[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Josephus]

My guess is unrelated.

This doesn't mention hein at all.

https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/eh#:~:text=Although%20eh%20has%20its%20roots,point%20of%20exaggeration%20and%20stereotype.

[crazy canuck]

....and he has now hired lawyers and intends to go after Global to begin legal action "to its fullest".

Defamation, I presume.

Yes, defamation.

Global will likely be in a tight spot.  They would need to provide anonymous transcript, I guess?

Medias are allowed a lot of leeway an can generally get away with some lying in their texts.  They generally have to prove it was of public interest, as you say, and that the core of their message was true. 

I just don't know how they can go about it and preserve the anonymity of their sources.  They say they have transcripts, but they are likely anonymous.  In the past, Canadian courts have not been kind toward journalists who wanted to protect their sources, but the law was changed in 2017.

No, media are not allowed to lie.

Also, media do not need to prove that their reporting is in the public interest.  They are also highly unlikely to plead a defence of truth.

In Canada, since 2009, media can rely on the Responsible Journalism Defence.  The core of that defence is that the reporter did not report the allegations as a fact and the reporter relied on more than one source.  There is also a requirement that the subject of the story be given an opportunity to repond.  All of which occurred here.

Without some evidence of malice I don't see a potential defamation action having much of a chance in these circumstances.

[crazy canuck]

A twitter thread from Karen Woods from back when this story first broke, adding a bunch of IMO interesting context.

Karen Woods 林爷 🇺🇦🇨🇦🌻
@KarenWenLin
Feb 27

🧵1. So, I've been watching the media, CSIS and the PMO going at the whole Election Interference story from the sideline, and it kinda felt like Deja Vu all over again. I will break this down for you from the POV of the media, #CSIS and the Chinese Consulate. #China #cdnpoli

@globeandmail's reports on the China's #election #interference, you'll know, it's all allegations so far. Some of which are true, others are just "urban legends". why is that? Cuz CSIS doesn't have a foot hold in the Chinese Disapora #cdnpoli

The way CSIS conducts theses "investigations" are mostly through interviews with people who understand the Chinese community, or a member of the Chinese Overseas Designated Community Leaders 侨领系统。 And they don't have to speak to CSIS...at all.
#cdnpoli

This creates an interesting dynamic. e.g how would CSIS even know that the Chinese Consulate is reimbursing (partial) political donations w/o even looking into the Chinese Consulate's bank accounts and transactions? They Don't!! Coz someone from the Oversea Designated (cont'd)

Community Program 侨领系统 told CSIS. They did that cuz they were pissed off at Michael Chan & Han Dong. Someone ate someone else's lunch a little too much  if you know what I mean 😎. And don't forget when CSIS talked to you, you can lie to them. It's not illegal. #cdnpoli

I previously worked for a lobbying firm that had a contract with the Chinese Consulate. I did very little on that file cuz I wanted to focus on other clients and be in the media. My colleague worked on most of that file . The firm registered in the lobby registry.
#cdnpoli

In 2019, just before the federal election, CSIS talked to me coz they wanted to gauge where the Chinese community was through KOLs, community leaders and even members of China's United Front. CSIS was worried about foreign election too. CCPAC, a non profit (cont'd) #cdnpoli

.. that I co-founded was conducting some research in the Chinese Diaspora. So I was happy to share our findings with CSIS. I told them one shouldn't underestimate the support for #Beijing in the mainland Chinese Disapora even w/t the #antielab movement in #hongkong
#cdnpoli

Now back to Michael Chan and Han Dong. They both know who I am. Han Dong and I went to the same high school. He's older than me. It's No question that Michael Chan has always been very pro China. He's is under China's influence. We don't need CSIS to tell us that. #cdnpoli

Back in 2019, Michael Chan organized a pro Hong Kong police, pro stability rally at the peak of the HK Anti Extradition rally. In the same rally, Han Dong passed nomination forms around to sign up for new members cuz he was running in the DVN liberal nomination race to replace

the disgraced former MP Geng Tan. Tan had an extra marital affair that resulted in a daughter born out of wedlock. It's not that the Chinese Consulate preferred Han Dong. It's cuz Geng Tan had sexual scandals attached to his name. And this is where CSIS  got it wrong. #cdnpoli

My guess is that the person they talked to had a language barrier so context was lost. And Han Dong won his nomination by a razor thin margin, less than 50 votes. He had the help of Wei Cheng Yi , a well known Chinese Oversea Designated Community Leader, helping him sign up ppl.

So, did the Chinese Consulate help Han Dong win his nomination? Yes and No. Wei Cheng Yi is a proxy for the Chinese Consulate. By virtual of him helping Han, one *could* claim Han is the Chinese Consulate's preferred candidate. But that is not the case!! Cuz the other candidate

Jiang Banggu is also very China Friendly. So essentially, the Chinese Consulate had no skin in the game whether or Not Han or Jiang wins in the end, they will get a "pro China" Liberal MP. But here is the thing, Han is Michael Chan's candidate.

Michael Chan even brought Steven Del Duca to Han Dong's nomination. He pissed off people who were loyal to him but didn't want Han to win. It's very possible that they then talked to CSIS. How else would CSIS know about the supposedly $250K Consultate election funds 🤷 if CSIS

never talked the Michael Chan, never looked into his bank account or tax? An in-fight within the Chinese Oversea Designated Community 侨领 circle is what made people leak to CSIS cuz they hate Michael Chan. And the Consulate is trying to put a lid on the in-fight.

A Chinese diplomat once told me part of their job is also to "smooth things over" among pro China community groups and that is Not surprising at all. They all eat and drink from the same well. There is definitely competition. Now back to CSIS. What I find strange is its former

boss Richard Fadden is saying completely different things than its current director. Richard Fadden says he's worried about Chinese interference, and his succesor says China's interference didn't impact the outcome of the election. And the PMO denied being briefed by CSIS prior..

There is a power play in CSIS. And CSIS has become very political. People need to understand that CSIS is not law enforcement. With this amount of allegations, why hasn't the RCMP moved at all? What exactly is CSIS' objectives when they supposedly leaked to
@globalnews ? #cdnpoli

The media of course has its own narrative. "Anti China" is the trend now, so they will chase after that even if no trials, no criminal investigations result from this. They don't care. The news cycle moves fast. Even if Trudeau decides eventually that the media attention isn't

going away and he's going to throw Han Dong under the bus, so what? It just surprises me that CSIS has been monitoring Michael Chan for 10 years and they never once talked to him, or even looked at his bank account, and not once investigated him?? Is this Not Strange?

https://twitter.com/KarenWenLin/status/1630413714435330048

A lot of guessing and speculation in that piece.  Who is the person who posted it?

[viper37]

No, media are not allowed to lie.

Ok, fine.
Journalists are allowed to write things that are untrue, so long as it is not the core of their reporting.


In other news, the Quebec government will have to pay 385 000$ to Jean Charest (former Premier) following an information leak concerning his possible corruption emanating from the unit tasked to investigating corruption in Quebec, a unit his government itself created and nominated its leaders.
Link

[Sheilbh]

Not sure if you do want to know but I'm seeing lots of British centre-right/"growth" types swooningly posting this clip:
https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1644021360186859520

Have to say I don't like the swipe at WFH at the end but aside from that....I don't hate it.

Also feels like a good issue given all the stats I've seen on housing affordability in Canada. Just wonder when this type of politics will emerge in Britain - probably never

[Barrister]

Not sure if you do want to know but I'm seeing lots of British centre-right/"growth" types swooningly posting this clip:
https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1644021360186859520

Have to say I don't like the swipe at WFH at the end but aside from that....I don't hate it.

Also feels like a good issue given all the stats I've seen on housing affordability in Canada. Just wonder when this type of politics will emerge in Britain - probably never

Interesting.

I mean I'm sold on this kind of message, but you know transit and housing density are not issues that typically resonate with conservative-leaning voters either.  NIMBYism cuts across party lines.

[Sheilbh]

Yeah I was wondering if the politics were different but it doesn't sound like it.

It's an interesting strategy - and intrigued to see how it works out. If it's successful it might be a model centre-right in other countries (like the UK) look to copy. As I say I think NIMBYism/housing/rent seeking is the big vested interest that is constraining economies now and the party that wins on that probably defines the territory of politics for a generation.

[Jacob]

Not sure if you do want to know but I'm seeing lots of British centre-right/"growth" types swooningly posting this clip:
https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1644021360186859520

Have to say I don't like the swipe at WFH at the end but aside from that....I don't hate it.

Also feels like a good issue given all the stats I've seen on housing affordability in Canada. Just wonder when this type of politics will emerge in Britain - probably never

Makes sense. PP's strength is being a jerk to people and blaming them, so it makes sense he'll lean into throwing shit a mayors as part of his branding.

There's also the bit that dealing with mayors is primarily a provincial responsibility, so he's fishing in a pool that isn't really his.

[Jacob]

F.ex. right now the BC NDP is rolling out legislation intended to push through more density and decrease local gov't's ability to block housing developments.

This legislation may be good or bad (I believe it's decent, but I haven't dug into it enough to say whether it actually is) - but the point is, it's a provincial responsibility.

PP may have good ideas on this (I don't know), but this clip is literally just him saying "there's a real problem, and my solution is start being a dick to people".

[Sheilbh]

PP may have good ideas on this (I don't know), but this clip is literally just him saying "there's a real problem, and my solution is start being a dick to people".

Aren't there three specific proposals: tie federal infrastructure funds to new housing (phrased as penalties and bonuses); mandate high density deelopments around and over any federally funded transit station; and selling off underutilised federal goverment buildings to developers to redevelop (good luck on that one).

Like you I'm not sure if they're right or not but it feels like there's a shape of a solution there especially given that, as you say, the federal government's actual levers on this are probably quite limited.

[Jacob]

Aren't there three specific proposals: tie federal infrastructure funds to new housing (phrased as penalties and bonuses); mandate high density deelopments around and over any federally funded transit station; and selling off underutilised federal goverment buildings to developers to redevelop (good luck on that one).

I don't know, I'm just reacting to the clip 

The first one makes sense I suppose... though the details will be in the implementation. It could genuinely encourage building more, or it could be a way to transfer cash to constituencies for political reasons, all depending on the criteria. But that's just regular politics. On the face of it it makes sense.

The second one is kind of nothing I expect, as developing high density around new transit stations is pretty standard as I understand it - but it's not actively bad either.

The last one I'm more dubious about, expecting they'll be sold cheaply to political allies and result in the Feds having to buy new buildings at high prices later. Reminds me of the BC Premier we had who wanted to sell off Vancouver School Board schools if they were utilized at less than 95% or some such (and excluding special ed and all kinds of other crucial services from being included in the utilization figure)... in a city that continues to grow and where property prices have continued to increase. It was super short term thinking apparently designed to make life crappier in constituencies that didn't vote for her party in sufficient numbers.

[Jacob]

... but like you I don't hate that PP acknowledges the problem and wants to address it. Certainly it's an important topic.

[Sheilbh]

The last one I'm more dubious about, expecting they'll be sold cheaply to political allies and result in the Feds having to buy new buildings at high prices later. Reminds me of the BC Premier we had who wanted to sell off Vancouver School Board schools if they were utilized at less than 95% or some such (and excluding special ed and all kinds of other crucial services from being included in the utilization figure)... in a city that continues to grow and where property prices have continued to increase. It was super short term thinking apparently designed to make life crappier in constituencies that didn't vote for her party in sufficient numbers.

Yeah I'm most dubious on the selling off government buildings.

In the UK a lot of those "big ugly" government buildings were from the 60s and, my understanding is, are incredibly expensive to renovate because they're often riddled with asbestos and also not designed with residential use in mind so they're quite complicated to re-use. In theory I've no issue with re-purposing existing buildings, I'm just not sure it's as easy as people think.

Selling off old MoD bases might be more practical - but I don't know.

Although that's a new strand of eco-focused NIMBYism in the UK that because of embedded carbon we need to stop building new things or knocking existing buildings down but instead only re-purpose - I'm sympathetic in theory but I just can't see any practical way it happens.

[HVC]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cpeb9-RvfhX/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

[Barrister]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cpeb9-RvfhX/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

I mean... it's not not true...