Tuesday, June 20, 2017

More and more Canadians borrowing against their home equity

According to some Many Canadians may now be turning to their home equity as a way to raise money to fund a lifestyle that could be unaffordable for some.

A recent article in BNN points out that more and more Canadians are using their homes as if it were an ATM from which they could withdraw. Since 2011 the number of Canadians who have taken out a home equity line of credit (HELOC) has risen by 40 percent. As many householders are still paying on mortgages and other debts such as car loans, the added debt can sometimes not be managed. Many are not able to even make regular payments on time.
The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada's(FCAC) commissioner Lucie Tedesco said: "At a time when consumers are carrying record amounts of debt, the persistence of HELOC debt may add stress to the financial well-being of Canadian households." The Agency's report says there are about three million HELOC accounts in Canada, and the average outstanding balance is $70,000. Canada's debt to income ratio has now risen to record levels even higher than that in the US before its 2008-9 housing crash. Should there be an unexpected economic shock many households could be vulnerable and end up losing their homes.
The agency report actually shows that about 40 percent of consumers are unable to make regular payments towards the HELOC principal. Most consumers are unable to repay their HELOC until they sell their homes. The report note that banks were combining term mortgages with HELOCs and other products to customers, creating complex products that customers often did not understand too well. The FCAC report said: "Banks reported to FCAC that a readvanceable mortgage is now the default option offered to credit-worthy mortgage customers with down payments of at least 20 per cent,."
Some analysts fear a housing bubble, especially in areas such as Toronto and Vancouver, but unlike the US, Canada does not have much of a sub-prime mortgage market where loans are made that are quite risky nor does it have the complex credit products that fooled borrowers and investors in the US housing crash. However, the report shows clear signs that there are dangerous trends in Canadian's borrowing based on their home equity. The appended video shows prices in the Toronto housing market have declined recently due to government policy.
There are several other ways that you can borrow against the equity in your home as well as a HELOC. Many people choose to take out a second mortgage or a reverse mortgage. The options are outlined here.
The Mortgage Professionals Canada put out a report in which their chief economist William Dunning shows that 1.91 million Canadians now have a HELOC a lower figure than FCAC it would seem. Perhaps many who hold the accounts are not Canadian. The report estimates that 21 percent of Canadians who purchased their first home before 1990 still have not paid off their entire mortgage. One percent of those who bought homes between 2014-216 actually have negative equity in their homes. 4.3 million Canadian homes have a mortgage but 3.57 million homes have neither a mortgage or a HELOC. There are fully 1.48 million Canadian homes with both a HELOC and a mortgage. Canadians take out a HELOC not just because they need cash. A full 28 percent just used the HELOC for debt consolidation a smart move with low borrowing rates. Another 31 percent used the money to actually invest in the house for renovation and repair. Only 9 per used the credit for general purchases and finally 9 percent claimed to use it for other reasons. It would seem that many use the HELOC in quite sensible ways and only a small minority to finance what may be an unaffordable lifestyle.

Friday, June 16, 2017

Manitoba Conservative government may privatize home care services

The Manitoba Progressive Conservative (PC) government of premier Brian Pallister is looking to save money on provincial home care service programs and may even privatize the service.

However, Pallister won't say yet whether he plans to privatize the service saying: "I'll continue to say that we are looking for results and improving results. We shouldn't be close-minded about it. All across the country other provinces have faced up to these challenges — some private improvements, lots of changes within the public sector delivery model. We are pursuing these things. We are looking for options." A private company will operate the service only if it makes a profit so unlike a public service it needs to aim for more than just covering its costs. It would not want to incur a deficit to handle expanding needs. either.
In spite of Pallister's remarks, the Manitoba Government and General Employees'' Union (MGEU) revealed that the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority(WRHA) intends to contract out services provided by home care nurses for a newly announced "enhanced home care service". The government is great at rhetorical puffery when they want to promote what will probably be reduced services. MGEU president Michelle Gawronsky believes that the contracting out is a first step towards privatizing Manitoba's home care services resulting in public sector job losses. Gawronsky said: "[Home care workers] are very, very concerned. They're angry, they're upset. We are looking for major change to happen within our system and we are being attacked for trying to improve a system that is the worst in Canada."
The WRHA announced the plans for contracting out in April after the province cancelled the Hospital Home Team a unit of about 10 nurses who were in charge of caring for about 550 chronically ill patients in Winnipeg in their homes. The province had previously given $1.7 million to pay for the program but ended funding on March 31st this year. The appended video appears to be made by nurses in the program. On May 8 in a meeting with WRHA president Milton Sussman , Gawronsky learned about the contracting out scheme. Union members were shocked at the news.
The province has already cut health services in Winnipeg closing half of the emergency facilities, forcing many to make longer trips to emergency rooms. Present legislation in Manitoba requires all regional health authorities to provide home care services free to all who meet the program's requirements. The program is actually quite cost efficient in that it delays sending patients to a long-term care facility where costs are much higher. Under the current contract, 80 percent of the workers in the program must belong to the MGEU. However, contracting out could possibly lead to a breach in the contract according to Gawronsky who wrote to health minister Kevin Goertzen outlining her concern.
As the population of the province ages, a recent report claims that the program that costs now over $300 million annually could end up costing $874 annually by 2037. That is close to three times the present cost but that is over twenty years, a long period. Doing away with the program would cost even more. However much of that cost could be placed on the people now being served by the program rather than the government. In 1996 the then Progressive Conservative premier Gary Filmon also tried to move towards for-profit home care but had such negative reactions that he dropped his plans after a short pilot project.
The WRHA is being forced to find $83 million in savings for the coming year. Miton Sussman chair of the WRHA said that all options were on the table including privatization. He also said that he could not guarantee that jobs would not be lost. Not only will jobs be lost but they will be relatively well paying union jobs to be replaced by non-union jobs with lower pay in order to make room for private operators to make a profit should services be privatized. Sussman said that their had to be changes to achieve the savings required by the government. All five Manitoba health regions have been told by the government to balance their books and find savings for 2017-18. The budget for 2016-17 was $2.6 billion and was projected to wind up $30 million in the red. This is not that large a percentage in terms of the total budget.
Other services considered for privatization are MRI scans and cataract surgeries. However Sussman claimed that the WRHA was had made no decisions yet and was still considering options.,saying:"I don't want to speculate that it is something that is going to happen. What I am saying is we are looking at a whole range of options and if someone can provide a high quality at a lower cost, we have to consider those kinds of things.Where is makes sense, it might be something we look at." From the provincial government point of view it makes sense. It can provide new areas of investment for businesses many of whom support the Conservative government. It can also result in more donations as a token of appreciation.
The Pallister government has hired the consultant group KPMG to find savings and efficiencies in Manitoba health care systems KPMG is one of the big four global auditors with offices in many countries but main headquarters in the Netherlands. It employs about 189,000 people globally. It offers three basic lines of service, financial audits, tax, and advisory services. While the company has won many awards it has had clashes with the Canadian Revenue AgencyCRA) but for some reason the KPMG clients were given an amnesty :In 2015, KPMG was accused by the Canada Revenue Agency of Tax evasion schemes: "The CRA alleges that the KPMG tax structure was in reality a "sham" that intended to deceive the taxman.".[56] In 2016, the Canada Revenue Agency was found to have offered an amnesty to KPMG clients caught using an offshore tax-avoidance scheme on the Isle of Man.[57]
The KPMG report is completed but will not be released since much of the information is said to be proprietary. The Pallister government actually received an extensive report recommending reforms ordered by the previous New Democratic Party and co-authored by Dr. David Peachey of consulting firm of Health Intelligence Inc. in Nova Scotia. The report was received in February this year. However, the Pallister government decided to contract with KPMG for its own report.
These consulting firms that tell you how to save money actually cost a lot of money but they can provide expert opinion that you can use to support your favorite policies usually. This is worth a lot and avoids criticism which can be dismissed as political or ideological. Ontario spent nearly $7 million on consultants who helped a government-appointed panel recommend that the province sell a majority stake in Hydro One and liberalize the sale of beer. KPMG was one of several consultants involved.
The Manitoba PC government paid KPMG $740,000 for their report. Pallister earlier promised that 97 percent of the results would be released to the public with only the names of civil servants who had been asked for their opinions removed. Pallister explained: "My understanding wasn't that a lot of this information would be proprietary at the outset. And now I understand that it is legally my responsibility to protect the integrity of the process that was used... It's owned by the company that helped guide us." This contradicts the governments' own RFP (Request for Proposals) that it issued in December of 2016. which stated that all information, data, research, reports and other material produced by the consultant "shall be the exclusive property of Manitoba." Yet Pallister said: "Out of respect for the company and for future tendering processes I think it's important they have a manner of going about their business they've developed over many years and spent a great amount to develop that they want to protect, so that's part of the problem in releasing that information.:" No doubt Manitoba is quite happy for the public not being able to see the whole report. There could be reforms recommended that the government did not approve and reforms rejected that the government approves.
We should know soon exactly what changes are to made in home care services. We will probably never know if KPMG recommended changes that the government is not making or if it recommended against changes that the government is making. The KPMG report may have been produced with taxpayer money but it remains to be seen if the taxpayer will ever be able to see it all.


Saturday, June 10, 2017

Ontario economy grew at twice the Canadian average last year

For years while the price of oil was high, Ontario's growth lagged behind that of Alberta and Saskatchewan the main oil producing provinces. However, now its growth is surging while the oil producers are hard hit.

Canada's large banks predict that this year Ontario's growth will be near the top of all provinces. The jobless rate, 5.8 percent, is the lowest since 2001. The national average unemployment rate is 6.5 percent itself the lowest since 2008. In 2016, Ontario added 96, 800 full-time jobs and surprisingly part-time jobs actually decreased by 10,200 a plus for many workers. Manitoba has the lowest rates at 5.4 percent and British Columbia 5.5 percent. However there are still 437,000 Canadians looking for work according to Statistics Canada. In 2016 the province grew at twice the national average. The growth is not related to just one sector but includes manufacturing, real estate finance and technology. Tax revenue from corporations grew 16,.8 percent last year and 19.6 percent this year as corporate profits grew. The future looks promising as a survey of Ontario businesses by the Bank of Canada showed that sales are up and that companies are intending to invest in new equipment and hire on more staff.
The center of recent growth is in the Greater Toronto Area. The Conference Board of Canada predicts that this will be the leading metropolitan growth area in 2016 leading to a 2.6 increase in GDP for Ontario. Windsor, the Ottawa region, and the Kitchener-Cambridge-Guelph triangle are also prospering. The Conference Board claims: "Through 2019, Ontario households will reap the benefits of a robust business sector. With the labour market looking good, healthy consumer spending across all spending categories is expected over the near term." Robert Hogue, the senior economist at the Royal Bank of Canada(RBC) described the Ontario economy as vibrant and said: "The Ontario economy has been, I think, quite impressive at adapting, at adjusting, and at continuing to generate jobs." Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne will no doubt point to Ontario's growth if she announces a plan to hike the minimum wage to 15 dollars an hour.
In spite of the low unemployment level, the growth in the economy has not been matched by a parallel growth in wages. The average worker has not shared in the boom. Statistics Canada data show the average worker's wages grew just 1.1 percent last year. This is below inflation meaning that last year the average worker took a pay cut. This may have an effect on consumer confidence and sales in the future. As Nik Nanos, of Nanos research put it: "There's a collision between the psychology of consumer confidence and the reality of the economic numbers. When people don't feel that real wages are significantly increasing, when they're unsure about their level of job security, it creates a psychological chill on consumer confidence." However, borrowing iterest rates are low and that may encourage spending. The Bloomberg Nanos Canadian Confidence Index suggests that consumers in the province are feeling upbeat. The swing up began as the price of oil dropped. No doubt it reflects more money being available as less is spent on fuel.
There is some worry about growing protectionist rhetoric by Trump in the US and uncertainty caused by renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA). Exports could also be hurt if the Canadian dollar, the loonie, were to increase significantly in value. However there are positive signs too from the US. Aided by tax refunds and rising incomes Americans increased spending in April at the fastest rate since 2016 in a sign the U.S. economy is growing faster. This could result in an increase in Canadian exports to the U.S. especially as the value of the Canadian dollar is quite low. Another worrying factor for Ontario is the boom in the housing market in Toronto that may turn out to be a bubble.
While some complain of Ontario hydro rates, the province has a low tax rate of just 11.5 percent. Only British Columbia has a lower rate. Ontario is fortunate as well in that its economy does not depend on one main commodity. It is less subject to severe stress as has happened in Alberta where oil is its main source of revenue. However, the entire manufacturing sector in Ontario was badly hit during the 2008-9 recession and the recovery has been relatively slow with some negative effects such as there being more part-time and contract work with less benefits for workers.
British Columbia led all provinces in the growth of its GDP last year growing by 3.7 percent. This was up from 3.1 percent in 2015. Ontario came second with a growth rate of 2.6 percent the same as in 2015. Manitoba was third with 2.4 percent an increase from 2.1 percent in 2015.


Quebec unions shut down construction sites

(May 28)Unions representing 175,00 construction workers in Quebec launched a general strike shutting down major construction projects in Quebec after months of failed labour negotiations.

 1 of 2 
Labour federations and construction companies had negotiated late into the night last Tuesday but could not reach a deal before a midnight strike deadline. Workers in the industrial sector want more stable work schedules, but salaries are believed to be the main issue in the residential construction area. Michel Trepanier a spokesperson for the alliance of construction unions said; "Employers are asking us to sacrifice time with our families to be available for work... There are limits and they've been reached." Collective agreements had expired on April 30.
Some large projects in the city of Montreal were halted by the strike, including work on the new Champlain Bridge and the CHUM hospital. Hundreds of workers picketed at the two sites. Montreal is replete with orange construction cranes all of them idle now. Work was also disrupted on the new Turcor highway exchange a key highway stretch in the west end of the city.
Plumber Martin Gauthier supports the strike but hoped a deal could be reached quickly noting that the strike was costly: "I'm not making money today,. Nobody is winning — that's the bottom line." As well as construction workers about 1,400 Quebec government engineers walked of their job at the midnight deadline. The engineers have been in a strike position for almost a year. Union president Mar-Andre Martin said that a week of negotiations had not resulted in any notable progress.
The Quebec government could in time pass back-to-work legislation but will not do so for now. The provincial Labour Minister Dominique Vien said she is hopeful that the construction workers and employers can reach agreement soon saying: "The message I want to send is that it would be better to have a negotiated deal than a special law. I think that everyone here very much agrees with that." She estimated that the strike was costing Quebec economy $45 million a day. She said that the provincial government could not allow the strike to continue long as it would cost Quebec too much. She said the government was prepared to table back-to-work legislation.
Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre urged the province not to be "too patient" before legislating workers back to work. Coderre said: "We're not going to be patient for a long time." The federation of Quebec chambers of commerce also urged a quick end to the dispute. Stephane Forget head of the federation said: "The adage that says 'when the construction industry is doing well, everything is doing well' is also inversely true — a labour conflict has a major and direct impact on all economic sectors." Forget noted that a 10 day work stoppage back in 2013 caused a drop of 1.1 percent in the province's GDP for that year.
Construction job sites that did not join the strike were targeted by flash mobs of pickets that led many workers to lay down their tools. A mobile strike picket unit of up to 40 members moved from one location to another to convince those still working to join the strike. Some had not heard the news but others were reluctant to strike. Quebec has an anti-scab law that would normally prevent employers from still operating but some employer groups claim the law does not apply to the construction industry; if workers agree, some sites could remain open. However many job supervisors decided to comply with the strike as soon as pickets appeared.
Montreal was particularly hard hit as about 60 projects were halted. At the new Champlain Bridge more than 600 employees were off the job. The bridge costing $4.3 billion is slated to be finished by the end of 2018. It is replacing the most-used bridge in Canada. The Turcot exchange is a key cog in Montreal's highway network and is being replaced. Approximately 300,000 used the exchange daily in 2017. The project is just 40 percent complete and is slated to be finished by autumn 2020. Many street projects plus a new hospital project also are shut down for now.

Saturday, May 27, 2017

Trudeau needs to change NAFTA to protect Canadian water

Maude Barlow, National Chair of the Council of Canadians, criticizes Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for avoiding any confrontation with US President Trump on the issue of water and NAFTA.

Barlow has just issued a report called: Water For Sale: How Free Trade And Investment Agreements Threaten Environmental Protection Of Water And Promote The Commodification Of The World’s Water. The report looks at the trade threats posed to global water supplies by different trade agreements including NAFTA. Barlow notes:
“NAFTA rules that already trump domestic water protections could be made far worse with the upcoming renegotiation of the deal. Trump is attacking water protections in the U.S., locking in deregulation in ways that would make it very hard for future presidents to undo. Trudeau is doing the same here by not restoring the Navigable Waters Protection Act, despite his promise to do so. These realities, combined with Trump and Trudeau’s refusal to remove Chapter 11 from NAFTA, put water protection in the crosshairs.”
The World Health Organization(WHO) recently issued a dire warning that almost 2 billion people are drinking water contaminated with faeces. The contamination puts people at risk of contracting cholera, dysentery, typhoid and polio according to Maria Neira who heads WHO`s public health department. She added: "Contaminated drinking-water is estimated to cause more than 500,000 diarrhoeal deaths each year and is a major factor in several neglected tropical diseases, including intestinal worms, schistosomiasis and trachoma," While on average countries had increased funding for improving access to safe water and sanitation, still 80 percent said that they still did not have enough financing to reach nationally-set targets.
Modern trade free trade and investment agreements contain sections that undermine laws and regulations that protect water. Water must be removed ├ás a commodity to be traded in all such agreements to protect it, Barlow argues that that the investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) must be removed from NAFTA and other trade agreements. ``People and their governments must be given the right to restrict trade from places or in conditions where water and local communities have been harmed. Foreign investors must return to using the domestic courts of the countries in which they are operating and with whom they have a dispute. The political moment to have this debate has arrived.” However, Trudeau does not even seem to be bringing the matter up. The mainstream media is unlikely to discuss the matter either,
In trade deals, corporations would like to see water considered to be a commodity to be traded. It can also be treated as a service allowing for privatization of services that provide water. It is also treated as an investment. All of these descriptions allow water to be subject to clauses in an agreement that challenge water protection laws. Barlow argues that water should specifically be excluded from such provisions.
Wikipedia describes the ISDS provisions as follows:Investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) or investment court system (ICS) is a system through which individual companies can sue countries for alleged discriminatory practices. The practice was made widely known through the Philip Morris v. Uruguay case, where the tobacco company Philip Morris sued Uruguay after having enacted strict laws aimed at promoting public health.
ISDS has been criticized because the United States has never lost any of its ISDS cases, and that the system is biased to favor American companies and American trade over other Western countries, and Western countries over the rest of the world. Chapter 11 of NAFTA contains ISDS provisions,
The provisions allow one NAFTA party in Canada, US, or Mexico) to bring charges directly against the government of another NAFTA party before an international tribunal avoiding local courts. There is no other situation in international law where private parties are able to sue a state without showing the domestic courts are not independent or reliable, A sample of a case brought against Canada is S.D.. Myers versus Canada that the company won:S.D. Myers v. Canada Between 1995 and 1997 the Canadian government banned the export of toxic PCB waste, in order to comply with its obligations under the Basel Convention, of which the United States is not a party. Waste treatment company S.D. Myers then sued the Canadian government under NAFTA Chapter 11 for $20 million in damages. The claim was upheld by a NAFTA Tribunal in 2000.
The renegotiation should take place through a transparent process with all stakeholders involved not just corporations and politicians. Consultation with the public on the issues is also important. Another important part of the NAFTA agreement that needs to be deleted is the proportionality clause as discussed in a recent Digital Journal article.


Thursday, May 25, 2017

Saskatchewan premier Wall faces protests at dinner party he hosts

Hundreds of protesters from more than a dozen groups converged outside the Premier's Dinner location in Saskatoon where Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall gave a keynote speech.

Hundreds of people rallied outside the Premier's Dinner venue in Saskatoon Thursday night, where Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall gave a keynote address. The dinner was held at Prairieland Park, Hall A. The dinner was hosted by the ruling Saskatchewan Party led by Wall. Drivers on nearby Ruth St. found themselves surrounded by sign-waving protesters speaking through megaphones. Wall's popularity has dropped since he introduced a budget with many cuts.
Among the more controversial moves was to do away with the provincial bus service run by the provincially owned Saskatchewan Transportation Company (STC) as described in a recent Digital Journal article.
Cindy Harrison, a spokesperson for Stop the Cuts, a coalition of 12 organizations that organized the rally noted that cutting the STC would hurt rural people particularly: "We think the cuts are unfair and they were done without consultation and we're not willing to accept them. Saskatchewan has one of the highest rural populations in Canada. The cuts to STC will hit rural populations." She noted that while the protesters were feasting on hot dogs, those attending the dinner were paying $250 dollars a plate. Harris said that cash for access system was unfair when Wall was cutting services to the people of Saskatchewan. Federal Liberals have had similar events to raise funds.
Wall defended the right of the protesters to express their views:"We live in a kind of a society where people I think are not just free but encouraged to express what they believe. We know people are upset and obviously they're going to express that dissent as they did today and they should be welcomed and encouraged to do so. I knew before the budget was introduced that this was not going to be a popular budget and we made these difficult decisions because we strongly believe they're in the best interests of the province and the long-term interests of Saskatchewan."
A recent Mainstreet poll commissioned by Postmedia reveals the effects of the provincial budget, released last month, on Wall's popularity. In October Wall had a 52 percent approval rate but now only 46 percent approve of the job Wall is doing while 45 percent disapprove, with the remaining 9 percent undecided. The Mainstreet vice-president said that the poll numbers were mainly a result of the budget. Wall lost most approval in the two main cities Saskatoon and Regina whereas he did better in rural ridings. The budget itself was approved only by 26 percent with 45 percent disapproving. 51 percent disapproved of doing away with STC while only 18 percent approved. The poll was conducted March 30 and 31. 1,704 people were surveyed, using landlines and cellphones. A random sample of this size has a margin of error of +/- 2.37 per cent, 19 times out of 20.


Wednesday, May 24, 2017

Hundreds of Manitoba nurses rally at legislature to oppose cutbacks

Last Wednesday, hundreds of nurses and other front-line workers protested at the Manitoba Legislature about budget cuts they claim will compromise patient care in the province.

Sandi Mowat, president of the Manitoba Nurse's Union said:"We want the government to put patients first and focus on making investments and improvements in health care." About 600 nurses and other protesters gathered at the steps of the provincial legislative building. They oppose the government plans to close three emergency rooms and also cut the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority budget by $83 million. The government has also ordered health agencies and Crown corporations to cut 15 percent of management positions among other cost-saving measures in the health care system.
Half of Winnipeg's Emergency Rooms will be closed in the cutbacks. This will mean patients in emergency will need to travel further and also that there may be delays as well. The Winnipeg Regional Health Authority may attempt to privatize some services as it tries to achieve $83 million in savings. The shortage of doctors in rural Manitoba is bound to get worse as the Health Minister Kelvin Goerzten confirmed that the government would also axe a program designed to attract doctors to rural and remote parts of the province. The Conservative government has massive support in most rural areas and yet the government is punishing those who are most supportive of it.
The nurses union represents about 12,000 employees across the province. The union fears the cuts will affect nurses' ability to provide quality care for patients. Mowat said of the government claim that it wanted to decrease wait times: "I don't understand how decreasing the number of emergency rooms is going to decrease wait times. We have to see the concrete plan … where are all these people going to go?" Mowat said that there had been no consultation about the proposed closing of the three emergency departments with the group. She said that patients will be put at risk as they need to travel further. She said that nurses and other front-line workers needed to be consulted on these issues saying: "Step back, and do some consultation with the front-line nurses to ask them. We agree that the system needs work, we agree that there are inefficiencies. We can help them figure out what those inefficiencies are. Nurses know a lot about patient care and no one asked us."
The Health Minister Kelvin Goertzen said he had an obligation to reduce wait times. He said this means making tough decisions now to ensure a better future. However, to reduce wait times one surely might need to spend more money on staff and consult nurses and other front-line workers as to how this might be achieved. Goerzen is doing the exact opposite. His response explains nothing but is hopeful froth: "My hope of course is that in the years ahead that people will look back and say, 'Was it easy? No. Was it challenging? It was. But was it the right thing to do? Absolutely,." They will look back and say: "Why did I ever vote for the Progressive Conservatives." The Premier Brian Pallister said that he understood why people are concerned about the health care changes but said they should not fear.
Perhaps Pallister gets health care in Costa Rica where he has a luxurious property at which he hopes to spend six to eight weeks every year. His home in a rich part of Winnipeg on Wellington Crescent is worth about $2 million. The home is 9,000 square feet and has a seven car garage and a basketball court.
Katie Bryant, an emergency room nurse at Victoria General Hospital said: "People with life-threatening illnesses and life-threatening problems are going to have to be travelling further to hospitals to get the care that they need and that's unsafe and it's putting people at risk unnecessarily. I wish that they would have consulted more with front line staff and more with people that are there every single day, triaging these patients, taking care of these patients on wards, dealing with families, who are now potentially going to have to travel even further to visit loved ones."
The grant program to attract doctors to remote and rural areas of Manitoba in 2001 and changed in 2010, gives medical students grants of $12,000 in each of their four years at medical school and also further grants to physicians establishing a practice in Manitoba. For each year students were given the grant they were required to six months in an under-services part of the province upon graduation. The cut will save the government about $4.2 million a year. However, it will also leave some rural and remote areas even less able to find physicians serve them. It will no doubt have zero effect on the health care received by Pallister and his family.
Health Minister Goerzen said that money was not one of the most motivating factors in doctor's decision as to where to practice. But it might be a consideration for poorer medical students to have $12,000 each year to pay for their education expenses! Goerzen said: "We are going to put together a more central, provincial strategy in terms of how do we attract and retain doctors. We're moving the resources and attention to the things that actually motivate doctors to come and stay in the province." He said that the new approach would involve a more coordinated approach that would not see rural regional health authorities fighting each other for doctors. It sounds as if the government is going to centralize decision making taking any local control over health care facilities and funding away from them. Recruiting more doctors was a central plank in the Conservative platform. How this is to be accomplished has yet to be revealed. What the government has done so far is to ensure that Winnipeg has less emergency services and that rural areas will have even more difficulty recruiting doctors to serve their communities.


Friday, May 12, 2017

PM Trudeau defends Canadian dairy system

Trudeau defended Canada's dairy supply management system noting that every nation including the US defends its agricultural industries as much as it can.
 

 1 of 3 
Canada has a supply management system fodairy products, poultry and eggs. It is discussed in a recent Digital Journal article. Trump recently criticized the dairy system during a speech in Wisconsin a cheese-producing state. In an interview with Bloomberg television Trudeau points out that the US actually runs a dairy surplus with Canada. Trudeau noted that the system worked quite well in Canada and said: "Let's not pretend we're in a global free market when it comes to agriculture. Every country protects, for good reason, its agricultural industries." Trudeau made his response after Trump again attacked the Canadian dairy industry as well as lumber, timber and energy sectors. It is Canada that should be complaining about the energy sector under NAFTA. If Trump's slogan is America First, under NAFTA Canada comes second.
As an article in Rabble notes:The proportionality clause says that if the government of any NAFTA member country takes action that cuts the availability of energy for export to another NAFTA member country, it must continue to export the same proportion of total "supply" that it has over the previous three years. If it cuts energy available for export to another member country, it must also cut the supply of that energy domestically to the same extent.The proportionality rule means that Canadians cannot have priority access to their own energy supplies. Richard Heinberg, a noted California energy expert said that proportionality is unique in all of the world's trade treaties. Heinberg claims that "Canada has every reason to repudiate the proportionality clause, and to do so unilaterally and immediately." With the opening of NAFTA Trudeau has every opportunity to do this. However, he has yet to reveal what he intends to change. He has not mentioned this clause, no doubt for good reason. The US would never accept it being dropped. The US wants Canada to be first and foremost a reliable source for oil and gas who will not put the needs of Canadians above those of the US.
I doubt the issue will even make it to the mainstream press. What we have instead are attacks against the management supply system by international dairy bodies that have already been captured by the neo-liberal policy agendas that will profit large corporations. A recent Globe and Mail article by Campbell Clark, takes on the task of attacking the system and predicting its demise:The end is coming for Canada’s supply managed dairy market, not immediately, but almost inevitably. That’s not because U.S. President Donald Trump has claimed the Canadian system is unfair to U.S. farmers. The hypocrisy of a President who crows about an America First trade policy while demanding access to Canada’s market makes one of the best arguments for keeping the protectionist system. But the political market for supply management is weakening. For Canadian politicians, it will soon be more valuable to give it up in trade talks than it is to use it to buy the votes of dairy farmers.The article points out that from more than 100,000 dairy farms in Canada the number had declined to 11,260 in 2014. Half of these are in the province of Quebec but even there a Conservative MP Maxine Bernier is running for his party's leadership on a pledge to eliminate supply managed. It should be noted that the Conservatives have only 5 seats in Quebec in the federal government.
Campbell notes that the US wants concessions. Canada could trade doing away with the supply management system in order for greater market access for steel pipes, lumber, or exemption from border taxes. US lumber and steel companies may object to any such deal as it conflicts with Trump's America First doctrine. However, Trump may very well abandon that as he has other campaign promises especially as Steve Bannon seems to be losing influence and Wall Street and the military appear to be winning power in his administration. While the strength of dairy farmers under the supply-management system may be waning it may still be strong enough to keep its protections under NAFTA.
Trump has said that the US will report within two weeks what it is intending to do with NAFTA, that he promised to renegotiate.
Trudeau said he planned to move the trade conversation ahead "in a way that both protects consumers and our agricultural producers". Trudeau also noted about Trump: "He has shown if he says one thing and actually hears good counter arguments or good reasons why he should shift his position, he will take a different position if it's a better one, if the arguments win him over." Trump does often flip flop but Trudeau is being overly kind in suggesting Trump's reason for doing so.
There is no sign of the renegotiation being an open transparent process, or that there will be any public consultations on this exceedingly important issue. It is likely to be done in secret behind closed doors with the most important stakeholders giant international corporations having a significant presence. A list of demands from the Council of Canadians can be found here.


Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Trump targets Canada's dairy farmers under NAFTA

U.S. President Donald Trump promised, during a visit to Wisconsin a cheese-making state that he will defend U.S. dairy farmers who claim they are being hurt by Canadian protectionist trade policies.
dd Imag
Under the present NAFTA agreement Canada's dairy sector enjoys protection by high tariffs. There are also production controls that ensure the prices for products are sufficient for farmers to make a living. The Canadian dairy system is not a free-market system but involves supply management by the Canadian Dairy Commission(CDC):
The Canadian Dairy Commission (French: Commission canadienne du lait) is a Canadian government Crown corporation created in 1966 under the Canadian Dairy Commission Act (1966–1967). According to the Act, CDC is mandated to "provide efficient producers of milk and cream with the opportunity to obtain a fair return for their labour and investment, and to provide consumers of dairy products with a continuous and adequate supply of dairy products of high quality."The CDC also chairs the Canadian Milk Supply Management Committee that coordinates industrial milk supply in Canada. The Minister of Agriculture and Agri-food is responsible for the CDC. The U.S. and some other countries hate the system since global companies want a purely market-based system in keeping with neoliberal policies in the interests of global corporations.
Trump said in Kenosha, Wisconsin: "We’re also going to stand up for our dairy farmers. Because in Canada some very unfair things have happened to our dairy farmers and others.” While Trump did not detail his concerns he said that his administration would call the Canadian government led by PM Justin Trudeau to ask for an explanation. The explanation is that there would be no NAFTA without protections for aspects of the economy that are supply-managed such as dairy products. Negotiators worry about the political fallout from any attempt to do away with the system. The system is described here:In total, there are about 17,000 Canadian farms that operate under Supply Management; this is about 8 percent of all farms in Canada. The dairy industry is the largest of the three supply-managed industries in Canada, with 11,280 farmers operating in 2016 [6]. There are about 2,700 poultry farmers, and fewer than 1,000 egg farmers. Dairy is the largest industry of the supply-managed industries, but it is also Canada's third largest agricultural commodity in terms of farm cash receipts, making it a significant commodity for Canada [7].
Trump again threatened to eliminate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) if it cannot be changed in the way he wishes. Trump said: "It's another typical one-sided deal against the United States and it's not going to be happening for long." Trump naturally emphasizes negative effects of NAFTA on U.S. workers but it has had negative effects in Mexico and Canada as well. The appended video from 2006 shows some of those effects. If NAFTA is reopened for negotiation then Mexico and Canada should demand changes — not just the United States.
Some of the demands that Canada should make are listed by the Council of Canadians: "... if the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is to be renegotiated, then it must be fundamentally changed, meaning at minimum its investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS), energy proportionality, and water as a good, service and investment provisions must be removed. We also argue that the negotiation process must be done in an accountable and transparent way that includes public consultations." The proportionality provisions prevent the Canadian government from ensuring that there are sufficient supplies of goods to supply Canadians before exports of those goods are allowed. The proportionality provisions apply to oil and gas:
"The deals say that Canada must maintain at least the same level of oil and gas exports to the United States as it had supplied for the past thirty-six months. Only if Canadian consumption is cut proportionately, and then only in times of crisis, could the Canadian government claim jurisdiction over its own energy resources."
So far there has been complete silence as to what changes the Trudeau government is seeking in NAFTA. Neither the U.S. nor Canadian government have suggested that the negotiation process be transparent and accountable, or that there will be any public consultations. Usually trade deals are held behind closed doors with mainly government and corporate representatives taking part.


Tuesday, April 25, 2017

Canada to pass legislation on over-booking flights

After the outpouring of anger over a United Airlines passenger who was injured when he was forcibly removed from a flight, the Canadian government announced that it will pass legislation to address the problem.

A spokesperson for Transport Minister Marc Garneau, Marc Roy, said that rules about bumping will be included in an air passenger bill of rights. The bill had been promised last fall. The bill will require clear minimum requirements for compensation when flights are oversold or luggage is lost. Roy however did not say whether the legislation would set industry-wide standards or whether the compensation levels would be raised to match those in the United States or Europe.
Garneau, the Transport Minister, would not comment directly on the United Airlines incident in Chicago. He said he did not know if a passenger in Canada can be removed due to overbooking. Garneau said: “I certainly have seen what happened in the case of the United Airlines flight and that is why last November I announced that we would be putting in place what we call a regime of rights for passengers. We recognize that when a passenger books a ticket, they are entitled to certain rights.”
Gabor Lukacs, a passenger rights advocate, said the troubling video showing the forcible removal of the United Airline passenger showed the need for greater protection of the traveler. Lukacs said: “Sadly, people realize what bumping actually means only when an incident so extreme happens." Lukas said all airlines should be forced to have the same compensation limits rising to a maximum of $1,500 in line with the US. In 2013 Lukacs won a Canadian Transportation Agency case against Air Canada which required the airline to raise compensation to a maximum of $800 depending on the length of delay.
The usual reason for a person being forcibly removed from a flight is that they are drunk or regarded as a threat. However, Lukacs pointed out:“If for any reason the airline tells you you need to leave, you have to leave. You don’t get a choice, you cannot argue about whether you have to leave or not because it is their aircraft.” Airlines overbook flights as a hedge against people not showing up. However not all airlines do it. Both Westjet Airlines and Air Transat said they do not intentionally overbook flights. Air Canada does but claims that bumping is rare. Spokesperson Peter Fitzpatrick said in an email: “We appreciate this is inconvenient for customers and we do take a very conservative approach to avoid this situation arising and when it does, we pay significant compensation.”
CEO of U.S.-based FareCompare.com, Rick Seaney, said that he had never seen anything such as happened on the United flight. He said that airlines typically raise the amount of compensation until someone volunteers to take a later flight. The Canadian Transportation Agency said it had received 55 complaints about overbooking in 2015-16 which was less than 4 percent of all the complaints filed.
The United Airlines incident that caused all the fuss was a flight from Chicago to Louisville. A United spokesperson said: “Flight 3411 from Chicago to Louisville was overbooked. After our team looked for volunteers, one customer refused to leave the aircraft voluntarily and law enforcement was asked to come to the gate. We apologize for the overbook situation.” The Chicago Department of Aviation(CDA) officers dragged the man off the plane. Karen Pride, spokesperson for the CDA said: “The incident on United flight 3411 was not in accordance with our standard operating procedure and the actions of the aviation security officer are obviously not condoned by the Department. That officer has been placed on leave effective today pending a thorough review of the situation.”
Joseph D'Cruz, of the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto said that airlines overbook to save money:“Airlines overbook because very often people book a flight and then don’t show up. It’s called a no show. And the no-show rate can vary depending on the route. So in order to protect themselves from having empty seats on the plane, they overbook.” In Canada the federal government has not mandated any sort of compensation for those who are bumped D'Cruz said. Airlines apparently offer whatever is sufficient to entice a person to give up their seat. The United airlines case shows how few rights the traveler has.
United's Contract of Carriage says:"If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority." Passengers with disabilities, and minors under 18 will be the last to denied boarding. United policy further states: "The priority of all other confirmed passengers may be determined based on a passenger’s fare class, itinerary, status of frequent flyer program membership, and the time in which the passenger presents him/herself for check-in without advanced seat assignment." In the United States the biggest US airlines bumped 475,054 passengers from flights in 2016.


Friday, April 21, 2017

Trudeau flip flops to join Trump on Syria attack

(April 7) At first, when many countries jumped on the US bandwagon blaming Assad for the apparent chemical attack in a town near Idlib in Syria, Canada took a common sense cautious approach as an investigation into the incident had not yet even been started.

Trudeau said that the international community had to do more to investigate the the Syrian chemical attack. He roundly condemned the attack that killed more than 70 including children. Trudeau said: "We're all shocked and horrified by the terrible images and actions that just happened in Syria with chemical weapons." Trudeau said the Canadian government 'obviously, unequivocally" condemned the attack and "pushed the international community to do more to condemn, to find out what's going on." He did not blame Assad as the U.S. and others had already done.
Yet after Trump unilaterally, without waiting for a UN resolution or investigation, fired Tomahawk missiles at a Syrian airbase, Trudeau came out in support of his action. Trudeau said that Canada was briefed in advance, about an hour before the U.S. missile strikes on the Syrian airbase. He said U.S. Secretary of State, James Mattis, called Canadian Defence Minister, Harjit Sajjan, Thursday night and Sajjan immediately briefed Trudeau.
For some strange reason, Trudeau's account contradicts what Trump's Press Secretary Sean Spicer had to say. Spicer said: "Missiles were launched at 7:40 p.m. during dinner. Foreign leaders and congressional leaders were notified starting at 8:30 p.m., just as first impacts were hitting the ground." It seems a bit odd if Canada had been warned ahead of other nations but Trudeau repeated his claim in a later speech. Trudeau also said that Canada would continue its mission in northern Iraq but that the government would continue to work to see how it could help in Syria.
Trudeau had a phone conversation with Trump on Friday morning. Trudeau told Trump that Canada fully supports the "limited and focused action to degrade the Syrian regime's ability to conduct chemical weapons attacks". Conservative MP Pierre Polievre during question period in the House of Commons, claimed that were inconsistencies in the Trudeau governments' response to what has happened. On Thursday, Trudeau had suggested there were continuing questions about who exactly was responsible for the attack and that the UN Security Council should launch an investigation into who was responsible. Polievre said Trudeau's rapid change of position shows Canada had been "completely out of the loop" on developments in the region. Polievre said: "Now [Trudeau] says he fully supports the United States's unilateral missile strikes against the Assad regime. The government's position seems to change with the wind." It was not exactly the wind but the phone call from Trump on Friday that changed the policy. On Thursday, Trudeau had been "out of the loop" not realizing that like other U.S. allies he was supposed to blame Assad before any investigation as the U.S. and shortly after many U.S. allies had done.
Trudeau's story is that the U.S. had provided him with information about the attack: "Secretary Mattis called Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan to confirm that Bashar al-Assad and his regime were responsible for the horrific attacks on civilians of a few days ago. A trusted and reliable ally in the United States informed us that the Assad regime was responsible for these chemical attacks." Sajjan told the House that Assad's repeated use of chemical weapons must not continue. Canada was back in the loop, accepting the U.S. narrative before any investigation and not questioning the missile attacks but supporting them. Maybe Trump will call and thank him.
Interim Conservative leader, Rona Ambrose, of the main opposition party also supported the missile strikes saying: "The global community cannot sit idly by while deadly nerve toxins are unleashed on innocent civilians." Murray Rankin of the NDP said the Assad regime must be held responsible for these shocking crimes. An NDP statement on its website is somewhat more reticent about blaming Assad already. A CBC article discusses viewers questions with Brian Stewart an award-winning Canadian journalist.


Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Saskatchewan's 70-year old provincial bus service to shut down

Employees cried and passengers were angry when they learned last Wednesday that the provincial government of Brad Wall had decided to shut down the 70-year-old bus service.

The Saskatchewan Transportation Company is a provincial crown corporation:
The Saskatchewan Transportation Company (STC) is a Crown Corporation of the Government of Saskatchewan, created in 1946 by an Order in Council. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of Crown Investments Corporation of Saskatchewan, with a mandate to provide bus services carrying people and freight between major centres and to as much of the rural population as possible.Freight services will be terminated on May 19 and passenger services by May 31. The closure will see 224 people lose their jobs and hundreds of rural Saskatchewan communities without any bus service. The province of Manitoba to the east already faces that situation. There is no service on highway 16, the Yellowhead, that runs from Winnipeg to Saskatoon, through much of Western Manitoba. Our main bus service is Greyhound Lines with offices in Austin Texas and owned in Scotland by FirstGroup. Any service that is not profitable is discontinued. The idea that a bus service might be operated to serve all areas of the province is a non-starter. This was the case even under our former supposedly socialist New Democratic Party (NDP) government. We now have a Conservative government and the issue will not even be discussed. The Saskatchewan Party government of premier Brad Wall in Saskatchewan is also conservative. Now they too will enjoy Greyhound as their main bus service. There is no money to be made providing transportation to the small towns of Saskatchewan except on a few main highways so they will all be without service.
Norquay resident, Cara Severson, said: "I can't believe this. I don't know what I'm going to do, I won't be traveling any more. It's going to be quite a nightmare. You guys don't know what you're doing to small communities. Think about the little people." She hoped that Premier Wall could reconsider the decision. A Nigerian immigrant did not know how she would bring her daughter into Saskatoon for medical treatment. An elderly Saskatoon woman who took the bus to the Manitou Springs Resort and Mineral Spa near the small town of Watrous said she will simply not be able to go there anymore.
Tareq Sunny of Yorkton takes the bus every month on business and said: "It's shutting down forever? My life is shutting down." While the decision is estimated to save the province about 17 million a year it also ends over 200 jobs and deprives many, in rural Saskatchewan especially, of a valuable transportation service. Only two of STC's 27 different routes are profitable. No doubt carriers such as Greyhound will service these routes while the 25 other routes will simply be without service.
New Democratic Party critic Cathy Sproule said that the loss of STC would have a negative impact on seniors in rural areas and people who depended on the bus service for medical appointments and deliveries. Sproule said: "We have a minister who promised a year ago that they wouldn't be touching STC because of the valuable service it provides." A survey of customers in the STC's latest annual report showed that 93 percent of customers were satisfied and 95 percent of parcel customers.Jennifer Campeau who was minister in charge of STC in 2016 said: "By linking communities, people and businesses, STC serves the customer and the shareholder. STC provides citizens with access to essential services in larger and rural communities. Entrepreneurs across the province have access to shipping services that can supply parts or distribute products, expanding markets beyond their local community." Even though the passenger service is to continue until May many routes were cancelled just hours before the announcement of STC's termination was announced in the budget. Apparently the cancellations were made to allow management to meet with STC staff, a move that shows no concern about customers.