KINSELLA: Poilievre smart to abandon convoy protesters
Opinion by Warren Kinsella •
Toronto Sun Yesterday 

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre speaks to news media outside the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Sept. 13, 2022.© Provided by Toronto Sun

Spare a thought and a prayer, if you will, for the convoy types. Because they are sad and lonely these days.

Their suitor and champion has abandoned them, you see. Pierre Poilievre has ghosted the convoy folk.

It’s no small thing. Poilievre won his Conservative Party’s leadership in a landslide – not despite the convoy folk, but partly because of them. During happier times, Poilievre marched with the convoy enthusiasts, he sang their praises, he brought them coffee and posed for selfies.

And then, the Tory leader became invisible during the convoy cabal’s time of need. Poof! He was gone. Poilievre dumped them, much like Brad Pitt dumped Jennifer Aniston for Angelina Jolie, except with much more skill and a lot less drama.

The inquiry into the use of the Emergencies Act was a lot like a criminal prosecution, even if it will make no finding of criminal culpability. But it had all the trappings of one: a judge, a witness stand, court reporters, and an army of lawyers, stacked up like cordwood.

The Public Order Emergency Commission, as it was more formally known, conducted court-like hearings at the federal Library and Archives on Wellington Street. No media reports can be found to describe what would happen when the doors would open there.

Did the convoy leaders turn around in their seats, like in Hollywood movies, expecting Poilievre to stride in, and take over the conduct of the defence? Did they expect him to arrive like Perry Mason, and free them all from the chains of Trudeau-stan oppression?

Well, he didn’t. In fact, he said nothing as the hearings got going. He did not utter a word – not one, single solitary word – about his relationship with the convoy gang.

And, in so doing, he revealed – to this writer, at least – that he’s a lot smarter than we thought he was.

Consider the evidence, because there was a lot of it. For six weeks, more than 70 witnesses appeared at the inquiry. Hundreds of thousands of documents were submitted. Videos were played. Examinations and cross-examinations took place.

The evidence, for the convoy types – those who occupied Ottawa for weeks, those who blocked border crossings from B.C.’s Pacific Highway to Windsor’s Ambassador Bridge – was very, very bad. Vandalizing the statue of Terry Fox. Desecrating the War Memorial. Defecating and urinating in public. Yelling abuse at masked Ottawa residents, many of whom had not slept in weeks because of truckers leaning on their horns – which is 115 decibels, several times over.

Oh, and the waving of swastika flags. Ironically, it was the convoy folks’ top-notch lawyer who repeatedly tried to make that into an issue. No one else.

And through it all, with the convoy types getting hammered for day after day, where was Poilievre? Gone, baby, gone. Oh, sure, on an early November B.C. trip, he said he’d have something to say when all the evidence was in – except, the evidence is all in, and he still hasn’t said anything to defend the convoy-ers.

The Conservative leader did say one thing that was interesting, however, when touring the Left Coast. Poilievre said he “condemned” anyone who “broke laws, behaved badly, or blockaded critical infrastructure.”

“Behaved badly.” Which, of course, was pretty much all of them. You don’t get to hold a major city hostage for weeks in the name of “freedom” and then get a gold star, boys and girls. Ditto crippling border trade, or any of the other clearly-bad behaviour.

So, why was Poilievre smart to abandon Tamara Lich and her bridesmaids – Chris Barber, Pat King, James Bauder and Benjamin Dichter – at the altar? Well, Nanos has the answer.

KINSELLA: Alberta Premier Danielle Smith picking fight with Canada to get re-elected

KINSELLA: Trudeau, Poilievre score wins at Emergencies Act inquiry

The pollster did a poll, released this week, and found that nearly 70 per cent of Canadians fully supported the Trudeau government’s use of the Emergencies Act. Fifty per cent said the inquiry left them with an even worse impression of the convoy participants.

And the Poilievre Conservatives’ lead in the polls? Gone. Evaporated. Disappeared. As Nanos top guy, Nik Nanos, put it in an understatement for the ages: “If there continues to be a focus on the convoy … it could be a potential risk for Pierre Poilievre.”

No kidding. And you know who knows that most of all? Poilievre.

Which is why he’s ghosted the convoy folks. Which is why he’s kept quiet. Which is why he’s not dumb.

And which is why the convoy types are feeling sad and lonely, these days.

UCP AUSTERITY

Majority of Alberta teachers see increase in class sizes: ATA survey

Story by Anna Junker • Yesterday 

Alberta Teachers’ Association president Jason Schilling.© Shaughn Butts


Alberta teachers are seeing an increase in class sizes with greater levels of complexity and diversity of student needs, according to a new survey.

The seventh Pulse Rapid Research Study from the Alberta Teachers’ Association surveyed 1,085 teachers and 165 school leaders between September and October and found 64 per cent of teachers saw an increase in their classroom size, while about 36 per cent of teachers identified they have 30 to 40 students, or more, in their classes.

The largest class size growth was found in Grades 4 to 6, high school science and math, and junior high math and English language arts.

Eighty-five per cent of teachers also reported an increase in the complexity and diversity of student needs compared to last year. The top three complexities were identified as social/emotional, cognitive, and behavioural.

Jason Schilling, ATA president, said the results of the survey are “extremely concerning.”

“We need government to listen to teachers and school leaders and focus on the needs of our students and the government needs to start that work today. Just as teachers and schools have had an agile response to the public emergency health orders during the pandemic, government and school boards must react to the mounting issues in Alberta schools before things get worse.”

In an emailed statement, Education Minister Adriana LaGrange said the province is working closely with school boards to alleviate pressures on teachers by addressing enrollment growth, pandemic learning disruptions, class complexity and access to behavioural assessments.

She said the government is also providing additional funding through a new supplemental enrolment growth grant for school authorities growing by more than two per cent over the previous year and working on strategies to increase educational assistants in classrooms.

“I greatly value and appreciate the work teachers do to support our students and will continue to work with school authorities, the Alberta Teachers’ Association, and other education stakeholders to ensure we address the needs of our school system,” LaGrange said.

Related
‘Stand for public education’: Albertans pack legislature grounds for rally

Danielle Smith met with jeers from some Alberta teachers at UCP leadership forum

The survey found there was also a decline in support for students with exceptionalities, 56 per cent of survey respondents said. Thirty-one per cent of teachers estimated the timelines for speech, occupational therapy, physical therapy and psycho-educational assessments for students would take six months to one year, while 26 per cent believed it would not be completed at all within this school year.

The study also explored the impacts of COVID-19 and the curriculum. Eighty-six per cent of respondents indicated students are struggling with learning and have experienced significant gaps in their curriculum during the pandemic.

Schilling said these findings were identified across all jurisdictions in the province — large urban centres, small urban centres, and rural centres.

“Teachers across this province from border to border are seeing these complexities needs increasing from the pandemic and a lack of support for those,” he said.

“I can’t imagine having a student in my class that needs an assessment in order to provide them support so that they can move forward and be successful at school and not be able to get that assessment within the school year. That’s unacceptable.”

The study also found teachers and school leaders reported compassion stress, compassion fatigue, and unsustainable levels of moral distress.

ajunker@postmedia.com

UCP FASCISM 

Alberta premier rejects suggestion she erred with bill giving her sweeping powers

Yesterday 

EDMONTON — Alberta Premier Danielle Smith is rejecting suggestions she made a mistake when she introduced a bill that would give her cabinet sweeping powers to rewrite laws outside the legislative process.


Alberta premier rejects suggestion she erred with bill giving her sweeping powers© Provided by The Canadian Press

Smith says the changes being made to her sovereignty act reversing that authority simply reflect the normal process of honing and clarifying legislation.

“The sovereignty act wasn’t perfect in its wording. That’s why it’s being amended,” Smith told reporters Tuesday. “There are a couple of clarifications that we needed to make.

“I just look at this as part of the process. You introduce bills with three readings for a reason."

Smith has been widely criticized for introducing those unchecked powers in her sovereignty act as part of a broader plan to fight what she deems federal intrusion in areas of provincial responsibility.

After accusations last week that the bill gave her those powers, Smith reversed course on the weekend and said there would be amendments to fix it.

Her comments echoed those made by Justice Minister Tyler Shandro on Monday, when he told reporters: "I'm not going to characterize it as a mistake.”

Neither Smith nor Shandro have explained how the powers ended up in the bill if they were not supposed to be there.

Shandro pushed back Monday on reporters, who suggested he and the other members of Smiths United Conservative government didn’t understand that the bill contained the sweeping powers provision.

“Of course, the bill was understood,” said Shandro.

Asked if he was fine with the way the original bill was worded, Shandro, a lawyer, said he has given legal advice to cabinet "about what the options are, and what the advantages and disadvantages are for the various different decision points."

"I’m one member of (cabinet) who votes on it," he said. "I’m not going to speak specifically about one particular decision point and what my advice was on that. I think that would be breaching cabinet confidentiality."

The Opposition NDP says Smith either got caught trying to make an end-run power grab or is so incompetent she introduced an authoritarian bill without knowing she was doing it.

On Tuesday, NDP justice critic Irfan Sabir called on Smith during question period to waive cabinet confidentiality so Shandro could explain to Albertans what legal advice he delivered.

“This bill was a poorly drafted attempt at giving extreme power to the cabinet at the expense of the democratic rights of Albertans," Sabir said. "Albertans deserve to know how such a disaster was created."

Smith rejected Sabir’s assertion, saying she has been open about the legal process.

“The reason why we’re putting this legislation forward is to make sure that we are enforcing our rights under the Constitution," she said. "That is the beginning and the end of it."

The bill is in second reading. The next stage, committee of the whole, is when the bill is to be debated in greater detail, and that is when amendments are expected.

On Monday, UCP caucus members said they would forward two amendments.

The first change would clarify that any changes cabinet makes to laws under the sovereignty act can't be done in secret, but must instead come back to the house for the normal process of debate and approval.

The caucus also voted to propose an amendment to spell out when cabinet can take action.

Under the bill, cabinet has wide latitude to respond to whatever federal law policy or program it deems harmful to Alberta's interests.

With the amendment, harm would be defined as anything a majority of the legislature deems to be an unconstitutional federal intrusion in provincial areas of responsibility.

The bill has been criticized by political scientists and legal experts as constitutionally questionable and a threat to the checks and balances of democracy.

There is also concern that the legislature is usurping the role of the courts by deciding on its own under the bill what is constitutional and what is not.

Criticism is coming from all sides of the political spectrum.

Kory Teneycke, manager of the recent Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario election campaign, told CBC's "Power and Politics" program on Monday that the bill offends conservatism.

“I don’t see how you can fix this bill or why you would want to,” said Teneycke, who was also the director of communications for prime minister Stephen Harper.

“The UCP and Albertans are on the right track in saying the federal government has overreached on a number of issues around the resource sector, where they’re acting in an unconstitutional and heavy-handed way – but the solution to unconstitutionality is not more unconstitutionality,” he said.

“I think this is going to go down in history as one of the most ill-conceived pieces of policy and legislation. And frankly, as a conservative, it’s profoundly unconservative.”

Business groups, including the Calgary Chamber of Commerce, warn the legal uncertainty surrounding the bill is not good for investment.

Indigenous leaders have come out against it, saying it tramples on treaty rights.

Indigenous Relations Minister Rick Wilson told reporters he has spoken to leaders, has heard their concerns and has urged them to propose amendments if they wish.

“I said, ‘Put something together and I’ll be willing to take it forward on your behalf,’” Wilson said.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 6, 2022.

Dean Bennett, The Canadian Press

City solicitor sees no positives for Calgary in proposed Alberta sovereignty act

Story by Brodie Thomas • Yesterday 

City hall on Thursday, October 14, 2021.© Provided by Calgary Herald

A solicitor for the city of Calgary suggested the province’s proposed sovereignty act could create problems for the municipality, including forcing council to defy some laws against its will.

Deputy city solicitor Denise Jakal spoke about the legislation, touted by the governing UCP as a means of protecting provincial jurisdiction against federal overreach, in response to a question from Coun. Peter Demong during question period at Tuesday’s council meeting.

“I realize that they’re still in the process of amending the act, but I was hoping that you could describe what the proposed sovereignty act means for us as a municipality from a best-case scenario to a worst-case point of view,” said the Ward 14 councillor.

Jakal said the best-case scenario would be if the province didn’t use the act at all, since there remain many questions about its potential effects.

She said in the worst-case scenario, it could have a significant effect on the city.

“For example, if there was a suggestion of lack of constitutionality or potential harm to the province of Alberta, there could be directives that might interfere with arrangements we have with the federal government,” said Jakal.

“Another example might be we would be directed not to abide by certain laws that perhaps the municipality would be interested in abiding by.”

Related
Five things to know about the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act

UCP caucus votes to propose changes to Alberta's controversial sovereignty act

'This could cause us problems': Alberta's sovereignty bill could scare off investment, says Calgary chamber

She said there is still a high level of speculation about what is coming.

“I just want to assure council that intergovernmental affairs and the law department are watching very, very closely with respect to any new developments on this particular file.”

A recent Leger poll showed only about one-third of provincial respondents felt the sovereignty act is necessary .

When asked about this at a news conference on Tuesday, Premier Danielle Smith said she thinks Albertans are keeping an open mind on the legislation.

“People want us to fight Ottawa when they interfere in our areas of jurisdiction,” said Smith. “We got a 62 per cent mandate to push back against Ottawa and their unfair levying of equalization, and so we need to put the tools in place to push Ottawa back into its own lane.”

Smith cited a Canadian Taxpayers Federation report that suggested once the carbon tax is fully implemented, Albertans will pay an extra 37 cents per litre at the pumps while Quebec drivers will pay only 23 cents per litre.

“It’s absurd to me that SUV drivers in Quebec are going to have cheaper gasoline and diesel prices than Alberta where we produce the product and refine it. These are the kinds of things the federal government does all the time and, in my view, I don’t think that’s constitutional,” said Smith. She said the sovereignty act will give the province the tools to challenge Ottawa.

“I think it’s an important part of the process because this is going to change the relationship with the rest of the country. We are putting up a shield and we are not going to allow the federal government to interfere in our areas of jurisdiction. They’ve got to follow the Constitution.”

brthomas@postmedia.com

Rahim Mohamed: Danielle Smith's Alberta Sovereignty Act pretty awkward for the RCMP

Opinion by Rahim Mohamed • Yesterday 

After months of speculation, the Alberta Sovereignty Within a United Canada Act (Bill 1) was finally unveiled last week. For those expecting a bombshell, Bill 1 didn’t disappoint, sending shockwaves through the country.


Premier Danielle Smith looks into the gallery as the Fourth Session of the 30th Legislature opens on Nov. 29 at the Alberta Legislature in Edmonton. Smith's new Sovereignty Act could pose problems for the RCMP, writes Rahim Mohamed.© Provided by National Post

Reactions to the bill have run the gamut from outrage to bafflement . Legal experts are divided on the question of its constitutionality .

Much of the analysis so far has focused on the so-called King Henry VIII powers delegated to the members of Alberta’s cabinet under the act. The act in its current form empowers cabinet ministers to issue and amend regulations through orders in council, essentially allowing them to bypass the province’s legislature. (Smith announced over the weekend that she’ll rewrite parts of the bill to scale back the lawmaking powers it grants to cabinet members).

A less scrutinized, but potentially even more far-reaching dimension of the act involves its implications for the future of policing in the province.

At present, Alberta is home to a patchwork system of policing, where the RCMP — a federal agency under contract with the Alberta government — shares jurisdiction with a handful of municipal and regional police services. Policing in Alberta is community-based , with the provincial government, oversight bodies, and cities each playing a role in its administration.

Bill 1, which doesn’t mention the RCMP by name, designates both municipal and regional police services as “ provincial entities ” that must comply with cabinet edicts to not enforce federal laws and policies that run afoul of the Sovereignty Act. This language appears to place the Alberta government on a collision course with the Trudeau government over its controversial mandatory gun buyback program .

Alberta Justice Minister Tyler Shandro has already said that he will direct the province’s police agencies, including the RCMP, to not enforce the buyback program, which empowers RCMP officers to seize over 1,500 different models of prohibited firearms. Shandro has argued that he has the legal authority to do this under the Alberta-RCMP provincial police service agreement and has precedent to point to in British Columbia’s non-enforcement of some federal drug laws . The Alberta Sovereignty Act nevertheless changes the dynamic of this impasse.

For one thing, a public spat over the buyback program could be a “win-win” for both Premier Danielle Smith and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

For Smith, the dispute would play extraordinarily well in rural Alberta without hurting the UCP too much in urban areas, where handguns are the bigger threat to public safety . Further, it would give Smith an opportunity to use the Sovereignty Act without jeopardizing foreign investment (oil and gas investors who are anxious about gun crime in Alberta can always try their luck in Texas ).
Tasha Kheiriddin: Liberals using gun-ban overreach as a wedge against Conservatives
Alberta hasn't been 'ignored' Danielle Smith, quite the opposite

For Trudeau, taking a public stand against assault weapons (and Smith) would be a vote winner in the perennial electoral battleground of southern Ontario, especially with homicide rates trending upwards . It would also give him a chance to turn the page from the rather sordid affair in Nova Scotia .

But where would this leave the RCMP? It’s one thing for Canada’s federal police agency to abide by the terms of its contract with Alberta, and quite another to comply (or be seen to be complying) with a provincial edict to not enforce federal criminal legislation. (The creation and modification of criminal law is, of course, unambiguously a federal power under Canada’s Constitution).

The use of the Alberta Sovereignty Act to rebuff Trudeau’s gun buyback program would put the RCMP in a jurisdictional no-man’s land. This may be just what Smith wants.

Smith has already unveiled a plan to replace the RCMP with a provincial police force, but has had difficulty building public support for the initiative, which will cost Alberta taxpayers an additional $235 million per year (plus $366 million in startup costs). Using the Sovereignty Act to drive a wedge between the RCMP and Alberta’s other police agencies is one way for Smith to give the proposal for a provincial police force a shot in the arm.

None of this is to say that Smith is playing some sort of elaborate game of 4D chess with the RCMP — frankly, I’m not sure she even knows what she’s having for breakfast tomorrow morning. Smith, who as The Line’s Jen Gerson has pointed out is one of Canada’s luckiest politicians , has nevertheless been handed a yet another gift with Trudeau’s overreaching gun buyback program and could use it to kill two birds with one stone.

Premier Smith, the proverbial dog chasing a car, finally has her long-awaited Alberta Sovereignty Act. The question now is what to do with it? Weaponizing the act at the expense of the Trudeau gun buyback program would be a way for everybody to win.

Except, of course, the RCMP.

National Post

Rahim Mohamed is a master’s student at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy. His writing has appeared in The Line, The Hub, and CBC News Calgary.

AFRAID OF PROTESTS
Alberta looks at arming legislature security guards as part of justice amendments

Yesterday 

EDMONTON — Alberta's justice minister has introduced legislation that would arm security officers at the legislature, make it easier to enforce spousal and child support in other jurisdictions and increase the limit on civil claims at the provincial court level.


Alberta looks at arming legislature security guards as part of justice amendments© Provided by The Canadian Press

Tyler Shandro, the minister of justice and attorney general, introduced the Justice Statutes Amendment Act on Tuesday.

The sergeant-at-arms and the speaker of the legislative assembly reviewed security after the shooting on Parliament Hill in 2014 and a suicide at the Alberta legislature in 2019

The review concluded that members of the Legislative Assembly Security Service should be allowed to carry firearms in the legislature building and surrounding area.

"This is something that has been studied going back to 2014. This is a long time coming, I think. It's been studied to death," Shandro said in an interview with The Canadian Press last month.

"I think that's one of the concerns that the speaker has and the sergeant-at-arms. I am aware that they do have concerns and have been looking for these changes for many years."

Shandro said there are already armed sheriffs at the legislature, but most of the security officials have law enforcement experience that would give another level of protection.

"Providing these officers with the tools they need, including firearms, (would) protect all of those who occupy this building."


An amendment to the Interjurisdictional Support Orders Act would also make it easier for people to collect child and spousal support from ex-partners and spouses who live across the country.

It would allow the electronic exchange of certified documents to support interjurisdictional support orders.

British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Nova Scotia have made similar legislative changes.

"Given Legal Aid Alberta assists individuals who have partners and parents in many other areas of the country, this amendment … will help enhance the ability of our clients to collect critical child and spousal support payments in a more timely and efficient manner, putting money in the hands who need it most," John Panusa, president and CEO of Legal Aid Alberta, said in a statement.

An update to the Provincial Court Act would allow more civil claims to be dealt with at the provincial court level. The process at the lower court level is simpler and more cost-effective, but the limit is $50,000 and was last updated in 2014.

Amendments would allow government to adjust the limit up to $200,000.

"This increase in jurisdictional limits will enhance the court's ability to fulfil its mission to provide fair, accessible and timely justice for Albertans," said Provincial Court of Alberta Chief Judge Derek Redman.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 6, 2022.

The Canadian Press

YANKEE IMPERIALI$M
Mosaic temporarily curtails potash production at Canadian mine


By Rod Nickel

WINNIPEG, Manitoba (Reuters) - Fertilizer producer Mosaic Co said on Tuesday that it has temporarily curtailed potash production at its Colonsay, Saskatchewan, mine in Canada, citing slower-than-expected demand.

Mosaic said in a statement that its inventories are adequate to meet demand in the short term. The company had restarted Colonsay in August 2021 after idling it for two years.

Potash prices spiked this year due to sanctions against Russia and Belarus, the world's second- and third-biggest producers after Canada.

Prices have since declined, however.

Mosaic's decision to curtail production is short-term and longer-term fundamentals look positive, said Chief Executive Joc O'Rourke. The Florida-based company expects to restart both of Colonsay's mills in early 2023.

Colonsay was producing at a rate of 1.3 million tonnes annually, and plans an expansion to raise output to between 1.8 million and 2 million tonnes by late next year.

Rival Nutrien Ltd is carrying out a potash expansion of its own in Saskatchewan.

(Reporting by Rod Nickel in Winnipeg; editing by Jonathan Oatis and Sandra Maler)

City's animal care, including Edmonton's zoo, should face audit: Coun. Rutherford

Story by Lauren Boothby • Yesterday 

Three puppies and their mother were siezed last year after a complaint was filed that the dogs had inadequate shelter from the cold.© Provided by Edmonton Journal

As Edmonton’s independent auditor plans for next year, one councillor wants to see more scrutiny of how the city cares for animals, including at the municipally-funded Edmonton Valley Zoo .

How waste collection, Blatchford redevelopment, green energy transit vehicles, capital projects, and external civic agencies are performing are already part of the external auditor’s plans for review next year. Audits of the Valley Line LRT public-private model and information technology are also underway.

But during Tuesday’s audit committee meeting, Ward Anirniq Coun. Erin Rutherford said animal care should be added to the list, particularly because a funding request in the operating budget suggests the city may not be meeting its legal requirements.

“We need to be making sure they’re getting the best care possible in any context, whether it’s animal care and control, or whether it’s at the (Edmonton) Valley Zoo,” she told Postmedia after the meeting.

“It’s important for us to be the voice of our most vulnerable and, for me, animals that can’t speak are our most vulnerable. And when they’re in our care, somebody needs to advocate for them, and I feel passionate about being that voice.”

A funding request for animal welfare — hiring peace officers and animal care personnel, and providing grant funding for animal welfare — is in the draft 2023-2026 operating budget, but so far it’s unfunded.

A third-party assessment of the city’s capacity to care for animals would also be part of that work.

However, the funding request says approving this would “ensure adequate animal welfare and care for all species of animals in custody as required by legislation under the Animal Protection Act.” One result to come from the funding would be “organizational capacity to meet legislated standards for animal care and welfare,” it states.

Rutherford said she’s concerned this package isn’t funded in the draft budgets despite some language she interprets to mean that an independent assessment of whether or not standards are being met could be needed.

She plans to request this package be approved during this month’s budget debates. For 2023, the funding request is $3.3 million with 28 full-time equivalent staff.

The Edmonton Valley Zoo is asking for $10.9 million in the city’s four-year capital budget to upgrade and repair enclosures to meet requirements for animal care standards, and risks losing accreditation , closure, or having to send animals away if work isn’t completed.

Zoo spokeswoman Debi Winwood said in an email Tuesday they aren’t aware of an interest in an audit, but the zoo is accredited by Canada’s Accredited Zoos and Aquariums (CAZA) and adheres to very high animal care standards. “Our team is made up of dedicated animal care professionals who take care standards very seriously. With respect to an audit, we would await city council’s direction.”

Capacity for distress-free environment ‘inadequate’: city

Other councillors are also asking questions.

In written questions to city administration about the 2023-2026 budget, Ward Métis Coun. Ashley Salvador asked to what extent legal requirements for animal care aren’t being met. Ward Karhiio Coun. Keren Tang also asked why the service package is unfunded if it is required.

According to the city, the Animal Care and Control Centre (ACCC) was built to shelter stray and lost dogs and cats in 2010 for short-term stays, but after they began enforcing the Animal Protection Act (APA) in 2019, the volume and species of animals being sent there has changed “dramatically.”

“The facility design, staffing, capacity and equipment are insufficient to deal with the diversity of species, their varied medical and environmental needs, the volume of animals, and the length of stay required in the APA investigations,” the city said.

“The City of Edmonton continues to incur reputational and legislative risk because the capacity to maintain animals in an environment free from distress is inadequate.”

For instance, 77 birds and 75 reptiles were seized recently, overburdening staff and leaving them scrambling to fill in unbudgeted overtime, buy equipment and pay for veterinary consultations ad-hoc.

The ACCC has the capacity to hold 84 cats and 47 dogs comfortably, according to the city’s website. Lost animals without ID are kept for up to three days, or up to 10 days with ID. After that, “adoptable” pets are transferred to the Edmonton Humane Society.

Postmedia’s request for an interview with city staff was not granted by deadline.

lboothby@postmedia.com

@laurby

COP15

Hard talks on hard targets: real work begins at Montreal biodiversity conference

MONTREAL — Representatives from nearly 200 countries are to begin the real work Wednesday at a crucial meeting on global biodiversity — hard talks on hard targets for saving enough of the world's ecosystems to keep the planet functioning.


Hard talks on hard targets: real work begins at Montreal biodiversity conference© Provided by The Canadian Press

Observers say they're optimistic the 196 countries at the COP15 meeting in Montreal can agree that nearly a third of Earth's lands and waters should come under some form protection by 2030.

"There is huge support for it," said Stephen Woodley of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, a high-profile group of governments and civil society organizations advising conference delegates.

"I believe there is really significant support for 30 per cent in quality areas."

The 30-per-cent goal is the result of years of scientific study and consensus.

"If current land conversion rates, poaching of large animals and other threats are not markedly slowed or halted in the next 10 years, 'points of no return' will be reached for multiple ecosystems and species," said a 2019 paper published in the journal Science.

Aerin Jacob of the Nature Conservancy of Canada said 30 per cent is the result of 50 years of research.

"Scientists have studied this for years and years, and we know with a great deal of evidence that 30 per cent is the lower limit."

The same Science paper said the real target should be 50 per cent.

Momentum toward that goal has been building for years. It's been endorsed by the G7 industrialized countries and is supported by 112 countries from Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas, including Canada.

Still, much remains to be done. The text on conservation targets being debated by delegates has more brackets in it than agreed wording.

"We've made some progress," said Woodley. "It's tough sledding."




Related video: UN Biodiversity Conference kicks-off in Montreal
Duration 3:20
View on Watch

Connections between climate change and health explored at COP15 Montreal


What young leaders want for the future of biodiversity at the COP15 Youth Summit


Some of the disputed text concerns Indigenous people.

"There is a significant group who want to ensure that protecting 30 per cent of the Earth is not negative on Indigenous people or community-owned lands," Woodley said. "It certainly has been in the past, in some cases."

Others want to ensure that areas being conserved actually contribute to saving species, promoting ecosystem function, protecting against floods or wildfires or storing carbon.

"Those are all value judgments," said Jacob.

"I would argue we need to protect ourselves against all those things. We can't pick and choose."

Other issues to be settled include what constitutes protection. It doesn't need to be a park. It could be what is known as "other effective area-based conservation measures," known in COP-speak as OECMs.

The Vancouver watershed, managed to ensure water quality, is an OECM. So is Manitoba's wildlife-rich Canadian Forces Base Shiloh.

Private groups or land trusts will protect some lands. Others will be conserved by Indigenous management, an approach on which Canada is increasingly relying.

Woodley's group recognizes seven different types of conservation areas, some allowing limited resource extraction, with four different governance models.

In developed countries where natural areas are scarce and small, efforts will focus on restoration.

"There are so many solutions," Jacob said. "It's about making sure those things can survive and thrive."

And much will depend on how any plan is implemented. Discussions on finance are to begin later this week.

"An agreement without any action won't help us protect the life of the planet," said Jacob.

But both she and Woodley agree some kind of deal on conservation targets is likely to happen.

"We absolutely have to do this," Jacob said.

"It's not a question of no agreement. It's more a question of what the agreement will look like."

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 7, 2020.

— By Bob Weber in Edmonton

The Canadian Press

'Exaggerated' pandemic benefits fuelled 'excess demand,' driving steeper rate hikes: Scotiabank

AU CONTRAIRE IT MAKES CASE FOR 

UBI & WAGES FOR HOUSEWORK

Story by Stephanie Hughes • Yesterday 

COVID-19 benefit cheques. Scotiabank says the generous benefits likely fuelled excess demand in the economy.© Provided by Financial Post

One of Bay Street’s top economists estimates that the Bank of Canada’s benchmark interest rate is headed to 4.25 per cent, and more than a percentage point of the increase will have been necessitated by a need to offset “excess demand” created by what appears to have been overly generous COVID benefits.

“Pandemic support programs for firms and households are creating the excess demand that the country is experiencing,” Bank of Nova Scotia chief economist Jean-François Perrault concludes in a new assessment of Canada’s inflation scare , published Dec. 5. “Absent from these support measures, Canada would still be in excess supply.”

By “excess supply,” Perrault, a former assistant deputy minister at the Finance Department, means the economy would be weaker than it is today: suppliers of goods and services wouldn’t be struggling to fill orders as they have been for much of the year, and there would be less upward pressure on inflation.

The thrust of the Scotiabank report was to assess what’s driving inflation, not pass judgement on Ottawa’s response to the COVID recession. Perrault and and his co-author, René Lalonde, the bank’s director of modelling and forecasting, wrote that the main fiscal rescue programs — the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) and its successor benefit, the Canada Recovery Benefit (CRB ), along with Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy — had a “large and welcome impact on the economy,” as an extraordinary economic collapse was followed by the engineering of an equally extraordinary recovery.

Still, with hindsight, they said Ottawa’s response was “likely exaggerated,” and the “inflationary impulse” created by that spending is what Bank of Canada governor Tiff Macklem is now trying to offset with the most aggressive series of interest-rate increases since the central bank began targeting inflation in the 1990s.

“The Bank of Canada’s policy rate would not need to be above neutral were it not for these programs,” Perrault and Lalonde wrote.

The neutral rate is the theoretical rate at which the central bank and economists estimate that borrowing costs would be neither impeding nor encouraging economic growth. The Bank of Canada estimates the neutral rate is between two per cent and three per cent, and the Bank of Nova Scotia’s economics team puts the rate at 2.5 per cent.

In other words, if Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had ended his rescue programs sooner, or made them less generous, interest rates probably would be lower, according to Perrault and Lalonde, who used their in-house economic model to produce an estimate on the main sources of inflation.

They found that half of the upward pressure on prices since the end of 2019 was the result of global factors over which the central bank has little or no control, including U.S. inflation, commodity prices and a weaker exchange rate. And they found that supply constraints caused by the pandemic explain another 35 per cent of the increase in prices.

That means purely domestic factors such as the pandemic programs account for a relatively small amount of the inflation, but they had a “major impact” on the “output gap,” a concept that the Bank of Canada uses to take the temperature of the economy, as it measures the difference between policymakers’ estimate of the value of all goods and services the economy can produce without stoking inflation, and the actual level of economic output.

The CERB, which was swiftly put in place in March 2020 to provide $2,000 in monthly payments to Canadians who lost income from the pandemic; the wage subsidy, which supported employers; the CRB; and the Canada Rent Relief Program all helped the one million Canadians who lost their jobs during the onset of the pandemic, as well as many more struggling with shelter costs and running their businesses.

Those programs pushed tens of billions of dollars into the economy, lifting the output gap by 1.3 percentage points alone, according to the Scoitabank study. It’s the demand generated by that spending that the Bank of Canada is now trying to offset with higher interest rates, Perrault and Lalonde concluded.

The recovery had lots of momentum by the end of 2021, suggesting rescue programs could have been wound up. The CRB ended on Dec. 23, 2021, and the last of the pandemic-era supports, the Canada Recovery Caregiving Benefit (CRCB) and the Canada Recovery Sickness Benefit (CRSB), concluded on May 7, 2022 .

While there’s little Macklem can do about the global drivers of inflation, interest-rate policy has considerable influence over domestic demand. If not for the excess demand stoked by the COVID rescues, Perrault and Lalonde estimate that the Bank of Canada could have stopped raising interest rates when the benchmark reached 2.5 per cent.

The target rate is currently at 3.75 per cent, and Scotiabank’s economics team predicts Macklem will lift borrowing costs to 4.25 per cent when he and his deputies conclude their latest round of deliberations on Dec. 7.

Scotiabank expects a gradual decline in the pace of inflation over the next year to year and a half, averaging about 6.8 per cent for 2022. The team then expects inflation to fall to four per cent next year before returning to the Bank of Canada’s two per cent target in 2024. Scotia sees higher interest rates combining with weaker demand for exports from China and Europe combining to cause a “very mild recession, akin to a stall in growth” in the first half of 2023, followed by “very modest” growth over the rest of the year.

“Much of the reduction in inflation stems from a reversal of the global factors that have pushed inflation up in Canada and elsewhere,” Perrault and Lalonde said in the report. “These factors (largely commodity prices and supply bottlenecks) have mostly unwound the gains made over the last year and appear to be slowly working their way through to inflation. That is expected to continue.”

• Email: shughes@postmedia.com | Twitter: StephHughes95

MONOPOLY CAPITALI$M

Congress wants to grill Live Nation’s CEO over the Taylor Swift Ticketmaster fiasco


By David Goldman, CNN Business
Published Tue December 6, 2022

Congress wants answers from the CEO of Ticketmaster’s parent company after a ticketing snafu ahead of Taylor Swift’s Eras tour left millions of unhappy Swifties without the ability to see the the singer-songwriter perform.

In a letter addressed to Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino Tuesday, the House Energy and Commerce Committee demanded a briefing on what went wrong and what steps the company is taking to fix the problems. The committee members want to meet with Rapino by December 15.

“The recent pre-sales ticketing process for Taylor Swift’s upcoming Eras tour – in which millions of fans endured delays, lockouts, and competition with aggressive scammers, scalpers and bots – raises concerns over the potential unfair and deceptive practices that face consumers and eventgoers,” the committee wrote in its letter.

The committee noted it had previously raised concerns about the industry’s business practices and said it wants to meet with Rapino to discuss how the company processes tickets for concerts and major tours. It also wants answers about how Ticketmaster plans to improve in the future.

Swift’s Eras tour kicks off March 17 and will have 52 concerts in multiple stadiums across the United States over five months. Overwhelming demand snarled the ticketing site last month, infuriating countless fans. Customers complained on social media about Ticketmaster not loading, saying the platform didn’t allow them to access tickets, even if they had a pre-sale code for verified fans. Ticketmaster ultimately canceled ticket sales to the general public.

More than two dozen Taylor Swift fans sue Ticketmaster

Ticketmaster apologized to Swift and her fans who were unable to secure tickets and blamed the debacle on its “Verified Fans” system, a mechanism aimed at eliminating bots that gives presale codes to individuals. The system couldn’t keep up with the intense demand, Ticketmaster said last month. Roughly 3.5 million people signed up for the program to buy Swift tickets, its “largest registration in history.” That unprecedented demand, combined with a “staggering number of bot attacks as well as fans who didn’t have invite codes” drove “unprecedented traffic” to its site, Ticketmaster said, and, essentially, broke it.

But the House committee said the company’s explanation wasn’t sufficient.

“This statement raises questions over your bot management solution and its ability to adequately protect consumers,” the committee wrote.

The committee pointed out that the BOTS Act of 2016 allows the Federal Trade Commission to fine Ticketmaster with “steep” penalties if it “knowingly sold tickets that were improperly purchased” by bots.

In its letter to Rapino, the committee also said it wants information about the fees Ticketmaster charges customers. It also asked to learn more about dynamic pricing. ticket availability limits, restrictions on transferabiity and the company’s efforts to thwart bots and scammers.

Ticketmaster did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Justice Department has launched an antitrust investigation into Live Nation, the owner of Ticketmaster, to look at whether the company has a monopoly in the market for concerts, including ticket purchasing, a source familiar with the matter told CNN last month. Last week, more than two dozen Taylor Swift fans sued Live Nation for “unlawful conduct” in the pop star’s chaotic tour sale, claiming the ticketing giant violated antitrust laws, among others.

Rapino and Live Nation have caught the ire of Congress before. Senator Amy Klobuchar criticized Ticketmaster in an open letter Rapino in the days following the ticket snafu, saying she has “serious concerns” about the company’s operations. The chair of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust, and Consumer Rights, wrote that complaints from Swift fans unable to buy tickets for her upcoming tour, in addition to criticism about high fees, suggests that the company “continues to abuse its market positions.”

Rail workers warn of exodus after Congress forces through deal

BY KARL EVERS-HILLSTROM - 12/06/22 6

Railroad workers could leave the industry after Congress forced through a contract that does not provide them any paid sick days, an exodus that would ripple through an economy reliant on freight railroads to transport goods.

The exit of thousands of train conductors and engineers would be felt by major corporations and U.S. consumers alike. It could slow the delivery of food, fuel and online orders while strangling already-shaky supply chains.

The economy was almost upended by a nationwide strike before lawmakers intervened last week to enforce a deal many workers found lacking.

Those who were holding out hope for a strong contract might look for a new job after the deal failed to provide paid sick leave or put an end to strict attendance policies and strenuous schedules that require workers to be on call constantly, rail workers say. 

“I don’t think you’ll just see half of the workforce disappear, but you’ll see a good percentage, and we can’t afford for anybody to leave because we’re so undermanned as it is,” said Hugh Sawyer, an Atlanta-based engineer at Norfolk Southern.

Any exodus of workers would only exacerbate staffing shortages brought on by railroads laying off around 30 percent of their workforce over the past six years. That, in turn, has led to exhausted workers and persistent delays and cancellations when demand for shipped products spiked. 

Business groups have warned that the disruptions, which are driven by staffing shortfalls, helped fuel inflation.

Sawyer, who serves as treasurer of grassroots rail reform group Railroad Workers United, said that younger workers who place more emphasis on work-life balance will be the first to leave.

“Most of these people live in or around metro Atlanta. The economy’s booming. They will find a job elsewhere,” Sawyer said.

Workers say that some employees could leave as soon as they receive back pay and cash bonuses, which will average roughly $16,000 per person. Railroads will dole out that money within 60 days.

The Association of American Railroads (AAR) said in a statement that carriers hear workers’ concerns and agree that “conversations about work-life balance issues must continue.” The industry group said that railroads’ train and engine workforce has grown 8 percent since January. 

“The benefits and compensation packages are part of why that is the case — both of which are seeing historic increases through this deal with average wages and compensation rising to $160,000 over the course of the contract,” an AAR spokesperson said. “Railroading is difficult work, and our employees are compensated accordingly in recognition of that.” 

The contract signed into law Friday, negotiated with the help of the Biden administration, provides 24 percent raises over five years and allows workers to take three unpaid days off for medical appointments, a provision that wasn’t included in previous proposals. 

But it doesn’t offer any paid sick days, adjust schedules or remove attendance policies that penalize workers for missing time to attend family gatherings or other scheduled events.

“They talk about the money in this contract. It’s just not worth it to have to give up what these people have to give up,” said Jeff Kurtz, a Railroad Workers United member who worked as a locomotive engineer in Iowa for 40 years. 

Kurtz said that railway workers might take less money to work factory or trucking jobs that offer consistent hours and are always hiring. 

Congress last week overrode four unions that had not ratified agreements with railroads. Those include train and engine workers at SMART-TD, the largest rail union, who rejected the tentative contract last month. 

Unions lobbied lawmakers to add seven days of paid sick leave to the deal, while railroads pushed back, arguing that Congress would set a dangerous precedent by modifying the contract. 

The House passed the sick leave measure with the support of every Democrat and three Republicans. Just six GOP senators voted for the proposal, dooming its chances in the upper chamber. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) was the only Democrat to vote against it. 

“The senators who opposed the measure all have paid sick days, as do their staff. Apparently, they believe the nation’s rail workers are ‘essential’ to the American economy and supply chain, but not essential enough to deserve the same protection as them when becoming ill,” SMART-TD said in a statement following the vote.

Union officials have sought to keep hope alive by assuring workers that they are still pushing for paid sick leave. That could come in the form of another legislative effort or an executive order that requires federal contractors, including railroads, to provide paid sick days.

At the bill signing, President Biden said he would continue to fight for paid sick leave, but didn’t offer specifics on how he would go about it. 

“It’s a really good bill lacking only one thing, and we’re going to get that one thing done before it’s all over,” Biden said. 

And on Monday, activist investors filed proposals requesting that Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific provide paid sick leave, arguing that the companies must provide the benefit to stay competitive and keep workers safe.

“Focusing on the short term at the expense of workers poses potential risks to the company and the economy,” Kate Monahan, who leads shareholder advocacy at Trillium Asset Management, said in a statement. “As shareholders, we are asking management to reprioritize and take the longer-term view that safeguarding the health and safety of their workers will better position them for the future.”

Paid sick leave would represent a significant consolation prize for rail workers who are fed up with a system that they believe allows railroad executives to ignore their demands. 

Railroads and unions engaged in tenuous negotiations for more than three years and remained at a standstill until a Biden-appointed board of experts released contract recommendations in July.

While workers in other essential industries took part in a wave of strikes this year, rail unions must overcome a series of roadblocks authorized by Congress that are explicitly designed to make a walkout difficult, if not impossible, taking away a key source of leverage. That system won’t change anytime soon. 

“The federal government inserted itself into the dispute between the railroads and the railroad workers under the premise that it must protect the American economy. Yet, when the federal government makes that decision, its representatives have a moral responsibility to also protect the interests of the citizens that make this nation’s economy work — American railroaders,” Tony Cardwell, president of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division, said in a statement.