Juno News - Single-Use Plastics, No-Use Governments

00:00:00.000 Welcome to Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.

00:00:06.700 This is The Andrew Lawton Show, brought to you by True North.

00:00:12.940 Coming up, Justin Trudeau's virtue signaling ban of single-use plastics,

00:00:17.240 Yelp joining cancel culture, and MP Garnet Janis pushing back against an ad taking aim at large families.

00:00:25.440 The Andrew Lawton Show starts right now.

00:00:30.000 Hello and welcome to Canada's Most Irreverent Talk Show.

00:00:35.440 This is The Andrew Lawton Show here on True North.

00:00:38.000 It is Friday, October 9th, 2020, the Friday before a long weekend for those of you watching from Canada.

00:00:45.460 So hope you all are getting ready to have a momentous occasion that is Thanksgiving.

00:00:50.560 And I hope you have a great time with your family doing whatever it is you're doing, whatever it is you're allowed to do.

00:00:55.740 I don't know. We have the Teresa Tam advice of having a virtual Thanksgiving.

00:01:01.080 So that is where you just go on Zoom and you make a giant, you know, 27-pound turkey for yourself.

00:01:08.040 And everyone on the Zoom call makes their own giant 27-pound turkey.

00:01:12.180 So you actually slaughter like 19 times as many turkeys in Canada to do a virtual Thanksgiving.

00:01:18.360 You know, I wonder if PETA should be the one most prone to actually condemning this public health advice because now everyone has to make their own bird.

00:01:26.440 This is like going to be the Thanksgiving Day massacre if Teresa Tam gets her way. 1.00

00:01:30.820 But whether you're having a virtual or an in-person Thanksgiving, I hope you have a great one.

00:01:35.280 Just a bit of an update from a story I actually broke on Monday on True North and also on my show, on the Andrew Lawton Show,

00:01:42.900 that the federal government had sponsored an ad encouraging people to take grandma on a Niagara Falls vacation.

00:01:50.460 And this was particularly noteworthy because the federal government was also saying we're in a second wave.

00:01:55.580 It's so dangerous. Don't go outside. Try not to travel. And all of that sort of stuff.

00:01:59.980 And the ad in particular was a Niagara Falls tourism ad that was funded by the Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario.

00:02:09.580 And I had done my due diligence. I had reached out to the agency and not actually heard back by the time our story went out

00:02:16.120 and by the time my show went out. But I did hear back following the story.

00:02:21.220 And what was interesting is that the federal government has actually now disowned this ad.

00:02:26.160 The federal government said to me that, no, no, no, they're requesting the logo is pulled.

00:02:32.140 They didn't approve it. They actually passed the buck to the tourism agency in Ontario that they give the money to,

00:02:39.400 that then distributes the money to other local tourism groups.

00:02:43.240 And that agency said, yeah, yeah, we're pulling the ad altogether.

00:02:46.660 Now, the interesting part further to that is that as of when I'm recording this, the ad has not been pulled.

00:02:54.760 It's still online. It's still being advertised.

00:02:57.440 And I had a few people reach out to me on Thursday evening last night say, hey, I'm still seeing it on TV.

00:03:02.720 I thought you said they were pulling it. So I don't know when they're pulling it.

00:03:06.200 They say they are. But again, it doesn't seem like they're moving at too rapid a pace.

00:03:10.200 But true north gets results. And again, people should understand here.

00:03:14.340 My issue is not that you shouldn't be able to, you know, go to Niagara Falls with your grandma if that's what you want.

00:03:19.200 My issue is with the doublespeak from politicians, with the hypocrisy on one hand from them saying, hey, you can't do this.

00:03:25.620 But on the other hand, just dispensing money every which way and every which direction to say, hey, tourism, fine.

00:03:32.320 You want to run ads? Here you go. Have some money.

00:03:34.000 And it was the double standard, the doublespeak and the talking out of both sides of their mouths that I found so egregious about that.

00:03:42.740 And this is where we also, I guess, have a natural segue into the liberals long awaited plastics ban.

00:03:49.560 Yes, the liberals have brought this idea back from the dead, or at least we hoped it was from the dead.

00:03:54.760 But no, it is very much alive again of banning single use plastics, including grocery bags, takeout containers, straws by 2021.

00:04:04.440 Now, the liberals promised this in 2019.

00:04:07.220 And of course, when the pandemic hit, we realized that single use plastics are actually the safest and most hygienic things you can have in a society.

00:04:16.580 But oh, no, no, no, no, the liberals did not want that.

00:04:19.820 They want to go after them, baseless virtue signaling to get rid of plastic.

00:04:23.660 After we've gone through the most pivotal point, I think, in single use plastics, where everything's shrink wrapped, everything is one time use, everything's disposable.

00:04:31.540 Because that was the easiest way and the safest way and the cleanest way to go about things.

00:04:38.040 But the liberals are doing this.

00:04:39.720 They've announced it at the Museum of History, where the actually the last time I was at the Museum of History was for the leaders debate.

00:04:47.060 So it's just a place where bad things happen.

00:04:49.700 But the government says these things are harmful to the environment.

00:04:53.420 They're hard to recycle, and there are readily available alternatives.

00:04:57.100 So just looking at the list here, grocery checkout bags, straws, stir sticks, six pack rings for cans of cans of beer and pop and whatever, plastic cutlery, food takeout containers made from hard to recycle plastics like black plastic packaging.

00:05:13.020 And this is going to happen by the end of 2021, it sounds like.

00:05:18.300 And when you look at this, it's actually, I mean, it's flawed for a number of reasons.

00:05:24.140 For starters, you're just going to war with an industry for no particular reason.

00:05:29.700 And the other part is the fact that it just doesn't really work, because people have to replace these things with something for the most part.

00:05:37.280 Now, if you go to a restaurant and a restaurant says, OK, we're not going to give you a straw or we're going to give you a paper straw, which, by the way, a first world problem I know, paper straws are terrible.

00:05:47.420 Because if you like to nurse your drinks like I do sometimes, you have the drink for like 15 minutes and then eventually you just have like a paper mache sculpture in your drink.

00:05:56.020 Because the straw has just like collapsed on itself and is now breeding new life into your iced tea or Pepsi or whatever it is.

00:06:03.760 So that part's bad.

00:06:05.240 So restaurants can say, all right, we're going to give you a paper straw or no straw at all.

00:06:09.240 And yeah, you know, you can sip and the ice hits your teeth.

00:06:11.900 But whatever.

00:06:12.540 Get no ice.

00:06:13.240 Fine.

00:06:14.080 Stir sticks at Starbucks.

00:06:16.220 OK, you can use the wooden ones or you can use I guess you can't use a straw now.

00:06:20.080 But the plastic bags are interesting because what happens when you are told you can't have a plastic bag?

00:06:26.440 You aren't just going to carry your groceries out.

00:06:28.640 You replace it with something else.

00:06:31.240 So you either buy reusable bags, which get very dirty and ragged and tattered.

00:06:36.400 And if you're like me, you always forget them, which means you buy probably like five of them every time you go grocery stopping.

00:06:41.580 And I think I've actually got, you know, 172 of these things at some point.

00:06:46.580 And alternatively, you get a big paper bag.

00:06:50.500 And this was actually interesting and good on CBC for doing the story.

00:06:54.640 I didn't realize this, that the paper bags take four times as much energy to manufacture as plastic bags do.

00:07:03.360 This is according to a 2011 research paper produced in Northern Ireland.

00:07:07.860 They found that paper has an environmental footprint and that even making millions of paper bags and transporting them costs more in terms of transportation and greenhouse gases than it would for the equivalent number of paper bags.

00:07:21.300 Because they're paper, which is flimsier and weaker, the paper has to be thicker, which means they're heavier.

00:07:26.920 And this is something that even if you are using them and they can compost, you're still in manufacturing them using more resources than you would on so-called single-use plastics.

00:07:37.560 And the article also mentions out that people use single-use plastic bags for other things, such as for picking up dog poo or using them as liners for garbage bins or any number of other things.

00:07:50.360 And again, you tend to amass more of them than you're reusing.

00:07:53.780 But the point is, is that you can't really reuse a paper bag.

00:07:57.180 A paper bag is truly single-use and it took a lot more energy and negative environmental aspects to get to that point than it does for a plastic bag, which is small, which is light, which is thin, and ultimately is a lot more durable.

00:08:12.120 I've had the liquor store in Ontario has used paper bags for quite some time and I've had it happen where you just, if there's just a slight weakness in the bag, it just rips open and your, whatever your libation of choice is goes all over the place.

00:08:25.740 If it's going to happen, make sure it happens in the store so they replace it for you, in any case.

00:08:30.200 So what we're seeing here is a liberal government that is once again ignoring the axiom that it pledged its election on, which was evidence-based decision-making.

00:08:41.760 Evidence-based decision-making, that's what they said it all was.

00:08:44.460 They're turning their back on that and it's all about wanting to be seen as just so progressive and hip and they're going to be getting the Vox endorsement and Jacinda Ardern's going to love what they're doing.

00:08:56.920 They're going to be doing all of these international things that aren't actually helping Canadians.

00:09:02.500 And I'm just talking about the feasibility and the efficacy of this.

00:09:07.060 I haven't even talked about the business component, the millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars, that this will cost businesses who are not equipped to manufacture paper bags because they are plastics businesses or other companies and agencies as well, small and large businesses that are invested heavily in this.

00:09:27.000 And now we see that the government just doesn't care.

00:09:32.680 And yeah, you know what, if someone is manufacturing a product that is outlawed in some way, it's always going to be disruptive.

00:09:41.200 But to do it on a product or a line of products, a type of products, when there is no benefit to what the government is proposing makes no sense.

00:09:51.500 And again, it's not about the oceans.

00:09:53.040 You know, everyone has seen the, you know, horrific video and I won't play it because I just don't like it.

00:09:57.660 I don't like seeing suffering of animals.

00:09:59.540 But, you know, the turtle that had the straw stuck up its nose.

00:10:02.580 We've seen animals that are stuck in those little six can ring holders.

00:10:07.540 We've seen all of these things.

00:10:09.140 The waste that we put away in Canada is not the waste that's ending up in oceans.

00:10:15.420 There is a problem in Asia and Africa.

00:10:18.920 And I think the study was that 90% of all plastic in the ocean ended up coming from just a few rivers, the vast majority of which were in Asia.

00:10:29.540 Most of them or all of them were Asia, Africa combined.

00:10:33.080 And that's the reality here.

00:10:34.940 So Canada banning plastics, it's like Canada reducing greenhouse gas emissions, doesn't deal with the root of the problem.

00:10:42.700 If you think this is a problem, which is industrialization in China and India and so on and so forth.

00:10:50.160 And that's not to say we shouldn't do anything in general when we have environmental questions that are raised.

00:10:55.480 But this particular one does more harm than good.

00:11:00.340 We'll be back in a moment with more of The Andrew Lawton Show here on True North.

00:11:03.860 Welcome back to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:11:12.740 A couple of smaller stories here that I think combined speak to a bigger problem that we have in society right now.

00:11:19.720 The first comes from my province of Ontario, where Ontario wants to ban physical contact and body checking in the OHL.

00:11:28.640 Now this is coming from the Conservative government, Sports Minister Lisa McLeod, who I actually get along with quite a bit.

00:11:35.320 She said it's safe to say that body contact, unless it's incremental, will not be permitted as a result of COVID-19.

00:11:42.140 So if the OHL, which is the league that has, among others, the London Knights, the Sarnia Sting, and probably a few others, I believe it's hockey.

00:11:49.900 They are saying that, you know, if they're going to have a 2020-2021 hockey season, then body contact would have to be incremental.

00:12:01.260 That's what they say, and this would pose a challenge to how they amend their play.

00:12:07.840 Now apparently the OHL commissioner is part of an advisory committee giving guidance to the minister.

00:12:14.380 So he is on board, they're ready to do it.

00:12:17.120 But at a certain point, I'm not sure you can change the fundamental nature of a sport and still play it.

00:12:23.480 Like I was watching the other day, and I'm not a big sports person, as you well know, but I was watching some sport that I can't even remember.

00:12:30.260 It was football.

00:12:30.880 I was watching football, an NFL football game.

00:12:32.940 And they have obviously some changes in terms of how it looks, like the audience is not full, and you've got coaches and people on the sidelines that are wearing masks.

00:12:42.560 But the gameplay itself is fine.

00:12:44.800 The gameplay itself remains the same.

00:12:47.000 If they were to say all of a sudden, you know, the NFL has switched to like, you know, flag football, where you just like, you have to like pull the flag of, you know, Patrick Mahomes before you're sacking him, that would be probably not as good.

00:12:59.420 Now, I mean, granted, the NFL has jumped the shark in other ways, so it's entirely possible they would do that.

00:13:04.600 But to change the nature of the sport, which is what's happening here, I mean, to say, like, because activists have been trying to get rid of physical contact from a lot of sports, including hockey, for a while.

00:13:13.940 So we can't let COVID-19 be the way that they get that through, the way that they get to do that.

00:13:19.760 So that's coming.

00:13:20.940 If you're an Ontario hockey viewer, be mindful of that if you're ready for what's coming down the line.

00:13:26.500 Now, just on a completely unrelated note, I had someone reach out last week.

00:13:30.820 I think it was last week.

00:13:31.840 They were upset that I had said when I was interviewing Randy Hillier, who's an Ontario member of the provincial parliament, that I had said an MPP is the Ontario equivalent of an MLA.

00:13:43.940 Because they said that, well, not every province has MLAs.

00:13:48.280 There are two provinces that have other things.

00:13:50.780 And I said, yeah, but those two provinces are Quebec and Newfoundland, which combined, I don't think, make up the Andrew Lawton show viewing demographic as much as provinces governed by MPPs and MLAs do.

00:14:04.520 So I made this just as like an illustrative thing, because I realized that Ontario is the only province in Canada that has an MPP as the provincial representative.

00:14:13.700 So when I said it's the Ontario equivalent of an MLA, that was covering people in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and the territories.

00:14:22.580 And someone didn't like it.

00:14:23.820 So they may have been from Newfoundland or Quebec, but either way, I hope you all knew I wasn't trying to be like an Ontario supremacist in any way.

00:14:32.460 I was just trying to illustrate.

00:14:34.700 So we're all playing from the same rules here, unlike the OHL.

00:14:37.960 This is a big problem, though.

00:14:40.520 Yelp, which is a review place, it's kind of like the new modern phone book of sorts, has introduced a new rule where they're introducing, well, it's a new alert system, rather, to stand against racism.

00:14:53.420 This is what Yelp says on Twitter.

00:14:54.760 In the last few months, we've seen that there is a clear need to warn customers about businesses associated with egregious, racially charged actions to help people make more informed spending decisions.

00:15:07.240 Communities have always turned to Yelp in reaction to current events, and our user operations team already places alerts on business pages when we notice an unusual uptick in reviews that are based on what someone may have seen in the news, rather than on a firsthand experience.

00:15:22.060 Now, when a business gains attention for reports of racist conduct, Yelp will place a new business accused of racist behavior alert on their Yelp page to inform users, along with a link to a news article where they can learn more.

00:15:39.160 So what Yelp is now participating in is cancel culture to the point of ruining your business.

00:15:45.680 The whole point of Yelp and TripAdvisor is that you have, as a business, the ability to put your stuff out there, but you don't actually get to control other people's experiences.

00:15:56.300 So if someone says, you know what, the soup was cold, and they give you a one-star review, that's there.

00:16:00.980 You can't change that.

00:16:02.240 You can respond to it, but you can't change it, because Yelp believes that it has a right to be the database for user experiences, which is fine.

00:16:10.320 That's part of what business reviews are about.

00:16:12.580 But here's the thing, now they're going down this cancel culture road to say that they are going to brand your business as being a racist enterprise.

00:16:23.140 That's what they're talking about.

00:16:24.200 They say, business accused of racist behavior alert.

00:16:28.140 Now, if someone is a racist business owner and behaves in a racist way, yes, people are obviously going to talk about that.

00:16:34.740 They're going to get bad reviews and bad ratings, and there's going to be media coverage.

00:16:39.140 But eventually, media coverage wanes.

00:16:41.160 Well, if you're going to Yelp to check out a business, that's going to be there, it sounds like, for the entirety of the business's future.

00:16:49.720 There's also another aspect of this, though, which is what I find so dangerous, is that now Yelp basically is going to be just taking the media narrative of what's happened in a particular company, even when that's not necessarily true.

00:17:03.720 How many times have we seen cases where someone was accused of a racist act or a hate crime and we learned that it was either a hoax or that there was more to it than met the eye, that there was a personality clash between two people?

00:17:18.600 One really famous one, and I ended up breaking the story when I was contributing to Rebel a few years ago, was that a woman in a grocery store in London, Ontario, not an employee, she had been accused of an anti-Islamic hate crime against someone else in the store.

00:17:34.320 And the part of the story that the media didn't report on was that this woman was herself an Iranian immigrant.

00:17:40.060 So there's a very real chance that she herself was a Muslim or had Muslim roots.

00:17:44.800 And ultimately, what we saw was that that part of the story was tremendously relevant, but didn't actually make it into most of the coverage.

00:17:52.840 Now, all of that is besides the point.

00:17:56.040 So Yelp has decided to get into the cancel game.

00:17:58.860 So if someone, for some reason, accuses you of being a racist and the media picks it up, which we know they love to do, this will now become a part of your Yelp identity.

00:18:08.980 And you can't opt out of this.

00:18:10.800 You can't opt out of this process.

00:18:13.460 And this is quite a heartbreaking reality because there are a lot of business owners that are honestly just trying to do their very best.

00:18:20.340 They have enough hurdles and enough barriers that they have to deal with throughout the year.

00:18:24.660 This year, in particular, with the pandemic, there are even more challenges.

00:18:28.220 And now you throw one more, which is some race-baiting person looking for their time in the spotlight decides to concoct an allegation of racism for whatever reason.

00:18:38.480 And this is permanently tied to the business they don't like.

00:18:41.740 And to be clear, this is not me saying that racism doesn't exist.

00:18:46.280 It's not me saying that there can't be racial or racist conduct from a business owner.

00:18:50.740 It's to say that this is very much skewing against giving anyone the benefit of the doubt that it, well, anyone on the business side the benefit of the doubt, and now assuming the very worst about society.

00:19:02.360 And Yelp should be ashamed of themselves.

00:19:04.100 I've always been someone who uses TripAdvisor instead.

00:19:07.180 And I know it's kind of a moot point because I'm not giving either money.

00:19:10.200 But even giving them clicks, I will not use Yelp after this, legitimately.

00:19:13.760 When we come back, more of The Andrew Lawton Show here on True North.

00:19:19.220 You're tuned in to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:19:23.220 A couple weeks ago, people in Vancouver were shocked to see ads seeking to shame those who have more than one child.

00:19:29.660 One such ad declared,

00:19:31.140 The most loving gift you can give your child is not to have another, beside the picture of a black baby. 0.99

00:19:36.480 This ad reminds us of racist undertones which have often been associated with the population control movement,

00:19:41.420 targeting minority communities in particular with the message that they should have fewer children.

00:19:45.840 But it also perpetuates the false and disproven idea that large families are bad for society.

00:19:51.080 In reality, parents who make the sacrifice of raising children into productive citizens should be celebrated and not stigmatized.

00:19:57.420 Honestly, parents of large families have enough to worry about.

00:20:00.300 Having a larger population of younger people entering the workforce helps to ensure that there are enough taxpayers supporting the needs of our seniors.

00:20:08.100 So my riding association is fighting back.

00:20:10.340 We are taking out ads on buses sharing one of my favorite quotes from Mother Teresa.

00:20:14.500 How can there be too many children?

00:20:16.160 That is like saying there are too many flowers.

00:20:18.540 I will continue to stand up for families.

00:20:20.540 That right there was a statement in the House of Commons by Conservative MP and Shadow Minister for International Development Garnet Jenis,

00:20:28.700 taking aim at an ad campaign in Vancouver that, as he noted, has been called bold by some media outlets.

00:20:35.780 But in actuality, I think, is raising issues that Canadians should be very concerned about, not just at home, but around the world.

00:20:43.260 The ad itself was basically saying, and you can see there a picture of a black baby,

00:20:48.300 the most loving gift you can give your first child is to not have another.

00:20:53.840 MP Garnet Jenis joins me on the line now.

00:20:56.440 Garnet, good to talk to you.

00:20:57.340 Thanks for coming on again.

00:20:58.900 Great to talk to you too, Andrew.

00:20:59.860 Thanks for the opportunity.

00:21:00.960 Now, why did this rub you the wrong way, this ad campaign? 0.98

00:21:04.980 Well, I think on the face of it, some people are just inclined to say, well, this is kind of stupid and keep walking. 0.96

00:21:11.500 But as a politician, I'm noticing some of the broader trends in this, right? 0.98

00:21:18.660 It's not the first time that somebody has tried to push this message, this false message,

00:21:23.920 claiming that people who have sort of more than one child are being socially irresponsible.

00:21:29.100 You see some, quote-unquote, climate change people that try to deliver this message saying,

00:21:35.320 well, you know, if you have more children, they're going to consume more resources, 0.97

00:21:38.620 and that's going to cause climate change. 0.99

00:21:41.140 But, you know, there's also been a lot of these kind of coercive population control programs

00:21:47.180 that have targeted minority communities, that have targeted the developing world,

00:21:51.460 with this kind of false message that, you know, telling people you shouldn't have more children.

00:21:56.580 And it's based on totally debunked economic theories.

00:22:01.080 The idea that we need or benefit from population control is completely contrary to everything we've seen

00:22:09.040 in terms of how, you know, population has been able to grow dramatically in the 20th century

00:22:15.700 without negative impacts in terms of development associated with that.

00:22:20.660 So it's just pushing this false message that shames people with sort of medium-sized or larger families.

00:22:29.760 But also it's just false, it's incorrect, and it's, you know, nobody should feel bad,

00:22:35.960 nobody should feel guilty about having more children.

00:22:39.680 In fact, you know, we see how in societies that have very low birth rates, aging population,

00:22:46.220 it becomes harder and harder for those societies to care for their seniors.

00:22:49.180 If you don't have enough people entering the workforce relative to the number of seniors,

00:22:53.040 then it becomes harder to provide the services that elderly people need

00:22:58.880 in order to continue to thrive in older age.

00:23:02.360 Oh, yeah, we see that happening in a particularly stark way in Japan,

00:23:05.760 where I think the latest stories that I've seen have been about finding robots

00:23:09.900 to work in, you know, their equivalent of nursing homes 0.89

00:23:12.580 because they just don't have a young workforce.

00:23:14.900 But even in Canada, we had last week from Statistics Canada,

00:23:18.300 the report that our fertility rate here has reached an all-time low.

00:23:22.700 So, I mean, whether this is good or bad for the country is a separate discussion,

00:23:26.520 but the idea that an ad campaign needs to be telling people to have fewer kids

00:23:30.940 when we're already having statistically and historically an all-time low amount of them

00:23:36.320 just doesn't seem to make sense.

00:23:37.900 It's like, how low do they want it?

00:23:39.380 Yeah, and I would never, you know, tell people how many children to have one way or the other.

00:23:44.920 Some people, you know, for a variety of reasons, choose to have fewer children.

00:23:49.260 There's some people out there who I know who might want to have more children who can't

00:23:53.340 because of whatever aspect of their circumstances.

00:23:55.320 And I'm certainly not advocating the opposite, where we shame people for not having children.

00:23:59.960 But there's a reality at the wider social level, which is that if you don't have

00:24:04.620 a certain level of people entering the workforce, it just becomes harder to support

00:24:09.360 those that are leaving the workforce.

00:24:12.440 And I think that's a reality in a lot of places.

00:24:14.560 I mean, Japan is an interesting example, of course, because they, you know,

00:24:17.360 they don't have the same kind of immigration that you see in, you know,

00:24:20.940 in North America, in Western Europe.

00:24:23.660 And immigration certainly kind of fills part of the gap, but it can't be the whole story

00:24:32.420 for two reasons.

00:24:33.820 One, because, you know, sometimes there's a, you know, if you have newer people coming

00:24:41.580 that don't have a social or relational connection with those that are aging, the kind of care

00:24:47.900 and support that used to happen inside of families isn't present.

00:24:51.620 I think, you know, Ross Dothit makes this point very well in his recent book, Decadent Society.

00:24:57.500 But the other issue, and sort of the more obvious issue, is that if you promote this

00:25:00.760 kind of population reduction, population control message throughout the world, at some point,

00:25:06.360 immigration can't plug that hole, right?

00:25:08.440 If some societies have declining birth rates, that can be kind of responded to through immigration.

00:25:16.000 But if all societies are having dramatically declining birth rates and the global,

00:25:20.980 the aging population phenomenon becomes truly global, then you don't have the immigration 0.83

00:25:25.980 solution.

00:25:27.120 Yeah, I'm glad you actually brought up that point, because I know this has become a contentious

00:25:30.920 issue for moral reasons.

00:25:32.920 When we see international groups, or in some cases, governments that are prioritizing and

00:25:37.560 funding overseas birth control and abortion.

00:25:40.200 But there is a demographic aspect of that debate that's distinct from any moral one, it sounds

00:25:45.140 like.

00:25:47.180 Yeah, I mean, I certainly think there is where, I mean, I think there's different aspects to

00:25:53.260 the sort of international population conversation.

00:25:55.900 I mean, some of it is about questions of autonomy and, you know, bracketing the abortion conversation,

00:26:04.120 which is obviously controversial, controversial for a lot of legitimate reasons.

00:26:08.180 You know, I think, you know, it certainly makes sense for people to have information and awareness

00:26:13.960 about, you know, how they might be able to space children in their families and exercising

00:26:18.280 agency.

00:26:19.520 And, you know, but this crosses a line when people are put, have this message pushed on them

00:26:26.920 that you should have smaller families, or that smaller families is sort of necessary as part

00:26:31.980 of the road to development.

00:26:34.140 I don't think that's true.

00:26:36.660 I think there's maybe a correlation where, as countries develop economically, people have

00:26:41.100 fewer children, in many cases, because, you know, there are lots of reasons why that correlation

00:26:47.140 exists.

00:26:48.220 But I don't think it's causal.

00:26:51.580 And what we see is that countries that have really taken on this idea in a big way that

00:26:58.600 lower population leads to economic development, you end up with very, very coercive policies.

00:27:04.200 The clearest example is China's one-child policy, right? 0.77

00:27:06.540 This is somebody, you know, the one-child policy was taking the logic, quote-unquote, of this ad

00:27:12.380 and making it a coercive policy in a very sort of firm, aggressive sense.

00:27:18.060 And the one-child policy just has caused untold misery, you know, estimated millions of cases

00:27:27.620 of baby girls being victims of infanticide, you know, and all kinds of coercive control of families.

00:27:35.680 And the result of it now in China, starting to see it, but it's going to be more pronounced

00:27:41.500 in the years ahead is demographic winter, an aging population, you know, challenges in

00:27:48.240 terms of growth associated with that, and also skewed sex ratios, far, far more young

00:27:53.720 men than young women.

00:27:55.760 So these are these effects of coercive family planning policies.

00:28:00.660 So, you know, I think, you know, giving people agency in a way that respects human dignity,

00:28:06.400 you know, and helping people understand aspects of, you know, how to make choices about family

00:28:13.260 size, you know, is very different from pushing the message that you should have fewer children,

00:28:18.300 you should have smaller families, and the latter is totally wrong, coercive, and not something

00:28:24.300 that we should be a part of.

00:28:25.560 Yeah, and we are seeing some of the stigma on this as well.

00:28:28.520 I mean, one notable example is the Supreme Court justice nominee Amy Coney Barrett in the

00:28:33.520 U.S., a large family.

00:28:34.680 This has become central to a lot of the criticism she's getting in the media.

00:28:38.980 Turning to the policy side of things, though, I know Hungary has tried to boost its birth

00:28:44.240 rate, and they've put forward, I think, a year ago or so as a plan where they pay families

00:28:49.440 who have, I believe it was three or more children.

00:28:52.280 Do you think that governments need to start trying to have proactive measures, or do you

00:28:57.460 think it's simply, as you were saying at the beginning, just don't tell people not

00:29:00.920 to, just don't tell people what to do in this area?

00:29:03.140 Well, I think, you know, government should obviously tread very carefully.

00:29:09.300 I mean, at the end of the day, these are private decisions.

00:29:12.100 I think the first step is government making sure that we're not in any way funding or

00:29:18.120 supporting programs or organizations that are pushing kind of a false, coercive, you know,

00:29:24.820 you should have fewer children type of message.

00:29:28.360 You know, there are, I think, international organizations that have treaded very close

00:29:35.780 to the line, if not over the line, in terms of not just supporting choice and agency, but

00:29:39.960 actually pushing the idea that, you know, smaller families is desirable and you should

00:29:45.560 have smaller families.

00:29:46.560 So that's, you know, one thing government needs to watch out for is that they're not

00:29:50.340 kind of part of pushing these false messages.

00:29:54.200 I mentioned that China's one-child policy, and it's worth noting that the UN Population

00:29:58.220 Fund set up a information gathering system around population in the same year that the

00:30:04.740 one-child policy was created.

00:30:06.760 And then an award was given to those who were involved in starting the one-child policy.

00:30:12.200 And, you know, the UN Population Fund says they don't have anything to do with coercive

00:30:16.280 population programs.

00:30:17.660 But, you know, the realities in terms of the information gathering system, you know, so I

00:30:23.380 think these are things that government policy needs to be attentive to.

00:30:28.120 In terms of looking at the Hungarian model and that, I mean, I think we don't want finances 1.00

00:30:35.240 to be an undue barrier for people that are looking to start families.

00:30:40.700 And I think that means looking at aspects of our tax system, not with an eye to say, like,

00:30:47.980 you know, you should have one particular size of family or another, but just with an eye

00:30:52.100 to fairness.

00:30:53.960 So one thing I think about in this context, for instance, is the way our progressive tax

00:30:59.180 system works.

00:30:59.760 Our progressive tax system is designed to say that, you know, if you have a lot more,

00:31:05.240 more money sitting around, you can pay a higher percentage of your income in tax, right?

00:31:09.700 But it doesn't really always fully take into consideration the fact that if you have a,

00:31:17.660 you know, a medium to high income, but you're supporting a large family while doing it, you

00:31:24.200 don't exactly have the same kind of cash on hand as somebody who is making that same income

00:31:30.740 and single.

00:31:32.140 And if our progressive tax system is supposed to reflect the ability of people to pay into

00:31:38.120 that tax system, then maybe we need to look at, you know, tax policy that just reflects

00:31:43.800 the realities of what families are experiencing.

00:31:46.820 Especially when you take into consideration the fact that those that are having larger families,

00:31:51.080 those children will grow up and also pay taxes and continue to support the existence of

00:31:56.060 our social programs while their parents are moving into the sort of post-work age category.

00:32:05.760 Yeah.

00:32:05.940 And looking through some of the changes that the Liberals put in a couple of years ago that

00:32:10.240 went over, went after family businesses and, you know, income sharing among families.

00:32:15.040 I mean, that's another area that as well penalizes people whose families are very integrated,

00:32:19.340 involved and economically successful running a business.

00:32:22.120 Yeah, yeah, absolutely.

00:32:25.280 And, I mean, we're facing a real crunch, obviously, with the obscene deficits the governments are

00:32:33.140 running right now.

00:32:34.180 But that's why, you know, in principle, of course, you know, the income splitting issue is just

00:32:41.260 quite clear cut that we consume resources as families, not as individuals.

00:32:48.660 And it makes sense for taxation to be considered.

00:32:50.760 And I think, like, the income splitting debate was always kind of skewed by the left to say,

00:32:55.360 is this about providing a tax cut to this particular group or that particular group?

00:33:00.480 It was never about deciding to preference one group or another.

00:33:04.500 It was about tax fairness.

00:33:05.860 It was about saying that if you have two families that are making the same income,

00:33:10.820 they should pay the same rate of tax.

00:33:12.540 And whether you're talking about making $50,000 a year, making $200,000 a year, and whether you

00:33:20.040 want to make other adjustments to other brackets to offset it, the principle should be same family

00:33:25.460 income, same rate of tax.

00:33:29.140 Now, I know you've spoken out against this ad campaign in the House of Commons, and I appreciate

00:33:33.820 you joining me to do it as well.

00:33:35.440 You've also decided with your riding association to fight fire with fire.

00:33:39.480 Tell me about the ad you're running.

00:33:40.840 Sure, yeah.

00:33:42.540 Well, we've got an ad that's going to be starting.

00:33:47.040 I'm not sure exactly when it's going to be starting, but, you know, within the next couple

00:33:50.320 of weeks on some buses in Vancouver.

00:33:53.960 And it's a non-confrontational, non-judgment ad that just says, it quotes Mother Teresa saying,

00:34:02.120 how can there be too many children?

00:34:03.700 That would be like saying there are too many flowers.

00:34:06.520 That's to recognize that the children are wonderful, children are a blessing.

00:34:12.560 And, you know, I think people celebrate children.

00:34:20.260 And the idea that people should be shamed for having children is not acceptable.

00:34:26.020 So I just posted on social media about the ads were going to be running and gotten a great

00:34:30.320 response.

00:34:30.800 I should say the ads have a photo of four children.

00:34:33.180 Those are actually my children.

00:34:35.020 One of the things that I thought when I saw this ad telling people to have fewer children

00:34:39.240 with a picture of a young black child is thinking, you know, this child, you know, having their

00:34:46.260 image used to promote the idea that not having, that you shouldn't have children, you know,

00:34:51.980 imagine how that person is going to feel when they get older and they hear about how their

00:34:55.940 image is used in this ad, you know.

00:34:59.040 And so rather than find a stock image somewhere, I know my kids love being part of a big family

00:35:05.620 and they're very happy to be seen smiling at folks walking around looking at Vancouver

00:35:12.160 buses.

00:35:13.220 All right.

00:35:13.860 Well, their career in public life is getting off to a good start then too.

00:35:17.480 Sherwood Park, Fort Saskatchewan, Member of Parliament, Garnet Janis.

00:35:20.660 Always a pleasure, sir.

00:35:21.580 Thanks for joining.

00:35:22.760 Thanks so much.

00:35:23.340 Great to chat with you.

00:35:24.880 Well, that does it for me.

00:35:25.880 My thanks again to MP Garnet Janis and all of you for tuning into today's show.

00:35:30.340 Hope you have a great Thanksgiving weekend.

00:35:32.020 We'll talk to you next week.

00:35:33.320 Thank you.

00:35:33.820 God bless and good day, Canada.

00:35:35.620 If you enjoy the show and want to hear more of it, we need your support.

00:35:39.640 Head on over to andrewlaughtonshow.com and click donate to support the work that we're

00:35:44.480 doing and stand up for independent media.

00:35:46.800 Thanks for listening to The Andrew Lawton Show.

00:35:48.640 Support the program by donating to True North at www.tnc.news.

Juno News - October 09, 2020

Single-Use Plastics, No-Use Governments

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript