Navigator logo

Ignorance is far more dangerous than any spy balloon

In a dangerous world, what we need is a little humility. And what we don’t need, most especially, is politicians fanning the flames.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on February 19, 2023.

READ MORE >

An American fan writes to Tucker Carlson about Canada

I await your presidential bid and call-to-arms against Canada with keen anticipation

Gee, Tucker, you’re always saying the stuff most Americans are afraid to say.

Like this invading Canada idea you’ve floated. Dude, this time, you’ve hit the nail on the head. I’m so glad that before you got back to your obsession with the sex appeal of M&M characters, you turned to our northern neighbour. I, for one, am sick of the Canadians and all their wokeness and think it’s time we did something about it.

You’re absolutely correct that Canada is a Justin Trudeau dictatorship. Hardly surprising given he is the offspring of Fidel Castro. You have to be careful because the Canadians will have you believe they have a parliamentary system where their political leaders are freely and fairly elected every five years. But, as we know all too well, the globalists have hijacked these systems to install whichever puppet they see fit. Being naïve as they are, the Canadians failed to perceive what was so obvious to educated minds like mine and yours. Those Boy Scouts didn’t even try to Stop the Steal!

On the question of liberation, I’ve no doubt once they are greeted with our trademark American charm and the promise of our glorious dream of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness the Canucks will welcome us with open arms. As you observed, liberating dictatorships is what we do! They’ll learn that American intervention is a gift from the heavens, just like the Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans, Haitians and Chileans have done.

This one will be even easier — I hear they all speak English anyway.

Tactically, we will need some help putting this together. While I’m all for a “Bay of Pigs operation,” we might want to model this invasion on something that actually worked, as Trudeau’s true father managed to scupper us on that occasion.

I like your idea that we could probably complete a successful invasion without the armed forces and that “just a couple college kids with sled dogs could do the trick.” While you might have been joking, this could be effective. After all, the Canadians whooped our ass back to Washington and set fire to the White House in 1812 when we tried with the Army, so why not try something more clandestine to finally right that wrong?

Of course, the hard work will come once we’ve successfully invaded, and we must introduce Canadians to real freedom. That will mean limiting the autonomy women have over their own bodies, letting every citizen have access to military-grade weapons to protect themselves against the deep state and ridding them of their Marxist belief in universal health care.

Given Trudeau and his communist cronies have been repeated violators of human and democratic rights, it’s important we install our system of voting rights, world-renowned for its openness and fairness. What’s more, they seem to have this strange belief in welcoming vast amounts of immigrants and refugees. Don’t they realize that free societies impose travel bans on Muslim countries and bus their refugees around state borders until someone caves in and takes them?

All this reinforces your point that “Canada is a sick society.” Wokeness, after all, is a virus. But not the fake kind that Dr. Fauci warned about. This one is far deadlier. There’s no vaccine for it (I wouldn’t trust it anyway) but there is such thing as a little shot in the arm of American freedom.

Seeing as you’re effectively the GOP kingmaker these days, why not run in 2024 so we can make this invasion a reality? I’ve always liked the idea of a for-the-people revolution led by a commander-in-chief in a polka-dot bow tie.

Anyway, I await your presidential bid and call-to-arms against Canada with keen anticipation. In the meantime, I’m going back to my regular routine of testicle tanning, then spending some alone time reminiscing on the good old days with some vintage M&M packets.

Yours faithfully,

A loyal viewer.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on February 12, 2023.

READ MORE >

Having found its nerve, the Bank of Canada must hold it

The Bank of Canada must stay the course on high interest rates in the face of a frenzied appetite for them to come back down.

 

After being shelled with political fire for the past year, one might think the Bank of Canada would avoid differentiated forecasts until the noise around inflation began to abate. Instead, last week Canada’s central bank deviated from all others in G10 economies by explicitly signalling that a pause to interest rate hikes might be on the horizon.

While the Federal Reserve, Bank of England and European Central Bank were reluctant to make similar prognostications as they hiked rates this week, Gov. Tiff Macklem has boldly chosen to stick his head above the parapet.

In doing so, he has taken a significant risk; distinguishing himself from his counterparts gives his critics more fodder to misconstrue Macklem’s intentions.

Like its counterparts, the Bank of Canada was slow in acknowledging the deeply structural nature of inflation. Since then, it has remained steadfast in tightening monetary policy but now may have decided to move more quickly to a much hoped for endgame.

While Macklem was clear a pause doesn’t mean a pivot, his conditional commitment feeds an increasingly persistent notion that we are turning the corner on inflation. Speculative assets are up with markets champing at the bit for a return to cheaper money while the public, goaded by political criticisms that central banks are hell-bent on causing a recession, are ready to call it a day.

But people need to be reminded what the reality is rather than what they want it to be. While inflation has declined, it still sits at 6.3 per cent in Canada — a far cry from the target 2 per cent rate. Behaviour has a powerful effect on economics and promise of a pause risks playing into a yearning for sunnier alternatives.

Many underlying price pressures, such as wages, are proving persistent in the face of rate hikes. Meanwhile, uncertainty over the state of our federal finances is growing. Former Bank of Canada Gov. David Dodge recently issued a report concluding federal deficits are unsustainable for the decade ahead.

The Bank of Canada is a sophisticated and historically patient institution and its latest announcement certainly poured cold water on the idea that it is a blind follower of the Fed. Without further comprehensive employment and consumer price reports for a while, the central bank is probably just trying to temper expectations — but markets and the public are never that rational.

Einstein once famously defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. In the 1970s, after a temporary ease, inflation bit back more harshly than ever, with prices dropping then soaring — graphically looking like a McDonald’s M — with drastic quantitative tightening eventually bringing them under control. Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker is remembered as the man who saved the global economy, but was seen far less favourably at the time.

Having found the nerve to raise interest rates to battle inflation, the Bank of Canada must now hold it in the face of frenzied appetite for them to come back down. Should Macklem end up reneging on his conditional commitment, I am confident he will do so firmly and without fear of reprisal with monetary and historic responsibilities as his north star.

We have seen the Conservatives and the NDP quite willing to target the Bank of Canada. Although Macklem was clear this was a conditional commitment that fact will inevitably get lost as more Canadians struggle to make their mortgage payments.

Before their next rate announcement in March, it would be best if the bank worked to drown out the noise that will precede it and aggressively assert that a pause will only come if specific criteria are met, and that more hikes may have to follow if they are not.

Failure to do so will put Canada in a very difficult position to tackle inflation and failure to do that will result in pain for generations to come.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on February 6, 2023.

READ MORE >

A health care deal with the province can be Trudeau’s legacy

A crumbling health care system cracks at the very foundation of not only this country but who we are as a people.

Saints, it has been said, are the sinners who kept on trying.

For first ministers across Canada, their road to redemption may well run through Feb. 7. That’s when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and premiers will gather to start negotiating a new deal on the federal government’s funding for health services.

Hope, for this reason, is in the air as a sense that previously insurmountable differences will — at last — be cast aside for the greater good. And yet, many can only muster the most cautious sense of optimism. Because, let’s face it, Canadians have been let down on this issue countless times before. Politics has interfered; talking points have prevailed.

As a result, our health care system is now beyond the breaking point. Patients are suffering. Doctors and nurses are exhausted and burnt-out. Wait-lists are surging. Innovation is stalling and investment is falling to dangerous levels.

What most of us feel, at best, is hope of a kind: like the branch you cling to before the current carries you over the falls. The reality is this: none of the significant problems in our health care system will fully get fixed until the federal government returns to its role and pays its share. Point finale.

While there are few reference points for the kind of selfless political leadership required to solve the health care crisis, one does come to mind: the efforts to patriate the Constitution and entrench the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the early 1980s.

Memorably, Bill Davis played a leading role in negotiations between the provinces and federal government, helping to bring his fellow premiers into the fold through skilful diplomacy and good old fashioned Canadian compromise. This struggle would cost Davis politically. His support for Pierre Trudeau’s ambitions upset not only his federal cousins but his own caucus. And yet, today, his contributions are universally celebrated. Why? Because he put the good of his country ahead of partisanship.

In negotiating the future of health care in Canada, Davis’s successors should replicate his example. And there are signs this just might happen. When The Star’s Susan Delacourt recently asked the prime minister about Premier Doug Ford’s plans to clear Ontario’s surgery backlog by delivering more operations through private clinics, he chose to call it “innovation.”

Make no mistake, Trudeau’s answer was a momentous break with decades of orthodoxy. But the cliché that politics makes strange bedfellows is a cliché for a reason. The PM well understands that there is no deal if the lines of distinction are drawn too sharply before formal negotiations even begin. Crucially, he recognizes that Ford will be a vital partner in this upcoming negotiation and, that with Ontario’s support, he has a powerful ally in bringing other provinces along.

Some opposition parties will, predictably, try to upset progress. NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, desperate for oxygen, has said he’ll consider pulling support for the Liberals if they do not insist on no-privatization conditions for health care funding. While that might be in his narrow political interests, this is not the time for such considerations.

All of which is not to deny that getting this right will be a win for those who do, which raises the question of legacy, specifically the prime minister’s. Achieving this deal will produce very close to immediate results.

A crumbling health care system cracks at the very foundation of not only this country but who we are as a people. So the point is this: It won’t matter if Trudeau puts a Canadian on the moon. His accomplishments will count for nothing if he misses this once-in-his-premiership shot to repair our national foundation. If he does miss, his legacy is in deep trouble. But if he makes this crucial fix, his legacy will have a new cornerstone.

Make no mistake, Trudeau’s answer was a momentous break with decades of orthodoxy. But the cliché that politics makes strange bedfellows is a cliché for a reason. The PM well understands that there is no deal if the lines of distinction are drawn too sharply before formal negotiations even begin. Crucially, he recognizes that Ford will be a vital partner in this upcoming negotiation and, that with Ontario’s support, he has a powerful ally in bringing other provinces along.

Some opposition parties will, predictably, try to upset progress. NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, desperate for oxygen, has said he’ll consider pulling support for the Liberals if they do not insist on no-privatization conditions for health care funding. While that might be in his narrow political interests, this is not the time for such considerations.

All of which is not to deny that getting this right will be a win for those who do, which raises the question of legacy, specifically the prime minister’s. Achieving this deal will produce very close to immediate results.

A crumbling health care system cracks at the very foundation of not only this country but who we are as a people. So the point is this: It won’t matter if Trudeau puts a Canadian on the moon. His accomplishments will count for nothing if he misses this once-in-his-premiership shot to repair our national foundation. If he does miss, his legacy is in deep trouble. But if he makes this crucial fix, his legacy will have a new cornerstone.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on January 30, 2023.

READ MORE >

Why private health care will save lives

Politicians and other policymakers have figured out that private participation in a public health care system is no longer the bogeyman.

A fearlessly pragmatic intervention or a desecration of our national fabric and everything we hold dear?

A slippery slope certain to trigger a mass exodus of public health care workers or an innovative plan to boost collaboration and ease the burden across a strained-to-the-breaking point sector?

Or, finally, rerouting water away from the dam (to steal Premier Doug Ford’s metaphor), or a short-sighted stopgap that will only delay a greater flood? The spin lines are drawn in predictably binary and deeply unenlightening ways.

The truth is that, however you slice it, last week’s announcement by the Ford government of a multi-phased plan to fund for-profit clinics will fundamentally reshape Ontario’s health care landscape.

We are now firmly on the road toward significantly greater private participation in our health care system. The questions are: will it work and will Ontarians and Canadians support it? The Ford government is banking that the answers will be yes and yes.

Facing an avalanche of criticism, the government has decided the best way to reduce wait times is to expand the role of private clinics to provide a series of diagnostic and surgical procedures paid for by OHIP.

Ontario is not alone in taking this approach. Confronting its own dire challenges, Quebec, too, has started to make this pivot. In September, the Coalition Avenir Québec announced plans to open one-stop-shop medical facilities in Montreal and Quebec City, privately owned and built, but publicly funded. Meanwhile, British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan have made progress in reducing their surgical backlogs by implementing community-based models for procedures.

Some will say that this turn to privatization carries with it significant risk. These critics imagine the Ford government’s plan might lead to labour shortages in the public sector. Of course, introducing substantial change into a bureaucratic system as dense and complex as health care will be no easy challenge. But the risk of being perceived to do nothing — that is, to accept the status quo — is much, much greater.

On this front, Navigator’s most recent research on the views Canadians hold about the health care landscape is extremely revealing. For decades, conventional wisdom has held that changing the status quo in health care has been the third rail of Canadian politics.

But our data indicates this is simply no longer true. Indeed, more than half of Canadians (58 per cent) believe that the sector’s backlog is so urgent that change is necessary, even if this means allowing the private sector to play a more significant role.

Politicians and other policymakers are finally figuring out that private participation in a public health care system is no longer the great bogeyman it was once held to be; rather, many Canadians now see it as a vital tool in the delivery of services that will meet their needs.

It speaks volumes that, to this day, many politicians still run for their lives from this subject. Or worse, still think that airing blanket criticisms will fare better than proposing concrete solutions. But, as the events of recent months have shown, governments are waking up to the crucial and increasingly unavoidable point that many Canadians see privatization measures as realistic and even promising.

So here’s how I see it: Health care in Canada is at a tipping point and an expanded role for private health care providers, universally covered, has been the logical solution staring us in the face for the better part of a generation.

(While my opinions are my own, readers should know my colleagues have lobbied on behalf of organizations in the health care sector including medical professionals, hospitals and companies).

With more people suffering as a result of our overburdened system each passing day, with delays piled on delays as a result of COVID, governments can no longer afford to simply avoid or ignore this solution.

The reverse of what was so long held as unthinkable in Canadian political life is now true: embracing private health-care delivery, paid for by the public purse, is not only politically necessary but has become politically advantageous.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on January 25, 2023.

READ MORE >