Category Archives: Political Roundup

What’s going on in Canadian politics

Roundup: Not releasing the contracts

Posted on by

It seems that prime minister Justin Trudeau has rejected a call by the premiers to release the details of the vaccine contracts – as well he should have. So much of the past couple of weeks’ panic over the delays in Pfizer and Moderna doses has been this self-assuredness that the federal government must have negotiated a bad deal, and they’re going to “prove it” by demanding to see what’s in the contracts. After all, most of the conservative-leaning premiers are still operating under the assumption that Trudeau is some kind of naïf who can barely put his own pants on let alone govern a country (while most of them believe themselves to be super-geniuses). Of course, all that making the contracts public would do is to allow other countries to start trying to outbid what we paid for our doses in order to get the companies to break the contracts in order to get their own orders faster.

With this in mind, I would point you in the direction of this longread from Maclean’s, which goes through the story of the procurement process for these vaccines, including talking to some of the players involved, and while no secrets are divulged, some of the calculations on the part of the companies is better fleshed out, including the fact that our public healthcare system ostensibly makes out rollout likely to go more smoothly, which is good for the companies because it means fewer wasted doses. Now, mind you, it’s not going to be even across the country given the disparities in health systems between provinces, and the varying levels of incompetence that some of the provincial governments display, but there are some good insights in the piece, so I would encourage you to take the time to read it through.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The COVAX conundrum

Posted on by

It was another day of less than optimal vaccine news yesterday – first a warning that there was going to be more fluctuation in future shipments including what appears to be another reduction in the next Moderna shipment (of which we’re still not sure the allocation yet), followed by news that we are in line for a shipment from the COVAX facility, which comes with its own particular special challenges.

Why? Because part of COVAX is to provide vaccines to the developing world, and it appears that Canada is accepting vaccines that would be going to them. Except that’s not the deal we signed – while we are funding vaccines for the developing world through COVAX (and will be sending our excess doses once our own population is vaccinated), part of the procurement diversification strategy was the stream under COVAX that we get some doses while also funding for the developing world. But of course, that wasn’t clearly explained – and the minister did have to do the media rounds to do that later in the day, by which it was too late, and you had everyone tut-tutting that we’re taking doses from those who need it more than we do. Which, incidentally, is happening at the same time that the government is being yelled at for not procuring more doses faster (as though yelling will make Pfizer’s retooling go faster or Moderna’s supply chain issues resolve themselves), and lo, we have doses that we paid for, but we’re going to look like jerks if we take them. Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. Good thing this government can communicate effectively. Oh, wait…

Continue reading →

Roundup: Domestic vaccine production…eventually

Posted on by

There was a sliver of positive news yesterday, when it was announced that the federal government had signed a deal with Novavax to produce their vaccine in the future National Research Council facility in Montreal. The catch? That facility won’t be completed construction until summer, and then it will require Health Canada approval, so it may not be able to produce new doses until the end of the year – at which point, most Canadians should already be vaccinated using the Pfizer and Moderna doses we’ve contracted for. That doesn’t mean this facility still won’t be for naught – it’s possible we will need booster shots for the other vaccines, possibly do deal with different variants (and Novavax has shown success with the B.1.1.7 variant first spotted in the UK), and it also means that we will be able to produce for export to other countries who will need it.

Of course, this started back in on the same questions about why we weren’t able to produce vaccines domestically earlier, and why this plant is taking so long. Of course, this plant is actually moving faster than is usual – Good Manufacturing Practices facilities to produce vaccines usually take two or three years to build, not a single year, and there are several other facilities under construction across the country for other vaccine candidates. As for the same questions about why we didn’t contract to produce other vaccines here, it was because there were no suitable facilities – particularly from the approved ones. (This NRC facility was in talks to produce the AstraZeneca vaccine, but there is also talk about why the PnuVax facility in Montreal has not yet been tapped – but it may yet be for a future candidate once approved). And for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, we simply didn’t have facilities in this country that could produce mRNA vaccines to scale (most existing mRNA production was on a single-dose system for tailored vaccines used for treating particular cancers). And these are things we a) can’t build overnight, and b) didn’t know were even viable because it’s a new technology that had not yet been approved for a vaccine, especially on the scale of the one we’re dealing with now. It would have been a hell of a gamble to build a facility to GMP standards for a vaccine technology that may not have panned out.

Why I’m particularly annoyed about the return of these questions – particularly from the likes of Jagmeet Singh as he appeared on platforms like Power & Politics – is that they pretend that any vaccine facility can produce any vaccine, ignoring that not all vaccines are created equally, or that the technology to produce vaccines isn’t different across platforms. Singh’s notion that a nationalised vaccine producer should have been able to handle this is also farcical because again, what platform would it have bet on? All of them? It’s ridiculous and dishonest – as have been the demands to make the vaccine procurement contracts public (which no other country has done), because all that would do is allow other countries to look at what we paid, and then offer the companies more money to break the contracts with us. (And FFS, both Singh and Erin O’Toole are lawyers and should know this). The kinds of point-scoring that is taking place right now is getting to be beyond the pale, and it’s obscuring the actual kinds of accountability we should be practicing.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Not another Supreme Court reference

Posted on by

The medical assistance in dying bill is finally before the Senate’s legal and constitutional affairs committee, as the (extended) deadline approaches for it to be passed to comply with a Quebec court ruling, and we have justice minister David Lametti saying that there is always the possibility that they could yet refer this bill to the Supreme Court of Canada to get their judgment on whether it will meet the courts’ requirements. And I just cannot with this.

This is part of a pattern in this country where anytime there is a contentious or “moral” issue, parliamentarians of all stripes get afraid to put their necks on the line for something – no matter how right the cause is – and insist that the courts weigh in so that they can do the performative action of looking like they were dragged, kicking and screaming, into complying. They did this with lesbian and gay rights, they did this with safe injection sites, they did this with prostitution laws, and they did this with assisted dying – and in the cases of both prostitution laws and assisted dying, the laws drafted to replace those that were struck down were not going to comply with the court’s rulings, and yet they went ahead with them anyway so that they could force a new round of court challenges to really put on a show of kicking and screaming. It’s spineless, and it causes so much more unnecessary suffering (and in some cases, like with prostitution laws, deaths) when better laws could and should be drafted, but those MPs and senators who push for full compliance get sidelined by the skittish majority. And in the case of assisted dying, so many of those pushing to go back to the courts are simply seeking to re-litigate the action, which is not going to happen. A unanimous decision is not going to be scaled back on a second hearing.

While I am encouraged that Lametti did try to say that this option is not the best one, and his office later clarified that they have no plan to have yet another reference on assisted dying, but the fact that you have his clamour of people who don’t want to either make a decision, or who want to re-litigate the same issues, clamouring to send this back to the Supreme Court is disappointing. That parliament can’t respond to the Court’s ruling in a reasonable manner is one of the most irritating things about how we run this country, and it would be great if our MPs (and some senators) could forego the theatrics.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Not fussed about Payette’s pension

Posted on by

For the past week, in the wake of Julie Payette’s resignation, we have seen the various cheap outrage stories and QP attacks circling around. How dare she get her generous pension if she voluntarily resigned under a cloud of scandal? Why should Canadians have to pay for this? (Usually followed by the usual republican nonsense that falsely equates how much Canada’s contribution to the monarchy is and which grossly underestimates how much more an elected head of state would cost compared to the system we have in place now).

While Parliament could theoretically alter the laws that guarantee Payette her pension, trying to do so retroactively would invite a lawsuit that the government would be hard-pressed to win. Not to mention, the fact that she walked away without causing a constitutional crisis is probably worth the pension (because seriously, that could have been very ugly and messy). As for the additional annuity that former GGs are afforded to support any duties related to their time as GG that carry on afterward, be it speeches or answering letters, I’m less fussed about that because I think it’s healthy that we have people who are interested in keeping up civic duties once their term is over (especially as we don’t have ready-enough access to members of the royal family for that kind of thing), but would welcome additional transparency and reporting around that. It does, however, help make the somewhat ageist case that we shouldn’t appoint GGs that are too young because what do they then follow it up with after holding the second highest office in the country? (See: Michaëlle Jean’s time as head of the Francophonie). We also have to remember that things like a GG’s pension are made generous enough because it’s part of institutional independence – we don’t want a prime minister to threaten that pension if they aren’t going to get their way. It’s actually the same logic behind why you want a monarchy to be rich – so that they have independent wealth and that can’t be used as leverage by a government. Of course, Canadians have been conditioned to revel in hairshirt parsimony after the Reform Party years and media that delights in the response they get from cheap outrage stories, so we’re going to keep getting them, no matter how inappropriate and damaging to our institutions that they actually are.

Meanwhile, Erin O’Toole has been making the rounds claiming that Justin Trudeau would be in a “conflict of interest” if he chose the next GG on his own, and I just cannot with this completely illiterate nonsense. There would be no conflict because the GG acts on the advice of the prime minister – he or she is not going to say no if Trudeau decides to call an election, because there are no grounds for them to do so. The only time they have any kind of discretion around this is if the incumbent demands another election right after he or she ostensibly lost one, and if there is a viable alternative, the GG has every right to ask the incumbent to see if they can maintain confidence, and if not, another party can be invited to form government. There is this perception that the vice-regal has a truckload of discretion in these matters, and they simply don’t. More to the point, having the opposition sign-off on a new GG would then allow Trudeau to launder the prerogative and accountability for the decision to advise the Queen on that person, which we do not want. That’s not how Responsible Government works. Yes, there is merit to restoring the vice-regal appointments committee (but it’s too late for Payette’s replacement, because that process should have started months ago), but even then, the PM still has the final say from the names put to him on the short-list, as well he should. O’Toole is trying to sow confusion, and is giving further disinformation as to how our system works, which is very bad because it’s that kind of thing that undermines democratic norms. Knock it off!

Continue reading →

Roundup: Kenney’s boggling re-opening

Posted on by

Because the state of the pandemic is going so well in Alberta, Jason Kenney announced that they will start lifting some restrictions starting February 8th, and I am boggled. Just boggled. Kenney says that tagging the decisions to lifting restrictions to hospitalisation rates in three-week increments is somehow responsible because it’s a lagging indicator, but that’s precisely why it’s the wrong thing to do. It’s a lagging indicator. When hospitalisation rates go up, it’s already too late. New positives caught by testing can be up to two weeks behind infection, and hospitalisations can be a couple of weeks behind those, and this is a virus where the growth is exponential. It’s too late by then, and we have to remember that the province’s contact tracing still hasn’t been fully re-established after it got overwhelmed.

The notion that you can have “just a little COVID” and re-open the economy does not work – it grows exponentially, and hospitals get overwhelmed. It especially will not work a second time now that there are UK and South African variants in the community, which are way more easily transmitted, and places like the UK saw infection curves that went nearly vertical. Kenney is demonstration that he has learned absolutely nothing over the past eleven months, and he’s willing to let more people die for the economy.

I also wanted to take particular exception to Kenney’s health minister, Tyler Shandro, and his insufferable whinging that because of the vaccine delays, that Canada and Alberta are “not a priority,” to which I am forced to ask why they should be. Why are we so special as a country that we deserve vaccines before anyone else, particularly those countries who have been much harder hit that we have been? And I get that he is counting on the vaccines as their way out because they let the infections spread so badly that their hospitals were overwhelmed, and they had to largely shut down their economy again, but that’s on him. Vaccines were never going to be the solution for many, many more months. This sense of entitlement that Shandro is exhibiting is extremely off-putting, and needs to be questioned and called out.

Continue reading →

Roundup: A freak-out over vaccine math

Posted on by

With things in a particularly…fragile state around the vaccine rollout, leaking numbers without context should be seen as a Very Bad Thing, and yet that’s what happened yesterday morning, when it appeared to look like Pfizer was cutting the number of vials they were sending us before the end of our Q1 agreement, and there was a freak out. Premiers started demanding federal action (as though Justin Trudeau can just strong-arm Pfizer into producing more doses somehow), or badmouthing Pfizer itself (because that’ll help). And it turns out that it was all for naught.

It turns out that with the possibility that the vials of vaccine will be re-labelled to say that they contain six doses instead of five (which apparently is not uniform, and requires either a skilled operator or different syringes which are in short supply right now), Pfizer decided to rejig the math so that there are the same numbers of doses, but just in fewer vials. Health Canada has not agreed to this re-labelling, and has no timeline on when such a decision could be made, but Pfizer apparently jumped the gun in sending new numbers that got misinterpreted (and misrepresented once the context was actually known), and this government can’t communicate its way out of a wet paper bag at the best of times, so its inability to properly communicate these new figures only made things worse (especially as they didn’t smack it down during Question Period). And if Health Canada doesn’t relabel the vials? Pfizer still sends us the contracted-for number of doses. So the freak-out was for nothing – except maybe yet another kick in the ass for this government to get in the game when it comes to getting ahead of these things.

https://twitter.com/DavidWCochrane/status/1354845414164463617

https://twitter.com/DavidWCochrane/status/1354845416202924035

https://twitter.com/DavidWCochrane/status/1354845418199392260

https://twitter.com/DavidWCochrane/status/1354849397771800577

Meanwhile, we also found out that Ontario had mis-reported its vaccination figures, and they’ve only vaccinated half as many as they said they did, which really puts the province’s hue and cry into the fact that it was running out of doses into a new light – and also the fact that they have been so desperate to blame the federal government for everything. It’s the “look over there” strategy, that certain members of the media seem to keep falling for, every single time. The absolute incompetence of the Ford government never fails to astound.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ford playing up the pandemic theatre

Posted on by

The state of pandemic theatre in Ontario continues to ramp up as Doug Ford’s current campaign about railing about a) vaccine doses, and b) international travellers reaches a fever pitch. Ford is currently making a big dog and pony show about invoking a section of the province’s Health Protection and Promotion Act to mandate testing for air travellers when they arrive because the federal government has not yet done so (they have made the rule that people must get tested before they get on the plane), but what is telling is that Ontario still has done precious little about increasing lab capacity, and we are still lagging far behind on the kind of genomic testing that would help us identify which strains of the virus are being contracted. Additionally, the number of cases traced to international travel has been around one percent, while other case growth remains exponential, which is more proof that this is about theatre, not deal with the real problems.

https://twitter.com/sproudfoot/status/1354498471198416904

In the meantime, Ford government and their allies in certain media outlets have begun waging a campaign against doctors who are critical about the government’s lack of response, particularly about the carnage in long-term care facilities. One doctor has had his contract terminated from his position because of his criticism, and the Toronto Suntargeted another doctor that Ford later expressed “concerns” about (completely disingenuously) – though it’s worth noting that Chrystia Freeland has come to this doctor’s defence. It has been noted that this is not the first time that Ford and his people have used these particular tactics against their critics, but the fact that they are doing this to the very doctors and health experts who are trying to chart a course out of this pandemic is galling and rather telling about how this government is more concerned about their egos than they are in doing the right thing to protect the lives of people in this province.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Ghoulish misdirection

Posted on by

I continue to fume about yesterday’s ghoulish questions in Question Period, where the federal government is being blamed for the deaths in long-term care facilities because the vaccine rollout hasn’t been as expeditious as many had hoped, which is not only gross, but it’s about trying to provide cover for the (mostly conservative) premiers who have failed to do their jobs. Vaccines were never supposed to be the way we stop those deaths – actual public health measures like testing, tracing, and isolation were supposed to do the job, but the fact that premiers continued to under-fund these and didn’t invest in expanding capacity even when given billions of federal dollars to do so, were the actual solutions to preventing those deaths. But instead, these premiers and their ideological inability to grasp that in a pandemic, you need to pay people to stay home and cushion the economic shock, absolutely refused to do that and kept insisting that they re-open their economies with “a little bit of COVID” going around. Of course, that “little bit of COVID” turns into a whole lot of COVID because of exponential growth, and new variants mean even greater transmission. But the cover being given to these premiers is obscene.

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1354227667713855490

And lo, we have a report that shows that provinces continue to sit on federal pandemic funds, with Ontario clocking in at $6.4 billion unspent, as they struggle to re-open schools (recall that they cut corners from the expert recommendations and then had outbreaks) and have unchecked spread of the virus in yet more long-term care facilities, which now appears to be the so-called UK variant. So what is Doug Ford doing about it? Howling that he wants the federal government to institute even more border measures including testing people when they arrive (they are already tested before they get on the planes), and trying to pretend that Pfizer is simply lying to us about not shipping us more vaccines. And guess what? Reporters are focusing on the vaccines and hounding Justin Trudeau about it rather than demanding accountability from Ford for all of the deaths in long-term care that are because of his inaction.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Political theatre over terrorist listings

Posted on by

After Question Period yesterday, Jagmeet Singh rose to propose a motion that the government get serious about tackling white supremacy, which included listing the Proud Boys as a terrorist organization. After a brief interruption where Elizabeth May wanted the Soldiers of Odin added to that list – which was ruled procedurally out of order – Singh’s motion passed, and it was a big social media coup for him, which was also turned into a fundraising pitch so that they could “keep the pressure up” on the Liberals to actually go through with it.

The problem? This is all political theatre – and dangerous political theatre at that. The motion was non-binding, and does not automatically list the Proud Boys, but serves as political direction for the relevant national security agencies to do so, but they can’t actually do that, because there are clear processes set out in law to do so. The Conservatives tried this a few years ago with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and to have them listed – which still hasn’t been done, because there’s a process, and established criteria that it appears they don’t meet the threshold of under existing Canadian law.

To add to that, this kind of precedent should be absolutely alarming because it was a year ago that there were people demanding that Indigenous protesters blockading railways be declared “terrorists,” and if this were up to votes in the Commons (though, granted, this was a motion that required unanimous consent), that could turn bad very, very fast. There are established processes for terrorist listings for a reason, and they should be respected – not being used so that MPs can pat themselves on the back and virtue-signal that they oppose white supremacy. That doesn’t solve problems and can make the jobs of legitimate national security agencies more difficult, but hey, MPs get to make some hay over Twitter, so that’s what counts, right?

Continue reading →