Category: Canada

Anything related to Canada or Canadians

The political importance of jobs in the oil sands

Economists sometimes defend inflation by saying that it is a useful means for allowing the real income of some people to fall, without actually reducing the nominal amount. This is connected to human psychology. For some reason, it is more upsetting to have your salary cut by 2% at a time when prices are stable than it is to experience an amount of inflation that generates the same reduction in what you can consume. People like having an income that seems to grow or stay the same, even if it is an illusion, and they hate having an income that seems to shrink.

A related asymmetry arguably exists in terms of entire industries. Once an industry exists, it will fight for survival no matter how irrelevant or damaging it has become. People in the industry will lobby their political representatives for assistance and – especially if the number of people employed is large – they will often succeed.

This is why Canada still has an asbestos industry, even though the material is too dangerous to be used domestically and most people agree that it is unethical to sell abroad.

One reason why I worry about the rapid pace of oilsands expansion is because of the ever-larger constituency of people whose livelihood and financial security now depends on the continued operation of the oil patch. In the future, it may become completely obvious that the oil sands are bad for Canada and bad for the world. Even so, the more people employed by the industry, the harder it will be to wind down. It will also require scrapping more multi-billion-dollar hardware.

Growing the oil sands is politically easy; shrinking them is almost impossible. That’s another argument for slowing the pace of growth. It means there will be less inertia to overcome when we make the transition from digging up ever-more oil to phasing out our fossil fuel industries.

Oil sands similes

  • Exploiting the oil sands is like drinking seawater, when you are already dangerously dehydrated.
  • It’s like starting up a smoky old kerosene lantern aboard a space station that is rapidly running out of air.
  • It’s like giving more whiskey to the already-drunk guide who is paddling our canoe over Niagara Falls.

And yet, huge expansion plans are being implemented. The fact that is is profitable has led us to ignore the fact that it is incredibly reckless, as well as an act of violence directed against vulnerable people and future generations.

Gardasil

Yesterday, I got the my third and final vaccination against the human papillomavirus (HPV). Some strains of this wart-causing virus also cause cancer. The vaccine I bought – Merck’s Gardasil – protects against HPV types 16, 18, 6, and 11. About 70% of cervical cancers are thought to be caused by types 16 and 18, along with most HPV-induced anal, vulvar, vaginal, and penile cancers. About 90% of cases of genital warts are caused by types 6 and 11.

The vaccine isn’t cheap, but I think it would make a huge amount of sense to vaccinate all children with it, or with an improved version that covers even more HPV types. Giving it to all children makes sense because they are relatively unlikely to have already been exposed to HPV, unlike me. Still, even though there is a chance I have already been exposed to one or more types, I think getting the vaccine makes a lot of personal sense. A study of 4,065 males ages 16 to 26 found that over 30 months three men who were vaccinated developed genital warts, compared to 28 cases in a control group given a placebo, and that none of the vaccinated men were found to have pre-cancerous growths linked to HPV, compared with three cases in the placebo group.

The four doctors who were involved in this procedure were all aware that Gardasil can be used to prevent HPV in men as well as a means of protecting future sexual partners (one doctor prescribed the vaccine and three who gave injections over the course of six months). The vaccine is covered by some health plans.

Previously: Getting the HPV vaccine

Accelerating in the wrong direction

In terms of its actions, Canada continues to deeply misunderstand the nature, seriousness, and implications of climate change.

What we know about the history of the climate and the nature of greenhouse gases strongly suggests that the continuing build-up of greenhouse gas pollution in the atmosphere is highly dangerous.

Since burning fossil fuels is the major source of that pollution, both Canada and the world as a whole need to be talking about how to phase out fossil fuels.

Instead, we are talking about how to massively increase our production and exports of these dangerous substances. We should be winding down production of coal, oil, and gas – not continuing to dig and drill more and more, or building thick new export corridors for hydrocarbons that really ought to remain underground.

The government that hammers tent pegs up our noses

A pattern seems to have developed in the legislative politics of a certain northern country.

The people in power boast that they are going to do something dramatic but somewhat foolhardy: “Watch! I am going to hammer this tent peg up your nose!” or “Let’s make the census optional!” or “Let’s throw people in jail for harmless marijuana offenses!” or “Let’s allow the police and spies to watch everybody’s internet use!”.

After this declaration is made, both the political opposition and experts in the field bring up some of the very reasonable objections to the proposal: “What about my brain?” or “The whole point of a census is that everyone completes it” or “That’s pointless vindictiveness for a non-offence to society” or “That’s an insanely over-reaching way to catch only the stupidest criminal web users”.

But the issue has already become a matter of pride and honour for the government of the day, so they cannot back down or change plans. Occasionally, public and political opposition to the proposal are strong enough to stop it, at which point the government becomes bitter and petulant, stressing how everyone will need to live with the terrible consequences of not following the government’s plan. Often, however, they are able to circle up successfully around their bad idea and turn it into law.

This pattern of behaviour is likely to persist for as long as the opposition is leaderless and split.

Even those who favour the party in power probably realize that the political system only works properly when there is a credible opposition. If there is nobody else who looks capable of forming a government, there are few real checks on the power of the people in charge. That leads to them expressing their own psychological excesses and frustrations in ill-conceived legislation, which is bad for everybody.

Internet surveillance in Canada

The Conservative government is proposing a new law that would require internet service providers to monitor and record what Canadians do online, and to provide that information to the authorities without a warrant.

As well as being an obvious violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (§8 “Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.”), I think this is an example of thinking badly about security. Obviously, having the government monitor everything that happens online could prevent some bad things from happening. At the same time, it is virtually certain that the capability would be abused or that security breaches will allow it to be hijacked by those with nefarious purposes. The abuse could happen at the governmental level – say, with discreet inquiries being made into the private correspondence of members of competing political parties. It could be done within the police and intelligence services – say, a jilted ex tracking the emails of their former partner. It could be done within internet service providers – say, some low-paid tech at Bell or Telus deciding to earn a bit of extra cash by blackmailing customers.

The archives of internet use would be an irresistible target for malefactors of every type, from nosy bosses and spouses to spammers and rogue political operatives. Maintaining and trying to secure these archives would also be a major burden for internet service providers. Instead of being in the business of helping their clients communicate, they will be forced into the business of keeping tabs on their clients on behalf of the government.

The security risks created by internet surveillance are greater than the risks that it might help reduce. Furthermore, allowing the creation of internet surveillance systems violates the Charter-protected rights of Canadians. What Canadians do online is their private business. It is not something that governments have the right to monitor, just because doing so will occasionally allow them to catch people committing crimes. Hopefully, this proposal will never become law.

Canada’s coinage

The way you treat different denominations of currency probably says something about both your temperament and about the relative values of different currency units.

When I get pennies, for example, I discard them at the first opportunity. Pennies just aren’t worth carrying around.

Dimes and nickels, I put in a big glass jar. In times of extreme cash need, I may pick out a bunch to buy some ramen noodles.

Quarters and loonies I save for laundry.

Twonies (Toonies?) I save for coffee.

I am pretty happy about the relative sizes of Canada’s denominations. It’s good that the more valuable coins are generally larger. I feel a bit like pennies are a waste at this point. I suppose how you feel about them depends on how many small cash transactions you undertake each day.

350.org oil sands petition

As usual, Bill McKibben is saying sensible things and calling for appropriate actions. He is a non-Canadian who is concerned about the ethics of digging up and burning the oil sands, in a world where the climate is changing at a frightening pace.

He is asking Canadians to sign a petition:

“As a Canadian, I stand with people all over the world who are opposed to burning the oil sands, and demand that our leaders stop their campaign to discredit the movement to stop the pipeline.”

Please consider signing. He is hoping to get 10,000 signatures before he visits Vancouver in March.

Demonstrating British Columbia’s beauty

One of the big reasons for opposing the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline is because of how 200 oil tankers a year would threaten the coast of British Columbia.

I think everyone who has seen that coastline understands its beauty and ecological importance. At the same time, I suspect the idea can be made more salient for people by showing them photos and video of the areas that could be affected if the pipeline goes through.

It’s not clear what the most effective approach would be for reminding people about what is at stake. Really there is a spectrum of possibility, ranging from fantastic shots taken by talented photographers on top-notch gear and shown in magazines and galleries to amateur shots taken by visitors and ordinary British Columbians and uploaded to Facebook or Flickr.

In all likelihood, many approaches will be tried simultaneously. For my own part, I have been thinking about a potential photo show that would incorporate photos of the B.C. coast as well as photos from the successful protests against the Keystone XL pipeline, which took place in Washington D.C.. Toronto may not be the most appropriate venue for that, since people here don’t have much of a personal emotional stake in the integrity of west coast ecosystems.

Perhaps I should try and find the time to set up yet another website, where people could contribute photos from B.C. and explain why they oppose the Northern Gateway pipeline…