As Trump trial opens, evidence mounts Capitol attack was planned

On December 19, Beverly Hills salon owner Gina Bisignano read a tweet from president Donald Trump: "Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!"

© Brendan SMIALOWSKI Trump supporters clash with police and security forces as they storm the US Capitol hoping to reverse his loss in the presidential election

 Democrats allege Donald Trump encouraged the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol in an address to supporters just before it took place

"We'll be there," replied Bisignano, one of tens of millions who saw the summons to Washington to battle Trump's election defeat.

Meanwhile Ethan Nordean in Washington state and Enrique Tarrio in Florida were online making their January 6 plans as leaders of the extreme-right Proud Boys.

Nordean, according to a court filing, on December 27 appealed to followers for funds to buy protective gear and communications equipment.

A week later he and Tarrio told followers in a podcast to wear black, and said they would have to be prepared to fight.

"We are looked at almost like soldiers of the right wing," said Tarrio. "This stuff is real. We are in a war."

In the ranks of the extremist Proud Boys or Oath Keepers, among QAnon conspiracists and hardcore fans of the Republican president, the message was clear weeks ahead: Trump wants you to head to Washington to stop Congress from certifying Joe Biden's election win on January 6.

© ALEX EDELMAN

Supporters of US president Donald Trump protest outside the US Capitol on January 6, 2021

As Trump stands trial in the US Senate for incitement of insurrection, increasing evidence in court filings shows the attack on the US Capitol was premeditated.

- 'Set to boil' -

After Trump's tweet many fans announced plans to travel to Washington, some simply for a final pro-Trump rally.

But others spoke of halting the certification itself and inflicting pain on "traitors" in Congress.

They prepared for it. Dozens brought combat helmets, stun guns, body armor, communications equipment, and bear and pepper spray. A handful had firearms.

The night before, someone planted pipe bombs at two different locations near to the Capitol. The bombs never went off, and may have simply sought to draw police away from the Capitol as the assault began.

The alleged leaders of the attack, those appearing most organized, according to court filings, were the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

In late December in Berryville, Virginia, some 60 miles (100 kilometers) west of Washington, Thomas Caldwell was allegedly organizing for serious violence.

Described as a "commander" of the Oath Keepers, a violent far-right group of mostly ex-military and police, Caldwell planned to meet just outside Washington with members of armed militia from around the region.

"Let them try to certify some crud on capitol hill with a million or more patriots in the streets. This kettle is set to boil," he said on Facebook.

"They have morphed into pure evil even blatantly rigging an election and paying off the political caste. We must smite them now and drive them down," he added.

- Storm the Capitol -

In Bridgeville, Pennsylvania, QAnon and Proud Boy follower Kenneth Grayson, 51, was likewise preparing.

On December 23, court filings show, he texted to family and friends: "I'm there if Trump tells us to storm the fucking Capitol ... they are not going to steal this election."

In Georgia attorney William Calhoun was angry about Biden's alleged steal of the election. After the election he had already been reported to the FBI for calling for an armed attack on Washington.

On December 29 he posted: "Being physically present in Washington on January 6 is of key importance. We the people have no other realistic option to communicate our unwavering intent to demand fair elections now and forever -- or else."

A week later he announced he was on his way to Washington "to let them know this is their last chance to Stop The Steal -- or they are going to have bigger problems."

- 'The steal is stopped' -

The morning of January 6, Ronnie Sandlin of Memphis Tennessee and Nathan Degrave of Las Vegas, Nevada, made a video of their plans.

"I think it is time to take the Capitol and I don't say that lightly," said Sandlin.

"If we need to occupy the Capitol, we will occupy the Capitol....one o'clock is when it is all going to go down."

After the attack, participants declared success, having done what they planned to do.

"Today the American People proved that we have the power," Calhoun posted.

"We occupied the Capitol and shut down the Government -- we shut down their stolen election shenanigans."

Proud Boys Nicholas Ochs of Hawaii and Nicholas DeCarlo of Texas streamed a video from the scene.

"We came here to stop the steal," said Ochs.

"That's what I came down here to do. We fucking did it," said DeCarlo.

"It may resume, but the steal is for now stopped. You're welcome, America!" Ochs replied.

pmh/ec

New Zealand Maori leader ejected from parliament for not wearing a necktie
COLONIALIST RACIST TRADITION

By Praveen Menon

© Reuters/Mario Anzuoni FILE PHOTO: Ties are pictured at a Men's Wearhouse store in Pasadena, California

WELLINGTON (Reuters) - A New Zealand Maori leader who was ejected from parliament this week for refusing to wear a necktie in the chamber said forcing him to a Western dress code was a breach of his rights and an attempt to suppress indigenous culture.

On Tuesday, Speaker Trevor Mallard twice prevented Rawiri Waititi from asking questions in the debating chamber, insisting that MPs could only ask a question if they were wearing a tie.

When Waititi continued with his question after being stopped a second time, Mallard ordered him to leave.

"It's not about ties, it's about cultural identity, mate," Waititi said as he exited the chamber.

Waititi, who has called ties "a colonial noose," was told last year that he would be ejected from the House if he did not wear one. On Tuesday he wore a taonga, a Maori greenstone pendant, instead

Video: New Zealand MP asked to leave the parliamentary chambers for not wearing a tie (The Washington Post)

Mallard said on Tuesday that while ties were outdated in his view, an overwhelming majority of members asked that the rule be retained in consultations on the issue in the last few months.

Writing in the New Zealand Herald on Wednesday, Waititi said his action was not about ties, but about the right of Māori to be Māori, whether in Parliament or in the pub.

"I took off the colonial tie as a sign that it continued to colonise, to choke and to suppress out Māori rights that Mallard suggests gives us all equality," Waititi said.

"This is about more than just the tie or the taonga, this has everything to do with equality."

Asked to comment, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said that it was not something she had a strong opinion on, and that she had no objection to someone wearing a tie in parliament or not. SINCE SHE DOES NOT HAVE TO

"There are much more important issues for all of us," Ardern said.

(Reporting by Praveen Menon; Editing by Sonya He

The wealthy in Brazil cause controversy as they try to buy quick access to vaccine

SAO PAULO — Brazilian marketing executive Eduardo Menga is extra cautious when it comes to his health. During the pandemic, he consulted a slew of doctors to ensure he was in good shape and uprooted his family from Rio de Janeiro to a quiet city in the countryside where he works remotely. His wife Bianca Rinaldi, an actress, hasn’t worked since March.

© Provided by NBC News

Menga and Rinaldi are among a minority of Brazilians who will pay for a COVID-19 vaccine if an association of private clinics can close a deal to bring 5 million shots to Latin America’s most unequal country. President Jair Bolsonaro, under fire for his government’s handling of the pandemic, has promised not to interfere.

“When I go to a restaurant and I pay for my own food, I’m not taking anyone else’s food,” the 68-year-old Menga said from his home in Jundiai in Sao Paulo state. “I don’t think getting a vaccine from a private clinic will take it from someone else waiting in the public system. It could be an alternative line, and those who have the chance should take it.”

Amid the government’s stumbling vaccine rollout, many moneyed Brazilians want to find a swift path to vaccination, sparking backlash from some public health experts and igniting debate on social media, editorial pages and talk shows.

There has been concern globally that the privileged could game the system to get themselves vaccinated before others. When the connected have been caught leapfrogging ahead, in countries like Turkey, Morocco and Spain, they have faced criticism, investigations or forced resignations.

Brazil has had its reports of line-jumpers, too, but the nation stands apart because maneuvering isn’t only done in the shadows. Some is out in the open, with the prosperous coordinating efforts that the government endorses, according to Roberto DaMatta, an emeritus anthropology professor at the University of Notre Dame.

“The pandemic makes Brazil’s inequality more obvious, because the virus doesn’t choose social class, but the cure just might,” said DaMatta, who authored the book “Do You Know With Whom You’re Speaking?” a portrait of Brazilian privilege. It was inspired by episodes during the pandemic, including a judge who refused a policeman’s order to don a mask, then called the state’s security chief to protest and ripped up his 100 reais ($20) fine.

“Brazil’s wealthy normalized slavery for ages. Now, they accept that more poor and Black people die of COVID, and put little pressure on a government that has sabotaged the rollout. Taking the vaccine in this scenario might depend on organization, so the well-off are organizing,” DaMatta told The Associated Press.

Business leaders and some authorities defend attempts to secure a vaccine as boosting Brazil’s economic reboot. And anyway, they argue, why shouldn’t the well-heeled buy vaccines if government efforts are falling short? So far, Brazil has 13.9 million shots available for a population of 210 million people, and has given the first of two shots to just 1% of citizens since immunizations began Jan. 18.

Health experts, for their part, view such efforts as unethical given vaccines are scarce globally and at-risk groups are in more immediate need to avoid death; already nearly 230,000 Brazilians have died from COVID-19, the second-highest tally in the world.

And while people over 65 like Menga are near the top of the list, Brazil’s slow rollout, which could take up to 16 months, means it could be a long time before he gets a shot, and even longer for his wife, who is 46.

Debate over unfair vaccine distribution in Brazil first flared after Supreme Court employees reportedly maneuvered to set aside some 7,000 COVID-19 vaccines for themselves and their families; the government laboratory that will make and distribute AstraZeneca shots declined, saying it cannot reserve shots. Sao Paulo state prosecutors also lobbied for inclusion in priority groups, alongside health professionals.

After those efforts floundered, Brazil’s private health clinics stepped in to try to bypass government procurement plans. Executives from Brazil’s association of private clinics negotiated directly with Indian pharmaceutical company Bharat Biotech for its COVAXIN shot. The association of about 30,000 private clinics is registering would-be clients on a waiting list.

Brazil has no deals with Bharat and its health regulator has yet to approve COVAXIN, but in a sign of what the future may hold if the deal does go through, Rio Grande do Sul state’s association of judges asked its members last month if they were interested in buying shots from the clinics association.

Gonzalo Vecina, who headed Brazil’s health agency between 1999 and 2003, says such private-sector efforts pose a major problem, not only on ethical and legal grounds, but also to public health.

“The private network doesn’t have to follow the Health Ministry’s priority protocol. So, if this goes ahead we will have a line for people who have $200, where you can get a shot next week, and another that won’t move for months,” Vecina said.

“What everyone needs to understand is that the pandemic doesn’t end if it doesn’t end for everyone.”

Most of the planet is relying on public health care networks to administer vaccines, and few countries with large populations are using private channels for distribution. A notable exception is the U.S., where Americans can get their shots at pharmacies, clinics and other private institutions. Hospitals in at least eight U.S. states have been accused of favoring board members, trustees, relatives and donors who should have waited their turn.

On Jan. 26, Bolsonaro said he had signed a letter to bolster a bid from a group of Brazilian executives to score 33 million doses of the AstraZeneca shot, with half for them to use as they like and half donated to the country’s public health system.

Brazilian media reported at least 11 companies were in the group, including state-run oil company Petrobras, steelmaker Gerdau and phone carrier Oi, all of which declined to comment.

“That would help the economy a lot, and also those who might want to get vaccinated,” Bolsonaro said of the companies’ effort. Economy Minister Paulo Guedes labeled the effort “evidently very good.”

By contrast, a council of business leaders in neighboring Colombia hit a roadblock when it sought permission to purchase COVID-19 shots. Colombia’s health minister said the possibility would only be considered in the second phase of immunization, after all health professionals and people over 60 years old have received their shots.

Bolsonaro’s support notwithstanding, AstraZeneca declined the Brazilian executives’ effort, saying in a statement that it wouldn’t supply Brazil’s private sector, at least for now. Sao Paulo’s industry federation released a statement two days later denying such negotiations ever were pursued.

A former governor of Brazil’s central bank, Armínio Fraga, said he opposes the moves by wealthier Brazilians and fears vaccine prices could surge if companies are allowed to bid for them.

“We are living in a moment of global scarcity,” Fraga, a partner at investment firm Gavea Investimentos, said in an online interview to newspaper Valor. “We need some coordination so that priority groups are respected.”

RIGHT WING CLIMATE SOLUTIONS
Investments in nuclear energy could help solve the economic and climate crises

As the United States faces several key challenges simultaneously - COVID-19, the economic crisis, social injustice and the rising threat of climate change - the federal government is looking for solutions that help address multiple issues at once. Recent commitments by President Biden are encouraging: by tying the post-pandemic economic recovery to investments in clean energy, we can tackle all four existential crises at the same time.

© Getty Images

 Investments in nuclear energy could help solve the economic and climate crises

During his campaign, Biden ran on a sweeping clean energy plan, pledging to achieve a carbon-free electricity sector by 2035 with net zero emissions economy-wide by 2050 as part of his "all of government" plan for climate. The president's proposed tech-neutral approach opens the door for an inclusive plan to combat climate change, which includes nuclear power - the nation's largest carbon-free source of energy. This marks the first time nuclear power has been a part of the Democratic platform since 1972.

Additionally, we have seen increasing bipartisan congressional support for nuclear energy over the last decade. The new administration can build on this strong foundation by accelerating its investment in advanced nuclear energy to create new opportunities in the clean power sector and take meaningful steps towards cost-effective decarbonization. The nuclear industry can be ready to accomplish this with advanced technologies and a commitment to align with the equity-centered approach of the new administration.

The Department of Energy (DOE) leaves the new administration well-positioned to deliver on the Biden administration's appropriately ambitious decarbonization goals by continuing to invest in the bright future of nuclear energy. DOE recently launched the National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) to support the demonstration of advanced reactors and pioneer best practices for community engagement with new nuclear technology. That's because DOE has already recognized the promise of advanced reactors, acknowledging they can help lower carbon emissions and create new clean energy jobs.

Last October, the DOE approved a multiyear cost-share award to Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS) to develop and construct the Carbon Free Power Project (CFPP), a 720-megawatt small modular nuclear reactor (SMR) located at the Idaho National Laboratory. This crucial award will help ensure that the CFPP is fully operational by 2030 and competitive with other baseload energy sources like combined-cycle natural gas plants, but with zero greenhouse gas emissions. And in December, DOE's Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program (ARDP) awarded two U.S.-based companies - TerraPower and X-energy - with $160 million in initial funding to build first-of-their-kind reactors, expected to be fully operational within seven years. This is progress the Biden administration can build on by continuing to invest in the next generation of nuclear energy.

A CHEAP FOSSIL FUEL ALTERNATIVE TO COAL
Video: Gas has to take priority in transition to green energy: OMV CEO (CNBC)

The ambitious timelines for the DOE's projects mean advanced nuclear energy can play a meaningful role in enabling communities to reach their climate goals, potentially directly replacing fossil plants and partnering with renewable energy and battery technologies. In the long-run, the investment in advanced nuclear technologies will also help provide local, high-paying jobs for the communities where they will operate as well as jobs in the emerging supply chains. And for communities facing coal plant closures - like in Michigan, Ohio, Nevada and North Carolina - advanced nuclear will be the most effective option to provide always-on, carbon-free energy to replace the baseload of fossil fuels, something that wind and solar power are not able to do quite yet.

But investing in the next generation of nuclear is about more than keeping the lights on. The Biden administration's strong commitment to fostering electric vehicle (EV) adoption in the U.S. requires a similarly strong commitment to ensuring nuclear power remains a big part of the equation for how to provide what will be an increasingly large amount of baseload power to the electric grid. EVs aren't very clean if they don't run on clean energy.

To help realize our clean energy future, the federal government must continue to give the clean energy community the investment it needs to succeed. With the possibility of a budget reconciliation process being discussed in Congress, it is vital that policymakers and legislators recognize the momentum the nuclear technology industry has right now and how vital it is to keep that going. Paired with its comprehensive plan to reach net zero emissions as rapidly as possible, the Biden administration can build a stronger, more resilient economy powered by clean, carbon-free energy sources. The nuclear energy sector is ready to help.

Todd Allen is the chair for Nuclear Engineering and Radiological Sciences at the University of Michigan and executive director of Fastest Path to Zero, an initiative that supports communities as they plan for and pursue full decarbonization.

Suzy Hobbs Baker is the creative director of Fastest Path to Zero and co-founder of the Good Energy Collective, which seeks to make the progressive case for advanced nuclear as part of the climate change agenda.

Amazon's own investors are reportedly telling the company to stop pressuring warehouse workers who have begun to vote on forming the firm's first union

© Provided by Business Insider Amazon has faced criticism over its extensive surveillance of workers and its poor safety record. 

Patrick Fallon/Getty Images

Amazon investors are telling the firm to stop interfering in a unionization vote, the FT reported.

Alabama warehouse workers are currently voting on whether to form the firm's first-ever union.

Amazon reportedly posted anti-union messaging in the bathrooms of the Alabama warehouse.

A group of more than 70 Amazon investors is telling the company to stop interfering with a unionization vote in Alabama, according to a report from the Financial Times.

Nearly 6,000 workers at an Alabama warehouse are voting on whether to form a union, the first in the history of Amazon, which has long been staunchly opposed to its employees unionizing. The workers were due to receive their ballots on Monday as part of a mail-in election and have until March 29 to place their vote.

The investors calling for Amazon to cease pushing back on the unionization efforts collectively hold more than $20 billion worth of the company's shares, the FT notes. The group includes the comptrollers for the state of New York as well as New York City, BMO Global Asset Management, (CANADIAN) the Church of England Pensions Board, and Sweden-based Folksam and Ohman Fonder, per the report.

In a letter, the investors reportedly pointed to Amazon's stated "human rights principles," which include statements on respecting workers' rights to join and form or not to join a labor union "without fear of reprisal, intimidation, or harassment."

"As these workers seek to organize with [the union] for health, safety, and protection, Amazon's investors are watching," New York City comptroller Scott Stringer said, according to the FT. "There is power in their unity and power in labour, and they have my full support as they fight for a safe, fair workplace."

Amazon did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

Amazon has a history of working against employee efforts to form a union. Last week, the Washington Post reported that Amazon had posted anti-union messaging in the bathrooms of its Bessemer, Alabama, warehouse, the facility whose employees have begun voting on unionizing.

"Where will your dues go," a sign read on the back of a stall door according to The Post, referring to union fees.

DUES ARE THE BEST TAX CREDIT A WORKER CAN GET

THEY ARE 100% DEDUCTABLE COME TAX TIME

Read more: More than 40% of surveyed Amazon employees say they wished they were in a union, a new Insider survey shows

The company listed before quickly removing a job opening in 2020 for an analyst that would monitor worker activities around organizing.

Amazon has also used a tool to monitor dozens of private and public social media groups to find drivers that were organizing protests or strikes, per a Motherboard report from September. And in November, reports surfaced that Amazon had hired detectives with the infamous Pinkerton spy agency to monitor European workers' labor union organizing efforts.

OPINION | It's time to take action against growing (WHITE RACIST) extremism in Alberta

On Jan. 6, Canadians watched in horror as an angry mob stormed and terrorized the U.S. Capitol building.

If you were on social media in the days following, you might have seen some variation of the familiar "thank goodness we live in Canada" type posts and sentiment that we've been laughing a lot at these past four years.

 

© Scott Neufeld/CBC 

Members of the anti-immigration group Soldiers of Odin attend a yellow vest rally in Edmonton. Researchers are concerned that far right groups in Alberta are gaining steam, and members.

It's a convenient punchline to shrug off the dramatic, sometimes violent politics that seems to be surging south of the border.

But here's the thing: we're not immune. Moreover, we're overdue to take action on growing right-wing extremism in this province.

Just because we don't have protestors storming the Legislature in Edmonton doesn't mean we shouldn't be addressing this threat with pre-emptive urgency.

In Alberta, one only needs to look to the events that occurred this past year to know that we need to take action.

Over the years, we've become familiar with the yellow vesters and Wexit fringe. But they've seemingly rebranded, mingling with QAnon flag flyers and holding up ominously scrawled "Save The Children!" signs on Alberta streets last summer and "marching for freedom" against masks in the fall.

Even spiritual leaders in Alberta have noted the proliferation of QAnon and similar conspiracies among their congregations.

Peaceful gatherings of conspiracy theorists are one thing, but they've bubbled over into related, shockingly violent incidents.

In the fall, we watched a video of the assault of an anti-racism activist in Red Deer and the attempted hit and run on protestors during an racial justice march in Ponoka. And there was also a parking lot altercation between right wing and anti-racism groups that took place in Edmonton.

I spoke to Taylor McNallie, an anti-racism activist who runs Inclusive Canada (formerly known as Rural Albertans Against Racism) and whose demonstrations were targeted by right wing groups last summer.

She told me her group had been holding family friendly anti-racism discussion events and picnics in public parks across Alberta for years.

But after a right wing "patriot" group member punched her partner in the side of the head in Red Deer during an event in late September, her group was forced to move the majority of their discussions online.

Even then, she says, "You can't even have an online event without them recording the conversations, and trying to locate the people who took part."

Women in particular, McNallie claims, bear the brunt of threats for taking part in anti-racism events.

One woman who attended some events as an observer received text messages warning her to "Stay the F--k out of Red Deer," while another female activist was forced to take leave from her job and leave the province for some months.

And it's not just a couple of worrisome events here and there; research indicates right wing extremism is on the rise in Alberta.

Police reported hate crimes rose in the province between 2016 and 2018, and appeared to continue to rise into 2019 and 2020, although Statistics Canada has not yet released its full report.

And far right groups are gaining steam.

John McCoy, founder of the Edmonton-based Organization for the Prevention of Violence, noted that Alberta law enforcement is dealing with increasingly larger gatherings of right wing extremist groups in the province.

"Where these guys would organize an event and two or three people might show up years ago, now they've got 15 to 20 showing up," McCoy says.

An undercurrent of anti-authoritarianism lies behind these trends that some might argue has always existed in Alberta, but it is now interlaced with the lure of conspiracies like QAnon.

© Helen Pike/CBC We’ve become familiar with the yellow vesters and the Wexit fringe in Alberta. But according to Claire Porter Robbins, many groups on the far right have rebranded and now pose a much more serious threat.

But why now, and why Alberta?

The obvious factor here is economic insecurity.

About 11 per cent of Albertans are unemployed, and they're anxious. Premier Jason Kenney said he'd bring good oil jobs back to the province, but six years after Canadian oil prices started to tank, very little has changed.

Moreover, people are growing more and more frustrated — and their fears have been compounded by the pandemic.

Economically, things have gone from bad to worse. But more importantly, social isolation has forced those already vulnerable to the easy answers that extremist rhetoric provides farther into the margins.

Some of us spent quarantine time searching the internet for foolproof sourdough recipes; others channeled their loneliness, frustrations and prejudices into conspiracies and far-right online communities.

These far-right online communities are also all too eager to provide a space to validate these angry feelings and give a sense of purpose and meaning to others.

But the less obvious, more nebulous factor at play here is that we haven't adequately prepared and protected our society from racist and extremist overtures.

We can start with our schools.

We're at a juncture where the need for a provincial media literacy curriculum has never been more urgent. If adults can't differentiate between real events and inane conspiracies, how can we expect their children, who are growing up immersed in digital and social media, to do any better?

As political partisanship increases, educating the next generation on how to identify extremist rhetoric will have a longer term impact than debates about social media censorship.

Similarly, police services must continue to have conversations about how to identify bias and extremism, both in the public and within the ranks. The fact that the U.S. Capitol rioters included members of the military and police demonstrates the sad fact that law enforcement agencies are not immune to radicalization within their ranks.

Beyond direct involvement, this year has taught us an abundance of anti-bias and anti-extremism training can only benefit the relationship between police and the public. Like the Red Deer police officer who blamed "both sides" for this fall's violence, those tasked with protecting us must have a better understanding of how to address and police extremist gatherings.

Further, law enforcement will need to work in conjunction with social and health services to identify individuals at risk of radicalization or likely to undertake violence on behalf of ideological biases.

On a preliminary basis, further investment in mental health services for isolated individuals at risk of radicalization can combat the hateful, prejudiced worldview many far-right online communities espouse. And for those already engrossed in conspiracies and extremism, investments in rehabilitation, within both our prisons and the community at large, can pay dividends for long-term public safety.

As it stands, we're still in the thick of this pandemic, and Alberta's economic future has few bright spots. Extremism and conspiracy theories have fertile soil to grow here in this province — in fact, they've already taken root.

So we're faced with a choice: continue to deny and contrast our situation with our neighbours to the south, or act now to limit the progression of hatred and violence in our province.

© CBC Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

Questions arise over protections from reinstated Alberta coal policy

EDMONTON — Doubts are being raised about the Alberta government's decision to restore a policy that protects the Rocky Mountains from coal mining.

Energy Minister Sonya Savage on Monday brought back a 1976 policy that keeps open-pit coal mines out of most of the Rockies and foothills.

University of Calgary resource law professor Nigel Bankes says the ban doesn't apply everywhere, despite Savage's assurances that mountaintop removal mines are prohibited.

That means Benga Mining's proposal for such a mine, now before a review panel, could still go ahead.

Bankes also points out exploration already permitted can still go ahead, so hundreds of drill sites and kilometres of roads could still be built despite return of the policy.

Environmentalist Kevin van Tighem calls bringing back the coal policy a "bait and switch."

He says the energy minister's letter to the Alberta Energy Regulator still allows for the possibility of open-pit mines.

The Canadian Press

ALBERTA UCP PLANS TO KILL SAFE INJECTION SITES

'A matter of life and death': U of C study details benefits of threatened opioid treatment program

An opioid dependency program facing looming closure by the UCP government has not only helped patients curb their mental health struggles and reliance on illicit drugs, but is the reason why many feel they are even still alive.  

© Provided by Calgary Herald 

The Sheldon M. Chumir Health Centre in Calgary houses one of two injectable opioid agonist treatment pilot projects in Alberta.

That’s according to a new University of Calgary study led by Jennifer Jackson, a registered nurse and assistant professor in the Faculty of Nursing.

Injectable opioid agonist treatment (iOAT) clinics in Calgary and Edmonton provide a form of treatment for people with an opioid addiction, for whom oral treatments such as methadone or suboxone have been unsuccessful. The service has been described as “the last chance for recovery” for patients.

Alberta’s iOAT pilot began under the former NDP government in 2018. But those clinics could close next month, pending the outcome of an ongoing legal challenge , after Premier Jason Kenney’s government indicated last year it would not renew a grant dedicated to the service past March 2021.

Jackson’s research, which was published Monday, concluded that the lives of patients “had drastically improved through the iOAT program.”

“Several participants shared that they were fearful they would be dead if the program were to cease operating,” she wrote.

The study included qualitative interviews with 23 iOAT patients in 2019, all of whom had chronic opioid use disorder. Thirteen participants accessing iOAT services were referred through supervised consumption services.

Patients described their lives having been “transformed” for the better by enrolling in iOAT. They cited a decreased reliance on street drugs, a decline in withdrawal symptoms and an improvement in their mental health, with fewer anxieties stemming from previous drug-related behaviours.

Many patients said they experienced life-threatening overdoses prior to participating in iOAT, but none reported any overdoses after enrolling in the program. Some said the program helped them step away from a previous lifestyle that involved crimes like theft and selling drugs.

Participants reported they were better able to care for themselves, rebuild relationships and find financial stability and secure housing after enrolling in iOAT.

“The only fear is I’m scared what’s gonna happen if the program ever stops,” one said. “What would I do? Like, that’s a scary thought.”

Jackson said the primary benefit of the program for many patients, according to their interviews, is the relationships they have built with clinic staff.

One participant said iOAT granted them “a place where I can come where I feel safe… where people don’t look at me like a junkie, like an addict.”

“They look at me like a person,” they said. “They talk to me like a person.”

Related

'It is a death sentence': Patients launch lawsuit after UCP cuts funding for opioid treatment program

'We need certainty': UCP hints at continuation of iOAT amid lawsuit

Patients push forward with lawsuit to maintain injectable treatment for opioid dependence

Province to discontinue funding to first-of-its-kind opioid dependency program

Open letter calls on province to reverse decision ending a 'life-saving' opioid dependency program

Jackson said she was surprised “by how significant the benefits were,” noting the program “is on par with the gold standard in other places.” Other studies of similar programs in the Netherlands and B.C. showed that when services were taken away, between 13 and 20 per cent of patients died.

“I’m confident that if this was a service that provided support for people with cancer or people with diabetes, we would see one in every town in Alberta,” Jackson said.

“Patients are aware that if this program is closed, people will die from it. I hate to say so with such certainty because it’s a really awful reality. It’s not hyperbole to say that this is a matter of life and death.”

Elaine Hyshka, an assistant professor at the University of Alberta’s School of Public Health, said closing iOAT clinics would remove “a fundamental component of the continuum of care for opioid addiction in Alberta.”

“There has been research done on what happens when people are cut off from medications and from medical care that they’re provided. It’s not good,” said Hyshka, who was not involved in the study.

“We know it’s very likely that many people return to street drug use and so they will relapse and no longer be in recovery. The drug supply is so toxic in Alberta and across Canada right now that there is a real chance that patients will die as a result of the decision.”

© Provided by Calgary Herald 

Edmonton lawyer Avnish Nanda says if the program closes, 

the potential for fatalities is “staggering”.

Last September, 11 chronic opioid use disorder patients issued a legal challenge against the provincial government’s decision to halt iOAT services, alleging it violates their constitutional rights. The government has said it intended to transition clients to “other appropriate treatment options.”

The office of Jason Luan, associate minister of mental health and addictions, declined to comment.

A court will hear arguments Wednesday for an injunction, which would prevent all iOAT patients from being denied the treatment until the lawsuit reaches a conclusion, even if the matter is still before the courts beyond March.

Edmonton lawyer Avnish Nanda, who represents the patients, said the potential for fatalities associated with the looming program closure is “staggering.”

“If that were any other treatment regime or medical program, I think that would alarm a lot of folks,” he said.

Nanda said Jackson’s research is “consistent with what everyone has said about this program and its effectiveness.”

“The science is clear that if this program is cut, we should anticipate between 13 to 20 per cent of these iOAT patients, these Albertans, are going to die within a year because of their condition, because they are unable to access this treatment.”

Jackson said she sent the findings of her research to Luan, along with the premier and Health Minister Tyler Shandro. She hasn’t received a response.

“I hope that they have the courage to keep what we have because it’s already working,” Jackson said.

“We’re not asking for anything new. We’re asking that what we have, we keep. That’s the quickest possible policy win.”

— With files from Alanna Smith

shudes@postmedia.com

Penguins protest: Calgary students set up display in fight against education cuts

CALGARY — A snow penguin protest that generated buzz in Edmonton is now in Alberta's biggest city.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

FRONT STEPS OF THE LEGISLTURE BLDG EDMONTON

Representatives in Calgary for the Council of Alberta University Students say they have built about 250 snow penguins outside the provincial government's McDougall Centre to protest cuts to post-secondary education.

Late last month, students from Edmonton's University of Alberta and McEwan University used snow moulds to build about 800 penguins on the grounds of the legislature for the same cause.

Groundskeepers destroyed most of them the next day, as the government deemed them tripping hazards.

Marley Gillies, vice-president of the University of Calgary Students' Union, says the group has been in contact with management at McDougall Centre and hopes the penguin display will last longer.

Gillies says students in Calgary want to bring attention to a 22.5 per cent rise in tuition over three years and to cuts to Alberta's post-secondary institutions.

"This is something we are all really united on," Gillies said Monday.

The snow penguins may show up in Lethbridge, Alta., next, she said.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 8, 2021.

The Canadian Press

A Canada-U.S. flap over protecting migratory birds takes new twist

This story is part of Watching Washington, a regular dispatch from CBC News correspondents reporting on U.S. politics and developments that affect Canadians.

© Mike Segar/Reuters More than 1,000 migratory bird species are affected by a proposed U.S. regulation, including the sandpiper, seen in the foreground, and geese, seen in the background of this 2007 photo from New York City.There are competing schools of thought on when to punish someone for killing a migratory bird, and the Canadian government found itself at odds with the Trump administration.

There's the broad, existing practice: that penalties should apply to industries whose products and activities accidentally kill birds, such as oil wells, buildings and power lines.

Then there's the narrower interpretation: that punishment be limited to people who intentionally kill a bird unlawfully — by poisoning, trapping or shooting without a licence.

The Canadian government supports the existing interpretation of a century-old international treaty that protects hundreds of species that flutter across the border.

The Trump administration planned to limit penalties under a new regulation that was going to take effect this week on U.S. territory.

Now that move has been delayed by the new U.S. administration. Apparently some chirping from Ottawa played a role in that pause.

On Tuesday, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced a one-month delay to allow further public comment on the new regulation.

The rule would protect normal industrial activity from liability, and would reserve fines for those who intentionally set out to unlawfully kill birds.

It would apply to more than 1,000 bird species, according to a U.S. government's environmental study, including ducks, geese, swans, herons, cormorants, plovers, hummingbirds and sparrows.

The study said hundreds of thousands of birds were killed over a recent nine-year period in the U.S. by regular human activity, including things such as buildings, communications towers and oil pits.

Fines and civil penalties associated with accidental cases totalled about $105.8 million US over that same period from 2010 to 2018.

The U.S. federal study notes that bird populations are already in decline.

But it says illicit activity is only responsible for a small portion of those deaths. The Fish and Wildlife Service estimates, for example, that about 1,000 golden eagles are illegally shot each year in the U.S., which covers roughly 17 per cent of all golden eagle deaths.
What's the Canadian role

Enter the Canadian government.

Ottawa complained that the move violated the spirit of a 1916 cross-border agreement. It said the Trump administration move would imperil the 80 per cent of migratory birds in Canada that pass through the U.S. Canada submitted a formal complaint as part of the U.S. rule-drafting process but the last administration rejected it.

Now, the new administration has cited three reasons for hitting the pause button: environmental concerns, potential litigation, and the effect on several treaty partners.

The U.S. administration specifically mentioned the Canadian objection in announcing the one-month pause.

"The public has a strong interest in conserving the migratory bird resource and fulfilling shared objectives and obligations with a treaty partner, Canada," said Tuesday's regulatory announcement.

"These interests could be harmed by allowing this regulation to take effect on its current effective date."
What's next

A period for public comment has been reopened. People are invited to submit reactions to the proposed change.

Comments are allowed until March 1.

The new rule, which was supposed to kick in Feb. 8, has now been delayed until at least March 8. 

That's if the Biden administration doesn't cancel the rule entirely. 

The new administration has told a Federal Court that it could completely withdraw the Trump-era rule.