n n n ‘. concat(e. i18n. t(“search. voice. recognition_retry”),’n
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland’s autumn economic statement, while fraught with mounting debt and persistent economic risk, was first and foremost a liberal declaration of victory over the COVID-19 pandemic. While those were not his precise words, the repeated theme gave the impression every time the word “The Pandemic” gave the impression in the text of the 130-page statement. In her speech in the House of Commons, Freeland raised a triumphant fist. Compared to before the pandemic, I can proudly say that more than a million more Canadians are being hired today. . »
Other declarations are executed through the tax document. Canada’s pace of fiscal consolidation “since the depths of the pandemic” has been the fastest in the G7. Households’ inflation-adjusted source of disposable income is up by 8% “compared to before the pandemic. “And “construction starts are higher than pre-pandemic levels. “
The effect and purpose of such statements is to identify an underlying but tacit conclusion: Canada’s COVID-19 policies, from adequacy measures and fiscal extravagances to financial expansions and economic lockdowns, would have been painful, but they will have to be considered a success.
This is no way to address the history of Canada’s reaction to the COVID pandemic. In fact, much of this history has been buried and lost in Canada, as is the case in most other countries around the world. The National Post’s Chris Selley captured the burial technique. Most governments, he wrote last July, “are clearly eager to immediately turn the page on COVID-19. They do not need an investigation, for fear of having a bad image. “
Some national and regional investigations have been launched, added to the existing COVID investigation in the United Kingdom, which has been transformed into a public political circus starring former Prime Minister Boris Johnson and a parade of civil servants, scientists and bureaucrats ( although, mostly, politicians). as ignorant and stupid. The circus continued this week with critical references to current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who was once quoted as saying: “let other people die”.
The British inquiry, led by a one-man commission headed by Baroness Heather Hallett, has unsurprisingly divided the opinions of observers. The Guardian supports this effort. ” It is true that Lady Hallett’s painting advances at a majestic pace. Its final report is expected in 2026. But it investigates the greatest national trauma and the most serious domestic policy error of the state in fashionable times.
The authors of The Spectator newspaper are less receptive to the investigation, calling it a “COVID hoax” and saying genuine issues are not being addressed. “We want COVID research, but we don’t want it,” wrote Carl Heneghan, director of the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford. Heneghan summed up an attitude that applies globally, but specifically in Canada. “The lockdown has been the most disruptive peacetime policy in British history, with massive consequences for our health, children’s schooling and the economy. “At the time, the theory of confinement was new and untested: there was no knowledge about it. Now we have knowledge. This is an opportunity for research to gather evidence and ask whether lockdown and other interventions worked.
Last week in Alberta, a six-member provincial COVID committee, led by Preston Manning and appointed in January by Premier Danielle Smith, released a 100-page report with more than policy recommendations.
The committee’s goal was to review the law and processes followed in the province during the pandemic and make recommendations, but the scope of the investigation was limited. The goal was not to “conduct a thorough investigation into the government’s reaction to COVID-19. “”Without a mandate or capacity to address the full diversity of scientific, economic, and social issues surrounding the pandemic response, the Manning report lacks the intensity of evidence and analytical scope that Albertans or Canadians want to fully perceive what is happening and what is desired. what to do to cope. Make sure it doesn’t happen again.
Manning’s recommendations might make sense, but they don’t fully address the problems and, in some cases, boil down to political platitudes. For example, governments need to conduct due diligence on economic and other impacts before imposing basic regulations and lockdowns. “Yes. ” While it is not for the Panel to make a judgment on the adequacy or inadequacy of having an effect on the tests that have or have not been conducted, the Panel considers that having an effect on the evidence is essential. ” In terms of the actual economic effect on COVID policies, the Alberta report necessarily concludes that more studies are needed.
The Alberta report is a broad assessment that lacks detail, data and research. Only a full federal royal commission, led by panelists and staff that can be objective and empowered to delve into scientific, health, and economic issues, can provide a true understanding of what happened when state and local governments tackled the problem. Covid pandemic.
Perhaps it would not be easy to come up with such an impartial investigation, but the COVID story in Canada, now entering its fourth year, cannot be left to a single finance minister or government.
Court slams fake science in Liberals’ plastics ban
The sale of teak charcoal is a political manoeuvre
Argentina’s dollarization may be just the opposite of the “pink tide”
Ottawa’s fiscal plan provides some hints of the costs: billions of dollars in lost economic activity, rising public debt, and significant inflationary distortions. What exactly were the benefits?
Canadians want answers, and a real commission turns out to be the only way to get there.
• Email: tcorcoran@postmedia. com