Archive for the ‘Liberals’ Category

BC’s doctor shortage becomes campaign issue for province’s Liberals and NDP – The Globe and Mail

When the governing BC Liberals campaigned ahead of the 2013 election, they promised to connect every British Columbian with a family doctor. The partys platform set aside $132-million for the GP for Me program to help an estimated 200,000 people who wanted a family doctor but couldnt get one.

The program failed to meet those targets, and now the provinces doctor shortage is again becoming a campaign issue. Platforms for both the Liberals and the New Democrats include promises designed to address the problem.

But evaluating those proposals and measuring their success will depend in part on defining the scope of the problem. And that hinges on how the numbers are calculated.

The NDP, which is proposing building team-based urgent-care centres, estimates that there are 700,000 people without a family doctor, with about 200,000 still looking for one. The Liberals, who are promising to increase the number of graduating doctors and fund community-based health care, havent offered their own assessment, but the GP for Me website says the program connected 178,000 people who did not have a family physician with one. However, it also says that between 2013 and 2016, the population of B.C. increased by 162,600.

The NDPs statistics are in line with results from the Canadian Community Health Survey, conducted by Statistics Canada in 2015.

Lindsay Hedden, a postdoctoral fellow at UBCs School of Population and Public Health, said that although this number is not ideal, its not surprising.

British Columbia is exactly on the Canadian average, Dr. Hedden said. If it is a problem, it is not a problem that is unique to B.C.

The Statscan survey estimated the number of people in B.C. without a regular doctor was closer to 745,000. The survey estimated nearly 40 per cent or about 290,000 either could not find a doctor in their area taking patients or had a doctor who left or retired.

The rest were people who either hadnt tried finding a doctor, didnt think they needed one or had some other reason for being without a regular health-care provider.

But Dr. Hedden said they cant be ignored when measuring whats happening.

Its not a simple answer, the gap between the two is a complex group of individuals, Dr. Hedden said.

I think the biggest explanation is that those people just dont feel the need for one. They rather navigate the system with walk-in clinics when they need it.

This isnt to say they dont want a family doctor, Dr. Hedden said, but it just may not be worth it to them.

Its a balancing act for the amount of effort it takes to find a GP and the amount that one will use one. I would be surprised if there was a significant number who would say, no I dont want a GP, she said.

There is also a subpopulation of people that would be interested in finding a health-care worker but dont have the computer skills to navigate the website.

There is evidence, Dr. Hedden says, to suggest there are fewer family physicians per capita in lower socioeconomic groups, but a greater number of walk-in clinics.

NDP spokesman James Smith said even people who are not considered to be actively seeking a family doctor are likely to need one in the future and are not receiving regular care, which could have long-term effects on their health [such as] prevention and screenings.

The GP for Me program was created to connect more people and communities with physicians and clinics that were accepting new patients, with the goal of matching every patient that wanted a family doctor. It is still up and running, though the Liberals make no mention of it in their 2017 platform.

The Liberals did not make anyone available for an interview, instead providing a statement outlining their platform. The party is promising to spend $90-million over three years to bring integrated team-based primary-care services into more communities.

Follow us on Twitter: @GlobeBC

Original post:
BC's doctor shortage becomes campaign issue for province's Liberals and NDP - The Globe and Mail

Marijuana legalization presents both potential political risks and gains for Liberals, say insiders – Hill Times (subscription)

There will be both a lot of risk and a lot of reward at stake for the Liberals in their plan to legalize recreational marijuana in Canada by the summer of 2018, sayHill insiders and political players.

On the upside, the successful execution of a legalized regime in time for the next federal election will be seen as a win for the Liberals. But between now and then, a lot has to be worked out;from regulations with the provinces, to how the Senate will take to the bill, not to mention how public opinion evolves on the issue.

Will Stewart, a former Conservative staffer at Queens Park and managing partner at Navigator Ltd., who represents a number of clients in the cannabis industry, said there is both a lot of risk and a lot of reward at stake for the Liberal government in legalizing recreational cannabis.

If and when the legalization package passes, further hurdles could come for the government in the form of potential court challenges, said Mr. Stewart, pointing to early questions raised over the constitutionality of changes around impaired driving laws.

At the end of the day, I think the bill that weve seen will pass relatively unchanged through the House. I think the big risk here of this bill is in the Senate and all the uncertainties that come with the independent Liberals of the Senate, the Independent Senators, and the Conservative Senators that still make up a huge block of votes in the Senate. Thats where a huge amount of uncertainty will be for this piece of legislation, said Mr. Stewart.

Several sourcesThe Hill Timesspoke with pointed to legalized marijuana as part of a progressive Liberal election platform that brought in a new group of young voters into the electoral process for the first time, who will be key to the partys continued success.

However, Mr. Stewart and others pointed out that legalized pot might not be embraced by many new and first-generation Canadians, where the Liberals also found a lot of support in the 2015 election.

We know that some of the cultural communities are certainly a little bit more conservative in their outlook on this, but if you ask someone from the same cultural community who was born here or raised here how they feel about it, they might be just as happy to light up a joint as anybody else, said Angus Reid Institute executive director Shachi Kurl.

And by the time the October 2019 election rolls around, Canadians will be able to judge the reality of legalized marijuana, not just the idea.

Whether its the Affordable Care Act in the United States or the Phoenix pay system, sometimes new systems do not roll out perfectly, said Greg MacEachern, a former Liberal Hill staffer and senior vice-president of Environics Communications.

Liberal MP Bill Blair (Scarborough Southwest, Ont.), a former police chief who is also the lead federal political player on the legalization of marijuana as parliamentary secretary to the Justice minister, toldThe Hill Timesthat theres a lot of work to do in bringing about these changes and doing it right.

He added that the target date for implementationJuly 1, 2018is attainable.

The fact that there may be political risk in this I think is superseded by the fact that we need to do a better job of protecting our kids and we need to do a better job of keeping our communities safe. So a certain amount of political risk is acceptable. I think thats what Canadians expect of us in order to do whats right, he said.

On April 13, the government introduced two pieces of legislation in its effort to legalize marijuana. The first, Bill C-45, otherwise known as the Cannabis Act, creates a legal framework controlling the production, distribution, possession, safety standards, and sale of marijuana that would allow adults in Canada to legally possess and use small amounts of recreational marijuana from licensed providers. It also creates new Criminal Code offencesin some cases punishable by up to 14 years in prisonfor selling or giving marijuana to minors, though there will be no criminal offence for youth who possess small amounts of legal pot. It would allow adults to posses up to 30 grams and grow up to four plants at home.

The second bill, Bill C-46, or An Act to amend the Criminal Code (offences relating to conveyances), revamps Canadas current impaired driving laws to make it illegal to drive within two hours of having had an illegal level of intoxicants in your blood, and gives law enforcement new powers to request roadside tests for intoxication.

The plan to legalize and regulate recreational marijuana in Canada is one of the most significant public policy changes pursued by afederal government in recent memory, said Mr. MacEachern.

Were the second country to do this [after Uruguay] but really the first major government to introduce this. This is brand-new territory, he said.

Mr. MacEachern called the announcement of the marijuana legislation one of the governments best days thus far in 2017. It showed a government calm and in control of a major policy shift.

He said the government appears to be erring on the side of caution and trying to establish that this was a very thoughtful process and one that they didnt take lightly.

He noted the governments choice of wording, discussing strict control and risks associated, is seemingly aimed at those who arent so sure about it.

Joe Jordan, a former Liberal MP and senior associate at Bluesky Strategy Group, said there were two ways the Liberals could have played thiscoming out in tie-dye T-shirts or in Mountie uniforms, and they went with the Mountie uniform.

They were clearly putting a fence around this to alleviate fears that the country was going to turn into one great big Woodstock concert, he said, adding that the message was received that its not going to be a free for all.

This is a winner for them. I dont think there is any political risk in it at all. I think theyre on solid ground there, said Mr. Jordan, a former Liberal MP.

According to polling data released by Angus Reid on April 20, 63 per cent of Canadians surveyed said they favour of the marijuana legalization legislation, which shows a growing shift in public support for legalized marijuana. In 2001, polls showed less than half of Canadians agreed with recreational pot being legal. But even now, 31 per cent of respondent said cannabis legalization is a bad idea.

Angus Reids Ms. Kurl said the Liberals have likely scored a win on this with younger voters by keeping a key election promise, but theres risk in being able to competently manage what is going to be a really big transition in how law enforcement, how the legal system, how society adapts to and transitions to this new reality.

The recent poll numbers showed that people aged 18 to 34 and British Columbians were the most supportive of the bill, while Quebecers and people aged 55 years and up are the least on-board. The research also found that large majorities in Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, and Atlantic Canada feel age restrictions should be higher than the proposed federal minimum of 18.

As well, 66 per cent of people surveyed said they dont think the legalization plan will stop young people from using.

Blair continuing as frontman, Wilson-Raybould, Philpott, Goodale to work in lockstep

Sources said Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould (Vancouver Granville, B.C.) and her department took the lead on drafting the legislation, and she will continue to take the lead on it, including fielding questions in the House. Mr. Blair will continue to be the public-facing lead for the Liberals on this public policy issue.

Already Mr. Blair has travelled across Canada to meet with senior provincial and territorial officials, police and fire chiefs, bylaw enforcement, and public health officials, among others. He said he expects many departments to have officials get involved in the ongoing talks, including Global Affairs, Finance Canada, Labour, and the regional development agencies.

All of them will have issues that will need to be addressed, Mr. Blair said.

Health Minister Jane Philpott (Markham-Souffville, Ont.) and Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Minister Ralph Goodale (Regina-Wascana, Sask.) also have ongoing roles to play alongside their Justice counterparts in shepherding the bill through cabinet and caucus.

Health Canada has set up a Secretariat for Cannabis Legalization and Regulation that will be leading the process at that department. As well, this years federal budget earmarked $9.6-million over five years for a public-education and awareness campaign on marijuana.

Ms. Philpott is expected to answer health-centered questions on Bill C-45. Mr. Goodale will be concerning himself primarily with the border questions related to the new regime and how the U.S. administration will deal with Canadian travellers. It will continue to be illegal to transport marijuana over the border.

Mr. Blair said the biggest challenge will be getting the provinces and territories all on board and on the same or similar pages when it comes to the regulatory frameworks.

Each of the regions have different perspectives and priorities with respect to this issue and so working within that is a challenge, he said. But I think its an appropriate challenge and were committed to doing it right.

Mr. Blair said a considerable amount of discussion has taken place with the senior levels of government in the provinces and territories, and this will continue.

With so much left to be determined, its expected that lobbying of provincial governments by marijuana producers will spike.

Global Public Affairs Darrell Dexter, the former Nova Scotia premier who is leading the firms cannabis service, toldThe Hill Timesthat the federal governments approach is generally in line with what the industry wants, and said he thinks completing the process by the governments intended timeline is doable.

There will be some rough edges in the legislation that will need to be sanded off through the process, and thats entirely normal, Mr. Dextersaid.

Mr. Stewart said his sense is that plans at the provincial levels are more robust than what those governments are letting on in the press.

For provinces with elections set to take place between now and July 2018, including Ontario and BritishColumbia, Mr. MacEachern said he expects theyll wait until the election is passed to move on regulation plans.

If provinces and territories dont have a retail framework for recreational marijuana in place by the time legalization takes effect, the federal law sets it up so that consumers from those places can buy it through a mail system similar to the one used for medical marijuana.

Red Chamber is where the big risks lie

With a majority in the House of Commons, the governments biggest challenge getting it through wont be with MPs, but rather with the Senate, insiders said.

Mr. Blair said both Bill C-45 and C-46 are priority bills and hell be advocating for early progress on them. But he said its difficult to predict how far theyll get before June, when the House is scheduled to rise for the summer.

Mr. Stewart raised the possibility the government will prorogue Parliament this summer, as has been speculated. He said it makes a lot of sense, politically, to do so halfway through a mandate. But he added it would kill the legislation and probably make it impossible to hit the July 2018 timeline.

Whether or not prorogation this summer would hobble marijuana legalization efforts would likely depend on how far legislation gets in the House by the end of the June session, with a maximum of seven sitting weeks to go. If it doesnt get past second reading, reintroduction would likely be less of a setback. As has been done in the past, the House could give unanimous consent to reinstate a bill in the new session at the same stage it was at before prorogation.

Mr. Stewart said he expects the bills to make it to the Senate relatively unchanged. He said the Red Chamber is where the big risks lie, and where the most lobbying effect could still be had.

With the independent Liberals of the Senate, the Independent Senators, the Conservative Senators that still make up a huge block of votes in the Senate, thats where a huge amount of the uncertainty will be, said Mr. Stewart.

Its expected the directors of parliamentary affairs for each of the ministers involved will also be making efforts to engage with Senators individually.

Mr. Blair said theres a good understanding from the Parliamentarians hes spoken with that they cant delay unnecessarily.

Sources say there has been no negative reaction to the marijuana legislation from within the Liberal caucus, and that what was announced wouldnt have been a surprise to anyone who had been speaking with Mr. Blair in the lead-up to the bills tabling, or who had read the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulations report.

raiello@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times

See the rest here:
Marijuana legalization presents both potential political risks and gains for Liberals, say insiders - Hill Times (subscription)

‘The Liberals’ Version of Book Burning’: Maher Goes Off on Berkeley Over Coulter Backlash – Mediaite

During tonights broadcast of HBOs Real Time, host Bill Maher weighed in on the recent flap surrounding Berkeleys decision to cancel conservative author Ann Coulters scheduled April 27th speech.

Berkeley used to be the cradle of free speech, he stated. And now its just the cradle for f*cking babies!

The comedian lit into not just Berkeley, but other colleges across the nation, for shutting down speakers who dont say exactly what liberals want to hear.

Maher added, I feel like this is the liberals version of book burning, and its got to stop.

The Real Time host also took issue with Democrats like Howard Dean claiming that hate speech isnt protected by the First Amendment. Yes it is, Maher exclaimed.

S.E. Cupp agreed with Maher, saying that college students need to realize that in the real world there are no safe spaces.

Watch the clip above (which includes a brief exchange between Maher and Cupp on Fox News), via HBO.

[image via screengrab]

Follow Justin Baragona on Twitter: @justinbaragona

Have a tip we should know? tips@mediaite.com

Read more here:
'The Liberals' Version of Book Burning': Maher Goes Off on Berkeley Over Coulter Backlash - Mediaite

Vexed Liberals move to dump Kelly O’Dwyer while on maternity leave – The Sydney Morning Herald

Eight days into Financial Services Minister Kelly O'Dwyer's maternity leave, vexed Victorian Liberals have moved to replace her.

Fairfax Media has confirmed Tony Abbott's former chief-of-staff turned political commentator Peta Credlin has been encouraged to run against Ms O'Dwyer in the blue ribbon seat of Higgins, as a rebuke to the minister for the government's soon-to-be enacted changes to superannuation.

Play Video Don't Play

Play Video Don't Play

Previous slide Next slide

Robocalls attacking the government on superannuation changes have been rolled out against government frontbencher Kelly O'Dwyer in her seat of Higgins.

Play Video Don't Play

The first 'real moment' of Malcolm Turnbull's election campaign came in the form of single mother Melinda. Fairfax's Heath Aston explains.

Play Video Don't Play

The longest campaign in 50 years will lead to the shortest parliament in 50 years says Opposition Leader Bill Shorten. Vision ABC News 24.

Play Video Don't Play

With the election count going down to the wire who will be reach the magic number of 76 seats? Fairfax's Peter Martin explains.

Play Video Don't Play

Even if the Prime Minister forms majority government he will have to deal with the right wing in the Senate & his own party says Opposition Leader Bill Shorten. Vision ABC News 24.

Play Video Don't Play

With the outcome of the election up in the air what is to become of same sex marriage? Fairfax's Michael Koziol explains the possibilities.

Play Video Don't Play

'Australians want leaders to act like leaders not partisans' says Opposition Leader Bill Shorten. Vision ABC News 24.

Play Video Don't Play

NXT candidate Rebekha Sharkie has won the seat of Mayo from former government frontbencher Jamie Briggs. Vision ABC News 24.

Robocalls attacking the government on superannuation changes have been rolled out against government frontbencher Kelly O'Dwyer in her seat of Higgins.

It is understood that a number of branches within Ms O'Dwyer's electorate, which takes in Toorak, one of Australia's wealthiest suburbs, have chosen to meet when federal parliament is sitting, ensuring Ms O'Dwyer cannot attend.

"It's not factional at all," said one senior Victorian Liberal.

"I don't think anyone thinks it's fair that this report [on the challenge] has come just eight days after Kelly went on maternity leave. That's not a good look at all. The fact is there are some internal issues in Higgins that need addressing."

Those issues, Fairfax Media has been told, includeanger within some branches over the superannuation issue, and some unhappy long-time supporters of Peter Costello, the former member for Higgins, who feel they have been sidelined as Ms O'Dwyer looks to promote younger members of the party.

In the midst of the 2016 federal election campaign a group, called called Save Our Super, established by Melbourne QC Jack Hammond, held a rally at the Malvern Town Hall, in the midst of Ms O'Dwyer's seat.

That meeting attracted 200 people, mostly traditional Liberal voters. Institute of Public Affairs CEO John Roskam was among the notable attendees. A seat was, symbolically, left vacant at the meeting for Ms O'Dwyer, who did not attend.

That meeting called on the government to "grandfather" the impact of proposed changes on existing superannuation accounts.

According to reports at the time, the mood among attendees at that meeting was "white-hot rage". That rage among a wealthy and influential group of Higgins Liberal party members has not subsided.

The approach to Ms Credlin was seen as a shot across the bow to Ms O'Dwyer, amid reports the pair did not get along during Ms Credlin's tenure in Mr Abbott's office.

News Ltd, which first reported the story, quoted Ms Credlin as saying she had not been "formally approached" to run for Higgins.

A spokesman for Ms O'Dwyer said the minister was "on maternity leave with an eight-day-old son and is not commenting on this story".

The government has faced fierce opposition for its changes to superannuation, which include increased taxes on contributions for those earning over $250,000 and an annual $100,000 non-concessional cap on contributions.

The changes come into effect on July 1.

Speaking from her office on Friday ahead of the reported challenge Ms O'Dwyer wanted to send a message that it was possible to balance having a family with a career in politics.

"You can have a family and you can pursue a life of public service and you can do so at the highest levels," she told Fairfax Media.

"It is absolutely possible."

She also praised the support Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull had given her, as she became the first woman to give birth while in Cabinet, describing him as "incredibly enlightened and understanding" when it came to working parents.

"I couldn't ask for a better boss," she said.

Ms O'Dwyer worked right up until the birth of her second child, Edward, on April 13, phoning in to Expenditure Review Committee meetings when she could no longer fly.

She is officially planning six weeks of leave with Finance Minister Mathias Cormann acting in her portfolio.

Ms O'Dwyer faced a strong challenge to hold her seat during the 2016 election, particularly from Greens candidate Jason Ball, but held on to win with a 9.9 per cent margin.

More here:
Vexed Liberals move to dump Kelly O'Dwyer while on maternity leave - The Sydney Morning Herald

Why liberals and conservatives disagree on police: Column – USA TODAY

Emily Ekins and Matthew Feeney 4:34 p.m. ET April 20, 2017

At the Potter House Church on July 13, 2016, in Dallas.(Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images)

We have to give power back to the police, Donald Trump proclaimed during his campaign, and earlier this year he delivered ... or so he thinks. The early weeks of Trumps presidency indeed match his campaign rhetoric, replete with an executive order seeking to make assault against police officers a federal crime.

Americans are understandably divided by Trumps law and order approach to policing reform. Research suggests Americans reactions to Trumps policies will be shaped both by their own experiences with police and by their moral predispositions.

It starts with race. Anyone discussing policing in the U.S. needs to grapple with the fact that there is a wide racial divide in perception of police performance.

A Cato Institute survey found a strikingly high number 73% of African Americans and 54% of Hispanics believe thatpolice are too quick to resort to deadly force with citizens. Only 35% of whites agree. Similarly, African Americans and Hispanics are also 20 to 30 points less likely than whites to believe that their local police treat all racial groups equally or are held accountable for misconduct.

Different personal and vicarious experiences with the police undergird this divide.

The survey found that African Americans are nearlytwice as likely as white Americans to report police swearing at them or to knowsomeone physically mistreated by police.

Related content:

Investigate policing in the USA: Our view

On prison reform, should nation follow in footsteps of Louisiana?: Column

Officers fired after video shows handcuffed suspect stomped on the head

Interestingly enough, the study also found that African Americans report being stopped by police disproportionately more than whites as their incomes rise. This suggeststhat police are disproportionately scrutinizing black drivers in nice cars or in nice neighborhoods. Overall, higher-income African Americans report being stopped about 1.5 times more frequently than higher-income white Americans (and lower-income black and white Americans as well).

But what explains how the majority of Americans evaluate the police, given that most Americans havent had negative interactions with them? For instance, despite Republicans and Democrats having access to the same video footage of police shootings in previous years, survey data show that theyve reached dramatically different conclusions.

Strong majorities of Republicans believe that police only use deadly force when necessary (80%), are impartial (78%) and courteous (74%), and are held accountable for their actions(76%). This stands in contrast to Democrats, among whom a majority believe police are too quick to use lethal force (63%), fail to be impartial (60%), and arent held accountable (59%). Race cant explain this pattern: It persists among white Republicans and white Democrats as well.

So why do Democrats tend to believe that policing suffers from systemic problems, while Republicans think problems are isolated or confined to bad apples? Social psychology may offer some answers.

Social psychologists havefoundthat moral judgments strongly affect evaluations of controversial facts. Before weve even had a chance to sort through the empirical evidence, our minds tend tomake rapid effortless moral judgments. We then engage inpost-hoc reasoningto defend our conclusions.

In sum, people often engage in what scientists call motivated reasoning, where moral judgments come first and the justifications come later.

While each of usshares the same moral instinctsto one degree or another, some moral commitments aremore salientthan others to liberals or conservatives.

Data show conservatives placegreater emphasis on societal orderand thus tend to be moredeferential toward authority figureslike the police. Likewise, respect for authority figures may significantly drive positive attitudes toward the police, irrespective of the circumstances, particularly among conservatives.

In contrast, liberals are inclined to bemore skeptical of authority figures and to empathize moreparticularly with vulnerable groupswho report disparate treatment from the police, such as African Americans. This general propensity to empathizeis a significant predictor of white Democrats belief that the justice system is racially biased.

Naturally, there are exceptions. Not every Democrat is skeptical of the police, and not every Republican is deferential to authority. Nevertheless, data clearly showus a clear divide when it comes to how partisans think about authority.

With that in mind, policing reform is possible, but its hard. The U.S. is a vast and diverse country with about 18,000 law enforcement agencies. Widespread and comprehensive reform in such an environment is difficult. Yet there are areas of emerging consensus, with clear majorities across partisan and racial groups supporting body cameras and independent agencies investigating police misconduct.

When tackling policing reform, Trumpshould put himself in other peoples shoes. There are many law-abiding Americans who shudder when they hear about giving power back to the police, and Trump would be well served to understand why.

Emily Ekinsis a political scientist and director of polling at the Cato Institute. Matthew Feeney is a policy analyst at the Cato Institute.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2p0FymJ

Continued here:
Why liberals and conservatives disagree on police: Column - USA TODAY