Thursday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Corey Hogan makes the case for Rachel Notley's NDP to develop a progressive fix to Alberta's fiscal mess:

No matter what you decide to do, you're going to take a political hit with somebody. Credibility will be lost, capital will be spent.
...
Your upper income tax hike was a good start, but you and I both know it's only the minimum payment on that grand old PC legacy — Alberta's structural deficit.

Our taxes are so low they don't even pay for health care and education, let alone the rest of government. And it's not like there's no way out of this mess. If we moved to the tax rates of the next lowest-taxed province we wouldn't have a deficit at all.

If you're going to raise taxes, let's get it over with  — and better one big tax hike than three small ones. We'll be further ahead as a province and you'll have three years for us to get over it and thank you for your foresight.

Now, not 2018,  is the time to do what's necessary but not necessarily popular.
...
(J)ust because you need to spend your political capital doesn't mean you should waste it.

The amount you would need to win right-wing Alberta is well beyond your bank balance. Trading the goodwill of the people who voted for you in the hopes that it leads to the goodwill of people who will never like you is a sucker's bet. 
...
Compromising with those who will never support you is a good way to lose the support of those who do.

Pick a side. Making the person who's angry with you angrier is better than alienating your supporter.

- Thomas Walkom highlights why the Leap Manifesto bears no resemblance to the caricature being made of it by much of Canada's media. Rosemary Westwood argues that particularly based on the success of Bernie Sanders' campaign, the NDP shouldn't have to apologize for believing in the progressive and socialist principles which have worked so well for Canada. And Clare Foran discusses the future of Sanders' movement once the current presidential campaign passes.

- The Globe and Mail examines the state of money and politics in Saskatchewan - sadly including massive amounts of corporate money combined with little indication as to how it affects policy.

- Katie Hyslop writes that limitations on the availability of affordable supportive housing in B.C. can serve to tear families apart.

- Finally, May Warren reports on research showing that the majority of employment in the York region now consists of precarious work. And Jennifer Hollett examines the stressors facing precarious workers in Canada.

New column day

Last week, I wrote that the NDP should be careful about assuming that changes in leadership would necessarily help in a needed process of party renewal.

Obviously, both elected to seek out new leadership. And so in this week's column, I point out that leadership races shouldn't put on hold any answer to the broader questions about the proper structure and role of a political party. And in fact, the absence of any single person to direct a party from the top down should offer an opportunity to build grassroots involvement.

Wednesday Afternoon Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- The Ontario Association of Food Banks discusses the long-term damage done by childhood poverty and deprivation:

When facing a very tight budget, food is often the budget line that gets cut in order to afford rent or hydro: you can skip a meal for a day or two and still be OK, but there are much more immediate consequences to not paying your landlord.

Instead, people in this situation often turn to food with higher calories and lower nutritional value to fill the empty feeling in their stomachs. Prices of healthy food in Ontario have skyrocketed over the last year: fresh fruit has jumped by 19.7 per cent since 2015, and fresh vegetables by 23.6 per cent, whereas the cost of candy has only risen by 0.4 per cent, while non-alcoholic beverages (such as pop) have actually dropped by 0.9 per cent.

People facing tough choices every single day -- rent or electricity? food or medicine? -- have high levels of stress. Stress can affect both your ability to take care of yourself and trigger high levels of blood glucose. Since diabetes is a disease in which your body isn't able to manage blood sugar levels, this can have even more adverse consequences.

All these things combined put low-income and First Nations people at a high risk for diabetes. Managing diabetes is itself expensive: beyond just the dietary changes required to keep it at bay, there is also the cost of prescription, supplies and equipment. Yet those who are low-income also often do not have enough or any insurance to cover these costs, because they work in precarious, low-wage jobs without benefits. 

- Tamara Khandaker writes about the suicide crisis facing Attawapiskat (among other Canadian First Nations), while the Hamilton Spectator reports on a suicide pact stopped in the nick of time. And Jorge Barrera reports on Jean Chretien's appalling response that the answer is to abandon communities rather than to make resources available.

- BJ Siekierski points out that even the Canadian Chamber of Commernce has figured out that the Cons' arbitrary limit on the number of regulations serves mostly to make governance more difficult - though their plan to let the corporate sector vet regulations isn't exactly a substantial improvement. And L. Ian MacDonald reminds us of the ugly state of corporate fund-raising in Canada which goes a long way toward explaining why businesses are allowed to write so many of their own rules to the public detriment.

- Finally, Clark Mindock and David Sirota trace the $600 billion of U.S. corporate money shifted offshore in a single year.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Lookout cats.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- The Star makes the case for a new crackdown on Canadian tax cheats to not only merely recover money withheld, but also to name and shame the people who have thus far refused to pay their fair share:

(I)f the Trudeau government is genuinely serious about clamping down, it should be prepared to name and shame miscreants with a lot more zeal than it has yet demonstrated. There’s nothing like shining the antiseptic light of day into murky corners, to discourage banks, law firms, accountancy firms and the like from enabling schemes that play fast and loose with the public treasury.

Yet while agencies such as the CRA and the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC) are happy to name the small fish they catch breaking the laws and regulations, that hasn’t always been the case with bigger fish.

Just last week FINTRAC, which tracks money laundering and terrorist financing among other things, announced it had levied a stiff $1.1-million penalty on a Canadian bank for failing to report a suspicious transaction and various money transfers. But it declined to name the institution involved. Meanwhile it is busy naming players who have been slapped with fines of $15,000 or less.

And CRA has drawn criticism for quietly offering an amnesty deal to unnamed multi-millionaire clients of the KPMG accounting firm who were allegedly involved in tax avoidance on the Isle of Man. The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. reported that the group was required by CRA only to pay back the taxes they owed, plus interest. Yet the CRA routinely prosecutes and names people who fail to file tax returns or otherwise run afoul of the law.

If the government hopes to “give Canadians greater confidence that the tax system is fair to everyone,” its agencies should be prepared to publicly name offenders. Cutting deals to spare Ottawa the trouble of prosecuting, or to preserve the “good name” of financial institutions and their wealthy clients, isn’t going to reassure anyone other than the scofflaws themselves.

Ottawa shouldn’t be in the business of shielding those who have gone to extraordinary lengths to insulate themselves and their assets from public scrutiny.

- CBC reports on research showing the historical role of human sacrifice as a means of social control. And while the deaths may no longer be public or deliberate, Jim Zarroli and Kevin Drum both discuss how inequality of income and wealth are still easily traced in the U.S.' survival rates.

- Steven Greenhouse looks into the movement toward a $15 minimum wage in the U.S. And Laura Bliss comments on the need to pay more attention to the workers who help to maintain the society we have, rather than focusing almost solely on disruption and innovation in evaluating individual merit.

- Finally, CBC examines ACORN's work to make affordable Internet access available to everybody - with a particular focus on tenants in non-profit housing.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Jason Hinkel writes that for as much attention as global inequality has received in recent years, it may be significantly more of a problem than we've previously assumed - and getting worse as time goes by:

It doesn’t matter how you slice it; global inequality is getting worse. Much worse. Convergence theory turned out to be wildly incorrect. Inequality doesn’t disappear automatically; it all depends on the balance of political power in the global economy. As long as a few rich countries have the power to set the rules to their own advantage, inequality will continue to worsen. The debt system, structural adjustment, free trade agreements, tax evasion, and power asymmetries in the World Bank, the IMF, and the WTO are all major reasons that inequality is getting worse instead of better.

It’s time we face up to the imbalances that distort our global economy. There’s nothing natural about extreme inequality. It is man-made. It has to do with power. And we need to have the courage to say so.

- Meanwhile, Thomas Piketty writes that the aftermath of the Panama Papers represents the perfect time to crack down on tax havens.

- Aaron Hutchins exposes how Canada is regularly used to anonymize income for the purposes of tax avoidance, while Justin Ling looks into Canada's pitiful record of investigating and prosecuting tax evasion. And Mainstreet finds a whopping 81% of Canadians agree that the rich aren't paying their fair share - meaning there's plenty of demand for both far more enforcement than we've seen to date, and a more progressive tax system to begin with.

- Betsy Powell and Jennifer Pagliaro examine the schemes used primarily by developers to get around Toronto's political donation limits - while noting that there are some obvious fixes available to the extent anybody's committed to reining in those abuses.

- Finally, Colin Horgan raises one of the questions which the NDP should be working on resolving at this weekend's convention and beyond - being what role a political party should actually play.

Choose your progressives

Choose your drug policy: harm reduction...

#CdnPoli #HarmReduction "@VanAlias: #NDP2016 passed this. pic.twitter.com/D6nkKaTAi9"

— Susan Gapka (@SusanGapka) April 9, 2016

...or harm retention.

Spun out

Sadly, there are far too many half-baked outside arguments being made about the federal NDP's leadership review and how it connects to provincial-level choices. (To be clear, I contrast those against some genuine concerns being raised by members.) But let's highlight one particularly telling example of how the NDP in general is being misrepresented by the same people trying to push Mulcair out of the picture.

Here's the Alberta NDP's platform in the campaign which resulted in its historic victory last year, emphasizing a royalty review, an increased minimum wage, more progressive taxes, reversing cuts and enhancing public services.

The exercise for the reader is to assess whether this better reflects:
(a) a "rush to the centre", as Warren Kinsella says in an attempt to tar the NDP's successful campaigns with the same brush as its unsuccessful ones; or
(b) "a progressive platform consistent with the NDP's values", as I argued in pointing to it as an example worth following.

I'm not sure how anybody can conclude (a) without needing to do so in order to fit a convenient narrative. And again, we can fairly say that anybody whose main agenda includes trying to diminish the NDP's progressive victories shouldn't be paid much heed in deciding on the NDP's future.

Musical interlude

Deftones - Prayers/Triangles

Friday Evening Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Angella MacEwen discusses how most of what's sold as "free trade" serves mostly to hand power to the corporate sector at the expense of the public. Ashley Csanady and Monika Warzecha point out that the same is true for Ontario's business subsidies and tax credits which are normally advertised as benefiting workers. And Paul Tukker reports on the publicly-funded cost to clean up abandoned mines in the Yukon as yet another example of how we're paying the price for exploitative corporate practices.

- Meanwhile, the Canadian Press contrasts the B.C. NDP's push to take big donors out of politics against Christy Clark's insistence on being able to fund her campaigns with corporate money.

- Coral Davenport discusses new research showing that it's possible to decouple economic development from increasing carbon emissions.

- The Globe and Mail questions the Libs' sudden loss of interest in access to information now that their actions stand to be held to account.

- Finally, Desmond Cole calls out an insidious attempt to label as "violent" peaceful protests and their response to state violence.

Up for discussion

Kady O'Malley has already highlighted a few of the noteworthy resolutions (PDF) submitted to this weekend's NDP policy convention. But I'll point out a few more which look to me to deserve attention.

First, in the category of simple good ideas regardless of one's ideological orientation...

1-08-16 SEVERANCE FLEXIBILITY 
London-Fanshawe 
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the following be added to Section 1.5 in the policy book:
1.5.f. Amending the Employment Insurance Act (severance) and the Income Tax Act so that employees who have lost their jobs due to plant closure can, on a one-time-only basis, retain their severance packages and be able to invest some or all of that severance money into RRSPs even if the investment is above their RRSP contribution limit and can, immediately upon termination of employment, collect the Employment Insurance to which they are entitled without any loss of severance monies.

About the only concern is that this might be too narrowly framed in applying only to plant closures. But it's well worth looking at ways to make sure that EI does more for workers (see also 3-05-16 among other resolutions for examples) - and the principle that EI should supplement severance packages rather than swallowing them up for workers in an especially difficult job market its the bill.

1-20-16 PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE 
NDP Quebec Section 
...
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the NDP require that for each device purchased, the consumer must have access to the following information:
§ A clear indication making it possible to know if the device is repairable and the duration of the availability of separate parts and accessories, as well as the device’s reasonable life cycle;
§ An explanation of the product’s environmental impact provided by the producers, such as:

§ Impact of CO2 emitted when the product was produced;
§ Preservation of natural resources: quantity of non-renewable resources (gold, silver and tin) in the composition of the product;
§ Instructions for recycling the device or returning it to the producer for recycling.

This would fit neatly into the categories of consumer protection and environmental policy, at least allowing people to make more informed purchasing decisions and hopefully encouraging the development of more responsible production processes.

5-03-16 MAXIMUM LENGTH OF FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS 
NDP Quebec Section, Richmond-Arthabaska, Jonquière 
...
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the NDP support the adoption of legislation limiting the length of an election campaign to a maximum of 45 days. 

I'm not sure if anybody saw any merit in Stephen Harper's extended 2015 campaign for any purpose other than his own partisan advantage. But a legislated limit on the campaign period would seem a logical response to the issues raised when a prime minister can otherwise singlehandedly extend timelines and increase expense limits.

Meanwhile, a few other resolutions fit with ideas which have been discussed elsewhere, but haven't been given extensive attention among Canada's federal political parties. Among those are 1-18-16 (among others) on postal banking, 1-21-16 on a financial transaction tax, 1-27-16 calling for a review of tax policy including challenging the Cons' GST cuts among others dealing with more progressive taxation, 1-67-16 providing for an inheritance tax, 3-06-16 on a basic income, 3-16-16 and others supporting a fully funded mental health and addictions strategy, 3-89-16 to eliminate mandatory minimum criminal sentences, and 6-04-16 to call for an end to carding.

And several more offer some important fodder for discussion, including a charter of citizen and corporate responsibilities (1-47-16), a detailed plan to transition to a low-carbon economy as the basis for the next campaign (2-24-16), a prohibition against genetic discrimination (3-26-16), a fund to encourage youth involvement in politics (5-12-16), and a move toward more ongoing participatory policy-making (7-14-16 among others).

Of course it's doubtful that this weekend will even scratch the surface of the above (along with many more worthwhile ideas which have been put before the convention). But there's certainly no lack of thoughtful ideas worth taking away even if they don't make it to the floor - and hopefully several of the above will find their way into platforms and policy before long.

New column day

Here, on the leadership choices facing the federal and provincial NDP - and why neither should be too quick to assume that changing leaders will necessarily help to rebuild after election disappointments.

For further reading...
- I've dealt with the background to the federal party's decision on Mulcair in a previous series of posts leading to last night's performance review, as well as this column. And plenty more people have offered varying takes on Mulcair's leadership which deserve a look (even if I don't necessarily agree) - including Nicholas Ellan, Peter Thurley, Tom Parkin, Benjamin Fox Dickerson, Bill Tieleman, Peggy Nash and Dan Harris.
- Mulcair's latest rating as a potential prime minister can be found via Nanos here (PDF). And Cam Broten's approval ratings from the provincial election campaign are here and here, showing him at a steady 39%.
- Finally, CBC offers a roundup of NDP reactions to this week's election result. 

[Edit: updated link.]

On performance reviews

Following up on this post, I'll weigh in with my own take on the federal NDP's leadership review - based primarily on the question of what Tom Mulcair seems to have taken away from the 2015 federal election, and how it will position the party in the years to come.

As alluded to in some previous posts, I'd sum up my expectations in the wake of the election to be roughly the following:
- to critically assess what happened in the previous election campaign to determine what lessons can be learned, both for better and for worse;
- to put to rest any (however implausible) question as to which is the most progressive party in Parliament;
- to prioritize MP empowerment and outreach over caution and discipline;
- to transition away from "default opposition" status toward a stronger focus on policies and values; and
- to focus on long-term and broad-based movement-building, including with a concerted effort to approach people who were excluded from involvement with the party.

And on all counts, I'd see Mulcair as having at least taken meaningful steps down the right path.

The NDP's interim report and final campaign review (PDF) has received plenty of attention. And both offer at least a useful high-level set of reflections and ideas. 

But some of the more noteworthy moves since the election also include significant issue-based initiatives by MPs, as well as a strong policy focus on inequality, precarious work and fairness for First Nations. And Mulcair's own pre-budget tour featured ample interactions with party activists and interested newcomers alike, while his pre-convention discussions have included some important recognition of the need to build from the NDP's membership base.

The most important question for me is then whether those steps should be seen as a temporary nod to the base in light of the impending leadership review, or the starting point in building the movement needed to elect a truly progressive federal government. And I see both reason for optimism that Mulcair himself recognizes the need for a change in course following the election, and another opportunity to address any continued shortcomings at the next NDP policy convention.

When the generally positive direction in a new political environment is combined with the strengths Mulcair has always brought to the table, I'm looking forward to seeing what he can work on building given the opportunity. And so I'll be voting to support Mulcair in Edmonton - with both the hope and the expectation that we'll see more sustainable party renewal without a leadership race than with one.

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- In the wake of the Panama Papers, Don Pittis writes that tax shelters serve only to ensure that the wealthy don't pay their fair share for a functional society - meaning that everybody who can't afford to engage in financial shenanigans is left to pick up the slack. Neil Macdonald discusses the different rules purchased by the few who can afford them. And Ben Chu highlights why we need to crack down on tax avoidance to do anything about burgeoning wealth inequality, and Daniel Leblanc reports that the NDP is leading the charge to do just that.

- But Bruce Livesey documents the lobbying pressure on the part of the wealthy which stands in our way. And ThinkPol points out that the Panama free trade deal pushed by both the Cons and the Libs has only privileged tax evaders over the public.

- Robert MacDermid offers a few suggestions to reduce the impact of wealth on political financing - though it's worth noting that election and party funding represents only a small portion of the influence of the corporate elite on our political system. And the Pacific Gazette notes that an independent MLA has introduced legislation to bring British Columbia's political financing rules up to par.

- Ainslie Cruickshank discusses the need to remedy health inequality in Canada.

- Finally, Noah Zon argues that we need our anti-poverty programs - and notably the Canada Child Benefit - to keep up with the cost of living. And Anita Khanna calls for a push to finally end child poverty in Canada for good.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Stackable cats.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- CBC and the Star have both started reporting on the Panama Papers - offering a glimpse of the tip of the iceberg of international tax avoidance. And the Star also recognizes why we shouldn't let grey-area tax scheming pass without appropriate scrutiny, while Canadians for Tax Fairness reminds us of the wider problem.

- Meanwhile, Neil Macdonald points out how much more room there is for government priorities to shift toward the public interest, noting in particular that Canada's federal government spends three times as much on tax baubles as on health care.

- And Thomas Walkom follows up on the need for the federal government to enforce the Canada Health Act in the face of provincial governments (including Brad Wall's) who are eager to shred it.

- Charles Wohlforth offers a first-hand account as to how campaign donations can influence policy-making. And Noor Javed reports on how developers' donations in particular affect municipal decisions.

- Finally, Elizabeth Thompson reports on CUPW's renewed call for postal banking to improve both Canada Post and financial services to the public.

[Edit: fixed wording.]

#SKVotes - Election Day Reading

For those still examining their options in Saskatchewan's provincial election (or just wanting to remember the campaign that's been), here's a quick look at what I and others have had to say.

- You'll find my columns since the campaign began in earnest (all touching on the election at least in part) here, here, here, here and here. I also reviewed the Saskatchewan Party and NDP platforms as well as the single leaders' debate, and appeared on Canadian Glen's The View Up Here to chat about the election.
- And for points worth keeping in mind about the Saskatchewan Party's stay in power, see here and within links about their climate change obstruction, here and here on their attitude toward Saskatchewan's poor, here on their racism against First Nations people, and their privatization debacles.
- Meanwhile, among other sources deserving of a read before voting, Tammy Robert stands out as having had plenty worth discussing over the course of the campaign. And CBC and the Leader-Post each have dedicated election coverage worth checking out.
- And for anybody looking for voting information, Elections Saskatchewan has you covered.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- John Ross makes the case for a focus on the social determinants of health in all kinds of public policy-making:

Many studies show that if you work long hours in low-paying jobs and live paycheque to paycheque, constant life stresses have far more negative health effects than the causes listed on public health posters.

Life for many Canadians is more complicated than recommending a “healthy lifestyle.”

Society broadly needs to change the circumstances for all members of our society to enable people to have options and live differently. In our small province we could actually achieve this.

Donald Berwick, former CEO of the Institutes of Healthcare Improvement, said, “Any healthcare funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must — must — redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent health care is by definition re-distributional.”
...
How about this radical suggestion?

Start spending proportionally less on disease care and more on addressing the inequities of the determinants of health (and disease)?

‘Quality health care’ should be access to equitable income distribution, education, employment, food and housing security. That is not currently the case.

- Meanwhile, the Toronto Star calls for a concerted effort at all levels of government to address the needs of precarious workers. And Lois Weiner sees the Chicago Teachers Union's strike as an important step in challenging fundamentally unfair laws designed to silence workers. 

- Scott Vrooman points out that for all the bleating over relatively small budget numbers, there are far more important deficits that we should be addressing - including the glaring gap between any progress to limit greenhouse gas emissions and the steps needed to avoid catastrophic climate change. And Robert DeConto and David Pollard find that the feedback loops created by a warming planet in fact look to be substantially worse than typically assumed.

- Solomon Israel canvasses how the system of low-threshold arrests and peace bonds set up under Bill C-51 (and seemingly to be left in place by the Libs) raises severe civil rights concerns without making anybody safer.

- Finally, Jennifer Ditchburn writes about the future of open government in Canada. And Mike de Souza catches the National Energy Board deleting a sensitive internal e-mail.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- GOOD Magazine neatly sums up what the world would look like on the scale of 100 people - and how patently unfair wealth inequality looks in that context:


- Lawrence Mishel and David Cooper point out that a $15 minimum wage is entirely in keeping with actual economic growth over the past few decades - and only reflects a substantial change because we've allowed wage levels to deterioriate. And Lana Payne writes that a more fair distribution of wealth also figures to encourage economic growth.

- Steven Chase breaks the news that the Libs plan to "sanitize" a report on Saudi Arabia's human rights abuses to try to save face while pushing through a gigantic arms sale. But Tony Burman rightly makes the case to reconsider the deal instead, rather than facilitating repressive regimes.

- Meanwhile, Mike Blanchfield reports on Joseph Stiglitz' advice that Canada reject the Trans-Pacific Partnership instead of handing yet more power over to corporations rather than governments.

- Finally, Jennifer Graham highlights how Saskatchewan doctors are pushing for mental health progress as part of the provincial election campaign. And of course there's only one major party which intends to do anything to help.

Musical interlude

Tame Impala - Let It Happen

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Ryan Meili writes that the spread of for-profit corporate medicine - including through the Saskatchewan Party's privatization of care - demonstrates the need for enforcement of the Canada Health Act. And the Star makes the case for mandatory disclosure of drug companies' payments to doctors to promote their products.

- Marc Stiles observes that Seattle's push to build more rental housing has resulted in tenants being able to find affordable units. And Kerry Gold points out how soaring prices are driving workers out of Vancouver's real estate market.

- Ian Austen discusses how the over-budget and semi-functional Boundary Dam carbon capture and storage project has turned into a cautionary tale for anybody else considering "clean coal".

- Tamara Draut notes that widespread offshoring of work is now reaching well into the professional and knowledge-based classes. 

- Finally, Steve Barnes examines (PDF) the connection between electoral reform, political trust and health, and concludes that a more proportional system could have significant benefits in building a healthier society.

New column day

Here, on some of the important ways in which the Saskatchewan Party and Brad Wall have changed since they took power - and why voters should be concerned about the change for the worse.

For further reading...
- Brad Wall's previous position on health care queue-jumping is found here (via PressReader), and expanded on by the NDP here.
- The quotes referenced in the column as to giving credit to the previous government and governing with humility are found in John Gray's article here.
- And for more of my take on the election, see again my appearance on The View Up Here.

[Edit: Updated column link.]

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Nick Bunker points out that there's much more to an economic recovery than nominal GDP - with labour's share of growth serving as a particularly important indicator as to whether anybody is benefitting beyond the wealthy few. And Jordan Weismann argues that there's ample room for the U.S. in particular to raise tax rates on high-income individuals.

- Elaine Power discusses how a basic income could provide desperately needed food security for the people who need it most. And Jonathan Charlton reports on new research showing the connection between inequality and poor health outcomes in Saskatchewan.

- Hans Rollmann questions Dwight Ball's plans for health-sector privatization in Newfoundland and Labrador. Adrian Morrow discusses the connection between the Ontario Libs' pay-to-play fund-raising plan and the privatization of Hydro One. And Hamilton Nolan observes that plans to outsource pension management tend to do nothing but funnel unearned money to the financial sector at the expense of workers.

- Finally, Fairfax Media and the Huffington Post report on the widespread culture of bribery and corruption in the global oil industry. And Tantoo Cardinal and Sarah Harmer point to the murder of Berta Caceres in Honduras as the type of of human rights atrocity we should be calling out and ending - rather than encouraging in the name of resource-sector profits.

Radio activity

For those not yet aware, I'll be appearing on Canadian Glen's The View Up Here tonight (7 PM Saskatchewan time) to talk about Saskatchewan's ongoing provincial election. Stop by and have a listen!

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Duncan Cameron discusses how deficit hysteria has overshadowed the far more important issues raised by the Trudeau Libs' inaugural budget:

Ottawa deficit spending is not big enough to stimulate an economy lagging since the oil price collapse. The Canadian economy has suffered a major external shock, with Alberta taking a big hit.

The rise of precarious work indicates serious disguised unemployment.

A slack economy with many people wanting full-time work calls out for additional spending. Governments need to boost their own contribution to general well-being.
...
The Trudeau Liberals have postponed infrastructure spending and reneged on promised social spending. The NDP have identified 10 ways in which the 2016 Liberal budget falls short in meeting election promises, including not delivering on promised home care.

Importantly, the Trudeau budget does not say how the Liberal government plans to address the elimination by Stephen Harper of annual six per cent increases in health-care transfers to the provinces.

Indeed, the 2016 budget raises problems for both municipalities and provinces. Federal-provincial financial arrangements need to be updated after years of neglect by Ottawa of co-operation with other levels of government.

- Andy Blatchford points out another broken promise in the budget, as funding to encourage the hiring of young workers is nowhere to be found. Tim Harper writes about the Libs' turnaround on providing personal information to the IRS. And Thomas Walkom notes that the Libs are secretly encouraging employers to import temporary foreign workers despite the growing number of Canadians in need of work.

- Sujata Day discusses the Libs' glaring rejection of meaningful public consultation on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. And even Michael Den Tandt pauses briefly from cheerleading for corporate control to point out their failure to make any case for the TPP.

- Josh Eidelson highlights the move toward increased minimum wages as a key example of the labour movement reasserting its strength in the U.S.

- Finally, Andre Picard argues that our current lack of social supports for seniors is unacceptable. And Ryan Meili examines the party platforms on offer in Saskatchewan's election from the standpoint of healthy politics.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Playtime cats.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Martin Regg Cohn exposes the Ontario Libs' pay-to-play governing strategy, as cabinet ministers have been instructed to use their roles and access to meet fund-raising targets of up to half a million dollars per year. And Gary Mason reports that privileged access to Christy Clark is likewise a cash cow for the B.C. Liberals.

- Meanwhile, Sean McElwee points out the income divide among young voters both in being pursued by political parties, and in participating in the U.S. political system.

- Corporate Knights takes a look at the massive amounts of corporate money currently stashed offshore. And David Climenhaga offers the modest suggestion that we should at least stop shovelling public subsidies toward tycoons like Murray Edwards who are going far out of their way to avoid contributing to the public good.

- Mark Penny writes that Australia's experience with corporate tax slashing is much the same as Canada's, with massive amounts of foregone revenue producing none of the promised economic benefits.

- Nadja Sayej highlights the latest exercise in lowering expectations and standards of living for precarious workers, in the form of pod-like home-offices. But Sara Mojtehezadeh reports on the Urban Worker Project which is looking to give precarious workers a voice that's currently lacking.

- Finally, Karen Turner examines new research showing that mass surveillance serves to stifle minority opinions.

Monday Morning Links

Assorted content to start your week.

- Tom Parkin points out that the Trudeau Liberals are falling far short of their promises to fund infrastructure even while tripling their planned deficit.

- Jared Bernstein highlights how top-down block grants coupled with a denial of any responsibility for outcomes can lead to the deterioration of social programs. And Konrad Yakabuski notes that exactly that model seems likely to continue pushing health care costs onto Canada's provinces.

- Alexsandra Sagan reports on the spread of precarious work models into white-collar professions and public services. And Rachel Aiello notes that the Cons suppressed a report ordered by their own minister in order to attack labour rights while hiding the anticipated consequences.

- Jim Bronskill is tracking down the effects of C-51 to the extent a secret policing law allows for any public disclosure, with the latest revelations including the sharing of information among multiple (and in one case unknown) agencies and the instructions given to CSIS in disrupting Canadian civil rights. 

- Finally, Tammy Robert nicely summarizes the Saskatchewan Party's Global Transportation Hub scandal.

Sunday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Michael Bader argues that a cynical view of politics represents the most important barrier to progressive victories:

Cynicism is a corrosive force in our politics and culture, but one that is invisible to us because it seems so normal. My patients feel the same way. They keep repeating patters that are familiar and experience deviations from these scripts as anxiety provoking. It’s my job to help them see, through education and by creating new corrective experiences in which they are encouraged to freely choose a healthier way to be, that their emotional reality and distress are not something hardwired and inevitable. My underlying message is that transformational change is possible.

Progressives need to convey this same message in the broader political arena. The problem we face is that political cynicism of the sort that suffocates us today masquerades as realism, a realism that warns us that transformational change is a pipe dream and that aspiring to what we really want is a recipe for disappointment. When a patient conveys this belief, I see it as a symptom of an emotional injury rather than objective reality and I seek to change it, not surrender to its inevitability.

That's what a progressive movement should be doing on a social level; challenging cynicism and drawing people to our cause because our cause is big and grand and mirrors their own buried wish to be part of something that big and grand. We need leaders who can present such a vision and fight the realists who want us to be afraid of our own deepest longings.

- And on the subject of visionary policies which are too often dismissed based solely on questionable assertions as to feasibility, Jeff Krimmel points out how a basic income offers important benefits across the income spectrum.

- Craig Scott sees this week's federal budget as an all-too-familiar example of the gap between the Libs' campaign rhetoric and their actions while in power, while Kate McInturff writes that the Libs' budget falls far short of expectations for women in particular.  And Alan Freeman discusses how the CFIB was one of the groups which saw campaign commitments abandoned in the budget - though he rightly notes that the group's past willingness to be used by the Harper Cons may represent part of the explanation.

- Elena Holodny writes about the increasing number and cost of extreme weather events as the most readily visible symptom of climate change.

- Finally, Rose Hackman examines the effects of pervasive and groundless surveillance on a minority population.

On open debates

As promised here, I'll take a closer look at Saskatchewan's leaders' debate and what it may mean for the rest of the campaign.

Most criticism of the debate that I've seen so far has focused on two factors.

First, there's the combination of format and moderation: in particular, "open" debate period regularly led to little more than Brad Wall and Cam Broten speaking over each other.

And second, there's the fact the debate was limited to Wall and Broten rather than including additional leaders. In that respect, the conventional wisdom that the opposition party should generally prefer less leaders in the debate may not have applied here, as one of the most important questions in the broader election is that of whether the Saskatchewan Party's past governing coalition might start to break apart in a number of directions.

Those points of concern are both valid to at least some extent. And indeed they may have reinforced each other: while an open period may make sense when there's genuine doubt as to which of multiple leaders might want to speak, a more controlled back-and-forth probably would have made sense with only two leaders participating.

That said, the more noteworthy problem looks to have been based on the lack of more opportunities for direct interaction between party leaders - leaving them to try to use extremely limited time periods in the single debate to repeat a tiny number of talking points, rather than responding fully even to questions (let alone challenges from each other).

In some cases, the leaders went so far as to omit platform points which directly responded to questions. Wall was asked about having seniors staying in their homes, and didn't mention the property tax deferral plank which represents one of his party's largest platform promises. And when Broten was asked a question combining affordability and wages, his response focusing on the former left out any discussion about the NDP's plans to raise the minimum wage and promote a living wage.

In that context, the lack of depth of discussion on a lot of points and the perceived urgency in piping up at every opportunity shouldn't come as much surprise. And it's hard to see how much could have been fixed within the time allotted for the debate without cutting back into an already-limited number of topics discussed.

I'd thus think the biggest takeaway is that more debate - in time and number - might be needed to ensure that leaders have both the opportunity and the perceived obligation to demonstrate depth of thought and understanding, rather than simply trying to cover their planned soundbites.

See also Head Tale, Murray Mandryk and CBC's political panel with their views on the debate.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Christopher May writes that any full examination of political  dynamics needs to take into account corporations as sources of power, not merely economic actors:

(R)ecognising corporations as institutions of global governance encourages an analysis of the operation of power (in its various dimensions) within an important realm of the global system which remains obscured when accounts focus only on states and intergovernmental organisations. Crucially, this approach recognises that while specific corporate supply-chain constellations may be often rationalised as serving the goal of efficiency, they are actually the result of a continuing process of power relations, effective governance and the construction of legitimacy.

Research that has foregrounded private authority in the global system has gone some way in this direction, but the internal political economy of the corporate supply chain has not been extensively examined by these analysts. Thus, political economists might usefully move beyond this relative inattention to examine the realm of the supply chain as an interesting site of global governance in itself to reveal how global corporations shape their own political economic space. One way to respond to the often heard assertion that ‘corporations rule the world’ is to examine the global governance of the corporate supply chain to both offer evidence of where that rule does seem pervasive, but also to explore the limitations of such claims for corporate power’s influence across the global system.

- Meanwhile, Heidi Groover sees Bernie Sanders' campaign as a national extension of a movement to implement popular and progressive changes to economic policy over the self-serving objections of the corporate sector.

- Don Cayo follows up on the Institute for Research on Public Policy's look at the complex picture of inequality in Canada.

- Justin Wolfers takes a look at new research showing how inequality in children's living conditions leads to a massive gap in opportunity. And Robert Hiltonsmith and Sean McElwee point out that arguments against employment credit check bans (based on the specious reasoning that employers would simply discriminate in other ways instead) find no basis how those bans have worked in practice - while the case to prevent employers from limiting access to employment based on credit scores has held up to scrutiny.

- Finally, Anna Louie Sussman and Josh Zumbrun examine the spread of precarious work in the U.S., and note that it goes far beyond the more familiar examples of the gig economy. And Brent Patterson discusses the need to reform Canada's temporary foreign worker program to treat workers in Canada as people rather than commodities.

On creative reinterpretation

Shorter Bill Morneau:

Pay no attention to trifles such as a "platform". In fact, our only election promise was to draw up budget plans on the back of a napkin if given the opportunity. And promise kept!

Musical interlude

Electrostatic - Reflection

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Susan Delacourt writes that the Libs' federal budget is best seen as requiring an overriding "to be continued". And Don Martin flags a few points which may prove important later - including what might be an unexplained delay of any electoral reform.

- Meanwhile, Teuila Fuatai highlights how the budget falls short in terms of promised and expected improvements for Canadian workers. And Alison Crawford exposes apparent plans to outsource nearly half of Shared Services Canada's non-security work.

- Chantal Hebert points out that the overriding problem with the fiscal framework set up by the Cons - being heavy reliance on resource prices and other volatile sources of revenue rather than a more stable, more fair tax system - doesn't look to be changing at all.

- And Ian Young highlights a glaring example of how catering to high-wealth individuals has done nothing to serve the public good, as millionaires provided with easy immigration access are paying an average of a mere $1,400 apiece in Canadian income tax while having little economic impact other than to make housing less affordable for everybody else.

- Finally, Michael Geist rightly points out that a public consultation on the Trans-Pacific Partnership may be meaningless if the Libs aren't willing to walk away from the deal, as there's little reason to think the same actors who insisted on tilting the playing field against the public in the first place will be receptive to any changes or flexibility in interpretation.

New column day

Here, on what the Trudeau Libs' first budget tells us about the difficulty turning around a government - and how Saskatchewan voters should take the lesson to heart in deciding whether to settle for four more years of an anti-government governing party.

For further reading...
- I linked to plenty of reviews of the Libs' budget here. And to add a few more to the list, see Paul Wells on the Libs' half-measures and incomplete tasks, John Geddes on their deferred promises in general, Pam Palmater on the especially galling broken promises to First Nations, and Hugh Mackenzie on how the budget backtracks on a promise to close the stock option loophole.
- Meanwhile, we're into the home stretch of the Saskatchewan election after last night's leaders' debate. And I'll have more to say about the debate and how it fits into the broader campaign in a future post.

Juxtaposition

Verbatim Brad Wall then:

(W)e may -- possibly -- campaign on [privatizing liquor stores] in the next election, but people will be able to decide then. In other words, we would never change the act without a mandate to do so.

Shorter Saskatchewan Party response now to every invitation to make the case for any mandate during an actual election campaign:

[ERROR 404 CANDIDATES NOT FOUND]

Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives rounds up some noteworthy responses to the federal budget. Barbara Sibbald and Laura Eggertson write that while a few social determinants of health made the cut, our actual health care system will see virtually nothing. Armine Yalnizyan highlights how it falls short both Liberal promises and glaring needs in a number of areas, while Andrew Jackson emphasizes the need for increased revenue to pay for even the half-measures included in the Trudeau Libs' first budget. And Michal Rozworski opines that the Libs are doing little but following the Cons' plans for austerity:

(F)ederal spending on programs, on our social safety net, is set to rise to just 14.6 per cent of GDP one year from now, marginally higher than today. This is, however, a mere blip in the long downward trajectory since the late 1970s, when program spending was around 20 per cent. The projections in this budget do not signal a turnaround: program spending is to remain flat and fall back down to 2015 levels by 2020. All the rhetoric about rebuilding the middle class doesn’t translate into rebuilding our common social supports. The question is what will be cut in the future to make up for the boost in spending today.

Finally, a significant chunk of the deficit spending is simply due to better accounting. The Conservatives played fast and loose with the numbers and Harper performed some fiscal magic tricks to create surpluses for his final budget. The Liberals are projecting to spend more than the Conservatives but they are also projecting far lower revenues, especially in the first few years. This explains part of the headline-grabbing deficits.

- Sara Mojtehedzadeh discusses the problems for both sick workers and the people around them when paid leave isn't available.

- CBC News reports on the Prairie Spirit School Division's budget cuts caused by provincially-imposed austerity, while Austin Davis reports that Regina's public school system is scraping by with 665 unfunded students. So naturally, the response of the Saskatchewan Party (which of course took away the ability of school boards to raise needed funds) is to try to shout down anybody who dares to point out the underfunding.

- Finally, Charles Mandel points out a warning from climate scientists that we're plunging into catastrophic climate change faster than anticipated.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Clingy cats.

Saskatchewan 2016 - NDP Platform Review

I mentioned here that any attempt to review the Saskatchewan Party's platform ran into the problem that there simply wasn't anything worth analyzing, as two pages of conditional promises were buried under thirty of spin.

In contrast, the NDP's platform (PDF) includes plenty of meaningful ideas. And while the NDP's primary focus may not be where one would hope, there's ample material which could form the foundation of a highly productive term of government.

That said, let's start with the part which may be frustrating for voters seeking primarily to know what the NDP would plan to do: the first section is dedicated to "cutting Sask Party waste" rather than the planned uses for the money saved. That may serve the purpose of giving platform readers a reminder of the case against Brad Wall, but it delays any discussion of the NDP's own priorities until later on.

So what are those priorities once they do emerge? In addition to previous commitments to mental health, First Nations education and emergency services, some of the more noteworthy points include:

• A slightly more progressive income tax system, with an increased personal exemption amount (which seems like a popular policy choice, if seldom my preferred use of fiscal capacity), balanced out by a new tax bracket for people making $175,000 and up;
• Directly creating 2,000 child care spaces (along with a registry to assess need) and 2,500 affordable and social housing units, while also investing in hospitals and long-term care homes;
• Promoting Saskatchewan businesses through procurement policies and "Buy Local" initiatives, while also expanding incubator funding;
• Conditionally eliminating small business taxes only for corporations which have three or more employees to ensure a direct connection to jobs; and
• Adopting a Housing First policy and testing a basic income as part of a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy.

Lest there be any doubt, there's room to be more ambitious or make better use of available resources in a number of areas. The NDP is paralleling the Sask Party's promise to let seniors defer property taxes, holding off on any royalty rate increases even in the course of promising reviews, and making a weaker commitment to increasing the minimum wage than was found in the Alberta NDP's winning platform last year.

But if the NDP's platform may not get Saskatchewan to my ideal destination in a single term, it does suggest an important change in direction toward serving people rather than corporate backers. And that contrast deserves far more attention than the distractions which have dominated the campaign so far.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- David MacDonald argues that the federal budget should focus on desperately-needed public investments - with any revenue issues dealt with by raising taxes where past cuts have produced nothing of value. And Leadnow calls for a crackdown on tax evaders. But Paul Campos highlights the U.S. right's push in the opposite direction which has led to a disturbing amount of public support to slash taxes on large inheritances.

- Meanwhile, Karl Nerenberg points out that the Libs' invitations to discuss the budget were aimed primarily at corporate insiders. And Teuila Fuatai writes that the list of areas where the Libs are merely following the Cons' playbook now includes bargaining with Canada's public-sector unions.

- Laurie Monsebraaten reports on some of the parents hoping for this year's budget to produce meaningful steps toward available and affordable child care where past ones have fallen short.

- CBC finds that oil sands workers are looking to be retrained for renewable alternatives, rather than buying the claim that free money for oil barons is their only hope to find work. And Dario Kenner makes the case to combat inequality and climate change together. 

- Finally, Susan Delacourt reminds us that political parties are able to use our personal information in ways other types of organizations aren't permitted to - and notes that the Trudeau Libs don't seem to have any interest in changing that state of affairs.

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- James Ayre points out Radoslaw Stefanski's study as to how cutting off fossil fuel subsidies subsidies (among other public policy preferences) would go a long way toward helping a transition toward clean, renewable energy.

- Mike De Souza exposes the National Energy Board's service to the oil industry, including by editing reports to suit TransCanada's wishes and by telling a whistleblower into poor pipeline safety to accept a payoff and keep quiet.
 
- Rick Smith calls for the Libs to keep their promise to end the Cons' targeted Canada Revenue Agency attacks on progressive charities, while Alan Freeman argues that we should demand a thorough house-cleaning to ensure the CRA focuses on tax evaders. And Alex Boutillier reports on the continued muzzling of federal scientists.

- The Washington Post's editorial board highlights the unfairness of a criminal justice system designed to impose additional punishment on people living in poverty, while Campbell Robertson discusses how Republican governors have deliberately deprived poor people of the legal representation needed to navigate the system. And Craig and Marc Kielburger discuss how poor families may be trapped by a social safety net more focused on slashing support at the first opportunity than ensuring people have some means to survive.

- Finally, Thomas Walkom notes that differences in regulation may be an important factor in giving consumers the ability to influence corporate behaviour.

On unstable platforms

With Saskatchewan's main political parties having released their election platforms, now is the time when I'd planned to put together platform reviews to better examine voters' options.

But a funny thing happened when I went to what was supposed to be the Saskatchewan Party's platform (PDF). It turns out Brad Wall's party isn't offering a platform by any known meaning of the word. And what's most noteworthy in the Saskatchewan Party's promises is the absence of what are supposed to be priorities for Wall's government.

Let's start with the full list of "new commitments" offered by the Saskatchewan Party - which can be found in its entirety at pages 3-4 of the platform. (Seriously.)

That would be sad enough if the content of those two pages actually consisted of promises which could be considered new and/or commitments. But of the 18 bullet points which apparently make up the Wall government's entire platform for the next four years, fully half merely restate or extend plans already announced or in place. And several more are contingent on oil prices increasing - which is of course well beyond the control of any government.

Meanwhile, plenty of other past announcements which received publicly-funded hype are conspicuously left out of the platform. And most notably, even the sad excuse for a poverty reduction strategy which was hastily slapped together before the election appears nowhere - signalling that another term for the Saskatchewan Party can be taken as a mandate to let poverty fester.

Now, the most generous spin one can put on the platform document is that it reflects a stay-the-course philosophy. But does anybody buy that dozens of candidates and hundreds of staffers and volunteers would be putting in the time and effort to put together a campaign for office - with the assistance of millions of corporate dollars - to serve the grand vision of allowing home-baked cookies to be sold at coffee shops?

Somehow I have my doubts. And if not, then what's left out of the Saskatchewan Party's platform looks to be far more important in defining their direction for the province than what's included.

Sunday Morning LInks

Assorted content for your Sunday reading.

- Peter Moskowitz highlights why we shouldn't be counting on crowdfunding or other private sources to address social needs. And Lana Payne calls out the attitude of entitlement on the part of the wealthy which has bled our public sector dry.

- Meanwhile, Rob Gillezeau points out the Libs' uncosted platform commitments to First Nations - as well as the importance of following through rather than perpetuating the pattern of broken promises.

- Peter Kuitenbrouwer reports on the Libs' plans to ramp up the marketing of weapons in the Middle East. And Stephanie Nebehay and Angus McDowall remind us of the consequences of shipping arms to regimes which don't even pretend to have an interest in human rights.

- Claire Cain Miller examines how wages tend to drop in jobs which are occupied by increased proportions of women.

- Finally, Linda McQuaig offers some insights from her time in politics:

(F)or a few days, my comment sparked a minor media rumpus that seemed to reinforce the case for tight political messaging based on the rule, as reported by Susan Delacourt in her book Shopping for Votes: "Do not talk of sacrifice, collective good, facts, problems or debate."

In other words, avoid complexity and controversy -- or anything else that assumes the voter is capable of accepting the responsibility of citizenship.

Interestingly, however, the NDP reached the height of its public support last spring when it ignored this conventional wisdom, risking controversy and complexity by standing up against legislation that initially seemed popular -- the Conservatives' "anti-terror" legislation, Bill C-51.

Back in my perch in journalism (with no plans to run again), I'm wondering if we're well served by a conventional wisdom that has reduced the voter to a simple-minded consumer who's only out for herself.

Could it be that the voter is actually hungry to be treated as a citizen -- that is, treated as someone (to paraphrase Canadian author Gilbert Reid) who's an adult, has an attention span, some knowledge of history and empathy for others, is patient, open to debate, and even willing to make sacrifices for the common good?