With Canadians grappling with inflation not seen in a generation, the federal government has decided to throw fuel on the fire.
The conquest of inflation is one of the most far-reaching changes of our times. Countries used to think that they simply had to live with and manage escalating prices and wages. When inflationary trends got out of hand, they often had severe political consequences. Unlike unemployment, which affects just the small percentage of people who don’t have jobs, inflation affects everyone. And unlike unemployment, which shrinks what you might earn in the future (if you have a job), inflation shrinks what you have now by eroding the value of your savings. That’s why high inflation has been so often associated with political turmoil, from Germany in the 1920s to Iran in the 1970s to Latin America in the 1980s.
We forget now, but as recently as the 1980s, inflation was rampant across much of the world. Countries such as Brazil, Argentina and Peru had inflation rates that were measured in the thousands of percent. The United States kicked off the decade with over 12 percent inflation. In some European countries, such as Italy, it surged above 20 percent. In most of these countries, the causes were some combination of large government deficits, lax central bank policies and external shocks such as the oil crises of the 1970s.
These crises produced a policy revolution. Central banks became more independent and focused on taming inflation. Governments in the developing world became more fiscally responsible. In some cases — Chile and Mexico — they briefly tied their currencies to the dollar. One crucial reason that countries such as Italy were willing to give up their currency in favor of a common European one was that they believed that essentially merging their monetary policy with Germany’s would enable them to fix their inflation problem.
In large measure, it worked, and by the early 2000s, countries were congratulating themselves for having won the war. It all seemed part of a paradigm in which governments recognized the power of free markets and free trade. Thomas Friedman used the metaphor of the “golden straitjacket” to explain what happened. Governments placed themselves in a situation where their policy options were tightly constrained by markets, and as a result, their politics shrank but their economies grew.
Follow Fareed Zakaria‘s opinionsFollow
Over the past few years, it has seemed as if the opposite is happening almost everywhere. Look at Turkey, which by the 2000s had become a model developing country, taming inflation and spurring growth. Its policymakers were lauded across the world. Today, Turkey’s president has abandoned even the pretense of rational economic policy, using policy to reward friends and punish foes and advocating monetary policy that is the opposite of what most experts believe would work. Chile, which was considered the most fiscally prudent country in Latin America, now appears to have taken a path toward a more familiar left-wing populism.
Or consider the poster child of developing countries, China, where economic growth was the north star of policymaking. Today, President Xi Jinping pursues policies that often attack the private sector in key growth areas such as technology. As scholar Elizabeth Economy has pointed out, it is China, not the United States, that began the move to decouple the two economies and embraced protectionism and economic nationalism when Xi announced his “Made in China” strategy. India, for its part, has mirrored this with its own protectionism and subsidies.
The Western world has followed suit. Driven by an understandable concern about middle-class wages and inequality, economic policy is no longer oriented toward growth. Tariffs, subsidies and relief packages all reflect the fact that politics has trumped economics. Central banks everywhere have rushed in over the past decade to take extreme measures in response to the two big shocks of the age — the financial crisis and the pandemic. As Ruchir Sharma notes, in the mid-1990s not one country in the world had a ratio of debt to gross domestic product above 300 percent. Today, 25 countries have exceeded this mark.
The old obsession with economics over politics was overdone. It achieved great successes but created other problems, such as wage stagnation. But the current emphasis on politics over economics seems more dangerous. It allows politicians to engage in patronage policies, protectionism and short-term gimmicks to prevent ordinary people from feeling the pain of a crisis. In the long run, however, one wonders if it is these same ordinary people who will have to pay the price.
Protesters opposed to public health measures such as wearing a mask, adhering to lockdowns and vaccine mandates have increasingly turned to holding intimidating and aggressive protests at the homes of politicians, prompting calls for action to be taken to better protect democratically elected officials.
The RCMP told CBC News it has noticed a growing number of “incidents” singling out politicians at their homes and offices.
As the pandemic nears its two-year mark, politicians are but one target of the aggressive protests; front-line health-care workers and patients seeking care have also been intimidated by sometimes violent anti-vaxxers and anti-lockdown advocates.
But when it comes to these workers, the federal government co-operated with the opposition to pass Bill C-3, which makes it an offence punishable buy up to 10 years in prison for those found guilty of intimidating health-care workers and patients trying to access medical care.
Even with the aggressive targeting of politicians, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says that, despite having gravel and threats thrown at him during the last federal election, he has no plans to expand Bill C-3 to cover politicians across the country, for now.
“Nobody in the course of doing their job should be faced with threats of violence, threats to their family. That applies for health-care workers or for politicians or anyone else,” Trudeau said Wednesday.
“We continue to engage with public security, with police services to ensure that we’re doing everything we can to protect Canadians, but we haven’t, at this point, looked at similar legislation.”
An RCMP spokesperson told CBC News in an email that Mounties have “seen an increase in the number of incidents that either occurred or were planned” at politicians’ “residences or constituency offices.”
Those incidents seem to be targeting people at all levels of government. Earlier this month, protesters enraged by pandemic public health measures and vaccine mandates gathered outside Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek’s home.
“It is an incredibly unnerving and unsettling experience to look out your window and see people holding signs calling you a Nazi,” Gondek told CBC News.
“We have provided these public places for people to do these types of protests or rallies. You can’t do it at someone’s home. It’s simply wrong. It’s inappropriate. It’s an intimidation tactic, and you will not have good people running for public service if we allow this to continue.”
On Tuesday, Calgary city council approved a plan to pay for home security systems for council members.
Three provincial politicians in Ontario — Premier Doug Ford, Education Minister Stephen Lecce and Health Minister Christine Elliott — have been visited at home by protesters infuriated by lockdowns, school closures and vaccination programs.
When asked by CBC News whether the Ford government would consider a new law to protect public office holders, the premier’s office sidestepped the question.
“These petty tactics have no impact on this government’s resolve to do the right thing in order to protect the people of Ontario,” the premier’s office told CBC News.
“The only thing these people are doing is targeting and harassing innocent neighbours and family members who have nothing to do with the government’s decision-making.”
Former Liberal environment minister Catherine McKenna was the target of abuse and intimidation while in office. She said she wants to see the security budget for members of Parliament increased to ensure they are safe and that public life continues to attract good people.
“People yelling and screaming … at your home, or when you’re just out, I think it is next-level. That’s not why I got into politics,” she told CBC News. “I will say it was a very unappealing feature of politics, and that’s why I still speak out about it because I want good people to go into politics.”
McKenna said she would like to see social media companies held accountable for the way they’re sometimes used to organize aggressive protests.
“I’ve been very vocal about the need for social media companies to step up and take responsibility,” she said. “They have … created a vehicle that is now being used to foster hate and in some ways expands the network of people that normally would be, I guess, in their basement.”
Gondek said she agrees with that suggestion.
“Democracy will not survive if people feel threatened or intimidated to run for office,” she said.
“Those platforms should be held responsible for what is happening. They should be held accountable and responsible for the communication method that they have encouraged and put out there to embolden groups like this.”
Stephanie Carvin is an associate professor of International Relations at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs. She said that while politicians may be reluctant to pass laws limiting public expressions of opposition to government policy, they could take action against social media platforms.
“Social media organizations … are pumping out a lot of disinformation, a lot of hate, a lot of anger, encouraging bounties, to follow people around and try to catch them breaking the rules,” she said.
“We have seen the minister write to social media companies in December of last year to try and encourage them to take a more ambitious approach to trying to curtail this rhetoric. But beyond this, it’s not clear that that much is going to be done.”
Carvin said she hopes that the intimidation tactics being directed against public health measures will wind down as pandemic restrictions ease.
Canada fears armed conflict could break out in Ukraine and is working with allies to make clear to Russia that any more aggression towards Kiev is unacceptable, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said on Wednesday.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/blinken-says-russian-attack-ukraine-could-come-very-short-notice-2022-01-19 said earlier that Russia could launch a new attack on Ukraine at “very short notice”. Moscow, which has stationed military equipment and tens of thousands of troops near the border, denies it is planning an invasion and blames the West for rising tensions.
“We do fear an armed conflict in Ukraine. We’re very worried about the position of the Russian government … and the fact that they’re sending soldiers to the Ukrainian border,” Trudeau told a news conference.
Canada, with a sizeable and politically influential population of Ukrainian descent, has taken a strong line with Russia since its annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014.
“We’re working with our international partners and colleagues to make it very, very clear that Russian aggression and further incursion into Ukraine is absolutely unacceptable,” Trudeau said.
“We are standing there with diplomatic responses, with sanctions, with a full press on the international stage.”
Canadian troops are in Latvia as part of a NATO mission and Trudeau said they would “continue the important work that NATO is doing to protect its eastern front”.
Canada has had a 200-strong training mission in western Ukraine since 2015.
Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/canada-condemns-russian-troop-movements-near-ukraine-mulls-weapons-supplies-kyiv-2022-01-18 on Tuesday said Ottawa would make a decision at the appropriate time on supplying military hardware to Ukraine.
Trudeau side-stepped a question about sending defensive weapons, saying any decision would “be based on what is best for the people of Ukraine”.
(Reporting by David Ljunggren;Editing by Will Dunham and Philippa Fletcher)
With Canadians grappling with inflation not seen in a generation, the federal government has decided to throw fuel on the fire.
On Saturday, the Liberals’ vaccine mandate for international truckers came into effect, an ill-conceived move that will drive up the price of goods imported from the United States and exacerbate driver shortages and, more so, our national capacity to export Canadian goods.
Even without the mandate, today we have nearly 23,000 openings for professional drivers and counting — a vacancy rate already at a record high.
When we think of front-line workers, nurses, doctors and grocery store clerks are usually the first who come to mind. There is another occupation, however, that needs to be added to that list: truck drivers. Throughout the pandemic, tens of thousands of hard-working Canadians have been working round the clock to keep our supply chains moving.
Let me be clear: the Canadian trucking industry is strongly supportive of efforts to increase vaccine uptake among Canadians. Safe and effective, the vaccine is far and away the best way to prevent serious illness or death from COVID-19. The Alberta Motor Transport Association, for instance, partnered with the governments of Alberta and Montana to offer vaccine clinics for cross-border truckers.
Thanks to efforts such as these, the majority of truckers are fully vaccinated. Indeed, the vaccination rates among many Canadian Trucking Alliance members are well above the national average. As we have since the vaccine became available, we will continue to encourage our members to roll up their sleeves. This doesn’t change the incremental impacts of putting our MVPs — our professional drivers — on the bench.
That’s now our reality, thousands of truckers will be sidelined by this policy change. According to our data, the exit rate for the 120,000 truck drivers currently crossing the border will be between 10 and 15 per cent. Late last Wednesday evening, Canadians thought we had a reprieve on this direction, only to be rescinded within 24 hours. This flip-flop leadership just reinforced the confusion within the federal government on this issue.
And that, unfortunately, is just the beginning. The government has signalled that there will be amendments imminently under the Canada Labour Code, mandating any truck or bus drivers who cross a provincial border (federally regulated employees) to require vaccination. While the regulatory language, enforcement measures and penalties are still unclear, this government policy will force a driver whose route runs from Medicine Hat to Swift Current, Lethbridge to Cranbrook, or one side of a border town like Lloydminster to the other to choose between vaccination and working in our industry.
The federal government has snubbed meaningful engagement on this mandate. A consultation paper was posted on Dec. 7 and days later the process was closed to comments. Although Ottawa claimed to have engaged with stakeholders, the government clearly still doesn’t understand the severity of the outcome from a policy decision limiting Canadians ability to support bilateral trade or interprovincial mobility. At every step of the way, our industry has pleaded with the government to work with us on solutions, including regularly testing to keep our drivers behind the wheel, to no avail.
By putting politics ahead of common sense, the federal government is throwing up more roadblocks for a critical industry that is already under tremendous stress. As a result, Canada’s already fragile supply chains are going to be stretched even further.
What does that mean for Canadians? Well, get ready for more bare shelves and to open your wallets even wider for what is left. From food, to gas, to consumer goods, things are going to get even more expensive; that is if they make it to the shelf.
The cost of bringing a truckload of fruit and vegetables from California has already doubled during the pandemic due to the existing driver shortage. As Canadian fields lie fallow and covered in snow, produce prices will only go higher.
As is always the case with bad policies and bad politics, it’s going to be Canadians who are left holding the bag.
Jude Groves is the board chair of the Alberta Motor Transport Association.
Change your Perspective (Plastic use)
Trudeau says Canada fears armed conflict in Ukraine as Russia ramps up aggression – CTV News
Soccer-USMNT embrace the cold as World Cup qualifying heats up
Study casts doubt on reliability of rapid antigen tests in kids; COVID transmission through breastmilk unlikely
World Bank chief takes swipe at Microsoft’s $69 billion gaming deal as poor countries struggle
United Airlines cuts capacity forecast, flags cost pressure on Omicron turmoil
SETI Institute in the News – Media Roundup. December 2021 – SETI Institute
Your time is valuable: Here is how to negotiate for more at work