FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Just How Open Is Canada to Accepting Refugees?

In recent months — especially since the start of President Trump’s administration, his travel ban involving seven predominantly-Muslim countries and indications of plans to increase the deportation of illegal immigrants — a substantial number of people have crossed into Canada via the Manitoba and Quebec borders with the U.S. They are doing so in order to claim refugee status, despite having entered the U.S. as refugees or illegal immigrants. A number come from predominantly-Muslim countries such as Somalia. They are crossing at open border points to avoid being turned around at Custom’s land crossings due to the ‘Safe Third Country Agreement’ with the U.S. This agreement has been in effect for more than 12 years.  The agreement’s premise is that the U.S. is a perfectly good place to claim asylum, and people have to apply in which country they arrive in first.  So far, we are not talking about thousands such as is the case in Europe, but hundreds.

Already, there are some Canadian politicians, such as Michelle Rempel and Tony Clement of the federal Conservative Party, who are demanding that the federal government act to stop the flow of people illegally crossing the United States border into Canada. Just how you do this is not easy given the length of the open border!  Unlike President Trump, Canada has no intention of building a wall along the border. The resources necessary to police the entire border are simply not there.  These refugees, including women and children, are not seen as a security threat and normally present themselves to Canadian authorities in order to apply for refugee status.  The easiest way to stop the illegal border crossings is to suspend the Safe Third Country Agreement and allow people to request refugee status at official border crossings without endangering the lives of these people.

Public opinion in the past has been favourable as to the number of refugees coming to Canada. A recent poll by the Angus Reid Institute suggests that close to half of Canadians polled say the government has hit the mark with 40,000 total refugees (Syrian and other nationalities) expected to be entering the country this year. However, 41 percent say that the total is too high in what has become a notable split of opinion.  The reports of an increasing number of refugees crossing into Canada could influence future public opinion on the matter. The above poll also found that one-in-four Canadians believe that this country should have responded to President Trump’s executive order by adopting the same policy – including a temporary ban on Syrian refugees.

While legal immigration is important to Canada, the acceptance of refugees and their numbers is contentious, especially those that come from predominantly-Muslim countries where terrorism is a concern. There is a segment of the Canadian population that wants to restrict their entry and increase security vetting.  Whether or not you agree, there is no question that the refugee issue has become a touchy one.  Hopefully, Canada will not fall into the same illogical and ideological trap that occurred in the U.S.  However, there is little doubt that the question of how open Canada is to accepting more refugees will be severely tested in the coming months.

Leave a comment »

President Trump, Please Keep Your Immigration Ban On

As a Canadian, I’m hoping that the President can keep some form of ban on the entry of people from certain countries. Why?  Simple, it may help Canada to fill a shortage of ‘knowledge workers’ in several industries. Needless-to-say, such a ban will hurt a number of sectors in the U.S.  A Canadian study in 2016 concluded that there will be as many as 182,000 high-paying technology jobs up for grabs in Canada by 2019. However, the country’s school systems aren’t producing enough high technology expertise to fill those positions.  Close to a million people are working in information and communications technology jobs in Canada, and almost half of all technology workers are employed in the professional and technical services industry. They also have a significant showing in health care, the public sector and in manufacturing.

The U.S. is also experiencing shortages of ‘knowledge workers’ in several sectors, forcing companies to recruit and bring in skilled labour from other countries. This includes countries such as the seven predominately Muslim countries listed in the immigration ban.  Let’s consider a couple of facts.  A recent research report by Goldman Sachs estimates that 900,000 to a million H-1B visa holders (highly skilled foreign workers) now reside in the United States, and that they account for up to 13 percent of U.S. technology jobs. Technology giants like Microsoft and Google, among some 97 American companies, have pressed for increases in the annual quotas, saying there are not enough Americans with the skills they need. The high tech sector is only one of several that will suffer because of such restrictions.  Reports are coming out of persons on visas now working in the medical field, university research and financial services.

Several American tech companies already keep satellite offices in Vancouver, British Columbia. A number of these firms are looking into the possibility of expanding their operations in Canada.  Immigration lawyers are reporting a steep uptick in inquiries from foreign-born tech workers worried their U.S. visas may disappear.  Canada is a country that welcomes immigrants with open arms, especially those with much needed skills.  Canadian entrepreneurs also have programs to help Bay Area immigrants and others relocate to Canada, particularly the hundreds of persons on temporary H-1B work visas affected by this temporary travel ban.

Canadian companies, hospitals and universities are not the only organizations ready to capitalize on Trump’s immigration executive order should it remain in place. A number of European firms and organizations are also in the market for ‘knowledge workers’, no matter what their countries of origin. Whether or not one agrees with such a travel ban, there are always those who will benefit from its shortfalls and short-sightedness.  After all, as is the case for trade and commerce, we live and work in a global labour market.

Leave a comment »

Don’t Compare the Position of U.S. President to Canada’s Prime Minister

Recently, there was a poll taken in Canada comparing approval rates by Canadians for President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau. The poll looked at everything from the handling of policies related to the economy, security, immigration, foreign policy and health care — to name a few. However, such a comparison is really like comparing apples and oranges.  The role of the executive branch in the two governments varies greatly and the constitutional powers are significantly different.

Canada follows the Westminster system based on ‘parliamentary sovereignty’ and ‘responsible government’. The Prime Minister represents the political party with a majority of seats in the House of Commons, and the Cabinet is chosen from among the party’s elected sitting Members of Parliament.  For this reason, the PM depends on the support of his/her party to make policy and to pass laws in Parliament.  The President on the other hand is elected separately and chooses his/her cabinet usually from non-elected persons who support his/her policies.  While the PM sits in Parliament, the President must work to gather support from Congress to implement his/her policies.  The PM must maintain the confidence of the House of Commons to continue to form the government.  Otherwise, loss of a confidence vote in the House would mean that he/she must dissolve Parliament and usually call an election.  Moreover, the PM’s ability to formulate policies is very much dependent on the support of his party in Parliament, thereby limiting the PM’s ability to independently issue executive orders.  The President, unless he/she is impeached, normally resides comfortably for a four-year term.

The President is the civilian Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. He has the authority to command them to take appropriate military action in the event of a sudden crisis and certain circumstances.  In Canada, the Queen is the head of state, and the Governor General officially represents her in the country.  The Queen is therefore the Commander in Chief, although through the Governor General as her representative.  The PM and the Government is somewhat limited in what military actions can be undertaken without Parliamentary approval, especially where new funding is required.  None-the-less, in domestic or foreign crisis, the PM and the Cabinet can react as needed under certain circumstances.  However, as in the U.S., there can be political consequences and negative electorate reactions to such actions.

Let’s face it, President Trump does not reflect all the views and positions of Republicans in both houses of Congress, especially when it comes to matters of free trade and immigration. Prime Minister Trudeau has no choice but to reflect the majority wishes of his party, which in this case is the governing Liberal Party.  Therefore, to compare the policies of a President and Prime Minister isn’t really a fair comparison, especially when you have a President issuing so many ‘executive statements’ without any direct Congressional involvement.  Furthermore, there appear to be a substantial amount of overt differences of positions between President Trump’s policies and the Republican Party.  Such overt differences could not happen in Canada given the need for Party solidarity to continue governing under the Parliamentary system. Thus, forget any irrelevant comparisons between the two and polls like the one by the National Post.

Leave a comment »

Trump Doesn’t Get It – You Can’t Go Backwards When It Comes to Job Creation!

About 97 percent of clothing sold in the United States is imported, according to the American Apparel & Footwear Association. In developed economies like the U.S. and Canada, manufacturing and mining is giving way to the service and high tech sectors.  For example, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 1960, 1 in 4 Americans had a job in manufacturing.  Today, it’s fewer than 1 in 10. The industrial age is over and the information age is here.  U.S. coal mining declined 25 percent since 2008, which resulted in 50,000 jobs being lost over a four-year period. The mining industry, in general, lost more than 191,000 jobs since 2014.  Trying to resuscitate coal mining is a costly waste of time and resources.  Today, renewable energy is where the growth in the U.S. is, as evidenced by the solar industry’s growth rate of 20 percent annually.  It’s noteworthy that China aims to spend at least $360 Billion on renewable energy by 2020.

How we manufacture has also dramatically changed primarily due to the impact of automation. In order to be competitive and cost-effective, companies have little choice but to automate their processes, thereby requiring fewer employees.  In addition, they require better educated, trained and skilled workers.  Moreover, U.S. and Canadian manufacturers cannot and need not compete with emerging countries which have an abundance of cheap labour. In order to be competitive, they need to innovate and increase their productivity.

Innovation is the name of the game. The tech industry employs millions of Americans and Canadians. Practically all new private sector jobs have been created by businesses less than five years old. In the digital age, the U.S. and Canada have a major advantage, especially when it comes to the growing service sector.  Consumers are increasingly looking for the provision of good, timely and more localized services.  This includes more efficient modes of communication.

Investment in new technologies and people is what drives economic growth and the creation of new jobs. We need to focus on our new, innovative industries that will put us ahead of our global competition, not on the implementation of protectionist policies. You can’t turn the clocks back to an earlier period.  Globalization and new technologies have changed all that.  Whether President Trump likes it or not, tomorrow’s transition in job creation is already happening regardless of his unrealistic promises and ineffective policies.

Leave a comment »

Quebec Mosque Shooting Is a Sad Reflection of Our Times

Tonight I grieve for the families of those men killed and injured at a mosque in Quebec City, Canada. It will take a good deal of time and investigation to discover why a young white Quebecer would take it upon himself to murder people while in prayer.  Call it a hate crime, an act of terror or a lone wolf-attack, it makes no difference to those unfortunate families and communities.  Answers may only bring more questions.  Is this a sign of our troubled times?

I am also outraged that a spokesman for the Trump administration would use this horrendous crime to justify the recent ban imposed on persons from seven predominantly Muslim countries with respect to entry into the U.S.  If anything, Trump’s actions are inciting certain ultra-right wing groups, including white supremacists, to act against persons of other religions.  Trump’s actions are the epitome of islamophobia.  He is playing into the hands of not only radical Islamic groups, but also white supremacists in North America, Europe and elsewhere. For this reason, one cannot justify what Trump did in terms of protecting national security.

As described in Wikipedia, Islamophobia refers to fear, prejudice, hatred or dislike directed against Islam or Muslims, or towards Islamic politics or culture. There is no place in Canada for promoting such hatred, as evidenced by the sympathies sent to and the support for the families of this tragic event coming from Canadians representing all walks of life, religions and regions of the country.

I may not be a practicing Christian, but I believe in Christian values, especially that of loving one’s neighbour. Ours is a society that values tolerance, respect and inclusion.  Today, Trump cannot in all sincerity call himself a Christian by turning his back on refugees and immigrants from these war-torn countries.  Let’s hope that he and others will turn off their propaganda machines.  Otherwise, such tragedies as that in Quebec City will continue to be a sad reflection of our times.

Leave a comment »

Is Kevin O’Leary a Wanna-be-Trump?

On January 18th, Kevin O’Leary announced that he is running for the Conservative leadership in Canada, suggesting that as a businessman, he is better qualified than the current Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to work with president-elect Donald Trump. What does he have in common with Trump?  Yes, he has had some success as a businessman, but most would argue that he is no “financial guru” and he is not in Trump’s league in terms of wealth and influence.  Being a reality TV star, as a judge on the popular CBC-TV show “Dragons’ Den”, he does have certain celebrity recognition in Canada similar to that of Trump. However, like Trump, O’Leary has no real political or public service experience.

Simply asserting that as PM he would be in a better position to deal with President Trump and his administration than his fellow Conservative leadership candidates is not enough for him to win. At least it shouldn’t be!  In addition, the political, economic and social conditions are not the same as in the U.S. Canada has universal health care and illegal immigration is not considered a major issue. Like the U.S., Canada has had to tackle the results of the great recession primarily through infrastructure development and increasing the public debt. Employment opportunities for the middle class continue to exist and the social safety net is helping people to cope with unemployment.  Is there really enough anger out there for a similar “populist” movement to emerge comparable to that in the U.S.? I doubt it.

Canadians tend to support a more centrist approach when it comes to political and economic platforms. A move to the hard right is very unlikely in the near future.  O’Leary is far more moderate than Trump and understands the need for a centrist Conservative approach.  Like Trump during the Republican primaries, O’Leary will be a target for the other 13 leadership candidates — a number of whom represent the existing political establishment in Ottawa. O’Leary’s entrance into the Conservative leadership race has caused a stir and a fair amount of interest, at least in the media.  Like Trump, his name will raise greater media attention, hopefully not to the same detrimental extent as down south.

There is little doubt that Trump’s success has encouraged a neophyte like O’Leary to throw his hat into the political arena. While well-known in Canada and a Party outsider, he is not a member of Ottawa’s political establishment and is a reasonably successful businessman. However, are his qualifications enough for the Conservative Party and the rank-and-file?  Only time will tell.  One thing is for certain.  He is happily no wanna-be-Trump.

Leave a comment »

One Word for Life in 2017 – “Uncertainty”

Well, another year has gone and the New Year is about to bring with it a great deal of uncertainty. After the inauguration of Donald Trump, expect all hell to break loose.  No one seems to know what will happen, even the Republican-controlled Congress.  All corners of the world are facing old and new challenges, brought about by globalization, climate change, terrorism, populace movements, the Middle East crisis, economic downturns, free trade disputes, Brexit, Russian aggression, Chinese arms build-up, energy issues, and on and on.

Uncertainty breeds instabilities. As the world’s most powerful nation, the U.S. again is expected to play a major, steady and balanced leadership role. However, with loosely defined policies and a lack of specifics, no one is really certain as to what the President-elect and his cabinet have in mind.  They appear to be talking mainly about doing away with numerous policies and programs, but without offering anything specific to replace them.  One is against free trade agreements, for nuclear-arms build-up, smaller government, lower deficits, greater job creation, lower taxes, etc., etc.  Exactly how the new American administration is going to go about accomplishing and paying for these general goals is still very much a mystery!

Here we have the future leader tweeting on a daily basis, causing havoc in the markets and creating unclear and often conflicting domestic and foreign policy directions. Is this governance now by tweet?  How will a cabinet full of multi-billionaires deal with conflict of interest issues?  After all, this is the wealthiest cabinet in modern American history.  How will ex-military cabinet members handle sensitive matters when dealing with political allies and economic trade partners?  How will a cabinet with little or no experience in government and public policy deal with daily governance?  Can one expect that they will run government like a business?  Only time will tell.

For all these reasons, I’m not looking forward to the next dozen months. Let’s hope that cooler heads and reason prevail.  Please Mr. Trump, stop with the tweets.  Think before you open your mouth.  Words do matter, especially when they are uttered by the President of the United States. Work closely with your Congress, including both Republicans and Democrats.  Take into serious consideration the expert advice of senior bureaucrats.  Avoid being influenced too much by lobbyists and special interest groups.  Put aside your business interests and put the interests of your fellow Americans first.  Otherwise, 2017 could be a very rocky year.

Leave a comment »

After Trump’s Distortion of Facts, Who Do We Trust With the Truth?

Recently, I started reading “Lies, Incorporated (The World of Post-Truth Politics)” by Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America, published in 2016. The book was most likely written prior to the presidential primaries and election, during which Donald Trump’s cavalier distortion of facts became well documented.  Post something on social media or allude to something in a speech as fact, and everyone believes it!  Indeed, we now have organizations, such as lobbyists and politically-connected consultancy firms, who make it their business to distort the facts in favour of an interest group’s position, be they political or business in nature.  Even worst, they often will disseminate lies.

History is full of examples of such manipulative efforts, including those related to cancer and tobacco, health care, climate change, immigration, guns, abortion, gay marriage, etc. Both so-called conservatives and liberals have chosen certain facts to support their particular positions on most issues, often referred to as ‘bias predisposition’.  However, while it’s one thing to stretch the truth in one way or another, it’s a lot more serious to deliberately disseminate lies.  Can we truly rationalize that the end justifies the means?

Donald Trump and his electoral/transition teams have taken the premeditated dissemination of lies to a whole new level. One can only surmise how this Machiavellian approach in handling social-economic issues will affect the new administration’s dealings on the domestic and world stages.  Are truths to be swept aside in support of purely ideological reasoning?  Instead of basing decisions on facts, scientific-based or statistically proven, are we expected to support decision-making on fabricated truths?

It was once said that if one were to repeat something often enough, people will actually begin to believe it as fact. One of the dangers of ‘social media’ is that this is exactly what is happening.  Maybe, we’ve become lazy and complacent about questioning what is being fed to us everyday through media sources suffering from a lack of the normal journalistic verification and validation.  Perhaps, our biases, discontent and anger encourage us to simply seek out any information that conveniently backs up our interests and positions.  This is exactly what the likes of Trump are counting on.  “We will interpret the truth for you.” has become slogan of the day.  Just trust us.

Leave a comment »

With Donald Trump, What Can Canadians Expect in the New Year?

Back in July 2015, I blogged that Donald Trump could become the next president of the United States. Well, low and behold for all the reasons that I had alluded to back then, he is now the president-elect to the surprise of many.  Whether you like it or not, Americans will most probably be stuck with Trump and a Republican controlled congress for the next four years.  Indeed, his impact will no doubt be felt in the rest of the world, but in particular in Canada. After all, the U.S. is Canada’s biggest trading partner and political ally. Why is this so important?  Here are a few notable reasons based on past statements by Trump himself:

  • He plans to revisit the current terms of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada and Mexico.
  • He intends to increase border security measures, most likely forcing Canada to allocate more resources to the border.
  • He will nullify President Obama’s attempt to have greater relations with Cuba, a country with which Canada has long had economic and diplomatic dealings.
  • He wants Canada to greatly increase its defence spending, especially as it concerns the country’s contribution to the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
  • He will most likely support the proposed construction of the Keystone XL pipeline between the Alberta oil sands and the American Gulf Coast, despite continuing environmental fears.
  • He does not believe in ‘climate change’, and intends to pull the S. out of the Paris climate agreement which Canada supports through proposed carbon reduction goals.
  • Etc., etc., etc.

Just remember, when the elephant below Canada’s southern border sneezes, we catch a cold if not pneumonia! Trump’s unpredictability makes it even more difficult to predict what will happen next year.  At no time in U.S.-Canada relations have there ever been such potentially serious tensions and uncertainties.  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will have to adjust quickly to the situation in order to maintain normal positive and reciprocal relations with the U.S. administration. On the other side, Americans, especially those living in the northern states along Canada’s border, must make it abundantly clear to Trump that good relations are extremely important to each country.  After all we are close friends who live, work and play together on a regular basis.  However, like any nation state Canada has every right to defend its interests — be they domestic or international.

Leave a comment »

27 years after the Montreal massacre, gun control in Canada is as lax as ever

On December 6, 1989, Marc Lépine shot and killed 14 women at Université de Montréal’s École Polytechnique, before turning his (legally registered) semi-automatic gun on himself. That tragic event set in motion a new chapter in the history of gun control in Canada. On this day, numerous campaigns, marches, vigils and related events are held every year across Canada.

The federal government passed stricter gun control policies just six years after the tragedy, including the establishment of a long-gun registry. However, the Conservative government under Stephen Harper unfortunately dismantled the long-gun registry in 2012, and eased several restrictions on restricted or prohibited weapons. The same 2012 law abolishing the long-gun registry also relieved private gun sellers from the obligation of asking to see the buyer’s firearms permit.

The U.S., with the least gun control laws among industrialized countries, saw 181 mass public shootings with at least four fatalities since 1900. One of the most recent was the Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando, Florida, which saw 49 people killed by a shooter carrying a legally purchased AR-15 assault rifle. Rather than introducing stricter gun control initiatives, most states have made it easier to carry concealed weapons and to purchase guns, all the result of the Supreme Court’s nonsensical decision endorsing the ‘right to bear arms’ in their constitution.  Thankfully, Canada doesn’t have such a precarious right, despite what the Canadian Firearms Institute may advocate.

Today, Canadians continue to remind young people of the need to avoid tragedies such as that at the École Polytechnique 27 years ago. We must strive to ensure that there are much needed controls on the lawful possession and use of firearms.  The three pillars of gun control are licensing of gun owners, control on guns and a ban on weapons that are designed solely for the purpose of killing other human beings.  Whether such laws work in preventing deaths is a matter of politics. What is real are the lives that might potentially be saved.

Leave a comment »