regulation – mackaycartoons

Thursday February 6, 2025

February 6, 2025 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday February 6, 2025 (Also, The Toronto Star)

Breaking Down Barriers: A Call to Action for Canada’s Internal Trade

December 18, 2024

With U.S. tariffs looming large on the horizon, Canada stands at a critical juncture. The temporary reprieve from these trade threats offers a golden opportunity to strengthen our domestic economy by dismantling the interprovincial trade barriers that have long hindered our growth. Now, more than ever, all levels of Canadian government must turn political rhetoric into tangible action.

Transport and Internal Trade Minister Anita Anand and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre both recognize the crucial need to boost internal trade. Anand is making strides by promoting mutual recognition of regulations and enhancing labor mobility across provinces. Meanwhile, Poilievre has proposed a “free trade bonus” to incentivize provinces to eliminate trade barriers, promising financial rewards based on the economic benefits of deregulation.
The potential rewards are significant. Studies suggest that removing these barriers could add up to $200 billion annually to Canada’s GDP, translating into substantial savings for Canadian families and a stronger, more resilient economy. Deloitte’s report even estimates that families could save over $6,000 each year by reducing these barriers.

News: Interprovincial trade barriers: what they are, why they exist and how to cut them

January 17, 2025

However, the path forward is fraught with challenges. The Canadian Free Trade Agreement remains bogged down with exceptions that prevent the free flow of goods like alcohol and cannabis. Furthermore, some provinces and industries benefit from these barriers and may resist change. Public comments often highlight skepticism about provinces like Quebec and Ontario, which have been slow to embrace free trade ideals.

To overcome these obstacles, a unified, bipartisan effort is essential. Provinces must put aside regional protectionism and collaborate with the federal government to standardize regulations and enhance labor mobility. This includes addressing professional licensing standards, as suggested by Poilievre’s proposed “Blue Seal” certification, and ensuring that procurement and transportation rules are consistent across the country.

Beyond economic benefits, breaking down these barriers will make Canada more resilient against global market changes and reduce costs for consumers. By fostering a more integrated national market, we can enhance our competitiveness and create a more dynamic business environment.

News: Canada can do ‘substantial’ work fast on internal trade, minister says

January 24, 2025

As we approach provincial elections, it’s crucial for candidates to prioritize these issues. For too long, interprovincial trade barriers have been a topic of discussion without meaningful action. Voters should demand more than just promises; they should insist on concrete plans and timelines for change. Provincial leaders need to commit to working collaboratively with the federal government to streamline regulations and improve trade and labor mobility across the country.

Voters must hold candidates accountable, challenging them to pledge specific measures and deadlines for reducing these barriers. By prioritizing action over rhetoric, we can transform longstanding challenges into opportunities for economic growth and stability.

Comment: We’ll believe Ontario is ‘Team Canada’ on interprovincial trade when we see it

Now is the time for decisive action. The passion and urgency generated by external threats should fuel our commitment to dismantle internal barriers. By doing so, we can turn a moment of uncertainty into an opportunity for lasting growth and stability. Canada must seize this chance to fortify its economy from within, ensuring that we not only weather global market shifts but thrive in their wake. It’s time for provinces to step up and deliver real progress, ensuring that Canada is not only prepared for global market shifts but also thriving from within.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: the talk of removing interprovincial trade barriers may seem dull, but it’s crucial for the provinces to work on this for the benefit of consumers and the strength of our country. For too long, provincial premiers have maintained bureaucratic and protectionist barriers that offer no benefit to consumers, making it easier for Canadian businesses to trade with foreign countries than within their own nation. It’s absurd, and it demands hard work, time, negotiation, and a commitment to cutting through the red tape. In Ontario, there’s even a minister of red tape reduction, and this issue should be at the top of their agenda. With the current economic tensions, including a 30 day “ceasefire,” mere tears, booing national anthems and other theatrics simply won’t suffice. We need real action, and especially in the midst of a provincial elections, politicians should focus on eliminating these barriers when they aren’t kissing babies. All provincial leaders must prioritize this issue—it’s the one thing they can truly address. It may not be a sexy issue, and it won’t grab headlines when a small business gains more economic freedom, but dismantling interprovincial trade barriers is essential. It requires hard work, and this is precisely what we expect from our politicians, especially in times of crisis. Voters need to demand this every day of the election campaign, and it must become a pledged commitment by all leaders. Let’s push for meaningful change where it counts!

Please check out my making-of animated editorial cartoon for February 6, 2025, below! If you haven’t yet, please subscribe to my Substack newsletter, where I release my post every Saturday morning summarizing the week through my editorial cartoons. What you’re reading here is a “note,” designed to help craft my weekly posts and display the animated versions of my daily cartoons. Enjoy!

– The Graeme Gallery

Read on Substack

Friday July 25, 2024

July 26, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday July 25, 2024

The Risks of Privatization in Ontario’s Healthcare and Alcohol Distribution

Recent policy changes by the Ontario government under Premier Doug Ford mark a significant shift towards privatization and deregulation, raising concerns about long-term implications for public welfare. The expansion of pharmacists’ powers to prescribe medications for common ailments and the increased availability of alcohol in private retail outlets, such as grocery and corner stores, are touted as solutions to alleviate pressure on the public healthcare system and enhance consumer convenience. However, these moves may create more problems than they solve.

Expanding pharmacists’ powers to prescribe drugs for conditions like strep throat is intended to reduce the burden on family doctors and emergency rooms amid a severe shortage of healthcare providers. With around 2.5 million Ontarians lacking access to a family doctor, this measure appears to provide a quick fix. However, it overlooks the complexity and risks associated with diagnosing and treating medical conditions.

News: Ontario looking to give more power to pharmacists, as billing concerns haunt one program they oversee

April 9, 2024

Pharmacists, despite their extensive training, are not equipped with the same diagnostic tools or depth of medical training as doctors. They may end up prescribing treatments based on symptoms alone, potentially leading to misdiagnosis and inappropriate medication use. For instance, sore throats and rashes can have multiple causes, including viral infections that do not require antibiotics. Overprescription of antibiotics can lead to resistance and other health issues, underscoring the necessity of accurate diagnosis and appropriate treatment.

Critics argue that this move is a step towards privatization, diverting patients from publicly funded healthcare to private sector solutions. It risks creating a two-tier healthcare system where access to care depends on one’s ability to pay, fundamentally undermining the principles of universal healthcare.

July 19, 2024

The decision to expand alcohol sales to include convenience stores, grocery stores, and big-box retailers aims to provide greater access and convenience for consumers. However, this comes at a significant financial cost, with the government allocating up to $225 million to support this transition, including a substantial payout to The Beer Store to assist in the shift.

While this policy might seem beneficial for consumers, it raises questions about public health and safety. Increasing the availability of alcohol can lead to higher consumption rates, which are associated with a range of social and health problems, including addiction, accidents, and long-term health issues. The move also diverts significant public funds that could potentially be used to address pressing needs within the public healthcare system, such as improving access to family doctors and maintaining emergency services in rural areas.

These policy changes reflect a broader trend towards deregulation and privatization under the Ford government, prioritizing short-term solutions over sustainable, long-term strategies. While the immediate benefits of reduced wait times and increased convenience are appealing, they come with substantial risks and costs that may exacerbate existing problems.

Analysis: Ontario’s ‘alcohol deficit’ to grow with expanded sales: expert

March 1, 2023

By shifting responsibilities from public institutions to the private sector, the government risks creating a fragmented healthcare system where the quality and accessibility of care are uneven and dependent on private market dynamics. This approach fails to address the root causes of issues such as healthcare provider shortages and underfunded public services, instead opting for quick fixes that may ultimately lead to greater inequities and inefficiencies.

Analysis: I’ve seen what a functioning health care system needs and it’s not more downloading to pharmacies

Young Doug Ford: The Series

Ontario’s move towards expanding pharmacists’ powers and privatizing alcohol distribution raises significant concerns about the long-term impacts on public health and welfare. These policies, while seemingly beneficial in the short term, may undermine the principles of universal healthcare and public responsibility, leading to a more privatized and potentially inequitable system. It is crucial to critically assess these changes and consider whether they truly serve the best interests of Ontarians or merely offer a temporary reprieve at a considerable future cost. (AI)

Friday November 3, 2023

November 3, 2023 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday November 3, 2023

Navigating the AI Summit of Innovation and Concern

April 15, 2023

The recent surge in AI regulation has signalled a pivotal moment in addressing both the potential benefits and risks associated with artificial intelligence. With high-profile events like the Biden administration’s executive order and the British government’s AI safety summit at Bletchley Park, the global conversation on responsible AI usage has taken centre stage. Amid these discussions, concerns have surfaced about the potential misuse of AI technology by malevolent actors and criminals. However, the emphasis on regulation and global cooperation through such summits has illuminated the importance of addressing these risks while harnessing AI’s positive potential.

The Biden administration’s executive order aims to bring teeth to voluntary AI rules, using mechanisms such as the Defense Production Act of 1950 to compel AI companies to undergo safety testing. Despite the intricate details and the invocation of the Act to mandate safety tests for high-power AI models, concerns remain about the practical implementation of guidelines and their impact on innovation. Critics argue that overregulation could stifle progress and inhibit companies from engaging in necessary safety testing, leading to unintended consequences.

News: AI summit: Education will blunt AI risk to jobs, says Rishi Sunak

May 13, 2023

Similarly, the EU is finalizing its AI Act, introducing legislation targeted explicitly at AI. However, criticisms have arisen regarding the focus on long-term AI risks while overlooking immediate dangers. The EU’s proposed AI Act and the Biden order have been accused of not adequately addressing current issues, such as the environmental impact of large AI engines or the potential threat of AI deepfakes in manipulating elections.

Amid these regulatory developments, the British government’s commitment to hosting global summits emphasizes the need for collaborative efforts to ensure safe, human-centric, and responsible AI use. However, controversies emerged at the summit, notably with the attendance of executives from Chinese tech giants, sparking concerns about China’s intentions in the AI sphere.

News: How can AI be developed safely? There’s a global summit tackling this right now

June 17, 2017

The differing approaches taken by the US, UK, and EU underscore the challenge of finding a balance between regulation and innovation. While the efforts to regulate AI are crucial, the debates and criticisms highlight the complexity of achieving a consensus on the best path forward.

In conclusion, while these regulatory initiatives mark a crucial step in addressing the responsible use of AI, concerns persist about potential negative applications by malicious entities. The global AI community must continue to navigate this complex landscape, ensuring a delicate balance between regulation and fostering innovation to harness the vast potential of artificial intelligence for the betterment of society. (AI)

Friday March 19, 2021

March 26, 2021 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday March 19, 2021

A big deal threatens bigger cellphone fees

There are two things you can bet on when it comes to this week’s $20.4-billion bid by Rogers Communications to snap up rival Shaw Communications.

First, the deal would be very good for both of these telecommunications giants, and not least members of the Shaw family who would personally pocket $920 million in cash for their troubles.

Second, the current takeover plan threatens to be very bad for Canadian consumers, and that probably means people like you.

Think your monthly cellphone fees are sky-high today? They could blast into the stratosphere if this deal goes through as is. Because if one of Canada’s four biggest telecom companies is bought up by one of the others, there will be even less of the competition so urgently needed to keep some kind of a lid on prices.

Let’s hope Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is watching this one closely. Let’s hope even more that he’s ready to stand up for the interests of ordinary Canadians. The fact is, cellphone users in this country are already saddled with some of the most bloated cellular fees in the industrialized world. On average, Canadians spend 20 per cent more than Americans and an eye-watering 120 per cent more than Australians for cellphone plans that offer comparable service.

Canada’s “Big 3” telecom companies — Rogers, Telus and Bell — defend the high prices as the cost of providing a first-rate service in a vast land, though the U.S. and Australia are also pretty big places where bills are a lot lower than here. It’s also worth noting that a review by Canada’s Competition Bureau found that those Big 3 telecom companies, however they excuse their pricing, were racking up far stronger profits than their Group-of-Seven or Australian counterparts.

One of the problems industry analysts consistently point to is the lack of competition for providing wireless services in Canada. Today, Rogers, Telus and Bell control nearly 90 per cent of the market. If Rogers is allowed to gobble up Shaw, the Big 3’s market share will rise to 95 per cent.

Federal government after federal government has agreed more, not less, competition is what this sector needs. And they were all correct. Freedom Mobile, which was started by Shaw in 2016, has been credited with driving wireless plan prices down to at least some degree in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia.

So what happens if big-fish Rogers swallows up smaller-fish Shaw and takes over not just Shaw’s cable and internet operations in western Canada but its Freedom mobile business? Rogers has tried to silence concerns about its takeover plans by promising not to raise cellphone fees for three years. However sincere that offer is, it would do nothing to stop a whopping fee hike on Day 1 of Year 4.

While Trudeau knows that telecommunications companies need to earn enough money to underwrite expensive investments in internet and wireless networks, he and his party declared they would lower cellphone fees by 25 per cent by the end of 2021.

Given that both the Competition Bureau and the Canadians Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission will now take a year or more to review this deal, Trudeau has time to think this one out carefully. But at the end of the day he should be willing to intervene strongly on behalf of consumers. One option among many would be to approve the deal — if Rogers agrees to sell Shaw’s Freedom Mobile business to a company such as Cogeco, which is interested in expanding into the cellphone business.

Such a deal between Rogers and Shaw might not be as big. Almost certainly, neither would the cellphone bills be in this country. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial)

Friday November 13, 2020

November 20, 2020 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday November 13, 2020

Don’t give free rein to Ontario’s developers

Doug Ford is moving quickly but quietly to give Ontario’s developers the upper hand over Ontario’s environment.

November 22, 2019

For proof of this ominous change, check out how Premier Ford’s provincial government is stripping away the powers of Ontario’s 36 conservation authorities when it comes to approving new development in many of the province’s most vital natural areas.

Since mid-20th century, conservation authorities have been responsible not only for controlling floods but for protecting and restoring the land, water and natural habitats in this province. They’ve done a superb job, too, even if many developers consider them nothing more than red tape that slows or stops a money-making venture.

But in defiance of this long-held mandate, the Progressive Conservatives last week unveiled legislation that would curtail the conservation authorities’ ability to act as environmental guardians. And as if it was hoping the public wouldn’t notice what it was doing, the government slipped its proposals into its fat, omnibus budget bill.

The public, however, should take notice. What we’re witnessing is a direct threat to responsible environmental and land-use planning.

The new legislation would end the conservation authorities’ role in offering an informed response to development applications and how those applications might impact sensitive natural environments. More power to decide the fate of a proposed development, however controversial, would be handed to the provincial Minister of Natural Resources and Forestry.

If, where it still had jurisdiction, a conservation authority refused to issue a permit or imposed conditions for a development, a disgruntled developer could appeal directly to the natural resources minister or the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal. Until now, someone appealing a permit denial would have to go directly to the local conservation authority’s executive.

December 11, 2018

What the Ford government is doing is politicizing environmental and land-use planning. At the very least, its proposed changes to the Conservation Authorities Act raise the possibility a developer with a friend in government could one day win approval for a project over well-founded, local opposition.

This shouldn’t happen but the government intends to go even further. The province doesn’t want watershed management and conservation to remain core conservation authority programs, for which municipalities would have to pay. Instead, they would become voluntary programs a municipality could choose to support — or not.

The Ford government seems to have a grudge against conservation authorities. Last year, it slashed its funding for the authorities by 50 per cent while telling them flood control must become their core mandate. Those shrunken budgets have made it harder for conservation authorities to plant trees, restore forests, and prevent soil erosion and water pollution, all jobs that make for a healthier environment.

May 3, 2018

If the new legislation passes, Ontario’s river valleys, flood plains, wetlands, Great Lakes shorelines — indeed, its water supplies — would be vulnerable to degradation in even more ways. It is also worth noting that the same government is increasingly resorting to ministerial zoning orders which allow it to permit development while bypassing the municipal planning process, environmental assessments and meaningful public consultation.

If Ford truly believes the current process for approving development is too cumbersome, he could streamline the rules, perhaps even imposing tighter deadlines for municipal governments and conservation authorities to respond to a project proposal.

But the interests of the economy, development and money have to be balanced with the interests of our environment. And where they can’t, the interests of the environment should prevail. Ontario should, as the song says, be “a place to grow.” But it should be place to grow for healthy environments, not just developers’ bank accounts. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial)

Reddit: The MacKay political cartoon in today’s Hamilton Spectator couldn’t be better