On Vaccinations, the Soviet Union, and Chickens

Don Braid writes in the Calgary Herald:

Only Alberta has been forced to close all vaccination clinics for four full days. It's still a mystery why our authorities decided to go for mass immunization rather than the more controlled approach adopted by most other provinces.

But there is a clue in Health Minister Ron Liepert's comment last week about avoiding "Soviet mode."

He was talking about his distaste for asking people to prove they're high risk in order to get a shot. But the minister soon got exactly what he dreads--a classic Soviet-mode breakdown.

The symptoms are familiar to anyone who spent time in the old Soviet Union.

First, you line up to get something the government controls by monopoly.

Everyone shuffles along in perfect communal equality --the healthy along with the sick, the pregnant, the very young and the very old.

Hours or days later you finally reach the front of the line, only to learn that somebody else got your chicken.

Then they close the line until some undisclosed date when distant central authorities can produce and deliver more chickens.

The swine flu lines went through all those stages last week. Toward the end, parts of Calgary looked like some dreary Moscow street corner in 1975.

As Liberal MLA Dave Taylor put it, Liepert is "sucking and blowing" at the same time.

Meanwhile, the chickens have not come home to roost yet since no one's been fired for the mishandling of this colossal mess.

The Alberta government is set to announce a revised plan for restarting its vaccination program this week after suspending it over the weekend.

Related:

Don Martin asks where those 6 million doses are.

MPs held an emergency H1N1 debate on Monday nite. I'd wager that people interested in medical drama tuned into House on the teevee instead.

Speaking of mass confusion:

Children from 6 months to 9 years old should still get two doses, about a month apart, Dr. Fauci said. But the first dose usually provides partial protection, meaning a child might still catch the flu but would be more likely to have a mild case.

The World Health Organization last week recommended one dose of vaccine for all children, but the United States is ignoring that advice. The organization’s primary goal is to make sure that the world’s vaccine supplies stretch as far as possible among the world’s children. It endorses vaccine-stretching adjuvants and favors one dose per child so more children can get one.

Federal health officials, by contrast, are trying to make sure that American children are fully protected first. They have also decided not to use adjuvants, even though they think they are safe, because anti-vaccine lobbyists have campaigned against them, calling them dangerous, and officials feared that some Americans would be scared away from being vaccinated.

One dose? Two doses? What's right for kids when it comes to H1N1 vaccine?

Update:

Alberta's Vaccinations Will Resume on Thursday, Nov 5

H1N1 High Risk Targeted Immunization

Due to the unexpected national shortage of the H1N1 vaccine, Alberta Health Services and Alberta Health and Wellness announced plans to begin targeted immunization of Albertans at high risk.

* Starting on Thursday, November 5, children aged 6 months to under five years as of November 1st will be targeted. Proof of age (Health Care card, birth certificate or other valid identification) must be provided.
* On Friday, November 6, the program will expand to include pregnant women.

At this time, the vaccine will not be available to other Albertans. When more vaccine becomes available from the manufacturer, the targeted immunization program will be further expanded to include people under 65 with chronic health conditions. Details will be announced as more information becomes available on the vaccine supply.

Alrighty. Well, I still have lupus and I'm still high-risk with no available vaccination in sight. Great.
 

Quote du Jour: A kick in whose head?

Plunging natural gas prices are gutting the Alberta treasury, with the once-booming province staring at a deficit of almost $7-billion, its biggest ever.

The price of natural gas has fallen by more than half this year, steadily sliding each month as a flush of new supply in the United States smashes against weak demand because of the recession.

It has been a “real kick in the head,” said Alberta Finance Minister Iris Evans, as she announced a budget update and the new deficit of $6.9-billion for 2009-2010, $2.2-billion worse than predicted in the April budget.

This province has been run by economic fools for decades. Conservative fools who keep getting elected by an ignorant public that apparently likes being kicked in the head repeatedly by finance ministers who never come through on their forecasts. Ever. And we always end up paying for it by more cuts to essential social services like health care and education.

Don't look to the Liberals or NDP to be making any breakthroughs during the next election even with a lot of grumbling aimed at Steady Eddie Stelmach. The buzz now is all about the (further) right-wing party, the Wildrose Alliance. Just what we need - our own bunch of neocons.

I'm a liberal. Get me out of here.

Update:

Next thing you know, we'll be having a garage sale too.
 

Oily Reality

The Star's Thomas Walkom takes on Bank of Canada honcho Mark Carney's pronouncement last week that the recession in Canada "is over". While I agree with much of Walkom's arguments to the contrary which point to the reality on the ground for Canadians, I can't say that this is accurate:

And yet, it says Canada's recession is over. How so?

Two answers: China and oil. The bank's hopes depend on the Chinese economy continuing to forge ahead, with its consequent thirst for Canadian raw materials. But most of all, the central bank assumes that oil prices will stay high.

That would obviously benefit Canada's oil producing provinces (and, through spinoffs, the rest of the country). As well, by keeping the dollar high relative to other currencies, a protracted oil boom would, in effect, make all Canadians richer vis-à-vis the rest of the world, causing consumers to buy more things and thus boost the economy.

Yet it's not clear that oil prices will stay high. Thanks in large part to the collapse of the U.S. economy, crude oil inventories are building up – which should dampen prices.

More important, there are indications that the high oil price now is driven less by real demand for energy than by speculation and the desire of institutional investors to park their money in something safer than the U.S. dollar.

All of which casts considerable doubt on the central bank's prediction of steadily high oil prices creating a quick end to this particular slump.

The news out of the Alberta government today is that welfare numbers are soaring in this province*. And the other day, they dropped a bombshell when they announced that home energy bills might triple in the near future as a result of its carbon capture plans.

Calgary's unemployment rate has doubled over the past year and while cheery politicians seem happy that more people are moving out west, (a stark contrast to former Calgary mayor/Alberta premier Ralph Klein who called similar migrants "eastern bums and creeps" during the 1980s' oil boom), what they fail to add is that the migration is happening, once again, because of distressed economic situations in other parts of Canada.

Meanwhile, the land of milk, honey, cows and oil does not have adequate resources to deal with more newcomers and with sky-high rent and food prices, the picture here is anything but bright.

Add a Conservative gov't that for decades has subsidized the oil barons while cutting essential programs for ordinary Albertans, resulting now in the first deficit in 15 years while still fighting against making the corporations pay their fair share of dues and I sincerely fail to see where Wolkum gets the idea that oil will be Canada's great salvation - unless he's strictly referring to the already uber-rich and the corporations they rode in on.

As for China's role in Canada's recovery, Wolkum would do well to take a look at the harsh reality it finds itself in in relation to the US as analyzed by Niall Ferguson. We can't help but feel the ripple effects here.

Most Canadians don't experience recessions as economists do. Numbers don't get us through the day when we're trying to survive. Theories and forecasts don't put food on the table. What may be "good" in an economic sense (ex. the high price of oil) just doesn't translate into what's good for us peasants.

So, no, this recession isn't over. Not out here in the real world. And let's be realistic - because China and the price of oil certainly won't be (and isn't) our salvation.

----

*Alberta's welfare payout levels are absolutely appalling compared to the cost of living:

The amount a person can collect through income support varies. For example, a single person looking for work receives $583 a month, while a two-parent family with three children under the age of 12 would get $1,240 a month, plus a national child benefit supplement.

Related:

EI roll hits highest level since 1997

Alberta showed the fastest increase, and that province, plus B.C., Ontario, Saskatchewan and Manitoba all recorded their largest number of EI recipients since 1997.

In Alberta, the number of regular beneficiaries grew by 16.8 per cent to 57,000 in May.

Iris Evans Cures Mental Illnesses

I kid you not:

"The huge failure of Canadians is not to educate the children properly, and then why should we be surprised when they have mental illnesses or commit dreadful crimes?" she said.

This is why Easterners think Albertans are just a bunch of dumb hicks. (Not that we don't have our fair share of those here...)

Seriously, this woman is a trained nurse. And she's a former provincial minister of Health and Wellness. I kid you not (once again). Let's hope she never worked on a mental health ward. The stoopid. It hurts.

No wonder mental health services are so poor in this province. She probably thought that handing out flash cards with multiplication tables would automagically fix patients who needed help. On the other hand, she was too fucking cheap to even manage to do that.

And don't even get me started on this crap:

To raise children "properly" one parent should stay at home while the other goes to work, Alberta's finance minister suggested Wednesday.

In a tangent at the end of a speech on Alberta's economy to the Economic Club of Canada in Toronto, Iris Evans spoke about the importance of teaching kids about finances and how those lessons can be empowering.

After struggling with finances as a mother herself, Evans said, she made it her mission to teach her own children about money. Now, as adults with their own families, her kids have topped up RRSPs, live in good houses and have good savings, Evans said.

She also said good parenting means sacrificing some income to stay at home while kids are young, as her children have done.

"They've understood perfectly well that when you're raising children, you don't both go off to work and leave them for somebody else to raise," Evans said. "This is not a statement against daycare. It's a statement about their belief in the importance of raising children properly."

Iris Evans: Canada's Dr Laura. (And just as self-righteously annoying.)

Update:

Evans apologizes (but still stands by her cure for mental illnesses, apparently.)
 

Alberta's Deficit Budget

It's official. After 16 years of surpluses, Alberta's government will run a $4.7 billion deficit.

It seems whoever's in charge of updating the Alberta Finance site was having a bit of a nap since it took them almost half an hour to actually post Budget 2009 information after the 3 pm embargo was lifted.

Be that as it may, here are some of the so-called highlights:

* $23.2 billion over three years to build health facilities, schools, and roads – includes funding for carbon capture and storage, and GreenTRIP.
* 3.7-per-cent increase in operating spending to address population growth and inflation.
* Priority areas of health, education, advanced education, seniors and children services account for 75 per cent of the operating increase.
* Taxes remain lowest in Canada; tobacco tax increases and liquor markup is raised.
* Forecast $36.4 billion in spending in 2009-10; $31.7 billion in revenue.
* $4.7 billion deficit forecast for 2009-10; surplus forecast in 2012-13.
* $2 billion in fiscal corrective actions to be taken in 2010 if situation does not improve beyond forecast.
* New fiscal framework allows for transfers from Sustainability Fund to offset deficits.

(Pssst...read the fine print.)

Tories will hate all of the spending but they'll still keep voting these jokers in decade after decade anyway because they're too scared to try something new. Some of them are even talking up a new Ralph Klein revolution. If you survived the last one here, you'll know just how insane that was. I don't know why, considering the absolute global failure of Father Knows Best conservative economic philosophy, the majority of Albertans support the status quo. Riches rot the brain. That must be it.

And liberals? Well, nobody listens to us anyway and the Alberta Liberal Party is busy begging for donations for office rent and staff while the NDP has no response to the budget on its site either. When will these parties wake up and smell the immediacy of the internets? Their members do perform well in the leg - holding the over-bloated egos of the tories to the fire - but they're truly lacking in stoking up some much-needed left-wing populism in this province. Where's our revolution?

As for me, as an AISH recipient, I have to breath a huge sigh of relief for the $100/month increase I'm getting. Now if only I wasn't spending 60% of my income on rent.

Related:

Budget 2009 site

The Calgary Herald has extensive analysis.
 

Alberta Budget 2008: Health Care Premiums are History

Finally. Effective January 1, 2009. That's the biggest sound bite to come out of Tuesday's budget. Considering the fact that this province has been swimming in oil money for so long, that move is long overdue.

The Calgary Herald has more:

Spending up 12%

Finance Minister Iris Evans' first financial blueprint projects $37 billion in operating and capital spending this year and a relatively small surplus of $1.6 billion, based on extremely conservative commodity prices, such as oil averaging $78 per barrel this year.

The Cons always low ball the oil money projections so they can claim "success" each year when they pretend to act surprised at how much of a surplus actually results from that little game. Then they use that little trick to talk about how wonderful they are. It's gotten pretty old.

As for that increased spending, here are a few details:

Despite all the spending, no new K-12 schools or post-secondary facilities are planned for the fiscal year, although operating budgets will see substantial increases. The health budget will see a $1.1-billion increase in program spending, sending the total health tab to more than $13 billion.

More details here on the official budget page and here from the Herald.

Note: we're still playing catch up here from all of the slashing and burning the Cons did during the 90s to the health care system, education, and infrastructure spending - the 3 main areas of concern for all Albertans (the majority of whom kept re-electing this useless party anyway...insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results...lots of that happening in this province, obviously.)

But while Albertans may save more cash, very little is being socked away for the future. The government has allocated $279 million to inflation proof the province's primary savings vehicle, the Heritage Savings Trust Fund, but doesn't plan any direct deposits into the account.

Expect grumblings from fiscal conservatives over that issue although I don't know what they're complaining about since the Cons have kept stashing money away in that fund for a supposedly rainy day despite the more pressing needs Albertans have had that some of that money could have been spent on.

Fiscal cons have also been on the government's back for its pattern of 'spending like drunken sailors' under Ralph Klein (who actually was a drunk, but not a sailor), so expect blowback on that front too.

Exhibit A:

"We have some very serious concern about this government's addiction to spending," Scott Hennig, Alberta director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, said Monday on the eve of the budget. "It's irresponsible and not sustainable."

Afaic, if they'd actually spent more of that drunken sailor money on helping the poor in this crazy boom economy, they might have gotten some kudos from me. But the tories rarely spend on anything they can't see a fiscal return from, so that isn't surprising.

Here's a view into how they choose their priorities:

Funding boosts also will go to some controversial programs, with $7 million more headed to the Horse Racing and Breeding Renewal Program, and an additional $3-million for bingo associations. Combined, the two increases equal the same amount of new money dedicated to after-school children's programs in Alberta.

Gambling v children? Look who wins.

I'll add opposition party reaction as it comes in...
 

Alberta's Speech From the Throne

Alberta's Lt. Governor, Normie Kwong, delivered Alberta's Speech From the Throne (text) on Monday which was really just the Conservative government's launch of its election platform since it's expected that an election call will come at any time - most likely right after the speech with the date of March 3rd being floated.

You know there's an election coming up when the premier spends like a drunken sailor (in the tradition of Ralph Klein) and those promises have been coming fast and furious lately while Steady Eddy Stelmach hopes to hang onto his job. (Good luck with that!) As one reporter noted today, Alberta has had an influx of ~100,000 "immigrants" the past five years - not just from other countries, but from other provinces. Many of them had not had to suffer under decades of regressive Conservative rule in this province. On one hand then, they may throw their support behind these neanderthals if they're married to Conservative ideology or simply don't know any better about how the Cons have behaved in Alberta. On the other hand, the Liberals and NDP did make gains during the last election so the Conservative establishment here is nervous. And so it should be. Those new Alberta voters could bring much-needed change to a province mired in conservative orthodoxy for so long.

Probably the biggest news coming out of this year's speech is the promise by Stelmach to end health care premiums - a $900 million item that's long overdue. Charging premiums in this province, which has been drowning in oil money for decades, has been one of the Conservatives' most perverse taxes.

The move, which has been demanded by opposition parties and spending watchdogs for years, will save Alberta families $1,056 per year and individuals $528 annually. Municipalities, universities, schools and hospitals are expected to save more than $84 million annually.

Fellow Alberta blogger daveberta will also be following this race closely and here's a link to other Alberta blogs.

Updates as they come in...

- Kwong announced that health care premiums will be phased out over 4 years. That's just not fast enough.

- speaking of oil company money, Canadian Oil Sands profit quadruples. "Canadian Oil Sands said it earned $515-million, or $1.07 a unit, up from a year-earlier $128-million, or 27 cents a unit." That's just obscene.

- It's official: Steady Eddy just announced that our next election will be held March 3rd. Get out there and vote!
 

Flaherty's Mini-Budget

Poor People Suck.

Let's face it. It's time for Conservatives to be honest and come right out and say it. In fact, I think the Conservative party should just use that as their next campaign slogan.

And let me say this right off the bat too about Flaherty's neon green tie: Call the fashion police. there's been a violation. (And no, I don't care if some kid picked it out for him. It's still butt-ugly.)

Alrighty then, moving onto the business at hand - Flaherty gave what was supposed to be his "fall economic statement" today. What it turned out to be was a) a mini-budget and b) electioneering.

If you're too poor to pay income taxes (like me), here's your little gift: a 1% reduction in the GST on stuff you can't afford to buy in the first place but have to so you can survive. Big whoop.

If you're a big profitable corporation, you got a tax break too (albeit much, much more than the heathens - of course.)

If you're an average Joe or Jane, you got a mini-break. That'll get you a few extra apples at the grocery store.

If you're the Bloc or the NDP, you're voting against this nonsense when it's brought up in the Ways and Means committee this week.

If you're Stephane Dion of the Liberals, you're speaking against it (except for the corporate tax cuts) but you're not ready for an election because your party is wrapped up in internal scandals, so you're going to do a lot of bloviating about it but you'll still vote for it in the end.

If you're a voter, you won't be going to the polls for a federal election this year.

If you're the Conservatives, you just played another game of chicken with the Liberals and won.

If you want to look at the details, check out the Dept of Finance's site.

News related to the Poor People Suck Conservative philosophy: Alberta premier Stelmach vows to "eradicate homelessness" in 10 years. What could possibly be wrong with that, you ask?

1) Quick. Name one big city or Canadian province that's eradicated homelessness - especially one run governed by Conservatives. That's right - it's.not.gonna.happen.

2) 10 years? Like Liberal MLA Dave Taylor said in response to this announcement (paraphrasing): "We already know how to build houses. It shouldn't take 10 years to do that." And the kicker? This proposed "secretariat" won't even be formed til next spring and the government's not sure what powers it will have yet. That lost time counts against your "10 year" timeline, Eddie. I'll be doing the countdown (from whatever overpriced rental I'm living in because the waiting list for low-income housing in Calgary is always at least 2500+ people long and buying is absolutely out of the question.)

Let's get real here. My province and the feds have more than enough money to really help the poor. The fact is that they simply don't want to. They still believe in Reagan's trickle down economics. Apparently, none of them care that's there's been a drought down here in Povertyville for a helluva long time.
 

Stelmach's Oil Royalties Compromise

Here's how the Conservative party/government operates in Alberta. They set up panels, committees and traveling road shows to pretend to care about the opinions of the voters peasants and then they go ahead and do what they planned to in the first place, despite the input.

So, it comes as no surprise that "Steady Eddie" Stelmach, who had set up his own panel to study royalty revenues from the oilpatch, announced today that, contrary to what his experts advised, he's going to ask for half a billion dollars less than what they recommended. Who cares if Albertans have been ripped off for years now?

Broken down, the government forecast additional royalties in 2010 to be as follows:

* $470 million more for natural gas -- about $270 million less than recommended by the expert panel;
* $460 million more on conventional oil -- about $4 million more than called for by the royalty report;
* $470 million more for oil sands -- nearly $200 million less than recommended by the panel.


The expected $1.4-billion increase in royalties would hike Alberta's total 2010 royalty take to about $8.6 billion from $7.2 billion.

The oil lobby had been extremely vocal and threatening prior to this announcement stating that various companies might "have" to pull out of the province. In other words, if they couldn't continue raking in the megabucks on the backs of all Albertans, they'd take their toys and go home - to the US, to China or wherever they came from in the first place. Let's face it, can anyone in their right mind in this financial climate with oil at $90/barrel and projected to be at $70/barrel in 2008 expect the rest of us to believe that they'd actually suffer if they had to fork over more royalties? Poor them.

In the meantime, because of the oil boom in Alberta, our cost of living has skyrocketed and the influx of people looking for and finding work here has overstretched our (already underfunded) infrastructure. So, who's really suffering here? It's definitely not the oil patch.

And, just as an added perspective of exactly what this government thinks about "governing" in this province, it doesn't get much clearer than this, does it?

Meanwhile, Alberta Liberal Leader Kevin Taft, who was at the premier's press conference in Calgary, declined to comment on the report. Taft said it was "undemocratic" to freeze the opposition out of the technical and media briefing, which didn't give his party advance time to review the plan.

"We need time to study it, and will get back as soon as we can."

Albertans who keep electing these Conservatives, especially after the mess Ralph Klein perpetrated on our province, really need to get their heads out of their ideological bubbles. They, along with the rest of us, have been complaining for decades about people issues like the state of our health care services (why do Albertans still pay health care premiums??), the cuts to education, the inattentiveness to the needs of the poor, the refusal to actually listen to anyone but the sound of their own voices, the backwards attitudes towards civil rights etc etc etc. Yet those Conservative voters just can't bring themselves to kick the useless, arrogant bums out of power.

I've often said that, rewriting another popular saying, 1000 monkeys in a room with calculators could manage Alberta's economy just as well as these Conservative governments do. And they might even do a better job of it - especially during times like this when oil money is flooding the province.

So, I don't have any tears to shed for these oil companies and the fact that Steady Eddie caved to their whining shows that he's just as spineless and beholden to that lobby as Klein was.

I'll post more analysis of today's announcement as it comes in. From what I've heard so far, those who expected Stelmach to follow the advice of his panel are disappointed.

Related:

CBC's roundup of Alberta oil royalties news, background and reactions (includes video of Stelmach's press conference)
 

'Canada can no longer afford homelessness'

That's the correct conclusion that Gordon Laird of Calgary's Sheldon Chumir Foundation reached in his piece about how much homelessness costs our country.

The coldest, deadliest nights of the year are now behind us. But the cost of homelessness isn't. According to a new report from the Sheldon Chumir Foundation for Ethics in Leadership, Shelter: Homelessness in a Growth Economy, homelessness is costing Canadian taxpayers $4.5 billion to $6 billion a year.

Canada in 2007 collectively spends more managing homelessness than it spends on international development ($4.1 billion) or on annual debt reduction ($3 billion). In fact, the cost of homelessness in Canada is comparable to the cost of the $4.35 billion 2006 GST tax cut and the entire 2007 environment plan on climate change, fresh water and wildlife conservation.

Since the early 1990s, Canada's main response to homelessness has been to build new emergency shelter beds and fund front-line services to help contain and warehouse a growing pool of homeless Canadians.

It hasn't worked. Welfare services, municipal services, provincial health-care systems and the non-profit sector have been left to take up the slack for the estimated 300,000 homeless people as well as the upwards of 2.7 million low-income Canadians who now face housing affordability problems.

This nation's decade of relative inaction on homelessness, from 1993 to 2004, cost Canadian taxpayers an estimated $49.5 billion, across all services and jurisdictions.

All levels of government have shown a lack of leadership. Most provincial governments, for example, inadequately fund welfare, making it difficult, if not impossible, for recipients to find a place to live in our soaring real estate markets. Some of these same people then wind up in homeless shelters funded by all three levels of government. Taxpayers are paying at least twice and still we have homelessness.

While Canada's economy is booming, poverty is actually increasing. It was assumed that the economic boom would benefit all Canadians, but the evidence shows that the income gap is actually growing and affordable housing is harder to find. CIBC World Markets predicts that the average Canadian housing price will double by 2026.

Poverty is now the leading cause of homelessness in Canada, trumping substance abuse and mental illness. Canada's "new homeless" – families, women, students, immigrants, aboriginals – are simply low-income Canadians who need affordable housing.

Many governments, both here and abroad, are championing the notion of "Housing First," that is, immediately addressing housing needs through rent supplements. It has finally been recognized that homeless shelters are effective only as a short-term measure.

When I started working with the homeless in Calgary back in the early 90s after the last oil boom and bust, I suddenly realized how well hidden they'd been - stashed away in shelters, treatment centers, jails, short-term programs, hospitals, church basements, motels, or in parks or other areas where I had not ventured often, sleeping on someone's couch for a nite or a week, staying with family temporarily - very much invisible. And the stereotypical homeless person - the bottle picker or alcoholic - was definitely in the minority but was and is the most visible.

The number of homeless people who were working homeless back then hovered around 45% - a stat unfamiliar to most Calgarians at that time, I suspect. I haven't looked at the latest numbers here but considering the availability of low-wage jobs available here which, unfortunately, are the type of jobs that suit many homeless peoples' skill sets or stage in life, I'd guess that number has risen. The disconnect comes between the cost of living and those low wages.

Then there are the sick. I had a homeless client who went in for kidney dialysis regularly, another one with severe gout, several diabetics and epileptics, one with "wet brain" (Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome) and then there were the mentally ill, of course. People who were or should have been receiving government disability benefits. But those payments are not enough anyway, leaving too many housed sick people (and I know this firsthand) at an almost constant risk for homelessness because landlords typically ask for the first month's rent and a security deposit. (Here's an idea of how much that can cost at this time.)

It should come as no surprise that the poor are hardest hit during boom times: the cost of everything skyrockets because of "supply and demand". And, as we saw with the failure of Reagan's Trickle Down economics theory, the fact that more people are making more money definitely does not end up helping the disadvantaged.

Laird is right, the more homeless there are, the more services they need and that does cost more money - obviously. There are the problems that led to people becoming homeless along with the new problems caused by ending up homeless - a huge load for some people to deal with before they can reclaim any sort of "normal" life again. Those services, in this province, have mainly been surrendered to the private sector while the PC government stubbornly refused to raise welfare rates during the 1990s or to provide any extra services at all. (At that time, the allotment for a single, employable person was ~$400/month - unconscionable).

Along with increased homelessness over the years, the NIMBY (Not in MY Backyard) attitude grew here - even in the dead of the coldest winters when the City of Calgary needed to make more emergency shelter beds available to avoid having homeless people dying from exposure. I recall an interview with one fearless campaigner who absolutely refused to consider allowing a local empty building in her neighbourhood to be used because she feared for her safety. Last winter, when another community was petitioning the city not to open such a shelter in their area, she actually spoke in support of emergency shelters after realizing that her worst fears were never realized - she had continued to be safe in her neighbourhood, despite the fact that the shelter had opened contrary to her wishes. The lesson: not all homeless people are dangerous. And I think if the public actually took some time to educate themselves about who is homeless - including the families on the street - they might develop more compassion. But we're not there yet.

We saw the blowback in Alberta recently when the Stelmach government staunchly refused to impose rent controls. Let the market decide, was the mantra. The problem with that attitude in these times in this province is that soaring housing costs are no longer only affecting the poor and homeless: they're hitting the middle class as well. And, when that happens, the voices speaking against the market-based economy (which really means "whatever homeowners/landlords can get away with charging") become much louder - especially when other costs are rising as well, like gas prices. Suddenly, more people are "disadvantaged" and the gap between the homeless and the middle class narrows - especially when some realize they may be one paycheck away from actually being homeless too. Stelmach's response was to only allow landlords to raise rents once per year. Not enough Ed. Sorry.

Tory governments are in love with "task forces" here - talk til you drop and wait to find out that they're not going to do much of anything anyway. It's their addiction so they claim they're "listening" to Albertans. They may be listening but they don't exactly hear anything other than the sound of their own voices most of the time. In fact, they can be so out of touch that former premier Ralph Klein even admitted that his government had no plan for how to deal with the latest oil boom. They are always trying to play catch up and it is always years too late.

Alberta's year end surplus was $8.5 billion, "more than double the original estimate." Mind you, they've continually low-balled the surplus estimates so they can come out in front of the cameras like proud peacocks to proclaim "look how wonderful we are!" while using their so-called surprise as a justification to not properly fund services in the meantime. And, every year, it's "let's stash this away for a rainy day". Well, it's been pouring and they haven't even noticed - or they just don't care. Just how much have Albertans benefited from these windfalls? Ask around. Not much.

And so they'll continue to place small bandages on major issues like homelessness hoping nobody will notice that they have no willingness to seriously tackle the problems. Ostriches with tiny first-aid kits. That's what they are.

The only booming that's not happening here is the voice of Albertans coming through loud and clear in parliament on behalf of people who are suffering as the tory MLAs prefer to cover their ears and sing "la la la...I can't hear you" just like the spoiled children they are.

So no, you won't see homelessness wiped out in this province any time soon. However, if more people knew about how much it really costs to keep so many people homeless, maybe they'd actually give a damn. For that to happen, they'd actually have to start really caring about how this government spends its money instead of continuing to act like doormats. And, if they did that, fewer of those Tory MLAs would be headed back to Edmonton after the next election.


Related:
Shelter: Homelessness in a Growth Economy report (.pdf file) from the Sheldon Chumir Foundation

CBC Calgary Forum: Blueprint Alberta: Rent

Average cost of a one-bedroom apartment:
In 2003: $661
In October, 2006: $780

Rental vacancy rate in Calgary:
In 2003: 4.4 per cent
In October 2006: 0.5 per cent

NPR's special about Housing First.

h/t to The Progressive Economic Forum for highlighting The Star's article.
 

Random News & View Roundup

- Following up on last week's stunning testimony about a warning given to a senior RCMP officer prior to the Air India disaster, which James Bartleman has kept under his hat for 22 years, the inquiry judge said on Monday that the government is now trying to "discredit" him.

Ottawa — The head of the Air-India inquiry is accusing the federal government of trying to undercut James Bartleman's startling testimony about what transpired in the days leading up to the deadly 1985 bombing.

John Major, in a pointed intervention at the hearings Monday, observed that there seems to be an “effort by government to discredit Mr. Bartleman.”

The former Supreme Court justice went on to express concern that Gordon Smith, Mr. Bartleman's former boss at the Foreign Affairs Department, appeared to have aligned himself with that effort.

“You're just falling into line with the others,” Mr. Major interjected as Mr. Smith was fielding questions from lawyers.

“I'm not questioning your sincerity, but it's obvious that they don't like that testimony (by Mr. Bartleman). You are one of several who seem upset by that evidence.”

This is all quite bizarre. So many questions...

- Euegene over at Le Reve Gauche has a great roundup of reactions to the Alberta PC party's decision to reject rent controls. I wonder how many of their members live in rentals where the cost has increased $1000/month lately.

- Oh come on already: just give Wolfowitz his walking papers and be done with it. Why do the Europeans feel they have to make a deal with the Americans to let them pick the next World Bank sockpuppet? Wolfowitz broke the rules. Send him packing. End of story.

- FYI: May 8 is World Red Cross Red Crescent Day.

- Remaking the Peace Movement -
The Democrats Don't Own the Antiwar Movement

The New York Times ran a story May 6 called With New Clout, Antiwar Groups Push Democrats. In the first sentence of the story the Times reports that, "Every morning, representatives from a cluster of antiwar groups gather for a conference call with Democratic leadership staff members in the House and the Senate."

The "anti-war" groups the article refers to are not your standard, every-day peace group, that have long been working to end the war. They are talking about more recently formed groups, funded with more than $7.1 million since January, to go out and take control of the anti-war message and to capture the bulk of mainstream media coverage about the anti-war movement. Thus groups like Win Without War, Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, National Security Network, MoveOn, and others are being heavily funded by foundations close to the Democratic Party and are being largely directed by Democratic Party strategists.

The Times reports, Rodell Mollineau, a spokesman for Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid's office, "said the coalition amplifies what Democrats are trying to do in Washington to end the war." "It helps us reverberate a unified message outside the Beltway." "These groups give voice to a message we're trying to get outside."

The unified message that the Democrat leaders are talking about is that the mess in Iraq is all the fault of George W. Bush and the Republicans in Congress. This theme is now dominating the work coming out of these Democratic Party front groups and their job is to make sure that no one points any fingers of responsibility at the Democrats in Congress who continue to fund the occupation. We are not supposed to talk about that unsettling fact.

To their credit the Times did mention that there is currently some controversy surrounding this Democratic led effort. They write, "There's a dividing line between those groups who feel the most important thing is to be clear on bringing the troops home as soon as possible, and the groups that feel that unity within the Democratic Party is most important and the most important thing is for the Democrats to win the White House," said Medea Benjamin, a co-founder of Code Pink, an antiwar group that is not part of the alliance. "So the groups who feel the most important thing is to win the White House would naturally be more inclined to listening to Speaker Nancy Pelosi when she says the only way we can get a vote through is if we water it down."

- Uvi Avnery: The Real Question Isn't Why Olmert Started the War in Haste, But Why He Started It At All.

Yes, Olmert must indeed go home. We need a new leadership, one that understands that Israel will know tranquility only if we make peace with the Palestinians, even when the price is the dismantling of settlements. Is this being discussed seriously? Would this demand draw hundreds of thousands to the square? Of course not.

Random News & Views Roundup

- Springtime Subpoena Fest! Better than a hot dog-eating contest by a country mile.

- Albertans slacking on environmental actions:

Fifty-seven per cent of Quebecers polled said they are promoting better behaviour toward the environment, while only 36 per cent of Albertans said they are doing the same.

Well, why bother? All of that pollution coming out of the oilsands projects is going to kill us anyway. /snark

- Did you know that today is World Water Day? This year's theme is water scarcity.

- With all of the political sparring in Canada lately over the treatment of detainees in Afghanistan, one thing I haven't heard an opinion about from our prime minister (unlike, say the Netherlands foreign minister and representatives of the US and UK) is what he has to say about Italy cutting a deal with the Afghan government to free 5 jailed Taliban commanders in exchange for one of its citizens.

- By the way, if our prime minister doesn't care about the fate of detainees in Afghanistan (and they are not all confirmed members of the Taliban), then why does he even bother with the Geneva Conventions or agreements to protect their rights? His attitude endangers our troops. Period. Did he even notice the fallout from the Abu Ghraib scandal? Disrespect human rights and you place soldiers' lives in even more peril.

- From the "why did Gates say that?" file:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Robert Gates cautioned on Thursday the Army would face problems without emergency funds but insisted U.S. forces could fight a third war despite being stretched in Iraq and Afghanistan.

- Meanwhile, the UN Security Council is scheduled to vote on tougher Iran sanctions on Saturday.

- College Republican groups in the US are holding blatantly racist anti-immigrant events:

This week, Boise State University College Republicans have joined the list of College Republicans who have held anti-immigrant "games" by creating a despicable ad to promote a conservative speaker on campus. The ad advertises a food stamp drawing and a free meal at a "Mexican restaurant" for students who "climb through the hole in the fence" and submit illegal identification. This recent derogatory stunt comes on the heels of national news reports that confirm the rise in hate groups who are feeding off of anti-immigrant sentiments. Sadly, while these activities continue on America's campuses and while Republican presidential candidates use harsh words on immigration for political gain, the national Republican Party has remained quietly on the sidelines.

It has been three weeks since Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and DNC Hispanic Caucus Chair Ramona Martinez sent a letter to RNC General Chairman Mel Martinez regarding the despicable conduct of College Republicans. The Republican Chairman has yet to respond.

Sick, sick people.

- LA's Vicious War on the Homeless:

On the morning of February 8, a white hospital van stopped a few feet from a curb in Los Angeles' skid row area. According to witnesses, a man wearing a soiled hospital gown fell through the doors, and the van, later connected with Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, drove away.

The man, a paraplegic, began crawling down the street, a bag of his belongings clutched in his teeth and a colostomy bag dragging behind him. Other homeless people helped the disoriented man into a nearby park, just before police called an ambulance.

This horrible scene came just three months after the city attorney's office filed an indictment against Kaiser Permanente for dumping a 63-year-old patient on the streets of skid row in her socks and a hospital gown last year, an incident that was captured on videotape.

Patient dumping has become so widespread there's a bill in the California State Senate to criminalize the practice.

But these practices go deeper than a few isolated incidents. They are part of a system of abuse against LA's poor and homeless population.

- John Bolton: neocon warmongering monster:

Former US United Nations Ambassador John Bolton told the BBC today that he was “damned proud” of how the U.S. intentionally blocked efforts to achieve a ceasefire last summer when Israel was bombing Beirut and many other locales in Lebanon.

Severe Neglect: Women's Rights in Canada

Following on the heels of International Women's Day on Thursday (which I wrote about here - read the accompanying comments as well), I found 3 news stories today that illustrate just how much still needs to be done for women in Canada.

The first:

GENEVA (Reuters) - Canada needs to improve social services for its aboriginal population, particularly native women who face persistent and marked inequalities, a United Nations panel said on Friday.

The U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination found there was a "lack of substantial progress" in addressing discrimination against native communities within the officially multicultural country.
[...]
Stressing that native women make up "a disproportionate number of victims of violent death, rape and domestic violence," it recommended Ottawa improve services, including shelters and counseling, for victims of gender-based violence.

And, here's the predictable response from the Conservative government which, btw, scrapped the Kelowna Accord:

"For 13 years the Liberals paid lip service to aboriginals ... this (report reflects) an accumulation of years and years of blatant disregard for aboriginal issues," said Deirdra McCracken, a spokeswoman for Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice.

There is no doubt that previous governments - Conservative and Liberal - severely neglected the plight of aboriginal people in our country however, the Liberals under Paul Martin had finally pledged to commit to change and were supported in Kelowna by First Nations leaders when the Kelowna accord was agreed to. The tories threw that away and decided to come up with their own plan. Where is it?

Secondly:

The Alberta Council of Women's Shelters says more and more abused women are being turned away in the province, a trend being called the dark side of the economic boom.

According to the council, more than 13,000 women and children used shelters in 2006, but another 14,000 had to be turned away because the shelters were full — a 16 per cent increase over the year before.

Meanwhile, Alberta's shelters received nearly 100,000 crisis calls in 2006, a nearly 50 per cent increase over the last two years.
[...]
Also, Alberta has one of the lowest rates of social assistance in Canada, putting abused women at a further disadvantage, she said.

This really isn't new at all. Alberta has always had a lack of shelter spaces for abused women. The Klein government admitted last year that it had made no plans for dealing with another oil boom. As a result, the new (Conservative) Stelmach government is responsible for playing catch up and, trust me, the situation for women here isn't going to change any time soon because the tory governments here have always had only one priority: making money. Spending money on social programs doesn't fit with that agenda.

Thanks to oil revenues, Alberta has a $7 billion surplus. The last I heard a single person on social assistance was alloted $401/month to live on. Rental housing is extremely expensive and the social services infrastructure has always been lacking. Those who can't "make it" in the boom are simply tossed aside. It's survival of the richest - always has been here and always will be.

Thirdly, and directly related to the first two stories:

OTTAWA–Politicians and advocacy groups lined up on International Women's Day to blast Conservative cabinet minister Bev Oda for cuts and mandate changes at Status of Women Canada.

Oda's constituency office in Bowmanville was occupied for several hours yesterday by members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada protesting the moves.

A day earlier, Oda had announced a $5 million increase in grants the agency distributes for women's projects. The money amounts to a redirection of a $5 million cut to Status of Women's administrative budget last September, resulting in the closing of 12 of 16 regional offices on April 1.

The government has also changed the criteria for what projects receive funding. Advocacy and research projects will no longer be eligible for grants, in favour of groups providing direct services to women.

And perhaps most controversially, the word equality has been removed from literature related to the agency.
[...]
Paulette Senior, chief executive officer of YWCA Canada, said her organization has been doing both service delivery and research/advocacy work for decades. She pointed to the organization's major study on women's shelters, conducted with the help of Status of Women funding, as an example of how research can help make services more effective.

The third phase of that study, on how to implement the findings, will likely not be funded under the new guidelines.

"All these things are inextricably linked," Senior said in an interview. "How do we know the services we're providing are effective if we don't do any research?"

Exactly. Women in need are being undermined by the very federal minister charged with looking after our interests. There is nothing more illustrative of that fact than the scrubbing of the word "equality" from the government's website - as if the idea of equality is nothing but a quaint relic from the past that has no relevance to the situations women find themselves in today in this country. Of all of the proverbial slaps in the face to women in this country, that one stung and bled while women were sent the message that the abuse of our rights will continue under this tory regime. Why is the equality of women such a threat to these Conservatives? Perhaps the answer is to be found in their very moniker: conservative.

There is no doubt that societal and governmental policy changes take time. There is absolutely no excuse however for the fact that women's rights have not progressed more swiftly in our country. We are a wealthy country with progressive social values overall - no matter how much the regressive conservatives among us would prefer to reverse that fact - yet we cannot even provide the most basic security, prosperity and equality rights to over half of our population. And I don't even need to mention how that impacts the children of this country as well. That's been well-documented.

Why are we stil being held back from achieving our full potential in society? And why are so many people - male and female - afraid to allow that to happen?

And last, but certainly not least, what can we do about it?