... but I wish He would choose better messengers:
Reflections, Observations, and Analyses Pertaining to the Canadian Political Scene
Wednesday, April 6, 2016
The Outrage Continues
In the weekend Star, Tony Burman gave five reasons that Canada should cancel the Saudi arms deal, an immoral agreement which the Trudeau government refuses to budge on. I will simply give the headings of his arguments here:
1. Canadians oppose it
2. Canada is being bought off
3. Saudi Arabia is an awful regime
4. Canadian arms are undoubtedly killing innocent people
5. Canada’s arguments have no moral core
In response to that column, Star readers offer their views:
Canada must cancel the contract selling armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. Yes, let's pay the agreed upon penalties. Canadians are not so venal as to be ready to sell the lives of thousands of people, and in the process, sell their souls for a handful of coins.Unfortunately, given the obdurate stance of the Trudeau government, it is doubtful that any of these compelling points will move any of our representatives' hearts and minds on this very important issue.
Better to pay the penalty for cancelling the sale than the ones implicit in the ratifying of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In the latter case Canada will be liable to pay corporations that deem to be shortchanged by enacting legislation to redress old wrongs, like First Nations inequalities or environmental protection.
Canada should cancel this deal with Saudi Arabia and not ratify the TPP. We expect this government to deliver on the profound human values that have been a hallmark of Canada.
Bruna Nota, Toronto
Once again Tony Burman masterfully and succinctly provides us with an excellent and well-reasoned article on this very serious and important topic. Is our government listening?
As a Canadian and member of the Liberal party I call upon the government to reconsider the Saudi arms deal. Do we really want the blood of those weapons when used on our hands? Is this what Canada stands for? I think not. While this is a complex issue, there is a line to be drawn in the sand.
Canada is not “back” when it sells out its moral fiber with such a deal.
Janice Meighan, Toronto
Mr. Burman provides five compelling reasons why Canada should kill the $15 billion arms agreement with Saudi Arabia. Here are two more:
1. Canada may have bypassed its own tough weapons export control laws to ink this deal. In doing so it circumventing its own rule of law and due process.
2. Canada needs to bring Saudi Arabia's extremist theological and financial support for groups like Daesh, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram and the like to light rather than trying to gain from it.
Ali Manji, Thornhill
Tuesday, April 5, 2016
A Little Bit Of Justice
Just when I fall into despair that justice will ever prevail, the gods send me a small bone:
Former Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro lost his appeal of his election overspending case and was taken away to jail Tuesday, after an Ontario judge found he had committed offences that “strike at the heart” of the democratic process.Justice Bryan Shaughnessy, who heard Del Mastro’s appeal in Oshawa, offered this grave assessment of the latter's sins:
Del Mastro was convicted in the fall of 2014 for violating the Canada Elections Act during the 2008 election and was sentenced last summer to a month in jail.
“Violations of the election spending limits and deliberate and concerted efforts to evade compliance with the honest and truthful reporting of contributions and expenses, such as occurred in this case, is a serious affront to our democratic system of government and fairness of our election process,” he said.Never, I suspect, has there been a better poster boy for the morally-depraved universe of the Conservative Party that existed under Harper, a legacy that may well-resist the party's current attempts at renewal.
“The offences that Dean Del Mastro committed … are serious and do strike at the heart of our democratic electoral process.”
Lest We Forget
The Star's Tim Harper reports that Kellie Leitch, one of the robotic but very malleable mainstays of the former Harper regime, has become the first declared candidate for the Conservative Party's leadership.
I hope no one forgets her appearance with Immigration Minister Chris Alexander during the Conservatives' desperate and divisive bid to hold on to power during the last election. She and Alexander made a good team, given that both are singularly devoid of even a shred of personal integrity:
I hope no one forgets her appearance with Immigration Minister Chris Alexander during the Conservatives' desperate and divisive bid to hold on to power during the last election. She and Alexander made a good team, given that both are singularly devoid of even a shred of personal integrity:
Monday, April 4, 2016
The Panama Papers
Marie over at A Puff of Absurdity offers a very good overview of something that is certain to have long-lasting reverberations, The Panama Papers. Be sure to check out her post.
The Toronto Star reports the following:
In the largest media collaboration ever undertaken, more than 370 journalists working in 25 languages dug into 11.5 million documents that revealed Mossack Fonseca’s [a Panamanian law firm renowned internationally for establishing shell companies] inner workings and traced the secret dealings of the firm’s customers. The more than 100 news organizations involved shared information and hunted down leads generated by the leaked files using corporate filings, property records, financial disclosures, court documents and interviews with money laundering experts and law-enforcement officials.Significantly, the only Canadian media organizations to participate in the consortium undertaking this massive investigation are The Toronto Star and the CBC/Radio Canada. At least someone in our country is concerned about the public good.
Why is this such an important investigation? First and foremost, it identifies a panoply of individuals and companies whose main motivation is tax avoidance. Their allegiance to themselves and, in the case of corporations, their shareholders, is paramount.
It should be stressed here that the vast majority of those involved in these schemes are doing nothing illegal, merely taking advantage of loose tax laws that permit such avoidance. But to me, this points to an incontrovertible truth about some wealthy individuals and many corporations: they feel no obligation to pay the country of their residence their fair share of taxes. In other words, they are putting their own financial security and profits above the land that nourishes and hosts them, the land that provides them with an educated workforce and the infrastructure that make their wealth possible.
And that should serve as a cautionary tale of great magnitude as we contemplate, for example, signing both the CETA and TPP free trade deals. The Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions of such trade agreements give priority to corporations over state sovereignty so that should a country's laws impinge upon a company's profits, that company can sue the government. Given that The Panama Papers will confirm that loyalty and patriotism are concepts foreign, indeed, inimical, to those who pursue profit at almost any cost, there is surely reason for real caution.
The investigation is a wake-up call for governments to amend tax laws that in fact aid and abet theft from national treasuries. Here at home,
... Canadians have declared $199 billion in offshore tax haven investments around the world, according to Statistics Canada.But experts say that figure is a small fraction of the Canadian offshore wealth that goes undeclared.One need not have an especially rich imagination to consider how an increase in federal coffers of that size could be used for the benefit of all.
The precise annual cost to Canadian tax coffers is unknowable. But credible estimates peg Canada’s tax losses to offshore havens at between $6 billion and $7.8 billion each year.
Every so often, thanks to circumstance and the indefatigable efforts of investigative journalists, the curtain is pulled aside and we are able to get a peek at an underlying and ugly reality. Ours is a world in which selfishness and evil often prevail, thanks to the complicity of far too many and the shield of darkness behind which much of this takes place.
Perhaps The Panama Papers can help to bring some much-needed light and eventual reform to this shameful and unjust state of affairs.
Sunday, April 3, 2016
UPDATED: Pondering The Precariat
California, as you have likely heard, is raising its minimum wage to $15 by 2022. Although the efficacy of the increase is being hotly contested, with some claiming it will lead to substantial job loss and others citing studies that show just the opposite, the fact is that it will raise the incomes of 30 to 40% of workers in that state. And that statistic alone underscores the plight of the working poor and the precariously employed, not just in the U.S., but also in Canada. In the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area, for example, those employed in part-time, contract and temporary work is an astonishing 52%.
Those are statistics we can no longer ignore.
In a good and prescriptive editorial, The Toronto Star makes some solid arguments for both governments and unions to be much more involved in ameliorating this abysmal situation. It suggests that the federal government needs to do the following:
- Enhance the Canada Pension Plan. Precarious workers at the bottom of the rung have little opportunity to save for retirement.There is a role for provincial governments as well. Ontario, where one in eight workers makes the minimum wage, can do the following:
- Make Employment Insurance benefits easier to get. Precarious workers may not work long enough in temporary jobs to receive them, or the benefits may run out long before they have found a new job.
- Create a national pharmacare program. Canada is the only country with a universal health-care system that fails to cover the cost of prescription medicine. Right now 85 per cent of those earning less than $10,000 and 70 per cent of those earning between $10,000 and $20,000 — in other words, precarious workers on the bottom employment rung — don’t have an employer-provided health plan.
- Create a national, affordable child care system that will enable parents to take on new jobs when they’re offered.
- Raise the minimum wage to at least $12 an hour, and aim for $15. As one economist put it, the current minimum wage of $11.25 “falls far short of any suggested benchmark: productivity gains, the average industrial wage, the living wage, or the poverty line.”Unions can help as well, by reaching
- Beef up the Employment Standards Act to require employers to give paid sick days, ensure temporary workers are paid the same rate as fulltime workers doing the same job, and follow the example of Australia, where casual employees must be paid 15 to 25 per cent above minimum wage to compensate for having fewer benefits.
- Enforce the Employment Standards Act with more inspections and follow-up fines and charges. Companies in violation of the act should be ineligible for government contracts.
out to precarious workers in temporary and part time positions and represent them on issues from wages and scheduling to minimum hours per week.There are all kinds of arguments brought forth on a regular basis to oppose many progressive measures such as minimum wage increases, ranging from job loss to having to pay more for goods and services. The issue of job loss has been studied, with some finding it decreases employment and others finding no such effect.
However, it seems to me that there is only real question to be asked, and Canadians are in a unique position to answer:
Are all of us are willing to pay a little more, be it through taxes or the cost of goods and services, to ensure that all of our fellow citizens' lives are defined by much more than quiet but deep desperation?
UPDATE: Although not discussed in this post, another redistributive policy approach gaining a fair amount of traction is the guaranteed annual income, about which I have written many times on this blog. Canadian Dimension has a very interesting piece on the concept and its possible negative consequences if not implemented correctly. Click here to read it.
Saturday, April 2, 2016
Will The Trudeau Government Ignore The Warnings?
As pointed out by The Mound, Joseph Stigliz has issued a dire warning to Canada about the dangers of the TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership); essentially, it will enrich the few at the expense of the many. As well, he has warned about two other grave dangers the pact poses for our country:
The controversial but not-yet-ratified trade agreement could tie the hands of the Trudeau Liberals on two key parts of its agenda — fighting climate change and repairing relations with aboriginal people, the Nobel-winning professor warned Friday.During the recent World Economic Forum in Davros, he spoke to his old friend and now International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland about his concerns, perhaps best summing up its impact on the daily lives of a great many working people this way:
... the deal benefits big business at the expense of working people, driving down the bargaining power of workers, including their wages.Despite Freeland's openly-professed enthusiasm for another trade agreement, CETA, which carriess with it similar perils, one can only hope that she listens to her old friend with open ears and has influence with our new prime minister. So far, the signs are ambiguous:
Freeland’s spokesman Alex Lawrence said the government is keeping an open mind about the deal and is following through on its promise to consult widely with Canadians.When an economist of Stiglitz's stature speaks, none of us can afford to turn a deaf ear.
“Many Canadians still have not made up their minds and many more still have questions,” Lawrence said.
The House of Commons trade committee is studying the TPP — a process that Freeland has said could take up to nine months.
Lawrence said the committee would travel across the country as part of its outreach to Canadians.
After that, Freeland has promised that only a vote in Parliament would ratify the deal, which was negotiated under the former Conservative government.
For a more detailed discussion of this issue, here is a Q&A with Stiglitz.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)