SNC Lavalin - They are all wrong. They are all right.

The SNC-Lavalin affair, distilled into a nugget, involves the Prime Minister of Canada, and his close political and bureaucratic allies, pressuring the Attorney General to institute a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) against SNC-Lavalin for bribery, rather than prosecuting this Canada-based but global engineering giant. This would mean large fines and supervision for years, to try to prevent the corruption from recurring, but minimal impact on day-to-day operations of the company. Prosecution, on the other hand, could result in  one of Canada's largest companies being banned from working in Canada for years, and could see it move its headquarters, and its best jobs, to another country. Since it is based in Quebec this would have enormous negative political consequences for the Liberal party.

Canada didn't used to have DPAs, they were created for SNC-Lavalin and the Prime Minister clearly wanted one used to prevent damage to the Liberal brand in Canada.

Jody Wilson-Raybould decided to stick with the prosecution despite immense pressure from the Prime Minister's Office.

The normal instinct of people when faced with a crime in theory is to want to vigorously punish the perpetrators. This instinct doesn't work. Centuries of the death penalty did not eliminate the crimes that were punished in this way. And when it is time to use the legal system that was developed in theory, in practice we get unintended consequences such as much larger fractions of the poor and of cultural and racial minorities in jail (maybe this is partly intentional). Or, with corporate crime, we are faced with destroying a company on principle, when the damage to the punishers will be great, and all it will mean is that American and European companies, that have governments that somehow manage to not put their companies out of business when they do bad things, will fill the void.

Trudeau was right to recognize the damage caused by prosecution of a corporation, to thousands of workers who did nothing wrong. Ironically, it was politicians like him who created the laws on prosecution which, in theory, seemed harsh enough to prevent corporate crime. Jody Wilson-Raybould was right to say that SNC-Lavalin did not qualify for a DPA.

So, what is the magic solution? Well, it seems quite simple to me: Prosecute the executives, throw them in jail, fine the company, and let new people take the helm. SNC-Lavalin will easily survive having to bring in a new management team (and if it doesn't, it has much bigger problems).

Why don't western countries prosecute executives for corporate crimes? There probably are lots of legal arguments, but I'm going to guess that the major reason is that the elites in any country are all friends, and prosecuting the executives of a major corporation based in that country, means prosecuting the friends of the elites that run the political parties that have power. Trudeau will have socialized with the leaders of SNC-Lavalin, Bombardier and other powerful Canadian corporations, and will not want to see his friends in jail.  Especially as they are also generous donors to the Liberal party.

Letter in 2600 Magazine, "Free flow of (false) information?"

Published in 2600 Magazine, Autumn 2018

[ 2600 Magazine is known as "The Hacker Quarterly", and appeals to readers who are interested in understanding telecom, computer, physical and other types of systems, especially their exploitable flaws. It is named after the 2600 Hz tone that, once upon a time, allowed 'hackers' or 'phreakers' to make free phone calls in North America]

Dear editors;

I have to respond to the article “Free Flow of Information” by Daelphinux, because his choice of Ebola and Polio as examples of the “essential function” of researchers in our society inadvertently makes the case for the opposite.

Where to start? Well, with Ebola, three articles [1] [2] [3] in the March 12, 1977 issue of Lancet are the obvious place, because this is where Ebola was created. The science was terrible. One, for example, used one poorly preserved liver sample to draw the unwarranted conclusion that not only the woman from which it came had died from this new virus, but everyone else in this outbreak of hemorrhagic fever. Since then the definition of Ebola has morphed, so that all that is needed for a definitive diagnosis is (A) one symptom that is most likely not bleeding, (B) contact with an Ebola patient and (C) a positive Ebola test. Bleeding is now a rare symptom. In a study of 44 patients from Sierra Leone, only 1 had this symptom.[4] And the tests are shockingly unreliable. In one study of healthy Africans, in places where there was no current Ebola outbreak (and in some places where there never had been) scientists found that over 15% of people tested positive. In a paper that I recently had published, I showed that the symptoms of Ebola are so vague that they mostly overlap with the adverse reactions to an Ebola vaccine being tested in another really shoddy piece of research.[5]

Polio, by comparison, seems like a slam dunk, but it isn’t. The last great US epidemic was in 1952 when America suffered 37 cases per 100,000. The vaccine was tested on almost 2 million American children in 1954 [6], of which less than one quarter were actually vaccinated. By then the rate was down to 24 per 100,000, without the vaccine possibly being the cause of the decline. By the time vaccination started, in 1955, the rate was down to 18, less than half the epidemic peak. Complaints were made that even by 1960 less than half the target population had been vaccinated[7], but by now the rate of polio was down to 1.8, less than 5% of the epidemic peak. 

But I known you’re going to say that, at least polio was eliminated, except in some ‘shithole’ countries as a certain President might say. Unfortunately that’s not true. Consider that another name for what we know of as polio is Acute Flaccid Paralysis (AFP), which is only known as polio when the virus is detected, and otherwise just called AFP. But to a paralyzed child, it doesn’t make any difference what type of AFP caused their life to be destroyed. The World Health Organization collects statistics on both polio and AFP. And while they proudly note that the number of cases of polio have sunk to very close to zero, the number of cases of AFP have rocketed from 13,857 in 1996 (the first year they started counting) to over 100,000 in 2011, and has stayed above 100,000 ever since.[8] And nobody seems to care, including almost all scientific researchers. Probably because other causes of AFP are things like pesticide poisoning that are not likely to jump on an airplane and paralyze us westerners.

Scientific researchers do perform some important functions, and have radically changed our society, in some ways for the better (communications technology, for example) and in some ways for the worse (nuclear bombs and other weapons of war). But Ebola and Polio are certainly not good examples of the former.

- David Crowe

References

[1] Johnson KM et al. Isolation and partial characterisation of a new virus causing acute haemorrhagic fever in Zaire. Lancet. 1977 Mar 12; 1(8011): 569–71. 

[2] Bowen ET et al. Viral haemorrhagic fever in southern Sudan and northern Zaire. Preliminary studies on the aetiological agent. Lancet. 1977 Mar 12; 1(8011): 571–3. 

[3] Pattyn S et al. Isolation of Marburg-like virus from a case of haemorrhagic fever in Zaire. Lancet. 1977 Mar 12; 1(8011): 573–4. 

[4] Schieffelin JS et al. Clinical Illness and Outcomes in Patients with Ebola in Sierra Leone. N Engl J Med. 2014 Oct 29.

[5] Crowe D. “Ebola Ça Suffit!” is not enough to Prove Efficacy of an Ebola Vaccine. American Journal of Immunology. 2017 Jul 4; 13(3): 165–72. http://thescipub.com/abstract/10.3844/ofsp.11329

[6] Francis Jr T et al. Evaluation of the 1954 Field Trial of Poliomyelitis Vaccine. Final Report. University of Michigan. 1957 Apr. 

[7] Alexander ER. The extent of the poliomyelitis problem. JAMA. 1961 Mar 11; 175(10): 837–40. 

[8] AFP (Acute Flaccid Paralysis)/Polio case count. WHO. https://extranet.who.int/polis/public/CaseCount.aspx

Note added by editors:

It's great to see our readers lend their fields of expertise to ongoing discussions. This may also be the first letter in our pages ever to have used footnotes!

Canada and Saudi Arabia

Dear Prime Minister Justin Trudeau;

I am outraged that you still will not cancel the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia.

If you cancel the sale now, you will look moral and a hero in the future. If you wait until the grisly truth comes out about the Saudi government, you will look hypocritical.

For your own public image, you must act now.

You are supporting a government that is more barbaric, in Yemen, against its own people, against diplomatic conventions, against the practice of journalism, that most medieval states.

- David Crowe

Canada's Dismal Transportation system

[This letter was submitted to the Globe and Mail as follows]

Dear editor;

Since the 1980s Canada has cancelled about half its train service, and now about half its bus service (if we include both Greyhound and Saskatchewan’s government bus service). In that time China has built about 20,000 km of high speed rail (average speed with stops 200km/hr, top speed 300 km/hr) and an uncountable number of subway lines. China is a developing country, while Canada obviously is not developing anything but further means to worship the automobile.


[and published, with changes highlighted]

Since the 1980s Canada has cancelled much of its train service, and now about half its bus service (if we include both Greyhound and Saskatchewan’s government bus service). In that time China has built thousands of km [actually it is about 20,000km as I wrote] of high speed rail (average speed with stops 200km/hr [they omitted the top speed of 300km/hr]) and dozens of subway lines. China is a developing country, while Canada obviously is not developing anything but further means to worship the automobile.

Vaccines

The Globe and Mail published a completely pro-vaccine article in October, 2017 (similar to an article they published in June of this year) that appeared to be denying that adverse reactions are even possible, let alone questions about efficacy. Of course I had to write, and of course my letter didn't get published. The newspaper did accept two letters. One just echoed the absolutist position, making absolutely false statements about historical infectious disease statistics. The other said that we should try to understand why people have anti-vaccine views, which the author implied were irrational.

Why do I write, when it's futile? Well it feels better to put my thoughts in writing, and I can always post them here.


For the record, here is my unpublished letter.

Letter to Globe and Mail (October 23, 2017)

Pro-vax dogmatists want to have us believe that all critics of vaccines are either flat-earthers or discredited scientists. When I graduated from university with a degree in science I also was a firm believer in vaccines. But when I was finally challenged on my views about 20 years later, I was forced to confront the fact that I had no direct knowledge in this area, and I had just accepted the assertions of people like Timothy Caulfield (“Silencing anti-vax noise will not be easy”). Gradually I realized that there were many critics of aspects of vaccines who were highly credentialled scientists and even MDs who had changed their views when confronted with evidence.

When I finally started reviewing evidence about vaccines I was shocked to discover that some widely accepted dogmas were false.  For example, for most infectious diseases death rates were declining for decades before the first vaccine was available. Vaccine dogmatists love to just show the chart starting with the year of the start of vaccination. But the decline in deaths after vaccination may well have been just a continuation of the other factors that were improving before vaccination (such as better sanitation and diet). I discovered that the well documented timeline of polio cases and vaccination in the United States did not support the belief that the polio vaccine ended the epidemic. By 1960 the Journal of the American Medical association reported that less than half the vulnerable population had been vaccinated, yet the epidemic had petered out to about 5% of the 1952 peak.

Another undeniable source of information is that the United States has paid out more than $3.6 billion in compensation for vaccine damage since the government took over payment for vaccine damage in 1988.

It is futile to argue about whether vaccines cause autism, because autism is poorly defined (although there actually are many scientific papers that do note such an association). However, sudden mental and physical regression following vaccines is well documented, whatever you want to call it. While rare, each time it occurs, the cost is massive, both to the vaccine recipient, but also to their family, who are now responsible for the care of a severely disabled person.

Let’s have an honest discussion about vaccination, recognizing that there are costs to any vaccination program, in terms of adverse effects, and that the benefits are often exaggerated by pharmaceutical companies that stand to make billions of dollars from each new vaccine added to the recommended vaccine schedule.

- David Crowe

Canada's position on North Korea

[Submitted to the Globe and Mail, but not published]

August 13, 2017

Sometimes, when your friend is on the verge of doing something dangerous, you have to intervene. It’s certainly good that [Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister] Chrystia Freeland criticized the dangerous rhetoric and actions of the crazy North Korean dictator, but what about the twitterer in chief in the White House? 

If it’s not possible for Canada to criticize a friend, we’re not true friends. Even silence would speak volumes, as people have noticed with Trump’s silence over white supremacist violence. To simply say, “When they [the US] is threatened, we are there.”, without also noting Trump's tweeted threats, is higly irresponsible. 

Will Freeland still put all the blame on North Korea if Trump is emboldened to a pre-emptive strike? Even if that results in the North devasting Seoul, and the Chinese military crossing the border, as they have promised to do if the US throws the first punch?

[This letter was not published by the Globe and Mail. That's not unusual for me. But what was interesting is that no letters were published in response to an extremist pro-vaccination op-ed by one Timothy Caulfield, which illustrates that mainstream media have indeed become propagandists for the vaccine industry.]


Dear Editors;


I don’t know on what basis Timothy Caulfield (“Stop those naturopaths who spread anti-vaxxer myths”) was criticizing BC naturopaths for criticizing thimerosal, the vaccine preservative. Was he trying to say that it is no longer used in vaccines? It still is, in multi-dose flu vaccines, for example. That it doesn’t contain mercury? It is about 50% mercury by weight. That there’s no evidence that the form of mercury it contains, ethyl-mercury, is not toxic? There’s lots of evidence.

If we are going to have an adult conversation about vaccines we cannot pretend that all vaccines, under all circumstances, no matter what ingredients they contain, are safe, effective and necessary, and we need to stop using the childish pejorative, “anti-vaxxer”, to describe all their critics, whether they are parents who have seen adverse reactions with their own eyes, doctors who have seen patterns of damage from vaccines and changed their opinion, or scientists researching vaccine additives, such as mercury or aluminum.

- David Crowe

Manchester Bomb Massacre

Letter to the Globe and Mail. Publication Declined.

When we in the west take the senseless bombing of a wedding party in Yemen as seriously as the senseless bombing of concert goers, then perhaps both problems can be solved.

Canadian Defense Minister Harjit Sajjan mouths the credo of western interference in muslim countries. He can’t or won’t understand that outbreaks of horrific violence require not just the existence of jihadist ideology, but also our killings to provide the justification that sick and warped people need to see themselves as heroes, and not as monsters. The BBC is already reporting that the British used Libyan jihadists to destablize Gaddafi, believing their promises to have no interest in politics outside their country, but sometimes the enemy of my enemy is not our friend, but the enemy of everyone.


-  David Crowe

After emailing this letter, I also found that, according to Russia Today, the sister of Salman Abedi, Jomana Abedi, told the Wall Street Journal that, “I think he saw children – Muslim children – dying everywhere, and wanted revenge. He saw the explosives America drops on children in Syria, and wanted revenge. Whether he got that is between him and God,” she said.

The cost of not taking your medicine (is less than the cost of taking it)

Submitted to the Globe and Mail newspaper, but not published, as usual when I criticize the medical establishment.


A recent Globe and Mail article, “The cost of not taking your medicine”, estimates that 125,000 deaths occur every year in the USA due to people not taking their medicine. Ironically, way back in 2000, the even more prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association published an estimate that 106,000 people die each year from properly (!) prescribed medications in hospitals. Given increases in population and pharmaceutical use, that’s roughly the same number. But if you include improperly prescribed medications (wrong drug, wrong dose, etc), over-the-counter drugs and drugs prescribed outside hospitals (via a GP, old folks homes, prisons, etc) the number of people who die from taking their drugs is much, much higher than those who die from not.

And many of the people who don’t take the drugs are probably experiencing side effects that they don’t want to confront their doctors with, probably because they are worried their doctors will chastise them. And, in many cases doctors will dismiss the side effects as unrelated to the new symptoms. At least until the drug is pulled off the market for causing too many side effects or deaths, as happens quite often.

Sex Selective Abortion in Canadians of South Asian Descent

The Globe and Mail newspaper (Toronto) reports that a study has shown that the preference for male babies among women living in Canada, but born in South Asia, remains strong no matter how long since they immigrated.
Most striking is that the ratio of boys to girls among Punjabi women who have given birth to two girls, and no boys, is 240 boys to 100 girls.

It's probably true that most people who have two children of the same gender would prefer a third child of the opposite gender, however it probably does not lead to an abortion in many cases.

What is problematic is a statement by Kripa Shekhar, executive director of the South Asian Women's Centre in Toronto, that, "A woman has a fundamental right in Canada to decide whether to have an abortion, and should not come under pressure from a spouse or other family members to deliver a male child…This is an issue of choice that is taken away from a woman, in many ways it is very abuse."

Certainly the first part of this statement is not controversial to me. Women in Canada do have a fundamental right to an abortion (whether you like it or not) and I agree that they should not be pressured to have an abortion, any more than they should be pressured to keep a child they don't want. But is it true that in all cases (as is implied by this statement) it is men who are pressuring women to have the abortion.

I have observed that cultural practices, even when they clearly restrict women in some way, and not men, such as the Burka, Female Genital Mutilation, are endorse and enforced by both women and men who are part of that culture. Just as circumcision, for example, which may damage the sex life of men, is equally endorsed by both men and women who believe it is part of their culture, or who claim that it actually has health benefits.

What if at least some South Asian women want the abortion so that their third, and possibly final, child will be a boy?

If this was true (even if just for some women) then there is a clear conflict between a woman's "fundamental right in Canada to decide whether to have an abortion", and a prohibition on sex-selective abortion.

Since I don't believe that we can reliably determine whether someone would make the same choice outside of the influence of other family members there doesn't seem to be a solution to the problem. Imagine if, for example, South Asian women were forbidden from having abortions, or from having abortions of female fetuses? This would clearly be racist because it assumes that all South Asian men are misogynists, and it assumes that no South Asian women in Canada are strong enough to make up their own mind.

Given that I believe overuse of ultrasound is a health concern, I wouldn't object to restricting the use of ultrasound, but in reality a doctor can always find a medical reason to require one, and the decision to abort when the parents find out the gender can be made without anyone speaking the reason.

The only solution, which isn't much of a solution, is to respect the right of all Canadian women to decide whether to have an abortion (knowing that in some cases they may have been pressured) and to hope that future generations become perfect in all gender matters, just like white people always have been (calm down, I'm being sarcastic).

Not published by the Globe and Mail (sigh, why do I bother?)

Dear Editors;

I sincerely wish Justin Trudeau would stop sucking up to the United States, it just encourages them to get involved in more futile and bloody wars, especially now we have a madman on the Presidential throne. Trudeau can chastise Russia all he wants, but Syria is their only base in the Middle East (unlike the USA), so a withdrawal of support just isn’t going to happen. Realpolitik 101.

Perhaps he is encouraging America to start another ‘humanitarian’ war to topple dictator Assad, just like the successful and rapid topplings of Hussein and Gaddafi. Unfortunately, although we thought nothing could be worse than those dictators, we soon found out we were wrong. And in this case we have the additional danger of a direct confrontation between the US and Russia.

It’s deeply disturbing that our Prime Minister, captured by his flowing rhetoric, is pushing the world towards WW III.

- David Crowe
 Calgary
 403-861-2225

Stop dissing Alberta's new election laws

Published in the May 2017 edition of Alberta Views magazine.

I’m no NDP [Alberta's mildly socialist governing party] hack, but “Getting Big Money Out of Alberta Politics” is wrong in their criticism of the dramatic improvements that the NDP made to Alberta’s election laws. Dramatically wrong. It is false to state that the Alberta limit of $4000 is greater than the federal limit, let alone almost 3 times greater. This is an enormous misunderstanding of federal rules, perhaps drawn from the VUE Weekly article that you also included in your April edition.

In fact, according to Elections Canada, in 2017 you can give $1550 to EACH of the registered federal parties. And another $1550 to Electoral District Association, Nomination Contests and Party-endorsed candidates for EACH party. And $1550 per election for EACH independent candidate. And $1550 in total to leadership candidates in EACH contest.

So if you really want to throw money around, and you want to buy influence with the two or three parties you think are most likely to win, you could easily give several times more than the $4000 total limit in Alberta. You are only limited by the numbers of parties, independent candidates and leadership contests. Unlike Alberta there is no global cap.

There are other tricks you can play, federally. You can, for example, give $1550 to a political party, and request that the money is allocated to a particular riding or candidate. And then give another $1550 directly to the riding or candidate.  I know because I actually queried Elections Canada as I was sure that they would have recognized and filled this loophole, but they confirmed that the limits apply to the entity receiving the money from you, and that there are no limits or restrictions on transfers between parties, ridings and candidates.

And if you like another candidate running for a different party you can rinse and repeat. And if that’s not enough you can donate $1550 to an unlimited number of independent candidates (perhaps to try to bleed votes away from a candidate you want to lose). And don’t forget the leadership contests.

- David Crowe
Former CFO, Green Party of Alberta

It is not lack of access to pharmaceuticals that causes expensive complications, it is excessive access

Dear Alberta Views Editors;

I was shocked to read, in the November 2016 article by Linda Mcquaig, “Medicare On Trial”, that she viewed the inability to afford drugs as a major cause of “expensive complications” and ER visits. I support pharmacare because this situation may sometimes occur, but McQuaig did not provide evidence to persuade me that this is a major problem. What is a major cause of adverse events and ER visits is excessive access to drugs. A 1998 paper in the Journal of the American Medical Assocation, for example, estimated that 106,000 Americans are killed by properly prescribed drugs in hospitals. That would amount to about 10,000 Canadians every year. And this study did not consider drugs prescribed in other settings (nursing homes, prisons etc), over the counter drugs, and improperly prescribed drugs. Pharmaceuticals are, in fact, one of the leading causes of injury of death. Not lack of access to pharmaceuticals, but access that is too easy, in a culture that believes everything can be cured with a pill, with the finger of blame pointing at both on doctors and ordinary Canadians.

Everyone is now familiar with the epidemic of opiod abuse which was not started by illegal drugs dealers, but by legal drug dealers, an epidemic that is causing a trail of death and destruction all throughout North America. This epidemic will not be mitigated by pharmacare.

Pharmacare, and medicare in general, are only funding mechanisms, and can make access to medical treatment more equitable, but they can’t deal with the epidemic of over-treatment (which involves more than just drugs). I would challenge anyone to show that, in Canada, lack of medical treatment is anywhere near as big a problem as over-treatment, mostly the overuse of pharmaceuticals.  Solutions must involve the education of everyone, not just medical professionals, about the dangers of the medical system, beginning a process of eliminating the many unnecessary and unproven treatments.  One of the problems with fee for service, which it was good to see another article in Alberta Views questioning, is that it provides an incentive to treat, and a disincentive to not treat, even if non-medical alternatives, such as changes in diet, exercise and other habits, would be far safer and, in the long run, more effective. Increasing the health of Canadians would also requires governments to have the courage to stand up to big corporations that sell products that cause disease, such as the chemical and food industries. As an added bonus, less reliance on the medical treatment system for conditions like diabetes, would massively reduce the cost of the system.

Until this day comes, it is up to individuals to educate themselves and avoid the system, despite the fact that they’re paying for it, until they absolutely need it.

Electric cars are no magic bullet

(This letter was published in the September 2016 issue of 'Alberta Views' magazine)

I don’t understand why so many environmentalists are in love with the electric car. Does it solve the problem of traffic accidents? No. Of roadkill? Of paving paradise to build roads and parking lots? Of ugly suburban development? Of better access to efficient transportation to the economically disadvantaged? It doesn’t even solve the problem of burning fossil fuels because even if we could achieve 100% renewable energy production for today’s needs, the hundreds of thousands of electric cars added onto the grid would move the yardstick out of reach again, and, batteries, tires and the manufacturing of the vehicle will have a significant environmental impact that is usually ignored. It seems to me that it is a painless way for the upper middle classes to claim the green high road with no impact on their lifestyle, ignoring the fact that there will be far fewer benefits than claimed, and maybe none. Driving a kilometer in an electric car still doesn’t make the shared environment better. It car is greenwashing of the elites by the elites. True improvements in our transportation system will come from improving pedestrian and cycling facilities, from more public transportation, and from devoting fewer resources, less energy, less space and fewer lives to the cult of the automobile, no matter how it is powered.

Light Armoured Vehicle Sales to Saudi Arabia – Response from Foreign Affairs Minister

[This is a July response to my April letter]

Dear Mr. Crowe:

Thank you for your email of April 14, 2016, concerning the situation of human rights in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the sale of light armoured vehicles (LAVs) manufactured in Canada to that country. I regret the delay in replying to you.

The promotion and protection of human rights is an integral part of Canada’s foreign policy. Canada stands up for human rights and takes principled positions on important issues to promote freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. Canada supports a stable and prosperous Middle East, governed by freedom, tolerance and pluralism, where human rights are respected.

Of course, Canada remains concerned about the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia. Canadian officials at the Embassy of Canada to Saudi Arabia engage regularly with Saudi officials, including the Saudi Human Rights Commission, to maintain an open, respectful and constructive dialogue on human rights issues. Canada’s engagement with Saudi Arabia on these issues extends into multilateral forums as well. For example, during Saudi Arabia’s Universal Periodic Review at the United Nations Human Rights Council in October 2013, Canada noted the increased participation of women in Saudi Arabian society, including the important role they have assumed within the Shura Council. I also welcomed the local municipal elections in Saudi Arabia in December 2015, in which women voted and a number of women were elected.

I take every opportunity to raise these issues and will continue to do so. On May 23 and 24, 2016, during my visit to Saudi Arabia, I raised critical issues with senior Saudi officials with respect to human rights as well as humanitarian issues. I met with several senior Saudi officials including the King, the Crown Prince, the ministers for Education and Energy, the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, and the President of the Saudi Human Rights Commission, who reports directly to the King. I also met with prominent women in politics, media, business and homemakers and had valuable exchanges on the evolving situation of women in Saudi Arabia. Our discussions centered on the importance of women’s rights and gender equality, two key Canadian values. Further, Canadian officials raise Canada’s concerns about human rights with senior Saudi officials on a regular basis and will continue to do so, both publicly and in diplomatic discussions.

With regard to the sale of LAVs to Saudi Arabia, Canada has sold LAVs to that country since the 1990s and has no information to suggest that these LAVs have ever been used against the Saudi population. Furthermore, an export of this type requires an export permit. Canada has some of the strongest export controls for military and strategic goods in the world. However, in light of concerns raised, Canada is introducing more rigour and transparency to its export control system. Canada is also delivering on its commitment to accede to the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty on a priority basis. I am pleased to have tabled the Treaty in Parliament on June 17, 2016, which is a first formal step in this process.

You may wish to read the statement I issued on April 13, 2016, regarding the sale of LAVs to Saudi Arabia, at http://www.news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1051599.

Please be assured that the Government of Canada will continue to monitor the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia and encourage the Saudi government to respect its international human rights obligations.

Regarding the situation in Yemen, Canada is concerned about the deteriorating situation in that country. The ongoing conflict is fueling widespread instability, chaos and exacerbating a growing humanitarian crisis. Canada urges all parties to participate actively and fully in negotiations led by the United Nations to find a consensus agreement. Such an agreement will be the only acceptable and legitimate course for a political transition.

In response to the humanitarian situation in Yemen, Canada has provided $19.5 million in humanitarian assistance funding in 2015 to help meet the immediate needs of millions of conflict‑affected people in that country.

Canada welcomes Saudi Arabia’s formation of a high‑level independent committee to investigate the Saudi‑led coalition’s actions in Yemen and encourages Saudi Arabia to disclose the committee’s findings as quickly as possible.

Canada calls on all parties to the conflict in Yemen to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law, including by allowing and facilitating the delivery of humanitarian relief to civilians in need.

Thank you for writing.

Sincerely,

The Honourable Stéphane Dion, P.C., M.P.

Minister of Foreign Affairs

Punishing Parents and ignoring annual medical genocides

Seeing the irony in the reporting of the Globe and Mail, I submitted this letter, which was, of course, not published.

It is ironic that on Saturday (June 25, 2016) the Globe & Mail (Toronto based newspaper) documented the sentences given as punishment to a couple who, while clearly loving their son Ezekiel, delayed treatment that may have saved his life (we cannot actually know). But on Monday you report on an estimated 70,000 Canadians a year injured (and a good fraction killed) by the allopathic medical system that the Stephan family avoided. A recent American paper estimated that medical errors are the third leading cause of death and a 1998 JAMA paper estimated that properly prescribed drugs in hospitals are the fifth leading cause of death. Yet, out of those 70,000 Canadians injured or killed each year, probably nobody will go to jail. The parents who followed standard medical practice for their children, such as use of an antibiotic that caused an anaphylactic reaction, will not be punished. Nor will the doctors who prescribed treatments that backfired and injured or killed someone. Not even when it is a genuine error will anyone be punished. When Health Canada approves a drug that is later found to have a high rate of injury or death, nobody at Health Canada, or the drug company that twisted the data to win approval, will go to jail. This is reminiscent of an oppressive religion that tolerates abuse and deadly mistakes within its ranks, but will never tolerate dissent. And although there are not enough stakes to burn all the heretics, the modern equivalent of an occasional public hanging helps scare patients into conformity and critics into silence.

Letter to Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion regarding sales of LAVs (Light Armoured Vehicles) to Saudi Arabia

I am shocked and angered that you are facilitating the sale of weapons to one of the most repressive regimes in the world.

I understand that this will be a big financial hit for Canada. But principles cost money sometimes. How will Saudi Arabia get a message that they need to change except by brave actions?

Sending the weapons is a message that they can continue to repress their own people, and murder and destroy with impunity in Yemen, and anywhere else they care to start a war.

Please grow a backbone and do the right thing. This is a tough decision, I understand. But really it’s a choice between money and morals. Which side are you on?

Regards,
    David Crowe

Polio is not near elimination

[Letter to the Globe and Mail, never published]

I hate to burst Margaret Wente’s post-Christmas feel-good bubble, but Africa did not have a year without polio, at least not if you care about the symptoms (sudden onset juvenile paralysis). The problem is that the World Health Organization calls this Acute Flaccid Paralysis if poliovirus is not found. And this is not a trivial problem because cases have risen from about 14,000 in 1996, the first year for which WHO bothered to collect statistics, and have been over 100,000 a year since 2011.

Margaret Wente apparently doesn’t know about this. WHO just documents it. And even when people are informed, they don’t seem to care. Because deep down westerners care about disease in poor countries only when they fear it might spread. And although WHO claims ignorance as to the cause, they have admitted that some of the cases are probably caused by exposure to pesticides. But who cares about children dying from poverty and pollution in lands far away? Certainly not WHO. Probably not you.

WHO Polio and AFP Statistics

A more realistic view of university troubles

[submitted to the Globe and Mail, but not published]

While Tom Flanagan is right that American Universities are in crisis, his thinly veiled racism is uncalled for. First of all he claims that marks have been inflated, with university being dumbed down from the good old days when he (and I) studied. But then he criticizes affirmative action claiming that the students who benefit from this (obviously people of colour) struggle to succeed. Joining the dots he is saying that black students simply aren’t even up to the dumbed down standards of today and shouldn’t get all uppity and try to go to colleges where smart white people go.

Flanagan is correct when he describes a US education bubble, both based on increased enrollment and unsustainable student loans. But I assume that his right-wing politics are what don’t allow him to point out that it is greedy for-profit lenders and the greedy for-profit colleges that have created this problem (and of course a US government that is for-the-profit and not for-the-people). Although Canada could certainly do better (low-cost or free university education would be a start) I don’t know of any signs that Canada is being parasitized by colleges whose main aim is to get students to take out loans for an education that will not meet the promises in the advertising materials.

Did Trudeau Favor Men in his Cabinet?

Published in the Globe and Mail

November 7, 2015

Whenever gender equity is discussed (or any other kind of employment equity) skeptics raise the concern that some women might be picked simply because they are needed to reach 50%, and therefore some more qualified men might lose out. But the possibility that Trudeau, for example, had more qualified women than men is never considered. Perhaps some men only got a cabinet position because although there were more qualified women, Trudeau wanted to boost the number of men to achieve parity.