A Tough Decision?

On Today's Menu

Even though I will be riveted to the television tonight watching the U.S. election results, I have had more than enough American political coverage, having just returned from Cleveland, where politics seemed pretty much to be the only topic being covered by the media. So a return to Canadian politics is in order.

Saturday's Star had some strong opinions from its readers on Finance Minister Bill Morneau and his "let them eat cake" attitude toward those mired in precarious work. I think it is safe to say that his attitude is not shared 'by the masses'.

Finance Minister Bill Morneau thinks the precarious work situation is OK and he sees nothing wrong with a situation where worker protection has been so eroded that people are having difficulty supporting families, affording housing and food, to say nothing about saving up for retirement.

The Liberal government has shown itself only to be concerned with the middle class.

Almost nothing has been done for the homeless, seniors and those on the extreme margins.

Obviously the Liberals will do nothing for the working poor in precarious work ... the ones accessing food banks to stay alive.

I am severely disappointed in this party and its misguided focus. Its child-care program will only be affordable to a select group and not the working poor who will need it most.

I did not vote for Justin Trudeau and nothing about his performance so far has changed my mind.

M. Schooff, Orangeville, Ont.

Get used to multiple careers, our finance minister says. Instead of trying to fix the symptoms, perhaps the government should focus on fixing the cause.

The standard of living has been falling for about three decades, going back to the days of Reaganomics, where tax cuts for the wealthy were supposed to trickle down to everyone else.

Well, history has always proven that idea to be total nonsense. Instead of giving tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations, the government should be focusing on social responsibility and ensuring that those with money are sharing it with the country as a whole, instead of hoarding it.

Otherwise, we’ll see more and more precarious employment, job loss and poverty, which will cause more precarious employment, job loss and poverty. It’s a downward spiral that hurts the bulk of the population, while making more and more for the wealthy.

James Knott, Mississauga

It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when the finance minister says, this is as good as it’s going to get, get used to it. He even has a term for it: job churn.

I worry about our grand- and great-grandchildren and their future. They are told to get a good education in order to get good jobs.

All this does is make them over educated and over qualified for entry-level jobs with minimum wage and minimum hours.

Big multi-national companies have no loyalties to their employees, but want their employees to be loyal to the company. At the first sign of trouble, it’s fire or lay off hundreds.

How is the next generation going to cope when they don’t know if they’ll have a job next week, month or year? No job security, no benefits, no pension. Can they afford to buy a house or a car? Can they give their children the things they need, like a university education.

I don’t know what the government can do to bring good-paying jobs with benefits and job security back to Canada, but when the finance minister says get used to it, there is something wrong.

Allan Mantel, Victoria Harbour, Ont.

Hiatus

I'll be out of town for a few days. Blogging will resume next week.

UPDATED: I May Have The Answer

Strange cacophonous sounds coming from the skies may seem like the prelude to a science-fiction film, but the phenomenon is actually happening throughout the world. At times sounding like trumpet blasts, at others like construction equipment, the noises have been heard for about a decade. Have a listen:



While no one has found an explanation for this mystery, allow me to put forth one: could it be Mother Nature expressing her horror at the way we have been heedlessly neglecting, abusing and exploiting the earth for far too long?

UPDATE: Thanks to Marie for providing this link to other possible explanations.

UPDATED: Lament For A Vanishing World

Those who read this blog with any regularity probably know that nature is something near and dear to my heart. I defy people to watch well-made nature documentaries, walk among the creatures we share the world with, or even visit a well-run zoo (I highly recommend the one in San Diego!) and not be struck and moved, as I have been. by the energy and intelligence that pervades our world.

Sadly, much of that energy and intelligence is being lost, as reports show that we are facing drastic reductions in our wildlife populations. The most startling statistic suggests that by 2020, just more than three years from now, the numbers that existed in 1970 will be reduced by two-thirds!

For more hard truth about what looks like a pending mass extinction, check out a post by The Mound of Sound, who writes regularly about matters that affect all of us.

As well, take a look at these two brief video reports to better understand the peril we are responsible for:



The picture for marine life is hardly encouraging either.



These reports are difficult to watch, as they should be. We should all feel not only disheartened but ashamed as we view them, given that our actions as a species have led to this; we need to also urgently understand it is only by responsible and mindful action that we can reverse an increasingly ugly truth.

But do we care? Are we willing to confront our self-indulgence and egoism, modify our wasteful ways, and begin to respect the other creatures we share this world with?

Those are more than rhetorical questions, my friends.

UPDATE: The Star's editorial today suggests measures our government can take to slow this precipitous decline in our animal population, and Thomas Walkom talks about threats to our iconic moose.

The Danger Of False Equivalency

In this morning's Star, Daniel Dale has a very interesting essay on why, despite the fact that it forks no lightning but provokes much outrage from his supporters, it is important to keep reporting on Donald Trump's shameless aversion to truth. Unfortunately, it is not yet available online, but if it becomes available, I will add a link here.

On a related matter, however, my friend Jonathan alerted me to a piece from Bill Maher that is well-worth watching in which he indicts not only the lying Trump but also excoriates the laziness and cynicism of those who embrace him:



And one more thing: it appears that Trump is right in claiming the election is rigged, just not in the way he meant.

A woman in Iowa was arrested this week on suspicion of voting twice in the general election, court and police records show.

Rote told Iowa Public Radio that she cast her first ballot for Donald Trump but feared it would be changed to a vote for Hillary Clinton.

"I wasn't planning on doing it twice — it was spur-of-the-moment," Rote told the radio station. "The polls are rigged."

Star Readers Speak Out On CETA

Recently, my newspaper of record, The Toronto Star, wrote what I felt was an uncritical endorsement of CETA. The part that especially disturbed me was this:

In the case of CETA, the demonization focuses on one part of the agreement, involving a process for resolving disputes between investors and governments. The so-called Investor-State Dispute Settlement system would allow foreign firms to challenge European laws if they felt they were being unfairly discriminated against.

The critics portrayed this as a way for corporate interests to ride roughshod over local concerns. So the EU amended the deal early this year, with the Trudeau government happy to go along.

They changed the system for resolving disputes, proposing a permanent system closer to a permanent trade court. They added measures aimed at making arbitrators act impartially. And they affirmed the right of governments to regulate to achieve “legitimate policy objectives” in such areas as the environment, labour, health and culture – even if that damages investors’ expectations of profit. In other words, they made efforts to tip the balance away from corporations in favour of the broader public interest.

What the paper failed to acknowledge was that most of the above is more aspirational and cosmetic than it is legally binding.

As usual, Star readers are voicing their views strongly and unequivocally. Each letter is worth reading, but I am reproducing just a few of them below:

Re: Trade deal with Europe should be salvaged: Editorial, Oct. 25

The Star was absolutely correct in saying that CETA is a deal worth saving. Who can argue with something that provides more opportunities for our goods and services and gives Canadian consumers access to European goods at a reduced cost.

But the editorial completely missed the boat when it didn’t indicate what changes to CETA were needed in order to make it more acceptable to all participants and by glossing over the main sticking point, namely the ISDS provisions.

ISDS stands for Investor State Dispute Settlement. In a nutshell, ISDS is a process whereby a foreign corporation (not a domestic company) can sue a government (federal, provincial or municipal) when it feels that a regulation adversely affects its potential profit. The process completely bypasses the court system of the country being sued and the decisions (made by a tribunal of corporate lawyers instead of impartial judges) are final and cannot be overturned.

ISDS is an affront to the sovereignty of any country and should be eliminated from all trade agreements, particularly those involving countries with well-established and independent court systems.

Can CETA be improved? Yes, by eliminating all sections that provide a clear and significant advantage to multinational corporations, starting with ISDS.

Dennis Choptiany, Markham

It’s hard to believe the Star’s editorial board would be lamenting the death of a trade deal like CETA. This is the same type of deal as all the rest. It has been negotiated for the benefit of large corporations and even the best arguments in favour of it are a joke.

Desmond Fisher, Ottawa

I find it astounding that people are surprised that the people of Wallonia, who were informed about CETA’s contents and had the power to stop it initially, did so. I have met zero people who have gone to meetings about CETA or the TPP and felt they were in our best interests.

Harper sold the wheat board to foreign investors, while Wynne sold the well that a town wanted for drinking water to Nestlé to be bottled — both showing government favours profit over public interests.

Just wait until corporations have even more power, which is the real purpose of trade agreements.

What we need are deals that can be discussed with, and supported by, the public. Trudeau promised transparency but is just finishing what Harper started, still behind closed doors.

Well done Wallonia!

Stephen Albrecht, Toronto

I fear your editorial bad mouthing the EU is unfair. And so is Freeland’s tough-guy take-it-or-leave-it attitude.

The investor state dispute settlement mechanism has been problematic for many Canadians and clearly is for Europeans. Your editorial states that’s all been taken care of, but a recent column by Thomas Walkom says the renegotiated arrangement is “non-binding.”

Which is correct? Clear explanation of this has been fairly thin in Canadian media. But the Europeans are communicating quite openly and I feel their concerns about a Trojan horse of multi-national corporate interests using “nice” old Canada to take advantage of the deal should be taken seriously.

Ken Pyette, Toronto

As I have written before, one of the foremost duties of citizenship is to be informed and knowledgeable. It is the only chance we have of holding our elected representatives to account. Anything less is a betrayal of us all.