Just a note on the item about bail reform. On May 16, the federal government introduced Bill C-48 to make some changes in bail access for people accused of some violent offences. The bill may or may not do anything useful - the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, if the pudding is ever put in the bowl.
The government made a big deal of Bill 48 - a grand total of four federal cabinet ministers seized the opportunity to sleaze their way into the press release announcing the introduction of the Bill.
Justice Minister Lametti (fair enough, he was the bill's sponsor) said: "We told Canadians that our government would step up and do its part to address how the justice system deals with repeat violent offending. Bill C-48 does that."
Public Safety Minister Mendicino climbed on board, saying, “Today’s announcement is a central part of our government’s comprehensive plan to keep Canadians safe."
Intergovernmental Affairs Minster LeBlanc took the opportunity to tell everyone how the Bill showed the federal government takes the concerns of provinces and municipalities seriously. More partnership was promised.
What's more, Health Minister Bennett assured anyone who was interested that "“Our government is committed to keeping our communities safe." Bill C-48 is one example.
With all this high-powered posturing and preening, one would expect that Bill C-48 would move ahead promptly - particularly since all the Opposition parties said they would support it. After all, a priority bill essential to public safety that is part of a comprehensive plan should get passed into law lickety-split, right?
If you thought that, you obviously have not been paying attention to this government.
As of tomorrow, it will be two months since Bill C-48 was introduced. Nothing has happened. Nothing. Not one of the four eager Ministers has even delivered a second reading speech. Parliament is now on summer break, so another two months will pass before anything CAN HAPPEN. But don't hold your breath.
My prediction is this. Bill C-48 will die on the order paper. It will never become law during this session of Parliament. Down the road, in a year or two, there will be another surge of controversy about catch and release treatment of violent, repeat offenders. The government will be ready with action - it will dust off Bill C-48, introduce it a second time, and issue another press release. Government in action.
We don't have to worry about foreign election interference in Canada - we got our own tax funded election interference right here. We call it the CBC. (re: Danielle Smith, the CBC and the NDP)
Okay, I admit a bit dramatic, but for example, mark the impressive reporting by the globe. Hit piece after hit piece on the Smith issue on the front page of the globe for months before the provincial election. The retraction is buried as an opinion piece.
If media is to be relevant in Canada it has to do much, much better. And, it seems the only way the media will do better is if there is punishment for very bad reporting. Yes, we all make mistakes, but maybe media should be making far fewer mistakes during an election cycle.
This might also explain why conventional media and journalism is dying in Canada. It's not just big bad tech, but a lot of self inflicted wounds also. More and more of us are just tuning them out now that we see through them.
On immigration, there are strong reasons why the government's current and planned approach is mistaken. The impact on housing, healthcare and infrastructure and the inability of government's to plan and implement in these areas means an increasing gap. Even the demographics and economic arguments are weak, as demographers such as David Green and labour economists such as Mikal Skuterud have noted. Arguing for lower levels of permanent and temporary immigration does not make one anti-immigration as the issue is what levels and types make the most sense for Canada and Canadians, whether born here or immigrants.
Central banks around the world erred with interest rates too low and growing the money supply too quickly, not only exceptionally so in responses to COVID, but almost continuously since 1997, when LTCM failed and several Asian countries suffered debt crises. They knew their actions should be inflationary but missed that the inflation stored up in asset prices only to be unleashed when Boomers accelerated asset liquidation for retirement and during COVID. Higher rates and a shrinking money supply hasn't reigned in inflation or extraordinary high asset valuations (Ex. housing) because governments continue to stimulate through deficit spending, and a whole generation has been conditioned to view credit as limitless and costless. The only solution will be significant job losses in the public sector required to balanced budgets, and enough Millennials defaulting on loans to change perceptions of credit risk. Unfortunately, the populist "don't worry, but be happy" bent of the Trudeau Liberals will delay action until something like a large credit rating hit occurs. Housing crashes happened every 7 to 10 years throughout history. Canada experience two significant ones in the early 80s and again in the early 90s.
My comment is about the story you promised not to talk about - C-18. You characterize the story as being an inner-media one. I think you might be too close to the story to see its true import and the fact that it is one that touches all Canadians in what will prove to be a very profound way. Indeed, if you want to make a list of failed Government efforts to deliver anything worthwhile C-18 and their attempt to rescue mainstream media should probably be at the top of the list. People smarter than me insist that an unencumbered and active fifth estate is essential for creating the accountability necessary for a healthy democracy. Not only is C-18 not going to deliver on the policy objective of propping up mainstream media, by my read, even if its potential fruits were fully realized, it would still have failed to revitalize this anchor of our democracy and represents a great case study for this Government's inability to understand issues and formulate reasonable policy in response. In characterizing this as just a media issue you seem to be missing the relevance of the larger story and its importance. I think it fair to say that your coverage of C-18 has uncharacteristically lacked vision and imagination. Indeed, the Government's failure here is probably their most significant dick stomping to date and one with the greatest implications for the health of the nation. I'll apologize now if I have a selective memory.
You disparage the Libs for their weak effort in "supporting" the mainstream media and you additionally disparage the idea of C-18 as an effective tool in bringing the MSM back to health.
I happen to agree with you, but ...
First, I must note that it is my opinion that the former "glory years" enjoyed by the MSM was that of the buggy whip industry before the invention of automobiles. In other words, I contend, the MSM as we knew it, is better regarded as a modern day buggy whip industry: it is dying and will end up dead very quickly.
As to C-18, I contend that it's main purpose was to funnel more money to the CBC without this being terrifically apparent and to thereby get the Lib's own "journalistic" enterprise and viewpoint to grow and dominate much further. I know, cynical. But, it is hard to not believe it when you consider the amount of money that would have been distributed to the Ceeb under C-18.
Now, as for your contention that "... an unencumbered and active fifth estate is essential ..." I agree with you. Now, having agreed with you, how does one square the buggy whip analogy and the idea of importance? Actually, I - like so many - have difficulty in bringing those two things into agreement. I can only make a few points.
First, the "glory years" of MSM were, historically, an aberration; we will not see a return to the "glory years" of fat profits, etc. And, make no mistake, it was the fat profits in the industry that allowed the industry to assume the mantle of sainthood, independence, moral sanctity, etc.
Second, what will happen is likely to be somewhat similar to the time before the "glory years" where there were many independent journalists, ranging from dubious to excellent quality; everything from pamphleteers on particular subjects to folks who put out reasonably comprehensive news and opinion sites. I refer you to the many left wing and right wing websites whose quality various from dubious to excellent. To me, even many of the more strident left/right sites can and do break news ignored by the remaining MSM but, more importantly, they bring various important aspects of stories that have been ignored by MSM to light. Good on them.
So, buggy whips being what they are, i.e. obsolete, we will now have to work to get our news. To think that we can get a comprehensive, well-rounded, totally unbiased news picture is unlikely in the extreme. What will happen is that some newspapers will continue, think the Globe and Mail, but only so long as the present Lord Thomson (or similar proprietors of other publications) feels a hereditary obligation to support it. What will also happen is that we (i.e. the public) will have to work at getting alternative information that is not covered by, say, the Globe.
Is all lost? Nope. But you will have to work for your news.
To me it is ironic that Quebec has experienced the worst oil by rail disaster in Canada yet refuses pipelines. If it takes another 10 years to achieve that rail diversion that will be about the time an Eastern pipeline could have been finished making everyone safer.
The problem is that the people who oppose pipelines also imagine that there’s a viable path to transition away from oil use, so they see no conflict in opposing both pipeline and rail transport. The truth is that even if everything goes perfectly, a transition away from fossil fuels has something like a 20-30 year timeline. However, activists have whipped themselves into a panic with “climate crisis” rhetoric, so we’re past the point of pragmatic discussion.
If you want to see another sad example of our future with disaster recovery, look no further than Lytton. It’s been two years since it was burnt down, and there’s still a lot of nothing there.
Here's a policy proposal for the feds. Offer citizenship to any crew that comes to Canada and builds 10 abodes per person on the crew. Kill two birds with one stone (sorry/not sorry to the vegans)
"At the press conference, Deputy Bank of Canada Governor Rhys Mendes was asked about housing prices — specifically whether or not the bank was factoring in the impact of higher interest rates on housing costs, increasing the very inflation that the hikes are meant to combat. **She** gave an answer so candid and dispassionate that we were a little taken aback — accustomed as we are to politician-speak."
Well this is what happens when you try to bash out a dispatch while sitting in front of a fire at a campsite with no WiFi and very slow cellphone internet. Will correct, and thank you. JG
Yet another reason why the CBC doesn't deserve taxpayer money anymore. Money from ads, subscriptions and donations, sure. But taxpayer dollars for lies during an election? The institution deserves the axe.
On defence spending -- this is one of those issues that's been kicking around across various Liberal and Conservative goverments and seems to come down to the fact that we like our taxes low and our services high, which means things that don't directly deliver to taxpayers today get starved. That's the military.
But, clearly this approach has starved the military of its capacity while governments of all stripes continue to talk up its value while keeping their wallets in their pocket. Nobody is arguing (as far as I can here) for a kind of minimally viable military, but that's the end result.
The 'deal' we get in NATO would be a significant policy target if we didn't already have it: pooling our miliarty spending with the biggest miltary spender on the planet and a grouping of other like-minded countries. The main ask is 2% spending on GDP and we have a military that clearly needs investment and modernization. Leadership would be to ensure we get there even if there isn't a broad voting constituency screaming for this. We are getting to the point where our inability to get a handle on this is becoming a foreign affairs challenge, so that decision should be easy.
This and finding ways to address chroniclly low productivity should be federal policy focuses, but I see no viable proposals -- not from the Liberals, but also not from the opposition parties. That's disappointing.
Your comment Dean; 'now that we see through them' is something I had not thought of. We do see through them now. It took us long enough, but we see the bias spin MSM puts on everything. I notice opinion writers and so call reporters while 'almost' praising the conservative have to get a hit in on Smith, Poliliever, Moe and they are even after Stefanson hoping for and NDP victory in Manitoba. 'I see through you CBC' would make a great T-shirt.
Just a note on the item about bail reform. On May 16, the federal government introduced Bill C-48 to make some changes in bail access for people accused of some violent offences. The bill may or may not do anything useful - the proof of the pudding will be in the eating, if the pudding is ever put in the bowl.
The government made a big deal of Bill 48 - a grand total of four federal cabinet ministers seized the opportunity to sleaze their way into the press release announcing the introduction of the Bill.
Justice Minister Lametti (fair enough, he was the bill's sponsor) said: "We told Canadians that our government would step up and do its part to address how the justice system deals with repeat violent offending. Bill C-48 does that."
Public Safety Minister Mendicino climbed on board, saying, “Today’s announcement is a central part of our government’s comprehensive plan to keep Canadians safe."
Intergovernmental Affairs Minster LeBlanc took the opportunity to tell everyone how the Bill showed the federal government takes the concerns of provinces and municipalities seriously. More partnership was promised.
What's more, Health Minister Bennett assured anyone who was interested that "“Our government is committed to keeping our communities safe." Bill C-48 is one example.
With all this high-powered posturing and preening, one would expect that Bill C-48 would move ahead promptly - particularly since all the Opposition parties said they would support it. After all, a priority bill essential to public safety that is part of a comprehensive plan should get passed into law lickety-split, right?
If you thought that, you obviously have not been paying attention to this government.
As of tomorrow, it will be two months since Bill C-48 was introduced. Nothing has happened. Nothing. Not one of the four eager Ministers has even delivered a second reading speech. Parliament is now on summer break, so another two months will pass before anything CAN HAPPEN. But don't hold your breath.
My prediction is this. Bill C-48 will die on the order paper. It will never become law during this session of Parliament. Down the road, in a year or two, there will be another surge of controversy about catch and release treatment of violent, repeat offenders. The government will be ready with action - it will dust off Bill C-48, introduce it a second time, and issue another press release. Government in action.
We don't have to worry about foreign election interference in Canada - we got our own tax funded election interference right here. We call it the CBC. (re: Danielle Smith, the CBC and the NDP)
Okay, I admit a bit dramatic, but for example, mark the impressive reporting by the globe. Hit piece after hit piece on the Smith issue on the front page of the globe for months before the provincial election. The retraction is buried as an opinion piece.
If media is to be relevant in Canada it has to do much, much better. And, it seems the only way the media will do better is if there is punishment for very bad reporting. Yes, we all make mistakes, but maybe media should be making far fewer mistakes during an election cycle.
This might also explain why conventional media and journalism is dying in Canada. It's not just big bad tech, but a lot of self inflicted wounds also. More and more of us are just tuning them out now that we see through them.
On immigration, there are strong reasons why the government's current and planned approach is mistaken. The impact on housing, healthcare and infrastructure and the inability of government's to plan and implement in these areas means an increasing gap. Even the demographics and economic arguments are weak, as demographers such as David Green and labour economists such as Mikal Skuterud have noted. Arguing for lower levels of permanent and temporary immigration does not make one anti-immigration as the issue is what levels and types make the most sense for Canada and Canadians, whether born here or immigrants.
At least CBC misreporting didn't influence the results of Alberta's election. The same cannot be said of the 2015 federal election:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/aunt-of-alan-kurdi-drowned-syrian-boy-did-not-apply-to-sponsor-family-in-canada-1.3214517
Central banks around the world erred with interest rates too low and growing the money supply too quickly, not only exceptionally so in responses to COVID, but almost continuously since 1997, when LTCM failed and several Asian countries suffered debt crises. They knew their actions should be inflationary but missed that the inflation stored up in asset prices only to be unleashed when Boomers accelerated asset liquidation for retirement and during COVID. Higher rates and a shrinking money supply hasn't reigned in inflation or extraordinary high asset valuations (Ex. housing) because governments continue to stimulate through deficit spending, and a whole generation has been conditioned to view credit as limitless and costless. The only solution will be significant job losses in the public sector required to balanced budgets, and enough Millennials defaulting on loans to change perceptions of credit risk. Unfortunately, the populist "don't worry, but be happy" bent of the Trudeau Liberals will delay action until something like a large credit rating hit occurs. Housing crashes happened every 7 to 10 years throughout history. Canada experience two significant ones in the early 80s and again in the early 90s.
My comment is about the story you promised not to talk about - C-18. You characterize the story as being an inner-media one. I think you might be too close to the story to see its true import and the fact that it is one that touches all Canadians in what will prove to be a very profound way. Indeed, if you want to make a list of failed Government efforts to deliver anything worthwhile C-18 and their attempt to rescue mainstream media should probably be at the top of the list. People smarter than me insist that an unencumbered and active fifth estate is essential for creating the accountability necessary for a healthy democracy. Not only is C-18 not going to deliver on the policy objective of propping up mainstream media, by my read, even if its potential fruits were fully realized, it would still have failed to revitalize this anchor of our democracy and represents a great case study for this Government's inability to understand issues and formulate reasonable policy in response. In characterizing this as just a media issue you seem to be missing the relevance of the larger story and its importance. I think it fair to say that your coverage of C-18 has uncharacteristically lacked vision and imagination. Indeed, the Government's failure here is probably their most significant dick stomping to date and one with the greatest implications for the health of the nation. I'll apologize now if I have a selective memory.
Dan, I appreciate your comment. But ...
You disparage the Libs for their weak effort in "supporting" the mainstream media and you additionally disparage the idea of C-18 as an effective tool in bringing the MSM back to health.
I happen to agree with you, but ...
First, I must note that it is my opinion that the former "glory years" enjoyed by the MSM was that of the buggy whip industry before the invention of automobiles. In other words, I contend, the MSM as we knew it, is better regarded as a modern day buggy whip industry: it is dying and will end up dead very quickly.
As to C-18, I contend that it's main purpose was to funnel more money to the CBC without this being terrifically apparent and to thereby get the Lib's own "journalistic" enterprise and viewpoint to grow and dominate much further. I know, cynical. But, it is hard to not believe it when you consider the amount of money that would have been distributed to the Ceeb under C-18.
Now, as for your contention that "... an unencumbered and active fifth estate is essential ..." I agree with you. Now, having agreed with you, how does one square the buggy whip analogy and the idea of importance? Actually, I - like so many - have difficulty in bringing those two things into agreement. I can only make a few points.
First, the "glory years" of MSM were, historically, an aberration; we will not see a return to the "glory years" of fat profits, etc. And, make no mistake, it was the fat profits in the industry that allowed the industry to assume the mantle of sainthood, independence, moral sanctity, etc.
Second, what will happen is likely to be somewhat similar to the time before the "glory years" where there were many independent journalists, ranging from dubious to excellent quality; everything from pamphleteers on particular subjects to folks who put out reasonably comprehensive news and opinion sites. I refer you to the many left wing and right wing websites whose quality various from dubious to excellent. To me, even many of the more strident left/right sites can and do break news ignored by the remaining MSM but, more importantly, they bring various important aspects of stories that have been ignored by MSM to light. Good on them.
So, buggy whips being what they are, i.e. obsolete, we will now have to work to get our news. To think that we can get a comprehensive, well-rounded, totally unbiased news picture is unlikely in the extreme. What will happen is that some newspapers will continue, think the Globe and Mail, but only so long as the present Lord Thomson (or similar proprietors of other publications) feels a hereditary obligation to support it. What will also happen is that we (i.e. the public) will have to work at getting alternative information that is not covered by, say, the Globe.
Is all lost? Nope. But you will have to work for your news.
To me it is ironic that Quebec has experienced the worst oil by rail disaster in Canada yet refuses pipelines. If it takes another 10 years to achieve that rail diversion that will be about the time an Eastern pipeline could have been finished making everyone safer.
The problem is that the people who oppose pipelines also imagine that there’s a viable path to transition away from oil use, so they see no conflict in opposing both pipeline and rail transport. The truth is that even if everything goes perfectly, a transition away from fossil fuels has something like a 20-30 year timeline. However, activists have whipped themselves into a panic with “climate crisis” rhetoric, so we’re past the point of pragmatic discussion.
Great read this week. Thank you !
If you want to see another sad example of our future with disaster recovery, look no further than Lytton. It’s been two years since it was burnt down, and there’s still a lot of nothing there.
Here's a policy proposal for the feds. Offer citizenship to any crew that comes to Canada and builds 10 abodes per person on the crew. Kill two birds with one stone (sorry/not sorry to the vegans)
Small edit:
"At the press conference, Deputy Bank of Canada Governor Rhys Mendes was asked about housing prices — specifically whether or not the bank was factoring in the impact of higher interest rates on housing costs, increasing the very inflation that the hikes are meant to combat. **She** gave an answer so candid and dispassionate that we were a little taken aback — accustomed as we are to politician-speak."
Rhys Mendes is a man.
Bigger edit it was a Lady-- Deputy Governor Carolyn Wilkins at the news conference,
edit of my edit --Carolyn Rogers is the current Deputy Governor
Well this is what happens when you try to bash out a dispatch while sitting in front of a fire at a campsite with no WiFi and very slow cellphone internet. Will correct, and thank you. JG
My pleasure. Keep up the great work and remember your mosquito nets.
Yet another reason why the CBC doesn't deserve taxpayer money anymore. Money from ads, subscriptions and donations, sure. But taxpayer dollars for lies during an election? The institution deserves the axe.
On defence spending -- this is one of those issues that's been kicking around across various Liberal and Conservative goverments and seems to come down to the fact that we like our taxes low and our services high, which means things that don't directly deliver to taxpayers today get starved. That's the military.
But, clearly this approach has starved the military of its capacity while governments of all stripes continue to talk up its value while keeping their wallets in their pocket. Nobody is arguing (as far as I can here) for a kind of minimally viable military, but that's the end result.
The 'deal' we get in NATO would be a significant policy target if we didn't already have it: pooling our miliarty spending with the biggest miltary spender on the planet and a grouping of other like-minded countries. The main ask is 2% spending on GDP and we have a military that clearly needs investment and modernization. Leadership would be to ensure we get there even if there isn't a broad voting constituency screaming for this. We are getting to the point where our inability to get a handle on this is becoming a foreign affairs challenge, so that decision should be easy.
This and finding ways to address chroniclly low productivity should be federal policy focuses, but I see no viable proposals -- not from the Liberals, but also not from the opposition parties. That's disappointing.
Your comment Dean; 'now that we see through them' is something I had not thought of. We do see through them now. It took us long enough, but we see the bias spin MSM puts on everything. I notice opinion writers and so call reporters while 'almost' praising the conservative have to get a hit in on Smith, Poliliever, Moe and they are even after Stefanson hoping for and NDP victory in Manitoba. 'I see through you CBC' would make a great T-shirt.