Friday Afternoon Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Owen Jones writes that a stunning Green by-election win in the UK can be traced to their offering meaningful hope that things can get better while Labour has chosen a strategy of reactionary centrism. And G. Elliott Morris highlights how the problem U.S. Democrats face with voters is one of being perceived as weak rather than falling offside of people's values. 

- George Tsakraklides discusses the myriad ways in which our existing systems and structures are being wrecked - as well as the need to build up again from the wreckage. 

- Seth Klein points out the desperate need for public investment as part of Canada's economic reorientation, including through new or revitalized Crown corporations. But Taylor Noakes reports on yet another instance of Mark Carney instead serving the interests of dirty capital, this time by facilitating the development of fossil fuel-powered data centres following a flurry of lobbying. And Darius Snieckus reports on Investors For Paris Compliance's warning that the capital class' push to lock us into fossil gas infrastructure represents a losing bet for Canadian savings. 

-  Finally, the Norwegian Consumer Council offers a painfully apt take on the enshittification of our world:

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Ben Cohen writes that we shouldn't take a negative rapid test as license to stop taking every possible precaution to limit community spread. The Star's editorial board asks whether people are ready to make vaccinations mandatory. Supreya Dwivedi laments the innumeracy and delay which are making Ontario's Omicron wave far worse than it needs to be, while Richard Murphy highlights how stupidity in government has led to catastrophe in the UK. And Andrew Longhurst discusses the need for far stronger action in British Columbia as well. 

- Arnaud Boehmann makes the case to engage in a wartime-style mobilization against a climate breakdown. And Charlie Smith notes that the crank court challenges by petro-provinces against the federal carbon pricing system have opened the door for the federal government to play a substantial role in guiding a transition away from fossil fuel production. 

- Jim Stanford calls out the Ford government's choice to treat gig workers as second-class citizens rather than providing them the same protections as other employees. And Josh Kaye points out the New Brunswick NDP's push for a four-day workweek as an example of a meaningful gain for workers which may be well within reach. 

- Astra Taylor interviews David Wengrow about his research showing that inequality is far from inevitable in a developed society and economy. 

- Finally, Robert Hiltz writes that SaskTel should serve as a model for a country which is desperately lacking for affordable and reliable access to basic communication services due to a corporate oligopoly. 

Thursday Evening Links

 This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Christo Aivalis rightly points out that the NDP needs to be a party of labour and fight to ensure workers' needs are central to Canada's political discussion, rather than amplifying the rhetoric of the exploitative corporate lobby even when it's in the guise of "small business".

- Pete Hudson makes the case for a public vaccine manufacturer in Canada. And the latest Dispatches from the Left includes a reminder of the harm privatization does to the public interest:

Now is the time to put efforts into organizing around taking back our Crowns, restoring services like laundry, cleaning, and food services that have been contracted out to private companies, and putting a stop to privatization of any kind. For-profit service provision is violence. This year we have done nothing but pay for the short term profits gained by the privatization of vaccine labs, of long term care, of STC, of all the auxiliary services necessary to make our healthcare system function. The cost has been far more than we can bear. Privatization robs the public of control over the ways that our communities are run. It robs us of oversight, of opportunity, and, in the case of those who died so Extendicare could have its most profitable year ever, it robs us of our lives. Public ownership isn’t a panacea for the problems of our time. But it is a step towards justice and equity.  

- Andrew Nikiforuk calls out the Kenney UCP's word games as it barges ahead with coal mining in the Rockies. And the Star's editorial board criticizes Doug Ford's prioritization of enriching donor developers over preserving Ontario's environmentally sensitive areas.

- Richard Raycraft reports on the Libs' sudden cut in funding to supports for people with disabilities related to printed text.

- Finally, Luke Savage writes about the need to focus on the development of democracy even when it would be tempting to give up in the face of public choices.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Kelly Grant and Andrea Woo write that soaring infection numbers show how Canada's response to COVID-19 has fallen far short of the mark. Andre Picard makes the point - which seems obvious to everybody other than right-wing premiers - that loosening restrictions on social activity will do nothing but exacerbate the spread of the virus. Bartley Kives traces Manitoba's descent from being a model for other Canadian provinces, to being a hot zone due to reckless reopening, while David Climenhaga is rightly frustrated by Jason Kenney's refusal to do anything but complain about the failure of voluntary measures. And the Washington Post highlights how Australia has been able to get control of the coronavirus through a massive investment in public health and a willingness to regulate dangerous behaviour.

- Jeremy Klaszus discusses the myth of right-wing fiscal responsibility (with particular reference to the UCP's combination of tax giveaways to the corporate sector and slashing of services for people). And Paul Haber reports on the Alberta municipalities which look to be saddled with environmental liabilities as the oil sector skips town without paying its bills.

- Joel Dryden speculates that Joe Biden's presidential victory may find an echo in Alberta politics in 2023. But Thomas Frank warns that nobody can afford to get complacent about the continued threat of fascism - particularly if most people don't see their nominally more progressive option as creating positive change.

- Finally, Sara Birrell offers a reminder of the benefits of Crown corporations - including the ability to ensure that economic development serves ends such as service expansion and environmental progress, rather than being limited to focusing on shareholder profits.

On distributive options

Both the Saskatchewan NDP and Saskatchewan Party have released their election platforms. And for all of the electioneering around what might be anticipated outside of those, we can already tell plenty from how each party has framed its flagship promises.

Take, for example, how the parallel Crown rebate promises from each party actually work.

 The NDP's plan involves using SGI's existing surplus to provide lowered rates and rebates:

Lower SGI rates by roughly $85 per vehicle and provide an immediate $100 rebate to all policy-holder...

Those benefits would then reach 800,000 licensed drivers: see SGI's latest annual report (PDF). The total cost is projected at $120 million (see the fiscal tables here) (PDF).

The Saskatchewan Party, meanwhile, is offering a 10% rebate on SaskPower bills:

A re-elected Saskatchewan Party government will introduce a one-year 10% rebate on electricity charges on power bills for all SaskPower customers...

The 10% rebate on the electrical charge on customer’s SaskPower bills will come into effect on customer’s December 2020 bills. Customers will receive monthly savings on their bills for 12 months starting in December 2020.

But while that has been framed in terms of its effect on residential and farm customers, the vast majority of the effect - and cost - involves incentivizing the use of power in the commercial and industrial sectors.

According to SaskPower's latest annual report, the province's $2.6 billion in electricity sales include $792 million to 130 power utilities (e.g. Saskatoon and Swift Current's local utilities); $571 million to just under 399,394 residential accounts; $521 million to 63,757 commercial accounts; $451 million to 19,466 oilfield accounts; and $190 million to 57,978 farm accounts.

The average benefit of $260 million in rebates would then be: $142.97 per residential customer (not the $215 specified in the platform); $327.71 per farm customer (not the $845 stated in the platform); $817.17 per commercial customer (unmentioned in the platform); and $2,316.86 per oilfield customer (unmentioned in the platform). And in the latter cases, it's not hard to anticipate that the availability of the rebate would actually incentivize the use of less-efficient power use options for as long as the price of power is being artificially held down.

The end result is that the Sask Party's plan costs twice as much as the NDP's to reach just over half as many people directly, with a built-in bias toward commercial interests generally (and the oilpatch in particular). Needless to say, it's not hard to see which of those options is better targeted at making life more affordable for people. 

Now, I'd think it's fair to question whether either of these planks should be considered a top priority given all of the other areas in desperate need of public investment. 

But it's certainly worth noting that the Saskatchewan Party is looking to spend far more Crown money to smuggle giveaways to the oilpatch and the corporate sector. And both the province's balance sheet and those of its families will be far better off with the NDP's choices.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- T.M. Scanlon analyzes the dangerous effects of wealth inequality. And Philip Alston discusses how COVID-19 has only exposed an existing pandemic of poverty and inequality which was previously masked by grossly insufficient poverty lines:

The consequences of this highly unrealistic picture of progress against poverty have been devastating.

First, it is attributed to economic growth, justifying a “pro-growth” agenda characterised by deregulation, privatisation, lower taxes for corporations and the wealthy, easy movement of money across borders and excessive legal protections for capital. In my six years investigating governments’ anti-poverty efforts for the UN, I encountered this convenient alibi time and time again. Everything from tax breaks for the super-rich to destructive mega-projects that extract wealth from the global south are lauded as efforts to reduce poverty, when they do no such thing.

Presenting the agenda of the wealthy as the best road to poverty alleviation has entirely upended the social contract and redefined the public good as helping the rich get richer.

Second, the progress narrative has been used to drown out the appalling results so often brought about by this perversion of pro-growth policies. Many of the countries that have achieved great growth in GDP have also experienced exploding inequality, rising hunger, unaffordable health and housing costs, persistent racial wealth gaps, the proliferation of jobs that don’t pay a living wage, the dismantling of social safety nets and ecological devastation. These phenomena, directly related to neoliberal policies, are unaccounted for in the tale of heroic gains against poverty.

...

Until governments take seriously the human right to an adequate standard of living, the poverty pandemic will long outlive coronavirus. This requires them to stop hiding behind the World Bank’s miserable subsistence line and abandon triumphalism about the imminent end of poverty. Deeper social and economic transformation is imperative, to avert a climate catastrophe, provide universal social protection, achieve redistribution through tax justice and ultimately to really get on track to ending poverty.

- Robert Watcher discusses how California's initial strong response to COVID-19 gave way to carelessness and then massive outbreaks. Robert Reich writes about the difficulty in trying to respond to crises while the U.S. Presidency and Senate are controlled by men bent on destroying effective government. And Pankaj Mishra notes that both the U.S. and UK have deliberately undermined their own public capacity just in time for its absence to hurt as much as possible.

 - Nik Koskal interviews Lezlie Lowe about the need for publicly-available washrooms - particularly in the midst of a pandemic where sanitization is even more vital than usual.

- Jordan Press reports on the justified push by Canadian labour to ensure essential workers receive a living wage while risking their health for the public.

- David Climenhaga discusses how the Kenney UCP is looking to take Alberta back to the era of child labour. And CBC News reports on how a shift toward increased health care privatization will ensure that treatment is only available to people with money to burn.

- Finally, Rob Mahon reports on the Saskatchewan NDP's criticism of Scott Moe's choice to hand outside businesses and workers the bulk of SaskPower's construction work. And Wayne Mantyka reports that the Sask Party is going far out of its way to break the promise that it would stop at privatizing liquor retailing, but leave warehousing in the hands of the Saskatchewan Liquor and Gaming Authority.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Jim Coyle lists a few of the lies voters tell themselves around election time. And the Angus Reid Institute counts the large number of voters who cast a ballot for a party they don't actually support - with the Trudeau Libs as the main beneficiary of begrudged ballots. 

- Luke Savage discusses how the NDP can build off a campaign in which substantial progress on policy discussions and leadership approval led to disappointing vote and seat totals. And Ed Broadbent offers his suggestions as to how the NDP can exert influence in a minority Parliament, while Stefan Avlijas writes that an essential element of the balance of power is strengthening left-wing parties so they're in a position to fight another election campaign at any time.

- Meanwhile, Roberto Rocha points out how a financing system requiring parties to fund-raise through a large number of relatively small donors has affected Canadian politics.

- Emma Gilchrist discusses what we can expect on environmental issues from the new Parliament. And Chris Hall writes about the regional fault lines within Canada's new group of MPs.

- Finally, Greta Moran discusses the value of public ownership of utilities such as power grids. And an even more widespread planned blackout which will leave millions of Californians without power only confirms how poorly people are served when profit motives conflict with essential needs.

On selloffs and sellouts

So far, there hasn't been much follow-up since the revelation that the Saskatchewan Party set up (PDF) a committee, and arranged for sensitive operational details to be handed over to bidders in the process. But while there's plenty left to be investigated about how both the secret committee and the Crowns themselves tried to sell off public resources behind closed doors, we can already identify some glaring dishonesty from the Saskatchewan Party government.

Here's what was revealed as a result of SaskTel's submissions to the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner about information never before revealed to the public. See para. 97:

In its submission, SaskTel indicated the following:

• the Cabinet Committee on Crown Structure had been set up to oversee the potential sale of up to 50% of crown corporations. It was created by the Premier at the March 1, 2017 Cabinet meeting.
• the Vice-Chairperson of the Cabinet Committee on Crown Structure (Vice-Chairperson), who was also the Minister Responsible for SaskTel and SaskTel Holding Corporation (SaskTel Minister), verbally asked SaskTel’s President and CEO to prepare the slide decks (records 10 and 11).
• SaskTel’s President and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) prepared the slide deck to allow the Vice-Chairperson/SaskTel Minister to review the progress that had been made and to ultimately make decisions and determine next steps, if any, to achieve a partial sale of SaskTel.
• SaskTel’s President and CEO was advised that the slide deck would be shared with the Cabinet Committee on Crown Structure where further decisions would be made.
• The content of records 10 and 11 would clearly be so important that Cabinet and its committees would had to have been involved in a decision.

So how forthcoming was the Saskatchewan Party about its having taken the time which could have been spent consulting on tragic budget decisions to work on handing over equity stakes in the Crowns? For the answer, let's go to the March 6, 2017 Hansard (PDF) - in the first question period after Brad Wall secretly set up his selloff committee:

Mr. McCall: — Mr. Speaker, it’s cold comfort to the 40,000 Saskatchewan people that are out of work on this government’s watch. The Sask Party’s callous cuts are putting thousands of jobs at risk, more jobs, Mr. Speaker. And their plan to sell off up to 49 per cent of our Crowns without a referendum puts even more jobs at risk along with hundreds of millions of dollars in dividends that help to pay for health care and education.

The Sask Party’s plan to sell our Crowns to pay for their mismanagement was given a resounding no in the Meewasin by-election, Mr. Speaker, and the Sask Party should listen to that message. Will the Premier honour his promise from the last election? Will he stop the attempted sell-off? Will he scrap Bill 40 today?

Hon. Mr. Wall: With respect to the Crown corporations, Mr. Speaker, let me say this: what we said in the wake of the MTS [Manitoba Telephone System] takeover, Mr. Speaker, is that were we, as the representatives of the shareholder, to get an offer with respect to SaskTel to buy SaskTel in its entirety, were we to get an offer that checked off a number of boxes including better coverage and jobs here in Regina and across the province and a good price, that we would take that deal to the people in a referendum.

What has become abundantly clear to members on this side of the House, what has become abundantly clear to me — yes, and including what we heard in the Meewasin by-election but not limited to that — is that the people of the province aren’t interested in it. They’re not interested in a referendum. They oppose the sale of SaskTel, Mr. Speaker. That is what we campaigned on.

So, Mr. Speaker, I will just confirm for members of the House that notwithstanding if there ever is an offer to purchase SaskTel, we’re not going to take it forward. It’s not for sale.

Of course, it took two and a half years and a change in the Premier's office for the public to find out that only five days before providing his assurance - in a forum where it constitutes contempt to make misleading statements - that SaskTel was "not for sale", Wall had himself put a process in motion to sell it. And the OIPC's report confirms that the process continued long after the above answer.

So when Moe - who was of course in Cabinet at the time - now tries to claim there's no reason to doubt any assurances about the future of the Crowns even as SaskTel explicitly argues that it's leaving the door open for future takeovers, he needs to be met with some sharp questioning as to when he'll disavow his predecessor for misleading the province. And if Moe actually expects voters to trust him no matter how often his government lies and gaslights about its intentions, then the only reasonable response is to prove him wrong.

New column day

Here, on how a public drug manufacturer could both secure Canada's supply of needed medications in the face of threats from both corporate greed and U.S. policy threats.

For further reading:
- Adam Houston and Amir Attaran have been warning about the dangers of a U.S. importation scheme for some time now. And Amina Zafar reports on the call from Canadian oncologists to ensure that needed cancer drugs are available, even as their suppliers have chosen to limit or discontinue them.
- Lauren Gambino reported on Bernie Sanders' caravan to highlight the availability of insulin in Canada which is entirely unaffordable in the U.S. And Hannah Frishberg reports on a particularly vivid example of the human cost of people scrimping on needed medications.
- Finally, both Andre Picard and Tom Koch point out the problems with allowing drug exports to the U.S. under the current, corporate-controlled system.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Susie Neilson discusses the growing health gap between the rich and the rest of the population in the U.S. And Ricardo Tranjan writes about the unfairness of an Employment Insurance system in which people with the most precarious work pay a higher proportion of their income while receiving less access to benefits.

- Ian McGugan comments on the sad reality that far too many voters are supporting clowns and charlatans in the absence of any perception that governments can genuinely change their lives for the better.

- Clive Doucet laments the fact that due to Justin Trudeau's self-serving calculation that he'd rather have the opportunity to win false majorities than implement a proportional electoral system, far too many Canadian voters may end up voting based on fear rather than values once again. And Marie-Danielle Smith notes that the Libs have abandoned any pretense that their corporate-friendly trade schemes can be described as progressive.

- Lois Ross' discussion of what farmers lost due to the Cons' trashing of the Canadian Wheat Board offers a reminder of what we stand to lose by failing to recognize the importance of public institutions. And Murray Mandryk recognizes that Saskatchewan is far better off for the failure of the Devine PCs' attempt to sell off SaskEnergy.

- Finally, Rebecca Traister points out the need for political commentary to reflect the changing face of the political system. And Alex Ballingall discusses the increasing recognition of the importance of the environment among Canadian voters, even as the two largest parties in Parliament go out of their way to offer as little as possible.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Matthew Desmond writes about the large number of economic and social benefits from paying workers a living wage. And Stephanie Akin reports on the significance of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez walking the talk when it comes to her own staff.

- Andrew MacLeod discusses the losses the B.C. Liberals inflicted on the province's Crown corporations - and the sad reality that reporting at the time was largely ignored by the corporate media.

- Paul Willcocks highlights the absurdity of the complaints about land speculation taxes by wealthy property owners whining they have more homes and shell corporations than they can be bothered to track in the midst of a housing crisis.

- Andrew Coyne writes about the Libs' quibbling over descriptors as it becomes increasingly clear that the Trudeau PMO put the thumb on the scale to assist SNC-Lavalin in trying to escape prosecution. And Anne Kingston comments on the significance of corporate bullies and their Lib enablers refusing to take "no" for an answer.

- Meanwhile, Caroline Criado Perez points out how safety testing based on the average male creates a world that's extremely dangerous for women.

- Finally, Doug Cuthand weighs in on the rise of right-wing violence and extremism in Canada - including the role of conservative politicians in stoking their flames.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Trevor Tombe highlights how equalization actually works - and how the bleatings of Jason Kenney, Scott Moe and other demagogues would serve only to eliminate anything worthy of the name.

- Mary O'Hara rightly argues that child poverty in the UK and U.S. is an outrage demanding an immediate response - and the same holds true in Canada as well. Alexandra Zannis comments on the need to move from temporary holiday charity to a commitment to human dignity and public support throughout the year. And Al Wiebe writes about his experience of poverty during the holiday season.

- Elizabeth Warren makes the case for a government generic drug manufacturer to ensure that public health isn't at the mercy of corporate rent-seeking. And Mariana Mazzucato discusses the importance of mission-oriented governance, including recognition of the positive role governments can and should play in economic development.

- Meanwhile, Murray Mandryk points out the lack of even a basic maintenance plan at SaskPower as a painful example of a vital public service being neglected.

- Finally, Max FineDay writes that reconciliation is only possible if everybody works toward it - and that there's far too little indication that non-Indigenous Canadians are prepared to put in the effort.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Matt Bruenig highlights Norway's high level of social ownership, with 76% of non-home wealth in public hands in an extremely prosperous country. And Patrick Collinson reports on the latest World Happiness Survey, showing Norway within a group of relatively equal Nordic countries at the very top.

- Christo Aivalis discusses the elements of economic democracy, as well as the need for the NDP to offer voters a clear option of social ownership:

(H)owever important things like Medicare, education, and social security were, they did not constitute the outer boundaries of the social-democratic project. Put another way, what fundamentally distinguished social democracy from liberalism was a conviction of who should control the economy, with liberals saying it should be within largely private control, and social democrats claiming that, through various means, the economy should be controlled publicly.

Canadian social democrats, simply put, need to re-embrace the value in challenging private property’s dominance over the state. This isn’t to say the party is without existing ideas on this front. Andrea Horwath’s Ontario NDP is pledging to re-nationalize Hydro Ontario, and is calling for a reversal of many contracted out public services. Similarly, Niki Ashton’s federal leadership campaign made public ownership a central plank, while Charlie Angus had specific policies that would encourage worker and community-owned enterprises. Still, much more must be done on this front, and as we’ve seen, specific lessons are found within the party’s own recent history.

Jagmeet Singh’s NDP has already made impacts on issues like overhauling our tax system with a view towards a more equitable society. But if the party wants to offer a unambiguous distinction between itself and the ostensibly progressive Trudeau Liberals, a platform predicated on democratizing workplaces and the wider economy is a fantastic start, especially when aligned with provincial NDP sections willing to promote the same objectives in those jurisdictions where they have the most power.

- Richard Poplak points out the outsized (and unaccountable) role played by Export Development Canada in financing questionable corporate activity.

- Sara Mojtehedzadeh reports on the difficulty injured workers have securing compensation in the face of abusive practices by Ontario employers. Tim Berners-Lee warns against allowing a small number of massive tech firms to dictate access to content online. And Crawford Kilian argues that a public-sector drug manufacturer is a needed cure for the problems with corporate incentives to encourage overprescription.

- Finally, Bob Ramsay writes that Canada's most privileged people are getting more antisocial with time and increased wealth, as charitable contributions as a share of income plummet among those with the most to give.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Axel von Schubert notes that the effect of Donald Trump's giveaway to his billionaire buddies will be to turn the U.S. into a tax haven itself. And Michelle Chen discusses how the growth in inequality has been the result of political choices at the behest of the people who already had the most:

Wherever you live in the world, here’s a newsflash: You’ve been robbed. Not by a hidden bandit, but a global kleptocracy: the super-rich who’ve managed to rob the poor blind in every corner of the globe for the past seven decades. And a research team led by pioneering economist Thomas Piketty, the World Inequality Lab, has mapped out how that theft has played out on a global scale.

Not surprisingly, America was near the top of the list in terms of how unequal our country is, in addition to being far richer as a whole than any other nation. Still, while inequality is universal—polarizing countries and dividing individual nations internally—some countries are, surprisingly, more unequal than others.
...
The wealth gap is epidemic but not inevitable. Policy choices still make a difference. In the United States, deeply ingrained antipathy for the welfare state and regulation has pushed a harsh neoliberal agenda since the late 1970s—a pattern that is now being reproduced across the Global South as poor countries attempt to capitalize on global trade but in the process are becoming more exposed to extreme market volatility and devastating poverty and social strife.
...
We can mitigate the worst effects of capitalist overproduction through mobilizing what’s left of our democratic institutions at the local and state levels, where social spending and education investment are often concentrated. Mobilizing grassroots campaigns to boost the minimum wage, expand union representation, institute universal health care, or guarantee retirement security obviously can’t overturn the global trend in wealth accumulation, but will at least move struggling communities toward a fairer social contract.
...
To ensure that future generations are better prepared to stop and reverse wealth polarization, developing a socially conscious, educated citizenry is key. On the other hand, given the number of college graduates working low-wage jobs and facing debt, Chancel emphasized, “education can’t do everything against inequality. This is where minimum wage policies, support to trade unions, work regulation policies, [and] laws to ensure that workers are represented in corporate governance institutions can play an important role” in balancing out structural inequality. 

- Meanwhile, Tracy Sherlock points out the increase in inequality in British Columbia over the past decade, with poor workers being paid less while the wealthy see their income soar.

- Ben Casselman writes that a turn toward full employment is offering a real opportunity for people who previously faced barriers to work.

- Finally, Mariana Mazzucato discusses the importance of creating wealth in multiple forms, particularly public ones. And Murray Mandryk comments on the Saskatchewan Party's reflexive refusal to allow the public to share in any new economic development, as epitomized by its choice to release a half-baked plan for corporate distribution rather than using existing retail infrastructure for marijuana sales.

On entrenchment

Following up on my earlier post and column, let's start taking a look at some of the more distinctive policy proposals on offer between Saskatchewan's NDP leadership candidates.

Probably the most noteworthy single promise so far is this from Trent Wotherspoon as part of his platform on Crown corporations:

Lock down our Crown Corporations and ensure they’re around for generations to come by putting the requirement for a referendum before any sale into the constitution…

Of course, the previous NDP government took steps to protect the Crowns through legislation, with decidedly mixed results. The Saskatchewan Party was cowed into acceding to the Crown Corporations Public Ownership Act. But it eventually felt entirely comfortable both selling off any public assets that weren’t specifically named, and indirectly attacking or ignoring the legislation itself after acceding to its terms once (PDF).

The major advantage of Wotherspoon’s proposal would then be to avoid allowing a single provincial government to sell off a Crown on its own to the extent a sale fell under the new constitutional definition.

But even if the NDP found a federal government willing to cooperate in passing a constitutional amendment to protect public ownership (which is far from clear with either the Libs or Cons in power, plus a requirement for Senate approval), it would face some logistical difficulties.

In order to lock down all Crowns, a constitutional amendment would need to be extremely specific in limiting all means of disposing of or reducing the public ownership of a clear and expansive list of assets. But there's some point where wording intended to protect against ill-advised sell-offs would also limit the ability to operate Crowns effectively by deciding whether some assets and lines of business might no longer fit within the public interest.

Meanwhile, it's also not clear that any protection would be extended to future Crowns which might be developed absent another set of constitutional amendments. And so any debate over a constitutional amendment, as well as any actual implementation, would likely be backward-looking rather than forward-looking.

Finally, the same process used to apply a constitutional amendment could eventually be used to reverse it - meaning that a single term of right-wing government at both levels could undo it in an instant. (And unlike the legislation still on the books, that process wouldn't necessarily involve any public consultation.)

To be clear, some of Wotherspoon's other proposals do rightly address broader issues and opportunities in the Crown sector. But they rank lower in priority and prominence than the constitutional proposal.

In contrast, Meili's platform plank on Crowns includes substantially more discussion as to where it's possible to expand on the services and industries currently included in the sector. And the future of our common wealth likely lies more in confirming for the public how the province benefits from treating Crowns as a valuable part of our economy and political system - not focusing on process to save them in form.

In sum, while it's well worth discussing how to protect and build Saskatchewan's Crown sector from corporatist politics, it's also worth questioning whether a constitutional amendment is the place to start.

New column day

Here, on some of the economic ideas on offer from Ryan Meili and Trent Wotherspoon in Saskatchewan's NDP leadership campaign.

For further reading...
- I've talked about some of the points of commonality between the candidates' platforms here.
- And the column responds in part to Murray Mandryk's view that there's some lack of talk about economic vision and other pocketbook issues in the NDP campaign.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Canadians for Tax Fairness discusses the appallingly small tax contributions made by Canada's largest companies, the vast majority of whom have foreign subsidiaries to avoid paying their fair share.

- Meanwhile, Robert de Vries and Aaron Reeves point out the unfortunate reality that far too many people are prepared to overlook how the wealthy manipulate our tax systems while holding people living in poverty to a spotless ethical standard.

- Martin Regg Cohn writes about the Ontario Libs' purely political choice to hand free money to businesses as the price of increasing the province's minimum wage.

- And Sara Mojtehedazeh reports on the Wynne Libs' decision to open the door to massive loopholes to allow employers to impose unpredictable scheduling on workers.

- Josh Gordon discusses the need for a property surtax in British Columbia to ensure both a modicum of tax fairness, and sufficient funding to provide public services.

- Finally, Tim Quigley asks whether Saskatchewan voters can reasonably trust a Wall government which has repeatedly broken its promises on Crown corporations - and rights argues that if not, then an immediate repeal of Bill 40 is in order to protect our Crowns. 

New column day

Here, on how Brad Wall's belated attempts to muddy the waters can't avoid a clear verdict that he's selling off Saskatchewan's commonwealth for corporate gain.

For further reading...
- Kendall Latimer reported on Wall's announcement that the price of previously-announced corporate tax cuts will be directed toward some other business-oriented use.
- CBC reported on the announced repeal of Bill 40, while Brent Patterson commented on the win for the activists who have been fighting it. And I'll point out again my post on how the bill was deceptive from the beginning.
- Finally, CBC also reported on the latest giveaway of what was a publicly-owned liquor store in Watson. And data on that store's sales in the column is from the government's backgrounder (PDF).

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Linda McQuaig makes the case as to why any NAFTA renegotiation needs to focus on workers' rights:

NAFTA has been key to the transformation of Canada over the last two decades, enabling corporations to become ever more dominant economically and politically, while rendering our labour force increasingly vulnerable and insecure.

Indeed, the much-lamented rise in income inequality and feelings of powerlessness among working Canadians aren’t mysterious consequences of participating in the global economy. Rather, they’re the predictable consequences of our country signing a trade deal that greatly empowers corporations and their investors at the expense of everyone else.
...
ISDS, which has now been adopted in other international trade deals, has created an extraordinary set of legal rights for corporate investors. “If anyone doesn’t need to be protected it’s these guys,” notes Toronto trade lawyer Steven Shrybman.

Yet “these guys” enjoy legal protections much stronger than the protections available, for instance, under international human rights laws — for victims of torture and wrongful imprisonment.

Furthermore, NAFTA gives corporations rights — but no responsibilities, Van Harten says. Governments can’t bring a claim against a corporation for breaching NAFTA, and affected individuals and groups have no right to standing at the tribunals.

Indeed, NAFTA provides few rights for citizens or workers to counter all this corporate power, only “side deals” on labour and the environment that are weak and largely unenforceable.
...
The NAFTA renegotiation should be an opportunity to revise the trade deal to include rights for workers and citizens, not just corporate investors.

- Meanwhile, Jessica Elgot discusses a UK push to develop organized bargaining structures for self-employed workers.

- Andy Beckett traces how both of the UK's main parties have come around to recognizing the dangers of unfettered corporate control. And Matt Bruenig comments on the need to confront capital in order to rein in inequality.

- Trish Audette-Longo points out Greenpeace's work documenting the track record of pipeline operators - who are regularly spilling while demanding approvals for new projects based on their supposed concern about safety. And Damian Carrington reports on new research showing how the effects of climate change will be extremely dangerous even for healthy people. 

- Finally, Jerry Dias writes that it's time to call out Brad Wall as a liar for his deception about Saskatchewan's Crown corporations. John Conway explores what's become of the CCF's plans for public ownership as a central aspect of economic development. And Pamela Cowan discusses Saskatchewan's persistent racial divide.

New column day

Here, on what the Wall government means when it talks about entering into "partnerships" with the corporate sector - and why Saskatchewan's citizens shouldn't stand to be cut out of the Crown assets now owned for public benefit.

For further reading...
- Others have also noted the "partnership" phrasing used by the Saskatchewan Party in identifying the future beneficiaries of its largesse. 
- Bil 40 is found here. And its effect on existing Crowns has been identified as both SGI and SaskTel have been looking to cede operations to private businesses.
- The "partnership" phrasing for SLGA is found among other places in its past annual plans (PDF).  And the latest job cuts - which are being spun as having been expected all along - were nowhere to be found when the Saskatchewan Party was announcing (PDF) and implementing its wholesaling changes.
- Finally, Adam Hunter reports on the Balgonie bypass fiasco. And in case there was any doubt that planning for a roundabout was supposed to include consideration of the needs of farm equipment, here's the information page from SaskBuilds' proudly-proclaimed partner.