Calling Ontario education strike illegal would undermine bargaining rights: Union

TORONTO — Ontario's labour relations board would send a message that labour laws and collective bargaining rights no longer exist if it complies with a government request to declare a strike by provincial education workers illegal, a union lawyer argued Saturday.



Speaking at a hearing that will determine the legality of the walkout by 55,000 members of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Steven Barrett urged the board's chair not to side with the Ontario government after it passed legislation that banned strikes and imposed a four-year contract on union members.

Thousands of workers, including education assistants, custodians and librarians, walked off the job on Friday in protest, and CUPE has indicated the strike could go on indefinitely.

Barrett, who called the legislation "Orwellian," argued the contract should be considered "imposed" because it was not produced through collective bargaining negotiations.

"Siding with the government here ... it actually sends a message that there's no more labour law, there's no more collective bargaining," Barrett told the hearing, which ran late into Saturday evening.

"Labour peace, which is imposed this way, isn't the labour peace the labour board should associate itself with."

The Progressive Conservative government included the notwithstanding clause in its education-worker legislation, saying it intends to use it to guard against constitutional challenges.

Board Chair Brian O'Byrne told Barrett the province had the right to invoke the notwithstanding clause under the constitution, even though it may have been "politically risky" to do so.

"Under our laws, governments can do this kind of thing legally. Even though some of us may find it distasteful or worse than that, they still have the right to do it," said O'Byrne.

"By law, when we have a collective agreement, then you're not supposed to strike. And the reality is there's a collective agreement, whether you like it or not," he said.

Barrett, citing case law, argued Ontario used the clause to address labour issues in an unprecedented and inappropriate way.

"The last ability to contest this assault is here and if you put an end to it, there's nothing left," he said. "If these protests are suppressed by an order that comes from you ... what is left for these workers to do? Just find another job?"

Saturday's hearing began at 9 a.m. and continued for more than 16 hours, with discussions between government lawyer Ferina Murji and CUPE's legal team growing heated at times. Murji accused union lawyers of acting with "complete disregard for respect and decorum."

Earlier in the day, Murji argued the labour board risks undermining the province's own labour laws if it fails to declare the walkout illegal.

"Ensuring that an unlawful strike is not allowed to continue is a very important labour relations purpose, and if you did not exercise your discretion to do so, it would significantly undermine the very clear prohibition on strike activity that is a key feature of the Labour Relations Act," she said.

Murji said such a walkout is illegal because the Labour Relations Act prohibits work stoppages while contracts are in operation. She also argued that CUPE leadership knowingly advised education workers to engage in an illegal strike.

She played video of CUPE-Ontario President Fred Hahn saying the union would provide the same benefits to workers that it does in any strike.

Murji also shared video of Laura Walton, president of CUPE Ontario's School Board Council of Unions, comparing the walkout to one that was planned in 2019.

CUPE contends the labour action is a political protest rather than a strike. The hearing has repeatedly heard deliberations over the definition of a strike.

It argued in its board filings that the goal of its members' action is "to express opposition through political protest to the (province's) decision to trample upon employees' constitutionally protected right to collectively bargain and right to strike."

"Irrespective of what label anyone puts on the activity, Mr. Chair, it is a work stoppage. And a work stoppage, with any other name, still amounts to a work stoppage and therefore a strike, full stop," Murji told the hearing.

The job action closed numerous schools, and the union has said the protest could continue indefinitely.

Barrett told O'Byrne that should he deem the strike legal, the job action could continue until the government repeals its new legislation or until the union and government negotiate its end.

"But that isn't your concern," Barrett told the chair. "The job of the labour board is to oversee the collective bargaining system, and in doing so give effect to Charter values and Charter rights. There are many ways in which the government could have avoided students not being in school ... they certainly didn't have to provoke the reason that we're here now, with respect to enacting this unprecedented, horrendous legislation."

CUPE had originally requested that both Education Minister Stephen Lecce and Andrew Davis, the assistant deputy minister, be called to testify before the board.

O'Byrne ruled that Lecce is exempt from testifying due to parliamentary privilege, but said Davis could be called to testify.

But after hours of delays, a lawyer for CUPE said he would not call upon Davis to provide evidence because documents the union wished to submit could not be made available.

The government's new law has set fines for violating the ban on strikes of up to $4,000 per employee per day – which could amount to $220 million for all 55,000 workers – and up to $500,000 per day for the union.

CUPE has said it will fight the fines, but will also pay them if it has to.

The British Columbia Teachers' Federation's representative assembly voted to send CUPE Ontario $1 million to help pay the fines, the union said in a post on its Twitter account. The donation comes a day after Unifor pledged to send $100,000 as a show of support for CUPE.

The hearing will resume at 7 a.m. on Sunday, which O'Byrne said he hopes will be its final day.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 5, 2022.

Nicole Thompson and Tyler Griffin, The Canadian Press

Trudeau weighing ‘all options’ on notwithstanding clause use amid CUPE Ontario strike

Aaron D'Andrea - Yesterday 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says his government is weighing “all different options” when asked Friday whether Ottawa will seek to amend the use of the controversial notwithstanding clause.


Prime Minster Justin Trudeau announces the GST credits being offered to families on Nov. 4 at the Dennis Timbrell Community Centre in North York, Ont.

© Tijana Martin/The Canadian Press

Trudeau’s comments come as 55,000 Ontario education workers took to the picket lines on Friday in defiance of the provincial government, which passed a law Thursday pre-emptively using the notwithstanding clause to make job action “illegal.”

Read more:

Can anyone block Ontario legislation designed to impose a contract on education workers?

“This is something all Canadians who value the freedoms, the rights, the opportunities that Canada gives them and gives us all, should be standing up to be very concerned about,” Trudeau told reporters during a news conference in North York, Ont.

“And yes, this is the federal government that stands up for people’s rights and freedoms and we are absolutely looking at all different options.”

Ontario education workers defy provincial legislation and strike

Duration 2:32  View on Watch

Trudeau had been asked by a reporter whether he would consider potential legislative amendments to change when the controversial notwithstanding clause can be used.

The law involving the notwithstanding clause came after Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government could not reach an agreement with the Canadian Union of Public Employees. The union has been seeking wage increases for the education workers, and indicated it would strike on Friday if an agreement was not met.

Video: CUPE members protest outside Ontario legislature

In response, Premier Doug Ford’s government pre-emptively passed a law that banned a strike, and set fines for violating the ban of up to $4,000 per employee per day -- which could amount to $220 million for all 55,000 workers -- and up to $500,000 per day for the union.

CUPE has said it will fight the fines, and that its job actions will continue indefinitely.

Ontario parents wonder what’s next as education workers remain on strike

The Progressive Conservative government included the notwithstanding clause in its legislation, saying it intends to use it to guard against constitutional challenges to its strike ban. Ontario Education Minister Stephen Lecce justified its use by citing the need to keep students in school following a disruptive two-and-a-half years of learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic and its restrictions.

Read more:

What is the notwithstanding clause? An explainer on the rarely used provision

The notwithstanding clause, or Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, gives provincial legislatures or Parliament the ability, through the passage of a law, to override certain portions of the Charter for a five-year term. Effectively, it allows governments to pass pieces of legislation notwithstanding their potential violations of Charter rights.

“Proactive use of the notwithstanding clause is actually an attack on people’s fundament rights, and in this case, is an attack on one of the most basic rights available, that of collective bargaining,” Trudeau said in his comments on Friday, adding that "all options" were on the table.

“There are a lot of people, parents like me who have kids in Ontario schools, that are concerned about the job actions, the strikes, but I can tell you all parents, all Canadians, should be extremely worried about suspension of our most fundamental rights and freedoms.”

Video: CUPE shouts ‘shame’ as Ontario government votes to impose contract on education workers

Trudeau had asked Ford on Wednesday not to use the notwithstanding clause, a measure the Ontario premier has used previously.

Ford invoked the notwithstanding clause in June 2021-- for the first time in the province’s history -- to restore parts of the Election Finances Act that had previously been declared unconstitutional. Ontario argued the move was necessary to protect elections from outside influence, while critics accused the government of trying to silence criticism.

Ford had also previously threatened to use the clause in 2018, when his government intended to cut Toronto city council seats during a municipal election. It sparked outrage, but the clause ultimately wasn’t invoked because of how a related court process unfolded.

Read more:

Ontario seeks to have education workers’ strike declared illegal

In June, Quebec passed a major reform to the province’s signature language law that reasserts the right of Quebecers to live and work in French. Premier Francois Legault has said the entire bill is covered by the notwithstanding clause. In August, a judge suspended two articles of that language law, citing risks to access to justice, until the case can be heard on its merits.

Quebec also used the clause in its religious symbols law that was adopted in 2019. Bill 21 prohibits public sector workers who are deemed to be in positions of authority, including teachers, police officers and judges, from wearing religious symbols such as hijabs and turbans on the job.

“It would be much better if instead of the federal government having to weigh in and say, ‘You really shouldn’t do this, provincial governments,’ it should be Canadians saying, ‘Hold on a minute; you’re suspending my right to collective bargaining? You’re suspending fundamental rights and freedoms that are afforded to us in the Charter?’” Trudeau said.

“The Charter of Rights and Freedoms can’t become a suggestion. It is something that has built Canada in fundamental ways by recognizing those foundational rights and freedoms that make us one of the best countries in the world.

“The outrage we’re seeing across the country right now at this latest use, building on top of previous uses that I have consistently condemned, is a moment for all Canadians to reflect and say, ‘Yeah, our fundamental rights are not to be cancelled away by governments who want to get things done in the easiest and most efficient way possible at the cost of people’s fundamental freedoms.’”

-- with files from Global News’ Isaac Callan, Colin D'Mello and The Canadian Press

CUTE COUPLE AND THEIR PROGENY

Trudeau's buyback tax may spur more buybacks into 2024: CIBC

Jeff Lagerquist - Yesterday 

Ottawa’s new buyback tax doubles the equivalent excise in the United States. 

(REUTERS/Blair Gable)

Canada's new tax on share buybacks announced by the federal government on Thursday could spur an increase in big repurchases by companies before the policy kicks in, according to CIBC Capital Markets.

The new tax measure aims to encourage Canadian firms to reinvest profits in their workers and businesses by taking a two per cent cut of all types of share repurchases by domestic corporations.

Ottawa's policy doubles the one per cent excise introduced in the United States under President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act in August.

CIBC analyst Ian de Verteuil calls the timing of Canada's new tax "peculiar," in a note to clients on Thursday.

"It is supposed to be implemented in January 2024. This gives companies a material window of time to make capital deployment decisions, before the two per cent tax is accrued and collected," he wrote, adding that substantial issuer bids over 10 per cent of outstanding shares, known as SIBs, "look likely in this period."

Post-2024, de Verteuil expects companies to shift their shareholder rewards strategies from buybacks to special or variable dividends.

The federal government expects the buyback tax to generate $2.1 billion in revenue over five years, according to the Fall Economic Statement released Thursday afternoon. de Verteuil calls that figure "somewhat conservative," estimating revenue could range from $400 million per year to over a billion in a given year.

"As we are likely heading into a period of weaker economic growth, we would expect the tax take to be towards the bottom of this range over the next couple years," he wrote. "[But] there is little doubt that criticizing buybacks is politically expedient."

According to his report, financial, energy and industrial companies account for the lion's share of buybacks in Canada. In the last 10 years, CIBC found Thomson Reuters (TRI.TO), Canadian National Railway (CNR.TO), and Suncor Energy (SU.TO)(SU) topped the list.

Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault recently accused Canada's oil and gas sector of rewarding shareholders before investing to mitigate climate change as profits soared on higher commodity prices. In the third quarter of 2022, the energy sector dominated total repurchases, accounting for 29 per cent, followed by financials at 23 per cent, according to CIBC.

"Given recent initiatives to limit additional fossil fuel production in Canada, it is scarcely surprising that energy companies have historically been reluctant to reinvest," de Verteuil wrote.

Jeff Lagerquist is a senior reporter at Yahoo Finance Canada. Follow him on Twitter @jefflagerquist.

'A cool $40 billion' revenue boost: What economists are saying about the fiscal update

Gigi Suhanic - Yesterday 

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland unveils Ottawa's Fiscal Economic Statement on Thursday in the House of Commons.© Provided by Financial Post

The Liberal government’s fiscal update , unveiled Thursday, paints a much different economic picture than the budget released in March, with Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland warning of a possible recession .

Ottawa downgraded its forecast for this year’s gross domestic product (GDP) to 3.2 per cent from 3.9 per cent. It also drastically cut its projection for 2023, and expects the economy to only grow 0.7 per cent from an earlier forecast of 3.1 per cent. Under a downside scenario, Ottawa said GDP could contract by 0.9 per cent next year.

However, economists think a 0.7 per cent growth forecast is a bit optimistic, and several expect GDP to come in at 0.2 per cent next year.

There was one upside that came out of the update: “a cool $40-billion” surprise revenue boost that will reduce the 2022-23 deficit to a projected $36.4 billion from the $52.8 billion forecast in this year’s budget, a note from National Bank of Canada Financial Markets said.

Still, economists at the Royal Bank of Canada said they would have preferred to see more of that revenue windfall “flow through to the bottomline,” adding, “program spending in the current fiscal year is the highest in nearly three decades outside of the pandemic.”

Major financial institutions also highlighted the projected decline in Ottawa’s so-called “fiscal anchor” — the debt-to-GDP ratio. For this fiscal year, debt to GDP is expected to pull back to “42.3 per cent from 45.5 per cent last year and the pandemic peak of 47.5 per cent,” BMO Capital Markets said in a note. However, the measure is well off the pre-pandemic level of 31 per cent, BMO added.

In the fiscal statement, Ottawa touted Canada as continuing to have the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7 — “not that competition there is the toughest,” National Bank noted.

Here’s what economists had to say about the fiscal update:

Cynthia Leach and Josh Nye, RBC Economics

“As expected, (Thursday’s) Fall Economic Statement focused on new green growth initiatives with only limited affordability measures that could have complicated the Bank of Canada’s fight against inflation. The government has built some fiscal room with strong nominal GDP growth significantly reducing its key debt-to-GDP in the current fiscal year. But with nearly two-thirds of positive economic and fiscal developments being recycled into new spending, not as much of the revenue surprise flowed through to its bottom line.

Excluding an $8.5-billion provision for ‘anticipated near-term pressures’ (the new risk adjustment?) net new spending over the forecast horizon is nearly equal parts growth- and affordability-oriented, and the latter is fairly well-targeted toward lower-income households. But these measures add to an already-elevated spending track — at 15.7 per cent of GDP, program spending in the current fiscal year is the highest in nearly three decades outside of the pandemic.

Rising public debt charges limit near-term improvement in the deficit profile, which is based on economic projections that now look optimistic (0.7 per cent real GDP growth next year versus RBC’s 0.2 per cent forecast). A downside economic scenario (-0.9 per cent growth next year) shows the government’s finances could quickly go sideways — literally, in terms of debt-to-GDP — and that doesn’t account for additional discretionary spending that would likely come with such a slowdown. While the government has preserved some fiscal firepower heading into what we expect will be a moderate recession in 2023, it might not have quite as much dry powder as hoped if it aims to stick to its fiscal anchor (debt to GDP ratio).”

Warren Lovely, Taylor Schleich and Daren King, National Bank of Canada Financial Markets

“…The FES arrives at a transitional moment for the Canadian economy, with slower growth set to take hold as aggressive monetary tightening works its way through the system. For the time being, however, we continue to receive predominantly positive fiscal news from Canadian governments, owing to a stronger-than-expected glide path for nominal GDP. That trend was well in evidence here, the underlying revenue outlook boosted a cool $40 billion versus budget.

In one form or another, Ottawa has committed a portion of the ‘bonus’ revenue to new measures, the newest of which are (not surprisingly ) focused on ‘making life more affordable.’ The resulting budget deficit for 2022-23, at $36.4 billion, amounts to a relatively contained 1.3 per cent of GDP. The updated deficit tally represents a non-trivial improvement versus April’s budget, where a shortfall of $52.8 billion was forecast, and further extends the federal government’s overall fiscal recovery. Reference note: At the peak of the pandemic, economic disruptions and extraordinary government supports saw the federal deficit swell to $327.7 billion. The deficit was knocked down to $90.2 billion by 2021-22 as the recovery started to take hold.

The medium-term fiscal outlook sees the positive revenue base effect carrying over, notwithstanding an expectation of slower growth ahead. With positive net adjustments more than offsetting new commitments, the FES flags progressively smaller deficits for each fiscal year, culminating with a $4.5-billion surplus in 2027-28 under the baseline scenario. Detailed year-by-year comparisons to April’s budget reveal an average budgetary upgrade of $10 billion a year. Put another way, the cumulative deficit (to 2026-27) is now $60 billion lower than that envisioned in April, which means less federal debt than previously telegraphed (in the here and now and longer term).

Combining smaller deficits with an upgraded level of nominal output could make for nifty progress on the federal debt-to-GDP ratio, which remains the government’s stated ‘fiscal anchor.’ This closely watched metric is slated to end 2022-23 at 42.3 per cent versus the 45.1 per cent level pledged at budget time. The baseline scenario implies only limited progress on debt-to-GDP in 2023-24 before regaining more meaningful downward momentum in the out years of the plan (e.g., debt-to-GDP reaching 37.3 per cent in five years from now).”

Ottawa unveils green energy tax credits of up to 40% in bid to keep up with Biden

Ottawa aims to balance fiscal restraint with targeted support amid darkening economic outlook

Ottawa reveals plan for new tax on stock buybacks

Stephen Brown, Capital Economics

“The $6 billion in new federal spending measures for this year, as outlined in the Fall Economic Update, amount to just 0.2 per cent of GDP and will have little impact on the economic outlook or monetary policy. By utilizing only a small part of the windfall from higher revenues this year, the government has at least succeeded in providing some fiscal support without triggering a self-defeating reaction in financial markets.

“Our GDP forecasts are more downbeat than the consensus, eyeing a 0.2 per cent drop next year and a sharper fall in the deflator, leading us to expect the deficit to widen again to two per cent of GDP next year. The government did at least acknowledge this risk in an alternative set of projections, which are closer to our own. The government’s baseline forecasts conveniently assume that the debt-to-GDP ratio will edge down by 0.1 point to 42.2 per cent of GDP next year, so it will not take much to push it up as we expect. Nevertheless, the public finances will look more favourable than those in many economies and, unless the government has a sudden change of heart when recession hits, fiscal developments should not prevent the fall in bond yields we expect as the Bank of Canada cuts interest rates.”

Andrew Grantham and Katherine Judge, CIBC Capital Markets

“(Thursday’s) fiscal update saw a notable reduction in the deficit projection for the current fiscal year and, even with some less favourable economic projections from here and modest spending increases, the updated longer-term projections now show a slim surplus being achieved by fiscal 2027/28. The debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to fall to 42.3 per cent in the current fiscal year, from 45.5 per cent last year, and reach 37.3 per cent by the end of the forecast horizon as it moves back closer to pre-pandemic levels (just above 30 per cent debt-to-GDP).

“The $36.4-billion deficit now projected for the current 2022/23 fiscal year (1.3 per cent of GDP) is well below the $52.8 billion that was expected in budget 2022, and the $90.2-billion shortfall (3.6 per cent GDP) seen in the prior fiscal year. Revenues are expected to be ahead of those prior projections, largely due to higher income tax receipts. The upward revision to revenue projections more than offset somewhat higher spending, including increased public debt charges linked to the rapid rise in interest rates seen so far this year.”

Douglas Porter, Robert Kavcic and Benjamin Reitzes, BMO Capital Markets

“Less than half of this year’s revenue windfall will make it through to an improved bottomline. Moreover, the double-whammy of slower (or no) growth and rising interest rates will limit flexibility into 2023. … The boost to government finances from higher inflation is temporary. Eventually, costs do catch up to the run-up in prices, and revenues get crimped by the economic slowdown. Accordingly, after a nice run of better-than-expected fiscal outcomes, Ottawa’s finances are expected to turn more challenging next year. Finance expects the budget deficit to narrow slightly again in the coming fiscal year (starting on April 1, 2023) to $30.6 billion, or just 1.1 per cent of GDP, and then to $25.4 billion in the following year. However, we suspect that the economic and interest rate scenario these projections are built upon are a tad optimistic, and lean closer to Finance’s so-called downside scenario.

“Ottawa’s fiscal update presents a healthier picture, thanks entirely to the tremendous strength in revenues flowing from robust income growth. Combined with strong nominal GDP growth, the debt-to-GDP ratio is now seen coming down further in the current fiscal year to 42.3 per cent and gradually fading from there — even in the downside economic scenario. Assuming the government adheres to its election platform, next year’s budget will provide a more complete measure of the medium-term fiscal landscape. At that point we will also have a much better read on how high interest rates will need to go to finally crack inflation. For now, today’s fiscal news can be characterized as moderately positive, as Ottawa largely steered clear of aggravating an already tough inflation backdrop.”

Black women have always moved this country forward. On Election Day, we won’t be stopped


OPINION: By voting on Election Day, our collective power will continue to move America closer to its promise for all.

Black Women’s Leadership Collective |
Nov 5, 2022

(Getty Images)

Black women are a voting powerhouse. When we show up at the polls, we bring our communities with us and decide elections. In 2020, we turned out in record numbers and helped change the direction of our country. We made it clear that nothing and no one could stop us. In this 2022 midterm election season, our futures, our livelihoods, and basic freedoms are on the ballot. It is again time to organize and mobilize every man, woman and young voter in our communities and vote.

Also Read:
Black votes do matter — if we vote

As leaders of the Black Women’s Leadership Collective — an organizing hub for Black women’s organizations, advocates and supporters representing over 19 million Black women across America — we know just how strong our power is. Together we helped elect Kamala Harris as the first Black woman vice president. By electing President Joe Biden and Vice President Harris, we made it possible for their administration to implement a COVID-19 recovery plan and get vaccines into our communities, lift 716,000 black children out of poverty, give young people up to $20,000 in student loan debt relief, lower prescription drug costs with a $35 cap on insulin and change federal policy on marijuana possession. And, after fierce organizing throughout Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s nomination process, Black women helped her take her rightful seat on the nation’s highest court. But that’s just the start, so together we must make it clear: We won’t let anyone stop us now.

While the country has begun to make progress on a number of issues, there is more work to do to create sustainable change and equity for Black women, our families and our communities. From criminal justice reform, codifying voting rights, help for families including access to affordable child care, getting weapons of war off our streets, to strengthening our democracy at every level, the solutions aren’t going to come from right-wing politicians — they come from us and the leaders we elect and hold accountable. And, with the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and strip away our freedom to control our own bodies, we must elect leaders who will codify reproductive freedom, including access to abortion. There are some who want to pass a national ban on abortion on top of the extreme new measures we are seeing across the country that criminalize women and their doctors. We remember a time when our bodies were treated as property; some said we were less than human and that we couldn’t be trusted with freedom. We are not going back.

(Getty Images)

Not surprisingly, a recent poll from Higher Heights Leadership Fund found that Black women are highly motivated to vote in the 2022 midterm elections with 80 percent saying that we have the power to make change on issues that matter most to our community. We also know how important it is that we make a plan to vote and then encourage our family and friends to do the same. Making a plan is easy; start by deciding if you will vote by mail, early in person or in person on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 8. Visit vote.org to make your plan to vote right now.



The Higher Heights poll also found that a large majority of Black women agree that while we have made great strides, Black women are still underrepresented in the halls of power. In fact, while we are the largest voting bloc in America, there are currently no Black women in the U.S. Senate or serving as governor, but there are Black women running for both as well as elected office up and down the ballot. Fortunately, a record number of Black women are running for office across our country in 2022, and we have the opportunity to elect more Black women to every office from mayor to city council to state legislatures to governors, Congress and the U.S. Senate. You can learn more about the Black women running for office in 2022 here. Electing more Black women means more spaces where our lived experience is represented and part of the decisions that get made on the issues that directly impact our lives.

Also Read:
Oprah delivers November surprise, endorses Fetterman over Oz

Together in this 2022 midterm election, our collective power will continue to move America closer to its promise for all. We won’t be stopped.

This op-ed was written by three leaders of the Black Women’s Leadership Collective (BWLC) – Donna Brazile, former chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Bishop Leah Daughtry, co-convener of Power Rising, and Karen Finney, CNN political commentator.

US Streams Are Drying Up


Parts of New Hampshire’s Peabody River were dry in August 2022.

 Photo credit: John Hammond / EOS

JENNIFER SCHMIDT 11/05/22
This story by Jennifer Schmidt originally appeared in Eos and is republished here as part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story.

For millennia, communities throughout North America have adapted to the ebb and flow of waterways. Water infrastructure provides reservoirs for times of drought and flood control for instances of deluge.

Drought is a way of life in some parts of the United States, said Jeffrey Mount, a geomorphologist and senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California. “What you worry about is whether you’re picking up a trend.” Long-term shifts in streamflow could signal a fundamental change in climate that scientists believe the country’s infrastructure is not designed to endure.

Unfortunately, such a trend is emerging. In the first comprehensive picture of streamflow in the United States, scientists reported that streams in the South and West have gotten drier in the past 70 years. Though unsurprising to many, the result is worrisome. The finding was published in the journal Water Resources Research.
What Is a Drought, Anyway?

“There are a lot of flavors of drought,” said Adam Ward, a hydrologist at Oregon State University who was not involved in the study. Abnormally dry stream conditions, a collective phenomenon termed streamflow drought, tend to follow prolonged meteorological drought, which is brought about by a lack of precipitation; the length of the lag depends on factors such as the size of the basin.

Previous anecdotal evidence and empirical data from some locations have shown that streamflow droughts have gotten more severe in recent decades.

“The larger question is, can you use this to help you develop policy that adapts to these changing conditions?” — Jeffrey Mount

Stakeholders define streamflow drought differently, often considering daily, seasonal, or long-term average flows. However, a barge moving through the Mississippi River doesn’t care what time of year it is, just whether there’s enough water flowing, said John Hammond, a hydrologist at the US Geological Survey (USGS) and lead author of the new streamflow study.

In the new study, researchers looked at measurements of streamflow between 1921 and 2020, gleaned from USGS gauges in 555 watersheds throughout the continental United States. To reveal any long-term changes arising solely from shifts in climate, the group focused on streams without dams or other management systems. The researchers evaluated the history of drought on these streams, considering several thresholds of fixed long-term average and variable seasonal average flows.

The data showed that in the South and West, streamflow droughts got longer between 1951 and 2020, regardless of threshold. Worse yet, droughts in these regions are becoming more intense. “[Recent] droughts have caused there to be a lot more missing water from the system,” Hammond said. Conversely, streamflow droughts generally got shorter and less intense in the East and North. These trends track with increasing aridity in the West, signaling that as the climate continues to dry out, streamflow drought will get worse.

The study’s scale “helps us see that the future of New Hampshire and the future of Sacramento can be very different,” Ward said. “It helps us understand why the EPA and Army Corps [of Engineers] have regions instead of one-size-fits-all policies.”

The results are useful for policymakers because they confirm there is a long-term trend in drought, said Mount, who was not involved in the study. “The larger question is, can you use this to help you develop policy that adapts to these changing conditions?”
Day of Reckoning

The study highlighted that understanding big-picture climate trends is critical in developing sound water policy. “The implications of changing streamflow are going to cascade through some of our regulations in a way that we don’t necessarily appreciate,” Ward said.

The changing climate is forcing the United States to evaluate the scope and efficacy of the Clean Water Act, for instance. Legal battles (including an upcoming Supreme Court decision) have been fought over the act for 50 years, with some policymakers questioning “what does it mean to count as a waterway?” Ward said.

“I think we’re here on a day of reckoning on drought policy.” — Jeffrey Mount

“When you get more frequent droughts, waterways go from flowing all the time to flowing sometimes,” Ward explained, a situation leading to a gray area regarding what features should be protected by a law written to address rivers — in other words, what counts as a waterway. Ultimately, Ward said, “none of our regulations are set up for changing streamflows.”

“I think we’re here on a day of reckoning on drought policy,” Mount said. Many of the country’s major water infrastructure projects and policies date back a century, when the climate and streamflow were very different.

“All of that needs a rethink,” Mount said.

The debilitating cost of remittances

November 05, 2022
GZERO Staff

Dilip Ratha knows how hard it is to work abroad and send money home. Why? Because he had to go through the same hoops when he was a migrant.

It's the inconvenience and the cost, the World Bank's head of KNOMAD and lead economist says during a livestream conversation on closing the global digital gap hosted by GZERO in partnership with Visa.

Still, Ratha points out, these flows are a lifeline for millions of poor families around the world. And they keep the lights on in remittance-dependent economies like El Salvador or Lebanon.

With an average 6% commission, the amount lost each year is double all the aid that the US gives to the entire world or what sub-Saharan Africa gets.

OPINION

In Pakistan, the very migrants who support the economy with their remittances are called traitors

Remittances received from migrant workers living abroad make up almost 8.5% of Pakistan’s gross domestic product.

Rafia Zakaria, Dawn.com

Aamir Qureshi/AFP

In recent years, as Pakistan has hurtled from one catastrophe to another, remittances sent by Pakistani workers living abroad have been a source of some small amount of stability. When foreign investments have seemed scant and aid packages have dried up, workers sending money back to families, investing in and purchasing assets in their home country has served as a reliable source of foreign exchange.

Now this once reliable source of money entering the country also appears to be threatened by both global and domestic conditions. According to the Economic Outlook Report issued by the Ministry of Finance, the first 10 months of 2022 have seen foreign remittances drop by 3.6% to $7.7 billion.

Some analysts forecast that Pakistan’s removal from the Financial Action Task Force ‘grey list’ will lead to better numbers in the remainder of the year as foreign investment sees an uptick. This prediction, however, does not seem to account for the current political upheaval in the country following the murder of journalist Arshad Sharif in Kenya and the initiation of the latest long march and sit-in led by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan.

While the removal of Pakistan from the grey list was a positive step, it may not deliver the country from its deep economic woes. For starters, the continuing catastrophe created by the floods and their aftermath means that much of the influx of cash seen in recent months will have to be utilised to stabilise the agricultural sector that has been all but devastated.

Second, while removal from the list means that Pakistan can issue bonds, the otherwise underwhelming performance of the majority of sectors in the country, along with the continuing threat of political instability, means that Pakistan will not be able to capitalise on these developments in the manner that would have been possible even a few weeks ago.

With few assurances about who will retain power in Islamabad and what they will do, one cannot fault foreign investors for being wary about putting their money in a country that seems to be jumping headlong into even more uncertainty than before.

Remittances received from migrant workers living abroad make up almost 8.5% of Pakistan’s gross domestic product. Unlike money from the World Bank, Asian Development Bank and foreign governments, remittances do not add to debt and do not need to be paid back.

For this reason, the comparison of remittance amounts to these other forms of capital inflow is inaccurate. While the money coming in from these other sources may prevent initial shocks from the reduced remittances, it is unlikely to do so in the long term. If anything, it will draw even more attention to whether Pakistan is going to be able to service its existing debts in the face of mounting new ones.

It is possible that a reduction in the official numbers for remittances reflects not an actual decrease in the amounts but rather a turn towards unofficial means of transmitting money such as hawala and hundi systems. The current political turmoil in the country has created serious doubts about the legitimacy and reliability of procedures, whether it is legal or financial institutions.

Undoubtedly, some migrant workers may be reconsidering whether they should send money home via official financial channels susceptible to government policies changing without notice. Anything at all can happen in Pakistan and that uncertainty can direct many people to use unofficial means as a way to play it safe.

It is beyond ironic, of course, that the feudals, industrialists and politicians that ply power in Pakistan (between runaway trips to Dubai and London) have invested much of their money outside the country. It sits in bank accounts in Switzerland, chateaus in France, flats in Kensington. Knowing that their fortunes cannot be seized by the country affords this class of people endless solace.

They may not be dual nationals but they know they can buy foreign citizenship with their money. This loophole allows them to present themselves as true patriots of the Pakistani people who have chosen to stay in the country as opposed to all the middle classes who have left. When they present this argument to the country’s poor, they emerge as truth tellers valiant and worth a vote.

The truth is far from this. Middle-class Pakistanis who have had to leave the country and go elsewhere for jobs are hardly traitors. Proof of this lies in the fact of the remittances themselves: these Pakistanis are choosing to send the money that they earn back home to pay for school fees, necessary medical procedures, the upkeep of parents and siblings, investment in property or in a business, etc. They too have the option to put away money in ‘foreign’ bank accounts but they put their faith in Pakistan.

Despite this, they are often portrayed as traitors simply because they have taken jobs abroad; never mind the fact there are no jobs in the country where they were born and would rather stay.

Such is the trickery of the very rich in Pakistan that they manage to turn the poor against the people who have just a little bit more. In this way, Pakistan’s very wealthy continue to insulate themselves from economic shocks: whichever government is in power makes sure to provide the particular people (all too often perceived to be thieves) it has assembled in its cabinet with a cut that can be safely stowed abroad.

Remittances are wanted in Pakistan but the workers who produce them are treated with ignominy and disrespect and labelled traitors for having left the country. In the meantime, the real traitors who are fixtures regardless of whichever political party is in power, fill their coffers with money borrowed in the name of the country. Pakistan has many tragedies playing out these days; the inability to distinguish between the real thieves and the real benefactors is just another one of them.

This article first appeared in Dawn.

‘Nuclear wars must not be fought,’ China President Xi says

Statement from Chinese leader Xi Jinping comes after a series of warnings about the deployment of nuclear arms as Russia’s war in Ukraine intensifies.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, left, meets Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing on Friday [Kay Nietfeld via Reuters]

Published On 5 Nov 20225 Nov 2022

China’s president has pressed world leaders to stop making threats and prevent the use of nuclear weapons in Europe and Asia as rhetoric over Russia’s war in Ukraine continues to heat up.

President Xi Jinping made the plea after meeting German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Beijing on Friday, the official Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.end of list

“The international community should … jointly oppose the use or threats to use nuclear weapons, advocate that nuclear weapons must not be used and nuclear wars must not be fought, in order to prevent a nuclear crisis in Eurasia,” Xi said.

A statement on Xi’s comments did not mention any specific nations related to nuclear threats, however, rhetoric by world leaders discussing atomic arms has heightened in recent weeks. Fears have intensified that Russia’s eight-month conflict in Ukraine could turn nuclear.

Moscow would face “severe consequences” if it uses any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in its war with Ukraine, the Group of Seven (G7) industrialised nations warned on Friday.

‘Armageddon’

NATO began a round of nuclear exercises in October simulating the dropping of “tactical” B61 nuclear bombs over Europe. The manoeuvres occurred in parallel to similar Russian military drills. Both sides described the exercises as routine.

Russia alleged last month that Ukraine forces were planning to detonate a “dirty bomb” in Ukraine and blame it on Moscow in order to drive global opinion against it. A dirty bomb is a conventional explosive device laced with radioactive materials.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog said this week it found no sign of “undeclared nuclear activities” at three sites it inspected in Ukraine at Kyiv’s request following Russia’s allegations.

US President Joe Biden recently warned the world could face “Armageddon” if his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, were to use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine.

Putin said in September he was “not bluffing” about using nuclear arms if Russian territories – including regions in Ukraine illegally annexed – were threatened by NATO forces. He accused NATO nations of “nuclear blackmail” and planning to “destroy” Russia.

Moscow later downplayed the threat to use atomic weapons and said any confrontation with the United States and NATO was not in the Kremlin’s interests.

The Russian leader said last week that Moscow had no intentions of employing nuclear arms in the Ukraine war. “We see no need for that. There is no point in that, neither political nor military,” said Putin

Biden responded in an interview, if Putin doesn’t intend to use such weapons, then “why does he keep talking about it?”

SOURCE: AL JAZEERA AND NEWS AGENCIES

BANKING

Europe’s top bankers are pressing regulator to back off

Senior executives exasperated with long list of requests by European Central Bank’s oversight arm


The headquarters of the European Central Bank in Frankfurt

European bank executives are expressing increasing frustration with what they see as excessive interference and unreasonable demands from the region’s top financial regulator.

Bankers are now becoming more vociferous about a raft of long-held irritations with the European Central Bank’s oversight arm, led by Andrea Enria.

These include more day-to-day gripes, such as burdensome data demands, but also more significant debates over lenders’ freedom to pay out dividends and bonuses as well as the level of intrusion that supervision warrants, according to executives familiar with the matter.

With dissatisfaction rising, Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, chairman of France’s Société Générale SA and a former ECB executive board member, wrote to the central bank in October to protest against officials’ requests to be present in bank board meetings, according to a document seen by Bloomberg. He argued that the practice damages the effectiveness of the management discussions.

“To my knowledge, no other authority in the major advanced economies attends board meetings and committees in its supervisory activity,” he wrote. “Not the Federal Reserve, nor the Bank of England, the Swiss national bank nor Finma. Some European supervisors have adopted such practice in the past, with apparently very little benefit and serious concerns raised by the supervised entities.”

After almost a decade of oversight from the ECB, which set up the Single Supervisory Mechanism as part of the region’s response to the sovereign debt crisis, banks weathered the pandemic era largely unscathed thanks to better capitalisation and significant government backstops. And while the industry also ultimately benefited from years of ECB pressure to reduce bad loans and improve risk management, bankers argue that it is now going too far.

While banks and their supervisors often have frictions, the latest come amid ECB calls to prepare for the high level of oncoming risk in the economy. In September, the European Systemic Risk Board issued an official warning on vulnerabilities in the financial system amid spiking energy prices and surging inflation.

Officials have also been proved prescient in their warnings in recent years about the risks mounting in the business of leveraged lending, as global banks have racked up billions of dollars in mark-to-market losses from that area over the past six months.
Risk warning

On Friday, Enria warned in a presentation that while lenders balance sheets are generally sound, risks are building in a number of areas including the residential real-estate market amid rising interest rates.

The SSM “was created to foster the safety and soundness of the banking sector, and we are committed to fulfilling this mandate and assessing the banks against very high standards,” an ECB spokesman said in a statement. “We have always been and remain open to dialogue about the efficiency and effectiveness of our supervisory processes.”

The chairman of France’s Société Générale wrote to the ECB last month to complain about officials’ requests to be present in bank board meetings

In the letter, addressed to Ramon Quintana, a director general at the ECB, Bini Smaghi said he had called for a meeting with Enria and the chairs of other major European lenders “to exchange views on how to ensure a proper assessment of banks’ governance.”

The ECB has previously said that occasional attendance by its staff as observers at board meetings is one of the tools it uses to assess banks’ governance frameworks. Société Générale declined to comment on the letter.

Bankers interviewed by Bloomberg argue that the ECB’s de facto ban on payouts at the height of the pandemic damaged them in the eyes of investors, and that moderation now isn’t justified given their bumper earnings.

Firms from Deutsche Bank AG to Banco Santander SA reported double-digit gains in lending income in the third quarter, helping bolster earnings even as central banks’ rapid increases in interest rates squeeze companies and consumers with higher borrowing costs.

Amid that tension, how the watchdog carries out oversight on a day-to-day level is grating more than usual. One executive compared the watchdog to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, claiming that supervisors ask the same question a number of times to separate bank staff, in order to compare answers.

Some requests are seen as probing deep into the business decisions of private companies, for example into specific drivers of profitability, says one of the people familiar with these interactions. Conversely, some bankers also allege that the teams assigned to them by the ECB and national regulators are often inexperienced or ask for reports that are highly granular and end up not being read.
Focus on minor issues

Agendas for board meetings at banks are seen as overly focusing on comparatively minor issues at subsidiaries raised by the regulator, one executive said. Meanwhile, committees below board level are being obliged to provide the watchdog with transcripts of meetings, according to another, giving a sense of unnecessary intrusion. Compliance teams complain of trouble retaining staff burnt out by the growing demands.

Still, the issue of dividends shows the ECB and bank are still able to work together. ING Groep NV, a Dutch lender that has one of the highest capital levels among European banks, said on Thursday that it would buy back as much as €1.5 billion of stock after getting approval from the watchdog. Chief Executive Officer Steven van Rijswijk said conversations the bank has had with regulators have been “constructive.”

And Intesa Sanpaolo SpA CEO Carlo Messina said that while supervisors do pressure banks, he doesn’t see a need to change how things operate.

“Our relations with the ECB are good,” Messina said on an earnings conference call Friday. “To date it’s still an acceptable relation, but undoubtedly, the supervision shouldn’t go beyond the way in which we operate at the moment. So I do not agree with the need for a strong clarification with the supervisor.”

Set up in 2014, the ECB’s banking supervision arm is unlike any other regulator, in that it coordinates financial oversight across the euro area’s 19 countries.

The watchdog has previously faced accusations of overstepping its mandate, notably for how Enria’s predecessor pushed banks to shrink their mountain of bad loans.

Today, bankers - and even some regulatory officials - grumble that the ECB’s plans to police climate risks go too far or that authorities are taking a heavy-handed approach to the lucrative business of leveraged finance.

While much of the frustration among bankers is over interaction with the ECB on a working level, big ticket projects like this year’s climate change stress test are also a sore point.
Supervisory review

The labour-intensive exam was billed as a “learning exercise” for regulators and lenders alike, yet several banks Bloomberg spoke to said they were disappointed that the initial criticism wasn’t more constructive given the effort they put in.

Enria, 61, has long been at the core of the effort to improve the financial health of Europe’s banks. Before taking over as Chair of the ECB’s Supervisory Board at the start of 2019, he led the European Banking Authority, which helps implement regulation and holds stress tests for lenders in the region.

The Italian national has made the ECB’s supervisory activities more transparent, for example spelling out how it treats bank mergers, and has sought to remove hurdles that banks face in moving liquidity across borders, albeit with mixed results.

In September, the ECB started a review of annual supervisory process, which is known as SREP. The European Banking Federation, a lobby group, said via a spokeswoman that there is “room for improvement” in SREP despite being an “achievement” and it would use the review to engage with the ECB over it.

Enria himself has recently hinted at the tension in the relationship with banks, but has doubled down on warnings that individual institutions need to focus on future risks rather than shower investors with cash.

In a speech last month, he said that optimism at banks over bumper earnings this year have generated “a certain reluctance on the side of banks to seriously engage in supervisory discussions” about economic risks.

Even so, Enria has acknowledged that the ECB and other authorities were overly pessimistic in their warnings earlier in the pandemic.

“We might be suffering the same fate as the boy who cried wolf in Aesop’s Fables, and a tendency might be spreading among banks to dismiss their supervisors’ calls for prudence as unjustified conservatism,” he said.

©2022 Bloomberg L.P.

Armed protest quelled inside overcrowded British detention center
By Simon Druker


Detainees at the Harmondsworth immgration removal center near London armed themselves and staged a “disturbance” on Saturday. Photo courtesy of detentionaction.org


Nov. 5 (UPI) -- Detainees at an immigration removal center near London armed themselves and staged a "disturbance" on Saturday, Britain's Home Office said.

The protest began after an early-morning power outage when the detainees left their rooms and congregated in the courtyard of the Harmondsworth detention center.

They eventually returned to their rooms and nobody was injured, the Home Office reported, saying they did have various weaponry.

Dozens of detainees were armed with knives and lumps of wood, CNN reported.

Members from the Metropolitan Police were called in to assist.

The detention center is located not far from the city's Heathrow Airport and houses hundreds of people, ranging from adult male asylum seekers to foreign offenders awaiting deportation as well as men who are in Britain illegally.

British officials raised concerns less than a week ago about overcrowding and other issues at the facility as well as the country's migration system as a whole.

Conservative lawmaker Roger Gale called the entire system "wholly unacceptable" as it currently stands. Gale made the comments outside the Manston migration center in Kent, in southeast England, which houses 4,000 people despite being designed to hold only 1,500.

"[Staff are] trying to do a good job under impossible circumstances," Gale told reporters Monday.

About 100 people at the Harmondsworth detention center were due to be moved to Manson on Saturday, before the protest broke out, despite the overcrowding issue.

This follows a separate incident at an immigration center in Dover on Oct. 30.

During the attack, a number of crude incendiary devices were thrown outside the premises by a man who arrived at the scene alone in a car.

Police say that attack was "motivated by a terrorist ideology."

Riot police deployed following 'disturbance' at London detention centre

Home Office says authorities have been sent to Harmondsworth centre in west London

The Harmondsworth Detention Centre near Heathrow airport. AFP

The National
Nov 05, 2022

Police and riot teams have reportedly been deployed to Harmondsworth detention centre following an overnight disturbance.

It occurred after a power outage at the west London centre, a Home Office spokesperson told Sky News. No one has been reported injured, and power was still down at the site as of 9am local time.

It comes as the Home Office comes under fire over its treatment of migrants and asylum seekers held at detention centres, and Home Secretary Suella Braverman's claim of a migrant "invasion."

It withdrew an earlier claim that detainees "armed with various weaponry" left their rooms and entered the courtyard.
READ MORE
Man found dead after petrol bombs thrown at Dover migrant centre
Thousands of lone migrant children living in UK hotels, says watchdog

Work is currently under way to resolve the issue and the appropriate authorities have been notified and are on the scene, the Home Office added.

Around 100 inmates staged a protest in the courtyard after the power outage, The Guardian reported.

The protest halted a move of about 100 residents to the Manston processing centre in Kent, it added as authorities were preoccupied with the power outage.

No one held at the site is said to have left the premises, known as the Colnbrook immigration removal centre, located close to Heathrow Airport.

In July, a demonstration was held outside the centre over plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda.

The disturbance comes less than a week after a man threw petrol bombs at a migrant centre in the southern port town of Dover. The suspect was later found dead.

Dover is the focal point of British processing of asylum seekers as the country tries to curb the number of people trying to sail the dangerous English Channel route.

The entrance to the Manston immigration holding facility. AP

Nearly 40,000 have arrived in the UK so far this year after attempting the treacherous trip from France, crossing one of the world's busiest shipping lanes in dinghies and other small boats.

Conditions at Manston have also drawn ire.

The Refugee Council has called for "urgent action" to tackle conditions at the site, which is holding at least 1,000 people more than its capacity.

The situation in Manston is not what it should be,” cabinet minister Michael Gove said last week, adding the situation at the centre is "deeply concerning."

Prison-like center puts focus on UK’s response to migrants

By SYLVIA HUI

yesterday

1 of 10

A young girl runs towards the fence carrying a message in a bottle inside the Manston immigration short-term holding facility located at the former Defence Fire Training and Development Centre in Thanet, England, Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2022. Details about overcrowding and inhumane conditions at a migrant processing center in southeast England have shocked Britain and reignited a heated debate about how the Conservative government is handling a sharp increase in the number of asylum-seekers arriving on U.K. shores. (Gareth Fuller/PA via AP)


LONDON (AP) — Behind wire fences in southeast England, children wave their arms and chant “freedom” to grab the attention of people on the other side. A young girl throws a bottle with a message inside. “We need your help. Please help us,” the note reads.

The children are among thousands of people being held in dangerously overcrowded conditions at a closed airport serving as a processing center for migrants who recently arrived on British shores after crossing the English Channel in small boats. The situation there has reignited a heated debate about the Conservative U.K. government’s treatment of asylum-seekers.

Located at the site of a former British air force base that had a short life as the civilian Manston Airport, the center in Kent was designed as a short-term processing facility housing about 1,600 newcomers. Up to 4,000 were staying there at one point this week, with some reportedly detained unlawfully for a month or more.

Independent government inspectors said they saw families sleeping on floors in prison-like conditions that presented fire and health hazards. The inspectors warned of the risk of outbreaks after cases of scabies, diphtheria and other conditions were reported.

“Welcome to the U.K,” read a headline in the Metro newspaper, accompanied by a close-up photo of young children gazing out from behind metal fences.

Facing pressure over the situation, U.K. Home Secretary Suella Braverman defended the government’s policies and described the increasing number of migrants arriving via the English Channel as “ an invasion on our southern coast.” Her comment drew widespread condemnation.

The conditions at the center in the village of Manston has put a spotlight on wider problems in Britain’s asylum system, which is struggling to cope with a record number of small boat crossings at a time when border officials are trying to clear a massive backlog of refugee applications.

“We’ve got this kind of perfect storm of more people coming — which the government was warned about — and added to the mix we have this huge waiting list of around 100,000 individuals who have sought asylum,” said Jonathan Ellis, the policy and public affairs lead at Britain’s Refugee Council. “There’s a lack of political will, a lack of political focus, and therefore, (a lack of) the associated resources to really tackle this issue.”

Around 40,000 people from countries that include Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq and Albania have crossed one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes in dinghies and other unseaworthy boats from northern France so far this year, hoping to start new lives in the U.K.

That’s the highest number ever recorded, and it represents an exponential increase from 2018, when only 299 migrants were detected arriving in England in small boats without authorization, official data showed. Last year, there were 28,536.

Dozens of people have lost their lives attempting the passage, including 27 who died when a packed smuggling boat capsized in November 2021.

Braverman, who is known for an uncompromising approach to immigration, has blamed criminal gangs for facilitating the crossings and focused on what she called spurious claims by some of those seeking refuge.

She told lawmakers in Parliament this week to “stop pretending that they are all refugees in distress.” Her harsh language has drawn criticism, including from within the governing Conservative Party. Some critics accuse Braverman of fueling anti-immigration hate.

“The government rhetoric since I arrived has been scapegoating migrants, blaming us for the problems of this country. But it’s gotten a lot worse,” said Hassan Akkad, a documentary maker who fled Syria in 2012 to seek asylum in the U.K.

“When you have a home secretary comparing asylum-seekers to an invading enemy, you are giving a green light to the public to attack them,” added Akkad, who works with refugee charity Choose Love.

The overcrowding at the Manston center reached a breaking point this week after hundreds of people were moved there from another migrant processing center nearby that was hit with gasoline bombs. Police said the man who carried out the Oct. 30 attack and killed himself afterward was likely driven by a “hate-filled grievance.”

Braverman also faced accusations that she blocked hotel bookings for asylum-seekers to ease overcrowding at Manston and ignored legal advice on the matter. She denied the claims.

Critics say government incompetence in managing Britain’s asylum system extend beyond Manston and precede Braverman becoming interior minister in September. The opposition Labour Party said only 4% of asylum claims from small boat arrivals were processed last year, meaning that more than 100,000 people are in limbo waiting for their applications for protection to be considered.

The U.K. is a preferred destination in Europe for migrants who speak English or have family connections in the country. Before the coronavirus pandemic, many tried to cross from northern France by hiding in freight trucks traveling through the Channel Tunnel. COVID-19 travel restrictions and stricter security measures on the route made the hazardous sea journey a more viable way to enter the U.K.

But despite the unprecedented increase in people arriving in small boats, the U.K. receives far fewer asylum-seekers than many other European countries, including France, Germany and Italy. Last year, 48,540 people applied for British asylum, compared to 148,200 applicants in Germany and more than 103,000 in France.

A controversial deal the U.K. government struck with Rwanda in April added to its reputation of not being the most welcoming. The agreement called for deporting some asylum-seekers to the African country, where their claims would be processed and successful applicants would be allowed to stay in Rwanda. The plan was meant to deter people from entering the U.K. illegally, but no one to date has been deported because of legal challenges to the policy.

U.K. authorities have also sought to work with their French counterparts to stop the Channel crossings. The two sides engaged in tense wrangling over the issue last year, but relations appeared to improve after Liz Truss — and her successor Rishi Sunak — became prime minister.

In a call with French President Emmanuel Macron last week, Sunak said the U.K. and France were “committed to deepening our partnership to deter deadly journeys across the Channel that benefit organized criminals.”

Ellis, at the Refugee Council, said authorities ultimately would need to focus less on hostile rhetoric and deterrence and more on safer routes for legitimate asylum seekers to apply for refuge.

“We need to challenge this political rhetoric that people should only come to this country through legal routes,” he said. “Ostensibly that’s reasonable, but for someone who’s fleeing the Horn of Africa, where are they meant to go? What are those safe routes? There is none.”

___

Sylvie Corbet in Paris contributed to this report.

___

Follow AP’s coverage of global migration at https://apnews.com/hub/migration