WHAT THE WORLD

French Master Forger Dies After Being Mugged For His (Fake) Luxury Watch

Bertrand Hauger

September 15, 2021

WHAT THE WORLD

Eric Piedoie, a French master forger known as "the art pirate," has died after being mugged in Cannes over his luxury watch — which (like his own work) was a fake. French daily Le Parisien highlighted the irony, calling his death Sunday from heart failure after the attack "one last snub" from a man who spent his life copying other people's work.

Miro, Giacometti, Niki de Saint Phalle, Yves Klein, Toulouse-Lautrec, Chagall: Beginning in the 1980s Eric Piedoie made a (devilish) name for himself by masterfully forging and selling works by the world's greatest artists, deceiving gallery owners and specialists alike.

Local daily Nice-Matin estimates that this colorful dandy had earned between 15 and 20 million euros from his imitations — a fortune he is believed to have squandered, mostly by gambling. In 2009, Piedoie was sentenced to 4 years in prison for forgery, and had since given up his illicit forgery activity.

EU leaders sign Athens Declaration on climate change and its impact on the Mediterranean natural environment

The Athens Declaration also includes special references to the positive significance of biodiversity, forests, the marine environment, ‘blue economy’, civil protection, prevention and preparedness

Photo: APE/MPE
18 September 2021 
FacebookTwitter: @NeosKosmosInstagram

EU leaders who attended the EUMed9 Summit on climate change and the environment in the Mediterranean, expressed their commitment to the implementation of the Paris Agreement, and to reducing the rise of global temperature by 1.5C in relation to pre-industrial levels, read the conclusions of the Athens Declaration that was signed at the conference on Friday.

Held at the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Cultural Centre (SNFCC), the summit brought together the leaders of Croatia, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Malta, Slovenia, Spain and Portuguese Foreign Affairs Minister Augusto Santos Silva. The summit was also attended by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. Earlier on Friday, Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis welcomed the two most recent partner countries to the summit, Slovenia and Croatia, and expressed his commitment to the target of Europe becoming the first climate-neutral continent by 2050.

The declaration reads that the leaders:

– Recognize the Mediterranean as being extremely vulnerable to the impact of climate change and prone to extreme weather events, and that it experiences more frequent, extensive and intense heat waves, droughts, heavy rainfall, floods and forest fires. As a result, the area now suffers unprecedented ecological damage, while the response potential reaches its limits.

– Recognize the need for decisive adaptation to these phenomena and for resilience policies in line with the new EU Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, and for prevention measures in all areas expected to be significantly affected in the Mediterranean region, including environmental and socio-economic sectors, as climate change poses serious risks to the environment, to society and to economy.

– Agree to work closely together to build synergies promoting the necessary transition from fossil fuels to Renewable Energy Sources and low-carbon energy technologies.

– Agree to promote climate change adaptation solutions based on the function of nature itself, and to ensure adequate protection, in particular of ecosystems critical to disaster prevention, such as coastal zones, watersheds, wetlands, forests and also urban areas.

– Emphasize, anew, that the climate crisis is a global threat which requires coordinated international action, and therefore they call on all countries to act collectively and without further delay, as the UN Secretary-General said on August 9.

– Call on all international partners, in particular the G20 countries, to ratify the Paris Agreement and announce ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

– Recognize the commitment to the rapid development of technologies and policies that further accelerate Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR).

– Call on all countries to participate in the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26, Glasgow, October 31-November 12, 2021) at the level of Heads of State & Government, and to commit to the goal of being climate-neutral by 2050.

The Athens Declaration also includes special references to the positive significance of biodiversity, forests, the marine environment, ‘blue economy’, civil protection, prevention and preparedness.

At the end of the declaration, the EU leaders “emphasize the urgent nature of the much-needed strengthening and deepening of cooperation among the Mediterranean partners, as the challenges related to natural disasters have a common profile, are often cross-border, and require initiatives to exchange expertise, useful conclusions, best practices and expertise.”

Concluding the declaration, the leaders say that “in the light of all the above, and in respect of existing regional agreements, we agree to further expand the work of the group of southern EU countries, by organizing sectoral meetings at all levels as appropriate, in a flexible and informal framework, in order to facilitate effective coordination and exchanges between the nine Partners.”

Source: ANA-MPA

6 Ways to Prevent Greenwashing and Risks from Trade Associations

The voice and political participation of business are critical to meeting ambitious emission reduction goals in the United States. An increasing number of private sector actors have started to advocate for climate policy at the federal level, but without aligning their trade associations to the same objective, their actions fail to move the needle.

Trade associations are a main conduit of corporate political influence in the United States, and often wield this power to undermine and, in some cases, outright block or reverse climate legislation. When companies are members of associations that lobby against climate policy, these businesses become guilty by association.

To avoid the associated reputational and fiscal risks, companies should focus their efforts on aligning their trade associations, as emphasized by WRI CEO & President Ani Dasgupta in a recent statement:

“We urge all companies to re-examine their lobbying, political spending and participation in trade associations to ensure that their actions are fully aligned with their public statements on climate change,” said Dasgupta.

How the Oil and Gas Industry Leverage Trade Associations

A recent example of trade associations’ influence comes from Exxon Mobil. In late June, one of the company’s top lobbyists revealed that the oil and gas major intentionally and strategically uses its trade associations, including the American Petroleum Institute and The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, to combat climate policy. This has included calculated and successful moves to strip funding for climate measures from the federal infrastructure bill, while voicing support for carbon pricing legislation precisely because they believed “it would never pass.”

This is a classic example of greenwashing. Exxon receives credit for appearing to support climate action while pouring resources into maintaining the status quo and spreading climate disinformation.

Earlier this year, a group of trade associations (U.S. Chamber of Commerce, National Association of Manufacturers, American Petroleum Institute and Business Roundtable) made the news with their newly announced support for carbon pricing or similar market mechanisms. Exxon is a member of each of these organizations, which puts the associations’ new positions under a cloud of suspicion. If Exxon uses support for carbon pricing as an insincere green talking point to score points with the public, is it possible that their trade associations are being asked to amplify this strategy?

Trade Association Memberships Put Companies at Risk

Time will reveal the breadth of consequences Exxon will face, but the company has already undergone reputational harm, an expulsion from the Climate Leadership Council, and will likely face congressional hearings.

On August 25, 2021, a recording of the lobbyist on the company’s climate strategy was cited in a brief filed in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Minnesota’s lawsuit against Exxon and other fossil fuel companies. Investigation into duplicitous climate policy strategy continues, and pressure to pass ambitious federal climate legislation is building.

Meanwhile companies in other sectors, such as tech, banking and consumer goods, face backlash and increased risks now too. This includes reputational risk, as the behavior of companies’ trade associations on climate has come under increased scrutiny from politicians, investors and civil society.

By giving money to organizations working to thwart climate action, companies become complicit in these activities. They then face the possibility of boycotts, lawsuits and loss of investor support, as well as huge financial risks tied to the cost of inaction on climate change.

The longer it takes to get the necessary climate policies in place, the higher global temperatures will rise and the more expensive it will be to deal with consequences such as ruined crops, disrupted supply chains and destruction of property from natural disasters.

Risk Management — Aligning Trade Associations

Companies’ trade associations should be working for them, not against them. In October 2019, WRI and 10 of our NGO partners introduced the AAA Framework for Climate Policy Leadership to guide companies on the new standards for political engagement. A core component of this framework is aligning the positions of trade associations with science-based climate policy.

To complement this new framework, WRI recently released a report exploring the barriers to corporate climate policy engagement and, more importantly, strategies to overcome them.

Redirecting the priorities of large, multi-industry associations is no simple task, but here are six easy places to start:

• Audit: Have a trustworthy third party conduct an audit of your company’s trade association memberships to evaluate instances where trade association climate policy positions do not align with your company’s. Commit to a clear process of what steps you will take if misalignment is found.

Over the past two years, many oil and gas companies conducted internal audits of their membership in trade associations. But because these were not conducted by objective third parties, in all cases, there were a number of notable errors where misalignment was not determined objectively. If these audits are not conducted by objective third parties, this can be another form of greenwashing.

• Team up: Find, align and collaborate with other corporate members who also have an interest in pushing climate policy.

For several years, companies within the US Chamber of Commerce have banded together to push Chamber leadership to adopt more progressive positions on climate change. There is power in numbers, and this group of companies needs many more partners to be able to truly shift the Chamber’s actions related to climate change.

• Focus on influencers: Find out what motivates and/or worries other members with the most to lose — and use this knowledge to better engage.

Whether this is through one-on-one outreach or encouraging your trade association staff to invest in member education, it is important to have companies from heavy-polluting industries on board with climate action.

• Engage: Speak with trade association staff in individual and committee meetings and ensure your views are known even if you are not sure you will prevail.

In recent years, many trade associations have formed new climate committees or task forces to engage their members on this topic, including the US Chamber and Business Roundtable. Companies should engage with these existing bodies and push for the creation of new committees where none currently exist.

• Vote with your dues: For most trade associations, membership dues are negotiated annually. Take advantage of this process and use your money to send a message.

Different companies may prefer different approaches based on how and when dues are paid. One example of a hybrid “carrot and stick” approach is to attach a set amount of money to a defined climate outcome. If the outcome is met the money will be released to the trade association as “bonus” dues. If the outcome is unmet, the same amount will be deducted from the next cycle’s payments.

• Meet your lobbyists: Ensure that any organization or individual lobbying on behalf of your company supports and promotes your climate policy positions.

Career lobbyists are not always loyal to their current employer — rather they may feel loyal to the status quo of their peers as they maintain an eye toward future career opportunities. Make sure that everyone speaking for your company is aligned with climate action.

As Senator Sheldon Whitehouse noted recently, “Despite considerable corporate support from the C-suite in corporate America, none of the trade associations are taking this seriously. None are leaning in to push for strong climate legislation, not even carbon pricing.”

Ultimately, it is the CEOs who must step up. Companies should not risk being guilty of climate inaction. They must align their trade associations — as a matter of urgency.

How Methane Emissions Contribute to Climate Change

September 17, 2021 

By Alida Monaco, Katie Ross, David Waskow and Mengpin Ge Cover 

Image by: Chris Leboutillier/Unsplash

The United States and the European Union announced a new pledge to reduce global methane emissions by at least 30% by 2030 relative to 2020 levels, with the intention that many more major emitters will join on in the lead up to the annual climate conference in Glasgow later this year. For the first time, the pledge sets the floor for what’s necessary to curb this dangerous climate pollutant over the next decade.

This announcement couldn’t come soon enough, because cutting methane emissions is essential to keep global temperature rise from breaching the critical 1.5 degrees C threshold, in addition to steep cuts in carbon dioxide. Despite the urgency to address these pollutants, however, methane emissions continue to rise globally, with 2020 seeing the highest atmospheric concentration of methane ever. Recent reports, such as the Global Methane Assessment and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Sixth Assessment Report, also underscore the need for fast action to reduce methane.

The good news is that acting on methane comes with tremendous benefits, helping to limit near-term temperature rise and improve air quality, leading to better public health outcomes and improved food security. These actions can often be implemented at zero or low cost, providing significant economic benefits for governments and companies. In fact, in several cases, the actions reap cost savings after the initial investments are paid off. Many of the mitigation measures are also readily-available across all major methane emitting sectors — energy, agriculture and waste — providing an excellent solution for governments to meet climate and development goals.

Why is Reducing Methane Emissions Important?

Methane is the second most abundant human-caused greenhouse gas (GHG), and is 86 times more powerful than carbon dioxide over 20 years in the atmosphere (34 times more powerful over 100 years). Because it exists for a relatively short time in the atmosphere, cutting methane provides a quick benefit in terms of limiting near-term temperature rise. Studies estimate that ambitious actions to reduce methane can avoid 0.3 degrees C of warming by 2050.

Reducing methane also helps to improve air quality, as it is a pre-cursor to ground-level ozone, a damaging air pollutant that harms human health and crop yields. Readily-available methane mitigation measures can also prevent more than 250,000 premature deaths and 26 million tons of crop losses annually.

How Can Methane Emissions be Reduced?

Twelve countries are responsible for around two-thirds of global methane emissions: China, Russia, India, the United States, Brazil, the European Union, Indonesia, Pakistan, Iran, Mexico, Australia and Nigeria.

Most human-caused methane emissions stem from three sectors — energy (35%), agriculture (40%) and waste (20%) — so a focus on action in these sectors can help to stave off immediate warming impacts.

Energy

The energy sector is responsible for more than a third of global methane emissions, with oil and gas contributing the lion’s share (around 14%). Methane emissions occur along the entire oil and gas supply chain, but especially from fugitive emissions from leaking equipment, system upsets, and deliberate flaring and venting.

Existing cost-effective solutions can help reduce emissions, including initiating leak detection and repair programs, implementing better technologies and operating practices, and capturing and utilizing methane that would otherwise be wasted.

The International Energy Agency estimates around 75% of total oil and gas methane emissions can be avoided using currently available technologies, with more than half of these reductions at zero net cost. But despite the clear economic case for sealing leaks, utilities often recoup the costs of leaked gas by passing them on to consumers. Voluntary coalitions are, however, coming together to work toward lowering methane emissions in the sector, such as the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative.

Food Systems

Agriculture is the largest contributor to global methane emissions, producing about 40% of these emissions, primarily from enteric fermentation (cow burps), rice cultivation and manure management.

Improved agricultural production practices — specifically focused on improving efficiency — can enhance livestock and crop yields, provide more income for farmers, while at the same time reduce methane emissions per unit output. In areas where emission reductions are more difficult to achieve, like enteric fermentation, groups such as the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate and the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases are helping spur greater innovation and technology deployment.

Reducing food loss and waste is another important area. Roughly one third of all food produced is lost or wasted throughout the food supply chain, with agricultural production responsible for the greatest amount, exacerbating food insecurity in vulnerable nations. These losses are due to many factors, including spillage or degradation during production.

If counted as a country, food loss and waste would be the third largest source of GHG emissions after China and the United States. But food producers and consumers can take immediate steps to reduce food waste immediately — from improving inventory systems, changing food date labelling practices and better facilitating the sale or donation of perishable products.

Small shifts in diet choices, particularly away from beef, can also make an impact globally, both in terms of freeing up agricultural land and reducing methane emissions. However, meeting today’s announced pledge does not necessarily depend on these diet shifts, according to data in the Global Methane Assessment.

Municipal Solid Waste

The waste sector accounts for around 20% of global human-caused methane emissions. Luckily, cost-effective mitigation solutions do exist, with the greatest potential related to separating organics and recycling which can also create new jobs. Upstream avoidance of food loss and waste is also key.

Additionally, capturing landfill gas and generating energy will reduce methane emissions, displace other forms of fuels and create new streams of revenue. The EPA projects that landfill gas utilization will remain the cheapest solution to mitigate emissions in the waste sector, often implemented at zero net cost. However, projects require high upfront capital costs which can sometimes be a deterrent in poorer jurisdictions.

Which Countries are Already Committed to Reduce Methane?

Outside of the newly announced global pledge, several countries have taken on individual commitments to tackle methane. In the last two years, for example, Nigeria and Cote D’Ivoire have committed to reducing methane emissions from the oil and gas sector by 45% by 2025 and 60-75% by 2030. The European Union has adopted an economy-wide methane strategy, with its accompanying models indicating that the region will need to limit methane emissions by 35-37% by 2030 relative to 2005 to meet its overall climate commitment. New Zealand aims to reduce biogenic methane emissions by 10% by 2030, and 24-47% by 2050, both relative to 2017 levels.
What to Look Out for Next?

The announcement of a global pledge to reduce methane emissions represents an important step forward — the first time that countries will collectively commit to acting to address methane across all sectors of their economies. At the same time, several countries are also finalizing their updated national climate action plans (the nationally determined contributions), where ambitious commitments to address methane should also be included — helping to keep the Paris Agreement’s goals within reach and ensure a safer future for all.

 

Workers Must Control Economic Policy and Economic Outcomes Canadian Workers' Pension Monies Used to Privatize Water in Brazil Protest in Brazil, May 3, 2021, against privatization of water and sewage services. September 17, 2021 - No. 84 • Greenwashing Privatization of Public Utilities • "Financialization" of Government Pension Programs BC Government's Sell-Off of Public Lands to Powerful Private Interests • Corruption to Profit Privileged Buyers  - K.C. Adams Workers Must Control Economic Policy and Economic Outcomes Canadian Workers' Pension Monies Used to Privatize Water in Brazil São  Paulo, Brazil, June 11, 2021. One of the matters of ever greater concern amongst Canadian workers is their lack of control over where their pension monies are invested. These very large pools of money are put into the hands of investment companies, financial institutions and financial oligarchs whose job is to seek the highest return for themselves and sometimes but not always the safest bet, irrespective of where the funds are invested. The workers exercise no control over the fact that investments are done according to neo-liberal considerations and go against everything Canadian workers on the whole stand for. The current term for it is "financialization." It refers to a process whereby financial markets, financial institutions and financial elites gain greater influence over economic policy and economic outcomes. The process transforms the functioning of economic systems at both the macro and micro levels both at home and abroad in favour of these narrow private interests no matter what harm they cause to the social and natural environment. Under the guise that business is business, very harmful, unacceptable nation-wrecking and anti-people investments are made. Such is the case with the investment made on April 30 of this year of more than $900 million of Canadian workers' pension money to privatize water and sanitation services in Brazil. A large section of Rio de Janeiro's State Water and Sewage Company (CEDAE) was purchased at auction by a private company 85 per cent owned by the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB) and the Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo). CEDAE was the most profitable water system in Brazil, bringing in $226 million a year, with part of these revenues used to subsidize services in areas where costs were higher. AIMCo, which says it manages the investments for 32 pensions, endowments and government funds in the Province of Alberta, already possessed a significant stake in Brazil's third largest private water and sewage company, Iguá Saneamento, used to acquire part of the public utility. However it was a last minute infusion of some $270 million from CPP Investments, giving it 46.7 per cent ownership of Iguá, that was decisive in allowing the company to win the bid for CEDAE. In preparation for the auction CEDAE was divided into blocks or concessions. The most lucrative concessions were scooped up by private interests, one of these being Iguá. The least profitable ones remained in the hands of the state, likely ending its ability to continue using the profits from some to subsidize others. It will likely also push rates up for users already in the grips of a severe economic crisis. Residents living in areas of Rio already serviced by private companies are said to pay up to 70 per cent more for water than those serviced by the public system. Opposition by unions and others in Brazil as well as Canada to the privatization of water and sanitation systems was swift. Brazilian unions said 3,500 public sector workers stood to lose their jobs. The Brazilian National Urban Workers Union applied for and won an injunction to delay the auction. State legislators also voted out of concern for it to be delayed. Both of them were overruled by a government decree that ordered the auction to go ahead as scheduled. The auction took place in the midst of the terrible crisis Brazil was going through thanks to President Jair Bolsonaro's reckless response to the pandemic and the grim consequences of this for Brazilians. It turns out the timing was likely deliberate. Bolsonaro's former environment minister was secretly recorded urging colleagues at a cabinet meeting to take advantage of the pandemic and of people having other preoccupations to get as many unpopular policies passed as they could, as quickly as they could. Canadian Union of Public Employees President Mark Hancock accused CPP Investments of helping to legitimate Bolsonaro's privatization agenda, saying "It's outrageous that our public pension plan is using workers' retirement funds to profit from people's need for clean water and safe sewage treatment. These are human rights that are essential for survival. Access to water services is already fragile and unequal in Brazil. Privatization will make things worse." The handing over of Canadian workers' retirement funds without their consent, and over their objection, to pay the rich through schemes geared to assisting private interests at home and abroad to line their pockets is unacceptable. It is all the more repugnant when it is defended in the name of high ideals to detract from the anti-social and nation-wrecking consequence of the investments. The facts reveal that workers must control economic policy and economic outcomes. They must set the direction of the economy and end the policies which pay the rich and destroy the social and natural environment. Protest at Canadian consulate in Rio de Janeiro, June 2021. (Photos: CUPE, Jonas, SINTSAMA-RJ ) Greenwashing Privatization of Public Utilities Greenwashing the privatization of public utilities has become the fashion when it comes to self-serving and unethical pay-the-rich schemes by governments and their agencies, including government-run financial institutions and investment companies. A good example is the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board's (CPPIB) greenwashing of its privatization of Rio de Janeiro's public water system, presented as supporting "sustainable projects and clean tech solutions in Brazil." The Senior Vice President of Infrastructure & Renewable Resources of the Alberta Investment Management Corporation (AIMCo), which collaborated with the CPPIB in the privatization, said the investment management company was "excited" with the outcome of the auction and "for the opportunity to invest further in the business alongside like-minded partners to increase the service levels in water distribution and sanitation in the State of Rio de Janeiro." He called the acquisition, via its holdings in the private water and sewage company Iguá Saneamento, "an excellent addition to our infrastructure portfolio that is well-aligned to meeting our clients' investment objectives." Does anyone believe that Alberta public sector workers, presumably the clients being referred to, would have as an investment objective for their pension fund the privatization of public services in Brazil or anywhere else? The Latin America director of the CPPIB, who enthused in a press release about the "new legal framework" established to facilitate the auctioning off of Rio's public water system, was similarly excited about the acquisition which he said would be followed by many more. According to him, the private sanitation sector with its captive market offers the prospect of a consistent and stable payback, and is "perfectly compatible with our expectations, as long-term investors." He added that Iguá was well positioned to be a powerful competitor in most or all future auctions as nearly a thousand Brazilian municipalities were expected to privatize, or seek concessionaires, in the next few years. Scooping up public utilities as fast as neo-liberal governments in Brazil, Canada and elsewhere put them up for sale is but one of many anti-social projects Canadian workers' pension funds have been used to finance. Investment managers of the funds do their "fiduciary duty" of investing workers' money where prospects of amassing maximum capitalist profit are highest no matter the consequences. Everything can be justified in the name of high ideals and this must change. It is high time that working people themselves decide where their pension funds should be invested. The direction of the economy should be set by working people, not financial markets, financial institutions and financial elites. Pension funds come from the social wealth that workers produce but do not control. It is this lack of control by the workers, who are the producers, over what is produced and how it is produced that is at the heart of the problem. The social wealth produced by workers must be reinvested in a socially responsible manner to build a diverse economy at home that has an internal self-reliant strength and trades with others for mutual benefit and development. Such an economy must have the aim to guarantee the rights and well-being of all, and humanize the social and natural environment. "Financialization" of Government Pension Programs In the 1990s the international financial oligarchy and their institutions pushed governments to restructure their pension systems so the funds could be invested in financial markets where it was said higher returns could be obtained than was possible by parking the money in low-risk but more secure instruments like government bonds.  Along with this push to "financialize" pensions came the pressure to convert pensions from defined benefit plans that guarantee a certain level of benefits to workers after they retire, to defined contribution plans, where the level of benefits one receives upon retirement depends on how well the plan is doing in the financial markets and on returns from other types of investments at any given time.  A big reason for these changes, in addition to reducing governments' responsibility to provide for workers' retirement security, was to put at the disposal of the financial oligarchy a vast new pool of money to invest in order to amass even greater private wealth for themselves. In 1997 the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board was created by federal legislation to operate at arm's length from the government. The mandate of the new entity established as a vehicle for the financialization of the CPP was to exercise its "fiduciary duty" to Canadians by first and foremost maximizing the return on investments made on their behalf. The Alberta Investment Management Corporation, established in 2008, operates in a similar way and under a similar mandate. BC Government's Sell-Off of Public Lands to Powerful Private Interests Corruption to Profit Privileged Buyers  - K.C. Adams - Below is Part Two of the series on BC Governments Sell-Off of Public Lands to Powerful Public Interests. Part One appeared in Workers' Forum September 15. The private buyers of BC public property in many cases soon made outsized profits. The following are examples of this profiteering from the legalized corruption of the BC government to pay the rich. Burke Mountain In a 2018 report, the BC Auditor General Carol Bellringer noted that the Liberal government sold off 150 hectares of public properties in Coquitlam's Burke Mountain area for $85 million to a single buyer. This was $43 million less than the known appraised market value. In reviewing Bellinger's report, Vaughn Palmer writes in the Vancouver Sun, "The Liberals must have known they were unloading the 14 parcels for $43 million less than they were worth. When they signed off on the sale in February 2014, they had in hand the appraiser's report putting the value at $128 million. 'The appraisal was timely in relation to the sale of the land,' says Bellringer. 'The quality of the appraisal work was appropriate, and the appraised values for the parcels of land were reasonable.'" Palmer continues, "Knowing the shortfall, why didn't the Liberals cancel the sale and do a proper one? I'm guessing it was because the transaction, like other land sales at the time, was part of a rush-job effort by the government of then-premier Christy Clark to try to balance the budget. "The prime beneficiary of the expensive-for-taxpayers transaction involving the Burke Mountain lands, acquiring all 14 properties for two-thirds of the appraised value, was Vancouver-based Wesbild Holdings. In blowing the whistle on the sale to the legislature in the spring of 2015, the then NDP Opposition noted that the company's billionaire founder and chair, Hassan Khosrowshali, was a major donor to the BC Liberals." George Pearson Centre and Dogwood Lodge These two public health care facilities on Cambie Street in Vancouver comprised 25 acres. A SkyTrain line, which opened in 2009, runs north-south under Cambie. Onni developers bought both parcels from the government in 2015-16 with plans to build thousands of housing units and commercial spaces. Onni bought Dogwood Lodge in 2015 for $85 million and immediately subdivided the land into two lots and began seeking city construction permits. By 2019, the same property, now cleared of buildings, was appraised at $380 million. Onni bought Pearson Centre in 2016 for $217 million and subdivided it into four lots. Officially appraised after its subdivision, the market value of the four lots increased to $462 million. Without building anything, Onni turned the $302 million it paid to the BC government for the public lands of the two health care centres into a total assessed value of $842 million. This meant a possible profit of $540 million merely for being privileged recipients of a state-run pay-the-rich scheme. By building on the lots, the return for the Onni oligarchs in control will be even greater. According to the Elections BC website, the Onni oligarchs gave the BC Liberal Party $575,000 and the BC NDP $115,000 between 2005 and 2018. Cottonwood Lands The NDP/Green Party coalition government sold the Cottonwood Lands in Maple Ridge, which comprised 11 public properties on 21 hectares (52 acres) for $20 million in September 2017. Developers Polygon and Morningstar together bought the 11 parcels and subdivided them into 71 lots. The 2019 assessed value of just eight lots of the 71 exceeded the original $20 million the government received for all 11 parcels. Polygon also bought Steveston Secondary School in Richmond and Coronation Park Elementary School in Coquitlam during the sell-off. The Elections BC website says the Polygon oligarchs gave the BC Liberal Party $962,000 and the BC NDP $87,000 between 2005 and 2018. Moody Centre SkyTrain Station Developer Ryan Beedie partnered with others to buy four public properties near the new Moody Centre SkyTrain Station in 2017 and 2018 for a total of $29 million. The BC Liberal government initiated the sale, which was completed after the BC NDP/Green Party coalition government took power in 2017. Soon after Beedie took possession of the four properties the appraised market value ballooned to $116 million. Elections BC says Beedie donated $668,000 to the BC Liberal Party between 2005 and 2018. The Aquilini Investment cartel, well-known for its ownership of the Vancouver Canucks, during the same 2005-18 period gave $1.5 million to the BC Liberal Party and $270,000 to the BC NDP. The Aquilini group partnered with others in 2014 to purchase 40 acres of public property in Burnaby for $58 million. The property is known as the Willingdon Lands. Even though designated as "surplus," the government, after selling the property which houses several mental health and drug treatment centres, leased it back from the Aquilini group. The rental fee has not been disclosed. By 2018 the appraised market value of the property without any additional development has risen from $58 million to $123 million. The Aquilini cartel has submitted a "master plan" for development of the Willingdon Lands, which is now before Burnaby City Council. Lisa Moore, a principal with the BC auditor general's office told the Vancouver Sun that her office was aware of all the donations to the Liberals and the NDP and the involvement of the donors in purchasing public property. She said the donations did not violate the election rules in force at the time. The BC government changed the rules governing donations to BC political parties in November 2017, banning most donations from companies and unions. The BC public treasury is now the largest source of funds for the three cartel parties in the BC Legislature. The government pays the cartel parties an annual allowance according to the number of votes received in the election. In the two and a half years prior to the 2020 BC election, the government paid out approximately $16.5-million to the three cartel parties that have members in the legislature. To be continued — Part Three: "BC Sold 50 Schools and Educational Land Lots in Six Years and Now Faces a Shortage of K-12 Space" (With files from a Postmedia investigation appearing in the Vancouver Sun, "Sold on your behalf: 164 B.C. schools and hospitals, agricultural and industrial lots worth $1 billion.") (To access articles individually click on the black headline.) PDF PREVIOUS ISSUES | HOME Website:  www.cpcml.ca   Email:  office@cpcml.ca

44th General Election

Right to Housing for All Canadians — an Election Issue

Evicting Homeless from Toronto Encampments Is the Crime
— Not Protesting It!

Three people were arrested on September 16 by Toronto police during a march to 14 Division Police Station. The march was organized to support the 26 people who are facing charges arising out of the forceful eviction of homeless people from a camp at Lamport Stadium in July. Following the arrests marchers held a vigil at 14 Division demanding the release of the three people. One of those arrested was Skyler Williams, spokesperson for the Six Nations 1492 Land Back Lane land defenders. [More]

Cities Have No Right to Criminalize, Brutalize and Remove Homeless People

– Statement, Skyler Williams, Six Nations
1492 Land Back Lane Defender –

(September 17) Indigenous people make up nearly 40 per cent of those living without homes on the streets of every major city across the country. This is the legacy of residential schools. Dispossessed of lands. Disconnected from language, culture and family. The legacy of trauma inflicted on our nations and our people over and over again. [More]

Montreal Activists Call for Action
on Housing Crisis

With less than a week to go before the end of the election campaign, housing advocate organizations and the People’s Action Front for Urban Renewal (FRAPRU) organized a protest in front of Justin Trudeau’s campaign office on Park Avenue in Montreal. On the day FRAPRU held its action, tenants from Trudeau’s riding were occupying his campaign office to express their opposition to the lack of commitments from the Liberals to improve the situation of tenant households with urgent housing needs. [More]

Interview

Governments Must Implement Demands Put Forward by Organizations Defending the Right to Housing

– Serge Lachapelle –

The following interview was conducted with housing activist Serge Lachapelle, an MLPC spokesperson on the right to housing and candidate in Laurier–Sainte-Marie.

Renewal Update: During this election the right to housing has been a serious issue in Montreal. Despite this, the cartel parties and media do not have those affected by this problem or with expert knowledge such as yourself speaking about the needs and solutions. Can you comment on this please. [More]

Legalized Corruption in Real Estate
to Pay the Rich

– K.C. Adams –

The revelations of a corrupt real estate deal involving the BC government, the City of Vancouver and Holborn Properties Ltd. raise important questions. How pervasive is corruption in real estate, not only in depriving people of the right to housing but in driving skyward the price of land itself and real estate generally? Large amounts of the people’s money and funds in the economy are tied up in real estate and paying residential and commercial rent. The resulting economic and social problems, including homelessness and bankruptcy must be addressed and resolved. [More]

Vancouver’s Little Mountain Swindle to Pay the Rich

Removing land as a commodity to be bought and sold would address the housing crisis and block the parasites and flippers who, like in the case of the Little Mountain corrupt deal to pay the rich, can without remorse tear down social housing and sit on an empty lot for years until the opportune time arrives to either sell it or build something on it for a huge profit. Instead of having rich owners expropriating the value workers produce in building, maintaining and supplying the necessary material for housing, the value would be reinvested back into the sector for the good of all. [More]

Sorry Details of Legally Corrupt Deal to Sell Little Mountain Property

The 2008 deal involves the BC government as owner of the property, the city of Vancouver and Holborn Properties Ltd, a global investment cartel whose principal owner is one of the richest oligarchs in Malaysia.

The 12 acres of Little Mountain lie in Vancouver just east of Queen Elizabeth Park. Seven hundred people lived in 224 units of social housing at the time of the sale. The units had been built in 1954 and were owned and maintained by BC Housing. Many of those living there and displaced in 2009 were seniors, people with disabilities, and low-income families with children. [More]

 

The Need for Modern Child Care and Early Childhood Education

– Peggy Morton –

COMMUNIST PARTY OF CANADA (MARXIST LENNINST) 

The fight of women and families for modern child care and early childhood education goes back more than fifty years as reflected in the report of the Royal Commission on Women released in 1970, which called for such an endeavour.

Since then, the need has only become greater as one government after another has made sure it has not created a national child care program as a right. The cartel parties treat child care as an electoral football to attract votes while different governments use complicated systems of credits and create budget categories of various sorts which families have to wade through as they fend for themselves, juggle their finances and worry about the safety of their kids.

For the past 28 years, the Liberals have repeated promises at election time to create child care “spaces.” All the cartel parties offer various forms of subsidies or tax rebates as partial payment to families for child care and early childhood education. Meanwhile the situation has gone from bad to worse. With average costs per child in major cities of from $1,100 to $1,700 or more a month, child care is both unaffordable and unattainable for most families.

It is now an accepted fact that affordable child care is a necessity in a modern economy. The pandemic further exposed the failure of the existing system and private business interests are calling for governments to provide more money for child care, saying they have a shortage of workers and want more women back in the workforce. These employers want to buy the capacity to work of more women, but they refuse to pay for the costs of child care needed for women to join or rejoin the labour force. The financial oligarchy expects that all these costs will be borne through user fees and from the public treasury.

Private interests also see child care as a “market” in which they want to expand their reach and control, with profits guaranteed by the state. One monopoly alone openly states it aims to capture an additional 10 per cent of the “market” which would increase the private for-profit share to 46 per cent from the current 36 per cent.

In a discussion organized by Women for Rights and Empowerment on September 8, the clear conclusion was that women are sticking to and fighting for our own demands. We set the standards, we take the measure. Working women have long established what we need to guarantee the right to child care and the rights of the workers who provide child care and early childhood education based on the needs of women and families and of the society itself.

Upholding the right to modern child care and early childhood education requires upholding the rights of the workers who care for and provide early childhood education. These workers are overwhelmingly women (around 96 per cent). While the average wage is just under $20.00/hour across Canada and Quebec many earn less and their jobs are often precarious. They have a right to decent wages, benefits and working conditions and all who are recruited abroad as cheap labour to care for our children must be given full status on arrival in Canada. The super-exploitation of migrant women brought to the country to care for children in private settings must be ended.

Quebec has had a program of $9 a day child care for many years. Sounds great of course, but the reality is that the waiting lists for licensed care are long, the number of spaces available has never come close to meeting the need, and workers are still low-paid. Everything indicates that the same Liberal promise of $10.00 a day child care within five years and 40,000 additional child care workers will never materialize.

With 1.3 million regulated spaces in Canada and Quebec pre-pandemic and 20 per cent of them closed during the pandemic, this leaves a shortfall of 280,000 spaces just to return to pre-pandemic levels. Around 63,000 child-care workers had lost their jobs as of February 2021 compared to the previous year. Promises over which nobody exercises control are murky indeed, the stock in trade of the parties vying for power.

The suspicion is that current promises will be part of neo-liberal programs to pay the rich to extend their reach and control of early childhood education and child care, replacing those programs which have closed with corporate chains subsidized by the public purse while women and families have to continue to fend for themselves for access and cover “their share” of the costs. Workers on night shifts need not apply!

Through the half-century long fight since the 1970 Royal Commission, women and their advocacy organizations have established the standards of what constitutes modern child care and early childhood education based on the needs of women, families and society. This is the measure, not the competing claims and cynical promises of the parties vying for power.

High-quality child care must be available for all who need it, especially the most marginalized, and without “user fees.” Centres must be properly staffed, appropriately located, and provide a modern standard of care. Indigenous peoples must have control over all aspects of the care of their children. There can be no place for private ownership and control, and all pay-the-rich schemes should be ended and recognized as a source of corruption which robs child care of needed resources.

The possibility for innovative new arrangements are endless. Child care, along with other public enterprise and services for all children including sports and culture, nutritious and delicious meals and education must activate the human factor/social consciousness. One thing is certain: we cannot rely on governments which pay the rich to create the modern institutions we require and must fight to create them ourselves just as we must fight to establish an education system which serves the needs of a society which seeks to humanize the social and natural environment.

Facts about Child Care in Canada

There are roughly 5 million children under the age of 12 in Canada, and about 1.3 million licensed child care spaces. These include 636,157 full and part day centre spaces for 0-5 year olds, 570,022 centre spaces for school-age children to 12 years and 143,647 regulated family (home) child care spaces for 0-12 year olds.

Statistics Canada reported in June 2021 that in 2019 there were nearly 302,000 child care workers in Canada. One third were immigrants or non-permanent residents. Twenty-five per cent of child care workers were self-employed. From February 2020 to February 2021, around 63,000 or 21 per cent of child care workers in licensed facilities became unemployed. In comparison, total employment in Canada decreased by three per cent over the same period. Women make up 96 per cent of the child care workforce. In addition, many migrant workers employed as caregivers on temporary work permits in their employers’ homes also lost their jobs when their employers began to work from home or left the work force.

In 2019, on average, child care workers were making $19.97 per hour, compared to average hourly earnings of $27.91 for workers in all other occupations. Keep in mind that this average is somewhat misleading, given the fact that the highest paid receive remuneration several times greater than what the lowest paid receive.

Prior to the pandemic, about 28 per cent of families in the work force with children had a child in licensed child care. From February 2020 to February 2021, at least 20 per cent of all licensed day care spaces had closed, and it is uncertain how many will be closed permanently. Many of those which closed were operated as “not for profit” centres by community groups or voluntary operators.

According to an RBC Economics report, nearly 100,000 women aged 20 and older have left the labour force since February 2020, 10 times the number of men who left the labour force. The 2016 Canadian census found that both couples without a post-secondary education and single parents had decreased participation in the paid labour force from 2005 to 2015. The high cost of child care and education as well as housing etc. are considered major factors in this decline.

In 2016, around 36 per cent of regulated spaces were operated on a for-profit basis. Large corporate chains are expanding, with one such company alone having a stated goal to capture 10 per cent of the Canadian child care “market.” As with long-term care for seniors, for-profit child care has been shown to pay poorer wages, have fewer highly trained staff and a higher rate of failure to comply with legislated staff/child ratios.

(With files from Childcarecanada.org, Statistics Canada and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives)