Trust, But Verify

In these troubled times, when existential threats force Canada to undertake bold, new initiatives, it is sometimes difficult to fully exercise our critical thinking skills. We have a prime minister taking our country into new realms as he seeks to bolster both our resilience and defence against deep hostility from the United States, a country still inexplicably in the thrall of a madman, and I applaud him for many of those undertakings. He is surely the correct person to be leading us at this time.

However, as expressed in my previous post, I think he is making a big mistake in his plans to privatize the operations of four of our major airports: Montreal, Torotno, Calgary and Vancouver. And I am hardly alone in those misgivings.

The Star's Althia Raj offers her thoughts:

Airports are cash cows. Mostly monopolies, they are fantastic investments, where new investors are often able to set prices on everything from passenger charges to parking fees and force them upon a captive audience. 

On the CBC, economist Jim Stanford warned, “This is going to be Highway 407 of the skies.”

Highway 407 was built north of Toronto using public money, then turned over on a 99-year lease to a private consortium, which steadily increased tolls to the point where it is now one of the most expensive tolled highways in North America. 

Even Liberal caucus members are divided on the issue, likely fearing that such a sale will mean only one thing for passengers: higher costs to park, higher costs from airport concessions, higher costs to fly.

Australia serves as a cautionary tale:

Australia privatized a number of its major airports in the late 1990s and early 2000s. While the government was able to get a good price for those sales, consumer costs went up, according to Rod Sims, former chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

"They removed the regulation on the airports prior to privatizing them. That meant those buying the airports knew they had a free rein more or less to do what they wanted," he told CBC News.

The Canadian Labour Congress has a similar warning: 

“Private investors don’t put billions into airports unless they expect to make billions back. The government is pointing to Australia as its model, and we’ve already seen the results there: higher costs for passengers and airlines, pressure on workers, and more airport revenue flowing to private investors.

Those who drop off passengers may be in for a rude surprise, if the privatized Heathrow Airport is any indication:

A £7 charge applies at Heathrow every time a vehicle enters the terminal drop-off areas*. Drop-off areas are located right outside each terminal, making for the easiest and quickest way to drop-off passengers.

And, as always, there is the voice of the people: 

A reminder that from the end of the Second World War through 1975, between 20—25 per cent of Canadian public debt was financed and held by the Bank of Canada. During that period, federal government capital expenditure funded highways, bridges, schools, hospitals and yes, even airports. The government did not go begging for cash from hedge funds.

But today, Prime Minister Mark Carney plans to sell off Canada’s major airports and recycle the proceeds for other infrastructure. In other words, investors will get up-and-running projects with established cash flow (where prices can easily be jacked up), whereas Canadians will carry the heavier risk and less profitable investments until mature enough for private owners to buy.

Modern capitalism in action: Corporations get the rewards; Canadians pay the charges and take the risks.

Larry Kazdan, Vancouver, B.C.

 

Privatizing airports is a big mistake — just look at Hydro One

Prime Minister Mark Carney says he is selling our public airports but keeping the land beneath them. That’s like selling an art museum with millions of dollars in art for a bargain price but keeping the land the museum sits on. Carney says he is “unlocking” the value of our public airports. Then says he is going to reinvest that money in other important infrastructure.

We heard the exact same argument and plan when then Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne privatized Hydro One and sent hydro rates through the roof. It used to be, privatization was only done by Conservatives. Now our public assets will be used to maximize profits for corporations. There is no free money, investors expect a good return.

Given the failures and dismal record of public asset privatization here in Canada and around the world, it is astonishing that Carney continues to promote privatization of public assets and infrastructure. Carney is engaging in public relations propaganda to pretty up profit, selling the myth it’s a beneficial way to finance infrastructure. The privatization of long-term-care homes where many died from neglect during the pandemic and Highway 407 and Hydro One has left the people of Ontario with no appetite for any more privatization of public assets. The privatization of Connaught labs by then prime minister Brian Mulroney also hurt us severely during the pandemic.

The privatization of rail, electricity and water and hospitals along with Brexit has made the UK’s economy a complete disaster.

During both World Wars and the Great Depression governments did not privatize public assets. They wisely kept them and we worked our way out of those terrible times with a robust public sector and non-profit public enterprise.

Carney and his Liberal caucus need to be reminded that the provincial Liberals were sent to the political wilderness for three elections in a row for their sale of Hydro One and the resulting rate crisis. Privatizing airports is a really big mistake. The same goes for seaports.

Paul Kahnert, Marham, ON

 What could private investment mean to Pearson airport and Toronto travellers? Here’s what the experts say, Sept. 16

This article mentions a $19 drop-off-fee at London’s Gatwick Airport. Gatwick is privately owned. What could that look like here? If you took the UP Express train to Toronto’s Pearson International Airport, would you be charged a drop off fee? What if you took the TTC Express bus to Pearson, would you be charged a drop off fee? What if you wanted a drink from the water fountain at Pearson, would you be charged a fee? What if you wanted to use the bathroom at Pearson, would you be charged a fee — and extra for toilet paper? 

I have been at privately-run airports where it cost $5 for a bottle of water and at another where you had to pay to use the restroom and pay extra for toilet paper.

I reluctantly voted Liberal in the last election because I believed Mark Carney was the best candidate to defend Canada, but if they follow through with this ill-conceived idea, I will vote against them in the next election.

Gerrard Weedon, Toronto 

Debate is healthy, and one of the backbones of a well-functioning democracy. Let us all hope Mark Carney respects that fact. 

 

So Many Questions

 

I have avoided posting anything thus far about Mr. Carney's economic summit and his trip to Europe in which Canada has been offered "associate membership" in the European Union. The main reason is I am still reading about and digesting these developments. However, one large, billowing red flag is the prime minister's intention to sell long-term concessions (think Ontario's privatized Hwy 407) in four major major airports (Montreal, Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver). Its putative purpose is to raise capital for improvements at other, smaller airports,  

This decision has nothing to do with asset development and everything to do with enriching the rentier class. In our rush to escape the slimy tentacles of Trump and his disciples, we may be giving far too easy a ride to schemes such as this, but the threat is not going unnoticed.

The following letters to the editor raise some very valid concerns:

Look what happened when they privatized Highway 407

Carney government will allow private investments in Canadian airports, Sept. 15

As much as I like Prime Minister Mark Carney’s approach in welcoming foreign investment, losing control of our airports really scares me. Just look at what happened to the privatization of Highway 407. That was a huge mistake and one I personally can’t forgive.

Norbert Hibbeln, Oshawa, ON

How to keep Canadian ownership and control 

Instead of selling off another asset to investors, I would suggest the following: Establish a direct link between Toronto Pearson International Airport and John C. Munro International Airport in Hamilton. Busses to start and a rail link to follow. Think the UP Express. Designate Pearson as the main international hub and Hamilton the main domestic hub. Pearson could be 70 per cent international and 30 per cent domestic flights with Hamilton 70 per cent domestic and 30 per cent international. Offer discounts on landing fees to airlines willing to use John C. Munro over Pearson.

This solution would reduce congestion at Pearson and make better use of an already existing but under utilized asset in Hamilton. It would also ensure that Pearson remains under Canadian ownership and control.

Peter Smith, Ajax, ON 

Question for the PM: Who is supposed to get rich here? 

When it comes to the privitization of public assets, the only real question I have for Prime Minister Mark Carney is “who is supposed to get rich here?” Or should I say richer?

John Gavin, Toronto

So, Canada is for sale?

When U.S. President Donald Trump wanted to “buy” Canada by declaring Canada as the 51st state of the U.S., there was outrage across Canada.

Now “Canada for Sale” is being considered by Canada itself, and its starting with the sale of Canadian airports. After airports, what comes next? Trump will be first buyer in line with top bid. Let us see what happens next after we sell off Canadian airports.

Qasim Abbas, Mississauga, ON

Then there is this Globe and Mail missive from a former airport authority chairman:

Ain’t broke

Re “Ottawa to announce steps toward opening up airports to more private investment, sources say” (Sept. 15): I believe any rationale for airport privatization falls short when weighed against the financial successes and positive economic impact of Canada’s not-for-profit, community-based airport authorities.

Under the 1990s National Airports Policy, about 20-plus major and regional airports were transferred to local arm’s-length authorities. Since then, these organizations have financed tens of billions of dollars in improvements through landing fees, concessions and airport improvement fees.

Local governance allows airports to respond to regional needs with boards that include business leaders, municipal representatives and labour voices. Why sell strategic assets, possibly to foreign investors, when they already generate stable public revenue and community benefits?

Privatizing airports would shift priorities from regional development to shareholder returns. A fragmented hybrid system, with some airports community-run and others privately owned, would weaken co-ordination, partnerships and the seamless airport connectivity Canadians rely on.

Mark Carney should abort this harrowing flight before it leaves the runway.

Gerry Gallant Former chairman, Charlottetown Airport Authority; Souris West, PEI

Transportation Minister Steve McKinnon is going out of his way to reassure Canadians about this development, saying that Ottawa will protect consumers from "unjustified price increases" The devil is in the details, of course, and I seem to remember similar assurances about reasonable tolls on the 407 when that was sold off by the Mike harris government in a 99-year lease. Today, it has, I believe, the highest tolls in North America.

Trust, but verify, as the saying goes. That can only happen if and when Canadians doff their rose-tinted glasses and begin to examine Mr. Carney's moves in the harsh light of day.

Sometimes, A Cudgel Is Needed

Some will probably find the lack of subtlety in the following anti-racism short from France disappointing, but it is this kind of bluntness that might penetrate some racists' heads. 

Guest Post: AI And The Precautionary Principle

The headlines have been alarming indeed, essentially warning that unrestricted ongoing development of AI has a 10% chance of destroying all of us by the end of this decade. The Mound of sound offers his thoughts on this this:

Oh, damn! The United States has not recognized the "precautionary principle." If the AI warnings are right, we may all pay dearly for that lapse. In fact we, all of us, might need the protection of the precautionary principle more than we do at this moment.

What is the precautionary principle? It's not new and has been stated and restated in slightly different ways but the Wiki summary of it will suffice for this discussion.

"The precautionary principle or precautionary approach states if an action or policy has a suspected risk of causing harm to the public or to the environment, in the absence of scientific consensus that the action or policy is harmful, the burden of proof that it is not harmful falls on those taking the action.

"This principle allows policy makers to make discretionary decisions in situations where there is the possibility of harm from taking a particular course or making a certain decision when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking. The principle implies that there is a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigation has found a plausible risk. These protections can be relaxed only if further scientific findings emerge that provide sound evidence that no harm will result."

Better late than never the precautionary principle has been recognized as the law of the land in Canada in both the Federal Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada.

In 2015, the Federal Court of Canada upheld the precautionary principle as part of the substantive law of our country. The Supreme Court of Canada has also applied the precautionary principle.

Can there be a peril more urgent than runaway artificial intelligence? The best and the brightest in that field from both academia and industry are warning that it could escape human control and actually turn on mankind. We've been warned by people like Geoffrey Hinton who was awarded the Nobel Prize for his work on artificial intelligence. He's the AI Nobel laureate. He admits the state of artificial intelligence today terrifies him.

And if you don't think societies will ignore existential risks read Jared Diamond's excellent book "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed." Put it this way, this is not our first existential rodeo, although there's a possibility it could become our last.

Guest Post From The Mound Of Sound -The Implications Of Global Debt

 

It's my pleasure to present another guest post from The Mound of Sound. I miss his blog because he often wrote of things I hadn't thought of. Global debt is one of those things:

You think you've got problems. The US debt clock just passed $40 trillion. That's a per capita debt of $114,285. Every man, woman and child and the clock is ticking.

But let's not stop there. The global debt stands at $350 trillion. Per capita that's a more manageable $43,750 although a fair percentage of those people are impoverished. Taken collectively the total debt represents 305% of global gross domestic product.

We're embarking on a very difficult time from the ravages of climate breakdown to water shortages, food insecurity, on and on and on.

What if we agreed that this is no time to be carrying 305% of GDP in debt. This is where we need to become a little creative.

I invoke the ghostly spirit of Solon. Sol who? Solon was an Athenian lawmaker. In 594 BCE, Athens had a nightmarish debt crisis. The lower orders were defaulting on their debts. Debtors and their families were being slung into prisons, some sold into slavery. Their creditors, the merchants, were in their own predicament. Too many of their traditional customers were in jail. You can't sell stuff to a guy in jail.

Solon's solution was a purge to cancel debt. "Seisachtheia (meaning "shaking off of burdens"), a revolutionary debt relief reform that canceled all debts, banned loans secured by personal freedom, and freed citizens enslaved due to debt."

I realize I'm digging pretty deep into the past on this yet this crippling measure of debt with the challenges that we cannot avoid could make paupers of all of us if we don't see the unmanageable debt as the threat.

Humanity is coming in for a crash landing. Now we must decide if it will be survivable

What Is A Proud Canadian?

 

Of late, I have been thinking about Canadian pride and patriotism, and how it is so different from the shallow, reflexive and exaggerated displays the Americans are so fond of. Instead of being loud and brash, we express our loyalty to our country in quiet yet assertive ways. Many of us, for example, shun travel to the benighted land south of us; we go out of our way to minimize the purchase of American produce and products whenever possible; buying Canadian has become the default position of many consumers.

There are those who say our identity is largely defined as not being American. And to that there are elements of truth, especially in these times when American values and culture have degenerated into a kind of Bizzaro World state, where cruelty and the denigration of others, where the attack on former friends and allies, reign supreme. All of that has led us to think more about what is important to us, and we've rediscovered something important: we are steadfast in the conviction of our values, values that embrace the collective over the individual, where kindness and compassion remain strengths, not weaknesses to be exploited, where common decency remain defining characteristics. Indeed, they have become more important than ever.

Mark Carney's Labour Day message exemplifies some of those values:

As mentioned, our way has traditionally been a quiet way, at least up till now. The relentless attacks on our character, on our very nationhood, are wearing us down to the point we are speaking up loudly when insulted, no longer willing to play a passive role in defence of our country. 

Many say, and to an extent I agree, that we should not take the bait of American provocation. Consider Doug Ford's recent comments that Trump could "kiss my ass." Personally, there was some satisfaction in hearing that, even though such a truculent and crass display of umbrage likely sinks to a Trumpioan level of insult we would be better to avoid.

But I admit that my pride as a Canadian is often deeply offended by American insult and condescension. They go out of their way to belittle us in ways that demand a reaction. Consider this recent interview of Scott Bessent by Lara Trump:

I rather liked this AI-generated response:

I will not bother talking about the juvenile, crass posts by Pete Hegseth who, with each foray into social media, proves he is not a real man at all. Nor will I deign to discuss Howard Lutnick, an especially vile mouthpiece of the Trump administration. It is sufficient, perhaps, to dismiss all of them as agents provocateurs of their deranged master.

So on this Labour Day I reflect on the things that make me Canadian, and I am proud. The day itself demonstrates many of the reasons for that pride. And for me, and I hope many other Canadians, that is a sufficient balm for the times we find ourselves living in.

No Indication Of Change

In my previous post, I discussed a myriad of incompencies and corruptions within the Doug Ford government in Ontario,  expressing the hope that the three byelections would convey a message of discontent. Unfortunately, with a turnout of about 25%, (having them at the end of summer was no accident, I am sure) the status quo was maintained.

With a provincial general election in the relatively distant future, we can be sure Ford and his ilk will view these results with pleasure, emboldening them to ever greater heights of ineptitude and backroom deals. Therefore, it becomes incumbent upon those who are able to remind people that this is a government with a rather abject contempt for democracy as we know it, not to mention egregious hypocrisy. Some letters to the editor serve that function.

Doug Ford calls Donald Trump a ‘loser’ now, but he was a fan not so long ago, Aug. 29

I’d like to thank Robert Benzie for reminding us that Ontario Premier Doug Ford was caught on a hot microphone indicating that he had favoured U.S. President Donald Trump to win the 2024 presidential election. I guess his support for the Republican ticket in 2020 is more defensible, as Trump wasn’t a fully known quantity yet. But Ford’s continued support in advance of the 2024 election is much harder to understand. By that time, Trump was already a convicted felon and had lost a civil lawsuit to a woman who’d accused him of sexual abuse.

When Ford’s presidential preference became known, more journalists in Canada should have been asking tough questions about his support for a man who had already been exposed as a lawbreaker and miscreant. His answers might have revealed something important about Ford’s character and helped inform Ontario voters in the 2025 provincial election.

John Connolley, Aurora, Ont.

Ford and Trump are cut from the same cloth. Both are bullies; both make uninformed, reactionary decisions; both like to put down journalists; and both enjoy bloviating. Ford’s words in defence of Canada may sound good, but let’s not forget his actions. For one thing, the premier keeps giving tax dollars to companies based in the United States. The best current example is the $750 that Ontario teachers will receive to purchase school supplies, which they will have to spend at Staples, an American corporation. When I was teaching, I mostly bought my supplies at Dollarama, a great Canadian company. It was also much more cost-effective. Go figure.

Astrid Budd, Toronto

Ford is and always has been a Trump clone, whose policies have proved time and time again to be just as destructive and foolhardy as the U.S. president’s.

Sophie Tanel, Vaughan, Ont.

That Ford was an ardent Trump supporter is embarrassment overshadowed only by the fact that so many Ontarians voted for him, twice, despite his clearly being a bad judge of character. Hopefully this huge red flag will be waved — in addition to the Maple Leaf — at the next provincial election.

Julia Bowkun, Toronto

Hopefully, as the years wind down on Ford's mandate, more people will begin thinking for themselves and realize a drastic change is necessary.