about abortion, or rather, asking the government to comment on the Conservatives’ stance about abortion. Throughout this, you had a bunch of pundits, almost all of them located outside of Ottawa, going “The Liberals are desperate! They’re using the abortion move 18 months too early!” The problem with that particular analysis is that it ignores the events going on around them.

What the Liberals were really doing, if someone bad bothered to pay attention, was responding to things the Conservatives have been doing around them. It started with Pierre Poilievre’s speech where he promised to use the Notwithstanding Clause to “make” tough-on-crime policies and laws “constitutional” (never mind that invoking the Notwithstanding Clause is a flashing red light that what you’re doing isn’t constitutional, and you’re doing to do it anyway—at least for the next five years, anyway. The Liberals were not going to pass up an opportunity to ask Poilievre just what else he planned to use those powers for, which is a perfectly reasonable thing to ask.

From there, Arnold Viersen tabled his petition calling for abortion restrictions, and the March for Life happened on the same week, which the Liberals (and usually the NDP) always put on a big production in Question Period about how important a woman’s right to choose is. This all happened within a few days, so of course they were going to respond to it. And once those events happened, they moved onto other things (like lambasting Poilievre’s “housing” bill). Not everything is a desperation move. They talked about abortion back in December when the Conservatives swapped a bill so that Cathay Wagantall’s backdoor abortion-banning bill could be voted on before they rose for the winter break (so it wouldn’t act as a millstone around their necks, even though the entire caucus voted for it), and everyone wasn’t insisting this was some kind of desperation move then. The moral here is that sometimes you need to pay attention to what is going on around Question Period, because it’s not the only thing going on.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukraine shot down 13 out of 14 drones launched by Russia on Monday night, with most of the debris falling on the Rivne region. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Belgium to sign another security agreement.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Recruitment rage-farming

Posted on by

It’s getting exhausting to think of the number of things that Justin Trudeau is supposedly personally responsible, whether it’s global inflation or the rise in interest rates. Today, it’s apparently the military recruitment crisis that the country faces.

First of all, in his tweet, Conservative MP James Bezan mischaracterized what the exchange between the committee chair and the Canadian Forces officer was, and the Chair said nothing about Trudeau or the government at all. But that’s what Conservatives to when they clip these committee exchanges and try to gin them up to make them look like it’s something scandalous happening, because that’s how they get their clips for their socials. To reiterate—nobody said anything at all about the government in the clip. The Chair was frustrated that the military can’t process potential recruits faster, not the government, because the government doesn’t play a role in this at all.

And even more to the point, Bezan knows this. He was a long-standing parliamentary secretary to successive ministers of defence in the Harper government, and he knows gods damned well that nobody in government approves or disapproves of recruits. But like everything these days, facts or truth doesn’t matter—it’s nothing but constant rage-farming to keep people angry, over the dumbest, most illogical things, because rage-farming doesn’t need to make sense. It’s all about feelings and vibes, and they’re willing to undermine democracy for clicks.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Three people were killed and six wounded in a Russian missile attack on the southern Mykolaiv region, while the Russians claim to have captured two more settlements—one in Kharkiv region, the other in Donetsk. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy was in Spain, and secured a promise for more air defence systems to help deal with the onslaught of Russian glide bombs.

https://twitter.com/ukraine_world/status/1795083380192604436

Continue reading →

Roundup: Hoping to master the algorithm

Posted on by

As I often rail about terrible government communications and Parliament being reduced to a content studio for social media clips, I was struck by two stories over the weekend. The first was a look into the Liberals’ trying to use social media more effectively to bring back Millennial and Gen Z voters, which means staffers are directing their ministers to tailor content more specifically to these platforms, and ministers using influencers more to get their messages across. While I’m less concerned about the latter because I do think that can be helpful and savvy, it’s the former that concerns me more because we have too many politicians chasing the algorithm as it is, and the algorithm is bad and fickle. If you listen to Aaron Reynolds of Effin’ Birds fame talk about using social media to build his business, he will warn that tailoring your business to specific algorithms is doomed to fail because those algorithms change and can wipe you out, and politicians chasing the algorithm is not only cringe-worthy, it’s frankly bad for media literacy and democracy in general.

The other story was that Conservative MP Branden Leslie produced a Facebook video chock-full of fake news clips that purport to show a future where Trudeau has resigned, but amidst the complaints that using news branding for this kind of deep-fake content is problematic and deeply unethical, Conservatives are defending it as perfectly justified because “nobody could mistake it for reality.” This from the party that is actively building a dystopian alternate reality built on disinformation for their followers to believe in, because they want them to forgo things like critical thinking in order to simply swallow whatever falsehoods the party wants to tell them, and now they’re asserting that people won’t be taken by the very falsehoods this video perpetuates, after they have been training that same audience to swallow falsehoods? Sorry, but you can’t have it both ways. This is nothing good, and a sign that there is no moral compass in the party whatsoever.

Throughout this, I am reminded of something Paul Wells said last week that really struck a chord with me:

I think the social-media revolution has constrained government’s attempts to explain themselves, and radicalized citizens’ responses, more than it’s helped anyone do anything good. And I think most political organizations’ attempts to master these tools end up looking like the tools are, quite thoroughly, mastering the organizations.

This is exactly right, and it’s why I worry that the Liberals trying to push more to social media to reach those Gen-Zers is going to make this actively worse, while the Conservatives are already using the worst features of these platforms to their most unethical extent. This is the state of political communications these days, and it’s very, very scary, and it’s dragging democracy down with it.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russians bombed a big box store complex in Kharkiv on Saturday, killing 14, wounding 43, with 16 others still unaccounted for, even though Ukrainian forces are pushing them back from areas outside of the city.

Continue reading →