Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- Aditya Chakrabortty comments on how massive amounts of wealth are both being siphoned out of our social systems, and used to buy the politicians who facilitate those transfers:

(A)t root, the Panama Papers are not about tax. They’re not even about money. What the Panama Papers really depict is the corruption of our democracy.

Following on from LuxLeaks, the Panama Papers confirm that the super-rich have effectively exited the economic system the rest of us have to live in. Thirty years of runaway incomes for those at the top, and the full armoury of expensive financial sophistication, mean they no longer play by the same rules the rest of us have to follow. Tax havens are simply one reflection of that reality. Discussion of offshore centres can get bogged down in technicalities, but the best definition I’ve found comes from expert Nicholas Shaxson who sums them up as: “You take your money elsewhere, to another country, in order to escape the rules and laws of the society in which you operate.” In so doing, you rob your own society of cash for hospitals, schools, roads…

But those who exited our societies are now also exercising their voice to set the rules by which the rest of us live. The 1% are buying political influence as never before.
...
Hirschman argued that citizens could protest against a system in one of two ways: voice or exit. Fed up with your local school? Then you can exercise your voice and take it up with the headteacher. Alternatively, you can exit and take your child to a private school.

In Britain and in America, the super-rich have broken Hirschman’s law – they are at one and the same time exercising economic exit and political voice. They can have their tax-free cake and eat it.

- Meanwhile, Jared Bernstein offers new evidence that tax cuts for the rich bear no relationship to economic development. And David Lawder reports on what looks to be a start in developing international standards to rein in tax evasion, while Rajesh Makwana points out that a global tax body may be needed to overcome corporate resistance at the national level in developed countries.

- Richard V. Reeves, Edward Rodrigue and Elizabeth Kneebone write about the multiple dimensions of poverty and inequality which put people at a fundamental disadvantage in seeking social inclusion. And Dave Lieber laments the use of the criminal justice system to lock offenders into perpetual debt servitude.

- Finally, Thomas Walkom writes that a time of low oil prices and reduced public revenues is exactly the point when it makes sense to implement consumer-level carbon pricing.

Tuesday Night Cat Blogging

Lookout cats.

Tuesday Morning Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Scott Vrooman rightly makes the point that increased wealth at the top tends to splash outside a country's borders rather than trickling down. And CBC News reports on how that process has been facilitated by KPMG and other firms wining and dining executives of the Canada Revenue Agency who are supposed to be ensuring their clients' contribution to a fair society.

- Paul Krugman describes the symptoms of robber-baron stagnation - which all too closely match the state of the U.S.' economy. And Ian Welsh outlines an economy which would serve the interests of people rather than profiteers.

- Unfortunately, the Libs seem bent on pushing the economics of destruction - not only by pushing more arms sales abroad, but also by looking to buy into another round of Star Wars missile defence schemes.

- Laurence Mathieu-Leger and Ashifa Kassam write about the suicide crisis in Attawapiskat and elsewhere. And Charlie Angus discusses the desperate need to go beyond band-aid solutions.

- Finally, John Oliver looks into credit reports and other background checks - and highlights how information which is useless at best and grossly inaccurate at worse is serving to keep people from finding work, housing and other necessities of life:

Monday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material to start your week.

- Robert Frank discusses the essential role of luck in determining the opportunities we have - and how the advantages of a strong social fabric are too often ignored by the people who benefit the most from them:

(C)hance plays a far larger role in life outcomes than most people realize. And yet, the luckiest among us appear especially unlikely to appreciate our good fortune. According to the Pew Research Center, people in higher income brackets are much more likely than those with lower incomes to say that individuals get rich primarily because they work hard. Other surveys bear this out: Wealthy people overwhelmingly attribute their own success to hard work rather than to factors like luck or being in the right place at the right time.

That’s troubling, because a growing body of evidence suggests that seeing ourselves as self-made—rather than as talented, hardworking, and lucky—leads us to be less generous and public-spirited. It may even make the lucky less likely to support the conditions (such as high-quality public infrastructure and education) that made their own success possible.
...
Being born in a favorable environment is an enormous stroke of luck. But maintaining such an environment requires high levels of public investment in everything from infrastructure to education—something Americans have lately been unwilling to support. Many factors have contributed to this reticence, but one in particular stands out: budget deficits resulting from a long-term decline in the United States’ top marginal tax rate.

A recent study by the political scientists Benjamin Page, Larry Bartels, and Jason Seawright found that the top 1 percent of U.S. wealth-holders are “extremely active politically” and are much more likely than the rest of the American public to resist taxation, regulation, and government spending. Given that the wealthiest Americans believe their prosperity is due, above all else, to their own talent and hard work, is this any wonder? Surely it’s a short hop from overlooking luck’s role in success to feeling entitled to keep the lion’s share of your income—and to being reluctant to sustain the public investments that let you succeed in the first place.

- Brennan Leffler exposes how employers are all too often able to brazenly flout legal protection for workers due to a lack of enforcement. Sara Mojtehedzadeh and Geoffrey Vendeville report on the multiple disadvantages facing women in the retail sector, while Mary Cornish studies the broader gender gap. And Teuila Fuatai surveys how some workers have been fighting for a fair minimum wage across Canada.

- The Economist examines the plunging cost of solar energy which figures to radically reshape our energy choices based on comparative costs alone, while Rebecca Penty reports that tar sands operators are well past believing it's worth developing new megaprojects. Daniel Oberhaus notes that with a political push, we could end our reliance on fossil fuels within a decade. And Chris D'Angelo writes that the oil industry has gone far out of its way to make sure decisions about our energy options aren't based on facts.

- Finally, Michael Butler weighs in on the Libs' failure to move ahead with a national pharmacare plan. And the McMaster Health Forum looks to the UK's experience to argue for pharmacare in Canada.

#YEG2016 Followup Links

While there's been plenty of ill-informed commentary since the NDP's convention last weekend, I'll take a moment to highlight a few of the followup points which deserve a read.

- Joshua Keep rightly recognizes the new leadership election as an opportunity for renewal, but no guarantee of improvement. Gerard Di Trolio focuses particularly on the prospects of an unabashedly left-wing leadership campaign. And Selina Chignall offers a look at what the NDP may be looking for in its next leader, while Samantha Power examines some of the competing forces within the party (though we shouldn't overstate the differences, particularly given that there was little apparent problem keeping all sides of any of the issues in the fold just an election cycle earlier).

- Gerald Caplan asks the question of whether the NDP's main problem has to do with its ability to be seen as a viable government. But I'd note in response that at least over the last two elections, the issue has been one of winning first-choice support rather than being in the consideration set of enough voters to contend for power.

- Nicholas Ellan offers a look at some of the tactics which worked for the Leap and Renewal movements at the NDP's convention - while discussing how they should inform the party's own work in the time to come. 

- Finally, Crawford Kilian points out that the most extreme response to the Leap Manifesto resolution amounts to an attempt to deny the glaringly obvious. And lest anybody think the issue is at all new based on the development of the Leap Manifesto itself, see my earlier discussion in this post and column.

Sunday Morning Links

This and that for your Sunday reading.

- Alexander Panetta reports on the G20's agreement on the need to crack down on tax evasion - as well as the steps Canada needs to take to get our own house in order:

The final communique warned of actions against countries that don't agree within a year to adopt bank-reporting standards being promoted by international agencies.
...
One section of the G20 communique applies to more countries, including Canada. It says countries must do a better job of tracking down the true owners of companies, specifically those who might be hiding behind strawmen.

Dennis Howlett says Canada is currently in non-compliance with that provision. The executive director of Canadians for Tax Fairness says oversight is especially weak in some provinces.

"Canada has a lot of work to do to comply with the international standards on transparency of beneficial ownership," he said.
...
A recent report by the group Transparency International said Canada runs afoul of multiple internationally-agreed standards set by the G20. It says Canadian law doesn't properly define beneficial ownership — the true identity of people drawing profit from a company. It also says authorities aren't required to track their identity, nor can they easily access their identity.

- Steven Chase confirms that the Libs' choice to approve a massive arms deal with Saudi Arabia came long after they were aware of increasing human rights abuses. And Susana Mas highlights the Libs' limited and selective disclosure of the facts they're willing to share publicly even now.

- Raul Aldaz reviews Gianluca Passarelli's study of the presidentialization of political parties around the world. And in what looks to offer a prime example, Tim Naumetz points out Justin Trudeau's plan to take any remaining policy-making levers out of the hands of the Libs' membership.

- Duff Conacher suggests that we can look to Quebec for an example in taking big money out of party politics.

- Finally, Trish Kahle discusses the need and opportunity for the labour and environmental movements to develop shared goals, rather than allowing cynical corporate interests to pit them against each other:

Environmental politics must become generalized in the labor movement, and vice versa. The language of climate justice has already begun to infuse a sense of class politics into environmentalism, and green groups’ support for recent labor struggles is a promising step forward. Initiatives like the Labor Network for Sustainability, Trade Unions for Energy Democracy, and the BlueGreen Alliance are helping to connect the dots. But environmentalists must go further, acknowledging that there can be no real solution to the energy crisis without the input and leadership of the people who already do the work. Understanding the climate crisis as part of neoliberalism’s larger attack on public welfare and democracy (with the impacts, like all social failings in the United States, experienced more acutely by people of color and particularly by African Americans) can help expand the terrain on which both unions and climate activists struggle.

Ultimately, we live in the world we build. That world is both social and ecological, constantly made and remade through what sociologist Jason Moore has described as “the web of life.” If organized labor—and the climate—are to have a fighting chance, unions must offer real alternatives to the world of “shared sacrifice” and dead zones, of poisoning by austerity, of cheap fuels and cheap lives. What would it take for today’s coal-belt communities, channeling the Miners for Democracy, to fight not against EPA regulations but for jobs restoring lands destroyed by mountaintop removal mining? What would it take for union activists to have a meaningful say at the next international climate talks?

This work is just beginning. But with a shared vision to guide it, labor environmentalism can take us far. Its core demand is simple: to build a world that all of us, not just the rich or white, can actually live in.

Saturday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your weekend reading.

- Lana Payne writes about the need for a Bernie Sanders in Canada to highlight and oppose the privilege of the wealthy few:

It is in this context of blatant unfairness — rules for the rich and rules for the rest — that politicians like Bernie Sanders have become so popular.

People are angry. And rightfully so. They play by the rules. Young people did what they were told. They are more educated than at any time in history and yet they face precarious employment and uncertainty and often bucketloads of debt. People are told to lower their expectations, especially over what the state should be providing.

And along comes Bernie, who says it doesn’t have to be this way. There is wealth. The problem is not that as a society we can’t afford free post-secondary education or universal health care, the problem is as a society we can’t afford rich people who don’t pay their taxes. We can’t afford to lose billions of dollars annually in tax revenues to tax havens.

We can’t afford to have an unfair tax system and Canada’s has grown increasingly unfair.

We need a Bernie Sanders in Canada. Someone who will change the conversation and put entitlement on the table. And then squash it.

- Jim Coyle discusses the latest UNICEF report showing that the poorest Canadian children are facing increasing disparities in health and well-being. And the CP reports on the urgent need for investment in First Nations in particular to close the gap.

- Andrew Jackson points out the unfairness in using increasingly unequal lifespans as an excuse to cut pensions and other income supports in a way which places the heaviest burden on lower-income workers. 

- Tammy Robert examines Saskatchewan's archaic political fund-raising laws, and starts tracing the Saskatchewan Party's largest donors over the years. And Jon Schwarz highlights Barack Obama's take on the influence of money in politics.

- Finally, Linda McQuaig questions why we've seen a knee-jerk response attacking the Leap Manifesto, rather than the global environmental calamity it's intended to help avert.

Musical interlude

Paul van Dyk - Time of our Lives

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- George Monbiot discusses how neoliberal ideology has managed to take over as the default assumption in global governance - despite its disastrous and readily visible effects:

(T)he past four decades have been characterised by a transfer of wealth not only from the poor to the rich, but within the ranks of the wealthy: from those who make their money by producing new goods or services to those who make their money by controlling existing assets and harvesting rent, interest or capital gains. Earned income has been supplanted by unearned income.

Neoliberal policies are everywhere beset by market failures. Not only are the banks too big to fail, but so are the corporations now charged with delivering public services. As Tony Judt pointed out in Ill Fares the Land, Hayek forgot that vital national services cannot be allowed to collapse, which means that competition cannot run its course. Business takes the profits, the state keeps the risk.

The greater the failure, the more extreme the ideology becomes. Governments use neoliberal crises as both excuse and opportunity to cut taxes, privatise remaining public services, rip holes in the social safety net, deregulate corporations and re-regulate citizens. The self-hating state now sinks its teeth into every organ of the public sector.

Perhaps the most dangerous impact of neoliberalism is not the economic crises it has caused, but the political crisis. As the domain of the state is reduced, our ability to change the course of our lives through voting also contracts. Instead, neoliberal theory asserts, people can exercise choice through spending. But some have more to spend than others: in the great consumer or shareholder democracy, votes are not equally distributed. The result is a disempowerment of the poor and middle. As parties of the right and former left adopt similar neoliberal policies, disempowerment turns to disenfranchisement. Large numbers of people have been shed from politics.

- And Mike Small highlights how privatization schemes are predictably enriching private contractors at the expense of the general public without delivering the promised services. 

- Steven Chase reports on the Libs' deceptive attempt to dodge responsibility for approving the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia. Alison succinctly links the sale to its known consequences, while Neil MacDonald points out that there's no difference at all between the Cons and Libs in their determination to push military exports at the expense of human rights. And both Michael Harris and the Globe and Mail's editorial board tear into the Libs for their hypocrisy and dishonesty.

- Meanwhile, Desmond Cole reminds us that Canadian torture victims are being met with utter contempt by the Trudeau Libs.

- Finally, Bruce Campbell writes that there's been virtually no progress on rail safety since the Lac-Mégantic disaster. And Mike De Souza notes that contrary to the spin of pipeline proponents, there's reason for concern that similar regulatory neglect and corporate greed connected to pipelines can result in damage on an equally large scale.

A place for discussion

Following up on yesterday's column, I'll expand somewhat on some of the decisions the NDP may want to consider as (or before) it elects new leaders. And since the recent federal convention has been treated by other commentators as everything from a shining example of party democracy in action to an absolute calamity, let's start at that level - with a particular focus on what should be seen as having worked and not in Edmonton.

I'll start by taking the view that whatever one's views on the merits, the convention's handling of resolutions related to the Leap Manifesto should be seen as an excellent example as to how policy debate can happen within a party.

Plenty of work went into developing a main resolution and informing members (and the public) about it. The convention's resolution panel examined its options, and put forward a primary resolution which addressed concerns about the original wording. The underlying issue was one which left room for thoughtful debate even among the convention's featured speakers. And the debate on the floor featured meaningful contributions from a combination of high-profile and rank-and-file members.

About all that was lacking was any sense of willingness to work with the outcome - which is unfortunate given that the resolution which passed leaves ample room for debate as to which portions of Leap should be accepted or not.

Unfortunately, time and capacity limitations make it impossible to engage in that level of discussion when it comes to all but a few resolutions at any given convention. And that seems to me to be a particularly important problem if conventions are seen as the sole direct opportunity for membership-level input into policies and choices.

But that's a problem which should be fairly readily fixed. The NDP's federal council has authority to make final decisions on policy between conventions - and the sheer volume of resolutions brought forward at every policy convention seems to me to signal some significant demand to ensure that more policy issues are dealt with.

With the council serving as a check on any mischief, there's no reason why the resolutions (PDF) which haven't yet been addressed by convention (and additional ideas put forward afterward) couldn't be made subject to systematic review and discussion through party channels. And the result of facilitating ongoing policy discussion could be to make the NDP and its policy conventions more productive in two ways.

First, it should help to narrow and clarify the issues up for discussion.

At the moment, there's a large amount of redundancy in the resolutions submitted since electoral district associations and commissions submit their own resolutions with little (if any) coordination. But the development of an ongoing policy forum should make it easier for EDAs and commissions to discuss and agree on the wording intended to address any given issue - which should reduce the number of resolutions submitted while better focusing their intent.

And second, the convention itself should run more efficiently and accomplish more if members' concerns have been addressed in advance, or can be addressed afterward.

In particular, there should be less room for argument about how much time is devoted to any specific policy - or policy in general - at a convention if there's a readily-available alternative forum in which to carry on the discussion.

Of course, it will inevitably take time for a new process to be developed and implemented. And I'd fully expect some of the past issues to remain until members' expectations adapt to a new policy review process. But in the long run, I'd think it's possible to put both convention time and members' policy interest to better use by making sure needed conversations about the NDP's direction take place on a continuous basis.

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.