UPDATED:A Love Affair That Hurts All Of Us

 

If you follow such things (i.e., the news) you will know that our current federal government, echoing the passions of previous ones, has an unmitigated and uninterrupted crush on the corporate sector. The only problem with that protracted affair is that the rest of us suffer the consequences.

Examples abound, including the government's failure to achieve any results from the revelations found in both the Panama Papers and the Paradise Papers. But today's post will examine only two recent and egregious demonstrations of our leaders' fealty to their business overlords.

The first is the the holiday disaster widely reported at airports. While undoubtedly much of the chaos is attributable to the weather vagaries imposed by climate change, the corporate contempt for passengers is also there for all to see. And it cannot be more obvious than in the debacle that Sunwing Airlines finds itself in the midst of.

The Canadian government is criticising leisure specialist Sunwing Vacations after an operational meltdown left hundreds of passengers stuck when winter weather disrupted the carrier’s operations earlier this week.

The Toronto-based company, like its US peer Southwest Airlines, has been scrambling to sort through the mess, leaving customers frustrated and angry. Canadian media reports that some of the carrier’s passengers have been waiting to be repatriated from Latin American holiday destinations including Cancun for up to five days.

Hmm, about that government 'criticism'. While I have seen U.S Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg at least go on national television to discuss Southwest Airlines' thousands of cancellations, it was only three days ago that our Minister of Transport, Omar Alghabra (or his office) managed these anemic tweets:

Canadians are patient when it comes to weather disruptions but they rightly expect their airlines to keep them informed and to manage these disruptions smoothly. I am very concerned with the current situation with Sunwing Airlines.

 This ongoing situation is unacceptable. Canadians must receive the information they need to return home safely. We expect all airlines to keep their passengers informed when it comes to delivering a service that they were paid to do.

Passengers have rights under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations to ensure robust passenger protection in situations like these, and our government will continue to ensure these rights are protected.

Surely, that will put the fear of God into Sunwing, eh? If you click on the above link, you will see the contempt with which this toothless tweet was met by those who responded to it. 

My second example is the pending merger between Rogers and Shaw, a merger that will obviously result in less competition and higher prices for telecommunication services. At least our Competition Bureau tried to block that merger as against the best interests of Canadians, but that veto was overturned by the Competition Tribunal. As well, it has met the approval of Industry Minister Francois-Phillipe Champagne.

Those opposing it are groups seeking to represent the interests of ordinary Canadians.

Commissioner of Competition, Matthew Boswell, head of the Competition Bureau, said he was “very disappointed” in the decision and is “carefully considering” next steps.

That could include an appeal of the Tribunal’s decision to the Federal Court of Appeal.

 Critics say the Tribunal’s decision was hastily made and follows a troubling pattern in Canada’s failure to foster healthy competition in one the country’s most powerful sectors.

 “Though the decision is disappointing, it is ultimately a product of Canada’s permissive and outdated merger laws,” said Keldon Bester, co-founder of The Canadian Anti-Monopoly Project. “It is … disheartening to see the Tribunal rush such a critical decision for Canadians at the request of the merging parties.”

Matt Hatfield, campaigns director of OpenMedia, said the decision was “the last nail in the coffin of telecom affordability in a dismal 2022.”

The buyout results in higher prices and fewer choices, in an already tight telecom market, he added.

Official 'cover' for the merger is the provisional sale made to Quebecor of Freedom Mobile, an arm of the Shaw empire. It comes with the 'expectation' that it will provide sufficient competition to keep Rogers-Shaw on its toes. We'll soon see how that one works out, but the auguries are not good, especially given that Globealive, a telecommunication entity with many companies, had wanted to buy Freedom Mobile for $3.75 billion, substantially more than the $2.85 billion Quebecor has paid for it. Speculation is that that deal wasn't accepted because it would have meant real competition for the Rogers-Shaw behemoth.

So there you have it. As usual, Canadians are being sacrificed on the altar of big business, the only true god worshipped by our government. One can only hope that Canadians ruefully remember their place in the pews the next time they go to the polls.

UPDATE: Oh, perhaps we can all rest easy now that Industry Minister Francois-Phillipe Champagne has articulated his expectations for Quebecor for its purchase of Freedom Mobile to be allowed:

Videotron would have to agree to keep Freedom’s wireless licences for at least 10 years and the minister would “expect to see’’ wireless prices in Ontario and Western Canada lowered in line with the company’s Quebec offerings.

“What remains before me is the separate request to transfer spectrum licences from Shaw to Quebecor. Promoting competition and affordability in the telecom sector is one of my top priorities. That position has not changed,” Champagne said.

However, there is no word as to why he has not investigated the refusal to sell Freedom Mobile to  Globealive, despite the company offering almost $1 billion more than did Quebecor. (See above discussion.)

But Champagne's statement makes for nice window dressing, doesn't it?

Would I Lie To You?

If your name is George Santos, the answer is a definite yes.

While TizzEnt sees Santos as an indictment of the Republican Party, Congressional-elect also seems to be an indicator of the sad state of politics in general in the U.S., given that many in his district feel he did nothing very wrong, and would vote for him again.

 

A Moral Failing

 

It has been said that a society is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable members. By that metric, we are all coming up far short.

Although I have seen a recent uptick in people wearing masks in stores, the sad fact is that the majority shun such practices, despite the fact that masking is one of the layers of protection we have to help shield both ourselves and others from illness. Another fact is that 2022 saw the most deaths from Covid-19, both in Ontario and across the country.

Nationwide, 19,035 people died of the disease in 2022 — up from 14,606 deaths in 2021 and 15,307 in 2020.

How can this be, given the great strides made in combatting the disease through vaccinations, treatments and prevention methods? In addition to the spread of Omicron, there are other reasons for this year's lethality.

Ethicists and medical professionals point out that, as 2022 wore on, COVID seemed to join a long list of illnesses, such as influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and rhinovirus, that society has learned to live with as long as the worst effects are confined to specific populations.

In COVID’s case, that’s the medically frail and the elderly.

“I think unless it’s in your house or your social circle, you kind of forget that these people need — deserve — our attention and care,” said Dr. Miriam Mottiar, an Ottawa anesthesiologist and palliative care physician, noting that in her practice she still takes care of people who are dying of COVID.

“It’s very sad for me and my colleagues, but it’s doubly sad, because it feels like if our society managed to mask, a lot of these deaths would be preventable, because we would have lower levels of COVID in the community. So I think there’s sadness, but there’s regret as well.”

The elderly and the frail are two groups we seem as a society willing to sacrifice.

It’s not often we see a lot of medically frail, elderly people standing in line at our local hardware store or grocer. So perhaps it’s understandable why, no matter where you go these days, masking seems to be a rare thing, as does social distancing.

Maxwell Smith, a bioethicist and assistant professor at Western University, says part of society’s increasingly tepid response to COVID comes down to the adage: what is out of sight is out of mind.

Because we apparently exist to serve the economy, governments now issue only weekly updates of hospitalizations and deaths, meaning that Covid is now in the background, joining the other viruses we have learned to live with.  And because it is less likely to now victimize the privileged, its threat-level has been downgraded.

[Maxwell says] that a common pattern in the history of infectious disease is for severe outcomes to shift to marginalized or disadvantaged sectors of society, while those privileged enough to not experience the worst outcomes move on.

“Now that (COVID) is sitting in those populations and the most privileged among us don’t feel threatened anymore, there’s very little tolerance to have collective measures put in place,” Smith noted. “We sort of just say, ‘Well if those people are vulnerable, let them take care of themselves,’ knowing full well that this will continue to disadvantage those groups. I think that is at play here.”

No one enjoys wearing a mask. Indeed, as one who has a beard, I find a certain itchiness creeps in after wearing one for long durations. That, however, is of minor consequence when one considers the protective effects both for the wearer and the general public. And I claim no special virtue here, given that I am largely, but not totally, motivated by an instinct for self-protection. 

Sadly, however, in the name of freedom, far too many are willing to risk their health and that of others. This, clearly, is not a good way to conduct our lives. It can only be seen for what it is: a moral failing.

 

 

 

The Soul Of Wit

As Hamlet character Polonius famously (and ironically) said, Brevity is the soul of wit. And I can think of few wittier than editorial cartoonists, whose illustrations, when they hit the mark, are succinctly brilliant.

My favourite is Theo Moudakis, whose work appears regularly in the Toronto Star. Today's edition sees some highlights of 2022 from the master. Here are three of them:

Undoubtedly, there will be more than enough political antics and betrayals to power Moudakis and his cadre of fellow pundits through 2023.

A Time To Reflect

While I doubt the new year will see me lose any of my outrage over the political machinations of our elected 'representatives', this is the season for reflection and hope. In that vein, I offer you the following. It reflects my own perspective, one that was not always easily achievable in my younger days of work stress and providing for a family. 

In the years since my retirement, I think I have come to understand the meaning and purpose of life: to be as kind and helpful as possible to others. Indeed, we can never know the ripple effect of even a bit of kindness, gentleness, a small gesture, or simply the affirmation we give when we listen openly to another.

Beware of your ‘destined mood,’ Dec. 17

Cathrin Bradbury’s article is storytelling at its best because its characters teach us by their lived experience; instead of letting the human failings of your neighbours make you mean and nasty, you should assert independent thinking to be kind and tolerant.

Character is not fate. Destiny is determined by choice.

This choice of “personality to be” is wonderfully illustrated in the Indigenous American tale told by a grandfather to his grandson about two wolves living within each of us. According to the grandfather, they fight because each one values different qualities of being human. The angry, mean, cynical, and predatory wolf wants to dominate the happy, kind, hopeful, and peaceful one.

Provoked by suspense, the grandson asks who is the winner of this clash between human traits.

The grandfather replies that it depends which wolf you feed.

The story illustrates that our behaviour is a direct result of the choices we will make along the way.

During this fractious time of gaslighting by populist leaders imposing their phony sovereignty over others’ democratic rights, it’s good to be reminded about peace on Earth to persons of good will.

The root word of both good will and beautiful mind is the Greek “eunoia.”

There is a beauty in choosing to do good. Peace on Earth to those who choose to do good this Christmas!

Tony D’Andrea, Toronto 

People Will Remember

 

H/t Moudakis

A cynic and pessimist by nature, I rarely attribute any lasting, long-term results arising from protests. In the case of the Greenbelt Corruption and Destruction, however, I have to admit to being guardedly optimistic.

People are not quickly forgetting this desecration of environmental stewardship, democracy, and ethical, principled government.

‘Dougtator?’

I don’t understand why anyone is surprised by the Ontario Conservative government. It was long evident that Premier Doug Ford has no use for democracy, consultation or voters once they have cast their ballot. He stuffed his cabinet with toadies and sycophants, and now has a free hand to show his true colours. “The people” are viewed as a cost centre and a liability — not owners and stakeholders in this province. “The people” are expected to let their betters, (millionaire developers) take care of business. “The people” don’t need green space — they just need to shut up and go to work. Like any employee they should do as told and not express an opinion in the “dougtators” presence. Oh and no unions need apply!

Wayne Stansfield, Hamilton

The Greenbelt was a controversial topic when it was first introduced, mainly because farmers were never compensated for the loss in their land value, and it has become a matter of considerably more controversy today, as Bob Hepburn has pointed out so well his article, “Keeping developers from cashing in on the Greenbelt” (Dec. 2). It is hard to understand why developers/speculators would continue to buy up property in the Greenbelt when it was not possible for development to occur there. What or who did they know? It is also hard to understand how the entire Conservative government could ignore the input from so many experts, including city planners and experienced environmentalists.. It is time for all of us to become more involved. Try HandsofftheGreenbelt.ca.

Jim Warren, Hamilton. 

Hearteningly, young people are also becoming active in opposing this mess that they will eventually inherit. Western University graduate student Brendon Samuels writes:

On a blustery Friday afternoon in December, a group of students, faculty, staff, elected officials and community members gathered at Western University for a student-led demonstration about Bill 23, the “More Homes Built Faster Act.”

... students recognize that Bill 23 has little to do with building affordable housing, and instead focuses on removing essential processes for land use planning. Bill 23 limits the role of conservation authorities, municipal governments, and the public in reviewing and approving new developments that may impact habitat, biodiversity, farmland and climate change mitigation and adaptation.

While not all of the proposals by SOGS (Society of Graduate Students at Western) are likely to bear fruit, such as their call for a general strike to protest the bill, three of their demands seem eminently achievable. 

... students called on Doug Ford’s government to disclose its secret mandate letters immediately, per its legal obligation. The Auditor General of Ontario’s 2022 value-for-money report warns that the province is failing to provide transparency that it owes to its constituents. How much taxpayer money has been spent by this government fighting legal battles to withhold the mandate letters?

... students call on the Ontario government to answer questions directly and provide evidence-based justification for its decisions and policies related to the housing and climate crises. It is unacceptable that we continue to tolerate blatant lies, deflections and marketing gimmicks from the majority government in response to questions from the opposition in the Legislature.

 Finally, students urge everyone to continue sharing what you are concerned about in Bill 23 and other changes imposed by this government. We must continue to apply pressure and prepare for our next opportunity to vote for real leadership in 3.5 years. We need more effective public education and organizing, with messages designed to reach disillusioned voters and young people especially. Readers, please consider this an open call for spicy Ontario memes.

The environment's well-being, made especially urgent by our climate crisis, should be a matter of real concern to everyone. The fact that people are writing letters and contacting their representatives is all to the good. That young people, with a great deal of present and future skin in the game, are taking up the cause suggests this is a vital issue that, contrary to government bluster and lies, will not go away anytime soon.

 

 

The Fox In The Henhouse

My apologies for titling this post with a cliché, but it seems particularly apt given who is really behind the plan to degrade our greenspace and wetlands, also known as The Greenbelt Grab. 

No surprise: it is the developers and homebuilders.

In a rather telling article, David Wilkes ( President and CEO of the Building Industry and Land Development Association) lays bare, perhaps inadvertently, the influence he and his ilk have over the Ford government's decision-making process.

He begins by trying to provoke a sense of outrage in readers, especially the ones hoping to buy a new home. 

When a family buys a new home in the GTA, as much as a quarter of the price consists of fees, taxes and charges imposed by the three levels of government.

More than half of that amount is levied by the municipality in the form of charges intended to pay for growth-related infrastructure, additional local services and new parks.

What does that mean in dollars and cents?

Across the GTA, municipalities collect $116,000 per new housing unit, on average, in growth funding charges. These include development charges, community benefits charges and parkland cash-in-lieu. The rates for the most significant of these charges — development charges — are based on background studies that municipalities are required to produce every few years.

His dishonesty begins by implying that any savings made through his plan, which I will get to in a moment, will be passed on to the homebuyer. Apparently, the market forces we have been taught to believe in will be magically suspended, so great is the builders' desire to bring affordable housing to all.

His plan, which is also an admission of the great sway builders and developers have upon Doug Ford, is this:

Ensuring that residents get the infrastructure and services they need is important. Unfortunately, for more than a decade, GTA municipalities have been collecting far more in growth funding charges than they have been spending, accumulating an estimated $6 billion in reserves. This estimate is based on the financial information returns that municipalities file each year with the provincial Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

When challenged about the intended use of these large reserves, municipalities state that the funds are allocated. However, in most cases it is not clear whether the funds have been allocated for the new infrastructure and services for which they were ostensibly collected. Transparency and accountability are missing here. (Emphasis mine.)

The last sentence is especially rich, given that, in concert with the government, developers have operated in an atmosphere that can only be politely described as opaque. But the extent of their  influence is apparent in the following:

Given the accumulation of large reserves of growth funding charges by municipalities and the housing affordability crisis we are facing in the GTA, it makes sense that our industry — and the public — wants transparency and accountability around how these charges are collected and spent.

This is why the Ontario Home Builders’ Association (OHBA) last month called on the province to audit major municipalities’ collection and use of growth funding charges. (Emphasis mine.)

Like the obedient soldiers they are, the Ford government intends to do precisely that, at least in cities like Toronto and Mississauga. Recently, the Housing Minister, Steven Clark, promised to make Toronto whole if reduced or eliminated development fees compromise their finances.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said Thursday that he does not believe that the loss of development charges entailed in a housing bill his government passed this week will hurt municipalities and said they can likely make up some of the shortfall by cutting waste.

While Clark promised to make the city whole, he also said Wednesday that the province would be launching a third-party audit of municipal reserve funds.

Ford evinced little but contempt for other municipalities objecting to the loss of development fees, including Mississauga's Mayor Crombie.

Ford said Mississauga has increased its fees on new homebuyers by nearly 30 per cent in the last two years and that makes it difficult for people to buy a home. He also accused Mississauga of not fully spending the development charge revenues it gets now, saying the city is sitting on millions of dollars in development charge reserves.

“I see that Mayor Crombie’s out there handing out flyers and doing this – all I say is get on board, stop being disingenuous, you know, with the people of Mississauga,” Ford said. “It’s just absolutely wrong.”

Crombie said development charges do go into reserves, but municipalities are not simply sitting on the money, rather they are treated like savings going toward future long-term projects, akin to a homeowner saving up for a new roof.

“We do not collect money we do not need, and we do not have unlimited chequing accounts,” Crombie wrote.

“In fact, the funds we collect are often not enough to support new growth – we are often short and have to use tax dollars to cover the gaps.”

The Ford government is wholly incapable of any kind of nuanced thinking; that is the limitation resulting from both inveterate, extreme Conservatives and Doug Ford's cognitive and educational shortcomings. 

And all Ontarians will bear the high cost of those failings.