I sometimes (actually most of the time) get irritated at
various politicians who put their party's or their personal needs ahead of
Canada's. I should know better than to take it personally. Being self-centred
is, I suppose, part of a politician's job description. But there are times when
I see something that is so outrageous that I fume about it all day.
Yesterday morning I saw a bit of Andrew Sheer's press
conference where he was denying any responsibility for what one of his party's
members (and someone who is running for the leadership of the Conservative
party) had said about Dr. Theresa Tam. Sheer who lost the last federal election
and then resigned as the leader has continued to act as the leader until a new
one can be elected. Sloan, an MP from Ontario has stated on Twitter " “Dr.
Tam must go! Canada must remain sovereign over decisions. The UN, the WHO, and
Chinese Communist propaganda must never again have a say over Canada’s public
health!” While it is entirely
appropriate that at some point when all of the information is available and if
one is qualified to understand the data, that all officials need to reflect and
discuss their decisions, this may not be the time.
Sheer, in his role as an interim leader, has refused to
comment on Sloan's statement. He has absolved himself of responsibility for
what a member by suggesting that it is not his role to discuss what any
leadership candidate says. By refusing to condemn the comments it appears as if
he is supporting them. Hiding behind someone else's comments is, at best, cowardly.
At worst it is a national leader demonstrating his bigotry, his ignorance and
his determination to find fault with anyone and everyone who does share his political
values.
Quite frankly, Mr. Sheer needs to develop some male body
parts, and have either the courage to come out and support the words and attitude
of Mr. Sloan or to stand up and condemn them. There cannot be a middle path.
Dr. Tam may not have given the best advice all of the time.
She and her team may have, in hindsight, needed to recommend more aggressive
action earlier. Or it may be that Dr. Tam should have recommended that we
follow the example of Sweden and Norway and therefore not mandated an almost
total closure of the country. Perhaps the federal government should have taken
control of all extended care facilities for seniors so that the death rate in
those places would have been significantly reduced. Maybe we should have done
more sooner or maybe we should have done a lot less. Hindsight is a wonderful tool
to learn from our past mistakes, but using it in the middle of a crisis may not
be wise. People who are not accountable to anyone such as Mr. Sheer or Mr.
Sloan, people who believe it is their right to take "pot shots" at
those who are doing their best, people who have no accountability should sit
down until they have some useful suggestions.
I would hope that in the next few years a number of the
possible scenarios will be investigated. Clearly we, and the rest of the world
need to know how to manage these sorts of crises. While we will never know,
many people including myself, would have been resistive if the Government of
Canada had locked down the borders immediately. There was not the time to have
a national debate as to how to deal with a medical crisis, someone needed to
make a decision. Someone needed to decide on how to make that decision.
The Canadian public decided that that person would not be Mr.
Sheer
Addendum:
It is interesting to note that Sweden has had a relatively
low COVID-10 death rate and it traditionally has one of the lowest rates of
senior institutionalization in the world (1).
(1) Age and Ageing 1997;
26-S2: 3-12
Nursing homes in 10
nations:
a comparison between
countries
and settings
MIELW. RIBBE, GUNNAR
LJUNGGREN1, KNIGHT STEEL2, EVA TOPINKOVA3, CATHERINE HAWES4,
NAOKI
IKEGAMI5, JEAN-CLAUDE HENRARD6, PALMI V. JONNSON7
No comments:
Post a Comment