Friday, March 29, 2019

Corporate Extortion



Two noteworthy revelations in the SNC-Lavalin scandal have come to light. The first deals with impropriety, and the second with what can only be called corporate extortion.

First, The Star reports the following:
As former justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould debated whether to intervene in the corruption prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, she received legal advice from her department that underscored what an unprecedented move that would be.

The legal advice prepared by the department set out her possible options on the SNC-Lavalin prosecution, including the ability to seek outside legal advice, but it stressed that no chief prosecutor has ever intervened in a specific case, and that any decision to intervene must be “hers alone.”

“Any decisions by the Attorney General of Canada are hers to make, independent of political considerations or processes, and in the public eye,” the document states.
Compounding the impropriety of the Trudeau government putting pressure on Wilson-Raybould to direct the Public Prosecutor to enter into a Deferred
Prosecution agreement with SNC-Lavlin is the revelation in documents obtained by The Canadian Press of the extortionate measures by the company to get what it wanted:
The documents... describe something called “Plan B” — what Montreal-based SNC might have to do if it can’t convince the government to grant a so-called remediation agreement to avoid criminal proceedings in a fraud and corruption case related to projects in Libya.

Under that plan, SNC would move its Montreal headquarters and corporate offices in Ontario and Quebec to the U.S. within a year, cutting its workforce to just 3,500 from 8,717, before eventually winding up its Canadian operations.

“The government of Canada needs to weigh the public interest impact of the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin,“ the presentation reads.

The company’s board and senior management were prepared to quickly bundle parts of the business that had no role in the Libya case into a new entity, putting the “trio of possibly convicted entities” into another organization that would operate “on a reduced business level in Canada or heading into eventual wind-up,” they read.

The details appear to contradict public statements by chief executive officer Neil Bruce, who has denied both that the company threatened to move its headquarters, and that the company cited its some 9,000 Canadian jobs as a reason the construction giant should be granted a remediation agreement.

The company walked back the comments days later in a statement, saying a remediation deal was the best path to protect its Canadian workforce.
A recent news report, which I am not currently able to find online, cited the commitment that SNC-Lavalin made to stay in Quebec after receiving a huge loan/grant from the Quebec government, so clearly, this threat was a thuggish bluff. As well, as I outlined in a recent post, there is plenty of current work federally for the company, even if it is barred for 10 years from bidding on federal contracts, and nothing in a conviction would prevent it from getting provincial contracts, of which it also currently has many.

Trudeau enthusiasts will continue to see his pressure on Raybould-Wilson as a noble expression of economic nationalism. More critical thinkers may draw the conclusion that the Liberal government was simply being cowed by the thuggish tactics of a corporate extortion artist.

Thursday, March 28, 2019

Wednesday, March 27, 2019

Judged And Found Wanting



If the true measure of a society is to be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members, Ontario, under the Doug Ford regime, and all those who voted for it, must be found wanting.

Perhaps it is a function of age, but the older I get as I continue to enjoy a comfortable retirement, the more my thoughts turn to the less fortunate in our society, a segment that was enjoying demonstrable improvement in the quality of their lives thanks to the basic income project imitated under the former Wynne government. Unfortunately, despite his campaign promise to continue with the experiment for its intended three-year term, Doug Ford broke his word and cancelled it early, the final cheque being sent out this month.

And the consequences will be severe:
Under the pilot project, individuals received up to about $17,000 annually while couples could get up to about $24,000. A top-up of $6,000 was available for those with disabilities.

In addition to fewer rules and surveillance, basic income was more generous than social assistance, which provides an annual income for basic needs and shelter of almost $9,000 for individuals, $13,600 for couples and just over $14,000 for a person with a disability.
Consider a few of the people whose lives were starting to show measurable improvement under the program, as reported last year:
Wendy Moore, who has been homeless for almost two years, is looking for an apartment.

After couch-surfing for almost two years, Moore, 60, is using her basic income payment to look for stable housing.

“My biggest focus is getting my own place and giving poor John his apartment back,” said Moore, who has been sleeping on her friend’s living room sofa for about a year.

Before joining the program in October, the single mother of six and grandmother of 12 was “barely surviving” on $330 a month in basic needs allowance from Ontario Works, the province’s welfare program for people without disabilities. [Because she was homeless, she did not qualify for a shelter allowance]

But under the basic income experiment, Moore receives $1,416 a month, an amount that remains constant no matter where she lives.

“It is giving me back my independence,” she said. “I don’t feel so backed into a corner. If I want to eat, I can afford to buy something instead of going to a food bank or a soup kitchen.”
Or consider Lindsay resident Kathy Mahood, 53:
When she joined the pilot project in October [2017], she was living on about $735 a month in federal Canada Pension Plan disability benefits and proceeds from the sale of her house.

“I figured I had a year and a half left before I would lose my apartment and have to rent a room. It was pretty frightening,” she said.

But with $1,200 in basic income every month on top of her disability benefits, Mahood has money for rent and healthy food — and has begun making regular payments to clear her credit card debt.

“If I am careful, I should be debt-free when the program ends in three years,” she said.

Mahood was able to buy modest Christmas gifts for her four grandchildren in December. She could afford to buy ingredients for Christmas baking. She can put gas in her car and has money for repairs.

“I feel healthier and I am not stressed all the time about money,” she said.
But those dreams are all over for many, many people. Here is how a few beneficiaries of the project plan to spend their last cheque this month:
Carmen Lord, 46, of Hamilton, who works part time in a dry-cleaning shop.

Monthly basic income: $1,415

Last payment will be spent on making extra car and auto insurance payments so she doesn’t lose her car.

“When I got the basic income in April (2018) I used the extra money to buy a car so it would be easier to get to work,” said Lord, who had a full-time job at a tech-support company at the time. “When I was laid off last fall, the basic income helped me stay ahead of my bills. But now I’m panicking. If I can’t find a full-time job, I will lose my car.”

Tracey Crosson, 47, of Thunder Bay, who moved to Toronto in January for better medical care.

Monthly basic income: $1,916

Last payment will be spent on credit card debt and advance payments for hydro, phone and internet.

“I need to get ahead of my bills because I am going to be living on $168 after rent (in May),” said Crosson, who has relied on ODSP on and off for the past 20 years due to an accident and will return to the program in April. Her monthly income will drop to just $1,169.

“It’s going to be tight. I need to pay ahead on my bills and get some extra food so I’m not starving. If I don’t do this, I’m either going to be dead or starving in six months.”

Dana Bowman, a 57-year-old grandmother from Lindsay.

Monthly basic income: $1,916

Last payment will be spent on grocery cards, advance payments for phone and internet, and household basics like toilet paper.

“The basic income gave me more courage to talk about poverty. It gave us a chance to give our input on what works for us instead of (the government) sticking us in boxes that haven’t worked in the past,” she said. “It’s going to be hard to go back to living on just $667 a month for basic needs … and not being able to afford healthy snacks when my grandchildren come to visit.”
Broken political promises are nothing new, of course, but to break a commitment on the backs of the most vulnerable surely tells us everything we need to know about the Doug Ford government and those who voted for, and continue to support, it.

All in all, not a pretty snapshot of our species.

Saturday, March 23, 2019

Putting Things Into Perspective



Many Canadians, including The Star's Heather Mallick, are under the impression that the Liberals are a truly progressive party, intent on offering all of us a better future. Indeed, in today's column, she lambastes people like Jane Philpott, wondering if she is trying to get Andrew Scheer's Conservative Party elected as our next government. Mallick is disdainful of the former cabinet minister's claim that she is acting in Canada's interests:
People in her riding are the same as other Canadian voters. They want a stable future for their children, an effort at preventing and preparing for the climate change that is about to devastate us, good jobs, equity for women, fairness for Indigenous people, and a national pharmacare plan.
A letter in today's print edition of The Star puts into a different perspective the notion that the Trudeau Liberals are making substantive efforts on the climate-change file:
Canada needs green deal to combat climate change
Toronto Star23 Mar 2019


According to UN scientists, we have just over 11 years to stave off the most devastating impacts of climate change.

A Green New Deal would create millions of jobs for Canadians. It would include: massive expansion of public transit, retrofitting of housing and rental units, and building communityowned renewable energy projects.

It is a bold and comprehensive plan to transition to 100 per cent renewable power within the decade, while also tackling social and economic inequality in the process.

The New Green Deal is far cheaper than dealing with unmitigated climate change. Global warming at or above 2 C will result in mass migrations, volatile weather patterns, increased wildfires, food and water shortages, damage to public infrastructure and severe loss of economic output for Canada.

Our community is ready for a climate plan that builds an equitable future.

Jordan Worona, Toronto
The world cries out for real leadership to mitigate the climate disaster bearing down upon us. Sadly, our current government, with its penchant for pious rhetoric and pipeline purchases, is not providing it.

Friday, March 22, 2019

A Very Pungent Odour


H/t Theo Moudakis

The source of that pervasive and rank smell bedeviling Ontario has been found. It is coming from an array of spineless politicians in the Ford government who, upon their election, checked any semblance of integrity they might have had at the doors of the legislature. Today's Star editorial captures their essence:
It’s been said that the shortest measurable span of time is from the instant the traffic light turns green until the driver behind honks the horn.

A close runner-up must surely be the time between a man or woman being elected to the Ontario legislature as a government backbencher and their having lost all self-respect and capacity for independent thought.

Standing ovations for Ford and his cabinet ministers have become mandatory for Progressive Conservatives in the legislature, turning the government side into a crowd of fawning applauders worthy of citizenship in North Korea.
His refusal to surrender independent thinking and “stand and applaud” Ford’s every utterance in Question Period appears to be one of the factors led to Randy Hillier expulsion from the Conservative caucus.
Hillier’s assertion that the clapping is a command performance is not difficult to believe, given that no set of adults would behave so obsequiously of their own free will.

To their feet they spring many times daily, furiously applauding dear leader, even as they furtively scan the chamber to ensure the premier’s ever-watchful staff has noted their fealty.

Simply put, this mindlessness is conduct unworthy of grown men and women, especially those who have been given the confidence of their constituents.

The orchestrated ovations are pathetic on the part of those who demand them, shameful on the part of those who meekly obey.
Prostitution has been called the world's oldest profession. For reasons that I hope are obvious, I beg to differ.

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Is Resistance Always Futile?



If I ever had the chance to sit down and chat with Randy Hillier, I doubt I would have much to say to the libertarian Progressive Conservative MPP recently permanently ousted from his party's caucus for reasons that appear contrived. He is alleged to have said "yada yada yada" (the horror!) to a parent protesting the changes to the province's autism funding model. Hillier claims he was saying it to NDP member Monique Taylor.

Now it is beginning to look like that was mere pretext for removing a man guilty of a far greater Progressive Conservative Party sin: refusing to be a team player. Unlike the trained and docile seals Premier Doug Ford has surrounded himself with, Hillier dares to think for himself, refusing to go along to get along, kind of the anti-Caroline Mulroney.

It is experience in workplace bullying I would find to be the basis for discussion with the MPP for Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston. Having experienced and resisted it myself in my last few years of teaching, I know there is a cost to standing up for what one believes in.

What does Hillier believe in? A clue is to be found in the reason he alleges he was bounced from caucus:
“MPP Hillier alleges that his expulsion was an act of reprisal against him for ‘raising concerns of possible illegal and unregistered lobbying by close friends and advisers employed by Premier Ford’ ...
It is for this reason the NDP is calling for a (Taverner-less) OPP investigation.

Perhaps more damning of Hillier is his refusal to provide what all cult-of-personality dictators demand: absolute obeisance and subjugation of the will to 'Dear Leader'.
Hillier...says...he was given a list of what he called “questionable and childish grievances” by backroom operatives.

Among them, he alleges, were complaints that he didn’t clap enough in the House and wasn’t actively sharing posts about the government’s activities on social media.
Party apparatchiks are spreading the word about how toxic Hillier is. (Message to MPPs: avoid this man or suffer career consequences.)
Simon Jefferies, a spokesperson for the premier, said “everything Randy Hillier outlined in his letter is an outright lie. These fabrications are absurd and categorically false.

“This further shows Randy Hillier never wanted to be a true member of our PC team despite repeated attempts by Premier Ford to engage him as an important member of our caucus.

Jefferies also disputed Hillier’s claim that he was in trouble for not seeking permission to attend his brother’s funeral.
Judging by the abject, grovelling behaviour of most of his fellow caucus members (Amanda Simard being one exception, having left over Ford's downgrading of francophone services, a departure that earned her the insult of "little girl" by Brian Paper Bags of Money Mulroney while he simultaneously praised the efforts of his daughter, Caroline Ford-Puppet Mulroney) it is fair to assume Randy Hillier will not be leading a revolt against Mr. Ford's oppressive tactics and systematic dismantling of programs that seek to make life more equitable for the people of Ontario.

Only the people can do that, Unfortunately, with the next election years away, it is a safe bet that much more social and economic carnage is on the immediate horizon.




Monday, March 18, 2019

What Fair Taxation Could Achieve



From the print edition of the Toronto Star comes this response to a recent column by Linda McQuaig, a response that strikes me as eminently reasonable:
Re Debunking billionaire claims of heroic capitalism, McQuaig, March 14

Linda McQuaig is right on the money. Since1980, the top federal tax rate has been cut by almost 50 per cent. If the progressive tax system had not been changed, there would be no deficits and we’d have a surplus nationally.

Inequality is at an all-time high. There is a massive concentration of wealth in the hands of the few.

We don’t have a wealth-creation crisis; there is more wealth than ever before. We have a severe distribution-of-wealth crisis. This concentration of wealth in the hands of the few is simply not sustainable.

Conservatives are always claiming the deficit is a crisis, yet they continue to claim that tax cuts are good for everyone.

Trickle-down economics has been completely discredited. It is a ridiculous belief that when the wealthiest have crammed as much money as they can into their pockets from tax cuts, the rest of us will get the odd $20 bill that falls out.

In the upcoming election, where’s the promise to restore a progressive tax system, where everyone pays their fair share of taxes? Reversing tax cuts is not raising taxes, it’s restoring funding to build a civil, more just and equitable society.

If everyone was paying their fair share, no one would mind paying taxes.

Paul Kahnert, Markham
We have been persistently fed the line that a rising tide lifts all boats. Reality, however, suggests something quite, quite different.


Thursday, March 14, 2019

A Different Kind Of Terrorism



While I have written extensively on Omar Khadr in the past, the former child combatant has not been much in the news of late, and so I assumed he had more or less settled down into a normal life. However, such an attempt, it would seem, is fated to be lined with obstacles. given his notoriety and the reflexive mouth-foaming of the rabid right-wing that apparently would like nothing more than see their delusion that he is a terrorist fulfilled. In their collective hysteria, they see Khadr as a clear and present danger to all that is sacred.

How else to explain this?
The tenants of a north-side strip mall in Edmonton say they’ve been subjected to growing harassment, both online and through phone calls, after news surfaced of Omar Khadr’s recent purchase of the property.

The commercial strip is home to a variety of businesses, including an auto shop, a daycare, and a travel agency — all of which have been serving the community for several years. Most of the Google reviews on those businesses have been positive, until reports emerged on Monday of Khadr’s ownership.
That this uproar is taking place in Albert is perhaps not surprising, but one hesitates to lump all inhabitants into the stereotype of that province: gun-toting, truck-driving good ol' boys. Yet there is clearly that element present, given the efforts to drive out of business all the enterprises that happen to be located in the strip mall:
“Don’t support this terrorist,” a Google review on Skyview International Travel and Tourism Inc.’s page reads. Bluesky Daycare, another long-standing business in the strip, has received several one-star reviews in the last two days.

The owner of Bluesky Daycare, who did not want to be named for fear of threats to them, said they knew of a change of ownership, but were not aware of the new owner and have not met Khadr either. They’ve owned the daycare for five years, and it has been operational out of the strip mall for almost 30 years in total.

“I’m receiving these reviews, and they’re kind of scary,” the owner said of the influx of negative reviews the daycare is receiving online. “ ... It’s going to damage my whole business.”
Few of those targeting the businesses will see the irony of their actions. In their zeal to see a 'terrorist' fail, they are engaging in their own form of economic terrorism, intimidation that serves no one well.

But then, when you are dealing with hysteria, common sense and logic rarely prevail.

Tuesday, March 12, 2019

The OECD Is Not Impressed

While many are trying to minimize the significance of allegations that the Trudeau government tried to subvert the course of justice in the SNC-Lavalin affair, there is one body that is taking them very seriously:
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development working group on bribery said in a statement Monday that it is "concerned" by accusations that Trudeau and staff in his office tried to get former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould to let the Quebec engineering giant negotiate a remediation agreement rather than pursue the firm on criminal charges of bribery and fraud.

Canada is one of 44 nations that in 1999 signed the legally binding Anti-Bribery Convention, which established international standards to criminalize the bribery of foreign officials. The idea was that all signatories — including all 36 OECD nations as well as eight others such as Russia and Brazil — would punish their own citizens and companies for trying to undermine governments elsewhere.

The statement says Canada's commitment under the convention is to "prosecutorial independence in foreign bribery cases," and that political factors such as national economic interests and the identities of the company or individuals involved should have no influence on the prosecution.
Drago Kos, the chair of the OECD working group on bribery, elaborates:
“This is the point of our concern,” he told the Star in a telephone interview.

And Kos said the excuse used by Trudeau and others for their interventions — that they were concerned about jobs at SNC-Lavalin [a concern that seems less and less legitimate, by the way] — is not a legitimate justification.
Here is more on this development:

As in so much else, it appears Canada talks a good game on the international stage, just as it does on the domestic one. However, as a signatory to the legally-binding OECD pact, it has obligations that no amount of prime ministerial obfuscation and equivocation can lessen. And that is something even the most ardent of Mr. Trudeau's fans cannot deny.

Saturday, March 9, 2019

Going Off Half-Cocked



In the best of circumstances, measured, critical thinking is hard work. And as the antics of the gun lobby group the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights amply demonstrate, thinking while foaming at the mouth is well-nigh impossible.
A Toronto trauma surgeon arguing for stricter gun control is being targeted by a national firearm lobby that has flooded Ontario’s physicians’ regulator with dozens of complaints about her.

Dr. Najma Ahmed, who was on call at St. Michael’s Hospital following the Danforth mass shooting, is co-chair of an advocacy group called Canadian Doctors for Protection from Guns. The group of doctors came together in February to argue that guns are a public health issue, and to push for the passage of Bill C-71, a bill to reform Canada’s gun laws.
That the doctor has the right to express her opinion on a dire public-health threat is just too much for the gun enthusiasts:
The lobby group the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights last month posted a “call to action” urging members to flood the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario with complaints against Ahmed, even if they have never been her patient. The post provides a step-by-step guide on how to do this, complete with a link to the complaint form.

“I hate to say it, but stay in your lane, Doctor,” the post reads.
This extreme attempt at muting Dr. Amed's voice has thus far resulted in 70 complaints against her, complaints that must be investigated, but it is likely they will ultimately be tossed in the trash, where they clearly belong:
In a statement, Dr. Nancy Whitmore, registrar and CEO at The College, said its mandate is to focus on complaints around clinical care or professional behaviour.

“The CPSO’s role is not to resolve political disagreements when clinical care/outcomes or professional conduct is not in question. We recognize that physicians can play an important role by advocating for system-level change in a socially accountable manner,” she said.

Like all complaints, she said, the ones stemming from the gun group’s campaign are being reviewed by a committee that will determine whether they are frivolous and vexatious.
As a surgeon, Ahmed has witnessed first-hand the terrible damage bullets inflict:
Guns are “highly violent instruments that are intended to kill and maim animals and people,” she told the Star, adding she has seen the damage bullets can cause to the human body. “They act like small metal missiles, and they tear apart the organs and tissues and blood vessels and they do enormous harm.”
In the cartoon world, Yosemite Sam was depicted as a very aggressive gunslinging cowboy with a hair-trigger temper which usually resulted in a fair bit of gunplay. But in cartoons, the effects of violence and mayhem are always shortlived.

Would it were so in the real world.

Thursday, March 7, 2019

The Hysteria Surrounding Alleged SNC-Lavalin Job Losses



I was watching The National ((aka The Whore of Babylon among those who reflexively defend all things Liberal) last evening, and was surprised to learn that there seems to be no basis for the claim that 9,000 jobs could be lost should SNC-Lavalin register a criminal conviction that would bar it from bidding on federal contracts for 10 years. As you will see in the following report, the company is currently involved in a number of such projects worth billions that will take years to complete, and there is nothing in a criminal conviction that would prevent them from bidding on provincial contacts, many of which they are currently involved in.

Which leaves one to draw a tentative conclusion: that the alleged interventions to get Wilson-Raybould to grant SNC-Lavalin a DPA was prompted, not by economic, but rather political, concerns. Being a Quebec-based international company, like that perennial basket case Bombardier, the feds felt they had to run interference to maintain their support in La Belle Province.

Go to the 28-minute mark of the following to see the full story:

Wednesday, March 6, 2019

Your Wednesday (Rueful) Smile

If you have been following Ontario politics lately, you will probably appreciate the latest from Theo Moudakis:



Meanwhile, Brad Blair, the OPP whistle blower, calls his firing a reprisal by Doug Ford:
“It is patently clear to me that this is reprisal and an attempt to muzzle me,” Brad Blair, who was passed over for the top job, said in a new court documents filed following his termination on Monday by deputy community safety minister Mario Di Tommaso, (aka Ford puppet), whom he accused of a conflict of interest.
And the Star editorial board has this to say:
It was glaringly obvious all along that Ron Taverner, Premier Doug Ford’s old chum from Etobicoke, must never be appointed commissioner of the OPP.

Installing a close crony of the premier at the top of the province’s most important police force, the very force that’s expected to investigate political wrong-doing at Queen’s Park, is a complete non-starter.

Regardless of Taverner’s qualifications or the purity of his intentions, making him boss of the OPP would politicize the force in the worst way. Just the suspicion that he could be acting as a political tool of the premier should be enough to bury his chances.

But trust the Ford team to find a way to make this bad situation even worse. It did just that on Monday with the abrupt firing of the senior OPP commander who had the temerity to publicly challenge the premier’s decision to appoint Taverner.
Taking Ontarians for the fools they sometimes are, the Ford government denies any involvement in Blair's firing.

It is an avowal that ever-eager but insensate members of Ford Nation will readily swallow. For citizens who are not given to the foaming-at-the-mouth reactions characteristic of that cult, the government's declaration will be dismissed for the patent nonsense it is.

Tuesday, March 5, 2019

An Attack On The National Soul



It grieves me to resign from a portfolio where I was at work to deliver an important mandate. I must abide by my core values, my ethical responsibilities, constitutional obligations. There can be a cost to acting on one’s principles, but there is a bigger cost to abandoning them.

- Excerpt from the resignation letter of Trudeau cabinet member Jane Philpott

Ethos is a Greek word meaning "character" that is used to describe the guiding beliefs or ideals that characterize a community, nation, or ideology. Canadians like to believe that ours is a nation that embraces fairness, opportunity and, perhaps most importantly, justice.

Unfortunately, given the tact that the Trudeau government is taking to defend itself against the ructions caused by the SNC Lavalin scandal and subsequent departure of two key cabinet members, one can only conclude that Canada's ethos is under attack.

Consider the evolution of Mr. Trudeau's 'explanation' which began after The Globe and Mail released a story alleging that Judy Wilson-Raybould was removed from her position as Justice Minister and Attorney General for refusing to grant a Deferred Prosecution Agreement to SNC-Lavalin. Initially, Trudeau averred that the decision not to prosecute was hers alone, and that she still sat in his cabinet as Verterans Affairs Minister attested to her ongoing contentment. It was at this point she resigned.

Over the last few weeks, the Prime Minister has attempted to change the focus, saying that his government would always stand up for jobs AND the rule of law. Now, the message seems to revolve almost exclusively around jobs and growing the economy. Consider the words of Steven MacKinnon, parliamentary secretary to the minister of Public Services and Procurement yesterday on Power and Politics.

"The government's adopted approach on this is one that has favoured jobs, it's one that has favoured pensioners, supply chains and a major Canadian company - all innocent victims of some corrupt management maybe a decade ago."

"We do have a disagreement here. We absolutely have a disagreement here and I think the current attorney general has said that, look you have to keep assessing the facts as these cases move along," he said. "But the fact is that we have 10,000 Canadians and their families and pensioners and suppliers and others who are not entitled to the same kind relief they would get if they were to work for an SNC-Lavalin competitor in the United States or in the United Kingdom ...

"The disagreement goes to how you see how Canada ought to approach major economic questions like the SNC-Lavalin issue. Do we do it like our OECD partners, do with these deferred prosecution arrangements, that have been widely discussed? Or do we do it with a ... perhaps more rigid approach?
That more rigid approach, of course, is not to engage in political interference, pressure, and honour the rule of law.

If you go to the whole interview, (start at the 1:28 mark) you will see that MacKinnon sharply implies that neither Wilson Raybould nor Philpott are concerned about "people" and "real jobs."

In his campaign to win office, Mr. Trudeau stoked the hopes of all Canadian that things could be better, and that politics would be done in a new way. Once stoked, such hopes demand action. Now that the Prime Minister has clearly been hoist upon the petard of his own lofty rhetoric, he can expect massive anger and massive resistance to this unprecedented attack on the national soul and the not-too-subtle message being sent that principle, integrity and honour must give way to economic imperatives.

Monday, March 4, 2019

Vengeance Is Mine, Sayeth the Ford



In almost biblical fashion, Premier Doug Ford has smote his enemy, aided and abetted by the OPP union.

Brad Blair, the OPP whistleblower who complained loudly and very publicly about the sweetheart deal engineered by Doug Ford to install his longtime pal, Ron Taverner, as the head of the police service, has paid a high price for his outrage: he has been fired.
“I want to advise you that Brad Blair is no longer a deputy commissioner with the Ontario Provincial Police effective immediately,” Interim Commissioner Gary Couture said in a memorandum to members of the force.

The dramatic move follows a complaint last week from Ontario Provincial Police Association president Rob Jamieson about the release of an email — contained in a Blair court filing on his bid to scupper the appointment of Ford friend Ron Taverner as OPP commissioner — on the premier’s concerns about unfamiliar faces on his security detail.

Jamieson wrote to Deputy Community Safety Minister Mario Di Tommaso, who was Taverner’s supervisor at Toronto police, last Thursday stating the release of the email likely resulted in bodyguard Sgt. Terry Murphy being “stood down” from Ford’s detail, according to a copy of the letter obtained by the Star.
Anyone with a critical intelligence will ask, quite legitimately, whether this can be the reason for Blair's dismissal. For my money, Doug Ford appears to be a very vengeful man, intent from the beginning on payback against a very brave man for his very public exposure of the Premier's cronyism.

I don't think the story ends here, not by a long shot.

Sunday, March 3, 2019

You Probably Don't Want To Hear This

.... but new research suggests that yet another climate-change feedback loop could be in the offing as we plunge headlong toward disaster:
The stratocumulus clouds, the layer of cloud shielding us from the direct rays of the sun could vanish one day. That’s according to a new research by a team of scientists. As Eric Sorensen reports, if this happens, it could lead to rapid global warming.



Watching the story, one is reminded of how, for millennia, the earth provided the kind of balance that allowed life to flourish. Clearly, all the signs suggest that nurturing environment is rapidly changing, and we have no one to blame but ourselves.

Saturday, March 2, 2019

Corporate Corruption



With corrupt corporate practices so much in the news these days, thanks to the Trudeau government's attempts at subverting justice for SNC Lavalin, I couldn't help but be struck by the naked greed so evident in the practices of a pharmaceutical called Insys Therapeutics. Several of the company's executives
... are currently on trial in Boston on charges of racketeering, fraud, and conspiracy, in connection to an alleged nationwide scheme to pay doctors bribes and kickbacks in exchange for prescribing the company’s fentanyl-based pain medication Subsys to patients who would not otherwise require the drug. The executives are also accused of conspiring to mislead and defraud insurance providers that were reasonably reluctant to cover costs for a medication designed for cancer patients when prescribed to patients without cancer.
To appreciate the depth of the company's greed and depravity, go to the 9:16 mark of the following news report, which includes a video extolling the virtues of something called titration, the practice of increasing the dose of a drug:



The 'rap' video excerpted in the above report (I will provide links to the full video at the end of this post) was created for and shown at Insys' 2015 national sales meeting. The message was clear: the more you 'push' the drug, the higher your sales commission will be.

According to former Senator Claire McCaskill, who helped investigate Insys last year,
"What they are saying to their sales representatives is, 'It's not enough that you get a doctor to prescribe it," said McCaskill, now an NBC News analyst. She said the company was telling its employees, "'We're going to pay you five times as much if you can get him to prescribe the strongest dose possible.'"
Interestingly, the company's response to these charges echoes the one heard from SNC Lavalin about the 'rogue employees' who acted without company authority in bribery of Libyan officials to the tune of $48 Million - (their petty cash reserves must be a marvel, eh?):
"The company in no way defends the misconduct of former employees and is fully cooperating with the government."
Nothing to see here, eh?







Friday, March 1, 2019

A Fascinating Rorschach Test



Reading the newspaper this morning, it occurred to me that the reactions to Jody Wilson Raybould's testimony before the Commons Justice Committee constitute a kind of political Rorschach Test, one that helps reveal people's values, psychology and moral sensibilities. As one would expect, it demonstrates that the Canadian psyche is a multi-faceted one, one that prompts reactions ranging from outright condemnation of the government as if it were the devil incarnate to a reflexive defence of the Liberals. While some of these public reactions constitute nothing more than political theatre, they are worthy of deeper examination.

First, there was the overblown call by Andrew Scheer for Justin Trudeau to resign. A risible attempt to suggest he occupies the high moral ground, his gesture would satisfy only inveterate Conservative supporters who think with their adrenaline, not their brains. In many ways, his stunt represents politics at its manipulative worst.

But extreme partisanship that abandons critical thinking is hardly limited to the right. A popular theme in so-called progressive circles found online and in Facebook political groups is that it is incumbent upon all to rally to the Liberal Party. The argument, simplistic in the extreme, is that to join in the criticism of Trudeau's tactics is to empower the Conservatives and risk handing over the next federal election to them.

This depiction of the political landscape through a Manichean filter benefits no one. Like the Conservative hysteria, it demands a surrender of critical thinking and morality in service of what is depicted as a far lesser evil than the party of Scheer. As well, there is a distressing tactic, taken right out of the reactionary's page, of shooting the messenger. The CBC, CTV, major newspapers, etc. are condemned as tools of the right for reporting on this scandal and keeping it alive. I choose to provide no links to demonstrate any of this, as I do not want to give them further exposure, but they are quite easy to find if you look.

The idea of voting for the lesser of evils no longer holds any appeal for me. Perhaps that sensibility is a function of my age as well as extensive reading and my ongoing efforts to be a critical thinker. The fact is that the Liberals and the Conservatives are not the only choice in the next election, and perhaps it is time for people to start taking their vote with greater seriousness and reflection. For a perspective on this, I highly recommend a post by The Mound that he wrote last month. As well, a post he wrote yesterday makes for worthwhile reading.

Finally, there is the reaction based, neither on pragmatics nor partisanship, but on morality and integrity. As I wrote yesterday, what I took away from Wilson-Raybould's testimony was a woman who fought hard to maintain her principles and integrity in the face of incredible pressure from both the Prime Minister and his operatives. It is a theme upon which Tanya Talaga writes:
Across Indigenous social media, this one quote of Wilson-Raybould’s was shared over and over again, “I was taught to always hold true to your core values, principles and to act with integrity. I come from a long line of matriarchs and I am a truth-teller in accordance with the laws and traditions of our Big House. This is who I am and who I always will be.”
An indigenous upbringing helped inform those principles:
“The history of Crown-Indigenous relations in this country, includes a history of the rule of law not being respected. Indeed, one of the main reasons for the urgent need for justice and reconciliation today is that in the history of our country we have not always upheld foundational values such as the rule of law in our relations with Indigenous peoples. And I have seen the negative impacts for freedom, equality and a just society this can have firsthand.”

For over 150 years Canada has bent laws, disrespected treaties, spent millions taking First Nations to court over resource sharing and tried to bully communities into pipelines.

But Wilson-Raybould refused to be complicit.
Integrity in public office is rarely seen, but I like to think I can recognize it when I see it. And judging by some of the reactions I have seen and read about, I am hardly alone in valuing it.

We have all witnessed politicians of various stripes come and go. Our cynicism, our pragmatism, our ideology clearly play a role in that revolving door. But sometimes the truth really is out there; all we have to do to see it is to try to shed some of our preconditioned responses.