Jagmeet Singh Strips Niki Ashton Of Her Critic Role

91 posts / 0 new
Last post
jerrym

melovesproles wrote:

Yeah, that video nails it.

It's impossible to take the NDP seriously as a party that can ever take power when they roll over on their people so easily. Media-managed finger-in-the-wind  pushovers with no fight in them who would need a dictionary to find the meaning of loyalty .

 

It now looks like Singh was leading the way in a wave of resignations and demotions across parties: Liberal MPs Pierrefonds—Dollard MP Sameer Zuberi and Kamal Khera lost committee assignments; Alberta United Conservative Party MLAs Municipal Affairs Minister Tracy Allard and Chief of Staff for the Premier Jamie Huckabee resigned and five UCP MLAs lost their committe assignments; and Saskatchewan Party Minister of Highways Joe Hargraves resigned. 

Maybe Singh sensed that the public outcry over PC Conservative Minister of Finance Rod Phillips that pushed Ford to demand his resignation was more than just a response to his fake email videos showing him at home and visiting Ontario businesses telling others that they should not travel, went beyond his lying hypocrisy to demand accountability of all politicians in this regard. In that regard, if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, especially in politics, Singh looks fairly good in this regard. 

Two Liberal MPs have resigned from their government and House of Commons roles after admitting to recently traveling overseas despite strict travel restrictions due to the spread of the coronavirus.

Pierrefonds—Dollard MP Sameer Zuberi stepped down from multiple committee roles while Kamal Khera, who represents Brampton West, resigned as parliamentary secretary to the Minister of International Development, according to a statement from the chief government whip.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/two-liberal-mps-resign-from-govern...

 

Following days of public outcry, several United Conservative Party members have stepped down after travelling abroad over the December holidays.

Premier Jason Kenney addressed the controversy on Facebook Monday saying he has accepted the resignation of Municipal Affairs Minister Tracy Allard and has asked his Chief of Staff Jamie Huckabay to step down.

“Albertans have every right to expect that people in positions of public trust be held to a higher standard of conduct during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Alberta’s premier wrote on Monday.

Tracy Allard resigns as Alberta's Municipal Affairs minister, Kenney's chief of staff asked to step down. 

In addition to Allard and Huckabay, Kenney said he’s also accepted the resignations of MLA Jeremy Nixon as Parliamentary Secretary for Civil Society and MLA Jason Stephan from Treasury Board.

“They as well as MLAs Tanya Fir, Pat Rehn, and Tany Yao have lost their Legislature committee responsibilities,” he wrote, adding the people in question “demonstrated extremely poor judgement” by travelling despite public health guidance to avoid non-essential travel.

https://www.citynews1130.com/2021/01/04/alberta-politicians-resign-holid...

 

Premier Scott Moe has accepted Joe Hargrave's resignation from his positions as minister of highways and minister responsible for the water security agency after more questions emerged about Hargrave's travel to California over the holidays. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ndp-accuse-sask-cabinet-1.58...

 

Ciabatta2

So my mom can't visit my grandmother in her Hamilton retirement home, as it won't admit people due to COVID.  

And I can't visit my uncle in Hagersville over Christmas, even if it's likely his last one.

My kids can't see their grandparents, whom they haven't visited since February.

By the time this is over, my wife will have not seen her parents in Eastern Ontario more than two years.

And some people don't even get to say goodbye, in person, if their family members are in hospital dying.

But Nikki Ashton can go to an airport, ride on a plane, go to another airport, ride on another plane, go to another airport, likely either rent a car or take transit or ride in a car with someone that's not her family, and visit someone in another country (and repeat this on the way back)?

"Ailing" or not ... holy heck is that ever entitlement.

Her punishment isn't an anti-socialist plot. It's punishment for her insane level of entitlement (and probably her bad judgment too.) New Democrat or not. The right values or not. She should be ashamed of herself.

Jagmeet doesn't do a lot right but he nailed this one.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Jagmeet certainly read the room correctly. People are rightfully incensed by these actions whether it was a luxuary getaway to St. Barts or a trip to visit an ailing grandparent. People all across the country have been making sacrifices and limiting travel and even in-community visits to loved ones because of the pandemic. It is absolutely tone deaf to do otherwise as a public representative who is counselling citizens to make these sacrifices. I am sorry that Nikki Ashton felt that her time with her grandmother was so important that she could send out a message of great self-entitlement. This is a huge disconnect for people who have not been able to see family for so many months - sometimes even within their own city.  My neighbour hasn't seen her husband since mid-January because of his location and obligations. All in all, I can fully understand this backlash against these choices, even if not illegal by the letter of the law.

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

David Doel has been amplifying the "stay-home-or-people-will-die" message that has led to these kinds of restrictions. Now suddenly he wants to have a nuanced conversation when someone on his team is caught in restrictions aided and abbeted by the hysteria he helped inflame? Disgusting and hypocritical.

And who is Doel to say that Ashton or someone else shouldn't visit a dying relative? It's easy to get on your high horse and pronounce judgement on someone else, and for him to say that he would not have made that visit, but when you're in that situation, it is completely different.

Doel defended Ashton. 

Pondering

Ciabatta2 wrote:

So my mom can't visit my grandmother in her Hamilton retirement home, as it won't admit people due to COVID.  

And I can't visit my uncle in Hagersville over Christmas, even if it's likely his last one.

My kids can't see their grandparents, whom they haven't visited since February.

By the time this is over, my wife will have not seen her parents in Eastern Ontario more than two years.

And some people don't even get to say goodbye, in person, if their family members are in hospital dying.

But Nikki Ashton can go to an airport, ride on a plane, go to another airport, ride on another plane, go to another airport, likely either rent a car or take transit or ride in a car with someone that's not her family, and visit someone in another country (and repeat this on the way back)?

"Ailing" or not ... holy heck is that ever entitlement.

Her punishment isn't an anti-socialist plot. It's punishment for her insane level of entitlement (and probably her bad judgment too.) New Democrat or not. The right values or not. She should be ashamed of herself.

Jagmeet doesn't do a lot right but he nailed this one.

The retirement homes have their own rules. If her grandmother were living alone elsewhere she would be permitted to see her. (People living alone are allowed contact with one other household). 

Which of the rest were dying? People are allowed to enter Canada to visit a dying relative. Any and all Canadians were and still are free to do what Ashton did. 

melovesproles

Quote:
I feel like what has actually happened is that the left has gone down that exact route, and that large scale, structural, and economic problems are essentially off the table for discussion. That needs to change.

 

Yeah, totally with you there. I was actually somewhat heartened by the early response to the Pandemic. I was surprised the machine took a pause for a moment and that it looked like there was a bit of reflection about labour, social responsibility, and the precarious ledge most people are clinging to. I agree that this has largely deteriorated into mass public shaming. Ford pretty much got a free pass for months just for coming up with a new folksy put-down every week: ‘a few pancakes short of a stack’ etc.

Anyway, I don’t have the energy to debate lockdowns etc. but I think a lot of your points and concerns are good ones, and I agree that our views are similar on many of the trends that are taking place right now. However, I think you undermine the case you are making with some pretty awful analogies (I think there is a major difference in how Covid is being treated compared to stigmatization during the AIDS crisis, skin cancer obviously isn’t contagious etc.) and you don’t seem to see any difference in the public health approaches taken, just that they are all ‘authoritarian’.

I think our biggest difference in perspective on this is that I think governments and public health officials are less leading the public than being pushed by it. That’s great that you are not motivated by fear, but your opinion is a minority one and it is not surprising that governments and public health officials have to give more weight to the views held by the wider public. That is how democracy works.

But I am worried by many of the things you see happening during the pandemic: normalizing of surveillance, a massive transfer of wealth to monopolies, and a Groupthink that is more focused on shaming individuals than the economic shifts that are clearly solidifying into a very bleak looking future.

josh

Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole has accepted MP David Sweet’s resignation as chair of the House of Commons’ information, privacy and ethics committee after it was revealed that a trip by Sweet to the U.S. included “leisure” travel not permitted by O’Toole’s office, a spokesperson for the leader’s office told iPolitics on Monday.

Sweet had gone to the U.S. for “a property issue,” but then decided to continue travelling for pleasure without informing his party’s whip.

“Mr. O’Toole has accepted his resignation as a Committee Chair,” Chelsea Tucker, O’Toole’s press secretary, wrote in an email to iPolitics.

Nor will he seek re-election to Parliament, Sweet said Monday.

https://ipolitics.ca/2021/01/04/conservative-mp-david-sweet-out-as-ethics-committee-chair-after-u-s-trip/

Ciabatta2

Pondering wrote:

The retirement homes have their own rules. If her grandmother were living alone elsewhere she would be permitted to see her. (People living alone are allowed contact with one other household). 

Which of the rest were dying? People are allowed to enter Canada to visit a dying relative. Any and all Canadians were and still are free to do what Ashton did. 

Is her yaya dying? I read she was "ailing" from Niki's tweet. My uncle is certainly "ailing". My naná "ailed" for more than a decade. (Needless to say, we had a lot of "this could be your last" visits and Easters and Birthdays and Christmases.) And for the rest, they don't meet the "one household" or "10 people" or "no social visits" rules.  My wife's family are immunocompromised and have to limit their other household interaction to a medical professional.

But none of that is the point.

The point is we're all being asked to make sacrifices in who we see, how we interact, what we do, how we work.

But those sacrifices that people are making even within their own communities, their neighbourhoods, their schools, their church groups, etc., are too big for her and her family half a world and multitudes of potential exposure pathways away? (Did she even think of the potentially high-risk people forced to work in those airports and planes etc. that may have no choice but to make ends meet and keep their job because of travellers like her?)

Any and all Canadians are free to do what she did. Absolutely. They are also free to go to on vacation, like all those Con/Lib politicians that we are deriding. That they are free to do this does not make it ok when we are asking everyday people to make such extreme social and economic sacrifices.

He's not ending her livelihood. He's not ending her membership. He's not kicking her out of caucus. The consequences, if anything, are pretty soft. If she wants the flexibility to flout the rules sans consequences, she can resign or sit as an independent. 

My neighbour two spots down didn't get to see his brother, his brother!, before he entered hospital (social bubble rules), didn't get to go to the hospital (visit rules), and didn't get to attend the funeral (10 people, max) - thems the rules during a time like this.

But Niki Ashton gets to go to Greece. That's entitlement, even if she's one of our favs.

NorthReport

It appears that Jason Kenney is the one who is going to pay the political price 

I like Singh's appraoch and the NDP could benefit from it in the next election.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_44th_Canadian_fede...

jerrym

With the stripping of Quebec Liberal MNA Pierre Arcand of his shadow cabinet post and the  resignation of Conservative Hamilton MP David Sweet from the ethics committee, the list of parliamentarians and parties involved in resignations and loss of committee work grows even larger. Other resignations and demotions across parties include: Liberal MPs Pierrefonds—Dollard MP Sameer Zuberi and Kamal Khera lost committee assignments; NDP MP Niki Ashton; Alberta United Conservative Party MLAs Municipal Affairs Minister Tracy Allard and Chief of Staff for the Premier Jamie Huckabee resigned and five UCP MLAs lost their committe assignments; and Saskatchewan Party Minister of Highways Joe Hargraves resigned. 

I still don't understand why Conservative Calgary MP Ron Liepert who travelled to the US twice, went unsanctioned while David Sweet was sanctioned by O'Toole. In addition, "Senate Opposition Leader Don Plett spent part of the Christmas holidays in Mexico despite government advisories against international travel." (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadian-politicians-pandemic-travel-1....)

The Quebec Liberals have stripped Pierre Arcand of his role in its shadow cabinet after he took a recent holiday to Barbados during the pandemic.

Arcand, who represents Mount Royal—Outremont in Quebec's National Assembly, had been the Liberal critic for matters related to Montreal and to transportation.

The Official Opposition said today in a news release Arcand's responsibilities will be reassigned.

According to Radio-Canada, Arcand is still a member of the Liberal caucus and has no intention of resigning as a member of the National Assembly.

News surfaced of Arcand's vacation after a witness in the Glitter Bay area of Barbados reported seeing him to Radio-Canada on Dec. 29.

At the time, Arcand said that when he and his wife realized Quebec's public health rules meant no family Christmas with children and grandchildren, they headed to the West Indies. 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/pierre-arcand-mna-covid-barbados...

 

Conservative MP David Sweet has resigned as chair of the House of Commons ethics committee after travelling to the United States over the holidays.

Sweet's resignation Monday followed the revelation that the Conservative leader in the Senate, Don Plett, took a personal trip to Mexico shortly after Christmas.

Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole asked all caucus members to refrain from international travel over the holidays. But his office said Monday that Sweet and Calgary MP Ron Liepert were given approval by the party's whip to undertake "essential travel" to the United States.

Liepert's travel related to "emergency repair" to property he owns in California.

Sweet, the MP for the Hamilton-area riding of Flamborough—Glanbrook, also travelled to the United States for an unspecified "property issue." But, the leader's office said, Sweet then decided to stay in the U.S. "for leisure" without informing the whip.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/david-sweet-covid-travel-1.5861069

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Property issues as an excuse is also freaking tone deaf. You make arrangements with locals to deal with your home if you can't get there yourself. These are politicians who can afford to have a second home outside the country. They are obviously well heeled enough to pay for professional services to take care of their properties.

cco

Ciabatta2 wrote:

(Did she even think of the potentially high-risk people forced to work in those airports and planes etc. that may have no choice but to make ends meet and keep their job because of travellers like her?)

What? If they need their jobs, they need their jobs regardless of whether people are flying to see their grandmothers. Is the idea that Niki Ashton's flight caused the airlines to not cancel flights, forcing flight attendants not to stay home and collect CERB?

NorthReport

It's just the typical Liberal pile on nonsense.

eastnoireast

Ciabatta2 wrote:

Any and all Canadians are free to do what she did. Absolutely. They are also free to go to on vacation, like all those Con/Lib politicians that we are deriding. That they are free to do this does not make it ok when we are asking everyday people to make such extreme social and economic sacrifices.

-

My neighbour two spots down didn't get to see his brother, his brother!, before he entered hospital (social bubble rules), didn't get to go to the hospital (visit rules), and didn't get to attend the funeral (10 people, max) - thems the rules during a time like this.

But Niki Ashton gets to go to Greece. That's entitlement, even if she's one of our favs.

i'm not particularly a fan (or not) of ashton; i don't necessarily sense a lot of depth to her analysis.  i'm also not particularly a fan of discretionary air travel from either an environmental or pandemic standpoint.

so for me, your observations of the glaring incongruencies regarding lockdown and travel policy are, for me, more to the meat of this whole matter.  

ordinary people are sacrificing much, and yet international flying vacations are fine, how many snowbirds?  limiting and health monitoring of international travel should have been one of the first tools deployed.

ordinary people are sacrificing much, there is no plan, we aren't building critical capacity, or fundamentaly changing how we do things, or supporting people adequately; we haven't hit bottom.

vacationing politicians are great lightning rods.  lightning rods divert energy.

speaking of diverting energy, i wonder how the sun seekers planned to explain their tans?

Aristotleded24

melovesproles wrote:
I think our biggest difference in perspective on this is that I think governments and public health officials are less leading the public than being pushed by it. That’s great that you are not motivated by fear, but your opinion is a minority one and it is not surprising that governments and public health officials have to give more weight to the views held by the wider public. That is how democracy works.

I think there's a great deal of truth to that as well. Queen's University professor doctor Matt Strauss pointed out that it was public panic, not the guidance of public health experts that resulted in government lockdowns. People see news stories about the pandemic, and they want the government to "do something." You also have the problem of media outlets and social media companies being arbiters of "the science," and whenever there's a conflict, the media tends to accept the government officials at their word as being the authority. It's ironic that the (up until recently) lax approach of Sweden was derided as being "anti-science," when it was their state epidemiologist who was in charge the whole time. I also think that's the reason that Bonnie Henry has gained the following she has in Canada (probably moreso even than Theresa Tam) because, unlike everyone else, she's dealt with this before. She knew what was doing, and whatever issues I have with her, I have to give her credit for dealing with a surging second wave while clearing a backlog of surgeries and keeping amenities like indoor pools and libraries open during this time.

Aristotleded24

To some extent, I can understand the frustration directed at Ashton over the issue of hypocrisy. Having said that:

Is anybody going to seriously defend the idea now that these broad restrictions, including advice to not visit family or limits on how many friends you could have at home, was actually about stopping the spread of coronavirus? Did anybody really expect that members of the ruling class would abide by the rules they expected the rest of us to? Furthermore, I am also troubled by the idea that the rules are so sacred that they should be followed, even to the point of people on this board defending hospital restrictions that prevented people from being with critically ill family members. It's nice to have an idea and a vision that you feel would be beneficial to society, but I feel now it has gone off the rail and that the vision is more important than actual humanity. You are so rigid and inflexible in your thinking that you would tell family members of a critically-ill covid patient that they can't see them, or judge them as being selfish? That's ideology over humanity right there. I find that very dangerous and frightening. If that's the way you think, then I don't want you or any political movement you are associated with anywhere near making public policy decisions that affect the lives of millions. We have seen all kinds of political movements throughout history, on the left and right, go off the rails and descend into violence and authoritarianism directed at anyone who didn't share the utopian vision of the victorious revolutionaries.

On the issue of "putting lives at risk," how many of you are perfect in that regard? Anyone here ever drive too fast? Run a stop sign? Smoke in a car with others present with the windows rolled up? And yet you would stand in judgement of someone else for visiting people they care about?

Finally, about the idea that "I-gave-up-Christmas-with-my-family-why-shouldn't-Niki-have-stayed-home?" I'm sorry you're upset, but ultimately it was your decision to buy into the bullshit, controlling, public health messaging. That's on you, not me, not anyone else, not Niki Ashton. If you can't see blatant alarm bells about these measures that something else is going on, then I don't know what else to say. I have always maintained, and continue to maintain, that when it comes to visiting family and friends, that everyone should keep in mind that there is a risk, to talk to their family and friends, and make a decision that is right for them. Anything else is needlessly overbearing and controlling.

Aristotleded24

In any case, Ashton isn't the only politician under scrutiny for family gatherings:

Quote:
An Ontario MPP is facing backlash after sharing a photo of a large family gathering this week, in apparent defiance of provincial lockdown rules.

Randy Hillier has been outspoken about provincial restrictions throughout the pandemic and posted a picture on social media on Dec. 27 of what appears to be his family celebrating Christmas dinner.

The happy scene goes against the provincial lockdown rules prohibiting indoor social gatherings with anyone outside of your household.

Say what you want about Hillier, but flouting rules that you are openly criticizing is not nearly as bad as flouting rules that you expect other people to follow.

Aristotleded24

And of course the doctors are always leading by example:

Quote:

An Ontario hospital executive who vacationed in the Caribbean over the holidays is no longer CEO of Niagara Health, according to a statement from the hospital network's board of directors, but is still CEO of St. Joseph's Health System as of 9 p.m. Wednesday.

Dr. Tom Stewart had been the CEO of two hospital networks in southern Ontario — with facilities that are battling outbreaks — and sat on a COVID-19 panel that advises Premier Doug Ford.

He resigned from that panel and two others hours after the news broke of a trip to the Dominican Republic despite government advisories to stay home, prompting outrage from health-care unions and the public.

Niagara Health and St. Joe's, both hospital networks in southern Ontario, are separate but have had a contractual agreement to share various services, including a joint CEO.

If this guy, who knows many things, is willing to do this, what does that say about the actual level of risk? Do you think he would have taken this trip if he believed it was unsafe? If he doesn't believe in the guidelines, why should anyone else?

Aristotleded24

eastnoireast wrote:
ordinary people are sacrificing much, there is no plan, we aren't building critical capacity, or fundamentaly changing how we do things, or supporting people adequately; we haven't hit bottom.

This point cannot be stressed enough.

Aristotleded24

kropotkin1951 wrote:
Hard to have a public health policy if we all get to make those choices. We are either in this together or we are not.

We're not in this together. We never have been. "We're in this together" is a lovely platitude they promoted in order to gain compliance. With the number of even *hospital exectuives* who have been found to be travelling duirng the pandemic, some of them several times, I'm shocked at how unwilling people *still* are to question the idea that these restrictions are intended for public health.

kropotkin1951

And the devil take the hindmost.

eastnoireast

kropotkin1951 wrote:

And the devil take the hindmost.

yeah, and that was before the pandemic.

melovesproles

So have the NDP polling numbers shot through the roof since throwing Ashton under the bus for visiting her dying grandmother?

melovesproles

We're not in this together.

I think a  good example of this was the Covid outbreak at Big White Ski Resort. All the blame was placed on the staff who committed the dual sins of living in cramped housing and socializing. Absolutely no reflection on whether the bougiest of luxury sports should go on during a pandemic. Business owners and luxury consumers have far more rights than workers. This was always true in our Capitalist system but its becoming more and more apparent in Covid times. Too bad there isn't a workers party out there.

Aristotleded24

melovesproles wrote:

We're not in this together.

I think a  good example of this was the Covid outbreak at Big White Ski Resort. All the blame was placed on the staff who committed the dual sins of living in cramped housing and socializing. Absolutely no reflection on whether the bougiest of luxury sports should go on during a pandemic. Business owners and luxury consumers have far more rights than workers. This was always true in our Capitalist system but its becoming more and more apparent in Covid times. Too bad there isn't a workers party out there.

In all seriousness, how bad was the outbreak? I know there were many cases, but how many of these are people who simply tested positive for covid but otherwise would have had no reason to suspect they are sick? Are there many people becoming seriously sick with this outbreak?

I take your point about the issue of luxury events going on during a pandemic as if it is a priority. That said, skiing is an active, outdoor activity that I think we should be encouraging more of to be in good shape anyways. Is this particular outbreak a big threat to public health, or was the resort simply unlucky and the media is in "Oh-my-god-the-ski-resort-had-a-covid-outbreak" mode while new outbreaks in elder care homes are announced and merely swept under the rug because they are so common?

melovesproles

In all seriousness, how bad was the outbreak?

According to Interior Health, 107 of the people included in the cluster live in the Big White community. There are now 29 active cases, with 133 people having recovered from the virus. 

That said, skiing is an active, outdoor activity that I think we should be encouraging more of to be in good shape anyways. 

Sure, I don't disagree that outdoor activity should be encouraged but there are lots of ways to get that without going to a ski resort. It's also an activity that is pretty much out of bounds to most low income people. I'm not actually arguing that ski resorts should be closed though. What bugs me is that the moral outrage here is directed at the workers, who early stories admitted were living in cramped quarters, and not at the resort or those travelling to go skiing. How is skiing more of a right than visiting a dying relative except that the former just affects people with money? Young people work in ski resorts to hit the slopes and socialize, not to get rich. If they are banning socializing, they should give the workers a raise. But the discourse around this is typical in that workers are taken for granted, consumers are entitled to their luxuries, and moral outrage is extremely selective and doesn't make a lot of sense.

Aristotleded24

Yeah, I get that. But that gets to the crux of the debate about what is essential and what is not, and how that decision is made. I don't even ski myself, but I don't like having someone else decide for me what I can or can't do, so I'm not going to adovcate doing that for anyone else. I think one of the issues with resentment about the covid restrictions are about what is allowed and what isn't why are you allowed to do this but I'm not allowed to do that, and on it goes. And if someone likes to ski, then there's an argument that allowing it leads to better mental health, better overall health, yada yada yada. If people lived at the ski resort, then that is of course a risk in these times. Would there have been some way to mitigate that risk while still allowing things go to ahead?

Speaking of risks, why are we all of a sudden worried about covid, and yet traffic accidents of people on the way to or from the slopes or people being injured while on the slopes isn't a big deal or the subjet of days-long running news stories?

JKR

Aristotleded24, why do you think "we are all of a sudden worried about covid?" Isn't the answer obvious now that some of our health care systems are being overwhelmed?

melovesproles

Speaking of risks, why are we all of a sudden worried about covid, and yet traffic accidents of people on the way to or from the slopes or people being injured while on the slopes isn't a big deal or the subjet of days-long running news stories?

Do you really need help with that question? These weak analogies and complete inability to understand what everyone else is saying make you sound like a child. Car crashes and ski accidents aren't contagious. And there have been lots of laws that have been passed to reduce deaths caused by traffic accidents which "tell people what to do or not do." Do you have the same problem with DUI, speeding and seat belt laws? This is high school debate club stuff completely divorced from the real world. 

If people lived at the ski resort, then that is of course a risk in these times. Would there have been some way to mitigate that risk while still allowing things go to ahead

Ski Resorts depend on low paid labour (often from other provinces/countries) with the trade off that that labour is in it for the lifestyle which includes access to the slopes and the aprez-ski lifestyle. It should have been obvous that this year was going to have to be different. Wages should have gone up significantly with the understanding that this was going to be a different year. I think that could have helped to create a different culture in worker behaviour this year instead of just dumping on workers.

But that gets to the crux of the debate about what is essential and what is not, and how that decision is made. I don't even ski myself, but I don't like having someone else decide for me what I can or can't do, so I'm not going to adovcate doing that for anyone else. I think one of the issues with resentment about the covid restrictions are about what is allowed and what isn't why are you allowed to do this but I'm not allowed to do that, and on it goes. And if someone likes to ski, then there's an argument that allowing it leads to better mental health, better overall health, yada yada yada.

Yeah I agree that is the crux. And I have a lot of sympathy for the need to balance Covid restrictions with policies that lead to better mental health. I don't believe that 'not liking being bossed around' is the most important political principle to take into account although like most people I don't like being bossed around. I have said before that I have appreciated Bonnie Henry's early approach (I say early because that was when I watched the press conferences.) She asked people to pull together and care about each other and when reporters pointed out someone that was doing something inappropriate, she usually answered that it's best not to get too judgemental about people we don't know. There could be good reasons for their actions and it's better to control what we do than go around shaming others. That's the approach I like. 

The Federal NDP didn't make that argument. They did their usual media managed poll chasing even though it's never worked for them.

Aristotleded24

JKR wrote:
Aristotleded24, why do you think "we are all of a sudden worried about covid?" Isn't the answer obvious now that some of our health care systems are being overwhelmed?

Health care systems have been overwhelmed for a long time. Covid restrictions, at best, might reduce the load on ICUs for a while. In the long term, covid restrictions end up shuffling the burden on the system around, without actually eliminating the load.

Aristotleded24

melovesproles wrote:

Speaking of risks, why are we all of a sudden worried about covid, and yet traffic accidents of people on the way to or from the slopes or people being injured while on the slopes isn't a big deal or the subjet of days-long running news stories?

Do you really need help with that question? These weak analogies and complete inability to understand what everyone else is saying make you sound like a child. Car crashes and ski accidents aren't contagious. And there have been lots of laws that have been passed to reduce deaths caused by traffic accidents which "tell people what to do or not do." Do you have the same problem with DUI, speeding and seat belt laws? This is high school debate club stuff completely divorced from the real world.

First of all, the flu is contagious, and even during the pandemic of 2009-2010, we never went to these extreme lengths. As for your analogy to seatbelts and impaired driving, what happened in that case was we were presented with evidence for their harms, and collectively as a society we took action. With covid, what's happened is that we were suddenly innundated, by the media, with the idea that we need to massively change our lives. Everything was imposed on the top, without much discussion or input from the population at large. It's one thing to slightly modify your behaviour (i.e. a strap of fabric across your lap while you are in the car, or make sure you have a safe ride home when you go out to party) but a complete overhaul of every aspect of our daily lives needs more discussion, debate, scrutiny, and skepticim than has been permitted with covid.

melovesproles wrote:

If people lived at the ski resort, then that is of course a risk in these times. Would there have been some way to mitigate that risk while still allowing things go to ahead

Ski Resorts depend on low paid labour (often from other provinces/countries) with the trade off that that labour is in it for the lifestyle which includes access to the slopes and the aprez-ski lifestyle. It should have been obvous that this year was going to have to be different. Wages should have gone up significantly with the understanding that this was going to be a different year. I think that could have helped to create a different culture in worker behaviour this year instead of just dumping on workers.

One of the things that I have long advocated is to scrap the temporary foreign worker program completely. I disagree with immigration for economic reasons because it is simply a means for employers to exploit cheap labour. (Family reunification and refugee settlement are completely different things, both of which I support because they are more humane.) Maybe employers paying workers enough so that people will want to apply is part of the solution.

melovesproles wrote:
I have a lot of sympathy for the need to balance Covid restrictions with policies that lead to better mental health. I don't believe that 'not liking being bossed around' is the most important political principle to take into account although like most people I don't like being bossed around. I have said before that I have appreciated Bonnie Henry's early approach (I say early because that was when I watched the press conferences.) She asked people to pull together and care about each other and when reporters pointed out someone that was doing something inappropriate, she usually answered that it's best not to get too judgemental about people we don't know. There could be good reasons for their actions and it's better to control what we do than go around shaming others. That's the approach I like.

Your vantage point matters in how your views form, and I think we have had fundamentally different experiences because we live in different provinces. Dr. Henry, at least at the start, was more balanced and measured in her communication and tried to remind people to be kind throughout this crisis. I feel that approach by medical officials has, throughout the Western world, been the exception. All the press conferences are focused on covid, how you can stop covid, why you shouldn't give anyone else covid, and on it goes. Meanwhile, as I said upthread, imposing restrictions and fighting amongst ourselves leaves the politicians who allowed this mess off the hook. Manitoba had a deadly second wave this past fall, yet the Pallister government had not made any preparations. Meanwhile, he imposed restrictions that closed a great many public spaces which by now have been in effect for 2 and a half months. I don't think it's a coincidence that governments that don't help their people are also ready to impose restrictions. I did mention upthread that I appreciate that libraries and pools are open in BC, even though specific restrictions (i.e. sign up in advance, follow the arrows, maintain distancing) are too strict for my preferences.

melovesproles

First of all, the flu is contagious, and even during the pandemic of 2009-2010, we never went to these extreme lengths. As for your analogy to seatbelts and impaired driving, what happened in that case was we were presented with evidence for their harms, and collectively as a society we took action. With covid, what's happened is that we were suddenly innundated, by the media, with the idea that we need to massively change our lives.

There were lockdowns during early influenza pandemics. The uncertainty around and newness of Covid is part of what scares people. It also makes fumbling through it the only approach. The media is always going to distort democracy but I think its pretty clear governments that have taken Covid seriously have had more public support than those that downplayed it. 

Your vantage point matters in how your views form, and I think we have had fundamentally different experiences because we live in different provinces. 

That's probably true.

Anyway, I think railing against the responses to Covid is less useful than making sure the neagative aspects of them aren't allowed to continue post-pandemic. I like that you are also thinking about those things. I get pessimistic too but I don't think the worst case is inevitable.

JKR

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Health care systems have been overwhelmed for a long time.

Covid is causing the mass cancellation of surgeries and requiring the construction of field hospitals. Mass cancellation of surgeries and the opening of field hospitals have not been happening before Covid. I think this COVID-19 "debate" has become pointless. This debate is like the pointless debate over climate change. Deniers  of climate change and deniers of COVID-19 are mostly impervious to rational argument.

Webgear
Aristotleded24

Of course the irony is that it's the CBC that has led the charge in branding the coronavirus as the new plague and cheering on lockdowns this entire time.

cco

Can we talk about Niki Ashton being stripped of her critic role in this thread, instead of making it the umpteenth thread to argue over whether COVID is a hoax?

Ken Burch

cco wrote:
Can we talk about Niki Ashton being stripped of her critic role in this thread, instead of making it the umpteenth thread to argue over whether COVID is a hoax?

Thank you.  Also, can we please let go of the ridiculous idea that the measures taken to reduce the COVID infection/transmission rate are the cause of every problem in Canada's healthcare system?  It's not as though every other communicable disease would be totally in hand if only it weren't for COVID?  Canada's healthcare system has been screwed up massively since at least the Mulroney era- COVID has essentially nothing  to do with that-  and there is especially no connection between the issues in the Canadian healthcare system and masking or social distancing, neither of which impose any real costs on the healthcare system at all.

Pondering

Such outrage over stupid trips with all the huge betrayals going on. It's a distraction. Privileged people are privileged. I'm shocked. I'm shocked that anyone is shocked. But it shows what hypocrites they all are! you say.  We don't already know that?  This will have zero impact on the election and offers no new insights. 

melovesproles

Such outrage over stupid trips with all the huge betrayals going on. It's a distraction. Privileged people are privileged. I'm shocked. I'm shocked that anyone is shocked. But it shows what hypocrites they all are! you say.  We don't already know that?  This will have zero impact on the election and offers no new insights.

I mostly agree but think it could have some impact in reinforcing narratives in Provincial politics in Alberta and Ontario where the governments are seen as bungling the Pandemic response. 

It's not shocking the Federal NDP didn't have the guts to stand by their member and point out the difference between visiting a dying relative and going on a beach holiday. It is also not shocking that there were a lot of NDP partisans on here who thought this would benefit the party's support becaus it polled well in the media. For a while now the NDP has been less a political movement and more a marketing firm furiously studying polls to knoow what positions to take in the hope of growing the brand.

earthquakefish

To kropotkin1951,

How do you deal with socialist-liberaterists?  They exist, they believe in the world should create something just for everyone, hard to picture, but know that takes people being people. It's quite complex, really and if you can only see in ideas, I'm sorry, but someone visiting their ill grandmother, they may never see again, is not socialist in my idea and a measure amounting to cruel when you condemn the action.

If people can't see those they love, especially, when dying, we will never be in this together.

Pages