Daily Archives: September 26, 2021

House progressives appear poised for a showdown with their own leadership team as Democrats steamroll toward a Monday vote on a Senate-passed infrastructure bill that is a key part of President BidenJoe BidenHaiti prime minister warns inequality will cause migration to continue Pelosi: House must pass 3 major pieces of spending legislation this week Erdoan says Turkey plans to buy another Russian defense system MOREs agenda.

Progressives on Thursday one day after a high-profile White House meeting insisted theyll vote against Bidens bipartisan infrastructure bill, which some call the BIF, if Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiPelosi: House must pass 3 major pieces of spending legislation this week Sunday shows preview: Pelosi announces date for infrastructure vote; administration defends immigration policies GOP should grab the chance to upend Pelosi's plan on reconciliation MORE (D-Calif.) goes ahead with a vote she promised to deliver to centrists in her caucus by Sept. 27.

The BIF, alone on Monday? No no, no, no, no, no, saidfirst-term Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.), a member of the liberal "squad."

I'm still with Pramila and still with my progressive colleagues that we want to pass reconciliation before we pass the BIF," he added, referring to Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalSunday shows preview: Pelosi announces date for infrastructure vote; administration defends immigration policies On The Money House pushes toward infrastructure vote Biden's baffling decisions leave allies wondering where they stand MORE (D-Wash.) That's still the case."

Pramila, the head of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC), insists half of her 96-member-strong caucus will vote against the infrastructure bill if the House goes ahead with the vote and does not first move forward with a larger $3.5 trillion spending package.

She and other progressives are worried moderates will scuttle that package if the infrastructure bill is moved through the House first, and they showed little sign of budging even after Wednesdays flurry of meetings that brought party leaders, centrists and liberals to the White House to meet with Biden.

Rep. Barbara LeeBarbara Jean LeeOvernight Defense & National Security Presented by AM General The Quad confab The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Alibaba - Democrats argue price before policy amid scramble House passes sweeping defense policy bill MORE (D-Calif.), who was among the progressives at the White House, urged Democrats to pump the brakes on Mondays planned infrastructure vote.

All I'm saying is we do need more time, because I know the votes aren't there, Lee, a formerCPC co-chair, told reporters just off the House floor.

The warnings from liberals came as Democratic leaders launched an orchestrated effort to show evidence of headway. Senate Majority Leader Charles SchumerChuck SchumerDemocrats press Schumer on removing Confederate statues from Capitol Democrats' do-or-die moment Biden touts 'progress' during 'candid' meetings on .5T plan MORE (D-N.Y.) showed up at Pelosis press briefing on Thursday to announce a framework designed to anchor the revenue provisions of a final deal.

Pelosi characterized the announcement as a giant step forward, but it left liberals unimpressed, stirred confusion among senators including Budget Committee Chairman Bernie SandersBernie SandersIn Washington, the road almost never taken Don't let partisan politics impede Texas' economic recovery The Hill's Morning Report - Presented by Alibaba - Democrats argue price before policy amid scramble MORE (I-Vt.) and was widely seen as a piece of theater designed to distract from substantive differences between centrists and liberals.

Lee downplayed Thursdays developments as just one step in the process and said the only way progressives will back the infrastructure bill is to move the $3.5 trillion package, which she pointedly said was the presidents legislation.

This is the president's agenda. Remember, this is the Biden bill. And so we want to support the president's agenda and the only way we can do that is to pass the $3.5 trillion bill before the infrastructure bill, she said.

Negotiations on that package have a long way to go, and theres virtually no chance it will be ready for action by the time of Mondays infrastructure vote.

Yet centrists, like liberals, are showing no signs of backing down.

Jayapals foil in the debate has been moderate Rep. Josh GottheimerJoshua (Josh) GottheimerSunday shows preview: Pelosi announces date for infrastructure vote; administration defends immigration policies Caregiving coalition airs 7-figure ad blitz backing .5T bill Democrats steamroll toward showdown on House floor MORE (D-N.Y.), a leader of the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus who said Thursday that theres zero indication Mondays vote will be postponed due to liberal opposition.

There wont be a delay, he said. Were going to get the votes and were going to vote on this on Monday.

Publicly, Pelosi and her top lieutenants are projecting calm. They say theyre confident they can pull off what would be nothing short of a legislative miracle and make good on a suite of Biden campaign promises, even if its not quite obvious how they are going to get there.

Were still on track, House Democratic Caucus Chairman Hakeem JeffriesHakeem Sekou JeffriesDemocrats steamroll toward showdown on House floor Frederica Wilson rails against Haitian deportation flights, calls treatment 'inhumane' Pelosi signals she won't move .5T bill without Senate-House deal MORE (D-N.Y.) told The Hill. Were in constant communication with the Senate, and were trying to land the plane.

But the threats from liberals has prompted some members of Pelosis leadership team to float the idea of delaying Mondays infrastructure vote.

If we're making progress, then, you know, what's the problem with putting off the vote for a little bit, Rules Chairman Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said Thursday. All we want is for everything to pass, so let's get the moderates to agree to that [delay]. ... You don't want to lose. What is the point of losing on the infrastructure bill?

Rep.Jess Garcia (D-Ill.), anotherCPC member, said he's awaiting more details in the coming days. But echoing the concerns of other liberals, he wants assurances that any final reconciliation package contains a top-line spending number at or near Biden's favored $3.5 trillion. And he wants to see where the Senate lands on immigration policy, following a ruling by the chambers parliamentarian that an initial reform proposal flouted Senate rules.

"I'm encouraged by what was announced. But as always, the devil's in the detail, Garcia said, referring to the framework announcement.

Not knowing more details, he added, I remain committed to that proposition" to oppose infrastructure on Monday.

Rep. Jimmy GomezJimmy GomezDemocrats steamroll toward showdown on House floor Warren, Bush offer bill to give HHS power to impose eviction moratorium Eviction ruling puts new pressure on Congress MORE (D-Calif.), anotherCPC member, acknowledged the stalemate but sounded a hopeful note.

Right now, a lot of Democrats not even just progressives want both [bills] to move together. Because they know one is not enough, he said. I think they both need to move together, and we'll see how much progress they can make between now and Monday. But I don't think that Monday is the end date.

Read the original:

Democrats steamroll toward showdown on House floor | TheHill - The Hill

Earlier this week, the PennEast Pipeline Company abandoned its plans to use eminent domain to take state-owned land in New Jersey for purposes of building a new interstate gas pipeline:

On Monday, September 20,the State of New Jersey submitted a letter to Third Circuit Court of the U.S. Court of Appeals stating it has reached an agreement in principle with the PennEast pipeline company that is seeking to abandon condemnation of 42 state lands for construction of an interstate gas pipeline. This announcement comes on the heels of PennEast taking the State of New Jersey all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court to defend its right to condemn these lands preserved by the state for public benefit.

"PennEast claims they aren't abandoning the project, but actions speak louder than words, and this move clearly suggests the polluting pipeline won't happen," said Tom Gilbert, campaign director, New Jersey Conservation Foundation and ReThink Energy NJ. "The news that PennEast won't move ahead with trying to condemn state lands to develop an unneeded fossil gas pipeline is a huge and welcome development. We applaud the Murphy Administration for successfully defending and preserving our public lands for future generations."

The planned condemnation was the subject of an important closely divided 5-4 Supreme Court decision issued in June, in which the federal government's power of eminent domain prevailed over state sovereign immunity, thereby empowering the federal government to delegate the power of eminent domain to private firms in situations where the latter want to use it to seize property owned by state governments.

While PennEast won the case in the Supreme Court, they appear to have lost the broader political struggle over the pipeline. It's possible they will yet find a way to go ahead with the pipeline without using eminent domain, or by condemning privately owned land. But the whole point of the effort to take state property was precisely that the company claimed there was no other practical way to complete the project.

Regardless of the fate of this particular project, the Supreme Court decision remains on the books, and the federal government can continue to use the power the ruling gives it. But, as PennEast learned, seizing property from hostile state governments is a tougher proposition than taking it from private owners. Most of the latter lack the political influence of the former, and they also usually don't have the resources for a prolonged legal and political battle of the kind New Jersey successfully waged in this case.

Politics aside, I still believe this was a terrible case that both sides deserved to lose. Both the majority opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts and the principal dissent by Amy Coney Barrett have very serious weaknesses. I went over many of them here.

Interestingly, the case cut across conventional ideological lines among the justices. The ruling divided both the liberal and conservative blocs on the Court. Conservative justices Samuel Alito and Brett Kavanaugh joined the Chief Justice's majority opinion, as did liberals Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer. Conservatives Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, and Amy Coney Barrett were all in dissent, joined by liberal Elena Kagan.

Originally posted here:

PennEast Abandons Plans to Use Eminent Domain to Seize State-Owned Land in Case that Resulted in a Major Supreme Court Decision - Reason

Breadcrumb Trail Links

Climate advocacy groups say all Canadians and parties must drop partisan concerns and push the Liberal government to act fast on climate.

Author of the article:

Publishing date:

The counting of mail-in ballots dragged on into the late afternoon in the LaurierSainte-Marie riding on Wednesday, but with 95 per cent of votes counted, Liberal Steven Guilbeault was 2,328 votes ahead of his closest challenger and claiming victory.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

It wasnt the easy win Guilbeault and his supporters had hoped for, leading some to wonder if voters in that riding were punishing the Liberals for recruiting the longtime climate advocate to attract green votes in 2019 only to shunt him into the heritage portfolio once elected. Many in Quebec wonder whether Guilbeault will be named environment minister this time around.

Its not up to me to decide, Guilbeault said in a telephone interview Wednesday. It was a privilege to be around the cabinet table and I do feel that as heritage minister I helped the arts and culture sector make it through the worst crisis it has seen in 100 years. But if the prime minister asked me to serve in another capacity, I would be very happy to do that as well.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

But climate change is the reason he got into politics, he acknowledged.

Climate is something I feel very passionate about. Ive dedicated most of my adult life to it, I started (with Greenpeace) at 21 or 22 and never stopped. So it is something I will continue to work on regardless of where I land.

He added that he considers Jonathan Wilkinson a great minister and worked closely with him as a member of the cabinet committee on environment and economy and on the Liberals Green Recovery Plan. He believes the climate fight should be a priority in which every minister should be engaged.

Guilbeault said he understands the impatience to see Canadas greenhouse gas emissions come down, and concedes that so far, that goal has eluded the Liberal government. But the reductions from measures such as the hundreds of public transit projects the Liberal government has funded across the country, including 300 electric buses for Montreal, will take time to show up in the emissions inventories.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

It takes time for these projects to produce results. Some things can be done more quickly, he said. For example, the Liberals now have a clear mandate to increase their carbon tax from $40/tonne to $50 next year and then by $15 a year to $170/tonne by 2030.

Climate policy expert Mark Jaccard agreed with Guilbeaults assessment of Wilkinson, adding that many factors must be considered when Trudeau chooses his next environment minister. For example, being from Saskatchewan is a point in Wilkinsons favour, he said.

If you are trying to advance action on climate, that can help because Saskatchewan and Alberta are the greatest impediments to rapid decarbonization, because they really do well via the fossil fuel industry. That doesnt mean they are evil people, but their self-interest is to be resistant to rapid decarbonization, said Jaccard, a professor of sustainable energy at Simon Fraser University.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Before going into politics Wilkinson worked in the clean technology sector, which Jaccard considers another point in his favour.

When one is trying to move a country with major fossil fuel resources toward rapid decarbonization, he can go to Alberta and talk to Albertans about how you can still develop your oil resources as long as you are converting them into hydrogen or electricity, and burying the carbon dioxide.

And environmental groups say it doesnt matter who is environment minister, as long as the government gets to work immediately to pick up the pace of climate action.

Canadians voted for the parties to work together and a clear majority of them voted for parties that propose serious and bold climate policies, said Caroline Brouillette, director of domestic policy at Climate Action Network Canada in a joint statement released Tuesday by a coalition of environmental groups whose membership includes more than a million Canadians.

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

It is time for Prime Minister Trudeau to collaborate with the other parties to intensify these efforts on climate, and quickly.

Jaccard agrees. Now is the time for all climate concerned Canadians to put (all parties) feet to the fire, he said, adding the NDP and Bloc Qubcois must work to ensure that aggressive climate policies get passed, and fast.

Those environmental groups want Trudeau to announce more ambitious emissions reduction targets before Novembers United Nations climate conference. Considering Canadas historic contribution to emissions, a fair reduction goal would be 60 per cent below 2005 levels before 2030, they said.

mlalonde@postmedia.com

This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.

Sign up to receive daily headline news from the Montreal Gazette, a division of Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Montreal Gazette Headline News will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion and encourage all readers to share their views on our articles. Comments may take up to an hour for moderation before appearing on the site. We ask you to keep your comments relevant and respectful. We have enabled email notificationsyou will now receive an email if you receive a reply to your comment, there is an update to a comment thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information and details on how to adjust your email settings.

Go here to see the original:

The vote is in: It's time to move on climate, environmental groups say - Montreal Gazette

Standing on the lawn of the US Capitol, in clear view of the supreme court, a coalition of Democratic women declared Roe v Wade was no longer the law of the land.

Nearly half a century after the court established the constitutional right to abortion, it allowed a near-complete ban to stand in Texas, the second-most populous state. Though the 5-4 decision did not address the substance of the Texas law, Democrats warn that it was a mere taste of things to come from the court and Republicans who helped expand its conservative majority.

When this court embraced this shameful Texas law, they brought shame to the United States supreme court, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, said at a press conference on Friday, ahead of a vote on legislation effectively codifying abortion rights into federal law. What were they thinking, or were they thinking, or were they just rubber-stamping what they were sent to the court to do?

After her remarks, Pelosi returned to the chamber to preside as Democrats narrowly approved the bill. The vote was largely symbolic Republican opposition in the Senate all but ensures the measure will not become law. Yet the Senate majority leader, Chuck Schumer, said he planned to bring it to the floor anyway.

The urgent push, however futile, was a reflection of just how powerful Democrats believe the issue could be in coming elections.

Were in totally uncharted territory, said Cecile Richards, a former president of Planned Parenthood who now co-chairs a Democratic political action committee, American Bridge 21st Century. This is a day that people certainly hoped would never come. But thats where were at now and theres no way to be on the sidelines.

In Washington and beyond, Democrats are embracing the struggle over abortion, portraying themselves as the last line of defense against further erosion or outright abolition of a constitutional right many believed settled long ago.

Joe Biden has weighed in, promising a whole of government response. The justice department is suing Texas over its law, which bans abortion at roughly six weeks, before most women even know theyre pregnant.

This week, the supreme court announced it would hear oral arguments on 1 December in a case involving a Mississippi law banning abortions after 15 weeks, a direct challenge to Roe. A ruling is expected next year, before the November elections.

The Democrats focus on reproductive rights also reflects shifting political dynamics.

Unity on abortion is a relatively recent development for the party. After successive defeats in rural America, and defections among white working class voters, Democrats won majorities in Congress with a coalition of urban and suburban college-educated voters who tend to be more socially liberal.

While Americans views are notoriously difficult to survey, polling has found that attitudes on abortion have remained relatively consistent. A solid majority say the procedure should remain legal with some restrictions.

A recent Monmouth University poll found that a majority of Americans want abortion to be legal in all or some circumstances. More than six in 10 said they did not want the court to revisit Roe. Among Americans with a college degree, support for keeping abortion mostly legal was even higher.

Public opinion hasnt been a barrier for anti-abortion activists, who have aligned with the Republican party to enact laws severely restricting abortion access in states across the country. They also made the supreme court a political priority, culminating in a 6-3 conservative majority, cemented by three justices nominated by Donald Trump.

Reproductive justice organizers were effectively out-organized in state legislatures, particularly after the Tea Party wave in 2010, and there really hasnt been an effective response since then, said Mary Ziegler, a legal historian at Florida State University and author of Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v Wade to the Present. But, she said, that could change as more Americans come to terms with the reality that abortion is now effectively outlawed in a state like Texas.

Mobilizing support around abortion rights becomes easier, ironically, in moments of crisis like this because everybody agrees that criminalizing abortion would be really bad if youre on the pro-choice side of the debate, Ziegler said.

Democrats say fear of losing Roe is motivating voters beyond their liberal base.

People have always believed that somehow, at the end of the day, no matter what politicians did, that the judicial system would be there to back up women, Richards said. That just simply isnt true any more. Now we actually have to face the consequences of making abortion illegal.

Anti-abortion advocates say the issue is also energizing their base.

This moment is a culmination of years of pro-life strategy and the stakes have never been higher, said Mallory Quigley, a vice-president of the Susan B Anthony List. She said her group was already knocking on doors in battleground states including Arizona and Georgia, seeking to mobilize pro-life base voters as well as those who can be persuaded to vote for the pro-life candidate.

Nationally, Republicans have been more circumspect.

Republicans have long been able to talk aggressively about abortion while knowing that the most aggressive policies would either fail in legislatures or be struck down by the courts, said Joshua Wilson, a political scientist at the University of Denver and author of The New States of Abortion Politics.

That certainty is gone now.

If Roe is overturned or otherwise significantly eroded, Wilson said, the GOP will own that change.

Even as Republicans in states like Florida, Arkansas and South Dakota promise copycat legislation, polling has found that most Americans believe the Texas law goes too far. Particularly objectionable, surveys found, is the failure to include exceptions for rape or incest and a provision effectively deputizing ordinary citizens to bring lawsuits against anyone who aids or abets an illegal abortion with the potential to earn $10,000.

Democrats face a challenging electoral landscape in 2022 as they seek to defend fragile majorities in the House and Senate and defy a historical pattern in which the presidents party loses seats midterm. Strategists caution that whether abortion remains front and center to the national debate will depend on factors including the state of the pandemic and the economic recovery.

Before then, Virginia will offer a first test of how abortion rights resonate with voters.

Democrats running for statewide office in November have all seized on the Texas law as a harbinger of what is to come in Virginia if Republicans are elected.

Terry McAuliffe, a former governor running to recapture the office, is portraying himself as a brick wall against efforts to restrict abortion access. His opponent, Glenn Youngkin, hit back at McAuliffe in a digital ad, calling the former governors stance on abortion too extreme for Virginia.

Olivia Gans Turner, president of the Virginia Society for Human Life, said voters who oppose abortion had been mobilizing since 2020, when the Democratic governor, Ralph Northam, signed legislation that overturned longstanding restrictions.

We in Virginia who care about the pro-life issue were already very alert and aware of the stakes, Gans Turner said. McAuliffes obsession with the subject, she said, had helped to put it front and center in a way that she believed would further motivate abortion opponents and possibly alienate moderates.

Abortion rights activists say fear that Roe is at risk is resonating with voters across Virginia, including with those who may not have previously considered abortion a priority.

Theres so much at stake now that Texass abortion ban has opened the floodgates to similar bans across the country, said Jamie Lockhart, executive director of Planned Parenthood Advocates of Virginia, which is working to elect Democrats. A Texas-style ban could easily come to Virginia if Glenn Youngkin is elected governor and Republicans take control of the house of delegates.

Lockhart said she had observed an increase in enthusiasm among voters and volunteers, some of whom pointed to the Texas law.

From what were seeing on the ground the increased level of enthusiasm that were seeing from from our volunteers and supporters, she said, there absolutely is the potential that Virginians support for abortion rights is the difference-maker in this election.

More here:

Democrats position themselves as last line of defense for abortion rights - The Guardian

Two Canadians whove been imprisoned in China for more than 1,000 days have arrived safely in Canada.

Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, detained on espionage charges since Dec. 10, 2018, arrived at the Calgary International Airport early Saturday morning, following an overnight fuel stop in Alaska.

Footage from CTV News on the tarmac shows several passengers greeted by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with a hug, though everyone in the footage is wearing a mask.

A spokesperson for the Prime Ministers Office told CTV News Bill Fortier at the airport that the passengers are indeed the two Michaels. The spokesperson added that it is very emotional moment for both of them and they would not be taking questions.

Later in the day, a smiling Kovrig landed at Torontos Pearson International Airport, where he was met by his sister and wife. Kovrig briefly spoke to media, where he issued his thanks for the support and said he would have more to say in due time.

Its wonderfully fantastic to be back home in Canada, he told reporters. Im so grateful for everybody who worked so hard to bring both of us back home.

Trudeau announced the two would be returning to Canada in a late-night press conference on Friday,only once the two had left Chinese airspace.

Welcome home, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, Trudeau wrote in a tweet on Saturday. Youve shown incredible strength, resilience, and perseverance. Know that Canadians across the country will continue to be here for you, just as they have been.

News of their release has garnered celebration from across Canada, including fromConservative Leader Erin OToole and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, as well as from people who knew the two Canadians.

"It's hard to describe but I'm just so thrilled for him and his family more than anybody else, Praveen Madhiraju, a colleague of Kovrigs, told CTV News Channel on Saturday. This has been a long time coming and we're just thrilled for this next chapter."

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland said the two Michaels showed incredible strength during their detention.

Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor are now home they, as well as their families, have shown incredible strength, bravery and resilience, she tweeted on Saturday. The Canadian government has worked hard to secure their release. We thank everyone involved who helped make it possible.

The Michaels arrived in Canada just one day after a British Columbia court dropped the extradition case against Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou over fraud and conspiracy charges related to American sanctions against Iran.

Meng had earlier Friday pleaded not guilty to all charges in a virtual appearance in New York court, where the judge signed off on a deferred prosecution agreement.

The two Michaels were both convicted of spying in closed Chinese courts earlier this year. Spavor was sentenced to 11 years in Chinese prison, while Kovrig had yet to be sentenced.

The detainment of the two Canadians has largely been seen as retaliation for Mengs arrest, though China has repeatedly denied any connection between the Michaels and Meng.

Colin Robertson, a former Canadian diplomat, told CTV News Channel on Saturday that the swift release of the two Michaels shows that their detainment was in fact retaliatory.

Obviously this is the acknowledgment that this was really a retaliatory hostage taking for Meng Wanzhou,

I think (this is) a triumph for quiet diplomacy, because this was kept very much to wraps. Nobody knew what was going on. I was as surprised as the rest of Canada.

With files from The Canadian Press

Here is the original post:

Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor have finally landed in Canada - CTV News

When Liberal leaderJustin Trudeau walked out of a community centre in Montreal's Parc-Extension after casting his ballot Monday, he was met by a group protesting gentrification in the rapidly changing neighbourhood at the heart of his riding.

Ballots hadn't been counted and already municipal issues were facing Trudeau, who was re-elected witha minority hours later.

The housing crisis in what's known as Park-Exis an issue at all levels of government and one confronting low-income neighbourhoods across the country but the protest overlapping municipal and federal affairs was timely in Quebec.

Asthe federal election neared its endFriday, municipal election campaigns were launched all over the province.

Tuesday, Projet Montral leader and incumbent Valrie Plante reacted to Trudeau's re-election, reiteratingdemands she made in August, including that the federal government find ways to maintain Montreal's affordability for home buyers and renters.

Plante said she applaudsthe Liberal platform's pledge to build affordable housing for the middle class, calling it "very important here in Montreal."

But Amy Darwish, a community organizer with the Comit d'Action de Parc-Extension (CAPE) who was one of the protesters in Trudeau's riding Monday, says it's social housing that politicians need to focus on.

"[Trudeau's] campaign promises this time focused almost entirely on access to property, which we don't think will do anything for the tenants of his riding many of whom are struggling to make ends meet, are struggling to make rent, let alone afford a down payment on a house," Darwish said.

She saysthere is a backlog of 700 people on a waiting list for social housing in Parc-Extension, a neighbourhood with one of the lowest median incomes and highest population densities in all of Canada.

In recent years, rents in the area have shot up as a snazzy Universit de Montral campus was built nearby. Darwish says the gentrification is pushing poor residents out of the neighbourhood, far from thecommunities and services they need most.

Denis Coderre, the Ensemble Montral mayoral candidate and the mayor who preceded Plante, also reacted Tuesday to Trudeau's election win.

Coderre, who is also a former Liberal MP,said Quebecerssent a message that they wanted stability andhe believescities willfigure prominently in this Liberal minority mandate because of howurban areas voted for the party.

"If you want to talk about housing, you have to be able to deliver the goods. Our team has the skills, efficiency and expertise," he said.

Darwish blamed Coderre for not doing more during his time as mayor in2013-17to create social housing in the city.

Mayoral candidate Balarama Holness of Movement Montreal says that if he is elected, he will ask the federal government to transfer ownership of the Peel Basin, a piece of land southwest of downtown Montreal, to the city to build social housing on.

"Housing is a fundamental right. Yet, over 24,000 people are on the city's wait list for subsidized housing, including 325 families in urgent need of shelter since July 1, 2021," Holness said in a news release.

Holness said he also wants Montreal recognized as a city-state so it can get more control over immigration, social services, and education.

Another issue that figured prominently in the federalcampaign and that could affect cities is gun control.

The Liberalscampaigned on a promise to toughen Canada's gun control laws. The party tabled a gun control bill, Bill C-21, in February that proposed giving municipalities power to ban handguns.

Plante said Tuesday she was disappointed by Trudeau's gun control proposals, suggesting they don't go far enough and put the burden on municipalities.

She said she would prefer to see harsher sentences as adeterrent to crime.

But Noah Schwartz, an assistant professor of political science at Concordia University, says tough-on-crime laws are rarely effective.

"People aren't necessarily weighing the full risk and benefits of what they're doing when they're doing it, so the prospect of longer sentences doesn't always deter criminals," Schwartz said.

Bill C-21 wouldn't solve the problem either, said Schwartz, whose research focuses on firearms policy.

Most of the shootings that happen in cities are with illegal guns smuggled across the United States border, which tighter border controls struggle to prevent, he said.

Plante suggested she wanted more illegal guns seized at the border.

"It's tricky because we share the world's largest undefended land border with a country that has the largest civilian stock of firearms," Schwartz said.

He saysthat, while investing in better police intelligence to prevent and better understand smuggling routes can help, governments often overlook tackling root causes.

"We really have to approach this issue more from a social perspective," he said.

"Why are communities, usually racialized communities, usually marginalized communities why are mostly young men coming from these communities joining gangs? Why are these gangs their only pathway to status and to wealth? Why aren't we creating more opportunities to bring these people into society?"

The Liberal platform says its government is "investing in prevention efforts and [is] providing $250 million directly to municipalities and Indigenous communities."

It's unclear in the platform if that money has already been spent or whether it is part of several different programs.

Whether it's at the municipal or federal level, Schwartz says there is often a focus on policing when it comes to guns.

"It's not necessarily about managing the issue as much as it is about managing the image of the issue," he said.

"We really have to look critically at some of these proposals that are being put forward."

See more here:

With a renewed mandate, what will Liberals do about gentrification and gun violence in Montreal? - CBC.ca