Mediaboss Marketing

The federal government is pledging a suite of measures to address affordability issues, including a temporary GST rebate hike, a one-time top-up to the Canada Housing Benefit and the long-awaited first phase of Canadas national dental care plan.

Dental care is a key plank of the agreement between the Trudeau Liberals and the NDP that would see the Liberals remain in power until 2025 but only if they deliver.

This first phase would provide direct, up-front, tax-free payments of up to $650 for children under 12 from families without dental coverage who earn less than $90,000 per year. This would expand to include people under 18, seniors and people with disabilities by the end of 2023, with full implementation by 2025.

Get daily news from Canada's National Observer

By the end of 2024 ... up to nine million Canadians who presently do not have access to dental care will be covered ... through a publicly administered, publicly funded plan, NDP MP Don Davies told Canadas National Observer in an interview. It's the single biggest expansion of public health care in 60 years.

Health Canada will receive $5.3 billion over five years to implement the dental care plan, according to the 2022 federal budget. The federal government says this targeted investment of $938 million for the first phase will benefit an estimated 500,000 Canadian children.

Tuesdays announcement of this interim type of arrangement is a good first step, said Dr. Lynn Tomkins, president of the Canadian Dental Association. Children 12 and under are particularly vulnerable, and it's important to assess whether theyre susceptible to cavities early in life. Tooth decay is the most common yet preventable chronic childhood disease in Canada and around the world, according to the Canadian government.

I am thinking about all the kids out there who aren't currently going to see the dentist, Tomkins said in an interview with Canadas National Observer. Hopefully, they will have the opportunity before Christmas to get in to see the dentist and to start on that pathway to good oral health.

The government aims to have the program for children under 12 in place by Dec. 1. It would cover expenses retroactive to Oct. 1.

Davies says, for the most part, the NDP got what it wanted for this first phase of the program.

The NDP is satisfied with the amount being offered per child because in most parts of the country, it's enough for a child to have an exam, X-rays, a cleaning and a procedure or two, said Davies, who is the NDPs health critic.

Parents and guardians of eligible children will apply through the Canada Revenue Agency. They must confirm their child doesnt have any private dental coverage and that the benefit will be used for the childs dental care expenses, according to the federal governments statement. It adds that recipients may be required to show receipts. Details on how and when to apply for the benefit will be communicated in due course.

The NDP wanted to have a full dental plan in place by the end of this year, but the Liberals didn't think that they could get it properly set up in the eight months that were given, that's why it's going to take a bit longer, said Davies.

Thats why we came up with the idea of an interim bridge benefit that will get Canadian children to the dentist this year, he explained. But that's conditional on us having a permanent plan in place by the end of 2023.

As our leader Jagmeet Singh has said: If they don't meet it, we will walk from the confidence-and-supply agreement and we won't even hesitate, said Davies. On Tuesday, the federal government reiterated that it remains committed to full implementation of a dental care program for households with incomes under $90,000 by 2025.

Davies noted the NDP believes every Canadian should have access to dental care as part of the public health system.

Every move that gets us closer to making sure that everyone can go to a dentist, regardless of their ability to pay, is a positive step in that direction, said Davies. The bottom line is, we ask ourselves one question: Does this get people who don't have dental coverage to the dentist to get their money? That's our touchstone and that's what we're driving towards. And we're not going to stop until this is done for every Canadian.

The $500 one-time top-up to the Canada Housing Benefit is another ask the NDP embedded in the confidence-and-supply agreement. At a press conference Tuesday, federal Conservative Party of Canada Leader Pierre Poilievre criticized the Liberals measures as inflationary and said the housing benefit isnt enough to make a substantial difference given the high rent in areas like Toronto.

Is it enough? Of course not, said Davies. But for many low-income Canadians, $500 is significant, he said, and when paired with the temporary GST rebate hike, will provide real help to people.

The GST rebate will be doubled for six months, which while not part of the Liberal-NDP deal, is something the NDP has pushed for in the spring but was rejected by the Liberals.

Putting money into the hands of those people is not inflationary because they turn around and they spend it in our communities, he said.

Natasha Bulowski / Local Journalism Initiative / Canadas National Observer

See more here:
Liberals, NDP unveil 'single biggest expansion of public health care in 60 years' - Canada's National Observer

As Franois Legault made his way around the room at a pizza restaurant in Laval, smiling and shaking hands, he stopped and delivered a message to four men eating lunch at a table.

"It's about time for a change in Laval," said the leader of the Coalition Avenir Qubec during thecampaign event in the city's Mille-les riding on Monday. "We have to change the colours."

On its way to what it hopes will be a resounding majority victory for a second mandate, the CAQ is looking to flip the province's third largest city from Liberal red to CAQ blue.

In 2018, the Quebec Liberal Party (PLQ) won five out of six seats in Laval, with only one seat going to the CAQ.

This year, however, nearly all of the candidates who wonunder the Liberal banner four years ago are gone. That includes Francine Charbonneau, who has represented the Mille-les riding since 2008.

The CAQ hopes Julie Side, a longtime party member, can break through in that riding.

"This year, I am convinced that it's the right one. It's the right year for Julie, and she's coming to Quebec City," Legault told the small crowd at the restaurant while standing next to Side, who finished a distant second to a Liberal in the Bourassa-Sauvriding in the northern part of Montreal in 2018.

In addition toCharbonneau, outgoing Liberal MNAsJean Rousselle andMonique Sauvhave alsoquit politics. Thesame goes for Guy Ouellette, who representedthe Chomedey ridingand was booted out of caucus shortly after the 2018 election.

In mostof the five Laval ridings the Liberals won in the last election, the CAQ finished second and not by much.

"Those ridings in 2018 were won by very close margins," said Philippe J. Fournier, a pundit and poll analyst behind the 338Canada poll aggregator.

"If you apply the current polling, especially among francophones, unless there's a micro-local target thing that we missed in the polling, the Liberals will be swept out of Laval except Chomedey."

Saul Polo, who was twice elected in the Laval-des-Rapides riding, isn't fazed by what the punditssay.

"In the past two general elections, all the odds were always against myself and this time it's no different," Polo said during a campaign event in Laval last Sunday.

"We feel comfortable in this situation."

Earlier in the campaign, Quebec Liberal Leader Dominique Anglade said the party was playing offence, not defence, when it came to the ridings in Laval.

"It's about more than preserving seats in Laval, it's about getting Sainte-Rose," Anglade said referring to the lone riding the CAQmanaged to win last time.

The mayor of Laval, Stphane Boyer, has noticed the increased focus on his city from party leaders, and he's all for it, believing it could lead to more commitments from future governments.

"I'm happy there's a tough battle in Laval," he said. "Historically, in Laval, there's been a lot of under-investment in different fields, whether it's culture, transit or others."

Despite the CAQ's dominant election victory in 2018, it has yet to make a major dent in Montreal.

Going into this election campaign, the party only held two ridingsin the city: Camille-Laurin (formerly known as Bourget) and Pointe-aux-Trembles both on the east end of the island.

That could change come Oct. 3, according to Fournier. He says the east end ridingof AnjouLouis-Riel and the Maurice-Richard riding, whichincludes part of the city's Ahuntsic neighbourhood are in play.

In 2018, as in Laval, both those ridings elected Liberal MNAs who are not running this time around.

"Basically, you look at the data of francophones per riding and everywhereyou have over 60 per cent francophones, the Liberals are in trouble," said Fournier.

Jonathan Marleau, the Liberal candidate for Maurice-Richard, saidhe believes the party's door-to-door efforts are paying off and he brushedoff talk of a CAQ takeover.

He also saidLegault's controversial comments on immigration aren'tgoing over well withvoters in and around Montreal.

"In Ahuntsic, people of course come from all, very diverse backgrounds," Marleau said. "When they talk to me they say that's something they're not very comfortable with. Because they want a leader to say that all Quebecers matter."

CAQ progress in and around Montreal, however, including in Laval, would deal a crushing blow to the Liberals who suffered historic lossesduring the last provincial election, dropping from 68 seats to just 31.

Continued here:
CAQ looks to flip script on Quebec Liberals, boot them out of Laval - CBC.ca

Francis Fukuyama tries to understand the criticism liberalism faces, and identifies solutions

Francis Fukuyama tries to understand the criticism liberalism faces, and identifies solutions

There is no such thing as society, Margaret Thatcher, the late British Prime Minister once said, highlighting what she thought of the responsibility of the individual. Thatchers idea of maximum individual and minimum state was the centrepiece of her economic philosophy. Her administration privatised public industries, deregulated the financial sector and dismantled the welfare state, unleashing a new era of free market policies. Across the Atlantic, President Ronald Reagan of the U.S. did the same. What was then called Reaganomics and Thatcherism, which came to be known as neoliberalism, spread across the world as a leading economic philosophy of the ruling classes in both liberal and authoritarian states. But neoliberal economic policies also heightened inequality, which created social tensions that eventually led to the rise of far-right leaders and parties on one side and radical identitarian groups on the other, which is now threatening liberalism itself. This is the context of Francis Fukuyamas latest book, Liberalism and its Discontents.

Fukuyama is a western political philosopher who doesnt need an introduction to a global audience. He shot to fame with his 1989 essay, The End of History, written a few months before the collapse of the Berlin Wall, in which he argued that humankinds end (objective or target) is liberalism. But his recent books, Identity(2008) and Liberalism, are an acknowledgement that the political situation today is demonstrably different from 1992 when he updated the essay into the book, The End of History and the Last Man. While he still believes that liberalism is the end of history, the liberal theory he embraces is no longer triumphant and the road is long and bumpy. Hence the title: Liberalism and its Discontents.

It is an earnest attempt by a die-hard liberal to understand the criticism the theory faces and identify solutions. For Fukuyama, the fundamental tenets of liberalism personal autonomy, individual rights, equality and property ownership are sacrosanct. The problem contemporary liberalism faces is that it was taken to the extremes by both the right and the left in the context of grotesque inequalities triggered by neoliberal experiments. In the book, Fukuyama emerges as a liberal democrat who believes in the role of state (without the state, liberal principles cannot be implemented), regulated markets and limited welfarism (individuals need to be protected from adverse circumstances beyond their control).

He also challenges some of the historical criticism of liberal theory. Fukuyama argues that Abraham Lincoln based his fight for the abolition of slavery on the Declaration of Independence which says All men are created equal. He calls into question the argument that it was colonialism that made the West rich, citing the examples of the modernisation of East and Southeast Asian economies in the last quarter of the 20th century. For him, communist China saw its best economic performance when it flirted with liberalism.

But the problem with Fukuyamas narrative is that it treats classical liberalism as a pristine theory thats dissociated from the violence committed by its practitioners. That allows Fukuyama, who argues theres no alternative, to continue to believe in the moral superiority of liberalism without any qualms, like the bland fanatics of western civilisation, as Reinhold Niebuhr wrote in 1957. When the Declaration of Independence, one of the foundational documents of liberalism, was announced, the U.S. was a slaveholding country and it continued to be so for decades. Even after the Declaration of the Rights of the Man and of the Citizen of 1789, France continued its racist policies at home and abroad for decades. European colonialism is today largely seen as a racist, violent project, unleashed by the same liberals who believed in individual autonomy, equality and consumer rights.

Colonialism didnt come to an end because the colonial masters one day decided to respect liberal principles it was brought to an end by decades-long anti-colonial, nationalist movements which often met with violent reaction from their overlords. This violent project didnt come to an end with the collapse of colonialism. Liberal internationalists in the West, commanding over the worlds most dangerous militaries, started invading countries in the East to export democracy and liberal values, and thereby shattering societies and dismantling states, spawning anarchy and violence. The list is endless, from the Irish famine of 1845 to the Iraq war of 2003.

For Fukuyama, neoliberalism is an aberration that could be fixed with state intervention. But minimum state and the autonomy of big industries were part of classical liberalism as well. Before the birth of the regulatory state, as Fukuyama writes, financial and industrial giants had enormous influence over state policies. Neoliberalism is actually a return to this original principle thats based on maximum individual. Fukuyama gives the example of post-war European welfarism to argue that liberal democracies could build an equity-based development model. But he has overlooked two underlying factors the tragedy of the Great Depression that strengthened the call for a stronger state and the threat of communism and working class revolutions. When he writes about the economic development of Southeast Asian nations, Fukuyama conveniently sidesteps the fact that these countries have historically had stronger state control over societies and economies, which manifested in their response to the COVID-19 crisis, in contrast to that of the Wests. Even in the case of China, the real question is whether China flirted with liberalism or liberalism flirted with China?

Liberalism as a political theory, a governance model (liberal democracy) and an economic philosophy (private property ownership) have played a critical role in human progress. But its not an ideological hegemon and like other theories, it also has a very violent history. Many liberal theorists, driven by what Pankaj Mishra calls a fanatical conviction of moral superiority, do not see this historical context and the problematic praxis of liberalism. Fukuyama is not an exception.

Liberalism and its Discontents; Francis Fukuyama, Profile Books, 499.

stanly.johny@thehindu.co.in

View original post here:
Review of Francis Fukuyamas Liberalism and its Discontents: Crisis of liberal democracy - The Hindu

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Liberal media pundits took issue with outlets referring to Sen. Lindsey Grahams, R-S.C., bill to ban abortions after 15 weeks by its title "Protecting Pain-Capable Unborn Children from Late-Term Abortions Act."

On Tuesday, Graham announced that he would be putting forth the bill to the Senate as the abortion debate continues to rage following the Supreme Court overruling Roe v. Wade in June.

Several Democrat politicians and progressive media pundits have attacked this legislation, but some liberal Twitter users took more issue with the reporting on the bill, claiming that "late-term" abortions, which generally refer to abortions that take place in the second and third trimester, do not exist.

"The Today Show" reporter Danielle Campoamor tweeted, "Friendly reminder: theres no such thing as a late term abortion. Reporters, news anchors and anyone else in the media its our job to report the truth, not regurgitate anti-abortion talking points and pseudo-science. If you cannot report accurately do not report at all."

Protesters shout as they join thousands marching around the Arizona Capitol after the Supreme Court decision to overturn the landmark Roe v. Wade abortion decision Friday, June 24, 2022, in Phoenix. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin)

PRO-LIFE ACTIVIST CLASHES WITH DR. PHIL, AUDIENCE MEMBER ON ABORTION: YOU KEEP SPEAKING OVER ME

Huff Post deputy editor Emily McCombs wrote, "I am once again reminding you that late term abortion is not a medical term. It is a political construct the right uses to mislead people about the nature of abortion. Doctors and scientists avoid it for this reason. You should too!"

"Late-term abortion is not a medical term, it's a made-up term that monsters like @LindseyGrahamSC use to scare people. Don't be fooled. Do be furious. Vote these f**kers out," head of Huff Post personal Noah Michelson said.

"A late term abortion ban would ban abortion at and after 41 weeks. Just saying," abortionist and New York Times contributor Jennifer Gunter tweeted.

Republican lawmakers have enacted abortion restrictions since the overturning of Roe v. Wade in June. (AP Photo/Bruce Schreiner, File)

The American Independent senior political reporter Emily Singer added, "Term pregnancy is 40 weeks. There is no such thing as a late-term abortion."

The Nation correspondent and frequent MSNBC guest Elie Mystal wrote, "Please stop calling Lindsey Graham's National Abortion Ban a late term abortion ban just because that's what he calls it. He's lying about what it is. YOU DON'T HAVE TO REPEAT LIARS JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT YOU TO, media people."

LIBERAL MEDIA OUTLET SKEWERED FOR BLASTING RUBIOS MOCKERY OF PREGNANT MEN: YOU GUYS JUST FAILED BIOLOGY

Several progressive Twitter users also largely referred to the bill as a "national abortion ban," which to some could imply a complete ban, despite it being limited to only after 15 weeks of pregnancy. In addition, the bill includes several exceptions such as rape, incest and when a woman's life is in danger from a pregnancy.

The bill also includes a criminal penalty of up to five years for doctors who perform abortions after 15 weeks but explicitly bans the prosecution of women seeking abortions. Precautions must also be taken for children born alive after an abortion attempt, including having a physician trained in neonatal resuscitation on hand.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced a new bill to ban abortions after 15 weeks nationwide. ((AP Photo/Alex Brandon, File))

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Grahams bill marks the first national GOP effort to limit abortion access after several Republican leaders have imposed restrictions in their states in the wake of the fall of Roe.

Lindsay Kornick is an associate editor for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to lindsay.kornick@fox.com and on Twitter: @lmkornick.

Visit link:
Liberals blast media coverage of Grahams 15-week abortion ban, say no such thing as 'late-term' abortion - Fox News

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas., applauded Governors Greg Abbott, R-Texas., and Ron DeSantis, R-Fla., Friday for sending migrants to liberal hotspots to show Democrats what border communities deal with on a daily basis.

Rep. Burgess joined "Fox & Friends First" to discuss how Abbott and DeSantis brought media attention to the border crisis and the hypocrisy from liberals as they speak out against the move.

"I assure you it is on the front pages of every small Texas town, every small Texas county where they're having to deal with this on an ongoing basis. And it has gotten worse month over month, and it is the worst I have ever seen," said Burgess.

MARTHA'S VINEYARD HOMELESS ADVOCATE SAYS MIGRANTS THERE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE TO MOVE 'SOMEWHERE ELSE

Burgess said he pressed Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Beccera on whether Texas communities are given any notice before a group of migrants crosses over the border. As a result, Burgess did not receive answers.

"Thank Goodness Governor Abbott has had the foresight to begin to push this story onto the national stage because that's where this discussion needs to occur," Burgess said.

Burgess argued the Biden administration's open-border policy provided "business opportunities" for smugglers and cartels.

Despite the influx of drugs, including fentanyl, entering the United States, Burgess said HHS has prioritized "how to push kids through the system faster."

"We're getting kids out to people who are not their parents, not primary relatives. We're sending them out to secondary sources. And that's not the way it's supposed to be. That's not the way current law reads. But Secretary Mayorkas changed it individually."

Burgess said policies like this are encouraging trafficking and children are going missing.

"In Houston, where they've simply lost 60 kids. Who knows what happened there? But do you worry about trafficking? I do. And that's why really the administration needs to get a much better handle on this. And it starts with border security," Burgess said.

A woman, who is part of a group of immigrants that had just arrived, holds a child as they are fed outside St. Andrews Episcopal Church, Wednesday Sept. 14, 2022, in Edgartown, Massachusetts, on Martha's Vineyard. (Ray Ewing/Vineyard Gazette via AP)

Burgess argued that the amount of illegal immigration is overwhelming border states.

"You can't deal with those numbers in a rational and really humane fashion."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

The Biden administration will consider "litigation options" this week against Republican governors sending migrants from the border to Democratic cities, according to a report.

The Friday meeting involving White House officials along with Homeland Security, State, Justice and Defense departments will also discuss other border issues amid a record number of migrants entering the country illegally, Axios reported.

The meeting was scheduled before Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis sent two charter planes full of migrants to affluent Marthas Vineland in Massachusetts on Wednesday, but after months of Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey sending busloads of migrants from the border to places like New York City, Chicago and Washington, D.C. Abbott also sent two buses of migrants to Vice President Kamala Harris Washington, D.C. home on Thursday.

Fox News' Brie Stimson contributed to this report

Elizabeth Heckman is a digital production assistant with Fox News.

Read more from the original source:
Texas Rep. Burgess says border crisis is 'worst' he's ever seen as migrants arrive in liberal cities - Fox News