[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

Not to further derail to the other thread about more Quebec laws; I just learned that it's illegal for a woman to take her husbands surname in Quebec.

It's one more sign of racism and intolerance toward religious rights to erase a women's identity.

[Barrister]

Not to further derail to the other thread about more Quebec laws; I just learned that it's illegal for a woman to take her husbands surname in Quebec.

It's one more sign of racism and intolerance toward religious rights to erase a women's identity.

Hear hear!  One more step towards smashing the patriarchy!

[Neil]

I don't think it's automatic in BC either...?

I'm pretty sure they ask you either way and go with what you tell them. Certainly, I don't recall having to take any extra steps in the process and my wife kept her name.

I'm pretty sure it was just a box to check on the marriage certificate if the wife wanted to change her name, at least in Alberta.  It's neither required nor banned. 

[crazy canuck]

Here is the number 1 viewed story on the Guardian website atm

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/15/canada-alberta-healthcare-system-covid-cases-rise

The situation in Alberta is "bleak"

On Monday, more than 60 infectious-disease doctors wrote a letter to the premier, Jason Kenney, warning of a catastrophic outcome if the province did not address the escalating caseload.

"Our healthcare system is truly on the precipice of collapse," the physicians wrote. "Hospitals and ICUs across the province are under enormous strain and have reached a point where it is unclear if, or for how much longer, we can provide safe care for Albertans."

The province has cancelled elective surgeries as resources and space are allocated to Covid patients. ICU beds, meanwhile, are at capacity.

"As soon as those breathing tubes come out, we're kicking people out of ICU to make space for someone else," said another nurse. "It's getting bleak. It's hard to watch."

Medical staff in Edmonton, the provincial capital, warned they would soon have to triage incoming patients to determine who could receive lifesaving care.

and the cause - conservative ideology.

Joe Vipond, an emergency room doctor in Calgary and vocal critic of the government, called the latest surge "intentionally cruel".

"This was always part of the plan – letting younger, low-risk people get infected to build herd immunity. I just think they didn't realize how much illness would result from it."

He says mounting pressure from a voter base skeptical of public health restrictions led officials to declare Alberta "open for summer" on 1 July and removed many of the mitigation measures they had in place. The government also said it would no longer require people testing positive for Covid-19 to isolate – a plan it quickly scrapped.

"The vast majority of Albertans are good citizens that believe in collective action, that believe in governments. Unfortunately, the political base of the ruling party cannot be described like that," he said.

One nurse pointed to the bitter irony that those most skeptical of public health measures are those most affected by the current wave.

"All these decisions from the government are clearly to satisfy their voter base," she said. "But what a lack of insight to see that it's their base that's dying and causing us to resort to battlefield medicine."

[Jacob]

I see what you mean about the Alberta vaccine cards vs vaccine passports, CC:

What's the difference between QR code and passport?

After months of resisting calls for a so-called vaccine passport, the province announced on Tuesday it would offer a card-sized COVID-19 vaccination record and a QR code for proof of vaccination through the province's MyHealth Records site or app, allowing Albertans to confirm their vaccine status at venues requiring proof.

But the notion of a provincial vaccine passport or a mandate requiring vaccinations to access non-essential events and services is off the table.

The difference is essentially around who bears responsibility for checking one's status and the lack of uniformity across the province (or city or town or neighbourhood).

Myles Leslie, a research associate at the University of Calgary's School of Public Policy and patient engagement and health services researcher at the Cumming School of Medicine, says it comes down to an ideological debate about whether you prefer government or private interests making more of the decisions.

"That's part of the philosophy of this particular government ... [that] it should be done by other bodies," he said.

"If you do that, then you're saying that a public health choice is something that should be done along the lines of business interests, because that's who you're empowering to do the checking. And that's an interesting call."

Leslie says that decision will mean a fragmented system across the province, with some businesses requiring vaccine proof and others not. He says we're "deconstructing society" and putting the onus on business owners to determine what our community norms ought to be.

Instead of serving customers food, a restaurant owner will now be forced to be in one camp or another in what is becoming a charged political battle.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/covid-fourth-wave-alberta-reality-check-1.6175564

[crazy canuck]

She makes a good point.  I was only considering it from the perspective of government shifting the liabilities to the private sector.  But I think her argument is stronger than that.  It is government shifting public health policy to the private sector.  But for those watching the conservative movement since Reagan, we probably should not have been surprised by this.

[Barrister]

Putting responsibility and choice in the hands of individuals will obviously "deconstruct society".  It's so obvious to me now.  In an " an ideological debate about whether you prefer government or private interests making more of the decisions" what sane person could possible answer "private interests" when instead we can have government making those decisions?

When will people learn?

[Barrister]

She makes a good point.  I was only considering it from the perspective of government shifting the liabilities to the private sector.  But I think her argument is stronger than that.  It is government shifting public health policy to the private sector.  But for those watching the conservative movement since Reagan, we probably should not have been surprised by this.

You're short-sighted.

It's all been an inevitable sequence of events since Goldwater, if not earlier.

[Jacob]

Obviously there's an continually ongoing conversation about where governments should set the standards and where they should evolve naturally through the actions of individuals and business interests. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree where those lines should be drawn, both in broad strokes and in terms of individual issues.

That said, until recently I would've thought public health was the subject of a pretty broad consensus as being better handled centrally and guided by experts. But evidently not.

[Barrister]

Obviously there's an continually ongoing conversation about where governments should set the standards and where they should evolve naturally through the actions of individuals and business interests. Reasonable people can reasonably disagree where those lines should be drawn, both in broad strokes and in terms of individual issues.

That said, until recently I would've thought public health was the subject of a pretty broad consensus as being better handled centrally and guided by experts. But evidently not.

I don't think reasonable people can reasonably disagree.  When it comes to public health there's little to no room for elected politicians to have any say, never mind leave it up to individuals to assess what level of risk they are comfortable with.

[crazy canuck]

BB has gone Full Fox News.  Nobody should go Full Fox News.

[Jacob]

I don't think reasonable people can reasonably disagree.  When it comes to public health there's little to no room for elected politicians to have any say, never mind leave it up to individuals to assess what level of risk they are comfortable with.

Are you okay? 

[Barrister]

I don't think reasonable people can reasonably disagree.  When it comes to public health there's little to no room for elected politicians to have any say, never mind leave it up to individuals to assess what level of risk they are comfortable with.

Are you okay? 

I'm better than okay.  The scales have fallen from my eyes.  It's as if I was blind my whole life, but now I can see for the first time.

[Josephus]

I don't think reasonable people can reasonably disagree.  When it comes to public health there's little to no room for elected politicians to have any say, never mind leave it up to individuals to assess what level of risk they are comfortable with.

Are you okay? 

I'm better than okay.  The scales have fallen from my eyes.  It's as if I was blind my whole life, but now I can see for the first time.

Languish has done its job. Time to shut it down.

[Jacob]

I'm better than okay.  The scales have fallen from my eyes.  It's as if I was blind my whole life, but now I can see for the first time.

Okie-dokie.