Monday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your Labour Day reading.

- David Macdonald offers a reminder that any difficulty employers are having finding workers is a result of their failing to pay wages to even match, let alone stay in front of, the cost of living. And Trish Hennessy takes a look at the politics of inflation - including the tools to support a reasonable standard of living which have mostly been ignored or ruled out in favour of blatant political bribes by governments who are ideologically opposed to helping people.

- Jake Rosenfeld discusses how the disconnect between low unemployment and continued exploitation is resulting in greater recognition of the importance of unions. And David Beers interviews Enda Brophy about the efforts of gig workers to fight back against platforms designed to evade the protections won in the 20th century.

- Meanwhile, Jorge Renaud writes that one of the U.S.' main workarounds to avoid paying reasonable wages - the prison labour complex - does nothing to improve the future employment prospects of the inmates who have been turned into profit centres.

- Christopher Curtis writes that the CAP government's failure to rein in an epidemic of drug poisonings should be a far greater issue in Quebec's ongoing election. And Karen Ward highlights the importance of how we talk about an avoidable public health catastrophe to avoid minimizing or excusing the human cost of inaction.

- Finally, EKOS offers a look at Canadians' views of the Flu Trux Klan - with a strong majority opposing it within nearly every grouping except for those who consumer disinformation on a regular basis.

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Ian Austen takes Alberta's shame to the international stage by pointing out how the UCP's "best summer ever" has given rise to the fourth wave of COVID-19. Adam Hunter points out how similarly disastrous pandemic mismanagement hasn't yet produced the same political consequences for Scott Moe as for Jason Kenney, while Doug Cuthand calls out Moe for putting politics over public health. And Zak Vescera reports on the Moe government's decision to start withholding modeling information which has demonstrated how reckless it's been.

- Meanwhile, Mackenzie Read talks to Nazeem Muhajarine about the need for more public health steps to get Saskatchewan's fourth wave under control. Lynn Giesbrecht reports on the hundreds of cases already known to have arisen in two weeks following the return to schools this fall. Dan Jones reports on the responses to Moe's attempt to point fingers at other for his failure to get people vaccinated in Northern and rural areas. And Jaela Bernstein discusses how underpaid frontline workers are bearing the brunt of anti-vaxxer rage.

- Supriya Dwivedi writes that the recent federal election highlighted the Canadian media's lack of recognition of how to deal with far-right disinformation. And Michael Spratt notes that while a manufactured controversy over a question about discrimination was turned to the advantage of right-wing parties, it also served to confirm the distinct and ongoing problem of racism in Quebec.

- Aaron Saad discusses how Canada's governing political parties have prevented their bases from fully understanding and engaging with the climate crisis. And Chris Hatch comments on the climate implications of the federal election.

-Finally, Loren Balhorn writes about the continued importance of working-class political parties to provide voters with a plausible mechanism for social change.

On narrow targets

At this stage of the federal election campaign, the seemingly wide range of outcomes is entirely an artifice of a first-part-the-post system with multiple parties contending for seats. Barring a drastic change in the last week of the campaign (which will likely need to overcome votes already locked in as well as significant inertia), we figure to see the Libs and Cons relatively close to each other in the popular vote, with the NDP a relatively strong third in what would be a minority Parliament in all but the most extreme possible outcomes.

The most significant point of uncertainty looks to be the Bloc - which seemed to have fallen from its earlier support levels earlier in the campaign, only to have ticked upward more recently. And as the campaign has played out it's worth wondering whether the NDP may have limited its ability to capitalize on opportunities - in Quebec in particular, and to some extent across the country.

On the Quebec front, the NDP has been explicit about limiting its focus to 6-10 ridings. And while it might be understandable not to launch a high-resource offensive into all of the terrain included in the 2011 Orange Wave, it has to be a disappointment to treat even seats which the party held in 2015 as secondary considerations.

After all, the result is that voters who have supported the party under multiple past leaders will perceive the lack of attention even after party finances have stabilized. And even in the ridings which are specifically targeted, the sense of limited aspirations from a strategic standpoint is particularly dangerous for a campaign based on asking voters to dare to imagine more than the status quo. 

Moreover, there's reason for concern about the same phenomenon playing out across the country and setting a ceiling on party support which caps the plausible seat count in double digits (again lower than levels the NDP has already reached), and limits the prospects of pushing aside either of the Libs or the Cons.

There is reason for optimism that the NDP is back on its 2000s trajectory of building from one election cycle to the next, including by being able to close its campaign strongly in close seats. But if the NDP wants to be able to put its ambitious platform into effect, it needs to be no less daring in the seats it contests - and it will be a severe disappointment if an opportunity to make far larger gains is lost to an overly cautious campaign plan. 

[Edit: fixed typo, wording.]

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Sarah Schulman discusses the importance of sleep as a determinant of health, arguing that a safe bed is the first step toward addressing all kinds of social ills.

- Laura Lynch interviews Adria Vasil about the massive amount of avoidable waste generated by a combination of online shopping and corporate brand valuation.

- Thomson Reuters reports on the justified anger of the world's smaller countries in response to the climate obstruction of the wealthiest countries on the planet. And Eleanor Boyle points out that if we recognize the importance of the fight against a climate breakdown, we should be willing to accept rationing as part of our battle plan.

- Gil McGowan, Guy Smith, Heather Smith, Mike Parker, Rory Gill and Jason Schilling argue that Jason Kenney has no right to turn the retirement savings of Alberta workers into a bailout fund for a dying oil industry. And Murray Mandryk points out the immaturity behind Scott Moe's trial balloons about claiming power over immigration and policing - though the more important factor in Moe's announcements looks to be a complete absence of independent thought as he instead parrots whatever Kenney says. 

- Finally, Nora Loreto highlights how Quebec's Bill 21 singles out minority women as being forced to choose between their faith and culture or the ability to support a family.

On unreliable suppliers

There's been plenty of bluster between Jason Kenney and Yves-Francois Blanchet over equalization and its relationship to the oil industry. But it's worth pointing out that to the extent Quebec (or any other province or jurisdiction) currently relies on fossil fuels from Alberta, Kenney himself has gone out of his way to make that an unacceptable risk. 

After all, Kenney's very first act in office was to declare that any supply of oil to a province which has concerns about pipelines can be cut off at any moment - taking what was already a dangerous symbol, and turning it into an immediate threat.

For the moment, there's a temporary injunction preventing Kenney from acting on it. But there's no indication he's backed off of the initial inclination to try to blackmail his province's customers into further endangering their own environment as the price of having any access to Alberta oil.

That represents an obvious reason why any Canadian province should be hesitant to make itself any more reliant on the tar sands than it can possibly avoid - particularly in deciding whether to accept the construction of long-term oil infrastructure. And even independent of the climate dangers of avoidable fossil fuel consumption, the safe course of action for any province looks to be to wean itself off the supply of an unscrupulous pusher as soon as possible.

Canada 2019 - Election Notes

With Canadians going to the polls tomorrow, I'll offer a few thoughts on what to watch for on election day and beyond in a campaign whose early stability seems to have given way to some late shifts. 

First, a minority Parliament seems likely. But of all the predictions and expectations which can go awry based on unexpected late-campaign movement, few are more precarious than the balancing act required to create a minority situation. And 2015 offers a recent precedent where a seemingly close race turned into an unexpected majority.

By the same token, the seat projections which have shown effective ties for first and third place based on median expectations shouldn't be seen to make those into particularly likely outcomes in any event. The end of the campaign matters in ways which won't have been caught by earlier polling, and the default expectation should be that they'll be off somewhat (even if we can only make the most educated guesses possible as to how, with Frank Graves for one already reporting that a Lib majority might be in sight).

Second, if a minority does result from the vote, the next crucial question will be which party or parties hold the balance of power - or which might instead be dismissed as unworthy of any say due to being just short of the mark. (See Paul Martin, 2004.)

There, the most important swing factor is one which has received relatively little attention in mainstream coverage, even if it seems to be the subject of plenty of individual-level interest.

The Bloc has undoubtedly regained strength in Quebec compared to the previous two election cycles, with some models hinting at prospects of winning half the province's seats or more. But the NDP has pushed its way upward in the polls at the end of the campaign as it challenges the Bloc directly for the support of progressive voters.

That matters in two key ways: a relatively small shift may be decisive in Quebec seats with multi-party splits (as can be seen from the sharp turns at the end of both the 2011 and 2015 campaigns), while also determining who emerges with the larger caucus and the balance of power in Parliament as a whole. And for voters who want to see the Libs forced to act on the national progressive promises they're again trumpeting on the campaign trail after neglecting them in office, it's crucial for the NDP to be in a position to set the terms of any governing arrangement.

Plenty of other battleground regions could also substantially change the balance of power with relatively subtle swings. And most importantly, a strategic vote against another neoliberal majority now looks to involve ensuring that other, more progressive parties get the upper hand on the Libs wherever possible.

But particularly given the lack of much organization on that front, it doesn't appear likely that any attempt to be strategic will overcome the two main forces in the campaign, being the NDP's surge and the Cons' collapse relative to the Libs. And so the main questions for tomorrow seems to be which of those factors will have a greater impact in electing MPs.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Damian Carrington reports on the Global Commission on Adaptation's research showing that we're woefully unprepared for catastrophic climate change - and that prevention today will far more than pay off in the future (except for those who consider climate apartheid to be an acceptable outcome). And PR Newswire points out the massive costs of the U.S.' existing air pollution (which Donald Trump and the Republicans of course want to exacerbate).

- J Mijin Cha and Jeremy Brecher recognize that climate action is entirely compatible with economic development and improved employment prospects. And Alex Balingall reports on the Assembly of First Nations' indication that it considers climate change to be the top priority in this fall's federal election.

- Allison Hanes writes about the harm Bill 21 is doing to Quebec's schools and other public institutions by implementing systematic religious discrimination as provincial policy. And Nicholas Keung discusses some of the community organizing being done to counteract the deliberate cultivation of bigotry and hate in the federal election campaign.

- And finally, Chris Hedges writes that longtime apologists for purely selfish capitalism are running scared in asking that they be allowed to determine for themselves what motives other than profit should be considered in the distribution of wealth.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Seth Klein summarizes new polling showing that Canadians are eager for far stronger action to fight climate change than the Libs or Cons will even consider. And Andrew Leach points out that the Cons' excuse for a climate plan is a study in vagueness whose few discernable elements are contrary to Andrew Scheer's apparent goals.

- Meanwhile, Jason Warick reports on the potential for severe water shortages caused by a climate breakdown - including in much of Saskatchewan.

- Ann Carlson discusses why oil companies are trying desperately to avoid answering for their deception about the dangers of carbon emissions. And Sam Levin exposes how Monsanto has tried to attack and smear anybody who dares to share factual information about the connections between its products and health risks including cancer.

- Alex Drummond reports on the safety risks of Ontario's underresourced emergency rooms.

- Finally, Will Hutton is optimistic that the exclusionary right-wing world order is approaching its expiry date. But Stephen Maher writes about Quebec's Bill 21 as a vivid example of the cost of bigotry as long as it's allowed to reign supreme.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Jesse McLaren and Kate Hayman discuss how better treatment of workers can reduce the strain on a province's health care system:

As front-line health-care providers we urge the premier to follow the Hippocratic principle, “first, do no harm,” and to not intervene to stop the $15 per hour minimum wage and paid personal emergency leave days.

If Ford is interested in ending hallway medicine, he should support policies that prevent people from getting sick in the first place: a higher minimum wage, and paid personal emergency leave days for all Ontarians.

Low wages prevent people from accessing healthy food, safe shelter, and filling their prescriptions. According to a study by the Canadian Medical Association Journal, 1-in-10 Canadians can’t afford to fill or renew their prescriptions, and this rises to a third for low-income families. When patients can’t afford to preserve their health and take their medicine, they often end up in hospital.

Until this year, the situation was even worse for Ontarians without paid personal emergency leave days. The seemingly obvious medical advice to “stay home when you’re sick” is impossible for those who can’t afford to.
...
When it comes to labour policy, all the premier has to do to start supporting the people and help end hallway medicine is … nothing. Let the minimum wage increase, and protect access to paid personal emergency leave days.

Backtracking on legislation designed with input from health providers, public health experts, and economists will only hurt vulnerable Ontarians and our health-care system.

- Samantha Marcus reports on New Jersey's new legislation allowing striking workers to access unemployment benefits - a development arising out of the mistreatment of telecommunications workers. And Erica Johnson reports on the latest revelations as to how employees in similar positions at Bell and Rogers have been expected to pressure customers.

- Eric Holthaus discusses the new generation of climate activists which has never known the issue as anything but an imminent existential threat. Clare Hennig points out the problems with treating climate conditions which are still subject to substantial change in both directions as a "new normal". And Jon Queally reports on the gall of the fossil fuel sector in demanding handouts to protect against the rising sea levels caused by its carbon pollution.

- Finally, Nikolas Barry-Shaw highlights just the latest poll showing that Quebecers don't share the obsession of their political class with discriminatory identity politics.

New column day

Here, on how Quebec's latest poverty plan falls far short of the "basic income" title it's received in some national coverage - and on how we should insist on political leadership toward the genuine article.

For further reading...
- CBC has reported on the new plan and the response it's received, as well as the draconian requirements Quebec has previously placed on recipients of social assistance.
- Andre Picard asks whether the new plan provides assistance to the right people, while noting how the system remains downright punitive toward some.
- And Nicholas Keung reports on the Ontario Human Rights Commission's research showing that recipients of social assistance face prejudice from a substantial proportion of the public.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Gabriel Zucman discusses how the wealthy currently avoid paying their fair share of taxes - and how to stop them by properly attributing income and ensuring registers of wealth. And Micah White is optimistic that the public response to the Paradise Papers may be to develop lasting solutions, rather than merely expressing momentary outrage.

- Andre Picard calls for data-driven decision-making on health care, while noting that plenty of important information isn't yet being properly tracked.

- Brittany Andrew-Amofah highlights three key areas where the Libs' immigration plans are in glaring need of improvement. And in a prime example of how Justin Trudeau's party is falling far short of its supposedly inclusive brand, Daniel Leblanc reports on the split developing within the federal Libs when it comes to Quebec's anti-Muslim Bill 62.

- Meanwhile, Brent Patterson calls out the Libs' broken promise of transparency on the Trans-Pacific Partnership and other corporate-friendly trade deals.

- Finally, Murray Mandryk writes that Bronwyn Eyre's ignorance of Saskatchewan's history - including the relationship between settlers and Indigenous peoples - renders her utterly unfit to be education minister. And Liz James documents just how wrong Eyre is about the curriculum under her ministerial portfolio.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Mark Karlin interviews George Monbiot about the prospect of politics based on empathy, sharing and belonging.

- Andrew Jackson and Kate McInturff each offer their take on the federal fiscal update - with both lamenting the Libs' lack of ambition.

- Karl Nerenberg highlights how the federal government is ignoring the needs of workers facing precarity and poverty. And Brennan MacDonald reports that the Libs don't plan to change that pattern when it comes to giving workers more security through the pensions they've earned.

- Manuel Muniz notes that the same problem of an economy built around accumulating wealth for a few at the expense of the many is arising around the globe.

- Emma McIntosh reports on Ontario Environmental Commissioner Dianne Saxe's criticism of a provincial government which has consistently put Indigenous communities at risk. And Jorge Barrera exposes the neglect behind Health Canada's failure to respond to the human rights tribunal orders requiring that the federal government stop discriminating against Indigenous children.

- Finally, Paul Wells weighs in on the incoherence of Quebec's Bill 62. And Chantal Hebert notes that opposition is building based on competence issues as well as the discriminatory nature of the bill.

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Jeremy Nuttall interviews Nelson Wiseman about the Libs' attempts to spin their way out of a trumped-up tax controversy - and how they're making matters worse in the process. And Murray Dobbin points out that there's a long way to go in making sure the wealthy pay their fair share: 

The dimpled face of Conservative leader Andrew Scheer in TV ads repeating the outright falsehoods contributed to a win-win-lose-lose outcome: The rich won by not having to play the game, small biz got a tax cut they didn’t deserve, the notion of tax fairness took a hit, as did any real increase in government revenue. The loss in revenue from decreasing the small business tax to 9.5 per cent will likely cancel out any increased revenue from what remains of the tax changes.

As the dust settles, we are left to puzzle over why Morneau and Trudeau chose this particular set of tax loopholes to close when there are so many others that would have been politically popular, would have forced the wealthy to defend their indefensible privileges, and would have brought in far more revenue.

One of the most outrageous giveaways which exclusively benefits the very wealthy is stock options. We lose a billion a year to this scam, which allows corporations to pay their executives with options to buy their company’s shares at a set, low, price. This loophole — the beneficiaries pay tax on just half the gains — also leads to CEOs driving up share prices in the short term to increase the value of their options, while discounting the long-term growth of the company.

The most costly loophole enjoyed by the wealthy is the capital gains exemption. The rationale for this break is laughable as it suggests that investing in the stock market is actually investing in new productive activity. In fact, it is nothing more than a tax break for gambling, which is exactly what anyone who invests in the stock market is doing.

There are other features of the tax system that basically reward people for already being rich — the benefits of RRSPs and Tax Free Savings Accounts accrue disproportionately to the wealthiest 10 per cent. The vast majority of Canadians — for whom these programs were supposedly established — come nowhere near the maximum contribution allowed. Capping the benefits could save billions.
...
The wealthy in this country can easily afford at least two new tax brackets targeting extremely high income. The myth so firmly rooted in the public consciousness and promoted by the media — that wealthy people create economic growth — needs to be challenged. It is useful to remember that in the late ’50s and early ’60s the highest marginal tax rate was over 80 per cent, and economic growth was nearly double that experienced over the past 25 years. 
...
Trudeau in the election campaign talked a lot about the scourge of inequality. The IMF report stated that, “between 1985 and 1995, redistribution through the tax system had offset 60 per cent of the increase in inequality caused by market forces.” Since that time, inequality in Canada has skyrocketed at the same time that the tax system failed completely to respond.

- But while Dobbin is unduly credulous about the prospect of the Libs actually living up to their promises, Luke Savage points out how their politics of spectacle are designed to distract from the type of elite-driven choices we'd expect from small-c and large-C conservatives. And the Globe and Mail has come around to the reality that Justin Trudeau is nothing but Stephen Harper with a sunnier brand, while Martin Patriquin reminds us that top-down control and contempt for the public are the historical norm for the Libs.

- Derrick O'Keefe writes that there's no room or time for neutrality in response to Quebec's Bill 62 which targets Muslim women for discriminatory treatment and isolation from basic social services. And Allison Hanes discusses the toxic mix of racism and sexism behind the bill, while Karl Nerenberg comments on its place in the broader politics of bigotry.

- Finally, Linda Nazareth highlights how Canada's social insurance system is grossly inadequate to deal with a new generation of corporate exploitation.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Peter Whoriskey examines how inequality is becoming increasingly pronounced among U.S. seniors. And Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson discuss how inequality contributes to entrenching social divisions:

The toll which inequality exacts from the vast majority of society is one of the most important limitations on the quality of life – particularly in developed countries.  It damages the quality of social relations essential to life satisfaction and happiness. Numerous studies have shown that community life is stronger in more equal societies.  People are more likely to be involved in local groups and voluntary organisations.  They are more likely to feel they can trust each other, and a recent study has shown that they are also more willing to help each other – to help the elderly or disabled.  But as inequality increases, trust, reciprocity and involvement in community life all atrophy.  In their place – as numerous studies have shown – comes a rise in violence, usually measured by homicide rates.  In short, inequality makes societies less affiliative and more antisocial. 

If you look at some of the most unequal societies such as South Africa or Mexico, it is clear from the way that houses are barricaded, with bars on windows and doors and fences and razor wire round gardens, that people are frightened of each other.  That is dramatically confirmed by a quite different indication of exactly the same process: studies have shown that in more unequal societies a higher proportion of a society’s labour force is employed in what is classified as ‘guard labour’ – that is security staff, police, prisons officers etc.. Essentially, these are the occupations people use to protect themselves from each other.  
...
Important to understanding the effects of inequality is the way it affects mental health.  An international study has shown that more unequal societies have higher levels of status anxiety – not just among the poor, but at all income levels, including the richest decile.  Living in societies where some people seem extremely important and others are regarded as almost worthless does indeed make us all more worried about how we are seen and judged.  There are two very different ways people can respond to these worries.  They may respond by feeling overcome by a lack of confidence, self-doubt and low self-esteem, so that social gatherings feel too stressful and are seen as ordeals to be avoided and people retreat into depression.  Alternatively, and yet usually still a response to the same insecurities, people may go in for a process of self-enhancement or self-advertisement, trying to big themselves up in other’s eyes.  Instead of being modest about their achievements and abilities, they flaunt them, finding ways of bringing references into conversation of almost anything which helps them present themselves as capable and successful. 
...

But the real tragedy of this is not simply the costs of so much additional security or the human costs in terms of increasing violence.  It is, as research makes very clear, that social involvement and the quality of social relations, friendship and involvement in community life, are powerful determinants of both health and happiness.  Inequality strikes at the foundations of the quality of life.  Status insecurity and competition makes social life more stressful: we worry increasingly about self-presentation and how we are judged. Instead of the relationships of friendship and reciprocity which add so much to health and happiness, inequality means we prop ourselves up with narcissistic purchases or withdraw from social life.  Though this suits business and sales, it is not a sound basis for learning to live within the planetary boundaries.  

-  Dr. Dawg, the Star's editorial board and Sadiya Ansari each criticize the Quebec Libs' bigoted attack on women who wear niqabs. And Emmett Macfarlane highlights why Bill 62's deliberate discrimination isn't likely to survive a challenge in court.

- Danyaal Raza offers some lessons for the U.S. from his experience working in Canada's health care system. And Gillian Steward writes that Donald Trump's actions to strip health insurance from Americans shows how important it is that Canada didn't settle for anything less than universality.

- Meanwhile, Ian Welsh argues that Barack Obama missed an important opportunity to reshape the U.S.' economy through both stimulus legislation and executive action.

- Finally, Susan Scutti reports on new research showing that exposure to air pollution in the womb has life-long consequences for a person's health. And Bob Weber reports on new research showing that methane releases from Alberta's oil industry may be far worse than previously assumed.

Leadership 2017 Links

The latest from the federal NDP's leadership campaign as the first voting window closes.

- Robin Sears frames the choice of members as being between a comfortable fit with Charlie Angus and a more ambitious option in Jagmeet Singh, while the Toronto Star's editorial board offers its endorsement to Singh based on its preference for the latter. And Adam Radwanski sees Singh as offering more swagger than the NDP generally exudes.

- Tom Parkin argues that the Bloc's attacks on Singh may both unite the NDP around the need to confront exclusionary identity politics, and win Quebec voters over to the cause. Stephen Tweedale examines Singh's social democratic credentials. And Janice Dickson reports on Singh's interest in running in Brampton East.

- Carl Meyer reports on Niki Ashton's plan to move beyond the Libs' patchwork funding for a green transition. And Maura Forrest and John Ivison interview Angus about his campaign based on authentic concern for the little guy, while Forrest interviews Niki Ashton about her plan for a bold progressive policy vision. 

- Finally, Eric Grenier examines the latest fund-raising numbers - which show Singh maintaining a lead, but not quite the same advantage he held in his first reporting period. And Drew Brown wonders whether the campaign is all but finished in Singh's favour, or whether the other candidates may all still be in the race. 

Leadership 2017 Links

The latest from the federal NDP's leadership campaign as the first voting window remains open.

- Power & Politics and the Toronto Star have each posted new summaries of the candidates and their plans. Gloria Galloway reports on Charlie Angus' campaign as focusing on taking the NDP back to its roots. And Maura Forrest interviews Niki Ashton about her efforts to pull the NDP to the left.

- Stephen Tweedale examines how Jagmeet Singh's platform addresses both poverty and inequality - including both direct redistribution and protections for vulnerable workers. Dan Donovan offers his endorsement to Angus based in substantial part on his view that Angus is speaking more to a business audience - which makes for a noteworthy contrast with John Ibbitson's argument that Singh would be the candidate to fundamentally change the NDP's orientation toward pursuing immigrant and suburban voters while reducing the relative role of organized labour. And Thomas Walkom argues that Angus may be the perfect candidate for the traditional NDP - but may not be what members are looking for after coming close to winning power. 

- Chantal Hebert points out that conventional wisdom about Quebec voters has been proven wrong repeatedly in recent elections - suggesting that the assumption that Singh's religion will actually be an issue may be similarly flawed. Supriya Dwivedi questions whether a potential coalition which specifically embraces voters motivated by religious discrimination is worth pursuing based on both its unreliability in Quebec, and its message to voters across Canada. And the Globe and Mail calls out the intellectual dishonesty behind Quebec's Bill 62.

- Finally, Christo Aivalis offers his take on what the NDP should learn from the successes of Bernie Sanders and Jeremy Corbyn - with particular emphasis on the need to inspire supporters with bold and clear social democratic policies.

New column day

Here, on how Jagmeet Singh looks to be a strong favourite as the NDP's leadership campaign reaches its first voting window - and how concerns about Quebec secularism may have been laid to rest by the challenger who previously gained the most by emphasizing them.

For further reading...
- I've previously written about Singh's prospects in Quebec among other campaign issues here, here and here.
- As I posted earlier, Guy Caron's apt response to Martine Ouellet is here:

- For further commentary on Singh's prospects, see Karl Nerenberg's take that Ouellet is ultimately complaining about nothing more than how Singh dresses, and Aaron Wherry's discussion comparing Singh to the NDP's most-beloved past leaders.
- Finally, my own leadership ballot ranking is here.

On discriminatory treatment

Following up on this post, let's take a look at Tom Parkin's other recent post which offers plenty of food for thought. Parkin's view broadly matches Guy Caron's position on Quebec's treatment of people who wear niqabs - but seems to me to fall short of making the case for deferring to Quebec's politicians when it comes to basic principles of inclusion and nondiscrimination.

At the outset, Parkin and Caron both disagree on the merits with legislation such as Bill 62 denying service to women based on what they wear. So the argument boils down to whether there's a particular reason to hold back in discussing harmful legislation - or offer artificial "respect" to a view which is both wrong in policy, and based in part on discriminatory intent - because of the nature of the body which has passed it.

And the NDP hasn't established a strict standard along similar lines before. For example, it worked on banning the mining and sale of asbestos in the face of a unanimous resolution of the National Assembly to continue the industry, and before any Quebec politician spoke out on the same side of the issue.

In addition to being on the right side of history on the merits, that action wasn't apparently seen as problematic based on the application of the Sherbrooke Declaration (PDF) - and certainly doesn't seem to have affected Jack Layton's strategy for building bridges in Quebec.

But is there something different in the combination of political and public views about the niqab? There, one has to ask whether any position is likely to hold up in the face of scrutiny. 

Needless to say, the prime example on that front is the federal Bill C-51 - which was viewed as a political slam-dunk for the Harper Cons until they ran into principled opposition from the NDP. Within months, Canadians had turned against the bill and the government which introduced it, while rewarding the party which had the backbone to speak up.

To be sure, there's no guarantee that public opinion would similarly change on Bill C-62. But it's dangerous to assume that public opinion is set in stone, particularly when one side of an issue hasn't been given a full hearing on the merits. And there's plenty of reason to doubt that the politics of exclusion in Quebec are as much a winner as they're assumed to be.

Key precedents include both the Parti Quebecois' fall from power as it tried to run on its Charter of Values, and the fact that the top two vote shares in 2015 federally (covering 62% of the popular vote) went to parties which opposed the Cons' attempt to discriminate against people who wear a niqab.

Moreover, there's an obvious opening to introduce new policies based on NDP values to Quebec's political scene.

It's undoubtedly for members of the new Quebec-based party to decide what their priorities are, and the federal party should pay close attention one way or the other. But I'd suggest some of the most important opportunities for the NPD-Quebec involve areas where it's possible to stand apart from the existing parties - and Bill 62 is one example where unanimity among current politicians may not match the public mood, particularly if there's a distinct choice on offer.

And that could lay the groundwork for what I'd hope will be the NDP's long-term plans to retake progressive terrain from the Libs.

In 2015, the difference in the effect of the niqab issue between the Libs and the NDP arose from the fact that the former was never challenged as the loudest voice on the side of opposing discrimination, while the latter hadn't yet spoken up on similar cultural issues. But that effect could be reversed if there's a link between a federal NDP and a Quebec counterpart which both take a forceful position against discrimination, while the Liberal brand is split from one level to the other. 

To conclude, there's always reason for skepticism about the political choice to stay silent in the face of false conventional wisdom. And even from the standpoint of political calculation, the NDP is likely better served confirming that voters who care about minority rights can count on it, rather than answering fundamental questions with an awkward silence or a jurisdictional dodge.

Leadership 2017 Links

The latest from the federal NDP's leadership campaign.

- Eric Grenier offers his take on the membership numbers released this week - including Jagmeet Singh's impressive signup totals. And Sarah Boesveld summarizes the state of the campaign and what's at stake.

- Kevin Taghabon's detailed interview with Guy Caron is worth a read in full, but particularly for Caron's take on when economic activity should be nationalized. 

- A few more Quebec MPs have offered their endorsements beyond those I've previously linked to - including Robert Aubin and Karine Trudel supporting Caron, and Brigitte Sansoucy endorsing Niki Ashton. And the United Steelworkers' backing of Caron makes clear that labour support is well distributed between the candidates.

- Ashton is promoting a Labour Day march in Toronto which may serve as a valuable indicator as to how far she's progressed in assembling the type of movement she wants to build.

- Finally, Michael Harris discusses Singh's potential to win over minority voters based on being able to offer perspective based on shared experience rather than Justin Trudeau's platitudes.

Leadership 2017 Candidate Rankings - August 27

We'll have to wait until next week to learn about the final membership count for the federal NDP's leadership campaign. But today's Montreal debate and other developments result in one shift in the rankings - while an opportunity for another one has been lost for now.

1. Charlie Angus (1)

While the other three candidates spent a substantial amount of time on Guy Caron's Quebec strategy (including a brief media flare-up over Bill 62 and religious freedom), Angus's response in both the debate and the media was to provide the most succinct answer possible while two of his competitors struggled to find their footing.

That success in navigating a tricky issue, combined with a fairly strong showing in the final French-language debate, helps to keep him at the front of the pack for now. But again, the relative position of Angus and Singh by this time next week will be determined in no small part by the membership numbers.

2. Jagmeet Singh (2)

In contrast to Angus, Singh took some time to respond to Caron - making for the second time Singh has been conspicuously slow to address a key issue. But once he spoke out publicly, his initial position seemed to offer a distinct and powerful alternative: while Caron's positioning ultimately focuses on jurisdictional deference over (or at least parallel to) correctness in principle, Singh offered a strong stand as to the importance of not disproportionately attacking minorities.

But if his debate message on the same issue didn't specifically backtrack on his public statement, it also failed to highlight what could have been an important contrast not only for him, but for the party's overall debate. And that represents a missed opportunity for Singh to turn the tables on Caron and Ashton in putting principle ahead of political calculation on a hot-button issue.

3. Guy Caron (4)

Caron made some progress in a crucial week for his campaign - both in again setting the agenda with his own proposals, and in outdebating his competitors on his home turf. But while he was the most comfortable candidate in today's debate by far, I'm not sure he was quite convincing enough to start the type of shift he needs in member support.

The end result is that Caron moves ahead of Ashton for now - based less on their likely first-choice support than on his growth potential if he lasts past the first ballot.

4. Niki Ashton (3)

Finally, Ashton drops to the bottom of the rankings due to two unforced errors: one involving her questionably wading into Manitoba's provincial leadership campaign, the other her muddled response to religious accommodation and Quebec's culture.

Those new problems only seem to echo a few earlier faux pas which similarly created negative impressions of Ashton - whether based on disagreement on the merits, or simply matters of political judgment. And I'd expect that growing narrative be a significant hurdle as she tries to win support beyond her initial base.