Two million Ontario school kids not in class, a near-record number of COVID-19 patients in hospital, and provincewide closures or restrictions on restaurants, bars, gyms and cinemas.
It’s definitely not how Premier Doug Ford and his Progressive Conservatives wanted to start off this election year.
But Omicron doesn’t care about the Ontario political calendar or how beleaguered voters might be feeling after nearly two years of pandemic life: it’s just a virus, a particularly infectious variant spreading through the population “like wildfire,” Ford said Monday.
“We’re going to get hit like a tsunami,” Ford added. “Brace for impact.”
He was talking about the impact on workforces across Ontario and on hospitals, but his message could just as easily have been directed at his political team.
While it’s fairly clear what the impact will be in the health system, the impact on Ontario politics is far trickier to forecast.
WATCH | CBC’s Mike Crawley answers questions about what’s next:
When will Ontario’s COVID-19 public health restrictions end?
5 hours ago
Duration 4:11
Ontario’s chief medical officer of health says it’s going to be a tough January because of the Omicron variant. When can we expect things to get back to normal? CBC Queen’s Park reporter Mike Crawley answers some of the most frequently-asked questions about the road ahead. 4:11
Despite plenty of criticism on Twitter of the Ford government’s handling of the pandemic so far, Twitter isn’t representative of the average voter.
Every published poll since last spring has showed the PCs leading. Ford’s approval ratings and favourability numbers in published polls remain in the 40 per cent range, and that’s enough for an election win in Ontario politics.
Will this Omicron-driven rise in cases and hospitalizations — or the government’s move to shut schools and ban indoor dining at restaurants in response — spell a drop for Ford in the polls?
Polling firms that have been tracking Ontarians’ views throughout the pandemic have generally found more voters saying the government was getting it right on COVID-19 restrictions than voters criticizing the measures as either too loose or too tight.
The chief exceptions: when Ontario neared the second and third waves without imposing significant new restrictions. That’s when the pollsters found growth in voters feeling the government wasn’t doing enough.
While there may be some people angry at the government over what they perceive as yet another lockdown, that polling evidence suggests the far bigger political risk for Ford and the PCs would have been to do nothing.
Ontario’s COVID-19 Science Advisory Table urged the government to impose what it called “circuit breaker” public health restrictions back on Dec. 16. In essence, a circuit breaker is what Ontario got three weeks later: the measures that took effect on Wednesday.
Some two million Ontario students, including four-year-old Sasha Mitsui, are currently learning online as the provincial government has ordered schools closed until Jan. 17. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
We’ll never know what difference it would have made had things kicked in three weeks sooner. We’ll also never know how well Ontarians would have adhered to such measures if they’d been in place over the holiday period.
As recently as last Thursday, the government seemed headed in the direction of a pretty much normal new year. That’s when Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. Kieran Moore announced that school would resume with in-person classes the following Wednesday, only two days later than scheduled. Just 72 hours after that announcement, Ford and his ministers were in an emergency cabinet meeting.
So, what happened?
“Ford was inundated with calls from hospital CEOs, labour leaders, corporate presidents and public health officials, warning that Omicron was contributing to mass staffing shortages, which threatened to disrupt the province’s labour force,” writes Robert Benzie, TheToronto Star’s Queen’s Park bureau chief, in this story on the reasons behind the government’s moves.
It’s the first time since the initial declaration of a state of emergency back in March 2020 that the government has brought in significant new restrictions without presenting full-fledged modelling as a justification.
The modelling presented in mid-December forecast upwards of 10,000 new cases per day by Christmas and that’s exactly what transpired.
A small percentage of those who got infected over the holidays now need care in hospital, but even a tiny percentage of hundreds of thousands of infections still amounts to a lot of patients. The sheer speed of Omicron’s spread also means the nurses and doctors who provide care are getting infected or exposed to COVID-19, stretching Ontario’s burnt-out health-care workforce even more thinly.
Moore’s forecast that all employment sectors will face 20 to 30 per cent of staff either calling in sick or having to self-isolate due to Omicron factored into the most controversial measure imposed this week, the closure of schools.
There’s not a great deal of confidence out there among teachers, administrators or parents that regular in-person classes will resume fully on Jan. 17.
Last June, the Science Advisory Table warned that Ontario’s “relatively heavy reliance on system-wide school closures” risked a range of impacts on kids, including learning loss and deterioration in mental health, in addition to the stress on parents.
Keeping the schools open amid this Omicron wave would have risked widespread transmission of COVID-19, said a senior political adviser to Ford, who spoke to me on condition of anonymity.
“If we’d opened, we’d have ended up in the same place, and had a tonne of spread in schools,” said the adviser.
“They were going to close either way. You can’t run a school with 25 per cent of the teachers missing. Nobody likes it, but nobody thinks we have a lot of other options.”
On Thursday, Ontario reported 2,279 patients hospitalized with COVID-19. The province’s record high of 2,360 patients came on April 20, 2021, during the peak of the pandemic’s third wave. (Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press)
VICTORIA – British Columbia’s auditor general says his office has found no evidence of a conflict of interest in the handling of provincial grants for the zero-emission vehicle sector, after an accusation by a truck maker earlier this year.
Michael Pickup says in a statement the investigation looked into accounting firm MNP’s handling of Advanced Research and Commercialization grant applications, reviewing “a significant amount of information” from the company, the government and all applicants.
Pickup says the results show no evidence MNP wrote grant applications for clients, influenced the evaluation process to benefit clients or used its administering of the program to “recruit” clients for the company’s other services.
In April, the provincial legislature unanimously directed Pickup’s office to examine allegations by electric-hybrid truck maker Edison Motors that MNP was both administering the grants and offering services to help businesses with applications.
The Office of the Auditor General says the allegations from Edison, which is based in Merritt, B.C., suggested MNP “was offering to write grant applications in exchange for a success fee while also deciding who received grant funding.”
MNP said at the time that the allegations were “false and misleading.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 28, 2024.
Certain solar farms will be banned on prime agricultural land in Ontario as the province expands energy production to meet demand in the coming decades, Energy Minister Stephen Lecce said Wednesday.
Ontario is looking to add some 5,000 megawatts of energy to the grid, with Lecce directing the Independent Electricity System Operator to secure “technology agnostic” energy resources. That means the province will use a mix of natural gas, hydroelectric, renewables, nuclear and biomass energy sources, he said.
But the province is making efforts to protect key agricultural areas in the process, the minister said.
Ground-mounted solar panels will be prohibited on prime agricultural farmland, said Lecce, who pledged the province would “never misuse” those lands.
“Our farmers need more energy more than ever,” Lecce said.
“They need access to to affordable energy and so we made a commitment to work with them on a policy that ultimately will respect prime agricultural land.”
Other energy products being considered on prime agricultural land will now require an impact assessment before proceeding.
The province is also giving power to municipalities to decide if they want a particular energy project.
“Long gone are the days where Queen’s Park imposes projects on unwilling communities, undermining those agricultural areas,” Lecce said.
The news is welcome to farmers, said Drew Spoelstra, the president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture.
“The new energy procurement framework is a major step forward for Ontario,” he said.
“Reliable and affordable energy is incredibly important to the growth of the Ontario economy, including food production, food processing and the agri-food sector.”
Farmers and Premier Doug Ford’s government have had an up-and-down relationship in recent years in light of the Greenbelt scandal.
The province had said they were going to build 50,000 homes on the protected Greenbelt, which includes prime agricultural land. But several investigations by provincial bodies found the process was flawed as it favoured some developers with ties to the government over others.
Farmers did not like the possible encroachment onto farmland and joined the chorus to denounce the Greenbelt move. Last summer, amid mounting public pressure to reverse course, Ford walked back those Greenbelt plans.
Lecce’s announcement Wednesday comes as the province’s electricity demand is expected to grow by about two per cent each year, although that could be even higher depending on electrification within the broader economy.
The IESO has said the province will need at least 60 per cent more energy by 2050.
Ontario has also recently been adding electricity storage projects, with an eye to about 2,500 megawatts, and the IESO said the province’s emerging battery fleet will pair well with wind and solar, so that the power generated by those methods can be stored and injected into the grid when needed.
Ford cancelled 750 renewable energy contracts shortly after his Progressive Conservatives formed government in 2018, after the former Liberal government faced widespread anger over the long-term contracts with clean power producers at above-market rates.
The province is also moving ahead with nuclear energy expansion, including seeking to refurbish units at the Pickering nuclear plant, build small modular reactors at the Darlington nuclear plant and exploring a new, large-scale plant at Bruce Power.
In 2021, the electricity system was 94 per cent emissions free, but that is now down to 87 per cent as it uses natural gas to meet demand.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Aug. 28, 2024.
In the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election, former President Donald Trump has been vocal in his criticism of Vice President Kamala Harris, labeling her as a far-left politician and questioning her competence. His derogatory remarks, including calling her “Comrade Kamala” and questioning her identity, are part of a broader strategy to undermine her credibility.
However, Harris used her Democratic National Convention (DNC) speech to counter these attacks effectively. In a 40-minute address, she dismantled Trump’s caricature by showcasing her experience, values, and policy priorities. Harris presented herself as a pragmatic leader with a strong background in law enforcement, emphasizing her work as a prosecutor and attorney general. She focused on unifying issues like protecting abortion rights, Social Security, and Medicare, while also stressing her commitment to national security and middle-class tax relief.
Harris also addressed potential vulnerabilities, such as her background and identity, by sharing personal stories that highlighted her American values and deep patriotism. This approach was aimed at making her relatable to a broader audience, countering Trump’s portrayal of her as disconnected from ordinary Americans.
The speech not only fortified her position within the Democratic Party but also presented a formidable challenge to Trump. By blending offensive and defensive strategies in her speech, Harris demonstrated her capability to handle the intense scrutiny and attacks that come with a high-profile campaign. As the election approaches, both Trump and his campaign team are likely recalibrating their strategies in response to Harris’ effective performance.
