Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Naomi Klein discusses how Canada is failing the basic test of resistance to a fascist regime. 

 

- Meanwhile, Linda McQuaig recognizes that Canadians have every reason to be disappointed in Mark Carney's choice to veer to the right and into the U.S.' corporate orbit, rather than governing based on the "elbows up" message at the core of his campaign. And Dale Smith writes that it's long past time to stop pretending that there's any point in negotiating with Donald Trump.

- Mike Allen reports on the corporate loyalty ratings which have been developed to ensure that political favouritism is the defining principle in the Trump White House's decision-making. And Maximillian Alvarez warns that Trump and his corporate backers are turning the entire U.S. into a giant environmental sacrifice zone.

- Tammy Robert discusses how the Sask Party's standard operating procedure in dealing with agricultural approvals (among other choices) is similarly to hand favours out to cronies with no regard for the public interest.

- Finally, Steven Lewis notes that the choice to build the medical system around private physician practices has long limited the effectiveness of social-level health planning - and is at the heart of a failing primary care system today. And Kevin Jiang discusses how people facing long COVID rightly feel like they've been forgotten by the health care system (and by governments generally).

Friday Morning Links

 Assorted content to end your week.

- Damian Carrington confirms the consensus among climate experts that the outcome of the fossil-dominated COP28 was an utter failure, while Paige Vega interviews Bill McKibben about the reality that it's long past time to be counting on empty and vague words to reverse a breakdown in progress (and the continued carbon pollution which is exacerbating it). And Alaa Al Kourdajie, Chris Bataille and Lars Nilsson warn that weasel wording is likely to be used as an excuse to actually expand production and pollution. 

- Rob Miller discusses how carbon capture and storage is far less effective and more costly than shifting to existing renewable energy technology - meaning that the fossil fuel stooges hyping the former and seeking to suppress the latter can only be treated as climate vandals. And Anna Aglietta highlights how the addiction to constantly growing extraction is at the root of both the climate crisis and the failure of efforts to combat it.  

- Tammy Robert exposes how the Saskatchewan Party has destroyed the province's crop insurance system by taking insurance premiums into general revenues - even as it's also managed to blow up the provincial budget and destroy public services. 

- Finally, Yan Jie, Taeyoung Choi and Ziyad Al-Aly find that the long-term outcomes from COVID-19 remain far more severe than those from seasonal influenza. And the John Snow Project points out Statistics Canada's survey results showing that nearly everybody will know somebody who has suffered from long COVID - even if that reality has rarely been acknowledged. 

Saturday Afternoon Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Carolyn Johnson discusses how one's initial development of an immune response to COVID may affect the impact of future vaccinations. Kim Constantino reports on a finding from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics that long COVID is responsible for a third of the U.S.' total number of job vacancies. Bronwyn Bragg offers her account of the impossible choices facing parents of young children who haven't had access to protection from vaccines at all. And Bruce Arthur discusses Ontario's imminent shutdown of its COVID science table as an example of obvious disregard for public health which is breaking down public trust.

- Tammy Robert goes in depth as to the Saskatchewan Party's choice to underfund health care in Saskatchewan, while the Globe and Mail's editorial board is rightly aghast at Scott Moe's choice to use a fiscal windfall to bribe voters rather than to make any effort to repair the damage. And Jeremy Simes reports on the grim circumstances facing Saskatchewan's health care workers based on both a lack of resources and the cultivation of anti-science violence.

- Brian Sullivan offers a look at what's happening to the former waterways being destroyed by our climate breakdown. And Damian Carrington asks how long we'll abide a fossil fuel sector which has proven itself determined to destroy our planet in the name of short-term profits, while Ainslie Cruickshank exposes how industry-sponsored curricula are being used to indoctrinate children to serve the interests of oil and gas tycoons.

- Thom Hartmann discusses how the wealthiest few have a stranglehold on U.S. politics, while Zachary Carter points out that the current debate over partial student loan forgiveness is really an issue of whether workers are to have any control over their own destiny in a social order designed to serve their exploiters.

- Finally, Ira Wells discusses how instability in the U.S. represents a direct threat to Canada. And Rachel Gilmore takes a look at the cross-border Diagolon movement - seen as too valuable to Pierre Poilievre for him to speak a word against it - which has been actively seeking the violent undermining and overthrow of elected governments.

Sunday Afternoon #skvotes Links

The latest from Saskatchewan's provincial election campaign as election day approaches tomorrow.

- A new poll shows the race tightening significantly, including with the NDP holding a significant lead in Regina. But in case anybody thought the coverage of polling would be equal depending on what's being found, this one is being reported accompanied by the Sask Party's spin - while the first public poll which was relatively close to its findings has apparently been disappeared entirely. 

- Meanwhile, Morgan Modjeski reports on the voters who are losing the ability to participate due to a lack of preparation for the continuing COVID-19 pandemic. 

- The Globe and Mail's editorial board offers its take on the election, with a notable perspective as to the relatively small differences in promises between the two main parties (though the assumptions and values behind the platforms still represent major differences).

- Jen Quesnel, Winter Fedyk and Tammy Robert offer their latest take on the campaign. And Robert also discusses the failings of both Scott Moe and the media to deal with the aftermath of his fatal vehicle collision, particularly as the family affected searches for answers.

- Finally, Doug Cuthand rightly argues that we need our political leaders to deal with the continued blight of racism in Saskatchewan.

Update: Another poll shows the race tightening. PressProgress points out the corporate elites and lobbyists funding the Sask Party. And Jason Hammond offers ten of the many reasons why the Sask Party shouldn't be kept in power.

Friday #skvotes Links

 The latest news and notes from Saskatchewan's 2020 election campaign.

- Nicholas Frew reports that a majority of Saskatchewan's voters are willing to fund a reduction in class sizes. And PressProgress highlights how Scott Moe is insisting that the public health measures required in every other indoor space be waived in order to allow for classrooms to remain overcrowded and underfunded.

- Jen Quesnel, Winter Fedyk and Tammy Robert offer their take on this week's leadership debate. 

- The Canadian Press reports on the NDP's outreach to - and support among - voters who have supported the Saskatchewan Party in the past. 

- Merle Massie challenges the new, provincially-appointed firearms officer to pay attention to the real threat of gun suicides. 

- And finally, Ahmereen Salim and Peter Gilmer write about the need for legislation to move us toward an end to poverty. 

Wednesday Afternoon Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Brendan Kennedy reports on the massive job losses being caused by the coronavirus pandemic. Andrew Jackson offers his suggestions to provide immediate help to workers facing that urgent crisis today, while also laying the groundwork for a transition to a clean economy once we're able to start rebuilding. And Angella MacEwen highlights the need for a rescue package to be based on both speed and responsiveness to gaps in coverage.

- Ricardo Tranjan examines the financial insecurity facing people who are being told their rent obligations and other expenses aren't going away even after their incomes have disappeared. And Heather Scoffield argues that the federal government needs to step up in ensuring that renters aren't left out in the cold. 

- Maureen Callahan discusses the class implications of COVID-19 in the Hamptons.  Polly Toynbee observes that an economic collapse is forcing the middle class to confront a decimated social safety net. And Nick Shaxson writes that tax justice needs to be taken into account in designing and funding our recovery. 

- Jerome Roos weighs in on the need to deal with the massive piles of debt accumulated even before the pandemic.

- Gillian Steward writes that Alberta's relative success in responding to the coronavirus can be traced to the public health care system which Jason Kenney is so determined to dismantle.

- Finally, Tammy Robert calls out Scott Moe and the Saskatchewan Party for delaying public information about the spread of COVID-19 in order to frame their partial budget announcement.

New column day

Here, on the Frontier Centre for Public Policy's unapologetic role in trying to minimize the harms of residential schools - to to mention otherwise undermining any attempt at truth and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

For further reading...
- Tammy Robert's post exposing the recent radio ad is here, with CBC following up here and here. And the Frontier Centre's only apparent response is the statement reproduced here absolving Roger Currie of any editorial role - but acknowledging no concerns about its own content. 
- Beyond the latest ad and related report, the Frontier Centre's own content on Indigenous issues includes such gems as other posts minimizing the effects of residential schools and the Sixties Scoop; a call to relocate First Nations to unwanted settlements; a push to take away socially-funded housing on reserves; a statement of opposition to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and an apparent endorsement without comment of the White Paper calling for an end to any official status.
- For some other background on the Frontier Centre and its funders, DeSmogBlog has a handy summary here. And Barrick Gold's contempt for Indigenous rights has been well documented.
- By way of contrast to the Frontier Centre's response to its cavalier attitude toward residential schools and the racism behind them, see Alberta's response to the inclusion of a similarly-ahistorical question on a distance learning assignment. And Robyn Pitawanakwat and Garret Smith contrast the Saskatchewan government's forcible removal of the Justice for our Stolen Children camp against Calgary's welcoming of a similar initiative.
- Finally, Greg MacDougall discusses how colonialism continues to be a cause of alarming Indigenous suicide rates, while Kathleen Martens reports on the RCMP's stunning treatment of Brittany Martel's death as non-suspicious as an example of how Indigenous lives continue to be treated as disposable. And anybody looking for a reminder as to how residential schools actually fit into Canada's treatment of Indigenous peoples would be well-served to give another read to the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Update: See also Murray Mandryk's column today. 

Monday Evening Links

Miscellaneous material for your Monday reading.

- Evelyn Forget discusses the international outrage at the Ford PC's cancellation of a basic income pilot. And Paul Waldeman writes about Republicans' shock that voters are smart enough to recognize their giveaways to the wealthy for what they are.

- Doug Cuthand makes what should be the obvious point that residential schools intended to suppress Indigenous culture didn't have any redeeming features. But Tammy Robert's post makes clear that not only is there a worrisome lack of consensus on the basic harms of genocide, but right-wing ideologues are spending money to try to undermine the development of anything of the sort. And Steven Zhou reports on similar attempts to cultivate racism within Chinese Canadian politics.

- Meanwhile, Nick Loenen notes that a shift to proportional representation will help to ensure that extremism and bigotry aren't rewarded with artificial majorities.

- Anne Price and Jhumpa Bhattacharya write that a public wealth fund should account for and close existing racial wealth gaps.

- Finally, Michael Harris writes about the Libs' failures on the environment - and David Suzuki's role in holding them to account.

Wednesday Evening Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Andre Picard writes about the unjustifiable limitations and inconsistencies in Canada's health care system:

Break your leg and the X-ray and cast will be covered, but you will need to pay for the crutches. Break your jaw and it will be wired at no cost; break your teeth and you will pay the dentist. Get cancer treatment at the hospital and there will be no charge; take the same oncology medication at home and you will pay dearly. Suffer from severe depression and your hospitalization will be covered, but psychological care and medications will not be covered by public insurance after you’re released. If you have diabetes and live in Quebec, many more of your drugs and supplies will be covered than in neighbouring New Brunswick. Need trauma care while visiting another province, and you could get stiffed with a big air ambulance bill. Live out your final days in a hospital and the state will pick up the tab, but do so in a nursing home and you will pay.

The list of inconsistencies and absurdities is a long one. Coverage often depends on where you live, where you work, your age – but more than anything, public coverage is limited by historical accident.
...

The inconsistent coverage of mental health care (and psychological services in particular), home care and prescription drugs has been the subject of much debate, but it’s just the tip of the iceberg.

If we are going to have a semblance of a national health system across 13 provinces and territories – without forgetting the large federal health system – it’s important to have equitable (not equal) access for all Canadians. Yet, the variations in coverage between jurisdictions have never been more pronounced.

...

Medicare cannot provide all care to all people at all times. We need to make tough choices on what is, and isn’t, in the medicare basket of services. We need to eliminate obsolete and wasteful practices, and embrace only new ones that are cost-effective.

We have the tools to do so. But good evidence isn’t enough. As the report notes, we need to “translate the language of science and evaluation into the language of decisions and public policy.”

- Jocelyn Timperley explores the long-term economic benefits of fighting climate change now, rather than having to answer for its effects later. And Merran Smith discusses the obvious risks of being left behind in a global transition to clean energy.

- Tammy Robert examines the Saskatchewan public's widespread recognition of the problem of climate change and willingness to help fight it - no matter how obstinately Scott Moe and the Saskatchewan Party try to stand in the way. And Jennifer Quesnel takes a look at the modest effect of an Alberta-style carbon tax even before accounting for rebates and investments from the new public revenue.

- Finally, Tom Parkin weighs in on the mirror-image cynicism of Doug Ford and Kathleen Wynne in Ontario's election campaign. And Donald Savoie discusses how Justin Trudeau is either taking Atlantic Canada for granted, or abandoning it altogether.

Leadership 2018 Links

The latest from the Saskatchewan NDP's leadership campaign in advance of next weekend's convention.

- Murray Mandryk's questions for the candidates led to substantial agreement on most of the areas covered. But one offers a potentially striking difference in their respective economic plans - with Trent Wotherspoon's tendency toward stark yes/no answers suggesting surprising acceptance of head office subsidies:

Would you continue with the policy of offering subsidies to companies to move to or maintain head office jobs to Saskatchewan?

RM: No. This has not been particularly successful, and there are more effective ways of increasing economic activity and jobs than direct subsidies to large companies.
TW: Yes.

- CBC reports on the latest fund-raising numbers showing Ryan Meili with a continued lead. But Candace Daniel's interview with Wotherspoon includes the noteworthy take that Wotherspoon had already met his fund-raising expectations even while trailing Meili - suggesting a leadership budget below than the $200,000 maximum.

- Meanwhile, D.C. Fraser reports on Meili's concerns with the late mailing of ballots which were just received this week.

- Finally, Jason Hammond offers his take as to why members should consider voting for Meili as the candidate who inspires the most support among the people whose involvement could help renew the NDP.

Update: I'll add a link to Tammy Robert's apt analysis of the campaign - but add only that contrary to her expectations, Meili hasn't been shy about using change as a theme even in talking about the steps the NDP needs to take as a party.

New column day

Here, expanding on this post as to how the promises which won Scott Moe the Saskatchewan Party's leadership will leave him with some difficult decisions to make in a hurry.

For further reading...
- Tammy Robert's coverage of the leadership campaign features this gem about Moe's substance-free campaign:

Moe’s campaign is unbelievably thin gruel from a man who wants to lead Saskatchewan, and personally I find it even more unbelievable that 23 MLAs – or Moe’s “Team”, as he describes them – stand behind this pablum, nevermind endorse it as what’s best for Saskatchewan people.

A Moe win is not what’s best for us – it’s what’s best for them.

- Alex Brockman has followed up on the expectations surrounding Moe's promise to reverse his government's education cuts, as well as the labour movement's continued calls to stop the Saskatchewan Party's cuts generally.
- Finally, PressProgress points out the anti-abortion messaging which help Moe to win social conservative votes - but raises questions as to whether the right to choose may be under an immediate threat.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Karl Nerenberg writes about Bill Morneau's conflicts of interest - with particular attention to the NDP's justified criticism of legislation aimed at privatizing pension management to benefit forms like Morneau's. And Brent Patterson discusses a push back against the Manitoba PCs' plan to privatize public services through social impact bonds.

- Marc Lee comments on the need for investments in British Columbia's public transportation infrastructure.

- Donna Ferguson interviews Diane Reay about how the UK's education system is set up to perpetuate social status rather than to give working-class students a fair opportunity to succeed. 

- Anna Tims reports on the constantly-changing and unmanageable terms of work being imposed on workers in the gig economy. And Sara Mojtehedzadeh reports on the much-needed passage of improved employment standards in Ontario.

- Nathan Robinson writes that the left is winning the battle of ideas as U.S. conservatives in particular have stopped having anything constructive to say.

- And finally, Tammy Robert highlights the small number of big corporate donors who are exerting disproportionate control over the Saskatchewan Party's leadership campaign.

[Edit: fixed typo.]

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Louis-Philippe Rochon discusses the need for monetary policy to be better coordinated with fiscal policy to ensure both sustainable economic growth and a more fair distribution of wealth:

Monetary policy has been a failure. It has failed to encourage growth, as has been plainly obvious in this lost decade, and has been uninspiring. Not many economists dare to speak out against the wisdom of central banks and their inflation targeting quest for fear of being ridiculed or being denied tenure.  But the recent history of central banking reveals an ineffective pursuit of inflation, and at tremendous social costs.

It is time to do three things.

• First, we need to seriously rethink monetary policy, its purpose and objectives. Is inflation a worthwhile target? If so, is monetary policy an efficient policy tool? My own research is clear: no and no. If that's the case, what role do rates really play? Well, we know they have redistributive properties, so perhaps we should focus on that. Indeed, raising rates will have an impact on wage gains, but also on rentier (money derived from natural resources) income.
• Second, we need to explore other acceptable objectives. Economic growth, income redistribution and low unemployment are all a good start, but that would imply keeping rates low. To counter possible speculative financial activities, we need robust regulations.
• Finally, we need to rely much more on fiscal policy and embrace its ability to deliver on economic objectives such as growth and employment. We've had three decades of favouring financial interests. It is time for the pendulum to swing back and  prioritize policies that will deliver wage gains, a higher standard of living for working Canadians, and increased focus on  ecological and environmental concerns.

- Noah Smith discusses the racial discrimination still reflected in U.S. lending policies and wealth distribution. Maia Szalavitz points out how the fundamental attribution error causes people to unduly blame less wealthy people for their circumstances. And Alexandra Mateescu writes that the gig economy is only exacerbating the mistreatment of vulnerable workers.

- Michael Kinnucan highlights the difference between marching and organizing in the pursuit ot social change, while noting that any real improvement depends on the latter.

- Finally, Tammy Robert calls out the Wall government for pretending its own excuse for a climate change program doesn't include substantial public expense. But I'll add the qualification that it's questionable whether the money blown on Boundary Dam reducing emissions, meaning that Wall may simply have us spending billions for no purpose other than to subsidize the oil industry.

On costly considerations

I've previously pointed out that there might be much less than met the eye to Brightenview's much-trumpeted "ground-breaking" at the Global Transportation Hub. But while there's now some dispute as to what work is being done at the Brightenview site, I'd think we should be particularly concerned about the terms involved if the GTH project is actually departing from Brightenview's historical trends.

After all, Saskatchewan's provincial government put substantial amounts of money into catering to the two main GTH tenants - with the theory that Canadian Pacific and Loblaws would serve as magnets for other businesses to relocate to the area. And it went far out of its way to cover up the terms of the 2009 CP deal in particular: they were only revealed through CBC's reporting this year after being withheld in the face of access to information requests.

Here's what the province agreed to in order to get CP to build on the GTH site (despite its theoretical agreement that the move would be mutually beneficial):

CP sold its old site to the City of Regina for $7.5 million.

The agreement says the land is being given to the private railway company "in consideration of CP's contribution to the project." According to the contract, CP agreed to pay for railway infrastructure, container handling facilities and buildings for the project.

Meanwhile, the Minister of Highways promised to pick up the cost for most everything else, including land, servicing, the moving of power lines, and construction of CP's parking lot and internal roadways.

And the province agreed to provide CP serviced, accessible land west of the city "at no cost to CP and free and clear of all encumbrances" except for a few easements.

Of course, the promise of drawing other substantial activity to the GTH area hasn't been met. And the lack of any other good news around the time of the last provincial election is exactly why Brad Wall was so desperate to cozy up to Brightenview in the first place.

But with the Wall government now relying on Brightenview as its only excuse for development in the area and the other scandals surrounding the GTH, it's apparent that the Saskatchewan Party now has a strong political incentive to ensure that something gets built - no matter who ends up paying the bill.

It's also obvious that Brightenview's track record involves many grand proclamations, but very little follow-through - particularly when it comes time to put the money contributed by unsuspecting investors into building anything at its own expense.

With that in mind, I'd think it's worth asking: what exactly are the terms of Brightenview's development? And in particular, how much is the public paying - either in direct costs for the Brightenview site, or in upgrades to the GTH area for Brightenview's benefit - as the price of the illusion of progress?

(See also Tammy Robert's post expanding on CBC's story about on the connection between Brightenvie and pay-for-play immigration.)

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Alex Collinson discusses how insecure work makes it impossible to reliably structure an individual's life:

Many respondents told us about how difficult it is to budget without knowing how much you’ll be earning from one week to the next.

The number of hours we are given every week changes, which sometimes makes it difficult to make ends meet.

Concerns about bills and budgets causes sleepless nights. These concerns also force those in insecure work to take any shift they’re offered, regardless of the personal impact.

It isn’t steady and I hardly get work but always have to be available to work just in case they phone. When they do phone I have to drop everything and say yes otherwise I can’t pay bills.

The precarious financial situation created by insecure work puts all of the power in the employers’ hands. It provides employers with the freedom and financial benefits of a flexible workforce, while burdening workers with financial risks and worries.
...
It’s not just the worker that loses out from insecure working.

The rise of low-paid self-employment and zero hours contracts is costing the economy billions every year in lost tax revenues.

That means we all lose out as a result of employers using zero hours contracts and shady “self-employment”.

- McKinsey examines the economic gains which would result from fairness for women in the workplace. And Michael Reich, Sylvia Allegretto and Anna Godoey are the latest to find that Seattle's minimum wage hike produced substantial wage gains while doing nothing to limit the availability of jobs, while Doruk Cengiz, Arindrajit Dube, Attila Lindner and Ben Zipperer find (PDF) similar results over a large number of U.S. minimum wage increases.

- Ben Doherty reports on a new study showing that Australia (like many other countries) is failing to adequately plan for the security and humanitarian consequences of climate change. The Economist discusses how our oceans are being used as dumping grounds rather than being treated with any respect or foresight. And Lynda Collins, Dayna Scott and David Boyd argue that we should ensure potentially dangerous chemicals are restricted until proven safe, rather than encouraging their deployment until their harms are indisputable.

- Marc Lee notes that British Columbia has plenty of fiscal room to fund the social policies which form the basis for the NDP/Green governing agreement. But Nick Falvo points out the challenges facing Saskatchewan and other oil-reliant provinces which have failed to account for the volatility of resource prices - but which still have a long way to go in meeting basic social requirements.

- Finally, Tammy Robert highlights the gap between Brad Wall's long-cultivated image, and the arrogance and gloom that surround his government. And Geoff Leo connects the dots between the Global Transportation Hub, Brightenview and the continued abuse of pay-for-play immigration schemes.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Gillian White highlights Peter Temin's work on poverty and inequality - including the standard which a person trapped in poverty needs to meet in order to have any meaningful hope of escaping:

Temin then divides workers into groups that can trace their family line in the U.S. back to before 1970 (when productivity growth began to outpace wage growth) and groups that immigrated later, and notes that race plays a pretty big role in how both groups fare in the American economy. “In the group that has been here longer, white Americans dominate both the FTE sector and the low-wage sector, while African Americans are located almost entirely in the low-wage sector,” he writes. “In the group of recent immigrants, Asians predominantly entered the FTE sector, while Latino immigrants joined African Americans in the low-wage sector.”

After divvying up workers like this (and perhaps he does so with too broad of strokes), Temin explains why there are such stark divisions between them. He focuses on how the construction of class and race, and racial prejudice, have created a system that keeps members of the lower classes precisely where they are. He writes that the upper class of FTE workers, who make up just one-fifth of the population, has strategically pushed for policies—such as relatively low minimum wages and business-friendly deregulation—to bolster the economic success of some groups and not others, largely along racial lines. “The choices made in the United States include keeping the low-wage sector quiet by mass incarceration, housing segregation and disenfranchisement,” Temin writes.

And how is one to move up from the lower group to the higher one? Education is key, Temin writes, but notes that this means plotting, starting in early childhood, a successful path to, and through, college. That’s a 16-year (or longer) plan that, as Temin compellingly observes, can be easily upended. For minorities especially, this means contending with the racially fraught trends Temin identifies earlier in his book, such as mass incarceration and institutional disinvestment in students, for example. Many cities, which house a disproportionate portion of the black (and increasingly, Latino) population, lack adequate funding for schools. And decrepit infrastructure and lackluster public transit can make it difficult for residents to get out of their communities to places with better educational or work opportunities. Temin argues that these impediments exist by design. 

- Vickiie Oliphant writes that inequality is looming as a major issue in Germany's upcoming election. And Justine Hunter notes that the growing gap between the privileged few and the general public is shaping British Columbia's provincial campaign.

- Meanwhile, the Tyee introduces readers to Christy Clark's club of lobbyists. And Emma Gilchrist points out how the fossil fuel sector has turned substantial donations to the B.C. Libs into massive public subsidies and policy favours.

- Mike Crawley writes about Ontario's limited introduction of pharmacare for young people, while Thomas Walkom points out the limitations of the Libs' hastily-assembled scheme. And Meagan Fitzpatrick discusses the hope that Ontario's first step will lead to a national pharmacare plan - though the more important analogy seems to be that just like Kathleen Wynne, Justin Trudeau will start implementing progressive policy if and only if he recognizes that it's his only hope of avoiding being overtaken by the NDP.

- Finally, Tammy Robert highlights the fact that the Saskatchewan Party's indignity being forced on people who die while on social assistance bears no resemblance to how governments across Canada handle the issue. And Scott Stelmaschuk reminds us about the federal tax implications of Brad Wall's plans to sell off chunks of Saskatchewan's Crown Corporations.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Martin Patriquin takes Saskatchewan's increasing recognition of the Wall government's institutional corruption to the national stage:

Politicians who navigate a corrupted political system have some of the easiest jobs in the world. With the weight and legitimacy of the state behind them, they need not sell anything more than access to themselves. And it is a seller’s market.
...
To be fair to Quebec’s political parties, it took over 30 years to perfect the scheme. Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall and the party he leads have figured it out in about 10 years — and they didn’t have to break a single law to do it.

Political parties are generally discreet about fundraising on the backs of their leaders. The Saskatchewan Party, which has ruled over the Land Of Living Skies since 2007, does so with the cheeseball gusto normally reserved for televangelists and used car salesmen.
...
In Quebec, companies and corporations had to break the law to donate to political parties. In Saskatchewan, it is entirely out in the open, and there is no limit to the amount an individual or a corporation can give. Hell, even companies based outside of the province can donate — and they have, including Calgary-based Trans Canada Pipelines and Vancouver-based Telus Inc., among dozens of others.

Wall himself is so nonplussed at the rather disastrous optics of all of this that he could barely muster a shrug when it was revealed that he owned shares in an oil company his government was lobbying to come to the province.
...
In politics, you eventually become what you profess to hate. The Saskatchewan Party was born out of a sense of austere populism in 1997 — the hardscrabble laypeople rising up against the entrenched establishment. After barely a decade in power, it has become quite the opposite: a political entity that proudly sells access to its leader, just as it does to the naming rights on its golf carts.

- Jordon Cooper recognizes that the most alarming part of Eric Olauson's plan to document and attack constituents who dare to question government actions is the fact that it seems to be standard practice for the Saskatchewan Party.  And the Treaty 6 Justice Collective reminds us of the importance of fighting back against austerity and antisocial policy. 

- Jim Sinclair rightly pushes back against the desire of Brian Day and other corporate health care promoters to scrap equal access to care in favour of pay-for-play health. And CTV reports on Mohammed Hajizadeh's research documenting the unfairness which already exists in favour of the wealthy in seeking out care, while Jane Gerster points out how "prominent" Manitobans are able to jump the queue.

- Meanwhile, Peter Goffin discusses Health Quality Ontario's study showing the lack of adequate care in northern Ontario. And the CP reports on the Canadian Human Rights Commissions' latest annual report - which deals particularly with how children are being left behind on many crucial rights issues.

- Finally, Neil MacDonald comments on the absurdity of the Trudeau Libs continuing to jail people for marijuana-related offences while (supposedly) charting a path toward legalizing its use. And Rob Gillezeau examines how the Libs' planned changes to the Parliamentary Budget Officer's mandate will insulate dubious policy choices from important checks and balances.

On non-solutions

Tammy Robert thoroughly documents how Brad Wall's billion-dollar deficit has nothing to do with either resource revenues (being Wall's primary excuse for blowing up the budget), or public services (which are his first target for attacks):

I can’t consider the way the Saskatchewan government has handled the prospect of streamlining public service – or even this deficit – credible, because all they’ve demonstrated so far is that they’re primarily interested in brazenly protecting their political tails by dividing and confusing the narrative, instead of even pretending to consider well-planned or strategic spending decisions.

What I know for sure that the mess we’re in is not just about reduced resource and taxation revenue (the latter of which has been at a record high, thanks in part to both increased population numbers and a run of successful years in agriculture).

No, the financial dumpster fire we’re fighting has everything to do with the fact that this government has jacked up spending – even with the best of intentions – to unsustainable levels, and has simultaneously ran out of money trees, aka the GFSF and the Crown Corporations, to continue to fund their spending habits.

Meanwhile, in case anybody was under the illusion that the Saskatchewan Party's current spin about a sudden budget crisis represents anything but an excuse to open up a new front in Wall's long-running war on public servants, here's his finance minister (emphasis added):

Doherty said the goal would be to hold compensation costs steady or reduce them if possible.

The austerity measures would be maintained over the long term, not just for the upcoming year, he said.

If Wall wanted to deal with the full range of options to improve Saskatchewan's fiscal picture, provincial employees would be well down the list of logical places to look. (On that front, CBC's look at the revenue effect of tax changes shows that merely mirroring Manitoba's PST could pay for all of the province's public service salaries another time over.)

And if he was acting reasonably in response to budget problems which he thought were temporary, he'd be asking for "sacrifices" which fit that bill - rather than demanding permanent reductions in the standard of living experienced by the people who keep Saskatchewan running, while asking nothing of his corporate benefactors other than that they keep funneling copious amounts of money into his political machine.

Instead, Wall is making abundantly clear that he sees his own billion-dollar deficit as nothing more than one more excuse to keep slashing away at Saskatchewan's workers. And it's about time that both the blame and the responsibility for fixing Wall's mess were placed squarely on his shoulders.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Erin Seatter interviews Adam Lynes-Ford about Brian Day's latest attack on universal Medicare. And Ricochet's editorial board highlights how Day is ultimately fighting only to exacerbate inequality:

Discrimination against racialized and Indigenous patients fosters health disparities across our country and sometimes leads to death.

Poverty hurts Indigenous people in particular, and it’s understandable if you think the wide income gap between them and other groups in our country means privatized health care will leave them behind.

But fret not. Privatization will give them the kick they need to find their bootstraps. Want health care? Make money. Want a physician to check for diabetes instead of assuming you’re drunk? Hand over dollar bills, preferably the red or brown ones. Just throw yourself into the capitalist economy, and you’ll soon get past all that labour discrimination and be able to fork out the cash to be treated right.

Like Ali, and like the founding father of oppressive medicare, Tommy Douglas, Day used to be a boxer too.

“If you’re competitive and you think you’re right, you want to keep going until there’s a final outcome,” said Day.

That’s why he won’t stop until universal health care is down for the count.

- Oliver Milman discusses the climate effects of rapidly increasing ocean temperatures. And Merran Smith and Dan Woynillowicz comment on the need for Canada to pull its weight in shifting to clean renewable energy, while Jackie Wattles and Matt Egan point to Oklahoma's rash of earthquakes as yet another consequence of insisting on chasing fossil fuels against all rational analysis.

- But Ethan Lou reports that the Trudeau Libs are instead aiming to grease the skids for foreign-owned oil development.

- Tammy Robert exposes the Wall government's use of federal immigration funding (backed by provincial guarantees) to inflate a housing bubble. And the Leader-Post's editorial board questions why the Saskatchewan Party is picking the pockets of school divisions and health regions.

- Finally, Kiran Rana takes note of the difficult job market facing new university graduates.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- J. David Hughes discusses the ultimate problem with new pipeline construction, as it's incompatible with any reasonable effort to meet even Canada's existing commitments to rein in greenhouse gas emissions:

Under a scenario where Alberta’s oilsands emissions grow to its cap, and B.C.’s LNG industry is developed to the level planned, economic sectors outside of oil and gas would have to shrink emissions by more than half (55 per cent) in order for Canada to meet the Paris commitment. This is simply not feasible, barring an economic collapse.

Industry’s response to these concerns is to claim that “new technology” just around the corner may somehow drastically reduce oilsands emissions. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers says we should “bet” on it.

Although small incremental improvements in technology are certainly possible, and progress has been made over the years, counting on a silver bullet is wishful thinking. And all the technology in the world won’t change the reality that allowing oilsands emissions to grow to the level allowed under Alberta’s cap will require drastic reductions in other sectors.

I also took a close look at the need for new oil pipelines. Growing oilsands emissions to Alberta’s cap would see an increase in bitumen production of about 45 per cent from 2014 levels. A review of existing pipeline and rail export capacity from Western Canada reveals that existing infrastructure can accommodate this growth without new pipelines (and still have a 15 per cent margin to allow for outages and maintenance). Bottom line: no new pipelines are needed.

...

Developing a climate plan to meet Canada’s Paris Agreement commitments is a challenging but achievable task for the federal government. Doing so while meeting Alberta’s and BC’s oil and gas production growth aspirations, however, will be virtually impossible. 

The oil and gas industry is certainly not going away any time soon, but if Canada is serious about meeting its climate commitments it is time for the prime minister and premiers to do the math and stop telling us we can have it all.

- Meanwhile, James Wilt examines the mining industry's federal lobbying spree - and the tax giveaway it's managed to wring out of the Trudeau Libs. And Norman Farrell exposes British Columbia's gleeful giveaways to Imperial Metals in contrast to their inflexibility in dealing with mere citizens.

- Adrian Morrow discusses how the Ontario Libs' political financing reforms fall far short of actually addressing the problems of undue influence they were supposedly intended to solve. But Douglas Todd notes that British Columbia (like Saskatchewan) represents an example of how matters could be worse due to a complete lack of interest in regulating outside funding. 

- Finally, Tammy Robert highlights [update: and expands on] the most glaring problems with the Saskatchewan Party's GTH land scandal (and the insufficient report from the provincial auditor general). And Farrah Merali and Mike Laanela follow up on the province's ship-'em-somewhere-else strategy to deal with homeless people by noting that there's no vindication in following an abhorrent policy.