FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Feb 9

Politicization of Health Issues in North America

by bcurry

The last few decades have seen a greater politicization of a number of issues related to health.  The clear division among pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine proponents during the COVID pandemic was a major indication of such politicization, with even public officials taking up one side or another.  The pandemic raised a number of health issues in both the U.S. and Canada, forcing governments and medical practitioners to support one side or the other.  However, the science was clear and supported the need for a vaccine and the various societal restrictions introduced to protect peoples’ lives.  The high number of COVID-related deaths, particularly in the first year of the pandemic, confirmed the urgency for action in order to minimize the terrible impact of the virus on the population at large.  Results indicated that where individuals were not immunized, the probability of serious health consequences and even death was that much higher.  Many ended up placing an extreme hardship on the health care system and communities.

In the U.S., the recent Supreme Court’s decision which overturned Roe vs. Wade — a 1973 landmark decision establishing a constitutional right to abortion — opened up the door to reviving the whole issue surrounding abortion, another primarily health issue.  Again, pro-life and pro-choice groups became more politically active in many states, with some state governments enacting laws introducing all kinds of restrictions on abortion, sometimes leading in practice to an outright ban.  This placed medical practitioners in a difficult situation, often putting a woman’s health in jeopardy as a result of the loss of the abortion option. 

More recently, governments in Canada and the U.S. have or plan to introduce legislation to support planned policy changes affecting transgender and non-binary youth and adults.  Often under the banner of “parental rights”, the laws aim to restrict health-care options for such youth and inform parents of any name and gender identity changes students request at school.  Age limits are being prescribed for the use by medical practitioners of puberty blockers and hormone therapies for gender affirmation.  As a result, medical experts and patients are weighing in on gender-affirming care and the potential impact of such laws on affected youth.  They believe that limiting their access to care will put some kids at risk of self-harm, especially with respect to their mental health.  Psychiatrists who see gender-diverse youth and adult patients believe that to outlaw access to puberty blockers ignores best practices, guidelines and international standards of care endorsed by major medical associations.  Such laws are an unnecessary and unconstitutional political intrusion into the personal health choices of children, their parents and their doctors.  What is difficult to understand is that it appears to be the policy equivalent to hitting a fly with a hammer, given that the issue affects a very tiny portion of the population, often depicted as representing well less than one percent of children and adolescents.

When it comes to personal health matters, I believe that the majority of people would prefer that the government stay out of the equation.  In Canada, we saw a similar political split during past debates on the issue of medical assistance in dying (referred to as MAiD).  There were those that opposed MAiD primarily on religious beliefs, compared to the medical profession and civil rights groups who argued in favour of assisting those with terminal diseases, living with pain, in anguish, and with no hope for a cure.  In the six years since assisted dying was decriminalized by the Canadian Parliament in 2016, more patients are seeking MAiD year over year as this option becomes more widely known and available.  Since the introduction of this practice into the Canadian healthcare system, over 40,000 Canadians have taken advantage of the option. Decisions for assisted dying are left to the individual, his or her family and their medical practitioners, using several prescribed guidelines developed under the program.

I don’t know about you, but I want to make decisions about my health with the least amount of government interference or that of politically motivated groups.  I want decisions to be based on the best science at the time and the experience and input of medical practitioners.  There has been far too much politicization of health issues, driven by motives that most likely have nothing to do with the freedom to determine what is right for each person.  Our beliefs are our own.  As long as one is not harming anyone else, our health-related choices are our business. 

Canada Civil Rights COVID-19 Health Care Health Care Systen Mandatory Vaccination US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jul 26

Why Canada’s Infatuation With Public Inquiries Is Flawed

by bcurry

Recently, opposition parties in the federal legislature have been demanding that the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau create a public inquiry into the matter of Chinese and other foreign interference in our national security scene.  I touched on this issue in a recent blog: Why would the Canadian government need a public inquiry on national security matters. 

Now, we have several health and medical related bodies asking the federal government to have a public inquiry into the handling by governments of the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada. On July 24th, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) published a letter by more than a dozen Canadian physicians and health advocates shining a spotlight on what they’ve dubbed the country’s “major pandemic failures,” from the devastation in long-term care homes, to vaccine hoarding, to higher death rates among lower-income communities.  Why would one need a public inquiry when there are already a number of federal and provincial bodies, such as Health Canada and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), which were directly involved in the coordination of policies and actions in response to COVID-19?  Indeed, Health Canada has already indicated that there are a number of audits and studies underway, including the launch of an independent public health review panel and a series of comprehensive audits on the agency’s pandemic response being undertaken by the federal Office of the Auditor General. 

The difficulty in Canada is that the responsibility for health matters is a shared one between the federal government and thirteen provincial/territorial governments.  The implementation of a national COVID-19 strategy had to be coordinated among the provinces which for the most part were responsible for the actual implementation of actions on the ground, including the eventual mass vaccination of Canadians across the country.  In addition, the on-going responsibility for long-term care residences lies with the provinces, and these facilities were known prior to COVID-19 to have major resource issues, including health care personnel shortages.  The unfortunate high level of pandemic-related deaths at the outset was largely due to numerous systemic problems in long-term care residences in several provinces.  As a result, plans are already underway by the provinces to attempt to correct these problems, especially when it comes to health care resources.  The state of our hospitals and emergency services are also the responsibility of each province, and would require a thorough investigation of problems arising during the pandemic with respect to the handling of patients.  There have already been several studies as to why communities with low incomes, immigrants and essential workers were hardest hit by COVID-19.

In addition, this past spring it was reported that there is a citizen-led, cross-Canada inquiry, the National Citizens Inquiry into Canada’s Response to COVID-19, which aims to examine how governments and institutions reacted to the pandemic. This appears to be a unique inquiry in many ways since it is citizen run and citizen funded.

Yes, there is little doubt that there were frustrations and concerns about the impact of existing complexities within the Canadian health care system, with its joint responsibilities between the two levels of government.  Some, like the physicians and health advocates, might conclude that Canada was ‘ill-prepared’ and ‘lacked coordination’ in the COVID-19 pandemic.  However, the same could be said for most Western countries, including the U.S. and Britain.  No one disagrees that it is time to investigate what happened and learn how to prepare for the next pandemic.  Having another full-scale public inquiry is probably not the best way to go.

There are enough expert organizations already out there, both federally and provincially, which need to examine their roles and resources when it comes to meeting the challenges associated with pandemics.  By doing so, each of the necessary blocks can be strengthened and improved so as to develop more coherent and appropriate policies and actions in the future.  In the past, Canada was infatuated with so-called royal commissions related to economic and social matters.  However, they were top-heavy in resources and took a very long time to complete.  In most cases, the resulting reports were simply shelved and forgotten about until the next crisis occurred.  I truly believe that our existing institutions can carry out their post-mortem studies in a lot faster and more efficient matter.  This way, they each will ultimately be accountable for the results, especially when it comes to carrying out any subsequent recommendations in a timely manner.

Canada COVID-19 Health Care Systen

Leave a comment »
Aug 2

Return to Offices in Post-Pandemic Era

by bcurry

Over two years after the pandemic abruptly forced tens of millions of people to start working from home, disrupting family lives and derailing careers, employers are now getting ready to bring workers back to offices.  However, it appears that workers in North America’s midsize and small cities have returned to the office in far greater numbers than those in the biggest cities.  Offices apparently have filled back up fastest in areas where COVID lockdowns were shortest and where commutes are done by car, rather than by public transit. 

In light of the Omicron variants which are creating other waves, the fact that the COVID pandemic is not over has created a snag in how employers are dealing with remote and in-person work.  In particular, the situation has forced some large and major employers to delay a return to the office.  The pandemic has also pushed employees to look at the health and safety protocols of their jobs and to become more vocal about the level of risk and the hazards they are facing.  Recruiters note that regional differences in office attendance and flexible work are making for a bumpier job market, especially given the increased competition for skilled workers in the current labour market.  In certain cases, some companies are forced to advertise jobs where the work is primarily done remotely.

Back-to-office plans have to take into consideration a number of challenges in order to accommodate workers in a healthy and safety manner.  The era of stuffing people into offices like sardines is over.  The inadequacy and poor quality of many existing office buildings was simply illustrated by the conditions surrounding the pandemic.  Indoor ventilation, air filtration and overcrowding became major concerns given the fact that highly infectious COVID was shown to be primarily spread as an aerosol.  The interior of many office towers today are climate controlled whereby one cannot open the windows in order to increase air quality.  Improving the ventilation and filtration systems has led to increased costs for landlords and tenants alike.  Another cost has been the need to have more stringent and frequent cleaning practices.

With health restrictions lifting, many workers are being called back to the in-person workplace, which can bring up a number of different feelings.  Employers can help ease this transition by having a comprehensive return-to-work plan, and clearly communicating it to workers.  Besides potential physical health hazards, there is also a need to address potential psychological hazards given the anxiety and stress that some returning employees may incur.  A gradual return to the workplace may ease anxiety, possibly by allowing for partial in-person work in the initial stages of the return-to-work plan.  There may also be a degree of anxiety of employees working alongside people who have not been vaccinated for COVID.  The question of mandated vaccination of workers became a highly controversial issue during this pandemic, causing a major schism between the vaccinated and unvaccinated.  Employers will have to address the issue as a policy matter and communicate their policy in a clear and concise manner.  They will also have to acknowledge and follow up on worker concerns or complaints.  They will have to show compassion and understanding that workers, particularly those that are immunocompromised, may be stressed, harassed or feel anxious.

How long will employers remain flexible?  When the pandemic loosens its grip, inevitably bosses could well demand that people file back in, and pronto.  The real question is whether the return-to-office plan will be done in a gradual, effective and controlled manner.  Several serious issues will have to be considered by employers as part of their plan, as highlighted above.  If the plan is not well thought out and effectively communicated, the issue of employee retention will quickly surface.  The situation of each individual employee will have to be taken into account and continuously monitored at the outset.  Flexibility is a key.  Employers may incur additional initial costs but they will be worthwhile in the long run.

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 Labor Force Labour Force Reopening the Economy US

Leave a comment »
Jul 11

Pandemic Illustrated Serious Concerns About Capacity of Canadian Health Care System

by bcurry

Increasingly, because of the impact of the pandemic, Canadians have been questioning the capacity of its health care system to meet their current and future needs.  Recently, staffing issues and staff absenteeism due to COVID have caused several emergency and operating units to shut down across the country, especially in more rural areas.  In addition, due to burnout and retirements, more and more medical professionals are leaving the profession.  Replacing them has become a greater concern, especially in the field of family physicians.

Nevertheless, Canadians still believe that they have better access to health care, live longer than Americans and rarely go bankrupt because of medical bills.  Canada’s mortality rate from Covid-19 is a third of the U.S. rate, a reflection of Canada’s more widespread use of health restrictions and its collectivist approach to universal health care.  Where it falls down is in what is referred to as ‘surge capacity’ where hospitals are capable of handling a sudden or longer-term surge of patients.  Even in normal times, Canada has fewer hospital beds per person than almost any other developed country, particularly when it comes to the number of available intensive care unit (ICU) beds.  For example, it is reported that on average, the U.S. has one ICU bed for roughly very 4,100 citizens.  In the largest province of Ontario that ratio is one to 6,000.

Then there are the issues surrounding the number of nurses and doctors available to serve Canadian patients.  While Canadian nursing schools are seeing a surge in interest amid the pandemic, experts warn it may not be enough to alleviate the shortage of people working in the profession.  In a 2009 report, the Canadian Nurses Association predicted that Canada could see a shortage of 60,000 full-time nurses by 2022.  The Association wants to see more financial assistance to nursing students and more clinical placements available for students to get hands-on experience in hospitals or other health-care settings.  Better compensation and working conditions are also on the table.  As for doctors, fewer graduates are choosing family medicine as a discipline, despite family-doctor shortages across the country.  This is despite the fact that the total number of medical school graduates applying for residency positions in Canada has risen over the past 10 years.  Access to family doctors and primary care is a problem for a large portion of the country.  According to a 2019 Statistics Canada report, 4.6 million Canadians over the age of 12 did not have a regular family doctor.  With an aging workforce and an increase in the numbers of retiring physicians, the primary care situation has even become worst.

The pandemic exacerbated already serious problems within the Canadian health care system.  Fortunately, the consequences of the pandemic for the system have stimulated a much needed national conversation on inadequate health care capacity, staffing shortages and under funding.  Part of the problem rests with the overseeing associations that regulate and control access to medical licenses across Canada.  For years, there have been systemic barriers to both qualified domestic and foreign trained medical students/practitioners to find residency positions in Canada.  While it is understandable that such bodies as colleges of physicians and surgeons want to ensure the highest of standards within the profession, there have been at times failures to really consider the impact of restrictive practices on the overall health care system.  The pandemic further demonstrated that among the biggest bottlenecks in the system is the staffing required by acute care, particularly in the emergency departments and ICUs.

With an aging population and people living longer due to the marvels of modern medicine and treatments, the discussion about the capacity of our health care system to meet the needs of Canadians has to take place now and not later.  Groups representing all facets of the system, from medical practitioners to patients, have to be allowed to provide their input to governments.  While the pandemic created several serious drawbacks for the overall system, the subsequent reactions of governments and health care providers demonstrated that collectively we can meet these future challenges as a nation.  Despite evident challenges, Canadians generally continue to be proud of their health care system, its workforce and its universal coverage.  However, as always, there is room for improvements.

Canada COVID-19 Health Care Systen

Leave a comment »
May 9

The Internet Was a Blessing Until It Became a Curse

by bcurry

A judge just threw out Donald Trump’s lawsuit against Twitter that challenged his ban from the social media platform.  U.S. District Judge James Donato rejected Trump’s claim that Twitter violated his right to freedom of speech guaranteed under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  He simply declared that Twitter is a private company, and ‘the First Amendment applies only to governmental abridgements of speech, and not to alleged abridgements by private companies.’  When Trump’s account (with over 88 million followers) was suspended by Twitter, he went on to set up his own platform Truth Social which apparently has not done very well.  Now, the question arises over whether Twitter’s takeover by Tesla CEO Elon Musk will offer Trump a possible return to the social media platform.

Marshall McLuhan, a well-known Canadian philosopher whose work was among the cornerstones of the study of media theory in the late sixties, coined the expression “the medium is the message” and the term “global village”.  He is credited with predicting the World Wide Web (WWW) almost 30 years before it was invented.  Little did he know, having passed away in late 1980, of the incredible eventual impact on our daily lives of the Internet.  The Internet is this generation’s equivalent to the telegraph, the telephone and the fax machines that allowed us to communication instantaneously and broadly across the globe.  However, as a marvellous communication tool, the Internet has also proven to be more susceptible to the spreading of misinformation and disinformation than any other means in modern times.

When one talks of ‘misinformation’, one is normally referring to suspect, invalid and often poorly researched information passed on by persons to other persons via social media for example.  Often such information is transmitted without real malice, but simply and inadvertently by persons accepting the information as being valid or such that supports preconceived views, referred to a ‘confirmation bias’.  ‘Disinformation’ on the other hand is where someone is deliberately providing false information in support of their causes, goals or conspiracy theories, similar to what we would view as propaganda.  Unfortunately, we are seeing a lot more disinformation being conveyed via the Internet then ever before.  States or organizations that want to control the flow of information for their own purposes are notorious for facilitating the spread of disinformation, especially as a form of mind control within their borders.  One needs to go no further for examples than Russia, North Korea and Iran.

Unfortunately, during the Covid-19 pandemic, certain groups within the U.S. and Canada began disinformation campaigns against the public health measures introduced by many governments to deal with the tragic consequences of Covid on our lives.  The information was used to justify anti-vax, anti-mask, anti-lockdown and other public health mandates, regardless of their evident effectiveness in controlling the spread of Covid and reducing the number of associated deaths and hospitalizations.  These campaigns of course led to numerous protests in both countries easily and quickly arranged via social media, often tying up scarce government resources.  In addition, groups have used the Internet to spread ridiculous conspiracy theories, the most notable being that which promoted the belief that the results of the 2020 Presidential election were affected by corrupt voter fraud.  This culminated in a mob of Trump supporters attacking the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, after Trump repeatedly said that he would never concede the legitimate election.

We must do a better job of educating future generations about the potential pitfalls of relying on one or two sources for information, particularly those who rely on non-verifiable and suspect origins.  We need to be much more suspect when assessing the accuracy and validity of our Internet sources, be they found in social media or on websites.  I might suggest strongly that we include mainstream news media and websites provided by objective professional organizations as an integral and regular part of one’s information sources.  Perhaps this is easier said than done.  After all, access to information via social media in particular is quick and dirty.  Regrettably, this is what the purveyors of disinformation and misinformation are counting on.

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 Donald Trump Mainstream Media Media Social Media The News Media US

Leave a comment »
Mar 26

Sorry Folks, But COVID Is Not Done With Us Just Yet!

by bcurry

You don’t have to be an epidemiologist to predict that COVID is not finished with us just yet!  Another wave is expected in the U.S. and Canada this spring, mainly because of the Omicron variant known as BA. 2, which appears to be more transmissible than the original strain, BA. 1, and has been fuelling outbreaks overseas.  According to the Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Research Center, the United Kingdom had a seven-day average of over 65,000 cases and 79 deaths as of March 16th.  Unfortunately, the lower vaccination rate in the U.S. is very likely to be of major concern as BA. 2 spreads farther in the States, especially in regions where vaccination rates are significantly lower than the national rate.  U.S. health authorities estimate that about 65.4 percent of Americans are fully vaccinated and just 44 percent have received a third booster shot.  Indeed, recent news media headlines note that COVID vaccinations — including boosters — have fallen to their lowest levels since 2020. 

What is indefensible is the fact that these vaccines have proven to be very effective against Omicron, leaving fully vaccinated people with milder symptoms and fewer hospitalizations.  In addition, vaccines greatly reduce the health care costs associated with COVID.  In a December 2022 study, the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation, which tracks U.S. health policy and outcomes, estimated that between June and November of 2021 unvaccinated American adults accounted for $13.8 billion in “preventable” COVID hospitalization costs nationwide.  However, simply because the number of related hospitalizations has steadily gone down in recent months, does not mean that the number of Omicron cases have also gone down.  One can expect that with more and more public health restrictions being removed, more people will become infected, with the unvaccinated most likely to suffer more severe health symptoms.

Federal reports show that the U.S. has spent billions to get vaccine shots into arms, including more than $19.3 billion to help develop vaccines.  Still, the U.S. has one of the largest COVID vaccine holdout rates among highly developed countries.  Particularly, as some question the need for getting the shots, especially boosters, or bristle at government or workplace mandates.  Needless-to-say, there are also costs associated for unvaccinated individuals themselves, often in the form of increased health premiums under employer health insurance plans.  In addition, the biggest financial risk vaccine holdouts have faced is getting laid off from their jobs due to employer imposed vaccine mandates.  A Kaiser Family Foundation nationwide survey in October 2021 found that about a quarter of workers said their employer required proof of vaccination, or faced dismissals, suspensions or regular COVID testing.

The U.S. is on the verge of unfortunately recording one million COVID-related deaths over the course of this pandemic.  What makes this statistic even sadder is the fact that the non-profit Kaiser Family Foundation estimated vaccinations could have prevented 163,000 U.S. deaths between June and November of 2021 alone.  Anti-vaccination and vaccine hesitancy remains a serious problem, despite the evidence that COVID vaccines are safe and reliable.  With the emergence of BA. 2, vaccines, particularly for those seniors 65 and over and for those who are immune-compromised, remain the first line of defence against hospitalization and death.  Yes, current vaccines do not prevent someone who is fully vaccinated from actually getting the COVID.  However, according to Public Health Ontario figures for example, the data shows that unvaccinated people over 60 were 15 times more likely to end up in the ICU with COVID than the fully vaccinated.  According to Ontario’s science advisory table, in January 2022 the rate of unvaccinated people in ICUs in the province of Ontario adjusted or “standardized” for age was 254 per million, compared to 22 fully vaccinated — a significant difference.

As of this March, Reuters reported that costs of going unvaccinated in America are mounting for workers and companies.  The same can be said for Canada, although over 80 percent of Canadians were fully vaccinated and a significant number have received a third-dose COVID vaccine.  Whether one agrees with vaccine mandates or not, they have proven to be effective where they were instituted.  There is little doubt, based on on-going emergence of COVID variants, additional vaccines will be required in the future to finally put an end to this pandemic.

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 US

Leave a comment »
Mar 9

Who Declared That COVID Vaccines Don’t Work Should Check Out Hong Kong

by bcurry

If there was ever a concrete example of the effectiveness of COVID vaccines, it is the current situation unfolding in Hong Kong.  Today, Hong Kong — a wealthy and modern financial center — now has the highest COVID-related death rate in the developed world.  Overwhelmingly, the elderly, unvaccinated residents, including toddlers and children too young to be immunized, have been hit hardest by the most recent Omicron variant outbreak.  This past January, less than 1 in 5 Hong Kong residents above the age of 80 had been fully vaccinated with two doses, and almost none had three.  That percentage has risen since then, but experts say it is still too little, too late, especially compared with Singapore, South Korea and Japan, where the elderly were a priority for vaccinations.  I find this statistic incredible given that public health officials in both the U.S. and Canada recommended late last year that anyone over sixty-five should get a booster vaccine shot in light of the Omicron variant, bringing the total to at least three doses.  In Ontario, Canada, for example, seniors in long-term care and in senior residences were even given a fourth shot to ensure that their immune systems could better resist the Omicron variant.  As a result, the number of deaths among seniors has significantly and steadily declined since the vaccines were first introduced in both countries.

Since the air-born Omicron variant is highly contagious, almost 90 percent of elderly care facilities in Hong Kong have COVID cases, and to date about 4,700 care home workers have tested positive.  On the other hand, the number of new COVID cases in Ontario remains low, especially as residential staff had been mandated to have at least two doses of the vaccine since the summer of 2021.  Workers in long-term care homes are currently required to have two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine to stay on the job, and they have until March 14th to get third shots.  For obvious reasons, this is the only sector in which the Ontario provincial government has made COVID-19 vaccination a requirement for employment.

When it comes to children aged between the ages of 5 and 12, both the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Canada Public Health Agency recommended that COVID vaccines be given.  Both public health agencies concluded that the benefits of protecting children against COVID-19 are seen as far outweighing any risk.  Yet, here you have Florida’s Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph Ladapo in a recent press conference, recommending that healthy children not receive the coronavirus vaccine.  Florida became the first state to officially recommend against COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children.  Dr. Lapado however did not outline any specifics or rationale behind this recommendation.  Of course, such positions have been behind the COVID-related policies of Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis, who has previously resisted the implementation of several public health measures.  Even officials in the state’s Department of Health and Human Services have asserted that unvaccinated teenagers are much more likely to end up in the hospital with COVID-19 than are vaccinated ones.

Interestingly, Florida ranked 19th among states in terms of the share of people receiving at least one vaccine shot, with about 78 percent of its residents at least partially vaccinated.  According to the CDC, the national vaccination rate is 76.5 percent.  However, when it comes to COVID-related deaths per 100,000 population, Florida ranks fifth in the country, just behind West Virginia, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and South Carolina.  In the past week ending March 6th , Florida reported 1,207 deaths from COVID-19.  In the week before that, 888 deaths were reported.  In total, Johns Hopkins University data shows that almost 71,000 Floridians have died from the disease since the pandemic began or 330 for every 100,000 people.  To date in the U.S., 958,621 people have died since the pandemic began, with the national COVID-19 death rate standing at 288 per 100,000 Americans.

Although the Omicron variant appears to have peaked, the virus is still spreading.  In Florida, the infection rate is still far higher than the national average.  It’s one thing to prevent children from wearing masks in school, but it’s another for the Governor of Florida to suggest that there is no need to vaccinate children!  Maybe, the Governor should spend some time in Hong Kong?

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 US

Leave a comment »
Mar 6

Truckers’ Convoy in U.S. Aspires to be More Calm Than Canadian “Freedom Convoy”

by bcurry

On February 23rd, taking its cue from demonstrations that paralyzed the downtown of Canada’s capital city of Ottawa for over three weeks, U.S. truckers embarked on a 2,500-mile (4,000-km) cross-country drive towards Washington, D.C., to protest coronavirus-related mandates and restrictions.  Having arrived in Maryland, organizers of the so-called “People’s Convoy” say they are planning to circle their armada of trucks, cars and SUVs around the Beltway on the morning of March 6th and into the following workweek at the minimum speed limit to slow traffic and get their message out to lawmakers.  The convoy, which recently numbered about 1,000 vehicles, intends to repeat that ritual each day this week until the group’s demands are met.  Organizers have proclaimed that they are law-abiding citizens who are simply exercising their rights to protest.  Unlike in Ottawa, they don’t want to shut anything down and they’re not planning to come into downtown Washington.

However, as in the case of the so-called “Freedom Convoy” in Canada, it’s not exactly clear just what are the ultimate goals of the American protesters.  As in the Canadian case, the convoy also involves a number or representatives of fringe groups, often with far-right links and other unrelated causes.  It seems apparent that there are a number of Trump supporters still asserting that the presidential election was stolen, as well as those from the anti-vaccine movement.  As in the Canadian case, many of the signs and messages can be seen referencing far-right political views and conspiracy theories.  A list of organizations supporting the convoy include those led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leader in the anti-vaccine movement, Gen. Michael Flynn, the former Trump administration national security adviser, and Rob McCoy, a Republican politician and Southern California evangelical pastor.  In general, the convoy participants do push for an end to government health rules requiring masks and vaccinations, a move that has already begun by governments as new COVID-19 cases have ebbed.  However, as in the case of Canada where provincial governments were responsible for implementing most public health restrictions during the pandemic, many of the mandates were implemented by individual states in varying degrees.

Given what happened in Canada, the Defence Department authorized deployment of about 700 unarmed National Guard personnel from the District of Columbia and neighbouring states to help manage the expected traffic.  Capitol Police said that plans were being drawn up to reinstall the temporary fence that was erected around the Capitol after last year’s January 6th riots in the Capitol.  Like the Canadian protesters, the organizers claim that they just have a message that they want heard and they’re not going anywhere until it’s heard.  Unlike the Canadian truckers’ convoy, they have not also stated clearly any specific protest against the American and Canadian vaccination mandate requirements for truckers crossing the U.S.-Canada border.  The Canadian protest included blockages by vehicles of the Windsor-Detroit and Coutts, Alberta, border crossings that occurred in late January and mid-February.  The negative economic impact of the blockades on trade contributed to the Canadian federal government invoking the Emergencies Act in order to pressure the protesters to remove their vehicles and reframe from further illegal activities.

In Canada, many arrests of leaders and protesters were made both in Ottawa and at the affected border crossings.  In the case of Coutts, Alberta, several guns, body armour and ammunition were seized by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).  The seizure is attributed to militia-style right-wing fringe elements.  In the case of the American truckers’ protest, it is hoped that the organizers will maintain a more peaceful stance.  In light of the decline in new COVID-19 cases and related hospitalization rates, the irony is that both protests against government public health mandates are occurring at a time when many of the restrictions are in the process of being removed.  If the American protest resembles its Canadian counterpart, one will probably see no clear plan and a hodgepodge of multiple and diverse grievances.  Many grievances will once again reflect the general malaise within a large segment of the population, often compounded by a growing mistrust of government and the authorities.  Unfortunately, as illustrated in the Canadian truckers’ protest, these grievances can lead to illegal and sometimes violent actions.

Canada Coronavirus COVID-19 Extremism Extremist Groups Federal Government Federal Government Populism U.S. Canada Border US

Leave a comment »
Feb 18

Debate Over Introduction of Emergencies Act to Deal With Trucker Protests in Canada

by bcurry

During the last three weeks Canada has been faced with protests related to a trucker convoy which are against government mandated COVID-related vaccines and public health restrictions.  Although blockades at the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor, Ontario and at the Coutts, Alberta, border crossingwere removed by heavy police operations, the illegal occupation of the country’s capital, Ottawa, had continued.  As a result, the Cabinet of Justin Trudeau’s federal government administration invoked the Emergencies Act.  The federal Act gives the government far reaching powers, allowing the government to freeze financial accounts, press tow truck operators into service and end blockades.  While the Act immediately takes effect, there is a requirement under the Act to table the legislation in Parliament within seven days.  The measures are time-limited to 30 days, but could be extended.  The current invocation is primarily restricted to enforcement at Ottawa’s illegal occupation and at any blockades at U.S.-Canada border points.  In addition, the Premier of Ontario, Doug Ford, declared a state of emergency in the province to clear crucial border crossings, with vehicle licence seizures among the tools at its disposal.

Of course, there are those who believe the Emergencies Act is not needed and is an overreach.  The Canadian Civil Liberties Association has launched a suit against the federal government, claiming that its invocation is in violation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  In Parliament, some opposition parties such as the Conservative Party and the Bloc Quebecois have stated their opposition to the measure, believing that it is not necessary to resolve the issues.  Meanwhile, the residents and businesses of downtown Ottawa have faced numerous serious problems because of safety concerns, forcing many businesses to be shut down during the three-week old occupation.  As a result, a class action suit against the occupation organizers has now ballooned to a $306-million claim for the disruption to lives and livelihoods from the occupation.

It has to be remembered that the Emergencies Act was created in 1988 as the modern-day replacement to the previous War Measures Act.  The infamous October Crisis refers to a chain of events that took place in Quebec in the fall of 1970 when a terrorist group known as the Front de libération du Québec (FLQ) kidnapped British trade commissioner James Cross and Quebec Minister of Immigration and Minister of Labour Pierre Laporte, who was eventually murdered while in captivity.  The then Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau invoked the War Measures Act, which was the only law available at the time to deal with national emergencies.  This led to the presence of military on Canadian streets to supplement the local police, the suspension of normal civil liberties and the authorization of arrests and detentions without charge.  Hundreds of people were arrested and charged under the Act, mostly in Quebec.  Most historians and jurists believe that that Act’s invocation was definitely an overreach, and something extraordinary that could never occur within the U.S. under its constitution.

This is why the Emergencies Act was written to ensure compliance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and provides for a number of safeguards to ensure its limited use.  The primary question revolves around just what constitutes a national emergency, and its implementation cannot be compared to what happened during the October Crisis of 1970.  A number of guidelines exist within the Act which has not been used since it was written in 1988.  The week-long closure of the Ambassador Bridge and Coutts, Alberta, border crossing definitely has a lot to do with the government’s decision, since there was a huge economic impact on U.S.-Canadian cross border trade.  Auto manufacturers in particular were forced to close down some manufacturing assembly on both sides of the border due to the negative effects on ‘just-in-time’ components.  Other large businesses also complained of the negative effects on the already stretched supply chains, beyond what were caused by the pandemic. 

There is little doubt that there are some extremist domestic and foreign elements that climbed on board the so-called “Freedom Convoy.”  These known provocateurs are using the truckers’ protest to promote their own agenda.  Time will tell what the eventual impact on ultra-right movements will be after the end of their illegal activities. Hopefully, the Emergencies Act will not become a regular go-to tool for governments in the future.

Canada COVID-19 Economy Extremist Groups

Leave a comment »
Feb 13

How Extremist Groups Spread Misinformation And Build Support Using Social Media

by bcurry

For some time now, observers, including myself, have been warning of the growth of right-wing extremist groups in Canada, many influenced by parallel groups in the U.S.  With the prevalent use of social media, the border remains porous to the influx of misinformation and propaganda originating with these American groups.  Their content is easily accessible through social media platforms, and their ideas are amplified on websites such as 4chan and Gab.  YouTube, in particular, has been described as a breeding ground for the alt-right.  They are seeking to recruit more followers, promote conspiracy theories, use provocative and sensational actions to gain news and social media coverage and spread misinformation that supports their views.  At the outset, these groups claimed that COVID-19 was all a hoax, perpetuated by governments and big pharmaceutical companies.  Once they could no longer argue the point as COVID-related hospitalization rates stressed the health care sector and hundreds of thousands of deaths occurred, they moved on to attacking vaccination programs and other public health measures.  As a result of vaccines and other COVID-related mandates implemented in Canada and the U.S., they turned to what they now claim to have been an infringement on our liberties. 

In the case of the current protests under the guise of a so-called Freedom Convoy, groups of Canadians have attacked the governments’ COVID-related public health measures.  Initially, thought to be a reaction of a small group of truckers to U.S. and Canadian vaccine mandates at the border, the protest was easily overtaken by a radical fringe.  At the outset, the convoy was started by Canada Unity, a group that has been extremely critical of all COVID-related mandates.  One simply has to look at the supposed spokespersons for the Convoy, none of whom are truckers, and examine their tactics.  You have several leaders who have participated in past movements, such as Tamara Lich, Dave Steenburg, Patrick King and B.J. Dichter.  They are known for promoting extremist messages and civil disobedience.  The resulting protest tactics include the three-week long occupation of the Canadian capital, Ottawa, and blockades at border crossings in several provinces.  These are anything but “peaceful.”

Next, one has to deal with the means by which such movements are funded.  This is where American web-based outlets such GoFundMe and the Christian fundraising site GiveSendGo come in.  Millions of dollars were raised by these mechanisms.  However, there is now a lot of concern about who are providing the funds, since the majority of funds (more than half) appear to have come from American sources.  It is believed that some of the largest contributors are probably associated with right-wing groups in the U.S.  Given that Canadian authorities have declared the Ottawa occupation and blockades as illegal, they are now working with the Biden administration to examine the nature of such on-line funding activities and whether they are legitimate or not.  Meanwhile, in light of the situation, Canadian authorities and financial institutions have moved to block the transfer of the funds to the Freedom Convoy organizers.  As a result, the organizers have now turned to collecting donations in cryptocurrency, which in itself creates causes for concern.

In the context of COVID alone, far-right movements have been sustained, and in some cases propelled into the mainstream, by co-opting vaccine anxiety and pandemic frustration.  Overall, there is little doubt that far-right extremists have hijacked the current agenda under the general banner of protecting civil liberties.  Unfortunately, waving Canadian and American flags and Trump and anti-Trudeau banners doesn’t really mesh with the reality that we are still in a pandemic.  Prior to the convoy protest, governments at all levels were in already in various planning stages to gradually ease restrictions, while ensuring that the health care system can handle hospitalization levels.  Today, with the Internet and social media, news travels fast.  The pictures and videos of protests in Canada have now led to similar protests in other countries, including the U.S., Australia, France and Austria.  The difficulty evident in the ability of Canadian police services to control the protests in Ottawa and at border crossings is no doubt lending encouragement to foreign elements, especially those associated with right-wing extremists.

Canada COVID-19 Extremism Extremist Groups Mandatory Vaccination Populism in Canada US

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Blog at WordPress.com.