FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Nov 1

The Big Problem With Canada’s Constitutional Use of the ‘Notwithstanding Clause’

by bcurry

Since Canada’s Constitution was patriated from the British Parliament’s authority to Canada’s federal and provincial legislatures in 1982, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) was added at the same time.  Section 33 of the Charter is known as the notwithstanding clause.  This override clause, allows federal, provincial, or territorial governments to temporarily override, or bypass, certain Charter rights.  Although the clause has been used only a handful of times by various provinces, it has set out some dangerous recent precedents where it has been used arbitrarily by Quebec and Ontario in particular.

For example, this November the province of Ontario proposes to introduce back-to-work legislation in advance of a potential strike by thousands of education support workers.  The government intends to use the notwithstanding clause as part of a controversial bill that would impose a contract on provincial education workers.  The province wants to avoid a constitutional challenge against the bill by labour unions and others which see the legislation as a violation of their right to collectively bargain, something that courts have agreed with in the past.  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told CBC News that: “Using the notwithstanding clause to suspend workers’ rights is wrong”.  The federal government has never invoked the clause.  Section 33 was intended for use by governments in extraordinary circumstances, and not to resolve government initiatives by circumventing citizens’ Charter rights.

In 1988, the Quebec Liberal Party invoked the notwithstanding clause to pass a bill that limited the use of English-language signage and advertising in the province. This was clearly a violation of freedom of expression under the Charter.  When it came up for renewal five years later, the legislation was replaced by another bill which complied with Charter rights.  In 1986, Saskatchewan’s Progressive Conservative government invoked the notwithstanding clause in back-to-work legislation that the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal had earlier ruled violated Charter rights.  In Alberta in 2000, the Progressive Conservative government used the clause to pass legislation against same-sex marriage.  However, the Supreme Court ruled in 2004 that marriage legislation was under federal jurisdiction which subsequently led to the federal government making same-sex marriage legal across all provinces and territories in 2005. The Ontario government’s 2021 use of the notwithstanding clause to protect a campaign finance law turned out to be very problematic when it came to actual election financing.

In 2019, Quebec’s government passed Bill 21 into law, the so-called secularism bill, invoking the notwithstanding clause to block individuals or groups from challenging the law for violating Charter rights.  The law bans public employees — teachers, police officers, judges, etc. — from wearing religious symbols at work. The law sparked protests and debate and was criticized by many as a form of legalized discrimination, and is expected to be challenged in the courts.  In 2022, Quebec’s controversial French language law reform was enacted proactively using the notwithstanding clause once again to shield the law from constitutional challenges.  Some experts argue that this law represented a political manoeuvre to avoid having a negative judicial ruling that would be inevitable if they hadn’t used the notwithstanding clause.  With numerous future lower court reviews, most believe that how Section 33 is used will eventually have to be decided when a case reaches the Supreme Court of Canada. 

These are a few examples of the use of the notwithstanding clause under Section 33 of the Charter.  This provision was introduced at the time of the Constitution’s patriation to politically placate the provinces in order to obtain their needed agreement to proceed with the new constitution.  In retrospect, this may have created more jurisdictional problems than it was supposed to resolve.  When the Charter was drafted in 1982, the unprincipled pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause was not envisioned.  Some claim its misuse has become totally unacceptable and all too prevalent.  Governments are hiding their political agenda behind its use, thereby undermining the protections afforded to people under the Charter.  Laws should not be allowed to avoid Charter challenges!  Where in the Constitution does it say that government authority should void the rights of citizens — particularly minorities — without proper recourse through our democratic and judicial processes?

Canada Charter of Rights and Freedoms Quebec's Bill 21

Leave a comment »
Oct 27

Women Still Cannot Break Corporate Glass Ceilings

by bcurry

Yes it takes time for more women to reach leadership positions in companies, even though more and more qualified women are entering business management fields.  One human resource expert in 2011 referred to the so-called infamous glass ceiling as being more of a brick ceiling.  Yes, there are more women in senior management than ever before.  However, proportionately, they still are under-represented as to their numbers in businesses in general.  Back in 2020, Bloomberg News reported that women held more than a quarter of the board seats at S&P 500 companies for the first time, a significant gain.  It was also reported at the time that, according to Catalyst which follows labour market trends, there now were 32 women leading S&P 500 companies.  Increasingly although at a snail’s pace, more women are now holding the top finance jobs (e.g. Chief Financial Officers) at large U.S. companies, despite the fact that companies continue to have fewer women in operational roles.

What is disheartening in 2022, Bloomberg News reports that women are leaving the top ranks of companies at higher rates than ever before — as female employees remain less likely to get promoted into leadership roles in the first place.  According to a new McKinsey & Co. and LeanIn.org report, for every woman at the director level who gets promoted, two female directors are choosing to leave their company.  Bloomberg notes that while women have long been at a disadvantage in the workplace, many of problems have been further exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.  For example, a lack of affordable childcare has contributed to more women leaving the workforce than men in recent years.  A gender pay gap, which had been narrowing, also stalled during the pandemic.  Furthermore, those in the highest ranks of their organizations are re-evaluating — because of a lack of advancement opportunities, flexibility or unequal treatment or a combination of these and other factors.  Many of the factors were once again particularly true for women representing visible minority groups, such as women of colour.  Women of colour continue to represent far fewer women promoted to a manager role from entry-level when compared to women in general.  This is further complicated by the fact that there are still simply fewer women in upper management at most companies to be promoted.

McKinsey and LeanIn reported also that the pandemic affected women in other ways, in particular those related to remote work and work-life balance, especially where children are involved.  They found that only one in ten female employees want to work from the office most of the time.  The summary of their report said “many” women call hybrid work schedules a key reason for joining or sticking with an employer.  LeanIn CEO Rachel Thomas points out that: “Women are not breaking up with work, they are breaking up with companies who are not delivering the work culture and the opportunity and the flexibility that’s so critically important to them”.

Women have made some strides to break the glass ceiling in recent years.  According to a 2014 report by Reuters, for the first time more than half of 4,000 corporations worldwide reported boards with 10 percent or more female members.  However, it is noted that for all the progress that’s been made, male CEOs and board members still vastly outnumber women. 

All in all, it appears that the pandemic has stalled the steady progression which promoted more and more qualified women to senior management and corporate board positions.  Most governments in the U.S. and Canada have made it clear that the current situation is still unacceptable.  At all levels of government, most have promoted women to leadership and judicial positions, cabinet portfolios, and have attempted to encourage more women to run for political office.  On the other hand, as one author noted, the inability to recruit and retain women in the corporate arena could be disastrous for businesses.  This is not hyperbole, especially when women now make up the majority of university grads and most plan to enter the labour force upon graduation.  Yes, frustration has set in and rightly so.  Paying lip service and tokenism are no longer an option!  At this time, what one has is only a crack in the glass ceiling!

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US Women's Issues Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Oct 20

Elder Poverty Is Growing In Both The U.S. And Canada

by bcurry

Employer pensions are not what they used to be.  An analysis done back in 2016  found that just 99, or about 20%, of Fortune 500 companies offered a “defined benefit plan” to new salaried employees in 2015.  This was down from 104 companies, or nearly 21% in 2014, and a dramatic fall from a decade earlier in 2005, when 248, or just over 48% of Fortune 500 firms had such plans.  Defined benefit plans provided pensioners with specific annual amounts of funds from a company pension following their retirement.  Instead, most companies began to offer “defined contribution plans”, leaving it up to employees to invest for their retirement through various financial institutions.  In 2022, the U.S. Labor Department reported that while 72% of civilian workers had access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan, only about 56% took part in one.  Many other Americans without company pension plans have been forced to invest in a 401(k) (today’s No. 1 retirement vehicle in the U.S.) or other kinds of retirement savings.  The problem is that less than half of working Americans have access to a 401(k) plan.  Many who have a 401(k) at work opt not to participate, and many who do contribute often don’t save enough.  On top of which, many seniors with 401(k) accounts were negatively hit by the Great Recession.  A whopping 36 percent of Americans have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.  As a result, Americans hitting retirement today frequently depend on Social Security as their only source of income, which wasn’t the program’s original intention as a supplemental plan.

In its annual retirement survey in 2007, the Hartford Financial Services Group Inc. revealed that many middle-aged and older adults have serious concerns about their financial security in retirement and are doing almost nothing to shore up their finances.  As a result, the survey indicated that many people plan to “continue working in some capacity while retired,” including one of every two workers in the U.S.  The number of elderly Americans living in poverty is on the increase, particularly following the impact on employment during the pandemic.  Those 65 or older usually weren’t eligible for as much pandemic relief as families with children, thus eating further into their savings.  By 2020, the figure for elderly Americans living in poverty had fallen to 9.5%.  However, in 2021, even as the poverty rate sank for everyone else, it rose among seniors to 10.7%.

In 2009, it was estimated that only about one-third of working Canadian adults have pensions, the majority of which are administered by funds that have taken substantial financial hits with large, unfunded liabilities.  As in the U.S., Canadian companies are relying more heavily on defined contribution plans to lower their human resource costs.  Many elder Canadians have come to rely on government programs such as the Canada Pension Plan (into which they have to pay premiums while working), along with Old Age Security and Income Supplement payments for lower income older individuals.  Although partially indexed to inflation rates, payments under such plans have fallen behind recent cost of living increases.

According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), although today’s share of elderly people officially below the poverty line in the U.S. is low by historical standards, it remains among the highest in the developed world, including Canada.  Furthermore, today’s hyperinflation is further cutting into the incomes of seniors in both countries.  In addition, with fewer workers accessing company retirement plans, there is an increasing concern that younger workers may not be saving enough for their future retirements.  Experience has shown that they cannot rely solely on social security payments to live comfortable and active retirement lives, without having to remain in or re-enter the labour force.  Both countries have a growing aging population, led by more and more boomers leaving employment to enter into retirement.  Given that elder poverty is on the increase, one has to question what will be their quality of life after retirement.  What we need today are longer-term solutions, and not small short-term “band-aid” increases in government pension schemes or random handouts.  What we don’t need are governments willing to reduce current high levels of fiscal debt on the backs of seniors.  Companies as well need to attract and retain workers with better funded retirement benefits. 

Moreover, how we treat the elderly is a societal issue!  It’s obvious that as a society, we are indeed at a crossroads when it comes to this important issue.  Given the financial circumstances of most millennials and generations Y and Z, one cannot expect that they will be in a meaningful position to help their parents financially.  Given the projected growth in the proportion of seniors falling on or below the poverty level, there is an immediate serious need for governments, communities and individuals to come to grips with the problem.

Canada Labor Force Labour Force Seniors Seniors US

Leave a comment »
Oct 14

When Compared to Americans, Canadians are still Naive about Extremist Groups

by bcurry

Finally, something very interesting is coming out of the House select committee investigating the January 6th 2021 assault on the U.S. Capitol.  Ten days before the attack, a Secret Service field office relayed one tip sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) warning that members of the far-right nationalist gang the Proud Boys planned to march, armed, into Washington DC.  For years, federal law enforcement agencies have sounded the alarm about rising threats of far-right violence in congressional testimony, in-depth reports and internal memos.  Months before 2020 presidential election, the FBI issued an intelligence report warning that far-right groups and white supremacists pose a “violent extremist threat” to the U.S. and the 2021 presidential inauguration, which could serve as a “potential flashpoint” for violence.  Even with all this available intelligence, largely because of Donald Trump’s continued provocation and resulting inaction, we know what tragically happened on that day.

Here in Canada, there is similar awareness among government agencies such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) who are at the forefront of Canada’s national security system.  For years, they have been aware of the activities of foreign and domestic extremist elements operating in Canada.  To be sure, there are linkages and interactions among several far-right groups and white supremacists between Canada and the U.S.  The Internet has simply made the constant communication among such groups all that easier.  This includes platforms and messaging apps like QAnon-hosting 8Kun, Parler, Gab and Telegram; and even such mainstream platforms like Facebook groups and on Instagram stories, Reddit, TikTok, Twitter and YouTube.

Despite the evident surveillance of extremists by the RCMP and CSIS in Canada and constant communication with foreign security agencies, including the FBI and Secret Service, most Canadians continue to be unaware of their activities in the country.  The Trucker Convoy, which occupied Canada’s capital last winter for three weeks and set up blockades at U.S.-Canada borders, had several extremist elements behind its planning and illegal operations.  Taken somewhat by surprise, this forced the federal government to take the unprecedented action of invoking the Emergencies Act in order to help end the Trucker Convoy’s activities.  Authorities appeared to have been taken by surprise by the extent to which small groups could carry out such protests in a threatening way and even call for the overthrow and replacement of the current legitimate federal government.

Like in the U.S., Canada has seen a significant polarization of the political spectrum.  Right-wing extreme groups have latched onto Canada’s angry populism, especially during the COVID pandemic and the imposition of vaccine mandates and other restrictions by governments across the country.  In Canada, at the very least, consensus politics is becoming a thing of the past.  For some time, politicians have been blind to the new emerging reality while the liberal mainstream press remains arrogant and complacent.  Indeed, some politicians have even gone as far as to show their vocal support for so-called freedom movements, although they represent a tiny fraction of the overall population.  Governments have had to once again declare that the right to be heard does not include the breaking of laws and any promotion of violence.

For some time now, I have been highlighting the extent to which there have been radicalization movements in both countries.  For example, The Role of Conspiracy Theories in Radicalizing North American White Folk, Potential of Insurgency Grows Everyday in U.S. and Canada, Canada also has its own Right-wing Extremist Groups, Right-wing Extremism is a Growing Concern in North American Communities, and White Extremism in North America is very Worrisome and Dangerous.  As indicated in FBI and Secret Service documents and gathered intelligence prior to the January 6th Capitol assault, there are mounds of evidence regarding the continuing activities of extremist groups in the U.S.  One would hope that Canadian agencies and mainstream media are paying attention so that Canadians won’t be as naïve as they were prior to the Trucker Convoy last winter.

Canada Extremism Extremist Groups Extremist Groups Populism Populism in Canada Social Media The News Media US

Leave a comment »
Oct 9

Is National Legalization of Cannabis on the Horizon in the U.S.?

by bcurry

This past week, President Joe Biden pardoned thousands of Americans convicted of simple possession of marijuana.  What’s more interesting, Biden announced that he has instructed Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra and Attorney General Merrick Garland to begin reviewing how marijuana is classified under federal drug laws.  Marijuana, also referred to as pot or weed, is currently a Schedule 1 substance under federal drug sentencing guidelines, the same as heroin and LSD.

The President’s move could be a first step in moving toward the federal government’s legalization of marijuana use for recreational and other purposes.  The issue leads us back to the legalization of marijuana by the Canada’s federal government in October 2018.  At the time, the new law made Canada the second country in the world after Uruguay to legalize cannabis.  In addition, on the day cannabis became legal, the Canadian government announced that it would introduce new legislation allowing people charged in the past with “simple possession” to apply for a pardon with no fee or waiting period.  By 2018, recreational cannabis was also legal for adults in nine U.S. states and the District of Columbia, and 30 states had government-sanctioned medical cannabis programs.  Today,19 states have passed recreational cannabis laws.

In both countries, there have been far too many persons who have ended up in prison for the simple possession of pot.  According to one study, as many as 500,000 Canadians may possess a criminal record for cannabis possession.  Their convictions hamper their ability to travel (most notably to the U.S), apply for jobs and volunteer with charities.  By some reported estimates in the U.S., there are nearly 5,000 laws on the books which bar people with past convictions from most of the necessities of life like housing, loans, work, and access to government services.  In both countries, arrests for cannabis possession particularly affected marginalized groups, disproportionately impacting people of color and low-income communities. 

Measuring whether the legalization of pot increased its consumption in Canada is difficult to ascertain.  Prior to 2018, most recreational pot users would not have declared their illegal possession and use, except in cases of medical cannabis use.  However, a Statistics Canada study based on data from the National Cannabis Survey showed that the prevalence of cannabis use has been increasing since its legalization in October 2018.  In fact, cannabis use in the year before the survey increased among Canadians aged 15 and older, from 15% in 2017 to 21% in 2019, for both men (from 19% to 23%) and women (from 11% to 19%).  It is believed that increased social acceptance of cannabis, and the increased number of outlets and range of products available were among the factors thought to have led to increased consumption.  In addition, cannabis can now be added to foods and drinks.  There is also some speculation that the COVID pandemic may have contributed to increased cannabis consumption due to the associated social and economic upheavals it caused over the past two years.

With the legalization of cannabis, Canada also introduced numerous regulations concerning its sale, production and distribution.  The Cannabis Act created new criminal offences for the sale of cannabis to youth — with penalties of up to 14 years in prison.  It also prohibits “illicit” cannabis of unlicensed producers, sellers and distributors.  Much like tobacco and alcohol, government regulations for growing and selling cannabis include standards for labelling and packaging.  Every package must be plain, without additional imagery besides brand name and logo.  Packages must also include a standardized cannabis symbol, a health warning and tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration levels.  The government also established the tax rate for cannabis, to be split by the federal and provincial governments.  Of course, the government wanted a cut of the lucrative legalized cannabis action.  So far, the regulated cannabis industry appears to be working well, ensuring the control, quality and safety of the product sold.

It may be useful for the U.S. to examine the impact of Canada’s legalization of cannabis as part of its planned review of marijuana’s classification under federal drug laws.  The federal government may also want to get into alignment with legalization actions already taken by 19 of its states.

Canada Marijuana Usage Marijuana Use US War on Drugs

Leave a comment »
Oct 4

Why The Minimum Wage Is Not A ‘Living Wage’

by bcurry

Going back over four decades, I studied changes across Canada in labour standards legislation, especially as they apply to minimum wages.  The minimum wage is the lowest hourly pay an employer can legally pay an employee whether they work part-time or full-time.  In Canada, minimum wages are primarily the responsibility of each of the ten provinces and three territories.  However, there is a federal minimum wage, which came into force in December 2021, adjusted automatically on April 1 of every year based on the average annual increase of the Consumer Price Index (CPI).  The federal minimum wage applies to workers and interns in federally regulated private sectors, including banks, postal and courier services, and interprovincial air, rail, road, and marine transportation — or roughly 6% of private sector employees in Canada.  The federal rate is currently set at $15.55 per hour.  Provincial and territorial minimum wage rates currently vary from $13.00 per hour in Saskatchewan to $15.50 in Ontario. 

Years after minimum wages were in first introduced in British Columbia and Manitoba in 1918, other jurisdictions followed suit.  Minimum wages are calculated and adjusted differently among the provinces, territories and the federal government.  Rates can be determined and adjusted according to regulations, rates of inflation and social and economic conditions.  In 2013, 61 percent of employees earning minimum wage were between the ages of 15 and 24, especially those working in the services sector (e.g. restaurants and fastfood chains) and the retail sector.  In recent years, there are those who argue that the current minimum wage rates do not reflect what became referred to as a ‘living wage.’  Originally, the formula for minimum wages was thought to be aligned with the average industrial wage rate, usually representing about 60 percent of that rate in Canada.  However, over the years, the determination of annual minimum wage rates became more a political factor based on the policies of the governing parties in power.  As a result, increases in the rates began to vary more extensively among jurisdictions and depended on the particular government in power.  For this reason, minimum wage rates began to lag far behind the rate of inflation and average industrial wage rates.

In today’s economy, many will rightly argue that current minimum wage rates, especially in urban centers, are putting workers in a near poverty situation given the high cost of living in many cities.  Matters have been made worst by the current hyperinflation being experienced across Canada.  As a result, many low-wage workers are required to have more than one job just in order to make ends meet.  Labour advocates say recent minimum wage gains are long overdue.  However, they also now advocate that the long-championed goal of a $15 an hour pay floor across the country no longer goes far enough to address the affordability crisis.  “We’ve been calling for a $15 an hour minimum wage for so many years, but now it’s no longer enough,” said Bea Bruske, president of the national Canadian Labour Congress. “It really needs to be $20 an hour or more when we look at inflation and the cost of food and housing.” 

Business organizations on the other hand continue to use the same old arguments against having a living wage.  These include the argument that higher minimum wages would cause employers to reduce the number of employees and the number of hours worked, potentially leading the hiring of more part-time workers.  A 2014 report from the right-wing Vancouver-based think-tank Fraser Institute concluded that both economic theory and the evidence suggest that living wages, like minimum wages, create distortions in the labour market that have a negative impact on employment.  Left-wing organizations in Canada, including the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and Living Wages for Families continue to campaign for living wages, arguing a higher standard of living will benefit the overall economy. 

Remember what Henry Ford said about higher than normal wages for his automotive assembly line workers in the early 1900’s.  He argued that not only would the high turnover rates for the dull and monotonous work — running at over 300 percent — be reduced, but his workers would eventually buy his Model Ts as many of workers could then afford to buy one for themselves.  In today’s consumer society, one can argue the same is true for many low-income workers if they were to have a living wage.

Canada Economy Labour Force Minimum Wages

Leave a comment »
Sep 28

Prohibited ‘Assault-Style’ Weapons Have No Place in Canadian Society

by bcurry

On December 6, 1989, a man entered a mechanical engineering classroom at Montreal’s École Polytechnique armed with a semi-automatic weapon.  After separating the women from the men, he opened fire on the women while screaming, “You are all feminists.”  Fourteen young women were murdered, and 13 other people were seriously wounded.  The shooter then turned the gun on himself.  After the events of that tragic December, the Coalition for Gun Control was formed in Canada.  Their efforts contributed to the 1995 adoption of Bill C-68, the federal firearm control legislation.  Its stipulations included mandatory registration of all firearms and licensing for firearm owners; a national registry for all weapons; background checks; and verification processes and controls on ammunition sales.

On April 18–19, 2020, a gunman committed multiple shootings in the province of Nova Scotia, killing 22 people and injuring three others before he was shot and killed by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).  Two assault-style weapons were used in shootings, although it appears that they were not legally acquired and the gunman was known to police.  Subsequently and effective immediately in May 2020, the federal government introduced legislation to ban a total of 1,500 assault-style firearms for use, sale, import or transport in Canada.  It includes a two-year amnesty period for current owners.  Eventually, there will also be a buyback program, but those details were still being worked out.

This September, in an obvious political move, the provincial government of Alberta announced steps to oppose federal firearms prohibition legislation and the potential seizure of thousands of assault-style weapons.  It intends to ask the RCMP not to take part in the confiscation of these weapons.  Alberta’s chief firearms officer proclaimed: “The planned confiscations represent a fatal approach to reducing violence in Canadian society and are unwarranted and unacceptable infringements on the property rights and personal freedoms of Albertans.”

A survey, conducted in May 2020 exclusively for Global News, found that 52 percent of Canadians polled, living in nine major centres, agree that all types of guns should be made illegal.  The polling was completed between March 24 and April 2, before the above noted mass shooting happened in Nova Scotia.  The poll by the Angus-Reid Institute showed about 80 percent of Canadians also support a ban on “assault weapons.”  Canada is not the only country to ban assault-style weapons.  In March 2019, New Zealand banned all military-style semi-automatic weapons and assault rifles after a deadly shooting killed more than 50 people. 

Interestingly, there is no constitutional right to bear arms as in the U.S.  Indeed, one can Make a case that it is a weak argument in Canada that the banning of such weapons is an infringement on someone’s rights and personal freedoms.  I would argue that, just as owning and driving a motor vehicle, owning a gun is a privilege requiring training in its use, registration and other prescribed requirements for licensed users as regulated by law.  Just as there are restrictions on the ownership and use of a motor vehicle and one’s driving license, so must there be restrictions on acquiring certain types of guns as a matter of public safety.  No one should be surprised that after the Nova Scotia shootings some sort of inevitable government gun control action would occur, especially as the vast majority of Canadians appear to be in support of such initiatives.  During the 2019 federal election campaign Prime Minister Justin Trudeau noted that: “These weapons were designed for one purpose and one purpose only: to kill the largest number of people in the shortest amount of time”.

Although I do not own a gun, like many Canadians I believe strongly that the possession of either handguns or military-style semi-automatic weapons is not a fundamental right.  The fewer these weapons are around and accessible, the better off and safer we will all be.  One only has to look at the American tragic situation involving an increasing number of mass shootings using assault-style weapons every year, including those in schools, malls and workplaces.  Canada should do everything possible to avoid going down the same road!

Canada Federal Government Gun Control Gun Control Gun Laws US

Leave a comment »
Sep 19

We Need to Adjust to Climate Change Now, Not Later

by bcurry

There are very few areas that aren’t affected by the consequences of climate change.  There are the number of extreme weather events that cause immediate damage and casualties, ranging from tornados and hurricanes to extreme heat and drought conditions.  Whether we can adjust to dealing with their consequences is a major question on many people’s minds, including mine.  Trying to slow up climate change appears to be a long-term goal.  This includes the introduction of new technologies to reduce the use of fossil fuels to heat and cool our homes, produce our electricity and transport people and goods.  Some refer to the increased interest in electric vehicles and renewable energy sources such as solar, wind and thermodynamics — all long-term in nature.  While this is all good and dandy, there appears to be a greater need for conservation and adjustment efforts on the part of all of us, especially in the short-term.

Increasingly, governments are being faced today with emerging issues resulting from the direct and indirect impacts on their citizens.  For example, it has been pointed out that Congress has helped cover Americans’ winter heating costs for decades.  But sweltering summers have made Americans’ energy bills soar, straining this key national safety net.  Under recent extreme heat events, Americans have died.  California has even recently introduced a new alert system designed to warn Californians of extreme heat forecasts.  In addition, these events place a great strain of the electricity infrastructure, forcing authorities to place embargos on the use of electricity, including that for air conditioning, during certain periods.  A significant proportion of the population, including the homeless, need to have access to cooling areas so as to avoid negative health impacts.  These health impacts in turn place a further burden on already strained health care facilities and emergency services.

The recent flooding of the Pearl River resulted in a temporary decrease in water production across the city of Jackson, the capital city of Mississippi.  According to state and local officials, the water system is failing.  Boil water alerts have become common place and can last for weeks.  Infrastructure from roads to water treatment is greatly in need of repair and many cases replacement.  During extreme heat events, roadways have even been known to buckle.  Bridges have been compromised and damaged due to flooding of local tributaries as a result of extreme rain events.  This in turn can cut communities off from emergency and support services, including access routes for supplies and people.  People are losing their homes.  Serious consideration must be given now to where homes are being constructed in known flood plains.

Of course, major droughts can lead to wildfires in many regions of the country, threatening towns, homes and agricultural lands.  Wildfires are unplanned and uncontrolled fires in natural areas, like forests and grasslands.  For example, the province of British Columbia (B.C.) has always experienced wildfires, but none as bad in recent years.  Evacuations of affected towns have become increasingly required.  One can’t forget the “out of control” wildfire that destroyed much of Lytton, B.C. during the summer of 2021.  Longer, hotter summers lead to more droughts and a longer wildfire season.  It is hoped that funding partnerships and community-led work, such as Firesmart, will reduce wildfire risks in B.C.  B.C. is also using climate information to set goals for resource management and to increase the resiliency of its forests.  Serious consideration must be given as to where homes are located in areas dominated by forests in particular, especially where access fire roads are few and far between.

In the area of conservation, there are a number of things that individuals and families can do.  For example, air conditioners (AC) and electric fans now account for about 10 % of electrical energy consumption all over the world.  Air conditioning can account for a whopping 60 to 70 percent of electrical power demand during peak hours.  Currently, there are companies that are in the process of developing new air conditioning technologies, thereby reducing the use of hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, which are greenhouse gases.  Hopefully, these ACs will become affordable and available in the near future.  Apparently, they could be two to three times more productive than the most common ACs on the current market.  In the meantime, people should now use their ACs in a restrained and sensible manner.

Cimate Change Climate Change Climate Change US

Leave a comment »
Sep 16

Florida’s Gov. Ron DeSantis – Treating People Like Garbage

by bcurry

It’s an old phenomenon, municipalities with full landfills end up transporting their garbage — although always under contract — to other jurisdictions.  Such was the case years ago when Toronto decided to truck its garbage all the way to Michigan state.  After all, locally no one wanted a landfill in their backyard.  In very recent years, there have been examples of provinces or states doing the same thing, but this time with human beings.

In Canada, this happened when former Alberta premier Ralph Klein cut welfare rates in the 1990s and offered one-way bus tickets to welfare recipients to travel to sunny British Columbia (B.C.).  A similar incident occurred in 2016 in Saskatchewan when two young homeless First Nations men were each given one-way bus tickets by Social Services from North Battleford, Saskatchewan, to Vancouver and Victoria, B.C.  Needless-to-say, the B.C. provincial and municipal governments were not too happy about any other jurisdictions’ policies to simply dump people when their own support services were already under severe stress.

Now we have Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, whose administration flew, on Florida taxpayers dime, two planes of Venezuelan migrants to Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts.  Apparently, they were not flown out of Florida but the flights actually originated in Texas.  Massachusetts of course is currently a Democratic-run state.  DeSantis said that Florida — not a sanctuary state — was sending migrants to Democrat-led states in response to their previous “virtue signaling” by declaring themselves sanctuary jurisdictions during former President Donald Trump’s years in office.  Around the same time, roughly 100 migrants aboard two buses sent by Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, were dropped off in Washington, D.C. 

However, what about the impact on those migrants?  No one expected to land in Martha’s Vineyard, having reportedly been told they were going to Boston.  There is even some suggestion that, if the migrants were lured on to the plane under false pretences then it could have been illegal to do so.  Imagine, landing on a small offshore island with a population of about 20,000 people, an island accessible only by air and sea.  Obviously, the local authorities had few resources to care for these migrants.  As a result, Massachusetts authorities had to move the migrants voluntarily from Martha’s Vineyard to a military base in Cape Cod so they could find shelter and chart their next steps.  President Joe Biden responded, and rightly so, that the administration has a process in place to accommodate migrants at the border and Republicans shouldn’t interfere with such obvious “political stunts.”  The President further stated that “Republicans are playing politics with human beings, using them as props. What they’re doing is simply wrong.”

As in Canada, any influx of migrants is covered under federal laws and the federal jurisdiction should be responsible for enforcing those laws.  Canadian federal authorities are expected to coordinate settlement programs with the provinces, often funded by the federal government, that are designed to accommodate the arrival of and application by migrants or refugees as part of the process used to facilitate their landed status.  This process was used to deal with a significant number of migrants who entered Canada from the U.S. during the Trump administration, fearing their deportation in the U.S. back to their countries of origin at the time.

But what of the extreme confusion, disorientation and trepidation that such migrants must feel when they are suddenly transported to other jurisdictions without due process under the law or a clear awareness of the circumstances.  In the case of those Venezuelan migrants who had endured harsh and dangerous conditions to arrive in the U.S., one can only imagine how the Congressional Hispanic Caucus reacted.  Just as past inappropriate interjurisdictional policies were condemned in Canada, so must Americans condemn these inhumane policies which leave localities scrambling to secure resources in support of the normal needs of human beings.  I must say that I’m not surprised that Governors Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott stooped so low as to implement such inhumane policies in order to gain some sort of political brownie points.  After all, we’re not dealing with garbage here!

Canada Immigration Immigration Policies Refugee Policies Republican Party U.S. Canada Border US

Leave a comment »
Sep 13

New Therapies Emerge To Deal With Climate Anxiety Symptoms

by bcurry

When I was a voluntary mentor to high school students as part of a community-based program, among the topics that young people wanted to discuss was that of climate change.  It was a topic for years that could not be avoided in light of existing discussion sites on the Internet and social media.  As we are seeing more and more severe weather events and their impact on people across the globe, but more importantly right here in North America, one cannot but help to wonder what the psychological impact is on youth.  Interestingly enough, there is now an emerging psychology field specializing in treating what has become referred to as ‘climate stress’ or ‘eco-anxiety’.

Recently, studies have indicated that eco-anxiety is particularly prevalent among college students.  For this reason, a number of college campuses have introduced group counselling sessions and individual therapy to allow students to talk through fears and frustrations of a world impacted by climate change.  However, it is recognized that many therapists and counsellors aren’t trained to provide students with this specific type of support, in part because of a lack of research about climate stress as a distinct phenomenon.  In addition, whether or not a therapist or counsellor believes in climate change, treating such anxiety must be done as in the case of any other anxieties.  Many leaders in mental health maintain that anxiety over climate change is no different, clinically, from anxiety caused by other societal threats, like terrorism or school shootings.  Interestingly, professional certification programs in climate psychology have recently begun to appear.  According to The New York Times, a group called the Climate Psychology Alliance now provides an online directory of climate-aware therapists.

While some will question the legitimacy of eco-anxiety, experts have come to recognize the range of feelings someone may have in response to climate change.  They point out that climate stress therapy is an effort to validate these emotions, help clients process their responses to climate change and provide coping strategies.  As for the causes of eco-anxiety, many individuals perceive that they are very real.  In January 2022, the publication Lancet in a 10-country survey of 10,000 people aged 16 to 25 reportedly found startling rates of pessimism. Forty-five percent of respondents said worry about climate negatively affected their daily life. Three-quarters said they believed “the future is frightening,” and 56 percent said “humanity is doomed.”

There is little doubt in my mind that young people, in particular, are increasingly expressing concerns about the potential impacts of climate change on their lives.  For this reason, they need to be informed and educated about the issue.  Many of its elements are complicated and not always very evident in their localities.  Understanding why they feel the way they feel is very important.  They need avenues in which to express their trepidations and fears.  Understandably, some will push to change familial and peer consumption and conservation patterns.  They may need our help, whether in schools or in communities.  Parents have to be aware of any symptoms that may be related to eco-anxiety.  Moreover, they must appreciate that this anxiety is real.  The more awareness by parents about community-based resources and accessible health-based information can prove to be invaluable. 

Cimate Change Climate Change

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