UPDATED: A Private Sector Addiction

 

I often wonder how many Ontarians realize that we are led by a premier addicted ideologically to the private sector. A man hobbled by a limited education and intellectual breadth, Doug Ford's paltry vision is one that extols all things private at the literal expense of the public. The signs are many.

One need only look at the Greenbelt Scandal, that, before it was stopped, was designed to rob citizens of necessary and valuable green space, wetlands and nature in general so that Doug Ford's developer friends could benefit to the tune of many billions of dollars. There is also the 'redevelopment' of Ontario Place handed over to a German company, Therme, to build a spa for the minority of people who will be able to visit it. And nothing is too good for the private sector; in the case of Therme, they have been given not only a 95-year-lease (whose terms are being kept secret from the public), but also a wholly taxpayer-funded underground parking facility that will cost over $650 million, as well as other untold costs that will no doubt be uncovered in future Auditor-General reports,

I could go on, but the most recent proof of Ford's follies are reflected in his obsession with privatizing more alcohol sales, despite the billions in revenue the LCBO puts into public coffers. And now, as a result of his monomania, we have a strike at the LCBO, one I suspect will go on for some time. It is going all according to plan.

The longer the strike goes on, the more opportunities thirsty Ontarians will have to discover new, private sector sources to slake their collective thirst. And as resentment grows over the LCBO's monopoly on liquor, fewer people will be concerned about the concerns that led to the strike - the protection of union jobs paying between $17 and $30 per hour, although apparently only 30% of those jobs are permanent and have benefits. Yet even that modest remuneration seems too much for Doug, because it is not going to the private sector.

Robert Kahnert of Markham, Ontario, offers his thoughts on the damage Ford's approach to policy is doing to this province:

What happened to our once civil society? We now live in an Ontario no one recognizes. Everywhere you look there is a crisis — homelessness, affordability, health care, education, building and infrastructure decay.

How did things that were once so good get so bad.? The answer is right in front of us. Most of the public wealth was transferred to the wealthy.  We have been fed a steady diet of tax cuts, deregulation,  and the need for privatization to get the “innovation and private sector efficiencies” with promises like “all boats will be lifted by the rising economy.” As we have clearly seen, false promises. Not only has our civil society been severely damaged but so had trust in democracy .

In the last provincial election, only 17 per cent of the population voted for Premier Doug Ford.  After slashing government funding to public services  starving them into crisis just to pay for tax cuts to the wealthy and their corporations, they then present privatization as the solution to a problem they created. The only thing deregulation and privatization does is create more profit-making opportunities.

The gap between the haves and have-nots is huge and widening at an ever-increasing rate.

 Small tax cuts to the general population have been used as a cover for massive tax cuts to the wealthy and their corporations.

 Reversing tax cuts is not raising taxes, it is restoring revenue to rebuild our once civil society. Beware any politician promising tax cuts. We do not have a wealth creation problem. We do have a very serious distribution of wealth problem.

Where is the leadership? We have the power. Don’t leave, speak up and vote to stop this insanity.

Paul Kahnert, Markham

Worshipping at the altar of unrestricted free enterprise comes with great costs. It is time that more of us realize the extensive damage such fealty does to the things we hold in common, and act to stop any further erosion of our services, values and culture that seem so foreign only to those who 'serve' us.

UPDATE: If you're still with me, Brittlestar has an entertaining but accurate video about the importance of the LCBO to Ontario's development:

What The Transcript Shows

 

My previous post addressed a concern that the media are writing narratives for us, telling us what to think, creating a consensus that may be at variance with reality. I cited the conclusions drawn about the Liberal loss in the Toronto by-election of Toronto-St. Paul and the debate between Joe Biden and Don Trump.

A producer of nine federal leaders' debates in Canada, Mark Bulgutch, offers his view of the American debate, observing that if one were just to read the transcript and not fixate on Biden's weak performance, one might come away with a different perspective.

Compare the content, not the performance, and then decide who should be president.

For example, when Trump spoke about abortion, he claimed that Democrats, “will take the life of a child in the eighth month, the ninth month, and even after birth — after birth.”

Biden responded, “He’s lying. That is simply not true.”

Trump: “Every legal scholar, throughout the world, the most respected, wanted it [abortion law] brought back to the states.”

Biden: “The idea that states are able to do this is a little like saying, we’re going to turn civil rights back to the states, let each state have a different rule.”

Trump on illegal immigrants: “We have the largest number of terrorists coming into our country right now. All terrorists, all over the world — not just in South America, all over the world. They come from the Middle East, everywhere. All over the world, they’re pouring in.”

Biden: “I’m not saying no terrorist ever got through. But the idea they’re emptying their prisons, we’re welcoming these people, that’s simply not true. There’s no data to support what he said.”

Trump: “And because of his ridiculous, insane and very stupid policies, people are coming in and they’re killing our citizens at a level that we’ve never seen.”

Biden: “Every single thing he said is a lie, every single one.”

As I said in my post, Biden did, despite his muddling performance, had policy on his side, while Trump relied on his usual strategy of total fabrication.

When Trump was asked about climate change, the best he could do was, “I want absolutely immaculate clean water and I want absolutely clean air, and we had it. We had H2O.”

Biden pounced. “The idea that he is claiming to have done something that had the cleanest water? He had not done a damn thing with the environment. The only existential threat to humanity is climate change. And he didn’t do a damn thing about it.”

Biden skewered Trump time after time. On Trump’s election denial: You’re a whiner. When you lost the first time, you continued to appeal and appeal to courts all across the country. Not one single court in America said any of your claims had any merit.”

On Trump’s accommodation of white supremacists: “What American president would ever say Nazis coming out of fields, carrying torches, singing the same antisemitic bile, carrying swastikas, were fine people?”

And finally, on why those who have seen Trump close-up now flee from what they saw: “His own vice president — look, there’s a reason why 40 of his 44 top cabinet officers refused to endorse him this time. They know him well. They served with him. Why are they not endorsing him?”

And I have nothing to add to Bulgutch's conclusion:

Yes, Joe Biden had some truly awful moments during the debate. But I’m not sure a president makes his toughest decisions in two-minute sound bites. Judge what he said, not how he said it.

 

 

Tell Me A Story

Regular readers of this blog will likely know that I have great faith in the so-called legacy media, especially newspapers. The reasearch and thought that go into articles and columns far surpass much of what one will find on the internet, especially that very poisoned segment known as social media. However, there are times when lazy thinking and herd mentality supplant reasoned commentary in the mainstream media.

I have been especially mindful of that fact given two recent events: the Liberal loss in the Toronto-St Paul by-election, and the Biden-Trump debate. A consensus narrative quickly emerged that has quickly become political orthodoxy, denying people the opportunity to analyse these two events for themselves.

By all accounts, the by-election loss was a devastating judgement of Justin Trudeau. Almost all of the ensuing stories concluded that it is time for the Prime Minister to go. While there is no doubt that his plummeting popularity played a significant role in the results, there are also other factors to consider, factors the press seems loathe to consider. 

First, there were over 80 candidates to choose from, giving voters the formidable task of wading through a jumble of names. Rather than enhancing democracy, this stunt served to make a joke out of the electoral process, as almost none of the alternatives were serious candidates. That the Liberal candidate, Leslie Church. lost by a mere 500 votes seemed to merit barely a notice.

Second, by-elections are traditionally seen, not so much as a referendum on the party in power but as a safe way to take them to task for perceived deficiencies; they are not necessarily an augury of future general election results. Instead, the narrative we have been handed almost exclusively focusses on Trudeau and his unfitness to lead the Liberals into the next election. While I am not suggesting there isn't room for such speculation, the fact that this is the sole interpretation of the result should disturb all of us capable of thinking for ourselves.

The same might be said about the Biden-Trump debate. While Biden's performance was not good, again, the media are presenting his performance as proof he will lead the Democrats to disaster in the November election. Having watched the entire debate, while Biden moments were indeed cringe-worthy, he did offer reminders of Democratic policies that have benefitted wide swaths of Americans, but did so in a less than strong, forthright way. On the other hand, Don Trump let loose with his usually litany of lies, but the attitude of the press seemed to be, "Well, that's just Donald being Donald." And, of course, little was said about his refusal to answer the questions asked as he indulged in efforts to refute previously-made points by Biden.

There are no doubt many amongst us who want to be told what to think. I am not one of them, and I am sure there are many more who prefer to exeercise their critical faculties rather than be force-fed what can only be described as media group-think.

Happy Canada Day

While I am not one to engage in flag-waving, these days it seems increasingly important to value what we have. Events in other parts of the world show how easily democracy can degenerate into cruel parody.

May we always value, respect and protect the things that make our country unique.

Happy Canada Day.

Same Old, Same Old

Although an inveterate cynic, for about one minute yesterday I felt something odd and rare: a moment of hope. The basis for that was an interview with Bonnie Crombie, the 'leader' of the Ontario Liberals. But the moment was short-lived.

In a one-on-one interview with Global News, ahead of a planned provincial tour serving as a dry-run for an election campaign, Crombie criticized the Ford government’s runaway spending and questioned the premier’s priorities.

“They’ve decreased the fiscal capacity in this government,” Crombie told Global News. “The highest spending budget at $214 billion, increased debt, increased deficit. We don’t know where the money is going. It’s certainly not going where it’s needed.”

 “They’re these little gimmicks, such as canceling the licence plate stickers,” Crombie said. “If you knew that also cost $1 billion a year, would you not rather pay the $200, knowing that that money would have gone to the health-care system or schools for your children, or build affordable housing?”

The annual $120 licence plate renewal fee, which brought $1.1 billion into the provincial coffers each year, was scrapped by Premier Doug Ford ahead of the 2022 general election as a measure to ease affordability concerns among voters.

(Parenthetically, yesterday the government announced that now Ontarian's will be relieved of the 'burden' of having to renew our free licence plates. Children that we are, many cheered this new freedom.)

Asked if the Liberals would bring the sticker fees back if they formed government, Crombie said: “We would look at it, certainly.”

“That’s a billion dollars of revenue,” Crombie said. “I know that they would prefer that billion dollars going into their health care, going into building affordable housing, or going into our education system.”

My immediate thought was, "That's real leadership."  However, then this happened:

Roughly a week after the interview took place, as Global News was preparing to publish a story, a spokesperson for the provincial party sent a statement from Crombie looking to clarify her earlier comments on reinstating the license plate sticker fee.

“Let me be clear — when I say I will “look into” the licence plate sticker issue, I mean that as Premier I will look into all of Ford’s gimmicks and backroom deals to make sure they are providing a value for money for consumers,” Crombie said.

“Would I bring back an unnecessary fee on families who are struggling to make ends meet right now? No,” Crombie said.

I guess we should thank Ms. Crombie for clarifying that she is cut from the same cloth as all of her poltical ilk.

Solutions Abound

 I'm away right now, but thought I would share a Twitter post by Mike Hudema, who devotes himself to matters of the environment. His posts show what is possible and indirectly cast light on the fact that our governments, which, although renewable energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels when all things are considered, do little to wean us off of those fuels and continue to heavily subsidize them. This, of course, conveniently ignores the increasingly dire climatic disaster engulfing our planet.

Choices

When the next federal election comes, there are those who will vote with a certitude we all should be wary of. Because they are sick of Justin Trudeau, many will eagerly cast their vote for Pierre Poilievre, the putative prime minister-in-waiting. On the other hand, those of us possessed of at least a modicum of thinking skills will vote, not with eagerness, but with deliberation, braced by the knowledge that our choice could very well have a long-lasting impact on Canada's trajectory. 

Two letter-writers in today's Star offer a reality check for those who vote, not out of careful consideration, but rather spite and weariness:

How long it will take to become really sick of Pierre Poilievre?

This isn’t just another byelection in Toronto, June 15

Those in the riding of St. Paul’s who are “sick, really sick of Justin Trudeau,” ask yourselves how long it will take you to become really sick of Pierre Poilievre. The federal Conservatives will weaken, not advance the urgent battle to limit climate change, they will pull back on Truth and Reconciliation initiatives, which will eventually lead to renewed blockades and hostility, and they will weaken gun control, even though the scourge of antisemitism has recently included shots fired at a synagogue and Jewish community centre. Poilievre will, of course, not talk about any of this. Nor may voters recall just how well the Trudeau government shepherded Canada through the pandemic, giving us one of the most minimized death tolls in the developed world. Many may be in the mood to break up with their feminist boyfriend, but waiting in the wings is a wolf in sheep’s clothing who squints when he looks you in the eyes. And did no one tell the dental hygienist who can’t bear to look at Trudeau about the new dental care program?

Ron Charach, Toronto

No real alternative to Trudeau

Most people agree Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is past his best-buy date. But what are the alternatives? Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has never had a real job outside politics. He proffers no policies just personal attacks and vacuous statements such as “common sense revolutions” a la Mike Harris, who destroyed education and other social supports. We look south and despair of common sense. The hard-working class listens to populist statements from politicians because they despair … but these politicians do them no favours.

John Bullick, Mississauga

We have always been taught that voting is a civic responsibility. Let us hope that our fellow Canadians cast measured ballots in the next election rather than following the lemming-like directives of those for whom thinking is but an optional, occasional and, apparently, a painful activity.

Feeding At The Trough

 

Those who read this blog with any regularity likely know that I am not an ideologue. While I consider myself progressive, it does not mean that I am blind to the faults of either the Liberals or the NDP. And it is about a member of the latter that I post today.

The implications of a CBC story is that NDP Mp Nikki Ashton has been feeding at the trough.

An NDP MP who frequently joins parliamentary proceedings remotely from her riding billed the House of Commons for a trip she took to reportedly meet with "stakeholders" over the Christmas holidays in Quebec — travel that included bringing her husband and kids along at taxpayers' expense.

... on Dec. 21 of that year, Ashton flew from Thompson, Man. to Ottawa — five days after the House of Commons had already risen for its Christmas break.

Ashton's partner Bruce Moncur, a former NDP nomination candidate, and their two children also made the trip with the MP to the nation's capital.

Then, on Christmas Day, 2022, the family of four travelled to Quebec City. Ashton billed the Commons for some of the expenses they incurred along the way.

The trip cost taxpayers $17,641.12, including $13,619.90 for airfare and other transportation, $2,508.39 for accommodations and $1,512.83 for meals and other incidentals, according to Commons records.

The optics are not good. While I encourage you to watch the entire three-minute plus clip of her cringeworthy news conference here, I was able to find an abbreviated version to post. Her refusal to name who she met with in pursuit of her 'official duties' hardly passes the smell test.

Ashton would only say that it was "various people" who are "connected to the issue of French language, French culture preservation." She said she wanted to get feedback on an overhaul of the Official Languages Act from unnamed groups.

While it does not appear that Ashton broke any Parliamentary rules in claiming the expenses, her insensitivity to the taxpayer rankles. Franco Terrazzano, director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, had this to say:

"If Ashton doesn't want Canadians to think that she billed taxpayers so she could take a vacation to Quebec over the holidays, then she better have a very good explanation, a very concrete explanation as to what value, if any, taxpayers actually got from this trip," Terrazzano told CBC News.

Terrazzano said MPs should think "about what their constituents would say" before taking big-ticket trips. He also said the Commons should consider tightening the rules on when MPs can be accompanied by their families on subsidized trips.

It can be legitimately argued that Ashton, by attending Parliament via Zoom, has saved taxpayers a substantial amount of money. However, it hardly seems ethical that a family trip with dubious benefits to the public should be considered a quid pro quo for that practice.

 

 

A Disturbing Report

A disturbing report in The Star suggests there has been a serious campaign of disinformation to promote Islamophobia in Canada. The source of this campaign? The state of Israel.

I have added emphasis in parts of the following:

On June 5, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz — citing sources and information it was able to obtain — reported that Israel’s Diaspora Affairs Ministry hired a private political campaign firm called STOIC to conduct a “large-scale” influence campaign after the war in Gaza started last fall. The New York Times also reported on the alleged campaign on June 5, citing Israeli officials and documents about the covert operation to influence U.S. lawmakers and the public with “pro-Israel messaging.” 

 According to Haaretz, the alleged campaign created fake news sites and “hundreds” of social media accounts to spread pro-Israeli stories about sexual assaults committed by Hamas and alleged ties between the group and a United Nations relief agency that operates in the Gaza Strip. The campaign targeted American lawmakers, and included a “well-co-ordinated effort to attack and smear” pro-Palestinian groups that are mainly in the United States and Canada, with “deeply Islamophobic and anti-immigrant” content, the newspaper reported. 

The newspaper reported this included a website called United Citizens for Canada, which allegedly spread Islamophobic claims that Muslim immigrants are a threat to Canada and demanding a sharia state.   

Although the United Citizens for Canada website has been taken down, I was able to find an archived copy of its homepage. That page, which starts with a charming picture of the lighthouse at Peggy's Cove, appears on first glance to be devoted to liberty and tolerance. However, a closer examination reveals something much darker:

United Citizens for Canada (UCC) is a vigilant non-profit organization, founded by committed to safeguarding Canada’s cherished values of freedom, democracy, and liberalism. Founded on the principle of awareness and education.

 UCC founded by worried citizens who are concerned about the possible future Canada is heading and decided to actively change reality. 

Our mission is to illuminate the concerns surrounding the growth of anti-liberal dangerous ideologies within our borders. We stand at the forefront of identifying and addressing the increasing presence and support for anti-liberal, aggressive and violent Islamic movements and organizations in Canada – a challenge intensified by our nation’s flexible and overly liberal immigration policies.

Our dedication is rooted in the belief that every Canadian deserves to live in a society that upholds democratic values and rejects anti-democratic messages. Through vigilant monitoring and exposure of events, demonstrations, and statements that threaten the fabric of our Canadian ethos, UCC aims to serve as a mirror to society, reflecting the urgent need for awareness and action against forces that seek to undermine our collective future by enforcing new values and a new order.

The Star article reveals that STOIC, referred to above, has been using Open AI to promote disinformation, and is linked with United Citizens for Canada:

OpenAI — the company behind the artificial intelligence chat bot ChatGPT — published its own report on misinformation campaigns that use its software. The report said the company banned users it determined were involved in an “influence operation” directed by STOIC that used OpenAI tools to create stories, fake social personas, and written comments primarily related to the conflict in Gaza, and posted on platforms like Facebook, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter). OpenAI also linked the United Citizens for Canada website to the operation. 

The group [United Citizens for Canada] was also named in a March report by the Digital Forensic Research Lab project, which is run by an American think tank in Washington. The project reported that there was a “suspicious network operating across multiple social media platforms” that boosted “anti-Muslim and Islamophobic narratives” from United Citizens for Canada. The report alleges the network used AI to generate fake content that included altering images to make it look like a man in a beard and skullcap was advocating for “Sharia in Canada.” 

The federal government is well-aware of the seriousness of this threat to the peace and order of our country. The question now is whether they will have the intestinal fortitude to hold Israel to account for this egregious incursion into our affairs.

I am not holding my breath.

 

 

Willy Loman Lives

One of the plays I most enjoyed teaching during my career was Death of a Salesman. It told the tale of a salesman, Willy Loman, who lived a delusional life, never acknowledging his shortcomings and limitations, preferring to believe that the key to success was personality. The play has a tragic conclusion as Willy finally confronts the truth.

There is likely no imminent epiphany for Ontario's Willy Loman, Premier Doug Ford, who wants desperately to be liked, pursuing at almost all costs the approval of the electorate. But as in the play, there are many who see through the self-delusion that envelops Mr. Ford; nonetheless, he continues apace, plunging our province into increasingly desperate fiscal measures that cannot have a happy ending. 

Perceptive Star readers take the full measure of the man:

Some observations made as to who Doug Ford is have been blatant. His Achilles heel is, indeed, that he likes to be liked. He is not stupid, but he is uneducated and has shown little interest in science or climate change. He has had to learn, but still seems to enjoy his apparent goal of being the hero among friends. I do not find his folksy demeanor endearing; it hides a good deal of insensitivity and ignorance. His bravado and bluster also come from the privilege of his family of origin. 

Anna-Lise Kear, Huntsville

Premier Doug Ford, like his late brother Rob, is a man of seemingly average intelligence, who too often goes with gut hunches. While it’s true that brilliance in a leader doesn’t guarantee success — Jimmy Carter too often micro-managed, Bill Clinton used his cleverness to evade the rules, while the highly intelligent Bob Rae wasn’t the most effective premier — running a province as complex as Ontario requires a certain level of intellect. When I see federal leaders weaving from French to English in debates, and taking on questions in both official languages, I marvel at the agility of their minds. One solution would be to mandate that candidates for premier be obliged to conduct one debate in French, or to take a few questions posed to them in French. Similarly, if the U.S. declared itself bilingual and mandated at least one debate in Spanish, I doubt that a pedestrian mind like Donald Trump’s would be up to the task.

Ron Charach, Toronto

As Premier Doug Ford throws taxpayer loot to the wind with free-for-all goodies, like an under-the-lake parking lot for the wealthy at the Ontario Place spa, no-cost automobile licences and beer in corner stores for those who can’t wait for the new convenience, my guess is that he’d win the possible snap election by a landslide. Opposition parties seem to feel they’ll be ready for Ford, but how so? The Liberals, the NDP and the Greens all need to recognize they’ll be splitting the left-of-centre vote with one another. A more apt term for such an election would be “Doug versus the Dividers.”

Jack Drury, Toronto

If Ontario taxpayers want to know where $225 million-$1 billion of their hard-earned tax dollars went, stop into the nearest convenience store, buy a bottle of booze/six pack, put it in a Premier Doug Ford-approved paper bag and head to the nearest park bench to cry into your beer.

Kat Duffy, Mississauga

I fully expect that Doug will soon need reaffirmation of his popularity. Expect an early election call in 2025.

An Early Vacay

Perhaps the aging infrastructure at Queen's Park cannot handle the heat that builds up in the legislature. Perhaps that is why Doug Ford has decided that all MPPs deserve an early summer break and an extended (by four extra weeks) hiatus that will end in late October. Hot weather makes people sweat.

Of course, there could be another kind of heat that the Doug Ford cabal is eager to escape from - the heat that comes from extensive questioning by opposition parties concerning things like the government's Billion-dollar Booze Boondoggle,  money that could be used to fund so many endeavours far worthier than putting alcohol into corner stores. 

Not having to answer pesky questions that pointedly call into question the competence of one's government can have a revivifying effect on politicians. There is nothing better than a long break to maximize the possibility of stabilizing the ship of state currently being buffeted by naysayers who question the Conservative mythology of being good fiscal managers. And one can always hope that the summer doldrums will lull everyone into passivity and forgetfulness about one's policy deficiencies.

Dougie has offered other baubles to distract us as well, like his essentially meaningless cabinet shuffle.

Stephen Lecce moves from education, where he has served as minister since 2019, to energy, swapping portfolios with Todd Smith, who has been the minister of energy for the past three years.

Lecce, who butted heads with teachers unions many times over the years, said he was honoured to serve in that role but is excited to lead the re-titled Ministry of Energy and Electrification.

There is really nothing for anyone in that shuffle, except for those who have a nostalgic pining for the good old Common Sense days:

One of the new faces in cabinet is Mike Harris, son of the former premier, and he takes over the red-tape reduction portfolio, which has been vacant since Parm Gill resigned in January to run for the federal Conservatives.

As well, for those who like to see the redemption of corrupt politicians, there is this:

Steve Clark, who resigned last fall as municipal affairs and housing minister amid the Greenbelt controversy, has been appointed government house leader. It's not a cabinet position, but is a key role within the government, as that person frequently fields the questions in question period.

Ford initially stood by Clark last summer as the Greenbelt land swap unravelled with two devastating probes.

The integrity commissioner found Clark violated ethics rules during a process that was marked by "unnecessary hastiness and deception."

The NDP has offered its assessment of this political legerdemain:

New Democrat Leader Marit Stiles said the moves mean little after a year of scandal and policy reversals.

"Playing musical chairs at the cabinet table isn't going to fix this mess," Stiles said. "We now have the most bloated cabinet in the history of Ontario, with the biggest premier's office, the biggest deficit and people are struggling more than they ever have before."

Stiles also took aim at Clark's return to prominence.

"It's deeply concerning," she said. "Let's not forget that this was a minister who resigned in disgrace because of his central role in the government and Doug Ford's Greenbelt corruption scandal and now he's going to be put in charge of it with pretty enormous responsibility."

People have already been quite vocal in their public expressions of disdain for this government, even in the cottage country Mr. Ford is so fond of. Dougie often says that he speaks to all kind of people on a regular basis. Let's hope that when he out and about this summer, people will share with him their impressions of his government's direction.

 

Canada's Corporate Concentration

Although I am past the age where I would consider attending a concert (unless James Taylor were performing),  I follow with interest the efforts the Americans are taking to bust the virtual monopoly that Live Nation has over ticket sales and costs. What is especially interesting is the often aggressive stance the U.S. takes when it comes to monopolies and the narrowing of competition, which stands in sharp contrast to Canada's weak mewling sounds over corporate concentration. As I have said before, Justin Trudeau has never met a corporate entity he doesn't adore.

David Olive writes:

In Canada, we complain about corporate concentration but don’t do much about it.

What a contrast that is with the U.S., which filed a landmark anti-monopoly lawsuit last week against Live Nation Entertainment, the world’s biggest concert promoter, and its Ticketmaster subsidiary.

The lawsuit was brought by the antitrust division of U.S. President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice.

It alleges that with control of more than 70 per cent of primary ticket sales at the U.S.’s leading concert venues, Live Nation engages in monopolistic practices at the expense of live-event patrons, artists, promoters and venue owners.

 The U.S. government seeks a breakup of the $22-billion (U.S.) Live Nation (2023 revenues), separating its promotion and ticketing businesses.

The Live Nation lawsuit is part of a Biden antitrust agenda aimed at curbing excess corporate power across the U.S. economy. 

The Americans have also gone after Apple and Amazon and grocery chain mergers; while  Biden's actions may be political in motivation, they stand in sharp contrast to Canada's inaction. Just recently, any concern about competitive pricing 

didn’t stop Ottawa from approving the merger of telecoms Rogers and Shaw.

As well, there is the much vaunted voluntary Canadian Code of Conduct for grocers, which, as I understand it, will not lower prices but 'bring stability."

Canada’s grocery code of conduct is a set of rules and guidelines that seek to improve fair dealings in the industry, especially between big grocers and their suppliers. These suppliers include both farmers, as well as producers of various kinds of processed foods.

In other words, nothing really there for long-suffering Canadian consumers. 

And while there is still corporate concentration in various U.S. sectors,  putting upward pressure on prices, ours is particularly egregious,

with our Big Five banks, Big Three telecoms and grocery chains, and just two major airlines and railways.

 [N]o one would argue that Canada can boast of adequate competition. The lack of it contributes to Canada’s laggard productivity growth.

I expect little to change here at home. Performative politics, or, as I like to call it, political theatre,  has long taken precedence over substantive policy when it comes to taming the corporate beast. The lion continues to roar loudly.

About Those Expanded Beer Sales

My good friend Dave in Winnipeg was reading my blog the other day about the expensive Doug Ford Follies regarding expanded beer and wine sales in Ontario. The experience of Manitobans in such endeavours proves instructive:

Have been following your blog and always find it informative and entertaining. The latest topic on the issue of allowing alcohol in grocery stores and convenience stores is something that could come back to bite ol'Dougie. In Manitoba there was experimentation in the past with allowing liquor sales in grocery stores. A few select Safeways and Sobeys currently are licensed to engage in limited liquor sales; this began back in the Filmon days. Old Gary also issued licenses to a few political contributors to open private wine stores. 

Our ex-provincial Conservative government under Pallister and subsequently Stephenson toyed with the same idea that Dougie wants to implement. Due to the current climate of mass shoplifting in Winnipeg the impetus for allowing booze sales in more grocery stores, convenience stores and gas stations was soon put to bed. 

It was pointed out to the now retired premiers that allowing liquor sales in such places would open them up to the large scale thefts that were plaguing the government liquor stores. To stop the mass thefts, often accompanied by violence, the Conservative government brought in security measures that not everybody agreed with but it eliminated the problem. 

To shop in a government liquor store in Manitoba you must first enter a small lobby at the entrance. The entrance from the street locks behind you and the entrance proper to the store is also closed and locked. When you present photo identification to an employee, seated in a booth protected by plexiglass, you are allowed access to the store. I recall that the liquor board of Ontario began implementing such measures in Northern Ontario last year but pulled it due to complaints. I have not heard anything about continuing liquor store thefts in the area but I'm sure it still goes on. Imaging putting liquor in any and all stores in Ontario; the thieves will have a field day.

Dave, from the keystone province

Of course, expect no wavering on this issue from Doug who, with the zeal typical of populists and demagogues, will brook no criticism, no matter how pointed and accurate. As people of his ilk are fond of saying, there is only one taxpayer; however, as has been reported, that taxpayer will be heavily subsidizing his quest for re-election, likely to the tune of $1 billion.

And that is something everyone should be concerned about.

If You Really Think About It...

The ads making the rounds these days from the PC war room tell you all you need to know about Doug Ford's view of the electorate: they are stupid - mere Pavlovian dogs that will salivate accordingly to attack ads. Young Sam Oosterhoff, who kindly posted the above on X, is just the latest of the Tory caucus to follow marching orders to denigrate the woman they see as their greatest electoral rival, Bonnie Crombie.

The above picture, which has also been promoted and propagated by various members of the PC caucus,  depicts their ongoing narrative of Crombie as The Tax Queen. The second point, about raising taxes every year as mayor, is a particular affront to intelligence. As far as I can determine, all municipalities raise taxes every year. That inevitability, for those who have any institutional memory, is thanks to the massive downloading that another PC government, led by the execrable Mike Harris, engaged in in the 90s, to the tune of the then massive sum of $3 billion. One needs only look at the ubiquitous homelessness and tent encampments blighting our cities to see how that one worked out.

As for supporting the carbon tax, well, there have been endless discussions about how the levy benefits the majority through the federal rebates; indeed, the latest revelation that the Parliamentary Budget Officer made a big mistake suggests this is just another of the red-meat issues that both the provincial and federal Tories use to stoke discontent.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer made an error in its carbon-pricing reports that are frequently cited in the Conservative Party's “axe the tax” attacks, and the Liberals want a more prominent correction issued.

The PBO quietly published a note on its website on April 17, admitting its economic analyses of the consumer carbon price in 2022 and 2023 erroneously included the impact of the industrial carbon price, too.

The PBO’s reports purported to analyze the impacts of the consumer fuel charge and rebates and concluded the carbon price’s impact on economic growth and jobs could mean up to 80 per cent of families won’t break even with rebates. The federal Conservatives seized on this talking point to counter the federal government’s assertion that eight out of 10 households will receive more money back through fuel rebates than they are taxed. For the last year, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and his caucus have cited the PBO report as a reason to “axe the tax.”

“By incorporating the impacts of the industrial Output-based Pricing System (OBPS) for industrial polluters, the economic impacts projected in your report certainly overestimate the real costs of the fuel charge,” wrote [Liberal MP Ryan] Turnbull.

Not that any of this will make any difference to the attack dogs and those who bay at their provocations. However, the electorate, if it wants to make an informed choice, really needs to rise above the street tactics so favoured these days by our 'leaders' and learn to think for itself.

A big ask, I know.

Will He Or Won't He?

H/t Theo Moudakis

When my son was young, he had a Magic 8 Ball which, if you asked it a question, would attempt to answer it after a fashion. One of its most frequent responses was something along the lines of, "All the signs point to it." For those given to political prognostications, that would seem to be the answer to the question of whether Doug Ford will call an early election in Ontario, despite winning a resounding majority two years ago.

Indeed, all the signs point to it. Despite paying out a potential $1 billion in early contract cancellation fees and subsides, Dougie is hell-bent on getting more alcohol into more hands at the earliest possible date. Why? Presumably non-drinker Doug believes that the way to a (wo)man's heart is through the liver, but more importantly, there are storm clouds on the horizon that may not augur well for a later election.

There is, of course the ongoing investigation into the Gteenbelt scandal, including a criminal probe by the RCMP. While such investigations are notoriously slow, it would not be a good look for the Ontario PCs if a negative result of that investigation came down before the next election. Another reason could be that they are still riding high in the polls, and given the recent by election results in Milton, one that was supposed to show the Liberals as a force to be reckoned with, the Liberals don't seem to have much of a ground game, leader Bonnie Crombie still finding her footing.

However, according to Robert Benzie and Rob Ferguson, the greatest impetus for an early election may be the fear of a Pierre Poilievre federal victory in 2025.

Sources say Ford is worried that if, as polls suggest, Pierre Poilievre wins an election expected in October 2025, there would be reduced transfer payments to the provinces, a scrapping of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s electric-vehicle strategy that is a cornerstone of Ontario economic policy and other slashed spending that would hurt the Progressive Conservatives.

However, such a plan is not without political peril.

... some Tories fear a reprise of 1990 — when popular Liberal premier David Peterson called a snap vote, and then lost to Bob Rae’s New Democrats in one of the most stunning upsets in Canadian political history.

“Peterson was higher in the polls (50 per cent in summer of 1990) than Ford (at 39 per cent in the latest Abacus Data survey) is now and had won a larger majority (in 1987 than Ford did in 2022),” said a fourth Tory.

“But voters were ornery and punished him for the early election.”

A fifth Tory expressed alarm that voters would feel it was “cynical and self-serving” to have a vote so soon after Ford received such a resounding re-election mandate in June 2022.

“What would the rationale be for going early?” asked the Ford loyalist.

Depending upon the engagement of the electorate, another peril could be the fact tha the PC government is showering payoffs and subsidies to various entities at a time when basic services in Ontario are fraying. Even if we consider just the payout to the Beer Store, to many, the money seems misallocated. Writes Robyn Urback:

To put the cost in perspective, that $225-million is roughly $100-million more than the Ontario government will spend to boost nursing enrolment over the next three years (the figure announced in the budget was $128-million). It represents nearly a third of what Ontario spends annually on autism services ($720-million). And it is almost equivalent to what the Ontario Liberals said it would cost in 2010-2011 to cancel a couple of gas-plant projects in Mississauga and Oakville. In reality, the cost for the Liberals to buy support in those ridings (which, of course, was paid for by taxpayers) rang in at more than $1-billion.

Then there is this missive from someone living in rural Ontario: 

Apparently, Premier Doug Ford and his government are using valuable time and funds to put beer and wine in convenience stores. As a resident of a rural community in the province of Ontario, I would far rather see time and money spent on providing adequate health-care facilities, doctors and nurse practitioners to those of us who have no primary care provider and very little hope of attaining one in the near future. To me this push to supply more access to alcohol is misguided when so many Ontarians are struggling to get help for a wide range of health issues. Wake up, Ford. Realign your priorities to meet the real needs of the people of Ontario, the people who voted you into power.

Sharon Phelps, Lindsay

The cynic in me would say that most sins are quickly forgiven and forgotten by an often-oblivious electorate. My inner, barely-alive optimist hopes this is not the case.