Canada is emerging from months of lockdown, but key questions remain unanswered about where Canadians are getting infected with COVID-19 and why case levels remain high in our hardest-hit provinces.
Ontario and Quebec have seen their rate of new cases plateau in recent weeks, still in the hundreds each day, and have little information on the source of infection or what effect reopening will have.
“It’s scary. There’s a large sense of unknown there,” said Dr. Michael Gardam, an infectious disease specialist and chief of staff at Humber River Hospital in Toronto, who is a veteran of SARS and H1N1.
“And there’s no way around the fact that this is uncomfortable.”
Even local health officials have concerns about lifting lockdown measures.
Dr. Lawrence Loh, the Medical Officer of Health for Peel Region, west of Toronto, said this week the province’s move to reopen was “out of step” with the “continuing risk” of the coronavirus pandemic, and recommended delaying easing restrictions.
“We have seen our new cases starting to plateau, but we have just not seen a decline in line with the province’s own framework for reopening at this point,” he said, adding the region had 20 per cent of all new COVID-19 cases in Ontario last week.
He notes the recent new case levels in the province — between 300 and 500 each day — mirror the levels in the early days of lockdown.
That concern was echoed by Dr. Chris Mackie, the Medical Officer of Health and CEO for the Middlesex London Health Unit in London, Ont., who said the region may need to “reconsider” reopening after case counts rose this week.
“We should not be seeing these sorts of numbers at this stage,” he said, adding the local increase, as well as the provincial one, is higher than it should be.
“If this continues on for the next few days, we might have to reconsider some of the loosening of public health measures.”
The Ontario Ministry of Health could not provide CBC News with a clear picture of where exactly people are getting infected in the province.
“This is ongoing work,” a spokesperson said in a statement, and said the issue was being examined by Ontario’s Chief Medical Officer of Health Dr. David Williams.
“Dr. Williams has asked the local public health units to collect more specific information from new cases about the possible sources of transmission.”
Experts say lifting lockdown measures without a clear picture of where new cases are coming from, and while testing is not at capacity, is cause for concern.
“We’re only ever measuring the tip of the iceberg, and so there’s a bunch of cases out there that we don’t know about, and presumably those cases are transmitting,” Gardam said.
“Because you’re not testing everybody, you are going to get cases where you don’t know where they came from.”
Dr. Irfan Dhalla, a physician and University of Toronto medical professor who is also a vice-president at Unity Health Toronto, said Ontario needs to proceed with caution.
“I would be nervous about some elements of the reopening strategy in some areas of the province,” he said.
“We need to redouble our efforts to continually improve our understanding of where ongoing transmission is occurring so that we can reopen safely.”
Quebec forges ahead with reopening
In Quebec, the number of new cases remains the highest in the country, with an 720 new cases and 82 deaths reported Thursday.
Quebec’s Director of Public Health Dr. Horacio Arruda said he’s still not satisfied with the number of people getting tested in the province, falling well below the capacity to test 20,000 per day.
And the province’s latest public health data provides no clear information on why infection continues to occur even after months of lockdown.
Despite this, Quebec is moving ahead with reopening soon.
As of Friday, people from up to three different households in the province will be allowed to gather outside in groups of 10 as long as they maintain physical distancing.
And starting June 1, the province will allow a number of personal care services such as dental clinics and massage therapy to reopen.
Hairdressers, manicurists and other beauty care services will be allowed to open on the same date — but not in the greater Montreal and Joliette areas, where there are still significant COVID-19 outbreaks.
“This has to be done while ensuring everyone’s protection — the protection of workers and clients as well,” Health Minister Danielle McCann said Wednesday. “So there will be rigorous prevention measures set up.”
Quebec’s public health strategic adviser, Dr. Richard Massé, said visits to these types of service providers can be carried out safely if both the providers and the clients respect the rules.
“If it’s done properly, there is a very good level of protection,” he said.
No clarity on source of COVID-19 infections
But the level of uncertainty over where infections are happening in Ontario and Quebec as lockdown measures lift is compounded by the fact that a large number of cases in Canada have no known source of infection.
The federal government can only provide basic information on where infection is occurring for less than half of our more than 80,000 COVID-19 cases — and even that data is incomplete.
The latest available update from the Public Health Agency of Canada found 3,787 COVID-19 cases had travelled outside of Canada; 24,848 are from “domestic acquisition”; while a further 10,433 have “information pending.”
Barbershops outside the Montreal and Joliette areas of Quebec will be able to open as of June 1. (Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press)
But not all parts of the country have the same problem.
While British Columbia, which looked like it could be among Canada’s hardest-hit provinces early on in the pandemic, now appears to be one of the best positioned to reopen.
British Columbia, which looked like it could be among Canada’s hardest-hit provinces early on in the pandemic, now appears to be one of the best positioned to reopen. (Ben Nelms/CBC)
So should parts of the country be moving toward reopening even if they can’t answer those key questions?
“Everybody would like them answered, but I think it’s just not possible in the current circumstances to be able to think that we can,” said Dr. Allison McGeer, an infectious disease expert and a professor at the University of Toronto’s Dalla Lana School of Public Health.
“So if we can’t do that, then the question becomes: Do we sit forever? Or do we move with everybody else in reducing precautions and watch to see what will happen?”
Ontario says its first phase of reopening is focused on “low-risk workplaces,” and that public health officials will “carefully monitor each stage.”
If the first stage of the gradual reopening of Ontario is successful, it will move toward second and third stages. If not, public health measures will need to be “adjusted and/or tightened.”
There’s really no way of knowing what the future holds for any part of the country as lockdown measures lift, McGeer says.
“The only way you can answer that question is by trying it out. There’s not a rulebook. You can’t know what’s going to happen when you do this,” she said.
“I hope that we all know, as Ontarians, as Canadians, that this step forward might be reversed, but we’re going to try it out and we’re going to see what happens.”
1 step forward, 2 steps back?
But Canada should consider whether reopening then backtracking could ultimately set us back further.
The incident led to an outbreak of more than 100 new cases and ultimately forced the country to shut down thousands of nightclubs indefinitely to prevent a spike in new cases.
Storefronts along Toronto’s Queen Street are among the businesses permitted to reopen as Ontario removes some restrictions set in place to curb the spread of COVID-19. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
“If you don’t have to backtrack at all, then it probably suggests that we waited too long to reopen,” said Dhalla.
“What we don’t want to have happen are large outbreaks that result in lots of people needing to be cared for in hospital and people dying, but I think it’s inevitable that we will learn as we go.”
McGeer said although it may not be palatable for Canadians to think about lockdown measures being reimposed if things don’t go well, it may be part of our new reality as we test the waters of reopening.
“Honestly, I think it’s the best we can hope for. We don’t want to stay in lockdown unless it’s essential that we stay in lockdown,” she said.
“But if we can allow more activity and not get into trouble, then that’s what we should be doing.”
She said Canadians should brace themselves for the possibility of lockdown measures being lifted then reimposed for the foreseeable future until an effective treatment for or vaccine against COVID-19 is developed.
“As long as we know that’s where we’re going and what’s going to happen, I think people will be happier with being allowed to do some things for a while rather than staying in lockdown for the whole time,” she said.
“But it’s really important that people know that this might happen — that we might have to go back.”
Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.
Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.
Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.
My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.
Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.
My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.
To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.
Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…
The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.
The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.
The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.
Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.
In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.
If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.
Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.
CALGARY – Sam Edney and Jesse Lumsden sat on a bench on Parliament Hill during an athlete celebration after the 2014 Winter Olympic Games.
Having just represented Canada in their sliding sports — Lumsden in bobsled and Edney in luge — the two men pondered their futures together.
“There was actually one moment about, are we going to keep going? Talking about, what are each of us going to do? What’s the next four years look like?” Edney recalled a decade later.
“I do remember talking about that now. That was a big moment,” Lumsden said.
As the two men were sounding boards for each other as athletes, they are again as high-performance directors of their respective sliding sports.
Edney, an Olympic relay silver medallist in 2018 and the first Canadian man to win a World Cup gold medal, became Luge Canada’s HPD upon his retirement the following year.
Lumsden, a world and World Cup bobsled champion who raced his third Olympic Games in 2018, leaned on his sliding compatriot when he returned from five years of working in the financial sector to become HPD at Bobsleigh Canada Skeleton in July.
“The first person I called when BCS reached out to me about the role that I’m in now is Sam,” Lumsden said recently at Calgary’s WinSport, where they spent much of their competitive careers and now have offices.
“It’s been four months. I was squatting in the luge offices for the first two months beside him.
“We had all these ideas about we’re going to have weekly coffees and workouts Tuesday and Thursday and in the four months now, we’ve had two coffees and zero workouts.”
Canada has won at least one sliding-sport Olympic medal in each of the last five Winter Games, but Edney and Lumsden face a challenge as team leaders that they didn’t as athletes.
WinSport’s sliding track, built for the 1988 Winter Olympics in Calgary and where Edney and Lumsden did hundreds of runs as athletes, has been closed since 2019 needing a $25-million renovation.
There is no sign that will happen. WinSport took the $10 million the provincial government offered for the sliding track and put the money toward a renovation of the Frank King Lodge used by recreational skiers and snowboarders.
Canada’s only other sliding track in the resort town of Whistler, B.C., has a fraction of Calgary’s population from which to recruit and develop athletes.
“The comparison is if you took half the ice rinks away in the country, hockey and figure skating would be disarray,” Edney said.
“It just changes the dynamic of the sports completely, in terms of we’re now scrambling to find ways to bring people to a location that’s not as easy to get to, or to live out of, or to train out of full time.
“We’re realizing how good we had it when Calgary’s (track) was here. It’s not going to be the end of us, but it’s definitely made it more difficult.”
Lumsden, a former CFL running back as well as an Olympian, returned to a national sport organization still recovering from internal upheaval that included the athlete-led ouster of the former president and CEO after the 2022 Winter Olympics, and Olympic champion pilot Kaillie Humphries suing the organization for her release to compete for the U.S. in 2019.
“NSOs like Luge Canada and Bobsleigh Canada Skeleton, they’re startups,” Lumsden said. “You have to think like a startup, operate like a startup, job stack, do more with less, especially in the current environment.
“I felt it was the right time for me to take my sporting experience and the skill set that I learned at Neo Financial and working with some of the most talented people in Canada and try to inject that into an NSO that is in a state of distress right now, and try to work with the great staff we have and the athletes we have to start to turn this thing around.”
Edney, 40, and Lumsden, 42, take comfort in each other holding the same roles in their sports.
“It goes both ways. I couldn’t have been more excited about who they hired,” Edney said. “When Jesse was coming in, I knew that we were going to be able to collaborate and work together and get things happening for our sports.”
Added Lumsden: “We’ve been friends for a long time, so I knew how he was going to do in his role and before taking the role, having the conversation with him, I felt a lot of comfort.
“I asked ‘are you going to be around for a long time?’ He said ‘yeah, I’m not going anywhere.’ I said ‘OK, good.'”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 4, 2024.
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia – Canada’s Gabriela Dabrowski and New Zealand’s Erin Routliffe remain undefeated in women’s doubles at the WTA Finals.
The 2023 U.S. Open champions, seeded second at the event, secured a 1-6, 7-6 (1), (11-9) super-tiebreak win over fourth-seeded Italians Sara Errani and Jasmine Paolini in round-robin play on Tuesday.
The season-ending tournament features the WTA Tour’s top eight women’s doubles teams.
Dabrowski and Routliffe lost the first set in 22 minutes but levelled the match by breaking Errani’s serve three times in the second, including at 6-5. They clinched victory with Routliffe saving a match point on her serve and Dabrowski ending Errani’s final serve-and-volley attempt.
Dabrowski and Routliffe will next face fifth-seeded Americans Caroline Dolehide and Desirae Krawczyk on Thursday, where a win would secure a spot in the semifinals.
The final is scheduled for Saturday.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published on Nov. 5, 2024.
