LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

For just a moment last week Jason Kenney got to return to the pre-COVID world of banging away at Ottawa and playing to the Wexit crowd in Alberta.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's gun control announcement offered Kenney a little relief from the stress of coping with the pandemic emergency.

Opposing gun control is a staple of the right in the west.  And the UCP add an extra layer of meaning to that opposition by suggesting the province should be exercising more direct control over how firearms are regulated within its borders.

Kenney responded to the ban on 1,500 assault weapons by saying "Our government is actively considering appointing Alberta's own chief firearms officer (CFO) to replace the CFO appointed by Ottawa."

The implied message is that Alberta doesn't need Ottawa to tell it how to deal with the province's guns.  The CFO deals with firearm licensing and administrative duties.

And the somewhat farther right elements of the province are seeing the provincial CFO declaration through a more explicit lens.

"Every province with any sense of liberty should appoint its own CFO, instruct the crown to not prosecute, and #DoNotComply," tweeted Derek Fildebrandt, former UCP MLA and now publisher of the right-leaning Western Standard.

Kenney has been consistent on the issue.  Even back in 2017 he was calling for a provincial CFO.  And when he unrolled some of the "Fair Deal" principles to increase Alberta's autonomy from Ottawa it was on the list, along with a provincial police force and provincial pension plan to replace CPP.

The wider gun control question is a core concern for the UCP.  The Trudeau Liberals' promise to institute wider bans just ramped up the rhetoric as yet another polarizing issue during the last election.

In November 2019 the Alberta legislature passed a motion playing to the provincial gun lobby:

 "Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly recognize and support the ability of Albertans to lawfully and in a responsible manner own and possess firearms and to engage in permitted activities involving the use of firearms, including but not limited to hunting and sport shooting."

That motion came in handy for Justice Minister Doug Schweitzer last week.  He quoted the motion in his joint statement with Kenney and declared, "The Government of Alberta will scrutinize today's move by Ottawa and explore potential responses through this lens."

For the UCP the gun issue is particularly useful as a sop to the rural Alberta base, a constituency that has suffered a load of UCP budget hits in recent months.  A war with provincial doctors over pay has prompted a number of rural doctors to withdraw services in smaller and rural communities.  The UCP also pared back on grant money to rural municipalities, leaving them with high policing bills and tighter pursestrings.

So the spectre of Ottawa taking away guns is a hugely attractive political development for the UCP to win back hearts and minds in the hinterland.

"The federal government keeps developing policies in downtown Toronto and it is out of touch with our rural communities, particularly here in Alberta," Schweitzer told a radio station in northwestern Alberta.

The Toronto-centric charge in part refers to Public Safety Minister Bill Blair, former police chief in Toronto and the architect of the federal gun crackdown.

The UCP is counting on its stance on this issue glueing the right wing and rural base in place while not alienating the urban vote.  Kenney and his ministers keep stressing the need for tougher sentences for gun toting criminals and strict border controls to stop gun smuggling as the solution to gun crime rather than "criminalizing" law-abiding gun owners.

Even in Calgary, where gun violence has become an issue, Kenney won't bite on the question of municipalities instituting gun bans, saying in January that criminals don't respect gun bans.

Popular sentiment likely splits on the urban/rural axis, but a weekend Angus Reid poll showed 65 per cent of Albertans support the assault weapon ban, while 35 per cent oppose.  That support is softer than the country as a whole, which runs to 78 per cent in favour, but it's still a political consideration.

But the UCP is counting on the gun control issue not being a deep seated passion for urban and middle of the road voters in Alberta.  Judging from social media outrage and petitions over the last couple of days, it is a matter of considerable passion for a segment of the province's population likely to support the UCP.

Photo Credit: CTV News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Eight weeks.  That's how long it took us to go from "we're all in this together" to "well, back to work folks."

Unable to accept a different sort of society that doesn't involve the service economy chugging along, the move to get the country back to work has moved from trial balloon to reality.

Here in Quebec, we've decided to open up schools and business outside of Montreal.  While the virus is contained neither inside long-term care homes, or in the wider population, particularly here on the island.

Did I mention the part where Quebec has been the hardest hit province, where its biggest city has yet to get a grip on the virus?

To make this premature restart happen, the province's schools are being turned into babysitting institutions with structure that includes everything but the striped prison uniforms, all in the name of the social health of the province's kids.

When, really, what it's about is freeing parents who can't work at home to go back to work.

By Monday next week retail stores across Ontario will be open for curb-side pickup.  What this means is a bunch of retail workers will be mingling around shuttling back and forth between stores and cars handing off goods.  Will they have adequate protection?  Unlikely.

In Ontario, the premier talks about opening up cottage country for the Victoria Day weekend, where a mass migration from the city to the woods will surely have no negative impact on the shoestring health systems in lake country.

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer talks about making the CERB more flexible to let people pick up shifts here and there to get back in the world and back to work.

The implication in all of this is that the people that need to get to work, the people's whose jobs do not involve videoconferencing and cloud services, but face-to-face interaction need to get back in the world.

They say people should get back to work in "safe" conditions.  But what exactly is safe right now?  There's so much about COVID-19 we don't understand, "safe" is a relative term.  But the things we do know help, particularly mass testing and tracing, are nowhere near in place.

And yet we plow ahead.

It's worth noting at this point the people most stridently calling for a reopening of the world are the people least at risk.  Writing a column involves no actual face-to-face human contact, which puts the whole idea of safety as something of an abstraction.

It makes me, to put it mildly, fucking livid.  Because every time someone says the economy is suffering with people at home, it ignores all the people who are going to leave their homes and get sick.  That will pass on the virus to their loved ones.  That will die.

Maybe it's not so easy for me to dismiss this because I live among people.  Maybe it's the hospital orderly who lives around the corner, and took care of my father-in-law as he was dying several years ago will see her hospital fill up with the sick and contagious.  Maybe it's because of the cashier who lives down the street, or the Canadian Tire clerk on the next block, will have to make do with paltry (or non-existent) raises while their stores fill up.  Maybe it's because of the woman who lives downstairs and whose need for dialysis doesn't give her the luxury of just staying home.

Maybe it's because I live in a neighbourhood where these people are not abstractions, or fleeting interactions at the checkout counter, but real people — my neighbours â€” that this is obvious to me.

But it does not seem quite so obvious to the people making the decisions.

These people are not abstract data points.  They are the people that are about to bear the brunt of the consequences for the reopening of our economy.  And make no mistake, there will be consequences.  Quebec's chief medical officer said outright there will likely be additional deaths because of the decision to reopen.

"I hope not too many people will die.  But make no mistake, the virus is here, and it is here for a long time," Dr. Horatio Arruda said when the plan was first announced, according to The Globe and Mail.  "We know it's a risky bet.  But we can't eliminate this virus.  It will circulate.  The question is, 'How do we balance everything?'  The economy, money, mental health. … It isn't just infectious diseases that are determinants of health."

The balance has been tipped then.

From here on out, the economy will increasingly become the most important factor in decision making.  And the people that keep our service economy going are the ones left to have their fates decided for them.

They are others to be sacrificed.  Perhaps with regret, but sacrificed nonetheless.  That's what going back to normal right now is, a sacrifice.  Not of us, but of them.  If you want things to get back to normal, that's what you're asking for: someone else's sacrifice.

Photo Credit: Jeff Burney, Loonie Politics

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.