OTTAWA—From laid-off government workers to green activists to anti-poverty advocates, Canadians are discovering the full implications of the
federal budget as the Conservatives reveal details of their far-reaching economic and social agenda.
While Finance Minister Jim Flaherty played down the impact last month, the measures sprinkled through the 498-page package are proving to be a road map to
the Conservative majority’s plan to fundamentally reshape and shrink Ottawa’s role in Canada.
The budget takes a scattergun approach to reducing the federal government’s capabilities and responsibilities — eroding future pension expenditures, reducing food and environmental
scrutiny, axing federal government jobs and chipping away at support for culture, health, foreign aid and the poor.
“Most of what we see is certainly a decreased interest in an active federal role in shaping social policy,” said Laurel Rothman, national co-ordinator for Campaign 2000, a Toronto-based
non-profit network fighting child poverty.
“Whether it’s on children, whether it’s aging, whether it’s affordable housing, whether it’s affordable child care, we need an active and involved federal government to set broad frameworks
in social policy direction and to help pay for it,” she said. The Conservative government “seems to be going in an opposition direction,” Rothman remarked. [...]
How these changes and others in the budget will affect the lives of Canadians will not be fully known for months, perhaps years. But already the impact is being felt across the country. Among the cuts so far:
Ending the National Council of Welfare, which advises government on poverty. It cost $1 million a year.
Closing the National Aboriginal Health Organization, which with a $4.4-million budget worked to promote the health of native people.
Trimming CBC funding by $115 million.
Cutting funding for Transport Canada, which regulates airline safety, by $152 million, and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency by $56 million.
Scrapping the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, a $5.2-million-a-year panel created by Brian Mulroney’s government.
Eliminating the Katimavik youth program.
Cutting 1,026 positions at the Canada Border Services Agency.
Taking $380 million, or 7.5 per cent, out of Canada’s foreign aid budget.
Eliminating 2,000 professionals and scientists, most of whom were engaged in efforts to protect the safety of Canadians in such fields
as food and product testing and environmental monitoring, according to their union.
In all, the government says it will chop 19,200 positions amid $5.2 billion in spending reduction over three years. But some analysts say the
job reductions will be much larger. And Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page says that, including previous budget reductions, cuts will total $37 billion over five years.
The budget also will make it harder for future seniors to collect pension benefits and, according to government sources, clamp down on recipients of
Employment Insurance to make sure they don’t turn down job offers.
Portrayed by Harper as a transformative move to address Canadians’ disproportionate focus on “our services and entitlements,” the cuts are part of the Conservatives’ plan to wipe out the $21-billion
budget deficit by 2015.
But taking into account Harper’s recent decision to cap future federal health-care funding for the provinces, some see the budget as a major step in a broader, long-term Conservative strategy.
In this view, Harper’s underlying goal is nothing less than the winding down of large parts of the role of the federal government in social and economic areas built up by successive Liberal governments. [...]
Killing us softly... Death by a thousand cuts...
Source:Federal Budget 2012: Death by 1,000 Cuts
Hennessy's Index: A number is never just a number. Trish Hennessy, National Office, (CCPA) Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. (1 April 2012)
$5.2 billion
Annual cost of most recent round of public service cuts when fully implemented, as announced in 2012 federal budget. (Source: Federal Economic Action Plan 2012, p.213)
$13 billion
Amount of yearly revenue lost to the Harper government’s corporate tax cuts in 2012-13. (Source)
70,000
Estimated number of real job cuts over the next three years due to federal austerity measures. (Source)
26
Number of years since Senator Jacques Hebert went on a hunger strike to protest the Mulroney government’s attempt to defund Katimavik, Canada’s largest youth volunteer program. He saved the program then, but the 2012 budget kills Katimavik. (Source)
40
Number of years youth employment centres have operated in Canada. The Harper government is closing the centres, despite the reality that youth unemployment is double Canada’s official unemployment rate. (Source)
$20 million
Amount of cuts to Environment Canada in 2012/13, rising to $88 million in cuts in 2014/15. (Source)
$33.9 million
Amount of cuts to Statistics Canada’s budget in 2012/13. (Source)
0
Amount of funding the National Council of Welfare, the First Nations Statistical Council and the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy can expect from the Harper government, which will stop funding these institutions at the end of this fiscal year. (Source)
10
Percentage of the CBC’s budget that has been cut this year. (Source)
67
Percentage of cuts to Canadian international aid agency Development and Peace’s budget this year. (Source)
$1.5 million
Amount of money that just one charity – the Tim Horton Children’s Foundation – makes from donated pennies every year. The Harper government has announced it is taking Canada’s penny out of circulation. (Source)
7 to 1
Amount by which spending cuts outstrip new spending measures in Canada’s 2012 federal budget. (Source)
[...]
The council’s annual report on welfare incomes in Canada is the only comprehensive analysis of social assistance across the country and how it interacts with federal benefits, he said. The council has also produced authoritative reports on child care, child benefits and low incomes in Canada.
Its latest report, “The Dollars and Sense of Solving Poverty,” released in August, showed that it would cost $12.6 billion to give some 3.5 million poor Canadians enough money to live above the poverty line. However, the economic and social consequences of poverty cost Canadians twice as much, the report found.
“So, I guess we don’t want to know anything about poverty or how to solve it,” said NDP MP Olivia Chow (Trinity—Spadina).
“Without the information, no one will be able to report on how many people this Conservative government is leaving behind,” she added. “It’s called out of sight and out of mind. And don’t get in the way.”
[...]
Since 1962, the National Council of Welfare had held up a mirror to the nation, highlighting the pockets of poverty and warning policy-makers of the consequences of neglecting those in need. It gave non-profit groups the facts they needed to speak credibly about hardship in a land of plenty. It tracked the emergence and growth of a crack in society between the comfortably well-off and the struggling. And it brought together social policy thinkers to find solutions to poverty — or at least keep the debate alive.
Now it’s gone. Kellie Leitch, parliamentary secretary to the minister of human resources, dismissed the loss offhandedly. “We are putting our policy resources to best use and reducing duplication,” she said, pointing to Campaign 2000 and Canada Without Poverty as high-profile non-profit organizations serving the same role.
Actually they don’t. They don’t have a government mandate “to advise the (human resources) minister on matters concerning poverty and the realities of low-income Canadians.” They don’t have the resources to buy Statistics Canada’s unpublished data. They don’t have the statutory authority to create opportunities for the poor to participate in the national decision-making process.
But Leitch’s rationale scarcely mattered. Everybody working in the field knew the real reason the Conservatives dumped the agency was that it was an unwanted piece of Liberal baggage. They hadn’t listened to it in years. They didn’t want to be nagged about poverty, inequality or social responsibility.
Scrapping the council saved an easy $1.1 million. [...]
Source:CBC and the Gag Order Budget
Karen Wirsig, Communications Coordinator, Canadian Media Guild. The Network | The CBC & Public Broadcasting: A National Conversation. (16.04.12) Links added.
The Conservative government has used its budget as a weapon, chopping more than 10 per cent from the funding it provides to CBC every year. It would take 25 years’ worth of CBC funding at the new level, which
is just shy of $1 billion or about $31 per Canadian, to pay for the F-35 fighter jets. By 2015, CBC funding will sink to 1999 levels, when local TV programming was nearly cancelled altogether.
This is not just another budget cut. Political choices are being made and our big daddy government is slapping departments and agencies with disproportionate cuts for being too mouthy. Aside from CBC, the Auditor
General, Elections Canada, and the Native Women’s Association of Canada also got hit hard.
The federal government is planning an unprecedented fiscal austerity budget, claiming that massive cuts to public sector jobs, services, and social programs are necessary to pave the way for jobs and growth. But in fact
the opposite is true. Austerity programs weaken the economy, and their implementation in many European countries has tipped the EU back into recession, fueled unemployment, and increased their debts and deficits.
There is a better way to make the federal budget work for the rest of us. The Alternative Federal Budget proposes a sweeping anti-austerity agenda that will yield high returns, boost productivity, stimulate private
investment, and create high value-added jobs in activities that improve living standards and reduce income inequality.
1.) Reduce Poverty and Inequality
Income inequality in Canada is at a 30-year high, rising at a faster pace than in the U.S. There are important aspects to income inequality that our government needs to address: the richest 1% of Canadians are now taking
home a bigger share of income growth than since the 1920s; middle-income Canadians have seen their incomes stagnate; and nearly one in 10 Canadians—including one in 10 children—still lives in poverty. The poverty rate is
even higher for Aboriginal peoples, women, and racialized Canadians.
This year’s AFB lays out a plan to reduce poverty in Canada by 25% within five years and by 75% within a decade. It re-establishes the federal government’s role in addressing growing market income inequality by
redistributing the gains of economic growth so all Canadians benefit. It improves Canada’s social safety net and enhances public services—including education, affordable housing, and national child care—that support Canadians’ efforts to earn a decent living while balancing family commitments.
2.) Bring Down Unemployment
Canada’s laboru market is still much weaker than it was before the recession. In December 2011, Canada’s real unemployment rate was 10.6%, with just under two million Canadians either unemployed or underemployed. Since
the start of 2009, the youth unemployment rate has been over 14%.
The AFB advances a job creation program that keeps the economy humming during uncertain global economic times and gets unemployed Canadians, including youth, working again.
3.) Restore Fairness to the Tax System
Between 2006 and 2013-14, the Harper government’s tax cuts will cost the federal treasury $220 billion—money that could be sustaining programs such as health care and public pensions. Tax cuts and loopholes, particularly
for corporations and high-income Canadians, have added to Canada’s deficit which is now being used as a rationale to cut public services.
The AFB will restore fairness to Canada’s tax system and protect public services Canadians rely on. The AFB asks Canada’s richest 1%, who are doing better than they have since the 1920s and whose tax rates are at an
80-year low, to contribute their fair share. The AFB also ends the federal government’s failed corporate tax cut experiment.
Corporate taxes fell from 29% in 2000 to 15% today but instead of putting extra profits into productive business investments as they promised, Canadian corporations have stockpiled over $500 billion in cash.
4.) Create a National Accessible Child Care Program
Three-quarters of Canadians consider the lack of affordable child care a serious problem and support the creation of a national early childhood education and child care program. An accessible, well-designed, high quality
child care system can more than pay for itself; it creates jobs, promotes health, advances women’s equality, addresses poverty, and grows the economy.
The Alternative Federal Budget establishes a policy framework for federal leadership in collaboration with provinces and territories, beginning to create an accessible child care program nationwide.
5.) Expand Our Public Health Care System and Create a National Pharmacare Plan
Canada’s universal health care system is our most cherished social program. The federal government plays an important role in making sure that Canadians across the country have to access similar services. Federal
initiatives can also encourage positive changes nationwide, as has happened in wait-time reductions.
The Alternative Federal Budget shows how we can improve our public health care system, and expand it in ways that will be cost-effective and sustainable. It puts a focus on primary health care reforms that will offset the
strain of population aging and growing health inequities. It also proposes a national Pharmacare plan that ensures that no Canadian will have to pay for prescription drugs.
6.) Repair Our Cities and Build Sustainable Communities
Over 80% OF Canadians live in cities, which serve as centres of job creation, immigration, and innovation. But decades of cuts in infrastructure funding, coupled with the downloading of programs and services to municipal
governments, have led to a municipal infrastructure deficit of over $120 billion.
The health of urban communities is of national concern, and federal investment is crucial to ensuring that cities continue to play their vital role in maintaining economic well-being and our quality of life. The Alternative
Federal Budget addresses this neglect, laying out a massive, long-term physical infrastructure program to help our cities with climate change, national transportation infrastructure, and housing.
7.) Protect and Improve Public Pensions
Canada’s current public pension system isn’t robust enough to provide decent retirement income for Canadians. More than two-thirds of Canadian workers don’t have a workplace pension plan and only about 26% of those eligible
to contribute to an RRSP actually do so.
The Alternative Federal Budget proposes doubling the Canada Pension Plan (CPP) and augmenting Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and Old Age Security (OAS).
These measures would help eliminate poverty among the elderly, particularly for women. The AFB also shows how Canada can improve its public pension system in a fiscally sustainable way without raising the retirement age.
8.) Invest in First Nations
First Nations citizens continue to lag significantly behind other Canadians on socio-economic indicators. Close to half of the Aboriginal population is comprised of children and young adults; without immediate action,
Canada risks abandoning an entire generation to poverty at a time when we have the resources to eliminate poverty in our lifetime.
This year’s AFB proposes sweeping changes to improve support for First Nations governments and invests in community infrastructure, health services, and education systems.
It also invests in a national strategic framework to end violence against Aboriginal women.
9.) Invest in Post-Secondary Education
Since the federal funding cuts of the mid-1990s, the financing of post-secondary education has been increasingly downloaded onto students and their families. Tuition fees have increased at more than double the rate of inflation since the early-1990s, with the largest increases occurring in professional programs. As a result, low-income Canadians are now half as likely to get a post-secondary education.
The Alternative Federal Budget significantly reduces university tuition fees while increasing access for low-income students in order to ensure that everyone in Canada can benefit from higher education.
10.) Address Our Environmental Challenges
Canada’s environment is central to our national prosperity and health. Delaying action on solving Canada’s environmental problems will result in missed business opportunities, increased financial and economic costs for
future environmental protection, and greater risks to Canadians’ collective health and climate. Increased tar sands development, fracking, and environmentally destructive pipelines are not the path to a more sustainable
future.
The Alternative Federal Budget will take several steps to address Canada’s complex environmental challenges, such as protecting our freshwater resources and species at risk; investing in energy efficiency;
supporting climate action in developing countries; and ending tax subsidies for fossil fuel development.
Federal cutbacks will slash services, increase unemployment — CCPA report
OTTAWA—Federal cutbacks announced in the 2010 and 2011 budgets will result in more than 60,000 job losses, says a study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA). Any
additional cuts in the upcoming federal budget would result in even more job losses.
The study, by CCPA Senior Economist David Macdonald, creates three scenarios to explore the impact of the next two waves of cuts and finds between 60,100 and 68,300 jobs will be lost somewhere in
Canada. The National Capital Region may lose over 22,000 jobs and Atlantic Canada may suffer 5,400 jobs losses, significantly raising unemployment in those areas.
“No matter how the cuts take shape, the job losses will be significant. They will be biggest if cuts are focused exclusively on the federal public service,” says Macdonald. “But if the cuts are spread
more broadly, it will mean there will also be job losses at non-profit agencies, Crown corporations, and private sector firms who do business with the government.”
The study identifies key areas that are already seeing cuts from previous waves and may see more of the same: programs for Aboriginal on-reserve housing, training and primary health care; support for
low income family, seniors and the unemployed; environmental programs; workplace and food safety inspectors; and Canada’s international profile. [...]
The rise of inequality ... "Left Behind" — A CBC Ideas 3-part series
Over the past 30 years, the benefits of economic growth in Canada, the US and much of the rest of the world, have gone increasingly to the top one percent of the population. For the majority of
families, however, incomes have stagnated. This rise in inequality coincided with a sea change in government policy. Beginning in the 1980s, governments in much of the English-speaking world
embarked on what has been called the neoliberal revolution - deregulation, privatization and tax cuts, aimed at liberating markets and stimulating the economy. The rising tide was supposed to
lift all boats, but it didn't. Jill Eisen explores what happened.
Ideas Podcast (16.01.12)
Jill Eisen, Left Behind, Part 1
Canadians have set a new record for household debt, a sign that many families are leaving themselves vulnerable to an economic shock.
The debt burden of Canadian households has surpassed levels of both the United States and the United Kingdom and, by at least one measure, they are hurtling toward those countries’ peak
levels of 2007, new Statistics Canada data show [table].
The concern is that any sudden negative event – such as a jump in unemployment, falling house prices or rising interest rates – could put many thousands of families in financial stress.
The debt squeeze also suggests that consumer spending will be muted in the year to come, putting a damper on economic growth.
Household Debt
Video: In conversation with Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney BNN Video (13.12.11)
And See:
Growth in the Age of Deleveraging
Remarks by Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of Canada, Empire Club of Canada / Canadian Club of Toronto (12.12.11)
The ratio of debt to personal disposable income hit a high of 152.98 per cent in the third quarter from 150.57 per cent in the prior three months,
Statscan said Tuesday. The report comes as Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney
is again sounding the alarm over swelling household debt. "Our greatest domestic risk relates to household finances," the central banker said in a CBC radio interview.
Roughly one in 10 Canadians is in a vulnerable financial position, Mr. Carney said – meaning that the cost of servicing their debt consumes more than 40 per cent of their
income – "and that, historically, is where people start to have issues in making their debt service payments."
Household debt levels have become "excessive," said Derek Burleton, deputy chief economist at Toronto-Dominion Bank. "There’s a growing vulnerability to an unanticipated event." Virtually
all measures of household debt are "flashing warning signs," he added. Credit market debt, at a record 150.8 per cent, is approaching comparable levels to the U.S. just before the housing market crash. [...]
New statistics show the national crime rate is continuing its 20-year decline – reaching levels not seen since 1973 even as the federal Conservative government prepares legislation that would put more Canadians
behind bars for longer periods of time.
[...] Providing an overview of the bills, for which the legislative summaries alone run hundreds of pages, is akin to trying to summarize the Bible in a single page. Here’s a best effort to summarize what’s in the crowded
legislative package:
Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act (formerly known as Bill C-23B): Pardons will become known as "record suspensions." Those who have committed three serious crimes, or have committed
sexual crimes against children, will no longer be eligible for a pardon, and waiting periods for those who have committed lesser (summary conviction) crimes will be increased to five years from three;
Penalties for Organized Drug Crimes Act (formerly known as Bill S-10): Proposes mandatory minimum sentences for those convicted of certain drug crimes. For example, Canadians convicted of trafficking a
certain quantity of drugs such as marijuana, or who carried, used or threatened to use a weapon during the offence, will face a minimum jail term of one year. Two-year minimums will apply to those who deal
drugs on school or prison grounds. Mandatory three-year terms will apply to those who build a grow-op on third-party property, those who create a potential safety hazard to children or to a residential area,
and those who booby-trap a grow-op;
Ending House Arrest for Property and Other Serious Crimes by Serious and Violent Offenders Act (formerly known as Bill C-16): Ensures that several classes of violent offenders will be sent to prison
rather than kept under house arrest. Those who have caused bodily harm, used a weapon, lured a child, been involved in human or drug trafficking, or committed an offence for which the maximum penalty is 14
years or life, are among those who will no longer be eligible;
Protecting Children from Sexual Predators Act (formerly known as Bill C-54): Amends the Criminal Code to increase, or apply, mandatory minimum sentences for certain sexual offences involving children.
Two new offences are also created: making sexually explicit material available to a child, and agreeing or arranging to commit a sexual offence against a child. The bill also gives judges wider scope to
prohibit contact with minors and access the Internet as conditions of sentencing and recognizance orders;
Protecting the Public from Violent Young Offenders Act (formerly known as Bill C-4): Proposes changes to certain provisions of the Youth Criminal Justice Act, including: establishing deterrence and
denunciation as sentencing principles, expanding the definition of violent crime to include reckless behavior that endangers public safety, facilitating publication of the names of certain young offenders,
and prohibiting imprisonment of youths in adult correctional facilities;
Fair and Efficient Criminal Trials Act (formerly known as Bill C-53): Among the measures sought to streamline and speed up criminal court proceedings is the appointment of "case management judges" to
assist trial judges, and the provision that, in the case of a mistrial, certain previously-rendered decisions are binding on those of any subsequent proceedings;
Keeping Canadians Safe [International Transfer of Offenders] Act (formerly known as Bill C-5): Mandates that the justice minister may use discretion when determining whether a Canadian imprisoned in a
foreign land should be returned to Canadian soil. A greater emphasis is also placed on the issue of public safety, the offender’s health, and their likelihood to engage in further criminal activity;
Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act (formerly known as Bills C-50, C-51, and C-52): Seeks to modernize the language of certain offences in the Criminal Code and other federal Acts and equip
police with new investigative powers designed for the computer age. Newly created offences include: possessing a computer virus to commit mischief and promoting hatred by posting a hyperlink directing users
to hate material;
Combating Terrorism Act (formerly known as Bill C-17): Will reinstate anti-terrorism provisions that expired under a sunset clause in 2007. The measures provide for a three-day detention without cause, known
as "preventative arrests," when it is believed that such action will prevent an act of terrorism. A suspect may also be compelled to disclose information to a court in relation to possible terrorism, even in
absence of a charge;
Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act (formerly known as Bill C-35): Allows victims of terrorism to sue individuals, organizations, terrorist entities, and those foreign states who support them for losses
or damages that occurred after January 1, 1985.
It is a juxtaposition of politics and reality that has prompted critics to accuse the government of ignoring facts at taxpayers’ expense as it pursues a criminal-justice agenda focused on punishment rather than prevention.
Statistics Canada released [its] annual survey of police-reported crime on Tuesday. It shows the overall volume of criminal incidents fell by 5 per cent between 2009 and 2010, and the relative severity of the crimes took a
similar dive.
Homicides, attempted murders, serious assaults and robberies were all down last year from the year before. Young people were accused of committing fewer offences. Even property crime was reported less frequently with
reductions in both break-ins and car thefts.
"These are police-reported statistics so they don’t necessarily reflect all the type of crime that’s taking place in society," said Steve Sullivan, executive director of Ottawa Victims Services and former federal
ombudsman for victims of crime.
"However, if the government is telling taxpayers it is going to spend millions and billions of dollars on getting tough on crime, I think the government at least has to have some evidence that they are addressing a
real problem. And neither these statistics nor the other surveys that we have would suggest that we are in some kind of crime wave."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has promised to introduce an omnibus crime bill early in the fall that will incorporate a number of former justice bills that died when his minority government was defeated
in March. It will include measures to put more young offenders in jail, end house arrest for a wide variety of offences, and impose mandatory minimum sentences for sexual offences against children and a range of drug crimes.
Unlike the Opposition, we do not use statistics as an excuse not to get tough on criminals...
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson
"Unlike the Opposition, we do not use statistics as an excuse not to get tough on criminals. As far as our Government is concerned, one victim of crime is still one too many," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said in an
e-mail Thursday evening.
"What critics often forget to tell Canadians is that there is a cost to crime whatever way you look at it," said the minister. "Canadians know that the safest place for dangerous criminals is behind bars." [...]
"The government doesn’t even try to pretend to present research anymore to suggest that their measures will actually reduce crime," said Mr. Sullivan. "If you just have longer sentences and you keep people there
[in prison] until the end of their sentences, you actually increase the chances that they will reoffend. Even the Republicans in the U.S. now are saying we need to move away from that kind of approach."
Alan Young, a law professor at York University in Toronto, said Mr. Harper is an "anachronism" when it comes to criminal justice policy. "I believe this is coming from him and his caucus and they have a certain
vision of what they would like to see in criminal justice," he said, "and it’s a vision that ran it’s course 30 years ago. Been there, done it, tried it, failed."
The government, he said, is impervious to scholarship and research and is making public policy determinations based on gut reactions rather than empirical evidence.
Irvin Waller, a crime prevention expert at the University of Ottawa, said he questions the reliability of the Statistics Canada numbers, but there are proven methods for reducing crime and it is time to implement them.
The Alberta government, for instance, has abandoned ideological debate for an evidence-based and balanced crime reduction program, Dr. Waller said.
It is a program, he said, that pays for more policing and prisons where they are needed, expands solutions to mental illness in the community, and invests in partnerships that tackle the causes of youth
crime and violence against women.
Statscan highlights
There were 554 homicides, down 56 from the year before. The decline in the homicide rate was largely driven by a decrease in British Columbia, where the rate hit an all-time low.
There were 693 attempted murders last year, down from 801 in 2009. This resulted in the lowest level in more than 30 years.
Nearly 93,000 vehicles were reported stolen last year, a 15-per-cent drop from the year before, and continuing a downward trend that started in the mid-1990s.
Nearly 153,000 youth between the ages of 12 and 17 were accused of a crime in 2010, nearly 15,000 fewer than a year earlier. The youth crime rate declined by 7 per cent.
More than 22,000 sexual assaults were reported in 2010, an increase of 5 per cent. The higher number represented the first increase since 2005.
The number of drug offences rose 10 per cent from 2009, continuing an upward trend. About half were for marijuana possession.
Three cities had increases in their crime severity index, which measures the seriousness of crimes: St. John’s, Sudbury and Peterborough, Ont. The cities with the lowest crime severity indexes were Guelph, Ont., Quebec City, Toronto and Ottawa.
[...] Harper’s government says tough sentencing and harsh conditions of incarceration provide deterrence and reduce recidivism. Decades of statistics and research say this claim is nonsense. Potential offenders do not generally know or care what their prison sentence is likely to be. Offenders are more likely deterred by the prospect of getting caught. Better enforcement, coupled with community involvement and preventive programs, will deter crime more effectively than harsh sentencing.
Thirty years ago, the MacGuigan Report stated, "Society has spent millions of dollars over the years to create and maintain the proven failure of prisons." This failure is largely due to the abuse of human rights which often accompanies incarceration. Yet the Harper government will accord to prisoners only "basic rights," in contravention of human rights law and fundamental human decency.
The public is willing to pay for increased public safety. An informed public, however, will not want to pay extra hundreds of millions of dollars of their tax money to incarcerate thousands of offenders in an American-style version of criminal justice, when such an approach is demonstrably counterproductive.
The Harper government should be compelled to divulge the real costs—both financial and in human misery—of what can only be described as an ideologically-driven crime agenda.
Safe Drug Sites
Source:Safe sites for drugs save lives
Staff Writer, Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION (21.04.11)
Links, citation and abstract added.
The published study on Insite's impact on Vancouver's Downtown Eastside should put to rest the Harper government's fretting about
whether any good evidence exists that the safe injection site improves the lives of drug addicts. The significant cut in overdose deaths in the Downtown Eastside after Insite opened is about
as real as harm reduction gets. Regardless of how the government's challenge on the clinic's right to exist results — it is now before the Supreme Court of Canada — Ottawa should commit
to supporting the clinic.
That support may not translate into federal funding for Insite, a clinic where addicts can inject their own drugs under supervision of staff that provides rudimentary health care and counselling
to users. But it does mean that Ottawa should no longer stand in the way of other clinics like Insite from opening.
The government will defend its authority to regulate safe injection sites at the Supreme Court next month, after successive British Columbia judges struck down the necessity of the clinic to get an
exemption. At present, such clinics can operate under exemption from federal drug laws by way of a minister's permit.
Insite opened in 2003 under a Liberal government and was in danger of being shut down in 2008 under the Harper government, which said it would focus public policy on addiction prevention and treatment.
Then health minister Tony Clement said that there was no good evidence that Insite helped addicts.
On Monday, the British medical journal The Lancet published a study, funded by Vancouver Coastal Health and the Canadian Institutes for Health Research, that found the rate of overdose deaths
in the Downtown Eastside neighbourhood fell by 35 per cent, compared to a fall of nine per cent in the rest of Vancouver. Researchers compared roughly the same period of time before and after Insite opened.
A similar clinic in Montreal is looking for approval to open, but that province is awaiting the Supreme Court's judgment. There are some 65 safe injection clinics globally, giving addicts a secure place to
shoot up, access to medical care and counselling. Bringing addicts into a clinic to shoot up benefits the neighbourhood, too.
Nothing prevents government from investing in prevention, treatment and harm reduction at the same time. Nothing, perhaps, but ideology. Support for safe injection clinics does not sanction drug use, it merely
recognizes that there is a drug problem and that it can have wide-ranging costs to people and the health and justice systems. Now, there is solid science to show that all those costs can be reduced through
humane delivery of health care at street level. Insite did not prevent all overdoses, but staff saved the users from dying.
The Harper government may or may not win its challenge at the Supreme Court, a legal battle over jurisdiction. But that should not trigger the closure of a neighbourhood resource that saves lives — other
evidence exists that such clinics also reduce the multiple health issues that ride along with drug abuse. The signs are that Insite, operating at capacity, needs to expand.
The government's intransigence on the delivery of a necessary, popular health service is preventing other safe injection sites from opening in Canada. It should now see its policy costs lives every year, and
allow other cities to follow Vancouver's lead.
Facts on crime and jail terms didn't fit vote getting strategy, so PM ignored them. Excerpted from Lawrence Martin's 'Harperland.'
Under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada's justice department, which had about 200 researchers in its policy branch, produced sophisticated studies that, as per the normal run of things in any
department, were supposed to be used to inform policy decisions.
Under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada's justice department, which had about 200 researchers in its policy branch, produced sophisticated studies that, as per the normal run of things in any department, were supposed to be used to inform policy decisions.
But a funny thing happened at justice. The researchers might just as well have gone on holiday.
The work they did went directly to nowhere because it either didn't conform with or directly contradicted the biases of the governing party. "We still produced a lot of stuff," said a former employee. "It just never saw the light of day." When a government starts suppressing its own research time and time again -- research the public is paying for -- it's serious business, he said. Some senior players in the department were bitter and frustrated, but they didn't dare raise their voices. They had their careers to look after, so they tolerated the censorship.
The Conservatives wanted to make up for many years of what they considered soft-on-crime legislation by their Liberal predecessors. New sheriffs were in town. Their crackdown measures included mandatory minimum sentences for a wide range of offences, a broadly expanded jail system, the closure of the prison farm system, the limiting of parole opportunities, and any number of other bills that set harsher punishments and sent young people to the slammer for minor offences. In its first four years, the government created or beefed up 19 minimums.
Rob Nicholson's justice department was the most ideologically driven in memory. The Conservatives planned to expand budgets for prisons by 27 per cent over three years. More space would be needed for all the incarcerations resulting from their new policies. Increased spending at justice continued even when almost all other departments were being hit with cutbacks.
Canadians could be forgiven for assuming that statistics and studies would be introduced to support the new draconian turn. But for much of this legislation, the stats and studies came primarily from outside the department and often contradicted the bills. Among the numerous studies was one by the Criminological Digest. Based on research covering 40 years, it showed that mandatory minimum sentences do not have a deterrent effect. Many state legislatures in the U.S. were trying to unwind such sentencing, as were the parliaments in Britain and New Zealand. The American experience indicated that increased jailing was hardly the advisable approach. Incarceration rates south of the border had risen 700 per cent over four decades, and there was no corresponding drop in crime. The state governments were moving away from the lock-them-up-and-leave-them strategy in a bid to reduce prison populations and soaring costs.
'Raw wedge politics'
A 235-page analysis of Harper's corrections policy by Michael Jackson, a law professor, and Graham Stewart, the retired head of the John Howard Society, said that pandering to people's baser instincts was overtaking decades of empirical evidence. "Raw wedge politics -- in place of studied evidence -- is the new face of public policy for Canada," wrote the authors. The government "creates the notion that the decent treatment of prisoners is somehow putting the public at risk when in fact it's the compete reverse."
Harper appeared to have little interest in hearing what the specialists had to say. In a speech in 2008, he rejected research-based justice policies, saying those behind them were trying to "pacify Canadians with statistics... Your personal experiences and impressions are wrong, they say; crime is really not a problem. These apologists remind me of the scene from the Wizard of Oz when the Wizard says, 'Pay no attention to the men behind the curtain.'"
Harper, said his friend John Weissenberger, viewed law and order as a matter of principle. "He feels that if you commit a crime the punishment should fit the crime. It's traditional conservatism in that it's the same type of idea he was raised with. It's closer to the average guy's view of law and order."
The Conservatives held to a dim view of criminologists. "In the case of crime," Ian Brodie said, trying to explain the Tory approach, "Canada had a very small community of criminologists propagating a policy perspective that didn't relate to the facts, and a bunch of people in government and the NGO community who got caught up in the thing for their own reasons." Brodie recalled a moment, shortly after their new government took over in 2006, when he, Rob Nicholson, Mark Cameron, Vic Toews and Stockwell Day were surveying the situation and asking, "Hey, do the facts matter here?"
Toews, he said, then spent years arguing with Statistics Canada that "the crime stats they collect massively understate crime in a known, systematic way." StatsCan reported on aggregate crime as reported to the police. "The problem," said Brodie, "as anyone who gives it a split second of thought realizes, is that not all crime gets reported to the police." Brodie made these remarks shortly before Harper made a highly controversial decision to scrap the mandatory long-census form, prompting the resignation of the head of Statistics Canada, Munir Sheikh. [...]
In keeping with their preference for wedge politics, the Conservatives attempted to label opponents of their philosophy "soft on crime." It was one of Justice Minister Rob Nicholson's favourite phrases.
What struck Don Davies, the NDP justice critic, was that the government was ignoring the evidence from south of the border.
"If getting tough on prisons -- locking people up longer and more harshly -- resulted in a safer society," he pointed out, "the United States would probably be the safest country on earth." [...] → Read more
The Commons human resources committee took three years to assemble 58 recommendations that would have given Ottawa a key role in efforts to help the poor.
The report called for a new federal transfer payment to complement provincial anti-poverty programs. It also pushed for a national housing strategy.
She says the government has bolstered the labour market and invested in housing through its Economic Action Plan.
"Our Conservative government believes that the best way to fight poverty is to grow our economy and get Canadians working," Finley’s spokesperson summed up.
Ottawa’s role in fighting poverty is focused on giving Canadians the skills they need to be self-sufficient and then using tightly defined government programs to target barriers that they can’t overcome on their own, Finley’s response says.
It goes on to list various programs the government has established over the last few years to help people prepare themselves for the job market and make ends meet.
"The best long-term strategy to combat poverty is the sustained employment of Canadians and the government is making significant investments toward this goal," the response concludes.
But Finley’s reply does not specifically address any of the 58 recommendations from the MPs. [...]
After four years in power, Stephen Harper's governance comes under the microscope of prominent Globe and Mail columnist Lawrence Martin. Focusing on the growth of executive power under Harper and
drawing on interviews with prominent insiders, Martin probes the smearing of opponents, the silencing of the public and diplomatic service, the secrecy, the prorogations, the unprecedented centralizing of power,
and the attempted muzzling of the media. He examines controversies such as the existence of a secret dirty-tricks handbook, the Chuck Cadman affair, campaign financing, the dismissal of nuclear power head Linda Keen,
the Afghan detainees cover-up, the turning of access-to-information laws into barricades to information, and more — and lets readers draw their own conclusions. Tough but balanced, Harperland offers a clear picture of a
skilled politician at a crucial point in Canadian politics.
→ Amazon.ca
Gas prices in Canada are soaring even though the price of oil is well below recent highs.
In order to help Canadians know what they should be paying for gas, the CCPA developed an online gasoline price gouge meter using calculations
by Hugh Mackenzie, based on his 2007 analysis, Gas Price Gouge: The Sequel.
According to Hugh's latest calculations, the average price gouge this week (May 12, 2011)
is 25 cents/litre, up from 14 cents/litre two weeks ago. One cent per litre across Canada generates excess profits at a rate of $1 million per day. So an excess profit of 25 cents/litre is generating $25 million
in excess profit every day—$9.125 billion a year. Click here to read more.
The CCPA’s Gasoline Price Gouge Meter measures in real time the difference between current retail prices in twenty cities in Canada and what would be a normal
price, based on current crude oil prices, current exchange rates and normal profit margins for gasoline refining, distribution and marketing.
Users simply type in the retail price they are paying and select the closest city from the list of cities on the site. The meter does all the calculations, estimates how much gas should cost, and lets
users know how much they’re being overcharged.
Measuring the performance of the Harper majority...
As Parliament resumes after Canada’s historic 41st election, all eyes are on Prime Minister Stephen Harper and how he delivers on his campaign promises of growth and stability.
With no encumbrances to its decision-making powers, the Harper majority government will be responsible — and will be seen as responsible — for Canada’s economic fortunes in the months and years to come.
How to measure success or failure? There are five aspects of economic growth that will affect the day-to-day lives of Canadians in every one of the 308 ridings represented by Parliamentarians. Each
aspect of growth is shaped by a short-term public policy approach that could enhance or disrupt long-term outcomes. [...]
Rising cost of living more worrisome than household debt...
Worries over the cost of living, the national debt and retirement savings have Canadians less optimistic about the state of the economy in 2011 than they were just a year ago, a survey suggests.
Canadians list worries over the cost of living as one of their top concerns for the economy in 2011. (Canadian Press)
But top economists are having a hard time convincing Canadians that the country will actually see moderate growth this year.
"The perceptions don't reflect the fact that things have been getting better for now a year and a half," TD chief economist Craig Alexander told a gathering of the Economic Club of Canada in Toronto.
Source:Perceptions of Canada’s Economy
The Economic Club of Canada; Pollara, Michael Marzolini, Chairman. Fielded 10-15 December 2010; 2560 Canada-wide interviews (margin of error: ±1.9%, 19 times out of 20)
"There's no question that the recession is over, so how do you actually reconcile the poll results with what the economic forecasters are talking about?"
Pessimistic Canadians
Economists declared the recession had ended in mid-2009 and had managed six quarters of economic growth and recovered all of the jobs lost during the recession.
Still, Canadians don't feel as optimistic.
The poll conducted by Pollara for the Economic Club of Canada and released prior to the gathering Thursday suggests that 38 per cent of respondents believed that the Canadian economy would improve over
the next year, compared with 54 per cent of those polled in December 2009. Also, some 20 per cent said the economy would worsen in 2011, compared with 14 per cent who felt that way one year ago. [...]
Cost of living
Among the major economic concerns of Canadians, 78 per cent cited the cost of living; 72 per cent noted the government deficit and national debt; 70 per cent listed having enough money to retire as their chief
concern; 69 per cent said health-care costs were their No. 1 concern; 57 per cent responded with value of their investments; and 55 per cent marked their own family debt load as their top priority. [...]
The relentless rise in household debt in Canada, both in absolute terms and relative to personal disposable income (PDI), is a growing cause for concern.
Since the mid-1980s, total household debt as a share of PDI in Canada has almost tripled – from 50% to 146% – and a visible acceleration in the long-term trend of
debt accumulation has taken root since 2007. With debt-loads mounting in Canada and U.S. personal debt in decline (reflecting deleveraging and home foreclosures)
over the past couple of years, there has been a rapid convergence in the Canadian household debt-to-income ratio vis-à-vis that of the United States. [...]
Canadian personal indebtedness has become excessive. Low income families seem particularily vulnerable
Economic and financial fundamentals suggest that the personal debt-to-income ratio should be in the 138% to 140% range over the coming five years.
The current ratio is at 146%.
A U.S.-style crisis is not in the making, but Canadian personal debt growth must slow relative to its past rapid pace of increase.
Various factors point to a moderation of household borrowing, but a sustained low rate environment with short-term rates only returning
to 3.50% by 2013 may still support personal liability growth of 5% annually. With personal income growth likely to advance at 4% per annum, personal debt-to-income could rise to 151% by 2013.
This suggests that further prudential actions might be warranted, but should not occur until the current housing cooling has run
its course and the economy is on a firmer footing.
Canadians are getting deeper and deeper into debt. Since the mid-1980s, the average household debt load has climbed to 146 per cent of disposable income from 50
per cent, according to a recent TD Economics report.
With rising debt comes debt collectors. They buy debt from credit card companies, utilities and other firms, and then try to get consumers to pay it back along with fees
and penalties — sometimes using questionable tactics. [...] Read more, see video
[...] Tsur Somerville, director of the University of B.C. Centre for Urban Economics and Real Estate, noted that the TD debt study does not measure net wealth so doesn't factor in real estate equity.
A severe correction in real estate prices is one threat to B.C. consumers, but most analysts are predicting modest declines to modest growth in the near term, he said.
"The problem comes up when those real estate values drop and then all of a sudden people, instead of having net worth, have net debt," said Somerville.
The TD household debt study uses information provided by Statistics Canada, which does not break the data down by province.
The Economic Case for Universal Pharmacare in Canada
The main argument that is typically made against the establishment of universal Pharmacare is economic in nature. This report shows that the economic argument in favour of such a program is loud and
clear, regardless of which industrial policy is subsequently considered. Canadians could save between 10% and 42% — up to $10.7 billion — of total drug expenditures.
A universal drug plan providing first-dollar coverage, established alongside a rigorous drug assessment process, would not only ensure greater fairness in accessing medication and improve drug safety,
but would also help contain the inflationary costs of drugs, regardless of the industrial policy Canada may choose.
The lack of political enthusiasm for Pharmacare can mainly be explained by fears of the escalating
costs such a plan is expected to entail. But this argument, which also predominates in the media, is completely lacking in substance. [...] Canadians cannot afford
not to have universal Pharmacare. — Executive Summary, p.5
Eliminating the mandatory long-form census may be spun as a "privacy" issue, but its real impact is on social analysis and policy development
Claiming their decision is a response to privacy concerns, the Harper government has scrapped the mandatory long-form in favor of a voluntary census, the National Household Survey,
now available online.1
This decision is ill-conceived and astonishingly short-sighted on its face, disingenuously framed as a matter of privacy to misdirect attention from the Harper government's underlying social policy agenda.
In The Progressive Economics Forum, CCPA's senior economist Armine Yalnizyan posts a letter (13.07.10) in which
signatories from diverse organizations "from all parts of Canada’s social and economic spectrum"1
request a meeting with the Minister to discuss the decision. Another article by Yalnizyan, published in The Hill Times, provides background and concise commentary on the issue.
There is no possible compromise here: asking Canadians to live without accurate census data is like asking surgeons to operate in the dark. No matter how skilled they are, they will make mistakes.
Without this information, governments, businesses, community agencies and charities will be unable to plan for the optimal allocation of resources. Money will be wasted, and that means a lower
quality of life for all of us.
But the people who will pay the most dearly are those who were the most vulnerable to begin with, the poor, aboriginal populations, recent immigrants, racial minorities and people with disabilities.
Without this information, we cannot make informed decisions about where to plan the next extension of public transit, or where to target different types of health resources.
→ Harper knows best, or does he?
As people became increasingly aware of the significance of the decision to kill the mandatory long-form census, a groundswell of alarm has turned into a wall of opposition.
Armine Yalnizyan, The Hill Times (19.07.10)
And see: All the latest on the census long-form debacle, CCPA.
Are privacy concerns the underlying issue in the Harper government's approach? Have there been serious breaches of privacy with respect to any aspect of the census? "[A]ccording to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, only three complaints were
laid about any aspect of the census in the last decade: two in 2006 and one in 2001."
"The number of complaints coming to us about the census has dropped in recent years," Privacy Commissioner spokeswoman Anne-Marie Hayden said.
The last time Canadians registered beefs on the census that were measured in the double digits was in 1996 – 14 years ago. And back then, the Privacy Commissioner’s office
only received 16 complaints. In 1991, the watchdog heard 33 complaints. [...] → Privacy commissioner not consulted on plan to scrap compulsory census,
Steven Chase, Globe and Mail (15.07.10)
Does the Harper government hope to cut social costs by obfuscating the identification of social need?
The poor and marginalized are among the demographics inadequately enumerated in the less reliable data collection of a voluntary abbreviated survey. Linda McQuaig writes that, "as income becomes ever more
concentrated at the top, as it has in recent years, we’ll know less and less about those at the bottom, making them easier to ignore."
So, as income becomes ever more concentrated at the top, as it has in recent years, we’ll know less and less about those at the bottom, making them easier to ignore.
Sam Boshra, a former analyst for Statistics Canada, puts it this way: "If this results in the poor and unemployed being undercounted, the government could justify reallocating resources
away from programs targeting these disadvantaged groups."
Boshra notes that the long-form data is the basis for just about all of Statistics Canada’s important social measurements. The unemployment rate, for instance, is compiled from the monthly
Labour Force Survey, but the sample used in that survey is based on the census data. Once the census data becomes voluntary, the unemployment rate will be considered less reliable, taking
the heat off governments in times of rising unemployment. → McQuaig: Making it easier to ignore the poor Linda McQuaig, Columnist, thesta.com (27.07.10)
Clement has suggested that Statistics Canada was on board with his decision, but the
resignation and comments of Munir Sheik, former head of StatsCan, seem to indicate the opposite. In the following interview,
Clement's elision and equivocation are evident. If I infer correctly, in response to the government's intent to proceed with the voluntary census, and the government's request for
strategies to eliminate the downside of such an approach, Statistics Canada responded; Clement then construed their response to indicate they were in agreement with the approach. But the decision to eliminate the mandatory
long-form was not in fact supported by StatsCan.
The Globe and Mail spoke to Industry Minister Tony Clement on Tuesday afternoon [20.07.10] about the debate surrounding the Conservative government's decision
to scrap the mandatory long-form census. A transcript of that interview follows.
Q: I'd like to clarify things. I thought you when you talked to me several days ago that you basically said to Statscan, "Look we want to do this, we want to get rid of the mandatory long-form,
and tell me what I need to do to make it so that there's no downside to that."
A: That is 100 per cent accurate. That is exactly what I said to them. [...]
Q: Ok... But the allegation [in later stories] is that's not what Statscan said, that [chief statistician Munir Sheikh] had said that you should not do this, we advise against
eliminating the mandatory long form.
A: I don't want to get into... I have to be careful because there is advice to cabinet [rules]. But that is, I would argue, not accurate.
Q: That Mr. Sheikh said you shouldn't do this?
A: I have to be careful what I saying here because It's my oath we're talking about.
There is no question that we wanted a change from the status quo. And there is no question that if we had not initiated the dialogue with Statistics Canada, Statistics Canada would
have gone ahead with the status quo.
But there is also no question that through the dialogue we had with Statscan, that I was able to report to my colleagues that there were ways we could mitigate the risk associated
with moving from a mandatory to a voluntary form. [...] Read the full transcript
Munir Sheikh, the head of Statistics Canada, resigned Wednesday over the federal government's decision to scrap the mandatory long-form census.
Munir Sheikh, the head of Statistics Canada, announced his resignation Wednesday. Image Credit: Statistics Canada, via CBC.ca
"I want to take this opportunity to comment on a technical statistical issue which has become the subject of media discussion. This relates to the question
of whether a voluntary survey can become a substitute for a mandatory census," Sheikh said in a release.
Over the last month, opposition has mounted to the Conservative government's plan to turn Canada's mandatory long-form census into a voluntary survey — a move critics say
will produce a skewed or useless national demographic record. The government says it made the change because the long form was an invasion of privacy and it was coercive
to force Canadians to complete it. [Read More]
"It cannot," he said. "Under the circumstances, I have tendered my resignation to the prime minister."
The Conservative government announced at the end of June that the long-form part of the 2011 census will no longer be mandatory because of privacy concerns. Now, Canadians who
receive the long form can refuse to fill it out. [...]
Critics ranging from economists to anti-poverty groups say removing the mandatory questionnaire will hamper their ability to do their jobs.
Randy Hatfield, executive director of the Saint John Human Development Council, called the decision "incredibly short-sighted."
The non-profit group uses data derived from the long-form census to develop its anti-poverty recommendations.
"A lot of the work that we do looks at trends over time," Hatfield said.
"If all of a sudden you cut it off you're not able to measure with any degree of accuracy or relevancy, then you've really got problems. ...If you haven't got the evidence it's pretty
hard to argue in favour of retooling public policy." [...]
Vienna, Austria – On July 13th, 2010 former presidents Fernando Henrique Cardoso (Brazil), Ernesto Zedillo (México) and César Gaviria
(Colombia) announced their endorsement of the Vienna Declaration. These
presidents join ranks with Nobel Laureates, drug users, scientists, doctors, advocates, and literary icons who have already signed the declaration.
To join this growing community, click here to sign the Vienna Declaration.
To learn more about who has endorsed the Vienna Declaration visit the Vienna Declaration blog.
For daily updates on the progress of the Vienna Declaration join us on Twitter
or Facebook.
We are encouraging all our supporters and their affiliate organizations to endorse the declaration and to invite friends,
colleagues, scientists, health practitioners, policy-makers, and celebrities to also join the call.
Together we will bring these issues to the attention of governments and international agencies, and illustrate clearly that drug policy reform is a
matter of urgent international significance.
Show your support for drug policy based on science, not ideology, visit www.viennadeclaration.com
and sign the Declaration today.
As he did with the occupation of Iraq in No End in Sight, Charles Ferguson shines a light on the global financial crisis in Inside Job. Accompanied by narration from Matt Damon, Ferguson begins and ends in Iceland, a flourishing country that gave American-style banking a try--and paid the price. Then he looks at the spectacular rise and cataclysmic fall of deregulation in the United States. Unlike Alex Gibney's fiscal films, Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room and Casino Jack, Ferguson builds his narrative around dozens of players, interviewing authors, bank managers, government ministers, and even a psychotherapist, who speaks to a culture that encourages Gordon Gekko-like behavior, but the number of those who declined to comment, like Alan Greenspan, is even larger. Though the director isn't as combative as Michael Moore, he asks tough questions and elicits squirms from several participants, notably former Treasury secretary David McCormick and Columbia dean Glenn Hubbard, George W. Bush's economic adviser. Their reactions are understandable, since the borders between Wall Street, Washington, and the Ivy League dissolved years ago; it's hard to know who to trust when conflicts of interest run rampant. If Ferguson takes Reagan and Bush to task for tax cuts that benefit the wealthy, he criticizes Clinton for encouraging derivatives and Obama for failing to deliver on the promise of reform. And in the category of unlikely heroes: former governor Eliot Spitzer, who fought against fraud as New York's attorney general (he's the subject of Gibney's documentary Client 9). → Kathleen C. Fennessy, Amazon.com
From Academy Award®-nominated filmmaker, Charles Ferguson (NO END IN SIGHT), comes INSIDE JOB, the first film to expose the shocking truth behind the economic crisis of 2008. The global financial meltdown, at a cost of over $20
trillion, resulted in millions of people losing their homes and jobs. Through extensive research and interviews with major financial insiders, politicians and journalists, INSIDE JOB traces the rise of a rogue industry and
unveils the corrosive relationships which have corrupted politics, regulation and academia.
Real Estate Prices
Source: Global Real Estate Trends
Adrienne Warren, Global Economic Research, Scotiabank Group (10.08.10)
[...] Based on the available data, residential real estate activity appears to have cooled again. Demand and
prices have softened alongside moderating global growth, heightened financial market volatility and
sluggish job creation.
The slowdown has been most dramatic in Canada. Average home prices in Q2 were up just 6.8% y/y,
compared with 16.6% y/y in Q1. Sales, while still at a high level, have trended steadily lower alongside
reduced affordability and exhausted pent-up demand. Meanwhile, increased listings are tilting overall
market conditions back in favour of buyers. We expect demand to remain at a lower ebb into next year,
and prices on average to be roughly flat.
In the United States, real home prices broke into positive year-over-year territory in Q2 for the first time
since 2006. However, monthly data point to a clear slowing in sales following the April 30 expiry of the
federal home buyer tax credit. Weak employment growth combined with a considerable inventory
overhang and rising foreclosures offer little prospect of any significant turnaround this year. [...]
Intraspec.ca : Tools for Personal Development — Readings, writings and research on matters of health and well-being.
A not-for-profit site (2002-2012) by Richard Dagan, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Exceptions, where copyright resides with the original author or current
holder thereof, include all excerpted text and third-party images provided herein. All such material is presented in accord with
fair dealing and fair use, fully cited,
and hyperlinked to source whenever possible. Logos and trademarks are the property of their respective owners. For privacy and legal notices, see About.
