What did you expect…?

One of the columnists over at the BBC has posted an article detailing what it describes as ‘cash hoarding’ by US firms.  The article expresses its suprise that the low interest rates and stimulus spending by the Fed and US gov’t have failed to encourage companies to invest. What boggles my mind is the failure of the author to ask WHY. It is one of the questions kids are taught in elementary schools to ask when they want to understand a situation. It is clear that US companies are hoarding more cash, and even borrowing at a beautiful prime rate to expand cash holdings. You can find out these facts by reading the quarterly reports filed by any publically traded firm.

The question that the article should be asking is why are US firms not investing this cash and creating more jobs? The answer to this could be found by having a conversation with almost any business owner. If I don’t have predictability, any semblance of cost stability in a given jurisdiction, I may not be willing to invest in that jurisdiction. I wish I had time to investigate this, i really do. It wouldn’t suprise me to see capital outflows heading outside the US to stable jursidictions.

Obama has restructured a considerable portion of the US tax code, required health care insurance from all Americans, invested trillions in stimulus spending. The only thing that businesses can infer from this is that they have absolutely no idea what the hell the government will do next. The rhetoric against corporate fat cats continues to spew, and thus companies continue to hoard money. Why would they invest in new factories if they don’t know what costs will be one month, six months, 12 months down the road?  The continued stimulus spending drives up the cost of low-skilled labour in numerous jurisdictions, further preventing these companies from expanding. A recession is supposed to be an opportunity for companies to buy up low priced capital/labour, but if the economy isn’t allowed to correct itself, how will this happen? Throwing trillions of dollars at a few industries will reduce the supply of given types of labour.

The situation isn’t that complicated, and we saw it in Alberta not that long ago. The boom forced up the price of labour because private industry, governments, and small business were all competing for access to the same labour pool. The price was driven up, and expansion slowed.  The government restructed royalty rates, tearing up dozens of long term contracts with industry. Industries responded by reducing expansion. The inability of a firm to trust a government is a dangerous precident. Firms might as well invest in Venezuala. At least they know Chavez can guarantee cheap labour. Even Russia, with questionable property rights, has allowed for predictability. You want to see growth? Stop screwing with the economy. You won’t see expansion as long as you keep re-structuring something every other week.

The development presents something of a chicken-and-egg situation: Corporations keep saving, waiting for the economy to perk up — but the economy is unlikely to perk up if corporations keep saving.

This situation underscores the limits of Washington policy makers’ power to stimulate the economy. The Federal Reserve has held official interest rates near zero for almost two years, which allows corporations to sell bonds with only slightly higher returns — even below 1 percent. But most companies are not doing what the easy monetary policy was intended to get them to do: invest and create jobs.

The companies aren’t investing and creating jobs because the government isn’t doing what will allow companies to invest and create jobs. The answer is simple, and it should be easier for government. Do as little as possible. The results will be fantastic.

To Serve and Protect, but not to Vote?

A  rather distressing story popped up in a few smaller media outlets this week. Alberta based soldiers serving in Afghanistan and other locations will not be able to cast ballots in this province’s municipal elections. The Toronto Star picked up the story,  as did 660 News.

Perhaps more shocking than the failure to provide ballots for the troops is the overwhelming silence and indifference in the media and the public. The military does semi-regular flights to Afghanistan. Getting 300 ballots on a C-17 and returning them in time for the Oct 18th election may be possible, and it should be necessary. How can we continue to ask our soliders to serve over seas, claiming they are protecting liberty and the freedoms we enjoy in Canada, while denying them those same rights?

A ballot is more than just a piece of paper.

Rethinking Public Transit

I had the chance to sit down with Craig Burrows at the U of C today, and he offered a few very interesting points.  He discussed what he believed should have happened with the west-leg of the LRT, and the objective of extending the line to MRU. While he didn’t offer much in regards to a full vision for the city, he did reiterate his proposal for the conversion of Calgary Transit buses to natural gas.

After some preliminary analysis, it seems as though this might actually be a feasible alternative. Depending on the costs of conversation, it might be a policy worth pursuing. I haven’t been able to find any concrete numbers on the for conversion, but the operating costs are a tempting proposal. The report can be found here

On a per gallon equivalent basis, Compressed Natural Gas is approximately $0.70 cheaper. That is in US dollars, and in gallons, so if we convert that to $CDN and Liters, we can assume it’ll be about $0.15 cheaper to use natural gas. 800 city buses driving 20 hours a day will use a fair bit of fuel. In a year, it could be a substantial savings. Even the infrastructure will be easier to establish as the city buses all operate from a single hub. One conversion will allow the full fleet access to the new fuel.

On the environmental side, we can smile knowing that CNG results in about 30% less CO2 emissions. That isn’t a bad sum either.

Best of all? It will support a local industry which has been suffering due to excess supply driving down prices. The proliferation of new fracking techniques down in the US and Canada has allowed significant sources of natural gas to come on stream at rock bottom prices. Sell clean Canadian natural gas to power clean Canadian mass transit. If Craig can offer a complete plan, he may just have a convert.

Reflections of Canadian Health Care

With Harper having largely abandoned the fundamental components of his Reform roots, the movement appeared all but dead. My surprise was understandable upon seeing Liberal MP Keith Martin outlining the failings of the Canadian system, and recommending utilizing the private sector to help fix these faults. Keith Martin’s comments would not be out of place in the old Reform Party, and bear a striking similarity to health care policy put forward by the Wildrose Alliance here in Alberta.

Martin recommends retaining the single payer system, but allowing private firms to provide services to consumers. Despite his colourful background, Keith Martin offers a valuable opportunity for MPs to reach across party lines and begin an honest discussion about the Canadian Health Care system. Limited privatization within a single payer system does not mark the death of Tommy Douglas’ dream. It offers a chance for Canadians beyond our generation to experience a top quality health care system.

With thanks to Stephen Taylor

100 Days

In exactly 100 days, American voters will cast their ballots in the mid-term elections.  In a weird way, it is hard to believe that we have almost reached the second anniversary of the Barrack Obama presidency. With the ever increasing polarization of the US political sphere, it is harder to gauge the attitude of Americans towards their Commander-in-Chief.

I’ve never been one to hide my disappointment with the failures of Barrack Obama. I reluctantly bought into the rhetoric of hope, and change, and the failure to achieve any meaningful progress has left me displeased at the current direction of the United States. I still wish Obama would close Guantanamo Bay, end extra-judicial military tribunals, pull out of the Middle East, and dismantle the domestic security apparatus built under Bush II.  I still believe that the best course for the United States is the dispassionate merchant advocated by George Washington in his farewell address. A nation willing to protect its own security, but focusing on the expansion of commercial relationships with outside states. The rapid expansion of the US security bureaucracy is acting as a previously unforeseen trade barrier with the outside world, and it is costing the United States jobs it can ill afford to lose.

The Rasmussen Reports offer a day to day breakdown of presidential approval ratings, and the trend is not in Obama’s favour. A solid 45% strongly disapprove of the direction of the country, with a mere 25% strongly approving. While Obama’s approval rating has not yet fallen below 40%, the last time more people approved than disapproved of Obama can be found back in November 2009. The trend may be the friend of the market, but it sure as heck isn’t the friend of Obama. The release of previously classified Afghanistan papers to wiki-leaks paints a rather unpleasant picture of the situation on the ground.

Assessing the Refugee System – Part 1

Rather than combine this into one ridiculous post, I figure I’ll post it as a series. I’ve touched on a few issues with the refugee system in the past, but this should provide a far better analysis of the issues and opportunities of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act here in Canada.

The intended series:

1. Background

2. Bill C-11

3. Refugee Claimants

4. Skilled Workers

5. Family Reunification

6. Immigration Consultants

7. The Politics of Immigration

With all the hullabaloo regarding the restructuring of the census, Jaffer-gate, and the budget, a key piece of legislation has passed through both the Commons and the Senate. Bill C-11 divided the Liberal caucus back in June when backbench members broke with Ignatieff on the issue of Immigration Reform. The bill passed through the Senate last week, and has now recieved Royal Assent. The estimated timeline for the implementation of this bill is between 12 and 18 months, but the short term implications will be significant none-the-less.

This initial post will offer a very brief version of Immigration legislation, and offer some basic facts about the refugee system here in Canada. While we all know Canada prides itself on opening our doors to those in distress, the details of these policies are beyond the day-to-day experience of most Canadians.

The Facts:

In the last 40 years, there have been three major shifts in Canadian immigration and refugee legislation. The first came under Trudeau in 1976 with the introduction of the Immigration Act. This removed the previous euro-centric focus for immigration and opened our doors to demographics restricted under previous legislation. South Asia and the Pacific Rim no longer faced as clear discrimination, and Canada observed a marked increase in immigration from these regions.

In 2001, Chretien introduced the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which set the foundation for the system as we saw it today. While the initial legislation left many questions unanswered, the objectives were largely unmistakable. Canada would open our doors to refugees, and expand support to help them integrate into Canadian society. The new focus of Immigration policy would be placed on family reunification above skilled workers.

The points in the above paragraphs are far too brief an explanation of these pieces of legislation, but I will address the topics of Refugee claimants, Skilled Workers, and Family Reunification later this week.

The Facts of the Canadian Refugee System:

Canada is the third largest recipient of refugee claimants, after the United States, and France.

Refugees receive a one-time amount of up to $1,330 from the federal government to cover essentials — basic, start-up needs like food, furniture and clothing. They also receive a temporary monthly allowance for food and shelter that is based on provincial social assistance rates. In Ontario, for example, a single refugee would receive $710 per month. This assistance is temporary — lasting only for one year or until they can find a job, whichever comes first.

Once a refugee makes their initial claim, they will then go before the IRB, a government body which will assess the legitimacy of their claim. Approximately 6%-8% of cases will be resolved without going to the IRB through an expedited process.

There will be approximately 63,000 refugee protection claims and 11,900 immigration appeals pending at the beginning of the 2010-11 reporting period. This inventory has become progressively larger over the last three years, and results primarily from two external factors outside the IRB’s control: an increased number of refugee protection claims referred and immigration appeals filed; and the shortfall in the IRB’s staff.

The average cost per claim is $3,200. The average processing time from referral to completion is expected to increase to 20.5 months as the number of cases in the inventory grows.

Approximately 25,000 refugee protection claim referrals are expected to be received in 2010-11

Canada Border Services Agency can request a claimant appear before the IRB if they believe the claim is fraudulent

If a refugee claim is deemed to be fraudulent, the claimant may choose to appeal the decision. Once appeals are exhausted, the claimant may face an exclusion order, permanently barring them from Canada.

We must recognize a few key points:

The total number of refugee claimants is increasing, but the resources allocated to address these claims have not  increased accordingly.

The cost associated with these claimants is in excess of $200m, a sum limited to the actual cash payments made in the first year of residency in Canada.

The desire of Canadians to act as a host for refugees has made this a key – albeit largely unknown- political issue.

Processing fraudulent refugee claims draws resources away from assisting legitimate claimants, and reducing wait times for permanent residence applications.

The length of the appeals process allows false claimants to establish  other grounds for remaining permanently in Canada. IE – Family members born while rejected claim is appealed.

Although not an exhaustive list, the majority of the key points are included in this list. Please do not hesitate to comment if I have missed anything.

Cheers

-TCC

The Issues with Ignatieff

I’ve been tweaking a piece on the changes to the refugee act for two days now, but it still needs more research. As such, I figured I’d offer my thoughts on the unfortunate downfall of Michael Ignatieff.

When I look at Iggy, I can’t help but think of Paul Martin. I see an educated, thoughtful individual who would be a valuable addition to any cabinet. Paul Martin was one of the best Finance Ministers this country has ever had, and Ignatieff would be an amazing Minister of Foreign Affairs. His understanding and vision for Canada’s role globally far exceed his vision for Canada domestically. Unfortunately, the latter of those two makes it hard to envision him as the next Prime Minister of Canada. When we look back on Paul Martin’s tenure as PM, we harken back to Mr Dithers, a politician governing by the polls, uncertain of what he wants to accomplish.

Love him or hate him, (and I certainly fluctuate between the two), Chretien had clear objectives for this country. He guided this country through some of its darkest hours, and seemingly left it in a better place than when he took office. If Ignatieff wants to be Prime Minister, he needs to come to the table with a vision for Canada. Chretien ran on the Red Book, Harper ran on five pillars, each focused on Standing Up for Canada. Ignatieff needs to articulate his vision, and he needs to do so now. Unfortunate for Iggy, the centrist policies which bouyed Chretien to office have been taken by the CPC. He will not win the support of Canadians presenting himself solely as someone who wants to be Prime Minister.

Stephan Dion picked the wrong issue, and ran on the Green Shift. It wasn’t necessarily bad policy, but it was poorly articulated, and a hard sell to a skeptical population, even under the best of circumstances. The Canada at 150 is a great start, and with a bit of tweaking, it could serve as Ignatieff’s vision for Canada in 2017. Rather than stating his desire to be PM, and fighting accusations of “just visiting”, a clear statement of his objectives for a Liberal government may just save faltering polling results, and restore the natural governing party.

R-E-S-P-E-C-9

The controversial budget bill responsible for the creation of this blog has once again reared its ugly head. A few weeks ago, I bemoaned the lack of respect demonstrated the most recent session of parliament. Deliberate attempts to disrupt committee meetings, political brinkmanship, and omnibus legislation have successfully extended the life of Harper’s minority government. Defying all nay-sayers, Harper has forced through an impressive amount of legislation and is within reach of a Conservative majority in the Senate

Although these are noteworthy achievements in their own right, Harper’s omnibus Bill C-9 may spell the end of Parliamentary Respect. I grew up as an avid Reformer, and a believer in a Triple E Senate. I still stand by the objective of meaningful Senate reform, but have new respect for the role of the Senate as a check to the power of the House of Commons.

The role of Parliamentary Committees in our system of Government is to amend bills, and address any glaring deficiencies with the legislation. The ability of these committees to hear testimony allows for analysis moving beyond simply what is politically expedient. While a given bill may strongly benefit the political agenda of a given party, it may be detrimental to the country as a whole. The tactics used by Conservative MPs to paralyze committees have diminished the ability of these bodies to effectively assess legislation.

We can state with a reasonably degree of certainty that the House of Commons is not functioning as it is supposed to. It is in this situation that a sober second thought becomes valuable. Because Senators are not beholden to the public, we can assume (or perhaps wish really really hard) that they will spend this time assessing the faults of bills emerging from the lower house. The Liberal and Progressive Conservative Senators have done just that. They have taken the time to examine Bill C9, and offered a set of amendments which do not touch the vast majority of Harper’s budget, but simply place non-budgetary matters such as privatizing the AECL, and overseas postal service in separate legislation. Passing these amendments would ensure proper study of the cost and benefits of these controversial measures without impeding any spending measures within the Bill itself.

Senator Doug Finley has stated that the Conservative Party will force an election if any changes are made to the bill. After failing to uphold his promises on Senate reform, Harper has decided to achieve reform in a different manner. The politicization of the Upper House will destroy its ability to effectively assess legislation. Perhaps the last check on the executive branch is rapidly fading. Harper is changing the rules of the game here in Canada. We can only hope he knows he is playing with fire.

The Rewards of Failure

After considerable introspection, I’m realizing that a career in public health services might be an excellent idea.  The newly created Alberta Health Superboard has drawn intensive criticism, with many claiming it is a bloated, top heavy body.  When the bonuses paid to top executives in the financial industry  drew fire during the pinnacle of the financial crisis, I defended the concept. The reasons for this are two fold. If you want to retain top talent, you have to offer reward for great performance. If you are able to reshape a company to a point where it is making great profits, rewarding employees will help retain the staff that made the company successful.

There is a key caveat to this statement though. If the company does not have the necessary resources to provide the bonuses, they shouldn’t be paid. If the company is not performing, the bonuses should not be paid. Bonuses and other incentives are provided as a reward. No one is entitled to a bonus. The financial reports for the Alberta Health Board were released last week.  The Calgary Herald offered an excellent summary of the report. Below are two telling paragraphs from the story.

All told, Duckett (AHS Chief) and more than a dozen other executives were paid $5.8 million in salary, bonuses and benefits in the 2009-10 fiscal year, according to newly released financial statements.

Duckett collected $744,000 in total compensation, during a year in which wait lists grew, the superboard ran an $885-million deficit and fumbled its H1N1 vaccination rollout.

The average bonus paid to the executives on the board was around $90,000. This is when the average nurse makes less than $80,000 to work in a dysfunctional health system largely created by the incompetence of the superboard. I would be very interested in seeing the percentage of health expenditures on administration over the last decade. The more money that goes to these executives means less money will be available for the actual folks on the ground providing service. If you want to provide obscene bonuses and salaries to executives, fine. That is your prerogative as a government. You only serve to alienate the population which previously supported you. Providing obscene bonuses when your board has botched a year of health challenges and run the largest deficit in provincial history? That is a problem.

On the plus side,  6 employees will receive bonuses ranging between $250 and $500 for offering innovative, valuable ideas to address the problems in the system. That is roughly one half of 1 percent of the bonuses paid to these super-board members. At least we know these employees are contributing something tangible. Rather than giving them a token sum, when don’t we just appoint them to the superboard instead? At least we know we’d have 6 capable people…

To Serve and Protect

This was posted on a Justin Beach’s blog, The original can be found here. This was written as a response to the events which took place at the G20 summit in Toronto last weekend. I have written more than once that the price tag, at minimum $1.2 bn, was not worth it. The expected economic benefits were washed away in a sea of violent clashes. Even before that happened, the cost of hosting a two day event could retrofit a sizable chunk of the equipment for the Canadian Forces. One of a dozen better uses for these funds.

Perhaps more disheartening is the conduct of the OPP and various other police forces present in Toronto. The reason why Canadian police departments have garnered respect in the past has been the upstanding professionalism and dedication to the public good. The violation of civil rights seen in mass arrests, unlawful containment, and as of yet unsubstantiated rumours of uttering threats to persons in custody are serious accusations.

For police organizations in Canada to regain the respect of the population, they must accept responsibility for their actions during G20. Accept the kudos for dealing with the black bloc, but accept the consequences for dragging bystanders into the mix.  We’ll see how the independent inquiry goes.

The following was posted by ‘Eric J’. While it is as of yet unsubstantiated, it provides an valuable perspective.

As a serving member of the Canadian Forces and a combat veteran, I can say with absolute clarity and conviction that i am disgusted by the actions of the supposed “other half” of our nations security, the civilian shield to the army’s sword. I managed to fight and win battles while vastly outnumbered, against a heavily armed, mobile, guerilla force with as few as 10 fellow Canadians. 10 Canadian taxpayer funded and trained, government employees fighting and dying to prevent the lawlessness and injustice the so-called Black Bloc seems only too willing to promote. 10 Canadian ambassadors (because that is what you are when your wear and salute your nations flag) that knew their jobs and acted as consummate, trained professionals in all things, which incidentley is why i am alive to type this. The enemy we fought was entrenched within a civilian population and knew only too well the problems that could be created by putting innocent Afghans in the center of the conflict. So as is our duty and our job we let them bait us and let them crow and then when we had a shot we took it WITH NO CIVILIAN CASUALTIES. How could I know? Because we were the medical center for the region and we visited the villages regularly.

Knowing when to apply force and how to apply it can be a very simple thing when you assign value to the thing you are leveraging that force against. Am I prepared to kill the human being who is placing the IED or recoiless rifle that will kill three of my brothers? 3 of my fellow Canadians who have answered the call to defend what we so often take for granted half a world away? Without pause yes, and I will for the rest of my life, I took an oath that does not end with a contract.

When you put that uniform on you are no longer John Smith of Toronto. You are a member of the Canadian Forces, just as you are a Royal Canadian Mounted Police Officer, or an Ontario Provincial Police Officer. A government employee who’s mandate and training is to PROTECT the public. Not to protect themselves from threats within the public. It is their job as the civilian arm of our nations security to be the blue line between those that would see our way of life burnt to it’s end and the Canadians who see more than a simple flag.

Instead they formed a black wall and responded to WORDS with unrelenting, armed and often random VIOLENCE.

I don’t care if Osama Bin Laden himself is hiding on Queen Street like Waldo… you don’t just drop an airstrike on the village.

You PARTICULARLY don’t do it after the entire village sang Oh Canada in fear.

I understand the effect of an unsuspecting ambush tactics to confuse and demoralize… but when the first three ranks of ‘protestors’ are waving peace signs standing outside the gap wearing American Apparel and drinking starbucks… I might tailor my tactics accordingly.

People have said that they ‘understand’ why Police might have been on edge due to the events of the day before…

Bullshit.

I understand that i watched friends die and then the next day went out and did my job with the professionalism expected of someone who claims to serve his country and as in holland i gave chocolate to children while the engineers rebuilt.

When you back people into a corner… they will fight and sell their lives dearly to escape.

The ‘kettle’ is a useful tactic to isolate ‘riot ringleaders’ but with even minor coordination it can simply be turned into a turnstyle type processing operation as opposed to a way to jack up arrest counts to justify budgets and manpower.

Too little too late from the Police especially after the complete lack of presence as the city they are paid to protect, burned the day before.

A number of extremely reputable journalists and civilian truth mongers have been given unprecedented ability to expose the absolute incompetence of both the police leadership and of the individual line trooper.

This is as sure a black stain on their official colors as it was a death knell to the Canadian Airborne after one of their members killed a Somali boy. I would hang my head in shame if i affected any part of Sunday’s riot operation, willing or not.

I have a relative who was caught up in the crowd. Just a student who is young and wants to take inspired photos, and does it damn well. He was detained (not arrested) But I have seen his footage and i am disgusted.

I did not put my life on the line and watch my best friends take their last breath to come home and watch the largest gathering of law enforcement this country has ever seen… cowed to the point inaction as the city and its citizens endure the wanton destruction to their homes and business, only to have it answered by a heavy handed and indiscriminant hammer blow against quite possibly the very same people they so utterly failed to help previously.

I understand that to put a riot line in front of the black block may have caused injuries and violence.

Well… they asked for it. Says so right on their sign.

Guess what else. That’s why you took the oath of service to your country. If you don’t want to get injured on the job… be a yoga instructor.

Excuses are quite common apparently everyone has one. I would advise anyone reading this to write their local MP and ask what your government is doing to police it’s members and policies that have utterly failed in their duty to this country.

I was in the city all weekend and if i had a dollar for every group of 6 police officers i saw sitting on corners shooting the shit… I would probably have enough to hire a ten man infantry section for the weekend to lead the police through some drills, of how to serve the nation they are sworn to defend.

This should not be taken as a sweeping assault on the police as i even have a few relatives and many friends among their ranks. But just as I would not stand for injustice within my own house… I will not stand for it in theirs.

I have met countless officers who uphold our laws with dignity and professionalism. I would gladly give my life for anyone of them.

What will not stand is when under the guise of ‘security’ police are given sweeping powers with no chance of reciprocity, the need to explain themselves or chance to defend against bullying tactics employed on a peaceful gathering of my country’s citizens.

I don’t give a flying squirrel if they were threatening, or there were reports of weapons. You have full body armour and shields. Suck it up. Besides, you should be happy. Bricks move a lot slower than bullets.

I support our law enforcement as i support our troops. But my support is not a blank cheque to be held cheaply against the values and rights you trample as surely as you stepped on our flag. You will find me a tenacious opponent and one now who wants to know just how that cheque i did write you was used… and i think after saturdays impotence and sundays ignorance someone has to pay the piper…

and this time, it won’t be me.

I had hoped to finish my piece on Afghanistan this evening, but this seemed a far more interesting topic. Afghanistan, the new GG, and Economic Recovery should be posted during the weekend.

Cheers

TCC