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

Jason Kenney is putting voters in the driver's seat with recall and citizen initiative legislation.

He just failed to mention the seat is in an autonomous vehicle.  The UCP doesn't really want the average joe touching the steering wheel.

The bar set by bills introduced this week is so high to actually yank a sitting politician or directly effect legislation that precious few voters would hazard the attempt.

Generally following the pattern set in the 1990s by similar legislation in BC, recalling an MLA under Bill 52 requires a little essay submitted to the electoral office, a petition with the signatures of 40 percent of eligible voters collected over 60 days, and then there still has to be a vote.

In B.C. only one bid for a recall has come close, although the MLA resigned before the final outcome.

It looks easier to turf a municipal politician under Bill 52.  There's no final vote required just 40 per cent of eligible voters have to sign the petition. The voter turnout in the 2017 municipal election in Edmonton was just 31.5 per cent.  There aren't all that many folks deeply engaged in municipal politics.

Bill 51, The Citizen Initiative Act, allows voters to propose new laws and policies if they can gather signatures from 10 or 20 per cent of the province's voters, depending on whether the proposal involves provincial jurisdiction or requires a constitutional referendum.

The signatures have to be collected in person, not online, within 90 days.  The chief electoral officer has 60 days to verify the signatures.  The petition then goes to a legislature committee which has 90 days to decide whether to support the initiative or not.  If the committee decides against the initiative it triggers a non-binding public vote.

That's a lot of time and a lot of work.

Wouldn't it be more empowering if the grassroots voter could, say, phone their MLA, have a reasonable discussion about a pressing issue, and then have the MLA present those view in the legislature?

Isn't it the job of elected representatives to always be listening to their constituents' concerns?

The Kenney government has been criticized for its lack of meaningful consultation on important policies.  Doctors felt disrespected by lack of consultation when the government tried to change their contract.  Teachers were outraged by changes to their pension which happened without discussion.

The government is about to hold public hearings on its coal mining policy after revoking the last one in 2020 without saying boo to affected stakeholders.

A grassroots uprising of farmers, municipal councillors, country singers and nature lovers prompted a pause in the UCP's coal plans.  When the Citizen Initiative Act passes, opponents can jump through a zillion hoops and wait months for what would likely end in a province wide vote.  By that time who knows how many mountain tops would be blown off by coal mining conglomerates.

Kenney used the example of the previous NDP government's imposition of a carbon tax as a worthy target for a citizen initiative.  With taxes in mind the Alberta Taxpayers Federation is applauding Bill 51 as a step forward in participatory democracy.

No one in government is suggesting a petition on coal mining would be just as good an example.  One wonders if that would make it through a legislature committee, dominated by the governing party.

These bills are aimed at the populist wing of the UCP which just loves the idea of recall and referendum.  But even within the party, grassroots democracy isn't everything it's trumped up to be.

It was announced this week that Kenney will face a leadership review during the UCP's fall 2022 general meeting.  It looks like the party is addressing rumblings in constituency associations about the handling of the pandemic lockdown and the UCP's continuing plummet in political polls.

But the timing of the review makes it impossible for malcontents to actually turf the premier.  The general meeting happens in fall 2022 and the next election is slated for spring 2023.  No political party is going to jettison a leader six months before an election.

The devil is in the details.  The timing of the leadership review; the number of signatures required to fire an MLA; endless red tape in changing government policy or legislation — it's all detail that undercuts Kenney's claims he is putting power in the average Albertan's hands.

Photo Credit: Calgary Herald

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.


Well, who saw this one coming? Americans elected Joe Biden as president partly because of widespread Democratic, journalistic and smart-set mockery (but I repeat myself) of immigration restrictions as "putting children in cages".  And now there's a flood of migrants to the southern border unlike anything seen in decades and they're desperately placing youths in lockable detention facilities.  Almost as if incentives matter.

So who saw it coming?  Nobody who's anybody foresaw the consequences, including the journalists Matt Taibbi recently mocked as having embraced a one-party orthodoxy redolent of the old Soviet press.  But all the nobodies did who study economics and try to apply it to public policy.

We may be a dwindling group.  But conservatives have, or once had, a habit of comparing the laws of economics to those of physics, saying you ignore either at your very real peril.

Ignore gravity and take a painful fall.  Raise the minimum wage, and put teens, women and the poor out of work.  And among these laws, an important place was once given to the law of unintended consequences.  The point being that if you have your intentions right but your incentives wrong, you won't get the results you wanted.  And it might properly be called the law of unintended but predictable consequences, because we know incentives matter.

No, really.  In our personal lives, if for instance our kid's sunglasses are covered by the company plan, we're going to get a more expensive pair than if it's an out-of-pocket expense.  Not one person in 50 fails to make that calculation and not one in 10 has to think about it first.  Shout "free beer" and see what happens.

Alas, when it comes to public policy, people appear to lose focus.  Suddenly 2+2=4 turns into one over the square root of (one minus v squared over c squared) and they can't figure out what to do next so they ignore it and hope it's gone in the morning.

It's not.  Instead this one started, for me at least, with a March 8 New York Times email saying "The number of migrant children detained at the border has tripled in two weeks to more than 3,250, as the U.S. struggles to find room in shelters."  Which is a far cry from "Trump puts kids in cages".

At least it's a far cry as a headline.  But as NBC conceded the same day, "More than 3,200 unaccompanied migrant children are being housed in Customs and Border Protection holding facilities, two sources confirmed to NBC News.  Nearly half of the children have been held beyond the three-day legal limit in small concrete cells with no beds, known as iceboxes."

Oh dear.  Orange man bad.  But still…

The next day the Epoch Times, which bears no resemblance at all to Pravda, reported that "DHS Pleads for Volunteers to Assist With 'Overwhelming' Surge at Southern Border".  So what was to be done?

The Washington press corps was busy fawning over Biden, or would have been if he were having press conferences, so instead they were fawning over Jen Psaki as she circled back to not answering softball questions, and then running stories about how great Biden's dog Major is that amount to unconscious self-satire, or how "Comedians are struggling to parody Biden."

At least that one continued "Let's hope this doesn't last" because the problem isn't that Biden isn't funny, in a creepy way.  It's the abdication of the duty to criticize, and the capacity to, if the person is left-wing.  And that abdication is no service to anyone including the left-wing.  For instance with this increasingly problematic border issue.

By March 13 NBC was reporting "FEMA to help with influx of migrant children at U.S.-Mexico border" and adding "'A Border Patrol facility is no place for a child,' said Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro N. Mayorkas."  But there's an absolutely classic case of substituting saccharine sentiment for serious analysis, and staring stunned as the LUIC returns with flaming brand like one of Kipling's Gods of the Copybook Headings.  Because if unaccompanied minors are sent into the United States (and not all of them are seven and just wandered up to the lack of wall by the way) you either turn them away, let them in or put them in a facility.

There's no fourth choice.  As you should have foreseen.  And it gets worse.

If you make a big hoohah about how the other guy was a monster for adopting the third choice, and you can't or won't adopt the first, or the second, you… uh… say.  This game is hard.  You adopt the kid-in-cage choice without meaning to, preparing for it or acknowledging it.  And meanwhile you've sent a gigantic signal that the border is open to the land of opportunity, so more and more people come and your problem becomes worse and worse and your sickly sweet rhetoric more and more revoltingly irrelevant.

As NBC finally warned on March 14, the election being safely won, "Playing to the Democratic base on the issue while ignoring the need for more enforcement has merely exacerbated the problem."  Gosh.  Ya think?  How'd that happen?

Oh right.  If you think all the way back to the 2016 election, anybody who was anybody directed a two-minute hate at Trump for his border wall, declaring it evil and impractical.  Actually more like a five-year hate.  But his stand on immigration was an important reason for his victory.

Of course his wall never did get built, partly because of his deplorable habit of not thinking things through either.  But by failing to contemplate whether it really was evil, whether it really was impractical, and what if any relationship exists between the two, the Democrats and their media and cultural sympathizers dug a big pit they just tumbled into going "Aaaaah, what fool put this pit here?"

You did.  Not just by failing to anticipate this predictably unpredicted visit from the Gods of the LUIC.  By your far more general disposition to shout angrily that all you need is love, practicality is a trick of the hard-hearted and problems will vanish if only we elect Joe Biden as saviour of the universal human race.

C'mon, man, as someone might say.  Think like grownups.  Or even like migrant youth, who see perfectly clearly what hey, Trump's gone and the border's open means.  Why didn't you?

Photo Credit: Slate

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.


Tom Mulcair was the leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada between 2012 and 2017. 

Since the Fall, Justin Trudeau has been champing at the bit to launch into a general election. In October, the Liberals threatened the opposition parties that if they insisted on pushing for a new committee to study the WE Charity scandal, it would be a confidence vote that could send Canadians to the polls. Trudeau wasn't bluffing. He couldn't decently have called an election just as the second wave of the pandemic was hitting, but if he could blame the opposition, he could get away with it.

Opposition parties live for the next election. That an election was seen by them as a potential threat and not a godsend, spoke volumes about the Liberals' strength and their own lack of preparedness.

Recent polls have the Official Opposition Conservatives at 30 per cent. Even at his low water mark in terms of personal  popularity, Stephen Harper still managed to get 32 per cent of the vote in the 2015 campaign.

In their elections held during the pandemic, both New Brunswick's Conservative and B.C.'s NDP minority governments were rewarded with majorities. Saskatchewan returned its government with a renewed majority. The Federal Liberals want their turn.

It's easy to understand. After a year of restrictions and lockdowns, people are exhausted and want some hope. The parties that had been there to help, got rewarded. That's an object lesson for the Conservatives as we head into a likely late Spring election. You have to have something other than frustrated grievances on offer.

The Liberals know that a Conservative Party below 30 per cent is their key to a majority victory. Over the past few weeks we've seen the Liberals check off boxes for promises on everything from a new language policy to guns. It hasn't all been smooth sailing but they've been clearing the way.

When Chrystia Freeland announced that we would not have a budget in March, you could sense the trap being set and the ballot question come into focus: do you want to re-elect the Liberals, who took care of you and your family; or do you want the Conservatives, who will bring tough times and austerity?

Freeland’s yet-to-be-scheduled budget will have a big honking plan for post-pandemic stimulus spending and more deficits to go with it. The Conservatives will rail that the Liberals overspent to the tune of $100 billion prior to the pandemic and when it hit…the cupboard was bare. They'll complain that we should've had a budget long before. They'll ask how such amounts could ever be paid back. It will all be true and it will all be for naught.

When the U.S. can cough up a further  $1.9 trillion to sail its way out of the post-pandemic doldrums, surely nothing Trudeau and Freeland can spend will appear worrisome by comparison.

A small clue as to the Conservative challenge could be seen in last week's activities that commemorated one year of pandemic. There were solemn events in various capitals across the country, including Ottawa. Trudeau, always at his best when emoting, was striking just the right chord.

Then it was Erin O'Toole's turn. It was tone deaf. Instead of empathy, caring and emotion, he rhymed off the government's  shortcomings. Dissing its performance on vaccines, making wobbly comparisons to the U.S. vaccine delivery (yep, they manufacture them, we don't). It was a recipe for a return to opposition.

The vaccine argument is over, that ship has sailed, Trudeau pulled off his Carbomite manoeuvre. Whatever had to be changed or added to the original contracts has been. We may have given up the right to sue, we may have greatly increased what we had to pay, it doesn't matter. People are getting vaccinated from coast-to-coast-to coast and we'll have largely moved on by June.

Somewhere the keeper of the Big Red Playbook is thumbing through the chapters covering the 1972 and 1974 Canadian general elections. In '72 Trudeau Père lost his majority after just one term. The flamboyant object of Trudeaumania had been given a lesson in humility. He made friends with David Lewis's NDP to govern for a while, then opened a withering fire on them as he called a general election for the Summer of 1974. The rest is history and Trudeau would reign (almost) uninterrupted well into the 1980's.

Trudeau fils can hardly wait to try his hand and seems unconcerned about any opponent.

Jagmeet Singh has done a very good job preparing his troops for the election. His fundraising has been strong and his support remains at a historically solid 20 per cent. He has some very seasoned advisors who have deep government experience, notably in Manitoba. They're ready for battle and know the task ahead. Their deft handling of the Green Party's attempt to make up an "insurrection" in New Brunswick during the last campaign showed expertise.  That bench strength will serve him well once again.

Tragically, some elements of his caucus have chosen to ride their anti-Israel hobby horse at this precise moment and it will take all of Singh's considerable skills not to let it become an unnecessary distraction. Even as historical elements from his Party's fringes try to ignite the issue, Singh will be required to waste precious energy and time explaining that talk of "Israel apartheid" and shmoozing with Jeremy Corbin are out of line with established NDP policy and out of synch with Canadian voters.

Annamie Paul remains an exceptional political figure in her own right. She knows environmental issues better than any party leader and is solid in debate in both French and in English. Unfortunately for her, like Banquo's ghost, Elizabeth May still haunts the hallways and can be counted upon to scold the other parties and help Trudeau whenever she can, most recently berating their "tomfoolery". It's difficult to see how that can help the new Green leader take on those same Liberals.

The Bloc is chugging along, leader Yves-François Blanchet has been careful not to make himself the author of the government's defeat, most recently backing the Liberal's Bill on medically-assisted dying. His party is always at the unique whim of the electors in La Belle Province. The Bloc has bounced between its high as official opposition and its low of only four seats, since being founded. Blanchet will try his best not do anything to compromise the 30-plus ridings he won in the last campaign.

Blanchet will be vying for the same seats O'Toole hoped to compete for in Francois Legault's heartland outside Montréal. Given O'Toole's underperformance to date, Bloc seats are probably at greater risk in the event of a Liberal resurgence. Legault could still prove to be a wild card, though, because he is ideologically close to the Conservatives. Legault also knows that a strong Bloc could help its provincial separatist sister, the Parti Quebecois, a rival for Legault's CAQ in next year’s general provincial election. Fifty shades of blue in the Quebec countryside.

Peter MacKay once famously said that Andrew Scheer had missed scoring on an empty net in failing to defeat Trudeau, despite the blackface scandal and other weaknesses.

That may not have been entirely fair.

What anyone facing Trudeau has to learn is that you're not running against a politician, you're running against a celebrity. That's why going on the attack often backfires. Canadians may not like all of the Liberals' policies or their politicians but they feel that they've known Trudeau all his life and, like indulgent parents, at times seem willing to excuse even the worst behaviour.

This will be a campaign like no other. By any fair measure, the Liberals have done exceedingly well in managing the social parts of the pandemic but failed miserably at others, in particular protection at our borders.

Trudeau is facing a third potential finding by the ethics Commissioner that he broke the rules. Will Canadians be as forgiving as ever, or will it be "three strikes you're out" as far as some voters are concerned?

Watching the opposition parties whiff on their attempts to pin down the defence minister on issues of sexual misconduct in the military, and completely muff their most recent outing with the Keilburgers, it's hard to conclude that Trudeau's confidence is misplaced.

The post What to expect from the Liberals: an election, ASAP appeared first on Macleans.ca.


A Dutch vaccine passport in The Hague, Netherlands. EU officials confirmed that they're working on a European "digital green pass" that would allow fully vaccinated people to move more freely within the bloc. (Robin Utrecht/Abaca Press via CP)

Marcus Kolga is a Canadian-Estonian human rights activist and an expert on foreign disinformation and influence operations. He is a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute.

The need for vaccination passports for future international travel will soon become an inescapable reality. If Canadians wish to remain internationally mobile, we must proactively seek a solution that integrates international standards and ensures the privacy of Canadian data.

Vaccination certification is the next challenge on the road to global pandemic recovery. The Trudeau government must ensure Canadians are prepared for that eventuality. Prime Minister Trudeau's concern about the "fairness" of vaccine passports, in that they could create classes of citizens with different freedoms, is understandable. His government will need to weigh the advice of health experts against the broader economic needs and those of Canadian in general.

But as a practical matter, hesitating and delaying the need for some form of standardized vaccination certification will cost Canadians in the long run—both in economic terms and in mobility. The faster we can open our borders safely, the quicker we can begin our return to normalcy.

We should look to European e-governance leader, Estonia, whose all-female led government has already developed a secure solution in partnership with vaccine producers and the World Health Organization.

International travellers will require proof of vaccination as early as this spring. British Airways announced this week that it will launch a digital vaccine passport on May 17, when the U.K. hopes to reopen to international travel.

Proof of vaccination could conceivably be required for attendance at major sporting events and concerts in the U.S. The CDC recently announced new guidance that allows individuals who have been vaccinated to "interact with other fully vaccinated people indoors without wearing masks or physical distancing."

The new recommendations open the door to the eventual easing of restrictions on medium-to-large gatherings for vaccinated Americans—in a country that expects to have enough doses by the end of May to vaccinate every adult (though, for now, the CDC still recommends all Americans to avoid big, crowded events). If large Canadian venue operators and sports teams wish to open up, they may have to follow the U.S. example.

By quickly developing and adopting a vaccination certification strategy, we might accelerate U.S.-Canada cross-border traffic and trade, open up air travel and speed up our transition from the current lockdown.

Estonia has developed an out-of-the-box system in partnership with the World Health Organization, which the Baltic nation is piloting along with Iceland and Hungary at the moment. The system is compliant with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation—meaning that it exceeds all Canadian privacy requirements—and ensures that no personal data is transmitted through its blockchain-based system.

With this Estonian-developed system, people who are vaccinated receive a PDF QR code that can be presented on a mobile device or on a paper version printed at home. The authenticity of the vaccination is linked back to the vaccine producers, multiple levels of government and local health authorities. No personal health information is linked to the certificate, which uses something called a “salted hash” to protect the unique code, which in turn simply provides confirmation that the holder has been vaccinated. The codes can be read at the airport using existing hardware, or any other Internet-enabled code reader.

A standardized national vaccine passport that ensures privacy is necessary. The Estonian-WHO developed solution is immediately available and would cost a fraction of what existing vaccine tracking software costs. Its blockchain-based technology means that it can connect with otherwise disparate systems—meaning that differing municipal and provincial systems can be connected with the federal government, which can then connect with systems in other countries to facilitate international travel.

An additional benefit of the system: it allows for the tracking of vaccine doses by barcodes and certifying their provenance, from the producers to the health clinic where the vaccinations are administered—ensuring the efficient and equitable application of vaccines. Current systems in the U.S. and Canada are experiencing significant challenges leading to vaccination delays and greater infection. This week in York Region, north of Toronto, hundreds of excess doses were shipped to one area, while shortages affected most other regions. The Estonian system would allow authorities to spot such imbalances in real-time and allow them to quickly adjust.

How vaccine passports are applied by local governments and businesses is indeed a matter of broader debate. However, by adopting this technology, Canada would then be prepared to apply it to other domestic uses—such as concerts and sporting events—in a way that ensures privacy and security for all Canadians.

Canada can benefit by looking to Estonia's proven track record and expertise in developing secure e-government technology and should consider its vaccination certification system to ensure the future mobility of Canadians.

The post Vaccine passports are inevitable and Canada should prepare appeared first on Macleans.ca.


So just who does Erin O'Toole think he is.

A few weeks ago, he's looking to be the soft-focus dad character.  A former Air Force guy and hard worker just looking to give families a chance.  He and the party seemed to want to move away from the more aggressive true blue version of O'Toole that charged his way into the leader's office.

Then this week he's braying into the camera, "Do your job, Mr. Trudeau."  The Conservative leader wants the prime minister to give the country a budget, or else he'll, I dunno, tweet more or something.  This was the swing back toward the more shitposty version of O'Toole that managed to capture enough votes to be the big man.

That the leader of the Conservatives can't figure out whether he's king poster or nice guy serious man is probably not a great sign that he has things under control.

A few weeks ago, the big Tory focus was making the big issue the complete and total failure of the COVID vaccine rollout.  The trouble with that is things no longer seem so disastrous.  Once early supply chain issues got ironed out, and production really started to ramp up things just aren't at the crisis point anymore.

This was the pretty obvious outcome of going to DEFCON 1 over vaccines.  If things get better — and they have gotten way, way better — you end up looking kind of dumb and have to pivot.

So, now we have O'Toole trying to stoke a similar amount of popular outrage against the idea that we haven't had a budget in a very long time.  It's an issue, surely, 2019 was a long, long time ago.  But I'm not sure it has quite the ability to get one's blood up in the same way "You're all going to die because the prime minister is incompetent" does.  Yet it still feels, and quite literally sounds, like it's coming at the same urgency.  It's certainly coming at the same volume: shouty.

And when a budget shows up next month or in May, is this really going to seem like the crisis he's trying to make it out to be now?  (It will not.)

Then there were a few errant social media issues at party headquarters.  First, there was the since-deleted post with one of those shareable meme-type images about how Justin Trudeau is hiding under your bed to steal the money straight from your wallet while you sleep.  The accompanying text was, "Justin Trudeau and the Liberals are more worried about saving Canadian jobs than their own."  Which, uh, oops.  Don't think that's what you meant guys.

Then today, while preparing for writing the thing you're reading now, I was scrolling O'Toole's learn about me page the little animated helicopter that follows you as you scroll seemed rather familiar.  It's got a little Maple Leaf on it, but is actually based on a Soviet-era helicopter.

Neither of these is anything approaching fatal, but it does kind of give the impression of flailing.

It's probably no coincidence that right now there is a parallel crisis of anonymous Tory sources talking about their unhappiness with the direction of O'Toole's leadership tenure.

Every day, or every couple of days, a new story based on sources in the Conservative Party asking to keep their names out of it so they can speak candidly about their boss show up.

Wednesday there was one in the National Post about how the O'Toole leadership team purposefully torpedoed the candidacy of his one-time rival Peter MacKay for the Conservative nomination of his old seat in Parliament.  Last week there was this one in Maclean's where various and assorted Tories were talking about how they don't really know what the Conservative platform or strategy will look like when the soon-but-not-yet federal election is on and are starting to get antsy.

"There's frustration with his leadership.  Nobody's saying, 'We so-cons [social conservatives] need to rise up,' or 'Next time we're going to be united behind this other person.'  There's no danger of a coup, but people are saying, 'Let's go.  Tell us what you stand for and we'll get behind it and support it.," one source told the magazine.

A leader who knew what it is he was about wouldn't be having this problem.  His vision of where to take the party would have a firm bearing, and he'd bring his caucus along with him.

Where this all seems to stem from are O'Toole's two leadership campaigns.  The first, when he lost by a fair margin to Andrew Scheer, O'Toole cast himself as a middle of the road type Conservative.  Not quite a progressive Conservative, but something a little more conciliatory and not so willing to indulge the party's right flank.

In his winning bid, he played himself as the opposite of that.  MacKay was the soft nice guy this time around, so O'Toole went with a pitch of himself as the true blue hardliner, ready to come in and kick around those weak libs.

After becoming leader, it seemed like he was maybe going to dial back that in part or maybe in whole and lead the party in a way closer to his first pitch.  Then the oscillations began.

If he doesn't go about deciding what sort of leader he is, O'Toole has little chance of winning anything when the election does inevitably roll around.

A better leader wouldn't be left in this sort of jam, they'd already have a plan for who they were and what they would do.  But Erin O'Toole isn't that leader, he's this one — or some other one, it's not yet clear.  For his sake, he should figure it out.

He's running out of time to pick what sort of leader he is, pretty soon "a good one" is going to be ruled out for him.

Photo Credit:  CBC 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.


Maj.-Gen. Fortin gives vaccine update

Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin, the military commander in charge of Canada’s COVID-19 vaccine distribution, gives a technical briefing on Canada’s vaccine logistics.