The End of the Liberals?

The public relations disaster that is the SNC-Lavalin case is, of course, not the end of the federal Liberals - or at least not quite. But there can be no doubt that the testimony of former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould has cast a rather dark cloud over Justin Trudeau's sunny days.

It does not matter if the "consistent and sustained effort" to pressure her to get involved in the SNC-Lavalin case was within the bounds of what is acceptable or not. The amount of pressure was, considering the political and economic stakes involved in the consequences of a criminal conviction, probably not abnormal. It should surprise no one that a political party that needs to have strong support from Quebec if they wish to win the next election, would be anxious about potentially thousands of jobs being lost because a company went bankrupt. There are some who will argue that no political interference is ever acceptable; there are others who will argue that it was all within the bounds of what is legal and normal; that Ms. Wilson-Raybould was overly sensitive. Neither argument is right or even particularly useful.

The federal Liberals in the past three and half years have made of a number of decisions that might put their capacity to win another federal election in doubt. For example, the decision to not only approve the pipeline but then buy the company that was going to build it may attract a few Albertans to the Liberal party; in all likelihood, those decisions will lose far more votes in British Columbia. The federal government's decision to impose some sort of carbon tax on provinces that have not developed their own plans will win no votes in those provinces. The government's movement on either how Canada supports veterans or how it deals with Indigenous land claims and the myriad of other issues that need to be resolved so that First Nations can take their legitimate place within Canada has been pathetically slow. And now, because of the SNC-Lavalin case, whether it is true or not - the Liberals look to be as manipulative as any other party. Any right to present themselves as the party who are morally upright, ethical and who have a vision of what justice might look like is gone.

Of course, it is gone because it is to the Conservatives' benefit to stand up in the House and be morally outraged. There is no point reminding them of all of the times that a Conservative government created (or destroyed) legislation that supports large industry including oil companies; of all of the times that they welcomed and benefitted from aggressive lobbying from such multinationals. There will never be a conversation that suggests that the Conservatives pushing for this issue to be aired in public - to benefit their political aims - is equally as unethical. The whole affair is just one more bit of proof that we have devolved into a world where one can get ahead fastest by tearing down the opposition as opposed to creating viable alternatives.

It is going to be an interesting few months. The Liberals may be hamstrung by their leadership's over-aggressive approach to wanting input into the SNC-Lavalin case and therefore will be even less productive than usual; the Conservatives are lead by a man who is comfortable standing on the same stage with speakers who are clearly racists; the NDP, which has been directionless for a number of years as it searches in vain for votes in the centre is led by a leader who has yet to sit in Parliament.

If there was somewhere to move to - I might consider it.

The Never Ending Wars in my Life

In the late 1940s - six countries were created - Israel& Palestine (1948), India & Pakistan (1947) and North and South Korea (1948). Four of the partnered countries were created with the support and in sometimes outright manipulation and coercion of the western countries who had been "successful" in the proceeding world war. India & Pakistan were created as those on the Indian sub-continent demanded independence from Britain. In the following 70+ years, there has been constant tension and sometimes outright war between the adjoining countries.

While there have certainly been other conflicts that have caused a greater loss of life in the past few decades (i.e. Rwanda, the Sudan, Syria etc) the above areas have for my entire life been in the news, have been the cause of constant debate amongst western world leaders and have on more than one occasion, brought the world close the another all-out war. The causes for the antagonism between the countries are complex and frequently seem to be lost in time -I am not sure if anyone really understands the original grievances. Two of the conflicts have, at least on the surface, partial roots in religious differences (India/ Pakistan - Hindu/Muslim; Palestine/Israel - Muslim/Jewish); part of the causes of the original conflicts stem from Western, generally imperialistic countries, assuming that they knew what was best including what type of government the "people" needed.

In spite of decades of negotiations, posturing and outright threats any possibility of peaceful co-existence or in the case of North and South Korea, reunification seems to be unlikely either in my lifetime or my grandchildren's. It is almost as if there is more invested in perpetuating the conflict than truly resolving it. All of the parties appear to be so entrenched into their positions that only total capitulation on the part of one country will satisfy the other. The dialogue frequently reminds me of some terrible daytime reality television program where adulterous couples fight in front of the cameras - one can only assume for money as they display their pettiness and their stubbornness.

In the past few days, India and Pakistan are verbally and perhaps with a few planes, fighting again over Kashmir. While there is all of the usual posturing promising to both be reasonable and at the same time protect their honour and their right to stand up for what they believe to be right - there are continuing concerns that there are some within both regimes who would consider using the nuclear weapons to resolve the conflict once and for all. It is not the first time that the world has had to hold its breath. I can remember when I was in elementary school receiving some instruction as to what to do if there an atomic war (hide under my wooden desk). At least four of the countries created in the 1940s have some nuclear capability ( plus of course, South Korea which could have access to US nuclear weapons). There is no way any one individual can know how concerned one should be - but it feels as if someone should be doing something to slow the hyperbole down.

Life was perhaps so much easier when all one had to do was to find a champion with a solid horse and a long lance to defend one's honour.

Measles - I Told You So

I know that it is petty, childish, and perhaps even a little bit mean - but lately, every little once in a while I get this urge to tell the parents of children who have measles that I hope they are feeling incredibly stupid. Of course, I feel sorry for the handful of kids who have contracted measles. It is no fun being sick. For the parents who perhaps now realize how misguided they were to ignore medical advice and are now dealing with sick children, I am sure that their lives have been turned upside down as they have to deal with all of the issues of kids needing to stay home for a week or two. Hopefully, none of those parents are dealing with any of the long term consequences of contracting measles.

But really - this should not be an issue. The science is clear (go to Google Scholar and look up numerous scientific research papers). Inoculations against childhood diseases do not cause autism.

I could be reasonably content if parents who decide not to follow medical advice isolated their children from the rest of us. I would not worry if they did not enrol their children in our public school system or take them to public places such as shopping centres or airports because then those children would pose no risk. But some parents keep on insisting that they have the right to share whatever diseases their children may have contracted with the rest of us. And they don't.

It boggles my mind that competent adults who are educated, bright and have all of the benefits of living in a country that has had good public health - have decided to follow the words of people with no background in medicine whose theories are so irresponsible that they should be charged with some crime. For individuals who are alive and well because of western medicine to say that that medicine's theories cannot be trusted is incomprehensible.

The individuals who can't receive inoculations due to other health concerns, or because they are too young need our protection. Those individuals have the right to know that we, as fellow citizens, will do whatever we can to ensure that they are safe. Making sure that our children cannot be contagious seems to be the least that we can do.

This most recent outbreak has also highlighted the fact that international travellers can become infected while travelling and bring the disease back to Canada. Within the last few days, it has been announced that someone who was contagious, passed through the Vancouver airport and then flew to Inuvik with a stop in Leduc, Alberta. Everywhere that individual stopped and breathed distributed the measles virus. Every store, every airport waiting area, every plane - everywhere - that one contagious individual put others at risk. We can all imagine the anxiety of the parents of an infant who has not received all of their inoculations and who was on one of the planes? Measles is a disease that should not exist. The only way to prevent such outbreaks is to ensure that all children are inoculated against measles. Perhaps international travellers who had not received their inoculations should be quarantined for a week or two after returning from certain countries.

I still want to say "I told you so"!