LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment

Friday, April 29, 2022

ALBERTA

A party divided cannot stand — especially if they can’t stand their leader

The UCP may not fall as a result of its divisions. But after the result of the party’s leadership review vote is announced on May 18, it’ll have to be either all Jason Kenney or no Jason Kenney at all!

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney addresses a carefully curated crowd of about 100 supporters at a UCP “Special General Meeting” in Red Deer April 11 (Photo: Screenshot of United Conservative Party video).

Credit: Twitter screenshot / United Conservative Party

by David J. Climenhaga

April 25, 2022

A house divided against itself cannot stand.

That goes for political parties too, I daresay.

And I’d say the United Conservative Party (UCP) led by Premier Jason Kenney is getting perilously close to the point where it’s so divided against itself, that if nothing changes, it’ll have to have to be folded up like a tent, thrown in the back of a blue pickup truck, and driven out of town!

It’s been apparent for a while there are serious divisions within the UCP – COVID deniers versus public health affirmers, Progressive Conservatives versus Wildrosers, neoliberals versus social conservatives, rural MLAs versus urban MLAs, possibly even climate change deniers versus “green conservatives,” to borrow a phrase from Preston Manning.

It looked for a spell as if the UCP – cobbled together in 2017 to restore the Progressive Conservative dynasty created by Peter Lougheed, who led the PCs to power in 1971 and created the big-tent model that kept them there until 2015 – might actually have cast out the demon of division animated in 2009 by the advent of the Wildrose Caucus in the Alberta Legislature, and its near miss with power in 2012.

Whether it was principally the superb campaign run by NDP Leader Rachel Notley or the divisions that bedevilled the Conservatives will forever be debated, but the rift in the conservative movement unquestionably contributed to the NDP victory in 2015 that ended 44-year PC Dynasty, and eventually the PC Party itself.

Kenney was anointed leader in a somewhat-tainted UCP vote in 2017. He seemed to lay to rest any doubts about the unity of the new conservative party, though, with his convincing electoral victory in 2019.

There were lots of Albertans, on the right and the left, who concluded then Kenney was the saviour of the right, who had resuscitated the indivisible Alberta Tory coalition of old.

But that ole Demon Division was not so easily cast out. Disagreement over how to respond to COVID seems to have been the catalyst, and Kenney’s own inclination to use polarization as a political tool certainly contributed.

That led to the party referendum on Kenney’s leadership now being conducted through a controversial – and itself divisive – mail-in vote, with allegations of cheating in the wind and Kenney himself calling members of his own party “lunatics” and implying that without him at the helm, bigotry would run wild in the UCP.

By the end of last week, no politically alert Albertan could miss the fact the UCP has become a public snake pit, with MLAs, party members and political staffers mud-rasslin’ on social media and in the press.

On Friday, Postmedia political columnist Rick Bell quoted eight sitting UCP MLAs publicly assailing their leader in a single column! In addition, he tossed in two Independent MLAs exiled from the UCP Caucus by Kenney for disloyalty to raise the total to 10.

Quoting Chestermere-Strathmore MLA Leela Aheer, Bell wrote: “With the NDP, people had concerns about certain policies. ‘With us, they’re concerned about corruption.’”

Airdrie-Cochrane MLA Peter Guthrie, from the party’s COVID-skeptical right, called Kenney “a federal Ottawa elitist.” Richard Gotfried, the moderate former Progressive Conservative from Calgary-Fish Creek, told Bell the premier is beholden to a small circle with “very little skin in the game in Alberta.” Same thing? Sure sounds like it.

Brian Jean, Kenney’s chief leadership rival in 2017 and victor in a recent by-election in Fort-McMurray-Lac La Biche on a platform of replacing the premier, made it clear that, this time, he won’t stand for cheating by Kenney’s supporters.

The same day, Kenney’s interim issues manager, Bryan Rogers, called the MLAs quoted in Bell’s column “just the same old crew” with a clip of clowns from an episode of The Simpsons.

The intramural mudslinging on social media got so bad and so public the Canadian Press reported on it.

“An internal feud battering Alberta’s governing party took a new twist after Premier Jason Kenney’s issues manager went on Twitter to compare Kenney’s United Conservative backbench critics to clowns,” wrote CP’s Dean Bennett in the deadly serious tones to which the national news service defaults.

Airdrie-East MLA Angela Pitt, another of the UCP MLAs quoted by Bell, took to Twitter to fire back: “This is exactly the kind of bullying and intimidation that happens every day from the Premier’s staff. MLAs provide dissenting opinions and they are ridiculed like clowns or called insane.”

Members of the UCP, which under Kenney has edged very close to the Christian right in Alberta, should be familiar with the metaphor about what happens when houses are divided against themselves.

It was famously used by Jesus of Nazareth himself in his memorably clever defence against Pharisaical accusations he’d been working on the sabbath by, among other things, casting out demons.

It was used again by the first Republican president of the United States, Abraham Lincoln, to describe the state of that Union in 1858, on the brink of the U.S. Civil War.

“I do not expect the Union to be dissolved – I do not expect the house to fall – but I do expect it will cease to be divided,” Lincoln added on June 6 that year at the Republican State Convention in Springfield. The Springfield in Illinois, that is, not the one in The Simpsons.

At the risk of channeling President Lincoln, I don’t expect the UCP to fall either, at least before the next general election.

But after the result of the party’s leadership review vote is announced on May 18, it’ll have to be either all Jason Kenney or no Jason Kenney at all!

'A political football': Concern over Alberta's premier pushing U.S.-style views on school curriculum

Protesters push province to 'Ditch the Draft'

Adam Lachacz
CTVNewsEdmonton.ca

Digital Producer
Published April 11, 2022

A professor studying social studies education in Alberta is concerned that American-style rhetoric about curriculum is creeping into what the premier is saying.

On Saturday, Premier Jason Kenney delivered a speech to the United Conservative Party as members start to receive ballots for the leadership contest.

Among making a case for why voters should choose party unity over a leadership contest that Kenney said would pave the path for an NDP victory, the premier outlined the party's achievements while in office, including on the draft curriculum.

"(The NDP) tried to put their woke left-wing dogma in the school curriculum," Kenney said. "We reversed the NDP's attack on parental authority in education."

Kenney added that the party has focused on putting "the authority of parents back in charge of our education."

"We did tread the NDP's ideological curriculum rewrite and we began carefully developing a modernized curriculum that gets back to basics in math and reading with balanced content on our history and institutions," he said.

"Instead of divisive, woke, left ideology like critical race theory, cancel culture, and age-inappropriate sex education."

'WILDLY INACCURATE'

Carla Peck, a University of Alberta professor studying social studies education, said the premier's speech accused the curriculum of doing things it actually does not include.

"His comments were wildly inaccurate," she told CTV News Edmonton.

Peck described the concept of critical race theory as a way to help understand patterns of racial discrimination, not blaming individuals for racist actions.

"(This concept has) been around for around 40 years, so this isn't something new," Peck said. "What is new is that in the last few years, in particular, Republican politicians in the U.S. have somehow glommed onto this theory and decided it's a bad thing."

"It is about racism that exists in the policies, in the institutions that are in our society," Peck added. "This isn't about saying that every single person in Alberta is racist.

"It's about helping to really look at our institutions, our laws, legal policies, or other types of policies to see are they systematically discriminating against a segment of society and if it is that based on the question of race."

'A POLITICAL FOOTBALL'

When it comes to teaching Canadian history, Peck said the concept helps explain how discrimination begins and is perpetuated, especially important when exploring how Indigenous peoples were and continue to be treated.

"I don't know how you teach about certain aspects of Canadian history without understanding issues of systemic racism," she said. So, for example the creation of residential schools, the reserve system that Indigenous peoples were forced to live in, and the practice of enslaving other people.

"These are not just the actions of one or two bad people that decided let's create a system of enslavement. This is about these actions becoming part of the system of how society worked at the time and understanding the legacy of those actions today."

Kenney's comments show Peck that the curriculum is becoming a sticking point for more Albertans.

"It's become a political football with very stark opposing sides," Peck said. "It's such a shame to see U.S.-style politics and rhetoric so overtly used in Alberta. There have been undercurrents for sure, but to see the same language used by the Republican Party in the United States, I would call it distressing."

Peck said while the provincial election is scheduled to be held by May 2023 at the latest, the curriculum is already being positioned as an election issue.

"Both parties are already putting their mark in the ground about what they believe the curriculum should be and what it should look like and what it should do," she said, adding that curriculums usually stay in place for 20 to 30 years.

"(This) will shape the way that young people in Alberta will be educated for years and years to come," Peck added. "What we want is good for the children of Alberta, and ultimately what this has turned into is very competing views of what good looks like."

'The path to office': Kenney champions unity as leadership vote begins

'Looks like something from the 1950s': Ditch the Draft protests held across Alberta

UCP government pushing ahead with new curriculum, ATA president calls for process to 'stop'

NDP upset new Grade 3 social studies less focused on Ukraine; UCP says they're making it political

Alberta postpones new math, English curriculum for grades 4-6 to September 2023

Opinion: Sudden exit of AHS boss does not bode well for health of our system

Author of the article: Ralph Coombs

EDMONON JOURNAL / OPINION
Publishing date: Apr 09, 2022 •

Dr. Verna Yiu, CEO and president of Alberta Health Services, speaks during a COVID-19 update on Oct. 12, 2021. PHOTO BY IAN KUCERAK /Postmedia file

The dismissal of Dr. Verna Yiu from her post as CEO of Alberta Health Services raises serious questions. By all accounts, she served as a consistent and steady influence on the Alberta health-care system throughout her time in the position.

Why the firing? Columnist Don Braid suggests that it may be preparing the way for another round of reforms. Given the spotty record of previous Alberta “reforms,” one might assume Yiu’s discomfort.

I have come to believe that a government’s intent for health-care delivery is as important as the manner in which the system is configured. Most Canadians view health care as a public good, a moral enterprise, a right of citizenship that should be based on a one-payer system, publicly governed and portable across provincial boundaries.

Health-care managers commonly show a distrust of “contracted-out services” as such is not seen to add sufficiently to the overall strength of the team. Unquestionably, the patient is safest and the care more successful when everyone on staff sees themselves as a caregiver with a personal duty owed to the one in the bed.

There are others who believe health care could be viewed as just another commercial commodity, to be bought and sold, controlled largely by market forces and staffed by any means that brings the best price. But health care is complex and very, very personal and does not lend itself easily to free enterprise principles. Canadians have shown they want a system that will provide timely, contemporary and accessible care to those who are sick or injured.

Also wanted is a robust public health system, with actions and interventions to guard the overall health of communities. Equity is seen as fundamental and the system must be based on need, not income. Two-tier systems have been rejected as un-Canadian and wasteful of short resources.

Today, we find access to medical services widely impaired. This did not happen overnight. Shrinkage of capacity began in the early 1990s when the Klein government declared the system unaffordable and uncontrollable. Reform was demanded. Despite evidence that Alberta spent less of its GDP on health care than any other province, health funding took a big hit. Local governing boards were scrapped in favour of centralization.

In Calgary, the Calgary General Hospital was torn down, the Holy Cross Hospital was sold and the Salvation Army Grace Hospital closed. Hospital capacity shrank by half. Calgary’s population went on to double without corresponding increases in capacity. Waitlists grew. Herald headlines displayed “Welcome to Hospital Hell: a 14-hour wait in an emergency ward;“ and “Hospital patients dying for help: staff claim ER waits sometimes fatal;” “Alberta’s health care army in no shape for a surge: capacity in the event of an epidemic, major disaster or even a multiple-vehicle crash was doubtful.” Doubts rose. Was it wise to have a single authority control the funding, directly delivering the services, setting the standards, evaluating its own work and reporting principally to itself? Did not this run the risk of overly politicizing health care?

Alberta’s deficit in health-care capacity adversely affects all Albertans. Are we alone? Not so states The Commonwealth Fund report, Mirror, Mirror 2021: Reflecting Poorly, which ranks health-care systems in 11 peer countries, including Canada and the United States. Canada was awarded the 10th position just ahead of the United States in last position. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development lists a larger sample of like countries and ranks Canada no better.

So, Yiu is to be fired at a time when very real issues indicate that what is needed is a dramatic increase in both physical and caregiver capacity in existing facilities if there is to be a realistic hope in dealing with the enormous waiting list of deferred surgical and diagnostic procedures.

And, COVID-19 is not done with us yet. Alberta has aging facilities that have needed substantial upgrades for decades, if not total renewal. Yet, what the UCP appears to be offering is more cuts to AHS and the funding of more privatization. Something is wrong with this picture.

Ralph Coombs was CEO and president of the Foothills Provincial General Hospital from 1973 to 1990. He is past president of the Alberta Hospital Association and the Association of Canadian Teaching Hospitals. He served as chairman of the board of directors of the Alberta Catholic Health Corp.

Holocaust denier Chris Sky is listed as a featured speaker at a demonstration against COVID-19 mandates taking place this weekend in Ottawa.

Chris Saccoccia, better known as Chris Sky, has a long history of Holocaust denial, and has made remarks that are racist, homophobic and Islamophobic.

The event known as Rolling Thunder is being organized in partnership between Veterans for Freedom, Freedom Fighters Canada, and Neil Sheard of the Live From the Shed YouTube channel.

Sheard, a 12-year veteran of the Canadian Forces, tried to put some distance between his group and Skyon Wednesday. But Sky is still listed as a featured speaker on the Rolling Thunder website.

Helping queer Ukrainians from afar

LGBTIQ organizations both within and outside of Ukraine are working to get queer Ukrainians out of the country and out of harms way.

A protest against Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Credit: Dovile Ramoskaite / unsplash

by Stephen Wentzell

RABBLE.CA

April 26, 2022

Ruslana Hnatchenko considers herself lucky. She left Ukraine weeks before the beginning of Putin’s invasion to study in the United Kingdom.

Hnatchenko’s family remains in Ukraine, where her parents are responsible for looking after her grandmother.

Her grandmother wasn’t in great shape before the invasion. She was already in hospital when Russian troops began their attack. Staff at the hospital were responsible for transporting all patients to the basement of the facility in the event of an air raid.

Hnatchenko’s parents saw what kind of toll the constant changes took on her grandmother and decided to bring her home. Two days later, Hnatchenko says, the hospital was shelled.

“It was pure luck that we managed to get her out of there two days before,” she said, adding that nobody was hurt in that particular shelling, and patients were evacuated from the rubble to safety.

Despite being away from her family and friends, Hnatchenko has continued in her role as fundraising manager for the Sphere Women’s Association NGO, the main LGBTQ organization in the east of Ukraine. She also pointed out that Sphere is a historic group, as “one of the first lesbian feminist organizations” in the country.

In an interview with rabble.ca, Hnatchenko talked about how her work at Sphere has adapted over the past two months, with core projects including a community center in Kharkiv and an annual Women’s Solidarity Week.

When the invasion began in late February, Hnatchenko explained that Sphere organizers kept connected through daily social media posts. Within a week, they began working on a mental health support group, in addition to psychological consultations for community members in Kharkiv.

“We’re working on reforming our project to respond to the current calls of the invasion, as well as starting a financial aid program to support the community,” Hnatchenko said, explaining the NGO’s areas of responsibility “got a little bit blurred” when the war began.

“Activism and NGO work is usually pretty hard,” she said, adding, “especially in times of crisis and war.”

On top of her work with Sphere, Hnatchenko is continuing her studies and navigating the weight of the “emotions involved with having a family there and being worried for them.”

While the area Hnatchenko’s family resides in has so far been free of violence, she acknowledged that “the enemy could get closer” as Russian troops make their way into Eastern Ukraine.

While her family has enough in terms of supplies and food for the meantime, Hnatchenko’s told her three weeks ago that one of two supermarkets in the community closed its doors, putting further pressure on the only grocery store in town.

“It’s a privilege that not everyone has,” Hnatchenko explained. “Even in that town, there are volunteers who are distributing some humanitarian aid and food to others.”
Munich Kyiv Queer helping LGBTIQ people flee Ukraine, seek refuge in Germany

Conrad Breyer is an organizer with Munich Kyiv Queer, an advocacy organization that began in 2012 to help bridge the queer communities of twin cities Munich and Kyiv.

That year marked the first pride march in Kyiv, a march that Breyer noted became violent after police failed to protect participants. In response, Munich Pride decided to invite queer Ukrainians to share the march with their neighbors.

That gesture of good faith soon snowballed into what’s become known as Munich Kyiv Queer.

In an interview with rabble.ca, Breyer called the solidarity shown to LGBTIQ Ukrainians “really beautiful.”

“It was all about political actions, workshops, youth exchanges, and a lot of cultural projects like exhibitions, discussions, and films to improve the human rights situation of LGBTIQ [people] in Ukraine,” Breyer said.

With the war in Ukraine into its second month, Munich Kyiv Queer has shifted “to become a refugee organization.” Organizers have moved to helping queer Ukrainians flee the country to safer locations in the European Union, with a focus on Munich in particular.

Part of their job is to help refugees find accommodations in Munich, navigate the German bureaucratic processes involved in seeking asylum, and teach newcomers the German language.

“I must say, after two years of the pandemic, we’ve found a new energy in this and we’re a highly motivated team,” Breyer said. “[We’re] even growing right now because all of the community wants to help, and that’s a phenomenon not only in Munich, but all over the world.”

While Breyer remains hopeful the war will end, he called Putin’s actions “a nightmare” that has shaken Ukrainians to their core.

Holding back tears, Breyer explained that his husband is from Kyiv and not all of his relatives have been able to escape, “something which is really hard to digest.”

Breyer noted there are many LGBTQ individuals staying in Kyiv to help their communities. Some are even fighting in the army. Others, he remarked, are desperate. Many gay men and trans people have been forced to remain in Ukraine because their passports identify them as men.

Breyer and his husband have heard stories from friends in Odessa, whose walls were shaking from the impact of bombs. Their friends were desperate to leave Ukraine, but “there was no food or fuel.”

Instead, Breyer said his friends were forced to take a bus to flee, and that was after the bus driver charged them four times the price of a ticket.

Breyer has kept himself busy helping Ukrainians with medical care, accomodations, money, and food.

“There are many desperate people who are really in shock, calling us saying ‘I want to leave. Help me,’” he said. “We can send them money and try to comfort them and bring them to shelters where they can hide, but they can’t leave the country right now.”

The ongoing saga of the privatization the Canadian Wheat Board

The certification of this class action will allow the courts to hear the case of potentially 70,000 Canadian farmers. These are farmers who sold grain through the Canadian Wheat Board and did not receive full payment for that sale.

These activist farmers are still standing, urging us to listen to the backstory and why this class action suit could potentially impact each of us.

by Lois Ross

RABBLE.CA

April 26, 2022

I think it is fair to say that family farmers are among one of the most hopeful, resilient, and persevering occupations.

I am not romanticizing the role of the farmer by any stretch — just stating what I have observed over the last several decades. Stamina!

One example is the longstanding legal battles waged by farmers over the dismantling of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB).

Earlier this month, the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench, certified a Class Action lawsuit brought by Manitoba farmer Andrew Dennis against the Government of Canada and G3 Canada Ltd. The lawsuit alleges financial irregularities occurred during the privatization of the Canadian Wheat Board.

“We will, at long last, have an opportunity to ask the Court to rule on whether the Government of Canada or Minister Ritz unlawfully manipulated CWB accounts, depriving farmers of money rightfully owing to them,” stated Andrew Dennis, in an April 9th media release announcing the successful certification of the class action.

The certification of this class action lawsuit has been a long time coming — close to 10 years. It is only the first step in the actual lawsuit. Certification means that Dennis, on behalf of these farmers which forms a legally recognized class, has the right to pursue this lawsuit. The lawsuit itself can now proceed.

Throughout the past decade there have been several dizzying legal twists and turns. There have also been several appeals, delays, denials and various forms of stonewalling, but these activist farmers are still standing, urging us to listen to the backstory and why this class action suit could potentially impact each of us.

Meanwhile, neither the former federal Conservative government, or the current federal Liberal government, have wanted to fess-up to what most of us watching this show already know or, at the very least, suspect.

The saga of the dismantling of the CWB is covered in a rabble.ca column which I wrote in 2019. Read it here for a detailed picture of the importance of the CWB, the legal issues, and how the loss of the CWB is impacting farm incomes and family farms.

There is also a timeline on the CWB Class Action where you can read the Statement of Claim and the April 5 certification of the class action.

Dennis is the Manitoba farmer who is the face of this lawsuit. He is accompanied by the Friends of the Canadian Wheat Board (FCWB) and potentially tens of thousands of grain producers. This suit is the first step in the one remaining lawsuit among the several that were pursued in various jurisdictions across Canada by farmers challenging the privatization of the CWB. Along the way there have been wins and losses.

The certification of this class action will allow the courts to hear the case of potentially 70,000 Canadian farmers. These are farmers who sold grain through the CWB between August 1, 2010 and July 31, 2012 and did not receive full payment for that sale.

The dismantling of the CWB shows just how easily governments intent on pursuing their own agendas, often in the name of corporate concentration and privatization, bend the rules. They exercise authority through very questionable methods despite being holders of a public office and public trust, all the while insisting on the legitimacy of their actions.

It takes hope, and yes stamina, to avoid throwing up your hands in frustration and walk away.

The FCWB is a coalition of farmers and other Canadians who support a farmer-controlled CWB. In its April 9th media release about the court granting certification, it explained the crux of the lawsuit:

“The lawsuit alleges former Minister of Agriculture Gerry Ritz committed misfeasance in public office by unlawfully sheltering $145,000,000 of farmer’s money into an account that could be transferred to the Wheat Board’s purchasers in connection with the Wheat Board’s 2012 privatization. The Manitoba Court of Appeal accepted in a 2020 ruling that if this money had not been sheltered by the Government, it would have been paid to farmers. The claim also alleges that the CWB is liable to farmers by not paying them the full amount required under their contracts.”
-FCWB

Essentially the lawsuit calls for farmers to receive $145 million in moneys transferred from the CWB pooling accounts into a CWB contingency fund, along with $5.9 million used in the CWB transition to privatization. The lawsuit also calls for $10 million in punitive damages plus interest — an amount estimated, after 10 years, to be close to $190 million today.

In the end, the suit of $145 million might average out to an estimated $2,000 for each farmer. Exact amounts are dependent on the volume of grain each farmer delivered to the board during the 2011-2012 timeframe.

Meanwhile, just as importantly, and perhaps more-so many might argue, are the actions taken by then Minister of Agriculture Gerry Ritz. This is where this class action lawsuit could potentially affect each one of us and how we are governed.

The lawsuit alleges that the Minister of Agriculture, who through the use of Orders in Council, transferred farm payments into a general contingency fund, instead of paying out farmer contracts. In his ruling certifying the class action, the Justice’s clarity on the common issues startles. Read the decision here and skip to page 20 to read about the issues related to “misfeasance of public office” by the then Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

By the way, misfeasance is defined, more specifically, as the misuse of power; misbehaviour in office; the wrongful and injurious exercise of lawful authority.

Basically, the issue at the core of the class action lawsuit is whether then Minister of Agriculture withheld CWB contract payment to farmers using Orders in Council that overrode legislation passed by Parliament. Did the Minister of Agriculture, Gerry Ritz, have the authority to do so, and did he do so knowingly, and willfully?

As Stewart Wells, Saskatchewan farmer and chair of the FCWB notes in a recent interview for this column:

“There are very important legal questions to be solved, related to the nature of authoritarian governments. This case will turn on whether or not the Orders in Council that Gerry Ritz, then Minister of Agriculture and the rest of the Harper cabinet passed in October of 2011 were legal. These Orders in Council directed the Canadian Wheat Board to put every nickel they could find into the contingency fund –- a fund to be used for whatever they wanted it to be used for later on. If a minister of the government can override legislation passed in Parliament with just a Cabinet Order then you are in a real authoritarian system and laws and legislation are meaningless at that point — that is what we believe was done in October of 2011.”
-Wells, Chair FCWB

While this class action lawsuit is now certified and will be heard in court, there are still miles to go before final outcomes are known.

Meanwhile, Stewart Wells and the coalition of members belonging to the FCWB, understand their role and the importance of persistence on fundamental issues such as this one. Wells explains:

“Do we live in a democracy or some sort of authoritarian dictatorship, and does anybody have the temerity and perseverance to bring this kind of case forward and get it in front of the courts? Because if nobody had challenged this — and it would have been easy for all of the farmers just to walk away and say ‘well they did it and that is the end of it’ — But at some point you do not have a functioning democracy if people are not willing to stand up to have these matters adjudicated in a court.”
-Wells

By certifying this class action, Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Martin has directed that the questions and actions taken in October of 2011 surrounding the CWB finances must be answered and accounted for.

Wells emphasizes: “We have maintained for over a decade that the Government of Canada and CWB took money that belonged to farmers and sold it as part of the asset base taken over by the Crown and then provided to G3 Canada Ltd. the nominal legal successor to the CWB, and owned by the multinational Bunge and the Government of Saudi Arabia.”

For updates on the lawsuit, follow the Canadian Wheat Board Alliance.

On Workers Day of Mourning, lack of enforcement remains a top issue

While the number of Canadians who die in the workplace every year remains steady, some provinces have taken steps back when it comes to worker safety.

A photo of a worker in a yellow hard hat. On the National Workers Day of Mourning, Canadians who died on the job are remembered.

Credit: Jon Tyson / Unsplash

by Nick Seebruch

April 28, 2022

Every year on April 28, those who were injured or lost their lives in the work place are remembered as a part of the National Workers Day of Mourning.

Troy Winters, senior health and safety officer at the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) national office says that lack of enforcement of existing laws is one of the ongoing causes of workplace injury.

In an emailed statement to rabble.ca, he said:

“The greatest threat to workers’ health and safety simply remains the lack of enforcement of the laws we already have, and the lack of recognition of how much work can negatively impact the health and safety of workers. Hundreds of workplace related deaths and thousands of injures go unrecognized every year. While it has been an ongoing issue, COVID has really highlighted government inaction around enforcing laws that require employers to take all reasonable precautions to keep their workers safe. Additionally, the erosion of traditional employment relationships and the increase in casual and temporary work (through the gig or platform economy) means workers are not connected to their ‘employers’ who are then able to skirt all health and safety responsibilities.”

According to CUPE, nearly 1,000 Canadian workers die on the job every year. They note that this does not include those who’s claims were rejected by compensation boards.

According to the Association of Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (AWCBC) which tracks on-the-job fatalities and lost time due to work place injuries, 2020 – the year for which they have the most recent data – saw 921 Canadians die at work. And that’s just four fewer than the previous year which saw 925 deaths.
Safety regulations weakened in 2021

In a statement on the Workers Day of Mourning, the United Steel Workers (USW) highlighted how some provinces have made workplaces conditions less safe for some.

A statement from the United Steel Workers reads:

“A prime example are the changes enacted through Bill 59 in Quebec, which have weakened safeguards, diminished prevention initiatives and cut compensation for sick and injured workers. Our union fought back against these changes every step of the way … Similarly, the Alberta government recently stripped away workers’ safety rights through the Ensuring Safety and Cutting Red Tape Act. We must continue our work to strengthen health and safety provisions through collective bargaining to ensure workers are protected from governments who put employers ahead of workers.”

CUPE states that they too are seeing similar trends when it comes to regulations meant to keep their members safe.

“Unfortunately, for the past two years, health and safety committees have been under attack. CUPE members are reporting several reoccurring problems, from meetings being perpetually cancelled, to employers appointing union representatives and purposefully scuttling committee efforts,” reads a statement on CUPE’s national website.
Respiratory disease and cancers remain top hazard

The AWCBC continues to list respiratory diseases and cancers contracted from the workplace as the top cause of worker fatalities.

Of the 921 fatalities in 2020, 338 of them were caused by malignant neoplasms and tumours (cancers, carcinomas, sarcomas).

The top cause of a workplace related fatality was exposure to nonmetallic minerals excluding fuels. There were 360 Canadians who died in 2020 due to exposure to these materials in their workplace. The most common cause of death amongst Canadians in the workplace for years has been exposure to asbestos, a nonmetallic silicate mineral that saw widespread use in the 20th century in materials such as housing insulation and brake pads.

While most uses of asbestos are now banned, it continues to be a top workplace killer due to its carcinogenic properties which sometimes can take up to 50 years to develop from time of exposure.
Know your rights as a worker

As a part of their effort to ensure that no Canadian worker dies needlessly on the job, CUPE is reminding all workers on the Workers Day of Mourning of their rights which include:The right to refuse work you believe is unsafe until an investigation can be carried out;
The right to participate in deciding what is safe in the workplace and to report hazards;
The right to information on any hazard in the workplace that may cause harm, and how to prevent that harm;
The right to be free from reprisal for carrying out any of the other rights or any other requirement of health and safety law.

CANADA

Anti-scab legislation is a win for workers

Federal anti-scab legislation will add a strong layer for protection for workers, but back-to-work measures still remain a threat.

by Stephen Wentzell

RABBLE.CA

April 29, 2022

A photo of the Chicago International Charter Schools teachers strike of 2019.

Credit: Charles Edward Miller / WikiMedia Commons

Workers rights activists and union leaders across Canada are celebrating a key component of the Liberal-NDP confidence-and-supply agreement announced late last month: anti-scab legislation that is set to be introduced by the end of 2023.

The “anti-scab” legislation would prevent companies and corporations from hiring temporary workers (aka scabs) while regular employees are locked out or on strike.

While the legislation marks a win for workers, it also comes too little too late for many.

In a March 22 statement, Canadian Labour Congress President Bea Bruske said the country’s unions “look forward to working with the Government and New Democrats on executing this progressive policy agenda.”

“Canada’s unions have long fought for parties to work together and move forward on a progressive policy agenda,” Bruske said. “With today’s agreement, Parliament can now move forward on a recovery that puts workers and their families at its heart.”

The announcement comes nearly one year after Canada’s largest union, Unifor, released a 24-page report titled Fairness on the Line: The case for anti-scab legislation in Canada.

“The scab might be the single most polarizing figure in the world of labour relations,” the report begins, before going on to argue. “Strong and fair anti-scab legislation—at both the federal and provincial level—will help lead to shorter labour disputes, safer workplaces, and less acrimonious and conflict-ridden picket lines.”

Unifor’s report also noted that anti-scab legislation only existed in Q.C. and N.B. A federal ban on scab workers would give union members further protections when it comes to contract disputes.

A recent example of a large-scale scab effort took place between October and December 2021, when cereal giant Kellogg’s was the subject of a labor strike affecting nearly 1,400 employees across the United States.

After a tentative agreement fell through in early December, Kellogg’s announced they would replace all striking employees with new scab workers—a move that caused widespread backlash and led to boycotting of the corporation’s products. Kellogg’s quickly reversed course, with a new agreement signed on Dec. 16, ending the strike after 77 days.

Anti-scab legislation would also have profound impacts across the journalism industry in Canada, where many reporters work in non-unionized positions.

Just look at The Chronicle Herald, N.S.’s daily newspaper printed since 1874. On January 23, 2016, 61 members of the Halifax Typographical Union were locked out of the popular paper after a breakdown in negotiations between the Union and the Herald’s executives.

The lock-out lasted 19 months, but the paper never missed an edition thanks to scab writers who held the ship afloat long enough for an agreement to be reached. That agreement would see 26 union staff dismissed and widespread wage cuts for employees returning to work after more than 500 days without a paycheck.
Back-to-work legislation must end: Union leader

For Jan Simpson, the National President of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW), the move is a great first step, one that must be followed by governments ending the use of back-to-work legislation.

“The bargaining power of workers ultimately comes down to our ability to withdraw our labour,” Simpson noted in a statement to rabble.ca.

Simpson pointed out that union strikes are difficult positions for workers to put themselves in, forcing them to miss out on both pay and benefits.

“Using replacement workers, or scabs, undermines the bargaining power of locked out or striking workers because employers don’t have the same incentive to negotiate in good faith,” she said. “The ability to strike without scab replacements is vital to free, fair, good faith collective bargaining.”

Simpson added that while the legislation gives “a much-needed boost to workers’ power,” it also must be enacted quickly. She hopes that provincial governments will follow the federal government’s lead in evening “the playing fields between workers and employers during labour disputes.”
Abandon back-to-work legislation

The next step, Simpson says, is ending the use of back-to-work legislation, an option that allows governments to force workers back on the job, further jeopardizing their bargaining power.

For Elmwood—Transcona MP Daniel Blaikie, ensuring anti-scab legislation as part of the Liberal-NDP agreement represents “bringing the political will to get this across the finish line.”

The NDP finance critic touted the fact that the legislation will cover both walkouts and strikes, giving workers an opportunity to meet at the bargaining table without fear of being replaced on the job.

“Workers should be able to work on terms that they think are fair, and they should be able to withhold their labour when they don’t feel that the employer is dealing with them in good faith in contract negotiations,” Blaikie said. “I think workers should be empowered to make that call themselves and not have their rights undermined.”

While the timeline in the agreement would see legislation tabled by the end of next year, Blaikie says the NDP is “happy to move sooner.”

“[Workers] shouldn’t have to wait for an employer to lock them out in order to have their right to bargain collectively defended by the government and Canadian law,” he added.

The confidence-and-supply deal between the Liberals and the NDP, which runs until 2025, also includes action on 10 paid sick days, pharmacare and a national dental care program.

Republicans Admit Biden Can Cancel Student Debt

A new bill tries to claw back authority given to the executive branch on debt cancellation.

BY DAVID DAYEN
APRIL 28, 2022

ALEJANDRO ALVAREZ/SIPA USA VIA AP IMAGES

People march against student debt around the U.S. Department of Education in Washington on April 4, 2022. Members of the Debt Collective, which describes itself as a borrowers’ union, called for President Biden to abolish all student loan debt by executive order.

Five Senate Republicans confirmed that President Biden has the authority to suspend, defer, or cancel student debt, when they filed a bill on Wednesday to block Biden from carrying that out.

The bill, known as the Stop Reckless Student Loan Actions Act of 2022, would make direct changes to one of the statutes Biden can use for the purposes of debt cancellation or deferral. It also states that the executive branch may not “suspend or defer” student loan payments for longer than 90 days or for individuals who make more than 400 percent of the poverty line. The executive branch, under the bill, also may not “cancel the outstanding balances,” whether as part of a declared emergency or “through any type of executive or regulatory action.”

There would be no need for such a bill if there was not already authority granted by Congress to the executive branch to suspend, defer, or cancel student loan payments. The bill represents an effort to claw that authority back, or at the very least clarify the statute to remove all doubt.

Prior to this point, the question of whether President Biden had the authority to cancel student debt was contested, with Republicans generally disagreeing that Congress granted that ability to the executive. A rushed legal analysis published by a political appointee in Donald Trump’s Education Department a week before the end of his presidency suggested that debt cancellation was not legal, citing decisions written almost entirely by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. The Biden administration did their own legal analysis on the viability of debt cancellation last year, but the entirety of that memo has not been released to the public.

But the Senate Republican bill, authored by Rep. John Thune (R-SD), a member of the GOP leadership, settles the question of whether current law provides a path to cancel the debt. Clearly Senate Republicans are worried enough that it does to issue their own legislation repealing that authority.

The conservatives’ fear was heightened by a recent private discussion Biden held with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, where, according to published reports, the president said he was looking at options to cancel some undisclosed portion of student debt for the 43 million borrowers with federal student loans. There are indications that the relief would be means-tested in some fashion, but nothing has been announced.

The reports have caused conservative politicians, candidates, writers, and influencers to lose their minds, in ways that suggested real concern that Democrats actually might establish a policy that helps people. The GOP senators issued their bill the day after the reports circulated.

In addition to settling the legal question, the bill also provides a window into how the Biden administration might cancel student debt and what authorities it might use, according to Luke Herrine, a Ph.D. candidate in law at Yale University who wrote some of the early scholarship about student debt cancellation.

The bill begins by finding that the executive branch has “abused” authority provided under the HEROES Act of 2003, an amendment to the Higher Education Act intended to help military service members, to pause student loan payments for more than two years. This is actually a criticism primarily of the Trump administration, which used the HEROES Act to justify its enactment of a payment moratorium.

The HEROES Act contains language giving the secretary of education the ability to “waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision” involving federal student loans to ensure that those borrowers adversely affected by a declared national emergency “are not placed in a worse position financially.” That’s what Trump employed to stop student loan payments amid the COVID-19 emergency. This has been extended several times, and the most recent extension lasts until August 31.

But the Higher Education Act itself also includes something called “compromise and settlement” authority, which gives the secretary the power to release debt claims or settle for less than the full amount.

There are indications that the Biden administration will opt to use HEROES Act authority for debt cancellation, finding it a cleaner and more legally bulletproof line of reasoning. Clearly, Senate Republicans received that intel, as they focus much of their bill on the HEROES Act.

The bill amends the HEROES Act to limit any executive branch suspension of student debt payments to 90 days in the case of a declared emergency. It also limits that suspension or deferral to individuals with earnings lower than 400 percent of the federal poverty line. Finally, it states that any suspension or deferral would be deemed a major rule subject to the Congressional Review Act, a law that allows Congress to nullify executive branch rules by a majority vote (albeit subject to veto by the president). And it states that any COVID-related suspension of student loan payments “shall terminate” upon enactment of the bill.

There are also limitations on the cancellation of student debt in the bill, but it specifically targets a cancellation invoked “due to the COVID-19 national emergency or any other national emergency.” This indicates that the Senate Republicans think that the White House will try to leverage the COVID emergency for debt cancellation, the continuation of the moratorium, or both.

The Republicans know that a Democratic-majority Congress won’t pass their bill. Nonetheless, the bill provides an oppositional talking point for the party if Biden does cancel student debt. Therefore, it’s guessing at how that debt relief will be structured. However, the Republicans cover their bases by also reserving the right to nullify cancellation “through any type of executive or regulatory action,” which would cover the compromise and settlement authority in the Higher Education Act.

Using the HEROES Act works much better for the existing suspension than for cancellation, Herrine noted. But the administration could also opt to use compromise and settlement authority, justifying its decision by citing the national emergency. Accordingly, Senate Republicans attack both options in their bill.

Debt cancellation has been a significant conversation in progressive circles since well before Biden’s presidency. In the course of his campaign, Biden stated his support for canceling at least $10,000 per student borrower, but has usually added that it should be done through an act of Congress. However, Biden’s discussions with the Congressional Hispanic Caucus moved in the direction of using executive action. It’s likely that something will be done before the payment pause expires at the end of August.

Even with this acknowledgment that presidents can cancel student debt, Republicans would be likely to sue anyway. However, a recent Virginia Law Review article makes the case that “it is likely that no party would have standing to challenge the executive action.”