So, we are languishing on the vaccination rollout and medical doctors who are working in intensive care units filled with COVID carriers are not even allowed to get the second vaccine, which has greater protection for variant mutations. What is wrong with that picture?

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 26, 2021.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s tears failed to dampen the unprecedented spike in his unpopularity.

His mea culpa, offered while in isolation at his late mother’s home in Etobicoke, was designed to let people know that their pain was his pain. But nobody was listening.

The government’s decision to announce draconian lockdown measures the previous weekend was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.

Within two days, decisions to close children’s playgrounds and unleash unprecedented police powers on an already suffering populace were hastily reversed.

Ford says he went too far, but that is not the issue. He went to the wrong places.

During COVID, if we have learned one thing, it is that the outdoors is our friend. So why prevent children from enjoying playgrounds and shut down the sports of golf, tennis, baseball, soccer, and the like?

Surely if there is one thing that should be encouraged in a pandemic that is well into its second year is the need to get outdoor exercise through several avenues. The closure of all outdoor athletic venues is absurd, and the notion that you cannot even sit on a picnic table in a park is illogical.

What is not enough is the decision to ignore a plan for asymptomatic testing in vulnerable workplaces like grocery stores, food factory floors and shipping areas.

What is not enough is the decision to deny the most vulnerable workers paid sick leave.

Is it any surprise that without sick leave, and with no random workplace testing that silent and not-so-silent carriers are spreading the virus?

What is also not enough is the way that multiple governments have refused to prioritize hot spots for treatment.

In a Confederation, the vaccines are distributed on a per capita basis, but when one city has more than 1,500 cases per day, and a province might have less than 10, why is that per capital system inviolate?

We literally have dozens of public health experts micromanaging in their own municipalities, but we do not have a national approach for tackling this virus.

Provincial governments just say, give us more money to solve the problem, but they are not willing to play ball with a national “hotspot” strategy.

So, we are languishing on the vaccination rollout and medical doctors who are working in intensive care units filled with COVID carriers are not even allowed to get the second vaccine, which has greater protection for variant mutations.

What is wrong with that picture?

If we have learned anything during this pandemic is that the old ways are not always the best ways, and it makes sense to have a national rollout of a vaccine strategy.

It also makes sense to prioritize workplaces and school sites for onsite, antigen testing to stem the spread of the virus.

Shutting down playgrounds and treating people like criminals is no way to get the population on side.

Ontario’s COVID meltdown overshadowed a national budget rollout that should have put smiles on everyone’s faces.

The promised childcare investment, while lauded by every parent, will be a tough sell in provinces that do not want federal incursion in their field of responsibility.

Better to have $1,600 a month daycare in Toronto than embrace a national plan that makes childcare affordable and accessible wherever you live.

During the pandemic, women are the majority of those who have vacated the workforce and, in some instances, continued working while they home-schooled their children.

The national childcare investment should be applauded by all parties, but as usual, the Conservatives had nothing but complaints to offer.

Right-wing commentators grudgingly argued it might be a good idea but needs further study.

A national strategy for childcare has been studied almost as long as the legalization of marijuana, with the first report on the matter dating back to 1970.

Equality First: the Royal Commission on the Status of Women recommended 51 years ago that there should be a sliding scale of payment for childcare based on need. Chair Florence Bird would turn over in her grave if she heard that people were still asking for more studies on childcare.

The federal budget charts a path forward for other provinces to follow the lead of Quebec with a truly affordable system of childcare.

The economic burden of the pandemic has disproportionately fallen on women. Kudos to Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s first woman finance minister for investing real money into a national plan fifty-one years after it was first proposed.

Hopefully this plan will actually come to fruition.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

It would be dangerous for Liberals to skew their campaign to millennial voters. That cohort was a winner in 2015, delivering a solid majority to the Liberals. But it is not likely to be as effective this time around.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on April 12, 2021.

Liberal Rainmaker Keith Davey led the party to multiple successful elections.

Such was the Senator’s electoral prowess that he is widely credited with the Liberals becoming the “natural governing party” in the last century.

Last weekend’s Liberal convention reflected Davey’s rule.

He always said that the key to Liberal success was campaigning from the left and governing from the right.

The party secured the best policies for a socially progressive country while remaining fiscally prudent, so as not to scare the business community.

But this century is turning politics on its head.

In an effort to guide Canada through the pandemic, the government is spending as widely and rapidly as possible.

So, when it comes to a pre-election message, the party will have to prove that it can also be fiscally prudent.

So do not expect a blanket endorsement of a guaranteed annual income, even though this has been on the agenda of many progressives for decades.

Instead, there will be a resolution to cost the plan, and incorporate the views of provincial and Indigenous governments before anything specific moves forward on the national level.

Such a resolution will give some comfort to Bay Street, which is already making noises about excessive Liberal spending. And main street will be reassured in knowing that national income support will be available at least through the pandemic.

The convention will also embrace near unanimity on a resolution calling for the implementation of national standards for long-term care residences across the country.

There was a time when such a resolution would have meant political death in Quebec.

And everyone knows that it is near impossible to secure a majority government without substantial support in La Belle province.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Quebec Premier François Legault have been making multiple joint announcements in recent time, so they will probably organize an opt-out clause to handle the claim of federal interference in provincial health matters.

But at the end of the day, the death rate in Quebec cannot be ignored and simply assuming that more of the same will be a solution does not make sense.

The sturm and drang of a convention will allow all sides to air their perspectives but, in the end, the party will come out united behind a policy that will ensure a national strategy for long-term care and no national consensus on the Guaranteed Annual Income.

Party organizers have been very pleased with the participation level at the convention, with more than 4,000 registrants, of whom 60 per cent are new members.

New members are good news, but the party also has to be concerned about the ongoing support of long-time, loyal Liberals.

I was chatting last week with a former cabinet minister, who was a very active political organizer in the past, and he is sitting the next election out.

In his words, the party seems a lot more interested in recruitment than in involving those who have been around for a long time.

That could spell trouble, because in most elections where the Liberals lose, their loyal voters don’t necessarily change sides. They just don’t bother to vote.

Pollsters have recently identified that the party is either behind or in a toss-up in 13 ridings which they need to form a majority government.

Most of those ridings are rural, with a population that is not likely as mobile so long-term, loyal voters are important to the victory.

New political participants are important for energy and excitement. The young generation is most likely made up of urban participants who will not carry the day in the case of a tight election.

It would be dangerous for Liberals to skew their campaign to millennial voters.

That cohort was a winner in 2015, delivering a solid majority to the Liberals. But it is not likely to be as effective this time around.

The longer any party has been in government, the harder it is to keep everyone happy.

Marijuana legalization is a distant memory, and that policy will not persuade those new voters to support the Liberals again.

Instead, the party will depend on older people to carry tight ridings in rural areas.

Seniors are usually most likely to vote in large numbers, but the pandemic has altered everyone’s habits.

Trudeau’s Covid hotels have also cost support among snowbirds who represent up to 500,000 voters.

Hopes for majority could depend on whether the Trudeau glow is losing lustre with loyal Liberals.

The convention could kickstart that renewal—or not.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

If the prime minister’s team thought an early election could move the Liberals into majority territory, the uncertainty in Newfoundland may give them pause.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 8, 2021.

Three elections and three majority governments sent the message that a government managing COVID-19 is rewarded by the voters.

That was the general school of thought when Newfoundland and Labrador called its COVID election. But the arrival of the variant crisis has changed all that.

The Newfoundland and Labrador government was forced to call an election by August. Based on previous results in British Columbia, New Brunswick, and Saskatchewan, it appeared as though the electorate would put their trust in the party that was actually managing the pandemic. In all three of those previous elections, the governing party was returned with a comfortable majority.

So Liberal Leader Andrew Furey, a medical specialist, probably thought he was on solid ground when his government called the election in Newfoundland and Labrador. But in the middle of the vote, a virus variant crept into Newfoundland, taking a province that was almost COVID-free by storm, as Mount Pearl and parts of St. John’s were hit hard with the new virus.

All of a sudden, the province went from a place that had been a spectator in the coronavirus battle to a province that was facing a distressing multiplication of a frightening variant. Questions started coming: how can you have an election when people cannot get to the polls because they are forced into a quarantine to protect community transmission of these new variants?

So, health and election officials tried to sketch out a roadmap for a safe election. The government responded with more opportunities for mail-in ballots, but in order to achieve that goal, they needed to change the shape and date of the election.

In mid-February, the chief electoral officer of Newfoundland and Labrador postponed the voting date for almost half of the voting districts in Newfoundland. The delays occurring on the Avalon Peninsula represented most urban voters in the capital’s periphery.

The cancellations were spurred because frightened election workers resigned out of fear of interacting with the public on election day, according to chief electoral officer Bruce Chaulk. And voters were also frightened about what they might face in a lineup going into the voting booths.

Unlike most other provinces, Newfoundland and Labrador had been largely free of the virus, so citizens were extremely concerned that the variant had hit them hard.

The whole election process has been somewhat odd, with the premier participating in regular briefings with the chief medical officer of health, in the middle of an election.

Progressive Conservative Leader Ches Crosbie complained about the conflict of the premier’s appearance during an election, but that complaint was overridden by citizens’ desire for information.

Crosbie and Furey both carry an impressive political pedigree. Crosbie’s father was John Crosbie, the inimitable Newfoundland minister who served in the cabinet of prime minister Brian Mulroney.

Furey’s father is former backroom Liberal organizer and now Senator George Furey, who is the current Speaker in the Senate of Canada. His uncle is Chuck Furey, who served as a minister in the government of premier Brian Tobin.

Polls still predict victory for Furey, but the confusion around the COVID election has definitely eaten into his popularity.

Newfoundlanders are experiencing their first full lockdown. After three weeks, they are getting crusty. They understand it is for the collective good, but they also want to know why an election is happening in the middle of a medical crisis.

Taking a page from the Newfoundland book, a parliamentary committee in Ottawa passed a unanimous resolution last week demanding that no election be called during a pandemic. The Procedure and House Affairs Committee, not usually known for controversial recommendations, unanimously sought a commitment from the government that there would be no election, except in the case of a lost confidence vote. New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh endorsed the resolution, promising that his party would not trigger an election.

The Tories have not chimed in, although they claim the Liberals have been trying to trigger an election.

For their part, the governing grits claim they don’t want an election, but will not allow their legislative agenda to be blocked in by the Tories. The Liberals have accused the Conservatives of trying to block pandemic-related aid legislation designed to assist individuals and small businesses.

Now that Newfoundland’s election has been torpedoed by the pandemic, the prevailing wisdom that governments are rewarded during an election is definitely at risk.

If the prime minister’s team thought an early election could move the Liberals into majority territory, the uncertainty in Newfoundland may give them pause. Pandemic elections may not be so fruitful after all.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By procuring almost one-quarter million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, the government will be able to start distribution immediately so that frontline workers and the vulnerable elderly will get protection. And once the procurement deal was announced, Health Canada moved quickly to approve the vaccine.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 14, 2020.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pulled a huge rabbit out of his hat last week.

By procuring almost one-quarter million doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, the government will be able to start distribution immediately so that frontline workers and the vulnerable elderly will get protection.

And once the procurement deal was announced, Health Canada moved quickly to approve the vaccine.

By doing so, Canada joined the United Kingdom, and Bahrain, becoming just the third country in the world to approve the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Four thousand people will be receiving the vaccine next week with priority given to frontline health-care workers.

It also gave Trudeau some much-needed good news in advance of last week’s first ministers’ meeting on health that was not going to be an easy ride.

The federal government has been the major contributor to funding during the COVID crisis. According to Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland, the national government has been responsible for 80 per cent of the extraordinary costs associated with the pandemic.

And last week’s first ministers’ meeting gave the prime minister a chance to outline some of those successes, including funding for personal protective equipment and direct support for those who lost their jobs because of the virus.

But Trudeau is also under pressure to increase the federal financial share of provincial health funding, as the provinces were seeking an increase from 22 per cent to 35 per cent. That increase would represent additional funding of $28-billion annually, up from the current $42-billion yearly transfer.

Trudeau will not be able to meet their full demands, which some premiers have privately acknowledged as unrealistic. But any increase in ongoing funding will also be tied to the introduction of common standards into health-care delivery, while the provinces want to spend the money in their own jurisdiction with no strings attached.

In normal times, the federal involvement in provincial health matters is a no-go zone. There is simply too much jurisprudence that the matter falls under provincial authority.

More than two decades ago, BlackBerry co-founder Mike Lazaridis offered to develop a chip for health care that would record and retain health records for every single Canadian from cradle to grave.

That technology could have been critical in reducing duplication and overlap when patient records are often lost in transfer between hospitals or provinces, when people move.

The senior official involved in the offer, then heading up online initiatives for the government, shut the conversation down in five minutes. She said a single health information system would never happen because the federal government would not impinge on provincial jurisdiction.

That was long before this global pandemic infected the world and exposed gaping holes in provincial delivery of Canadian health care.

Our collective treatment of seniors living in long-term care facilities has been disgraceful. It was so bad that premiers actually called in the Canadian military to save patients. In the financial update, Freeland announced $1-billion to be spent in long-term care facilities on the condition that provinces and the federal government work together to devise national standards.

The provinces are resisting but the population is not impressed after what they have witnessed in filthy nursing homes across the country.

Seniors and single young people are probably those who have suffered most during this world crisis.

Isolation from family and friends is most difficult for those who live on their own, or who are in continuing care facilities where visits have been limited for almost a year.

The vaccine has finally given people hope that there is a light at the end of this tunnel.

The first person in the world to receive the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was a 90-year-old British woman who pleaded with everyone to follow her example.

Her message to anti-vaxxers was that if she could take it, anyone could. She said the vaccine would finally allow her to reunite with her family, from whom she had to isolate because of the virus.

Her message was meant to encourage those who might have doubts about the test. According to the American Food and Drug Administration, only 61 per cent of Americans are likely to get the vaccine. Many vaccine opponents see their refusal as an anti-government political statement. The vaccine is supposed to be taken by at least 70 per cent of citizens for the best chance to achieve herd immunity.

The vast majority of Canadians will likely be lining up eagerly for a vaccine. Their annus horribilus is finally coming to an end.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

The anti-gay and anti-choice views that formed the basis of his campaign for the Conservative leadership were bad enough.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 7, 2020.

OTTAWA—Derek Sloan should be tossed from the Conservative caucus.

The anti-gay and anti-choice views that formed the basis of his campaign for the Conservative leadership were bad enough.

Last week, he went from the ridiculous to the delirious, sponsoring a parliamentary petition that discourages Canadians from vaccinating themselves against the worst public health scourge in a century.

Sloan actually went so far as to claim that the vaccination was human experimentation and within hours of its announcement, his petition had gathered more than 22,000 signatures. Even more frightening was the decision by Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole to sidestep the question when asked about it during a presser on the government’s handling of the vaccine. On this one, O’Toole is making a deadly mistake.

While he and his party were starting to develop some media traction in the attacks on government pandemic strategies, the Sloan petition has the effect of throwing all that under the bus.

It makes a number of egregiously false claims including the fact that “no coronavirus vaccine has ever been approved because of serious adverse effects, including death to test animals, due to pathogenic priming; COVID vaccines are not designed to prevent infection or transmission and bypassing proper safety protocols means COVID-19 vaccination is effectively human experimentation.”

This is not the first time Sloan has put his foot in the wrong place. Who can forget his claim that Dr. Theresa Tam was a Chinese agent, a statement for which he did apologize? He has not apologized for opposing federal legislation to end conversion therapy. Sloan stands with those groups that claim they can stamp out homosexual urges through shaming and bullying.

O’Toole is refusing to silence Sloan and by not doing so, he will alienate the majority of the thinking population.

How can the Conservative leader convince Canadians to vaccinate themselves when his own colleague is leading the warped world of online anti-vaxxers?

Before the recent American presidential vote, social media websites like Instagram and Twitter actually blocked false anti-vaccination claims, suggesting they were untrue and designed to have an influence on the election result.

But here in Canada, O’Toole runs the risk of losing the public completely by refusing to stop Sloan from peddling his false and dangerous claims.

It looks as though the Conservatives are backing themselves into the same corner that cost them the last election.

Their refusal to shake off the extremists in their caucus and party are going to do them grievous harm when most Canadians are looking for leadership on pandemic issues.

With the government launching another confidence vote on the $25-billion COVID-fighting investment announced by Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland last week, the Tories could be facing the electorate sooner rather than later.

That means a clear, coherent strategy on the main issue of the day should not be muddied by caucus members with mixed messaging. Kicking Sloan out would mean a couple of days of internally negative headlines, but it would clear the way for an election that would not be affected by mixed Tory messaging.

O’Toole has struggled to place himself in the moderate middle when it comes to social issues facing his very conservative caucus. He made it clear immediately after his leadership that he was not going to follow the lead of Andrew Scheer and turn his back on the gay community.

But with colleagues who have no problem doing that, O’Toole’s brand is damaged when he does nothing about them.

Thus far, the Conservatives have not made much political hay out of the COVID challenge. Even with government missteps, the Tories have been kept off balance by bizarre claims from Sloan that question mask-wearing and accuse public servants of being in cahoots with the Chinese government.

Those statements were beyond bizarre but last week’s anti-vaccination rant makes Sloan’s previous missteps pale in comparison.

If there is one way that we are going to be able to end this collective, global nightmare, it is by massive immunization with a vaccine that can protect the globe from this deadly virus.

The opposition has every right to question the government on vaccine availability and rollout, and the federal/provincial cooperation that has characterized the last nine months could be shattered in the fight for vaccinations.

Under normal circumstances, that tension should provide a real opening for a reasoned, competent Opposition leader to show how his party could offer something better.

But when O’Toole refuses to fire a team member who is a delirious anti-vaxxer, all leadership claims ring hollow.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Putting Canadian jobs first would also ensure that when it comes to vaccines, we are not at the back of the line.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on November 30, 2020.

Now that several vaccines are on the horizon, there is hope in sight for an end to this global pandemic.

But Canadians are now learning that we might have to wait longer than other countries to be vaccinated since there is no domestic manufacturer.

The government was quick off the mark to sign agreements securing multiple potential vaccines as soon as international universities and companies began researching vaccines. Canada has already stockpiled enough syringes to vaccinate every single citizen.

But the material used to go into the syringe is not so easy to obtain.

Without a made-in-Canada vaccine, we are being forced to line up behind other countries that understandably want to protect their own citizens first.

Outgoing president Donald Trump launched Operation Warp Speed with the intention of securing enough vaccines as quickly as possible, strictly for American citizens.

Early on in the pandemic, he made it very clear that any personal protective equipment manufactured in the United States would be staying there. At one point, he even made it illegal to export 3M protective masks to Canada, even though Canadian pulp was imported to form the basis of the masks he was refusing to share.

In the end, the Canadian government partnered to open a 3M factory in Canada, the only way to guarantee security of supply of the medical-grade masks.

So why hasn’t the government done the same thing for vaccines?

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the country does not have the capacity to produce vaccines. Its strategy, instead, was to sign as many vaccine deals as possible so that Canada would be in a position to secure vaccines from multiple sources.

That strategy does not explain why the government did not secure domestic licensing agreements during the advance purchase negotiations.

Many other countries have those licensing agreements and are already beginning production in anticipation of an approval by the American Food and Drug Administration or the European certifying authority. Unlike many countries, Canada does not accept health certifications from other jurisdictions, and carries out its own analysis.

That gives most of us a sense of security that we are not simply mimicking approvals from elsewhere.

But to those familiar with the system, Health Canada approval delays are actually restricting the development of a robust domestic pharmaceutical industry.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am currently working to assist a number of Canadian companies selling PPE and/or developing tests to help in the global pandemic fight.

One such company in the Toronto area, BTNX, has been making Health Canada-approved test kits for drug testing, strep throat testing, pregnancy and others for more than 20 years.

In the early stages of the COVID outbreak, it started working on the development rapid antigen and antibody tests.

The tests were approved in Europe last spring, and are currently sold in the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Spain. Brazil, Peru, and with a partner in the United States.

But its test kits in Canada are still awaiting approval. Not only can the test kits not be sold in our country, according to Health Canada regulations, kits cannot even be exported for sale in countries that have already approved it.

So, the Canadian company, located in the riding of the minister for small business, was forced to set up its COVID manufacturing facility in the United Kingdom. That country has already approached the company, offering financial assistance to move the balance of its operations there.

But even though its test was included in the Regeneron drug protocol given to Trump, it is still awaiting Canadian approval.

Meanwhile, the Canadian government last week announced the purchase of 20 million similar test kits from a foreign competitor, despite the fact that the Canadian test kit was better ranked by the World Health Organization.

Purchase orders from major Canadian airlines remain unfilled while those airlines secure test kits from foreign companies.

Another Canadian company, again with deep roots in the testing area, has developed a saliva test that it expects to be approved in Europe and the United States in January. When asked about expected Health Canada approval dates, the company sarcastically suggested it might come in 2031.

But if the vaccine delay shows us anything, our country must have a made-in-Canada pandemic strategy.

A good start would involve prioritizing domestic pharmaceutical companies in testing and purchase of COVID-fighting tools.

Putting Canadian jobs first would also ensure that when it comes to vaccines, we are not at the back of the line.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Notwithstanding government advice, I have travelled south and am currently coviding in 30-degree temperatures on the sunny beaches of Mexico. To be clear, we left home two weeks before the government issued an anti-travel advisory to all seniors last week.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on November 23, 2020.

I am a snowbird sinner.

Notwithstanding government advice, I have travelled south and am currently coviding in 30-degree temperatures on the sunny beaches of Mexico.

To be clear, we left home two weeks before the government issued an anti-travel advisory to all seniors last week.

The government advice did not mince words: “avoid all non-essential travel outside Canada and to avoid all cruise ship travel until further notice…. If you are an older traveller, you may be immunocompromised or have chronic medical conditions such as obesity…. By choosing to stay at home…you can help protect yourself, your family and those at risk of more severe disease.”

Judging by the absence of northern vacationers in Mexico, most people are heeding that advice.

In what is usually the beginning of the high season, in our condo there is literally only one other Canadian couple from Calgary that has made the trek south.

Rules require us to quarantine in our unit for two weeks before accessing the pool or any other common facilities.

And we are extremely diligent in self-distancing and masking whenever we venture into any public spaces.

The good news is that most of the activities in Mexico take place outdoors. We walk on the beach daily and can easily eat outdoors at home or elsewhere.

We did not make the decision to travel lightly and even had several discussions with family members who are front-line medical workers.

But the bottom line: it is much easier to survive the social isolation in warmer weather.

The notion of simply staying in our Ottawa apartment would likely prompt risky indoor social gatherings.

The announcement of a potential vaccine has lifted the spirits of all, but it is definitely going to take up to a year to cover the country.

Already, disputes are erupting between levels of government on how many vaccines will be available by province and when they can be accessed.

Health Canada has yet to approve the vaccines.

There will be tremendous pressure on the federal government to fast-track treatments as American neighbours start receiving emergency injections before year’s end.

There are several vaccines on the verge of approval, two of which have announced results up to 95 per cent efficiency. U.S. President Donald Trump can take credit for that news, as he launched Operation Warp Speed to propel the race for a safe vaccine.

That has buoyed health-care workers in the United States, where at press time, almost every state in the union was on a negative COVID trajectory.

Canada’s numbers are also continuing to trend in the wrong direction. The premier of Ontario is expected to announce deeper lockdowns in Peel, York, and the city of Toronto because of the prevalence of COVID in the GTA.

As the numbers rise, there is confusion about the best way to flatten the curve.

Just as the Canadian government is telling snowbirds to stay home, the Ottawa medical officer of health is tearing up on television publicly discussing thousands of mortality statistics that aren’t covered in COVID death counts.

Dr. Vera Etches cited spikes in suicide and cancer deaths caused by delayed treatment as two examples of an indirect death toll wrought by the world pandemic.

One of my friends confessed recently that her aging mother is musing about assisted death because she can no longer tolerate the isolation of an assisted living environment where, for months at a time, not a single family member had been allowed to visit.

Further lockdowns prompted by the second wave have beaten down an already exhausted population, and some are simply ignoring restrictions on indoor gatherings.

That takes me back to my decision to pre-empt the travel advisory ban issued by the federal government.

Facing minus 20-degree weather locked inside in an apartment in Ottawa would make it far more likely that my attendance at risky indoor social gatherings would increase.

By travelling south, and exercising caution in masking, distancing, and social isolation, I fully expect to endure the winter with less risk of receiving or transmitting the COVID virus than would have happened in Ottawa.

The only issue we were truly concerned about was the trip to our destination, as we travelled through three different airports.

But the measures taken before we got on board, including temperature taking and masking on flights, led to a safe arrival.

Our commitment to good COVID avoidance practices will not waver. But it is much easier to stay safe in the sand than the snow.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

The COVID-19 story could spawn sympathy for the president. More likely, it will simply reinforce Donald Trump’s disastrous response to a world pandemic that has killed more than 200,000 of his fellow citizens.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 5, 2020.

OTTAWA—The twists and turns in the upcoming American election are never ending.

Just when we thought we had seen everything, the president, his spouse and high-ranking staffer, Hope Hicks, have all tested positive for the COVID-19 virus.

Not only will this stop the Trump campaign in its tracks, it will return COVID-19 front and centre to the national agenda, which is just where the Democrats would like it to be.

The markets reacted badly to the news of White House contagion, but that may have as much to do with pre-election confusion as confidence in U.S. President Donald Trump’s economic prowess.

If any American tuned into the first official presidential debate last week, they could be forgiven for feeling distressed about the state of the American body politic.

Borrowing from his television experience on The Apprentice, Trump hectored and bullied Joe Biden, but for the most part the wily Biden did not bite.

Trump himself had created such low expectations for “Sleepy Joe” that a measured, passing performance by Biden was viewed as a win across the country.

Couple that with the confusion about whether Trump will even accept the outcome of the election if he loses, and you have a recipe for chaos, something that world markets always reject.

Everyone knows how nasty Trump is but even his usually demure partner Melania was negatively in the news last week. She was quoted in a series of tapes, aired Thursday, claiming that migrant children who were separated from their parents were receiving better care in detention than they got at home.

The tapes were purloined by a former aide to the first lady, promoting release of her self-explanatory book entitled, Melania and Me: The Rise and Fall of My Friendship with the First Lady.

The book written by Stephania Winston Wolkoff joins tomes that have been penned recently by Trump family members and well-known journalists.

All are highly critical of the president, but nothing seems to dent his popularity with the all-important base.

By all accounts, Trump followers are motivated, even messianic. They may well represent the “basket of deplorables” that Hillary Clinton unfortunately characterized in a speech which ultimately cost her the presidency.

In retrospect, she was probably right. People who refuse to wear masks, say the coronavirus is a hoax perpetrated by political elites and Bill Gates, and claim that China created the virus to attack the United States, are the most ardent supporters of the president.

And he returns the favour, ignoring health protocols on mask-wearing to the point where his entourage pointedly removed their masks during last week’s debate.

Trump also went so far as to promote not-so-subtle support for white supremacists during the broadcast. When he was asked to call them out, he claimed they were only working to fight the far left, which was really responsible for the racial division and violence plaguing the United States.

But there is another twist on the road to the Nov. 3 election whose outcome we cannot predict.

Because the president will be under a two-week quarantine, it could free up his team to manage the messaging by targeting electoral districts where a 1,000-vote switch could make the difference.

While he still has access to his Twitter account, the quarantine may provide some breathing space to Republican spin doctors. There aren’t many left, but the party has deep pockets and the Trump family also has plenty of access to cash.

Since he spends so little in taxes (according to The New York Times in 2016 and 2017 his federal tax bill was $750 annually) he should have some money to flood the airwaves.

The newspaper plans to publish his tax returns for 2018 and 2019 later in the campaign, sending more bad news in the direction of the Trump campaign.

Unlike Canada, there is no limit on American advertising spending during a campaign.

And in the United States, a bare majority of the voting population voted in the last general election.

With the social isolation required by the pandemic, and the huge spike in mail-in ballots, electoral college votes can be decided by very small margins.

Trump supporters appear to be the most motivated.

Biden is running ahead, but no one is excited by his ticket, with the possible exception of the nomination of Kamala Harris as vice-president.

The COVID-19 story could spawn sympathy for the president.

More likely, it will simply reinforce Trump’s disastrous response to a world pandemic that has killed more than 200,000 of his fellow citizens.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

In a minority situation, an election can happen at any time if parties clash on spending priorities. But these are not ordinary times. In the middle of a pandemic, even getting to the polls is complicated.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 28, 2020.

OTTAWA—The election cat and mouse games begin.

In a minority situation, an election can happen at any time if parties clash on spending priorities.

But these are not ordinary times. In the middle of a pandemic, even getting to the polls is complicated.

The British Columbia government just called an Oct. 24 election. Hours after the call, it was revealed that voting results could take weeks to tabulate.

Because of the second wave of the pandemic, many people are limiting their movement amongst larger crowds.

Within hours of the election call, 20,000 requests for mail-in ballots had been sent to Elections BC.

According to officials, they expect a mail-in participation of up to 40 per cent, which means 800,000 ballots, compared to only 6,500 people in the 2017 campaign.

Election law says that absentee ballots cannot be tallied until the final results of the polls are counted, and that could be up to 13 days after the vote.

Given Canada Post’s COVID-based backlog as more people shop via the internet, the arrival of that many ballots could clog up the system for up to three weeks.

British Columbia Premier John Horgan called the snap election a year sooner than the end of his mandate, but his announcement came as no surprise. He and his team have been busy rolling out pre-election promises for weeks.

The early call is a gamble for Horgan, but he is also banking on the pandemic bounce that has been felt by leaders across the country.

New Brunswick Premier Blaine Higgs recently launched a similar quick COVID call two years into his minority mandate and was rewarded with a comfortable majority.

Popularity numbers for Ontario Premier Doug Ford and François Legault have also risen during the pandemic.

Even though both provinces are plagued by high levels of contagion and an increasing concern with the arrival of the second wave, the electorate has been happy with their work.

Voters are also witnessing unprecedented federal-provincial harmony which provides a peaceful backdrop in a world pandemic that could easily morph into panic.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is not oblivious to the crisis bump.

When the Corona virus impact appeared to be waning, the summer was replete with scandal stories like the one that caused WE Canada to shutter its operations.

But with the return of kids to classrooms, and more people back at the workplace and larger social gatherings, the predicted second wave is upon us.

The prime minister’s televised national address was designed to promote calm but also encourage Canadians to stay the course with limited social contacts and self-distancing.

He has also set out a plan designed to put the Liberals on a collision course with all opposition parties.

On the left, New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh is doing his best to put his party’s stamp on promised items like national pharmacare and childcare.

But the Liberals are crowding their space with the intention of securing support from voters who might swing between both parties.

On the right, Erin O’Toole is going to have to refrain from coming away from the Throne Speech as Mr. No. His focus on the deficit and spending may sit well on Bay Street but it does not comfort Main Street Canadians who are losing jobs, homes and life savings because of the financial havoc wreaked by the pandemic.

Then there is the Bloc Québécois. Trudeau’s promise to introduce national standards for long-term care facilities, a direct result of the deaths of thousands of innocent seniors, has raised the hackles of the premier and the nationalists in the province.

They claim that Ottawa should merely increase health budgets and that will solve all the problems.

However, the image of the premier calling in Canadian soldiers to clean up the mess in multiple facilities was not lost on the ordinary Quebecer.

Long-term care is solely the provincial jurisdiction, but it is obvious that the basic rule of protecting the health of citizens and workers was sadly ignored in multiple institutions in more than one province.

Canadians are wise enough to know that it makes sense to work on a national plan in a pandemic that has already killed almost 10,000 people. There is a public interest argument that trumps federal-provincial fights.

Trudeau is itching to test his vision in a federal election, but he risks a backlash if the Liberals are seen to provoke it.

However, Liberals would be happy if an opposition party pulls the plug,

Meanwhile the political war games are on.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Fiscal conservatism may be a Tory badge of honour, but Erin O’Toole’s challenge is to reach Canadians in the moderate middle.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 7, 2020.

OTTAWA—You never get a second chance to make a first impression. Erin O’Toole should have remembered that last week.

O’Toole has won the Conservative leadership. It is now his job to win the country. The decision to attack the Canada Emergency Response Benefit was downright dumb. It cast O’Toole in the image of a born-again tight Tory.

“Tory times are tough times” is a refrain that has haunted the party since forever. Fiscal conservatism may be a Tory badge of honour, but the O’Toole challenge is to reach beyond those members.

Most Canadians find themselves in the moderate middle. The current government has seen its popularity grow because of a robust financial response to an unprecedented pandemic. But in his first post-convention interview, O’Toole attacked the CERB, saying it undermined the employer wage subsidy program set up at the same time.

The amount of money paid out to unemployed Canadians was only $500 a week, but O’Toole felt it undermined employers who might have otherwise wanted to keep their employees on.

That interview reinforced the impression that the Conservative leader will be there for the money guys but not for ordinary citizens. How could he possibly attack a $500 a week payment that literally kept food on the table in millions of Canadian households during an unprecedented world pandemic?

The program was not perfect. But it was delivered in a timely fashion to a desperate nation.

The government is now considering a Guaranteed Annual Income to replace the panoply of support programs that currently litter the national and provincial landscapes. The conversation on a guaranteed income has been circulating in social policy circles for decades, but it took a real-life crisis to thrust the government into a temporary guaranteed income.

And It worked. With millions of Canadians applying for the benefit, computers did not crash, and benefits were distributed broadly and quickly. Why O’Toole would choose to attack that program in his first media interview demonstrates a clear lack of political antennae.

Much was written about his surprising victory against veteran Peter MacKay and many ascribed his win to political acumen. He certainly had the acumen to attract social Conservatives in his party, but that does not necessarily translate into a capacity to resonate with the general public.

His second move last week was the appointment of social conservative Candice Bergen as deputy leader. The photogenic Manitoba member was specifically tasked with tackling the issue of western alienation.

Bergen also happens to hail from the part of the party that he has to distance himself from if he has any intention of becoming prime minister. According to Campaign Life Coalition “Candice has a perfect voting record in the House of Commons on life & family issues.” That is code for the fact that every time she has had a chance to vote on abortion and gay rights issues, she has turned them down.

Notwithstanding her voting record, Bergen has spoken positively about LGBTQ rights, suggesting that she celebrates homosexuality, pansexuality and transgenderism. So, her viewpoint has been muddied by realpolitik. But the next Tory convention will undoubtedly face a push to approve the re-criminalization of abortion. And where will Bergen be on that issue?

Bergen’s appointment was also introduced as a way to reach out on the issue of Western alienation. With a former Tory Member of Parliament now running the Wexit Canada party, the Conservatives must guard their right flank. But the only way they can become government is by broadening their reach across the country.

O’Toole may have won the majority of Quebec votes in the leadership but his main opponent, Peter MacKay, had the support of most of the Members of Parliament.

That was because the social conservatism wave that rode O’Toole to victory is a non-starter in la belle province. O’Toole was smart enough to downplay his right-wing roots during the French debate. That was obviously enough to assuage his Quebec supporters. But an opening week focused on Western alienation and opposition to emergency COVID assistance is hardly a compelling appeal to Quebecers.

O’Toole’s mistakes were hardly fatal, but they do impart a flavour of just what kind of advice he must be getting. A Conservative spokesperson said he had incorporated some players from the MacKay team amongst his senior advisors. But he may not have been open to their advice. The “stinking albatross” comment may have cost MacKay his party’s leadership.

But the albatross in the O’Toole room is not going away any time soon.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.