Tag Archives: Public Health

Roundup: Announcing a limited plastic ban

Posted on by

The big news yesterday was that the federal government finally unveiled the first phase of their single-use plastics ban, focusing on six primary culprits – plastic bags, straws, stir sticks, cutlery, six-pack rings, and polystyrene take-out containers (though I’m not entirely clear if the can’t-recycle-in-this-country black plastic take-out containers would also be included). Most of these items are things for which there are alternatives that are fairly easily obtainable, and will likely become more affordable the more their production ramps up and they get scale in the economy that had thus-far been denied to them.

But there is immediate push-back. The Chemistry Industry Association of Canada bristles that in order to achieve the ban, the government is using the toxic substances mechanisms available to them, and the industry is aghast that they are in the same category as asbestos and lead – err, except that the proliferation of microplastics, particularly from plastics that break down, would quite probably fit that bill very well. The Alberta government is also grousing because they think this will affect investment in their petrochemical industry, even though the ban is quite limited and wouldn’t affect high-quality plastics which are will still see broad use, nor would it really affect their plans to turn Alberta into a hub of plastics recycling (which is important because there is very little plastics recycling in North America as we had relied on off-shoring the work to places like China, which shut their borders to it). The province’s energy minister also found it “ironic” that this announcement was made a day after Jason Kenney made his own announcement on plastics and recycling being part of Alberta’s “diversification” efforts, even though a) it’s not actually ironic, and b) this has been something the federal government has been talking about for over a year, did the necessary consultation process required under the Toxic Substances Act, and as a minister, she knows that these kinds of announcements aren’t dreamed up overnight but take some fair amount of planning and coordination. But Alberta is going to Alberta, whatever happens, so this is nothing new.

Continue reading →

QP: Fundraising from alleged gangsters

Posted on by

It being Wednesday, prime minister Justin Trudeau was present, and ready to answer — well, respond to — all questions put to him. Erin O’Toole led off, reading a script in French that was concerned about the world health information network and it being sidelined, which he blamed the prime minister directly for. Trudeau stood up and extemporaneously stated that they always had an eye out when it comes to infectious diseases and the Chief Public Health Officer was on the COVID file in December. O’Toole accused the government of reading press releases out of Beijing, and Trudeau disputed that, talking about being multilateral partners on this. O’Toole switched to English to repeat his first question, to which Trudeau accused him of drumming up alarmist political points before repeating his points about Dr. Tam being engaged early on. O’Toole added bombast to repeat the accusation, and Trudeau went on a tear about the Conservatives cutting science while his government invested in it. O’Toole then changed gears to talk about Senator Salma Ataullahjan’s candidacy for presidency of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, to which Trudeau said that governments don’t give endorsements but he wished her well. Yves-François Blanchet led off for the Bloc, raising the death of Joyce Echaquan, to which Trudeau stated that it was a reflection of systemic racism in Canada. Blanchet demanded the government do the work with the First Nations that the Quebec government was doing in response to the death, to which Trudeau first pointed out that Blanchet finally admitted that there was systemic racism in Quebec, before pointing out efforts the federal government was making. Jagmeet Singh was up next to lead for the NDP, and in French, he demanded that a future COVID vaccine be made freely available to Canadians, and Trudeau stated that they were working to ensure that it would be. Singh changed to English to reiterate the same question, insisting he wanted clarity, and Trudeau rambled about what a great job they have done on procurement to date.

Continue reading →

Roundup: An escalation of props

Posted on by

The moment that “remote sittings” began, which morphed into “hybrid” sittings, MPs began with the stunts. First it was signs in their backgrounds – which were ruled out of order as props, then it was dress code violations, and during the first “hybrid vote,” we saw MPs have their kids and dogs in the frame, and one of them was conspicuously driving while he voted. None of this is good for the practice of parliamentary democracy (and no, I don’t care what people say about how great it is they had their kids with them). And of course, one MP decided to take it to the next step.

https://twitter.com/davidakin/status/1313542759727484929

How this particular stunt wasn’t declared a de facto prop I’m not sure, but you can expect that this sort of thing is only going to escalate the longer it goes on unless the Speaker puts his foot down right now and stamps it out. And to be honest, when I’ve been cautioning against the problems that normalising “hybrid” sitting was going to bring, I didn’t think to include that MPs would start pulling stunts in the name of being “first” or “historic,” as they keep patting themselves on the back for these days, and yet they found new ways to surprise me. This is not a good thing. And because the Speaker didn’t say anything yesterday, I can only imagine how many more locales we’ll start seeing in the coming days, ever-escalating until someone comes to their senses and declares this to be the same as using props. Because honestly – this is going to be a very bad precedent.

Rideau Hall

In an unusual move, Governor General Julie Payette has contracted the services of former Supreme Court of Canada justice Michel Bastarache to be a “constitutional advisor” in the ongoing saga of the investigations of her office for harassment and bullying issues. It’s very odd and problematic, and here is professor Philippe Lagassé to provide some added context:

https://twitter.com/LagassePhilippe/status/1313577963565322240

https://twitter.com/LagassePhilippe/status/1313578978368802820

https://twitter.com/LagassePhilippe/status/1313581941103493121

Continue reading →

QP: Energy workers and omitted automation

Posted on by

The prime minister was away, having attended the state funereal of Rt.Hon. John Turner, but his deputy was again present, which was worth something. Erin O’Toole led off, with his script on the mini-lectern in front of him, and in French he accused government of dragging their feet on the procurement of ventilators, citing one contract in particular.  Chrystia Freeland assured him they were taking the pandemic seriously, and thanked industrial partners for stepping up. O’Toole tried again, and this time Freeland stated that his assertion wasn’t true, that they had sourced enough ventilators across the country, and were still procuring necessary equipment and medication. O’Toole switched to English to reiterate the question with added bombast, to which Freeland calmly assured him that they were confident they have the ventilators they need, and they have acquired so much PPE that they are acquiring additional warehouse space. O’Toole then switched to the topic of a possible refinery closure in Newfoundland, to which Freeland too exception to his characterisation, and reminded him that they just transferred millions of dollars to the government of Newfoundland and Labrador for the benefit of energy workers. O’Toole then raised Suncor job losses — studiously omitting that those losses were as a result of increased automation— and Freeland disabused him of the notion that the government doesn’t care about Albertans and listed the benefits delivered to the province. Alain Therrien led off for the Bloc, and he made the usual demand for increased health transfers, to which Freeland reminded him of the increased supports they have already provided. Luc Thériault repeated the plea, and Freeland repeated that they have given the provinces additional funds. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, and in French, he complained that some people made profits off the pandemic and they needed to be taxed, to which Freeland listed that they were working to combat tax evasion. Singh switched to English to complain that private clinics were giving COVID tests for a fee, and Freeland agreed that everyone should be treated the same, and that Health Canada just approved an antigen test.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Conflating the “leader’s courtesy”

Posted on by

New Green Party leader Annamie Paul is running for a seat in the upcoming Toronto-Centre by-election, and this has already caused a bit of a friction between outgoing leader Elizabeth May and NDP leader Jagmeet Singh. Why? Because May argues that Singh should repay the courtesy that the Greens extended him when he was running for his own seat in a by-election in the previous parliament and not run a candidate to oppose him. The problem? That May’s conception of “leader’s courtesy” is not really what she thinks it is.

First of all, “leader’s courtesy” largely only existed when it came to government or official opposition – third, fourth, and fifth-place parties are not really owed any particular courtesies. Second, what this particular courtesy involves is a member of the new leader’s own party voluntarily resigning their seat so that the new leader can run there in order to get into the Commons as soon as possible – it’s generally not about unheld ridings, even if it just happens to coincidentally be the same riding where Paul ran in the last federal election. The Liberals are certainly not obligated to not run to keep their own seat for the sake of giving Paul a seat, no matter if she is a Black woman. Hell, they’re running a Black woman of their own in the riding. Not to mention, less than a year ago, during the election, Paul came in a distant fourth place in the riding with a mere seven percent of the vote-share. Bill Morneau, incidentally, got 57 percent, and the NDP came in second at 22 percent – even if Singh did the “classy” thing, as May demanded, and didn’t run a candidate, it’s still unlikely that Paul would win – especially when she’s running against a legitimate media personality like Liberal candidate Marci Ien.

I would also add that demanding that the other parties surrender their candidates so that Paul can win it because she’s a Black woman leader smacks of tokenism, and is an implicit declaration that she couldn’t win the seat on her own. Not to mention, it deprives the voters of the riding the chance to make the decision on who they want to represent them. Again, the historical “leader’s courtesy” was about a riding that the party held, and it was usually intended to be a short-term measure so that the leader would have a seat, and would then run in their intended seat in the next election and return the riding to the MP who stepped aside for the leader. This is clearly not what is happening in Toronto Centre, so unless May wants to resign her own seat so that Paul can run there, she’s conflating just what exactly this “courtesy” really is.

Continue reading →

QP: Blaming Trudeau for Ford’s inaction

Posted on by

Prime minister Justin Trudeau was in town but chose not to appear at QP today, but fortunately his deputy was present in his stead. Erin O’Toole led off, listing countries that are using rapid tests and railing that Manitoba can’t procure their own. Chrystia Freeland led off with belated congratulations to O’Toole for his election as leader before stating that they have recently purchased millions of rapid tests. O’Toole railed that provinces couldn’t procure them, but Freeland insisted that they worked with the provinces on the Safe Restart Agreement. O’Toole switched to French to ask the same thing and Freeland repeated her response in kind. O’Toole returned to English to carry on his lament for rapid tests, and Freeland assured him that they would start arriving next week, and more announcements were forthcoming. O’Toole then attempted some revisionist history around border closures, and Freeland insisted that they got it right. Alain Therrien led off for the Bloc, and he, unsurprisingly, demanded increased health transfers, and Freeland assured him that they reached the Safe Restart Agreement with the provinces. Therrien said that it wasn’t enough, that they demanded $28 billion, and Freeland very calmly annunciated that Quebec got nearly $300 billion for health and economic recovery. Jagmeet Singh appeared by video to lead for the NDP, where he demanded a plan for testing and long-term care, both of which are provincial responsibilities. Freeland responded that they were working with provinces and municipalities. Singh stumbled over his attempt to pin the blame on the prime minister, to which Freeland agreed that the country was at a crossroads, before she reiterated that the government was working with provinces and municipalities. 

Continue reading →

Roundup: Learned helplessness sets into the Senate

Posted on by

News that the Senate has been suspended until the end of the month, and that they have only met fourteen times since March, is deeply irritating to me on numerous levels. My primary irritation is that the Senate has work it can do, but hasn’t been doing it both because they’ve been unable to get their committees up and running, and because there have been virtually no government bills that were not COVID-related or Estimates that have headed their way. On the committee front, it would seem that much of the drama that happened in the early part of the year in the Selection committee has largely resolved itself because the Progressive Senators Group has been revitalized and is now a viable caucus again, meaning that Senator Yuen Pau Woo’s attempt to exclude them from committee seats has been for naught, and they should be able to come to an agreement about equitable distribution of seats now that he’s not able to screw them over. As for government bills, this has largely been a question of timing – bills in process did not advance very far before the pandemic hit – but the government has a very full agenda and should introduce one or two of its bills in the Senate as they are capable of doing, in order to get the ball rolling on them. There is no excuse for them not to.

As for the lack of sitting days, this is largely the prerogative of the Leader of the Government in the Senate, and in the current pandemic state, I find that a kind of learned helplessness has been setting in, in both chambers. The Senate, disadvantaged on the part of resources, particularly when it comes to thinks like IT and video capacity, has taken a back-seat while the Commons has been gobbling up those resources to get its own operations going remotely, and yet the Senate could very well have come up with ways to meet in-person safely. The concerns about travel could be mitigated by just having senators stay put, but they have thus far refused to make allowances in their Internal Economy committee to let them do so that won’t cost them out-of-pocket if they don’t already have an apartment or condo in town. The current demands for “hybrid” sittings, in spite of the problems that have developed with them in the Commons, seems to be barrelling ahead in spite of the objections of the Conservatives, and despite the fact that simply creating a parliamentary bubble is the cheaper, easier, and better option.

The bitter irony in all of this is that for all of Justin Trudeau’s talk about a more “independent” Senate, the last eight months have turned the Chamber into one big rubber stamp, as process gets abused time and again in the name of emergency legislation because they refuse to create a parliamentary bubble. People should be angry about this, but most everyone is just shrugging and playing into the learned helplessness that has set it, making me all the more irritated by it all.

Continue reading →

Roundup: O’Toole and his conditional support

Posted on by

As part of their need to get bills that died during prorogation back on the Order Paper, the Liberals yesterday reintroduced the bill that would ban “conversion therapy” as a criminal offence. Erin O’Toole insists that he’s against this pseudo-science – really! – but in the same breath claims that this bill is terribly flawed and that the Liberals are just introducing it to set a trap for him. His claim that the bill is problematic is dubious, because he claims that it would criminalise conversations about sexuality or gender identity between a minor and their parents or faith leader, when that’s clearly not the case. This, however, is a pervasive bogeyman that the social conservatives in the Conservative caucus want to put forward, and we’ve seen versions of it for years. Remember how they were so opposed to the government’s legislation allowing for same-sex civil marriages, and how they were rending their garments and howling that this was going to mean that their pastors and preachers were going to be forced to perform these marriages, or that their sermons would be denounced as hate speech? Did any of that happen? Nope. But there is a constant need to beat the drum that their religious freedoms are being trampled by the LGBT community because said community simply wishes to exist unmolested.

To an extent, though, this is the Liberals throwing the cat among the pigeons, because it’s going to be O’Toole’s first big test as leader when it comes to whether or not he’ll appease the social conservatives to whom he owes a debt for their support of his leadership, or whether he’ll keep trying to project the image that his is a big, welcoming party that wants to draw in members of this community. From previous conversations with insiders when previous private members’ bills on banning conversion therapy were introduced, that this sends the Conservative caucus into a panic because they know it’s going to sow divisions in their ranks, and these usual fears about religious freedoms rear their heads. And it’s not like the Liberals came up with this specifically to cause O’Toole headaches – it was introduced in the previous session, and got derailed by the pandemic.

I also feel the need to point out that during the leadership, there were a lot of profiles in the mainstream media that kept repeating that O’Toole had pledged to march in Pride parades without mentioning that he made that pledge conditional on uniformed police also marching, which eliminates all of the major Pride parades in this country owing to the current climate and conversation about policing. It also shows that his support is transactional, much like his insistence that he’s pro-choice but voted for a bill that would open a backdoor to criminalising abortion was shrugged off in the mainstream media rather than called out for the bullshit weaselling that it was. O’Toole is going to try to play both sides on this bill, and I suspect that he’s going to concern troll his way out of it – that his “concerns” about this “criminalization” will carry the day and he’ll insist that he’s being principled and weasel out of standing up to the social conservatives that he is beholden to.

Continue reading →

QP: A parliamentary secretary flounders

Posted on by

Despite being in the building, Justin Trudeau was elsewhere for QP today, nor was his deputy present. Erin O’Toole led off, with a script on the mini-lectern in front of him, and he lamented that the pandemic early warning unit was scrapped months before the onset of this current pandemic. Darren Fisher got up to read a statement about the plans to conduct an independent review of the decisions taken. O’Toole was not satisfied, and demanded answers, and Fisher repeated his script on an independent review. O’Toole switched to rapid testing, and falsely insinuated that they would have eliminated the current testing backlog, though that is not the case — they are not the same. Fisher read that they are working with provinces and that new tests were approved. O’Toole blamed an outbreak in a Calgary hospital on the lack of rapid testing, and Fisher reiterated a script about working together to increase testing capacity. O’Toole switched to French to repeat the demand, and Fisher stumblingly accused the Conservatives of trying to politicise regulatory processes, but didn’t do so very effectively. Alain Therrien led off for the Bloc to demand higher health transfers, to which Pablo Rodriguez listed federal cooperation with Quebec. Luc Thériault repeated the demand, and Rodriguez said that they were dealing directly with the government of Quebec and didn’t need the Bloc to be middle-men. Jagmeet Singh was up next for the NDP, and in French, he lamented that infrastructure hadn’t been built, to which Catherine McKenna gave some happy talking points about the morning’s announcement on infrastructure priorities. Singh switched to English to repeat the question, and McKenna repeated her happy talking points in English.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Holding the right feet to the fire

Posted on by

As the pandemic rolls along, I find myself increasingly irritated with news stories that fail to mention jurisdictional issues. Case in point yesterday was a look at how the federal commercial rent subsidy is ending, but nowhere in the story did it mention that rent is actually a provincial jurisdiction. Part of why the federal programme was so problematic and underutilized is because the premiers signed off on the rules while the federal government put up funds by way of the CMHC, because that was pretty much the only lever they had at their disposal. The only time the provinces are mentioned in the story was in relation to that the moratorium on evictions in certain provinces were expiring – which is important, but the fact that this whole mess is really the provinces’ responsibility is not mentioned. The very same thing happened about a week ago around the problems related to the federal government’s disability payments, that again, because this falls under provincial jurisdiction, the only lever the federal government had at their disposal was the federal disability tax credit, which is why everything was not great and complicated.

I’m all for holding the federal government to account, as anyone who reads this blog will know, but we also need to be holding the right feet to the fire, and the provinces have been consistently getting a pass on the rent issue in the media (and the disability issue for that matter as well). Most of the premiers have ballsed up the response to this pandemic, on an epic scale in some provinces, but there seems to be very little appetite to deal with that. Instead, we get pieces (that I won’t link to) about how Doug Ford surpassed everyone’s expectations and how he’s no acting like a partisan bully any longer, and I’m sorry, but he hasn’t done his gods damned job in this pandemic, and just sounding avuncular at press conferences is not cutting it. And the federal government isn’t helping keep accountability where it belongs either because they keep retreating to this refrain that “we don’t want a fight over jurisdiction,” when no, you don’t have jurisdiction, you don’t have policy levers, so why are you being assigned the task of dealing with the issue at all? (And the first person who raises the spectre of emergency legislation as a means of the federal government asserting jurisdiction can leave right now).

So while I get that news organisations are trying to shine a light on these problematic federal programmes, omitting key pieces information like matters of proper jurisdiction, are not actually helping anyone. (And no, it’s not a conspiracy with the Conservatives, so you can stop that right now). Accountability is important, but holding the right people to account is just as important, and unless your article identifies who those right people are, and places it in that context, then you’re just confusing issues and muddying the water, which does the opposite of accountability. I also refuse to bow to this notion that “nobody cares about jurisdiction in a pandemic.” Sorry, but no, we have a federal constitution that clearly defines roles and responsibilities, and the federal government can’t invent levers of power out of thin air. Jurisdiction absolutely matters, and pretending otherwise is actively helping those who’ve ballsed up their responses evade accountability. That seems to me to be the opposite of what is trying to be achieved here.

Continue reading →