Day 5, Part 1

The sun came up on the fifth day. I had been holding my arms close about my chest for hours in a feeble attempt to fight off the cold air. The storm from yesterday had moved on and the sun hung bright in the morning sky, but it gave no warmth. I staggered forward a few more paces before falling to my knees. My brain barely registered the pain. We made progress through the night as best we could in the darkness of the woods, neither one of us had even a headlamp to help light the way. We never stopped, never rested, though both of us fell and struggled to get back up more than once. Little Foot was flagging more than I was by the end; for the past hour, her pace was no faster than a crawl. Her head was drooping and lulling to the side, her arms hanging limp. Little Foot’s face did seem to soften with the first light of dawn, as though the sun could hold the terror at bay.

Little Foot slumped down next to me on the trail, I was still on my hands and knees, “We can rest here. I have to stop for a moment. Sorry.” The word “Sorry” escaped her lips in a breathless whisper.

I pushed myself into a sitting posture, using my arms to pull my legs into a tolerable position in front of me. “Don’t be.” I replied. “I’m exhausted too. My ankle feels like it’s on fire, I can’t go on either.” 

Instinctively, I reached for my pack, I reached for my few remaining pain killers. But, they were gone. They were miles behind me in the woods somewhere. I sighed and rested my head on the tree to my back.

Little Foot sat down on my right side, leaning her left side into me. “Just a few minutes, okay.” She said, not looking at me. A certain measure of peace had come over her and (by extension me) with the rising sun. Hope had taken a foothold where there was only dread an hour before. I had parked my car at the next trailhead, and we had to be getting close by now. We just had to reach it today. We ended up resting against that gnarled tree for twenty minutes before setting out again. A small measure of resolve restored with the rest. Little Foot became the de facto leader of our two man group; she would set the pace and call our breaks. Both of us kept our heads moving side to side in a sweeping motion as best we could, always trying to peer into the woods as deeply as possible. Straining to see just beyond the last shadow. Both of us would jump and tense at every snapping branch or running deer or crying bird. But, at least, I wasn’t alone. 

Our morning moved along in such a fashion. Neither of us had any food, and my stomach began a slight protest. If Little Foot was hungry, she never said it. We were able to drink from a fast moving rain fed stream that ran near the trail. At little past noon, we stopped for our third break of the day. Exhaustion filled my entire body. My right leg visibly shook under the strain of lowering my body to the ground, my left leg extended in front of me so as to not take any of the weight. Little Foot sat (fell) down next to me. Her face was pale and drained. The gash on her forehead had reopened, a trickle of blood was mixing into her eyebrow. Her eyes looked dim with dark circles around them, her face was drawn. 

“Just a few minutes, okay?” she said to me.

I replied with a nod. And, with that, she leaned into me in the way we had become familiar. She put more of her weight into me than usual. The hope that had clawed its way into my mind was slipping away. Little Foot very well might die out here, even if we never see that monster again. She seemed so frail, so very close to death already. She fell asleep. “Just a few minutes” she had said, but I knew she needed more sleep than that. Little Foot needed so much more than rest, but that was all I could give her. 

I’ll keep watch and let her sleep. She needs rest. Hopefully we can spare an hour. We’ve got to be getting close. 

Day 5, Part 2

A whistling crept through the darkness. My eyes blinked heavily as sunlight edged out the darkness. My mind was simultaneously groggy, incoherent, and spinning in terror. Why was I afraid? Why does my entire body ache? Was someone whistling “Sittin’ on the Dock of the Bay?” My eyes shot wide open as the full weight of my circumstance came crashing down. I could suddenly feel my heart rapidly pounding in my chest. Wincing, I twisted in an attempt to locate the direction of the whistler. Little Foot gently shifted on my shoulder, still peacefully asleep. I shook her shoulder, forgetting about the deep raking gashes on her back. Little Foot’s face sprung to life with equal parts pain and fear. 

“We’ve got to go, now!” I said to her in an urgent whisper. “I can hear him, I think he’s getting close.”

Little Foot managed to get to feet and helped me to mine, both of our faces pulling back in pain. With walking stick in hand, we made our way down the trail. The whistling still faintly clinging to the air, always lingering in the background. After a while of walking, Little Foot asked, “How long was I asleep, and why did you let me sleep? I can’t believe you did that.” She finished with a shake of her head. 

“You needed rest.” I responded. “I was going to stay awake and let you sleep for an hour or so. But, you needed it. You’ve lost too much blood.” I could feel her disappointment, but I didn’t know what to do about it. “Look at you, you’re pale. You look like death.” And, with that, her face shot toward me with a harsh glare.

“You look like crap too!” Little Foot responded in a slightly higher tone. “Come on. We’ve got to move faster.” And so the pace quickened; I had to work hard to not be left behind.

After a mile or so, the whistling faded away. The sun had firmly settled into the western half of the sky, and it was slipping quickly toward the horizon. Little Foot’s frantic pace had slowed and I had caught back up with my hobbling gate. The trees seemed to be crowding the path again, old trees that seemed to crouch over us and cast deep shadows all around. There was a certain amount of comfort in hearing the whistling, we knew that it was some ways behind us. Now, there was no way to know. 

“Back there, when you woke me up,” Little Foot broke the silence. “you said ‘he is getting close.’ What did you mean? Who’s ‘he?’”

“Harry.” I responded without taking my eyes from the trees. “You met Harry on the trail, right?” Little Foot looked confused and shook her head. “He’s the one that chased you out of that campsite. He’s the one that attacked you!” 

“No.” She responded. I left the campsite that night because I saw some sort of bear prowling around. Sniffing at our tents. It wandered off behind the shelter and I got out of there. It was that bear that attacked me.” Her voice broke at the end, and she offered no more information.

I let the silence hang in the air, afraid to break it, but I finally offered “Harry has been following me. He’s always going the other direction, but he keeps popping up. That was him humming back there. He was sitting in the shelter when I got up that morning. Idly humming that same song.” 

We followed a bend in the trail, which put the sun fully behind the mountain. Dark shadows consumed everything. Night started its slow grip on the mountainside. And that’s when the quiet of the forest was broken by a third human voice. “That’s so nice of you to tell her about me. Though I thought you’d mention that we’re friends, I thought we had truly bonded over the past few days. You trying to offer me hiking advice and all.” He chuckled as he finished. “Be careful of the rocks. Thanks for that tidbit” He chuckled. 

Harry had easily overtaken us, and now he was casually sitting in front of us on a log next to the trail. He stood and took a few steps toward us. Little Foot and I had stopped in our tracks. She impulsively reached for my hand, I could feel her trembling. Every hair on my body stood on end. We both took a step back.

“Oh, let’s not do that.” Harry said, “Just sit down.” He gestured to the log he had just left. “Don’t make me chase you, how far could you really get anyway? Plus, I think safety is that way.” He pointed over his shoulder. “Night will be here soon. Sit down, we can talk while we wait.”

With her free hand, Little Foot pulled out her small pocket knife, and brandished it  toward Harry. The knife looked pathetic as it quaked in her fist. “Just let us go! Leave us alone!” She shouted. Tears had welled in her eyes.

Harry put up his hands in mock surrender as he moved aside. “By all means.” Harry said, now gesturing with a little bow down the trail he was no longer blocking.

We slowly walked past Harry, never taking our eyes off of him. He looked like a coiled spring ready to pounce, but he just stood there in his cruel mock bow. Little Foot and I eyed Harry over our shoulders until we reached the next bend in the trail. He straightened but never moved. He just watched us go, like a cat watches a mouse that it will soon play with. The turn took Harry out of sight, and that’s when the whistling picked back up.

Little Foot and I did our best to run. A pathetic sight. We couldn’t put enough distance between us and Harry. The sun was falling into the west, and there was nothing we could do. Night would be here soon. As evening blended into twilight, a glimmer of hope came to us in the form of a sign post. It read, “Parking lot trail 1.5 miles.”

Day 5, Part 3

The shadows stretched longer until dusk overtook everything. Trees were reaching out and clawing at our faces, roots and rocks grabbed at our feet. The dark woods swallowed us. The moon hung full in the sky casting devilish shadows and teasing pools of sickly pale light. Our shuffling run had slowed as we struggled our way through the dark. I jumped at every noise that came from the blackened forest. Owls cried in the night and deer crashed through the brush. I heard all of it as impending doom. A silence crept about the forest, but still “Sittin on the Dock of the Bay” cascaded around my mind. The silence was worse. It held a tenseness that my body strained against. My ears, my eyes, my nose all strained in search of danger. I was now coaxing Little Foot along. She had become even more pale with the moonlight, and she was drained. We had to stop, we needed to stop, but stopping was death. And so, I pulled her along, stumbling along roots and weakly pushing branches away.

Little Foot collapsed to the ground. “I can’t…I can’t…just go” she said through shallow panting breaths. “Leave me.”

“Get up! I’m not leaving. We’ve got to go!” I pulled up on her arm and she cried out in pain. “We can’t stop.” 

I hauled her back to her feet, and she stood slump-shouldered with her head down. I started to lead her down the trail, when Harry’s distant blood curdling scream pierced our ears like daggers. Little Foot lifted her pale face, her eyes locked on to mine, “He’s coming.” Her words should have been a scream, but they came out as an accepted fact.

I found a spurt of new energy. A last push to safety. Surely, my car had to be close by now. My right leg strained to drag my useless left leg into a run, my upper body bearing down on the walking stick for support. Little Foot managed to keep pace. Harry crashed through the woods behind us and a little higher up the mountain. Moonlight pooled on the trail up ahead. Like a divine light, it illuminated a trail junction with a sign post. The downhill path surely leading to the parking lot and to safety. The post was a hundred yards off, one-fifty at most. Burning hot pain shot up my left leg in jolts of agony as I put more and more weight on my left ankle. Little Foot tripped on an unseen root and fell to her hands and knees. “Get up!” I yelled as I pulled mercilessly on her ruined shoulder. “We’re almost there, we can make it!” And, with that, she struggled, for the last time, to her feet.

Harry let out a primal roar. He was closing fast. A crashing noise of crushing bramble and snapping branches exploded from our left. He burst from the forest in front of us, and landed in a pale pool of moonlight. No longer a man, a monster stood in front of us. Red saliva dripped between jagged teeth from his elongated snout. His own blood fell from his mouth to stain thick mats of fur on his chest. Harry stood poised on the balls of his back feet which had transformed into gigantic paws; long nails jutting out and digging into the mud. His eyes, blazing yellow in the moonlight, stared at us in anticipation of the chase. A monstrous werewolf basking in the pale light of the full moon.

Our screams mingled in the air as Little Foot and I clumsily backed away, not daring to look anywhere but at the terror in front of us. I tripped over a hidden root, landing hard on the ground. The werewolf took a single step, its massive paws pushing deep into the mud. Its mouth twisted into a snarl, exposing huge blood stained canines. The stench of carnage and death oozed from that savage muzzle. Once I fell, the beast pounced. In a blur it closed the gap between us. Little Foot, screaming and swearing, was pulling at my shoulders “GET UP! GET UP!” But there was no time, no chance to flee. Little Foot unconsciously took a step back as the monster leapt into the air. Without thought or conscious decision, I brought my walking stick up in front of me. One end buried itself deep into the werewolf’s stomach and the other slammed hard into the ground under my left arm. The werewolf’s terrible muzzle gaping with thick saliva dripping into my face, his eyes popping from their sockets. He hung in the air for a second or a minute (time seemed to have lost all meaning) before the beast came crashing down on top of me. I could hear its ragged and wheezing breaths, the smell of blood swarmed my senses, the werewolf’s sheer bulk crushing my right side. My left hand sunk deep into coarse brown fur as I pushed with whatever strength was still in me. After a moment, Little Foot came to my side and was weakly trying to roll the monster off. Finally, with a last heave and jerking of my own body, I was free.

My walking stick lay broken under the monster, and, without a second thought, that’s where I left it. I scrambled to my feet, primarily balancing on my one good foot, and took in my first deep breath. A new pain filled my body, it exploded in my chest, it erupted in my brain. I doubled over clenching my side. My very lungs seemed to be scraping against my ribs. The weight of the werewolf came down solidly on my chest. 

“Com’on” I gasped for breath, “we’ve got to go.” I said to Little Foot.

 She put an arm around my shoulder and gave a little push to get me moving down the trail as I gasped for another breath. Without my stick for support, my walk was pathetic; a run was beyond me. But, I limped a hopping, shuffling limp as quickly as I could. “He’s not staying down.” Little Foot said, offering for me to put my left arm over her shoulder. Her face, which she was still not lifting up, visibly curled into a wince. We made it to the sign post before I stole a look behind us. The monster was stirring, trying to force himself back to his feet. His breathing, like mine, was labored and painful. He stooped in a half crouching position, one knee on the ground and both wicked hands clutching his abdomen. Our eyes met, and he let out a low growl that seemed to shake the very ground. The last thing I saw was my broken walking stick discarded in the dirt. Half of it was wet with blood.

We turned down the access trail, my car now only a short walk away. A singular howl, weaker but with no less malice, broke the night air. My back stiffened at that sound, and I could feel my skin tighten. The echo of the howl faded away, but it was replaced with the sound of the werewolf rampaging through the woods. The crashing was slower but more ferocious. What had been a twisted game of cat and mouse, had now become something else. Something truly and purely horrifying. 

We trekked on, without hope that we could ever out run the monster. Wounded as he was, the deliberate noise coming from the dark woods was consistently growing closer. Little Foot, still supporting me under my left shoulder, stumbled and fell to her knees. Rocks digging deep into her palms. I looked down at her, my savior, and noticed drops of blood glistening in moonlight as they mingled into the dirt and rocks. She was breathing heavily. I saw her forearms flex and strain to lift her own body, but she didn’t budge. I reached down to help her up, but, as my fingers grazed her torn coat, her strength gave out and she collapsed onto her side. I fell to my knees, never minding the pain, to hold her, to coax her back up. We had to go, there was no time. My hands reached her cheeks, and a wet warmth covered my fingers. Gently I pulled her face out of the dirt to see the new horror. Little Foot’s scalp wound had reopened and blood oozed from it. But now, there was a new wound stretching from her brow to the crook of her lip. Deep tissues hung limply. Though the lids were squeezed shut, her right eye was most likely gone. 

“He got me when he fell.” She said in a cold and distant voice. Weariness and shock were all that Little Foot had left.

I cradled her head, weeping. My chest burned with pain as it heaved uncontrollably. “Why didn’t you say something? You supported me this whole time! You should of told me!” I cried. Tears freely falling. 

“It wouldn’t change anything.” Little Foot responded. Emotion started to break through her distant stare. “Now go!” She cried. A tear dropped from her eye. “While you have time. GO!” She gave me a weak shove. “Don’t worry about me, I’m fine.” A cold grin touched her lips. I looked down to her clenched hand that held her pitiful pocket knife.

I bent down, pressing my forehead to her’s. 

 ***

I don’t remember much else. I did hear a demon’s howl as I drove away, but I didn’t hear the werewolf attack Little Foot. I didn’t hear her screams. Her cries don’t haunt me every night; especially if I’m outside at night with a full moon looming above. 

I made a police report. I was forced back into those cursed woods to show the cop and park ranger the torn remains of Little Foot’s camp. I showed them where the werewolf attacked us. I was even forced to show them where I left Little Foot on the trail. In the end, it was ruled a bear attack. “In these woods” they said “people get attacked by bears more often than you’d think.” And that was it. I assume her family was told some fabricated story about an aggressive bear. I was never told. I was never given any of her personal information, so I couldn’t even try to find the family she left behind. I don’t even know her real name.

As for me, I haven’t been able to get myself back on the trail. I cannot hardly go outside at night. But, on the rare occasion that I have to, I swear I can still hear a soft whistling carried on the wind.

The post A Hike in the Woods, Day 5 first appeared on This Little Light.

In 2017, I filed an access to information request with Global Affairs Canada seeking records related to the creation of the WIPO Internet Treaties more than 20 years earlier. The timing of the request was not accidental. The exception for cabinet confidences in the Access to Information Act no longer applies after 20 years and my hope was to gain insights into the government’s thinking during the negotiation process that might have previously been publicly unavailable. The request took a long time to process and the department still withheld many records on a range of grounds. I rarely appeal to the Information Commissioner, but in this case I did.  Last week, the Information Commissioner determined that my complaint was well-founded, but Global Affairs and its Minister, Melanie Joly, have thus far refused to abide by the ruling.

The Information Commissioner recommended the release of most of the information at issue, yet the government seemingly won’t comply. According to the decision:

On August 31, 2023, I issued my initial report to the Minister of Foreign Affairs setting out my recommendation. I also asked the Minister to give me notice as whether she plans to implement my recommendations and, if so, what specific actions she would be taking in that regard. The Minister of Foreign Affairs did not give me notice whether she would be implementing my recommendation. It is very regrettable that Global Affairs does not take its obligation under the Act seriously and, in addition to ignoring the complainant’s right of access, ignores the Act’s requirement to respond to my initial report. This is a clear sign of a lack of commitment to transparency and a failure of leadership.

I have the right to apply to the Federal Court for review. While I consider that option, the failure of the Access to Information system becomes even more readily apparent. These records are literally decades old and have now been the subject of years of review. The Information Commissioner rightly notes that the department exhibits “a clear sign of a lack of commitment to transparency and a failure of leadership.” For a government that once campaigned on greater transparency, failing to abide by its own (inadequate) law sends a discouraging signal on its respect for access to information and undermines efforts to encourage the governments of other countries to commit to transparency.

The post “A Lack of Commitment to Transparency and a Failure of Leadership”: Melanie Joly and Global Affairs Ignore Information Commissioner Ruling in My Request for Decades-Old Copyright Records appeared first on Michael Geist.

Voters elect Wab Kinew, 41-year-old leader of the leftwing New Democratic party and a former rapper and broadcast journalist

Manitoba has elected Canada’s first provincial First Nations premier, handing the progressive leader a legislative majority following a contentious election campaign.

Wab Kinew, the 41-year-old head of the leftwing New Democratic party (NDP), has led the province’s party since 2017. A former rapper, broadcast journalist and university administrator, Kinew said his newly elected government will focus on reopening three emergency rooms shuttered in recent years. He also said the province would invest in more social housing.

Continue reading...

The past few days have been painful to watch as Canadian politicians grapple with the aftermath of recognizing and applauding a Nazi in the House of Commons. The episode and its response brings back memories from last year’s discouraging response to revelations that Canadian Heritage’s anti-hate program had provided funding to Laith Marouf, a known anti-semite. While there are obvious differences, the commonality lies in the pain to the Jewish community and the reticence for full-throated apologies and public engagement, misplaced hope that the issue will just recede from public attention, slow commitments to ensure it does not happen again, and reluctance to accept accountability for the inexcusable error. 

In the case of Marouf, it took weeks for the government to take action and so many MPs remained silent that Liberal MP Anthony Housefather felt obligated to issue a public call for his fellow parliamentarians to speak out. Months later, the Canadian Heritage committee conducted woefully incomplete hearings on the matter and never issued a report. Indeed, then Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez tried to avoid discussing the matter altogether, arguing that responsibility for the program lay with his colleague Ahmed Hussen. Yet when he appeared on Bill C-11 in October 2022, opposition committee members made a point of asking him the questions he had previously avoided. In particular, NDP MP Peter Julian asked him when he was informed about the situation:

Mr. Peter Julian: So at no point were you informed between July 19 and August 22, even though Minister Hussen was consulting with the department, looking at procedural next steps and confirming the organization’s project funding details. Is that correct?

Hon. Pablo Rodriguez: That’s correct.

As I blogged soon after, that claim seemed completely implausible given that the issue had been percolating for weeks. Now new documents obtained under the Access to Information Act indicate that it was more than just implausible. It was almost surely false with the only possible excuse being the old stand-by for shirking responsibility, namely that his own people – including his chief of staff and deputy minister who were aware and had raised the issue – failed to inform him of the situation.

The first notable email came from then Chief of Staff John Matheson to Heritage Deputy Minister Isabelle Mondou on August 16, 2022, nearly a week before Rodriguez says he learned about the situation. Matheson sends a link to a tweet from CIJA about the situation. One minute later, Mondou forwarded it to the responsible Director-General within the department, who quickly responded that she was aware of it and taking action. For Rodriguez’s claim to be truthful, his chief of staff and deputy minister would have had to have kept the issue from him for nearly a week even as the issue attracted growing attention.

The second email links Rodriguez even more directly. About an hour before the Matheson email to the deputy minister, Rodriguez’s Grants and Contributions Coordinator sent an email to the Heritage department stating that the Minister’s office was seeking information about the same allegations found in the tweet. Their concern was particularly acute since they were holding an antisemitism roundtable that same day and were concerned the issue might be raised. In fact, Rodriguez tweeted about the roundtable later that day and his tweet shows that CIJA’s Richard Marceau was in attendance along with MPs Housefather, Taleeb Noormohamed (the new Heritage Parliamentary Secretary and one of the first MPs to speak out on Marouf) and Ya’ara Saks, who chaired the event. The issue was clearly known to many, if not all, in attendance. 

Of course, it is possible that Rodriguez’s staff, fellow MPs, and deputy minister shielded him from the news as others ran interference for him in other ways. But as with this week’s events, I’d like to think that Canadian leaders would not want to be kept in the dark about these events but rather want to engage, take responsibility, and address them. The wake-up call that arises from both the Marouf affair and a Nazi in the House of Commons is that when the issue involves antisemitism there are still too many willing to remain silent in the hope that the issue blows over.

 

The post The Need for Truthful Accountability: What ATIP Records Tell Us About Pablo Rodriguez and Canadian Heritage Funding an Anti-Semite appeared first on Michael Geist.

Despite being born in the summer, I must admit fall is my favourite season. The scenery at this time is unmatched and with the temperature slowly dropping it’s a great time to wear your most comfortable knitted sweaters and sip on some warm beverages (and yes, I am a sucker for a Pumpkin Spiced Latte – how cliché, I know).

I would say that my love for autumn comes from all the family fun adventures I had with my younger sisters and parents growing up. So, with the official start of autumn soon underway, I wanted to share a list of some of my favourite family-friendly activities to do this fall.

Outdoor Fun Fall Activities

Take a Hike

I’ve already mentioned that the fall scenery is one of the reasons why I enjoy this season so much, and the best way I experience it is through hikes. What I like about hiking in the fall is that the weather isn’t too hot or too cold. So long as you bundle up with a jacket, pack a thermos filled with your favourite warm beverage and lace up your hiking shoes, it’s sure to be a great time for people of all ages.

Don’t Go Chasing Waterfalls…

…Is a lyric from the song “Waterfalls” by TLC. I of course am advocating for chasing waterfalls this season. Just like hiking, going out to a park or trail that leads to a waterfall can be a magical experience. While we typically think of Niagara Falls as the pinnacle of all waterfalls, there are plenty of others to see across Canada. Wikipedia has a list of all waterfalls across the provinces to help plan your next adventure in the great outdoors.

Visit a Farm and/or Farmer’s Market

When I think of fall, I am immediately transported to the elementary school trips to Downey’s Farm in Caledon, Ont. Whether you’re based in the Greater Toronto Area and interested in going to Downey’s, or live anywhere else across Canada, many towns offer their own farmer’s market or farm filled with plenty of activities for kids to enjoy. These can include a petting zoo, going through a pumpkin patch, getting lost in a corn maze, apple picking and so much more! There are plenty of activities to keep your young ones happy and will create memories that’ll last a lifetime.

Have a Scavenger Hunt

A scavenger hunt is a great way to keep the kids occupied. Develop a list of items to search for in a park, share the list with your children and their friends, and let the hunt begin. I recommend visiting a place that you haven’t been before – that way with every search, you’ll discover something new. Just be sure to accompany any young children as they explore.

Start a Leaf Collection

As a kid, I was obsessed with nature (who am I kidding, I still am!) and one of my favourite activities was collecting leaves. I was always fascinated by the varieties and an endless supply to keep me occupied. Consider purchasing a scrapbook to house all the findings, and every year see how many new leaves can be found! 

Go Treetop Trekking or Ziplining

Another remnant of my school field trips. Treetop trekking involves exploring bases found amongst the trees. Many of these places also offer high ropes courses as well as ziplining. If you’re not a fan of heights I wouldn’t recommend it; however, if you are looking for a bit of excitement, I highly suggest trying it out. 

Go to an Amusement Park

Many people view amusement parks as a summertime activity, but you may be pleasantly surprised to know that many amusement parks are open until October. What I like most about going during this time of year is that prices can generally be cheaper, and all the rides (except of course any of the water-based rides) are still active.

Indoor Fall Activities

Learn a New Skill

Have you considered using autumn as a time to learn a new skill? While my ideas so far have involved going outside, you may want to explore an indoor activity. Consider learning how to knit – I would recommend starting off small with a scarf (which may come in handy for the winter) and gradually tackling a more complex project. A new one I recently discovered is candle making and you can learn how to make your own fall-scented candle.  

Decorate

If you’re looking for more activities to do at home, consider decorating. There are many choices for fall crafts that won’t break the bank. Many dollar stores will have chic items that you can include in your home. I recommend asking each family member what they would like to see around the house, pick up said items, put together your favourite playlist, make a cup of warm cider and get to decorating!

Halloween Movie Marathon

Once you’re done setting up your home for the fall season, organize a Halloween movie marathon. What I love about Halloween movies is the vast selection. Whether you’re looking for a cartoon, horror, gore, camp, or something else, there is a Halloween movie for everyone. And don’t let September stop you from getting into the Halloween spirit a bit early.

Bake

If you visited a farm and found yourselves with pumpkins and apples, consider baking them into a pie. There are so many recipes to choose from and you don’t need to limit yourselves to just pies. Cakes, muffins, and tarts are among my favourite to bake. I’m also a sucker for candy apples too. Just be sure to wait until they are cool to eat and brush your teeth thoroughly to avoid any cavities.

Host a Costume Party

If you want to wrap up the fall season, you can’t go wrong with hosting a costume party. It’s a great way to get people together to celebrate Halloween and fall. However, fall can be a popular time for events, so if you intend on booking a venue or simply want to ensure that your friends will make it, be sure to plan early.

Disclaimer: This information and the websites referenced are provided for your convenience only and should not be construed as providing legal or insurance advice. Allstate does not control or guarantee the accuracy of any content on any third-party site.  Allstate is not responsible for the privacy practices of any third-party site.

12 Fun Activities for the Family to Do This Fall

The post 12 Fun Activities for the Family to Do This Fall appeared first on GOOD HANDS Blog.

The post Free Advice Part 2 first appeared on This Little Light.

The post Free Advice part 1 first appeared on This Little Light.

The Federal Court has approved a consent order requiring Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault to unblock Rebel News publisher Ezra Levant on Twitter. The order stems from a 2021 lawsuit filed by Levant which argued that blocking “violated the Applicants’ constitutional rights under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in blocking access to official governmental Twitter accounts, and thereby limiting the Applicants’ ability to, inter alia, access and communicate important information, participate in public debate, and express views on matters of public concern.” The order also includes a $20,000 cost award to Levant. Regardless of your views of either Levant or Guilbeault, the principle that government ministers should not block access to their feeds given the implications for freedom of expression is an important one.

The case dragged along for a couple of years and given the full agreement to stop blocking and pay costs, it appears that the government and Guilbeault recognized they were likely to lose. Instead, they agreed to a consent order in an effort to avoid establishing an adverse precedent. Yet even the consent order sends a signal to government ministers and others speaking on behalf of the government that limiting public access to Twitter or social media feeds may violate Canadians’ Charter rights to access government information. 

The issue of blocking users on social media has received considerable attention in the past, with the CCLA and Canadian media covering the issue. In 2018, a lawsuit was launched against then-Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson over blocking users on Twitter, but I don’t know what became of that case. In the U.S., the question is headed to the Supreme Court, which earlier this year agreed to hear a pair of cases involving politicians blocking users on Twitter and Facebook. 

While it is both understandable and reasonable for politicians to want to avoid harassment or other inappropriate behaviour online, social media services typically have a “mute” function that would allow them to do so without blocking public access to their feeds. Moreover, given the implications of Bill C-18 and blocked news links, government information may only be available directly from the original source on some services, thereby increasing the importance of unfettered access. Levant says that the government wanted him to sign a confidentiality clause in order to keep the settlement secret. He refused and has thereby opened the door to similar claims against ministers or others speaking on behalf of the government that block users since such an approach is clearly vulnerable to a legal challenge as a likely violation under the Charter.

 

The post Federal Court Approves Consent Order Requiring Minister Steven Guilbeault to Unblock Ezra Levant on Twitter appeared first on Michael Geist.

The Online News Act has quickly emerged as one of the government’s biggest policy failures with Canadian news outlets facing lost traffic, lost revenues, and lost competition. The source of the Bill C-18 failure was the government’s seeming inability or unwillingness to game plan the potential outcomes of the law, rejecting criticisms and calls for a “Plan B” by instead relying on the hope that the policy measures would simply unfold as they did in Australia. That obviously has not happened, leading to the growing realization that Meta’s blocking of news links, which has already gone on far longer than it did in Australia, is not a bluff. With Meta out of news in Canada, the government is hoping to salvage the law by convincing Google to pay at least $172 million for news links. Unfortunately, the draft regulations released by Canadian Heritage Minister Pascale St-Onge suffer from the same failures as the law, namely an inability to game plan the potential outcomes of the regulations. 

I’ve already written about how the draft regulations will do little to ensure more spending on journalism and how they are stacked against small, independent and digital first news outlets. But as I read analysis that suggests that Google got what it wanted – a cap on liability – I fear that the regulations are badly misunderstood. In fact, if you assess the competing policy objectives in the regulations and consider how they might actually play out, it becomes hard to avoid the conclusion that they don’t work and may well lead Google to walk away from news in Canada.

First, to be clear, the draft regulations do not create a cap on liability. As I noted in my first post on the draft regulations, they create a floor. In other words, the requirement to contribute the equivalent of 4% of search revenues in Canada – a number pulled out of thin air and never once raised at committee – is the minimum that Google or Meta must contribute to potentially qualify for an exemption from final offer arbitration under Bill C-18.  The 4% figure alone will be problematic given that it sets a minimum standard that is likely to be replicated in countries around the world and lead to billions in new liability.  However, the number is likely to be higher in Canada than the 4% minimum and there is little of the certainty the government promised.

The key to understanding how the draft regulations are likely to play out is to assess three policy choices in the regulations on obtaining an exemption from final offer arbitration that individually may have made sense to the government, but don’t work when applied together:

• The first is the regulation on “fair compensation”, which requires that all deals fall within a 20% band. In other words, the value of the best and worst deals presented to the CRTC must all be within 20% of each other. 
• The second is the regulation on how to determine what constitutes “relative compensation” when comparing deals. As discussed in this post, the relative compensation is based on full-time journalist positions, an approach that is advantageous for larger, more established outlets such as the CBC.
• The third is the regulation on what constitutes a “significant portion” of independent, indigenous or official language community news outlets. The regulations state that a significant portion is met where there is no group of 10 or more independent or official language community outlets or 5 or more indigenous news outlets that have been excluded. 

Why are these regulations unworkable in practice?

Start with the definition of a significant portion of news outlets. The law requires that a significant portion of independent, indigenous, and official language community news outlets benefit from platform agreements and opens to the door to any eligible news business to respond to a mandated “open call” to express interest in a deal. The effect of that regulation is that CRTC’s approval of the platform’s deals can be held up if any ten independent or official language community news outlets (or any five indigenous news outlets) object to the platform offer since without their agreement, the “significant portion” criteria is not met. Therefore, even if Google presents $172 million in deals with all the large news outlets and hundreds of smaller ones on board, just ten independent outlets can scuttle the entire process.  

If a group of ten outlets hold out, the platform can’t simply offer them more money due to 20% band on fair compensation. For example, if they offer a 30% increase, the effect would be to increase the value of many other agreements to restore the 20% band. Once that happens, others may come forward to demand more money and start the cycle anew. Since the 4% is a floor and not a cap, there is no limit to how high the number can go.

Now why might independent news outlets hold out? That’s where the second regulation that defines relative compensation based on full-time journalists comes in. If you are the CBC, that approach works well. But if you’re a small outlet with only a couple of full-time journalists but a large number of freelancers or community contributors, you might reasonably argue that the payment system does not reflect the value of your investment in journalism and you would therefore seek higher payments. But in order to do so, the relative compensation per journalist would increase and, with it, the corresponding 20% band on fair compensation. That would then require other agreements to be renegotiated and this cycle can continue as other groups (including five indigenous or ten official language community outlets) emerge and the number keeps going higher. 

The net effect is a set of draft regulations with understandable policy goals (fair compensation, ensuring smaller outlets are not left out) that may not work in practice. The combination of a 4% floor and regulations that can lead to a steady cycle of increased payments, means that the actual number is likely to be much higher and that there are no assurances of a cap on liability. And without that, Google has already stated that is likely to stop linking to news in Canada. If the government’s goal with the Bill C-18 regulations was to get Google onside and salvage its law, it may be headed the wrong way.

The post Why the Government’s Draft Bill C-18 Regulations Don’t Work: The 4% Link Tax is Not a Cap. It’s a Floor. appeared first on Michael Geist.

Regardless of where you live, major disasters can strike at any time, so it’s important to be prepared. Many Canadians don’t realize that Canada ranks second in the world in terms of frequency of tornadoes, with an average of 80 to 100 each year.

Tornado season typically runs from early March to late October, with the highest number of tornadoes occurring in June and early July. These violent storms bring winds that can result in significant property damage, injuries and even fatalities.

Hurricane season, affecting mostly the Atlantic Provinces in Canada, runs from June through November when the waters of the Atlantic Ocean are warm enough to produce tropical cyclones. Hurricanes often cause more widespread damage than tornadoes because of their breadth – some have been as large as 1,000 kilometres across.

Knowing what to do and how to prepare for these storms will help protect you, your family and your home.

How to Protect Your Home From Wind Damage

Maintenance of Trees and Shrubs

Regularly maintain the trees around your property by having them pruned and dead branches removed. This may help reduce the likelihood of them falling and damaging your vehicle or other belongings and prevent larger parts of the tree from falling during a storm. Have dead trees removed. Check with your municipal bylaws before taking action and we recommend consulting a professional as your safety is key.

Secure Outdoor Items

If safe to do so, before a windstorm hits, walk around your property and secure or store loose items such as patio furniture, barbeques, fire pits, children’s toys, gardening, maintenance or sports equipment, waste, recycling and compost bins. Loose items can be pushed around by strong winds and be damaged or cause damage to nearby property. Proactively address weak points or broken parts of your fence as loose boards can also cause damage during a windstorm.

Maintain the Exterior of your Property

Your home’s roof, garage doors, windows and sidings are at the greatest risk of damage from a windstorm. Ensuring that they are properly maintained and in good working condition can help to reduce the likelihood of damage and even limit or prevent damage to your home’s interior as well. Regular spot checks and warranty guidelines can assist you in ensuring they are well maintained and in good working condition.

Develop an Emergency Preparedness Plan

Mapping out and going over an emergency plan with your family and those in your household is a worthwhile exercise. The plan does not need to be extensive, but it should include information on what to do in an emergency, safe places to take refuge within and outside of the home, escape routes, emergency contact numbers, as well as the location and use of emergency supplies and equipment.

How to Protect Your Car From Wind Damage

Secure your vehicles

Take the opportunity to secure your vehicle(s) in your garage, secured carport or stable enclosed space. If not, try to keep vehicle away from large trees, streetlamps and power lines. To remove the risk of damage due to flooding, if possible, park your car on high ground.

Take picture of your vehicle

According to Consumer Reports, it’s recommended to take pictures of your vehicles before the windstorm – this also applies to your home as well. This will help to provide your insurance company with proof of damages in the chance that you need to file a claim

Fill your tank

In the event of an emergency, you may be required to evacuate your home or you may want to support others in need. So, ensure that your car’s gas tank is filled or, if it’s an electric vehicle, is fully charged.

Pack an emergency bag

It is also recommended that each family member prepare their own respective emergency bag. These essential items could include water, non-perishable food, cash, phone charger, change of clothes, insurance paperwork, etc.

Insurance paperwork

Consider keeping a copy of the car and home insurance paperwork in a Ziplock bag (to protect from rain and wind damage). If you need to file a claim, be sure to contact your local insurance provider as soon as possible.

Insure Your Home and Auto

Talk to your insurance representative and make sure you have the proper coverage if your home or car is damaged by a tornado or a windstorm.

While this article focusses on protection from high winds, it’s important to remember that torrential rainfall often comes with hurricanes.  So be sure to review our tips to help prevent possible water damage.

For more information on windstorm safety, visit the Government of Canada’s public safety site.

For weather alerts in your province visit Public Weather Alerts for Canada.

Home & Auto Insurance

Disclaimer: This information and the websites referenced are provided for your convenience only and should not be construed as providing legal or insurance advice. Allstate does not control or guarantee the accuracy of any content on any third-party site. Allstate is not responsible for the privacy practices of any third-party site.

Preparing For a Windstorm

The post Preparing For a Windstorm appeared first on GOOD HANDS Blog.

The rhetoric around Bill C-18 has escalated in recent days in light of the awful wildfires in NWT and British Columbia. In my view, the issues associated with these tragic events have little to do with Meta blocking news links and the attempt to bring it into the conversation is a transparent attempt to score political points (the connectivity issues with some NWT communities completely taken offline for days is somehow never mentioned). The reality is that Meta was asked about just this scenario at committee and it made it clear that it would not block any non-news outlet links. That is precisely what has been happening and the government’s legislative choices should be the starting point for understanding why compliance with the law involves blocking a very broad range of news links that extend beyond even those sources that are defined as “eligible news outlets”. 

The government and supporters of Bill C-18 talking points now emphasize two things in relation to Meta blocking news links: the law has yet to take effect and there is room to address their concerns in the regulation-making process. Both of these claims are incredibly deceptive, relying on the assumption that most won’t bother to read the actual legislation. If they did, they would see that (1) the law has received royal assent and can take effect anytime and (2) the regulation making process addresses only a small subset of Bill C-18 issues with most of the core issues finalized. In other words, the time to shape the law and address many of the key concerns was before the government repeatedly cut off debate in order to ensure it that received royal assent before the summer break.

Start with when the law takes effect. As noted above, the law has been passed and received royal assent. It is the law of the land and there is no scope for changes or amendments without a new bill that must be passed by Parliament. Section 93 establishes when the provisions come into force. The law initially envisioned a staged approach whereby certain sections would be proclaimed in effect by the government in stage one, followed by four additional stages, some of which were contingent on certain regulations coming into force. Yet at the last minute the government approved a Senate amendment that basically discarded the entire approach. Section 93(6) states:

(6) Despite subsections (1) to (5), any provision of this Act that does not come into force by order before the 180th day following the day on which this Act receives royal assent comes into force 180 days after the day on which this Act receives royal assent.

The entire law therefore takes effect no later than 180 days after royal assent, which is December 19, 2023. This change was included at the urging of the Canadian media sector (specifically Quebecor) which lobbied to have it take effect as soon as possible. Under this approach, the law can take effect at any time as the government need only issue the relevant Orders-in-Council. There is now little wiggle room. As of today’s post, the latest the law will take effect is in 120 days but it could happen well before that. 

Once the law takes effect, the clock on negotiations and potential mediation and arbitration begins. The timelines are fixed in Section 19(1) of the law: 90 days to negotiate and 120 days for mediation. If there is no agreement and no request to the CRTC to extend the deadlines, the issue can go to final offer arbitration. To be clear, none of these timelines are subject to the regulation making process. They are fixed and they create obvious urgency for anyone facing compliance requirements.

The regulation making process is the other issue worthy of closer examination, given the misleading claims about the ability to use the process to address concerns with the law. Start with some of the issues that are not subject to any new regulations:

• All the definitions, including the definition of digital news intermediary, news business, news content, and news outlet. 
• The requirements related to “making available of news content”, which includes both reproduction and “facilitating access to news” such as linking. These are already defined and there are no additional regulations forthcoming
• The ability for the CRTC to issue an interim order or repeal an exemption order with respect to digital news intermediaries
• The timelines, steps, and scope of the bargaining process
• The limitations on copyright user rights in the bill, including restricting the right of platforms to cite copyright limitations and exceptions
• Which news outlets are considered “eligible news businesses”
• All the rules related to the arbitration process, including selection of arbitrators, dismissal of offers, and much more
• The rules on discrimination, preference and disadvantage
• The rules on production orders

In case this list isn’t obvious, this is the vast majority of the law. There are no forthcoming regulations and nothing further to discuss on them as all of these provisions have received royal assent. 

So what is still subject to potential government regulations? Section 84 spells out most of them:

The Governor in Council may make regulations

(a) respecting the factors set out in section 6;

(b) respecting the time at which or the period within which an operator must notify the Commission under subsection 7(1);

(c) respecting how the Commission is to interpret subparagraphs 11(1)(a)(i) to (viii);

(d) setting out conditions for the purposes of paragraph 11(1)(b); and

(e) setting out conditions in respect of a provincial public broadcaster for the purposes of section 28, if the provincial minister responsible for that broadcaster has made a request to the Minister.

Translated from legalese, these cover:

(a) The factors that are to be considered if there is a “significant bargaining power imbalance” between digital news intermediaries and news outlets

(b) When a digital news intermediary must notify the CRTC that the law applies to it

(c) How the CRTC is to interpret the rules on granting digital news intermediaries an exemption from arbitration (ie. approve the private deals struck by the platforms)

(d) Regulations that establish new conditions for granting an exemption from arbitration

(e) Regulations for including provincial public broadcasters such as TVO as potential eligible news outlets

In addition, Section 76 establishes the power to establish a host of regulations related to penalties. Beyond the government, the CRTC will be empowered to establish regulations on a wide range of issues, but those are supposedly independent of government and not part of this process.

That’s it. The claims associated with the government’s regulation making process have been vastly overstated. Indeed, if it was the platforms making the claims, they would probably be called disinformation. About the only regulation that really matters right now involves Section 11, since it sets the criteria for an exemption from arbitration and approval of the deals between platforms and media companies. The reports about Google and the government negotiating aspects of the law surely involves what the exemption criteria is and how it will be interpreted. For example, the inclusion of a minimum spend by way of regulation would provide cost certainty and effectively have the government dictate to the CRTC how the criteria should be interpreted (namely, ignore them all if Google meets the spending target). The remainder are minor and have no real impact on how the law will be applied to Meta or Google.

When News Media Canada says “what we’re saying to Meta is, ‛The regulations aren’t drafted yet. Pick up a pen. Put down your saber and let’s try to work through this together” it’s a fake out designed to deceive. There are no regulations to be discussed that change the core elements of the law. It’s been decided, has received royal assent, and kicks in anytime within the next 120 days. News Media Canada and the associated lobby groups won the battle for Bill C-18. It’s the resulting consequences they don’t like.

The post The Bill C-18 Regulation Fake-Out: Setting the Record Straight on When Bill C-18 Takes Effect and the Regulation Making Process appeared first on Michael Geist.

So what’s next for Rachel Notley?

The buzz grows louder by the day that sooner than later Ms. Notley is going to move on from her present role as Alberta’s Opposition leader. 

Gossips are hinting at sometime early in the new year, possibly January. 

As for Ms. Notley herself and her inner circle, they’re playing it close to their vests. For now. 

Unusually for a party leader who has just lost an election on which many supporters had pinned their hopes, there is no clamour within the NDP Caucus or most of the party for Ms. Notley to go. 

Oh sure, there are few cranky voices, mostly associated with the leftward reaches of the party, nowadays a definite minority, who express bitterness about the strategy adopted by the NDP in the 2023 election campaign.

But really, caucus members and party supporters alike wonder, who else is there? 

Indeed, a lot of time is spent in NDP circles nowadays quietly ruminating about who else there is, whether or not they’d run for the leadership, and how much they’d mess it up if they got it. 

To a remarkable degree, Ms. Notley has rebuilt the party in her own image since she became leader in October 2014 – that is to say, progressive, but also quite conservative in a small-c, lawyerly sort of way.

Lose in 2019 and 2023 though her party did, she brought it to government in 2015 – something no one expected until about two weeks before the vote on May 5 that year, and that includes Ms. Notley and the NDP – for which she is still honoured, even loved, in Alberta NDP circles. 

In Edmonton, the NDP has become is a well-oiled machine, painting the town solid orange in provincial politics. In Calgary, not so much. United Conservative Party Premier Danielle Smith only had to appear reasonable in one short debate, it would seem, to scrape up another Conservative victory, although surely many Albertans are now suffering buyer’s remorse. 

As for rural Alberta, it is utter darkness for the NDP – probably for all of eternity. Never mind what’s the matter with Kansas. What’s the matter with Red Deer? 

The thing is, you need two out of those three to win the Legislature in Alberta, and while the NDP gained ground in Calgary it couldn’t gain enough. Close may count in more recreational activities than horseshoes and hand grenades, but politics isn’t one of them. 

So what’s left for Rachel Notley to do? She’s only 59 and astoundingly fit. She remains as sharp as the proverbial tack. 

Right now, according to her husband’s social media pages, she’s taking a break at a lake in B.C. She looks very relaxed. Thinking about retirement? Thinking about something else? Or just chillin’ in the Kootenays? 

Andrew Traynor has an idea. 

“Rachel Notley could win basically any seat in Edmonton if she ran federally. Edmonton-Centre is particularly winnable for a New Democrat,” Mr. Traynor, known on Twitter as Robert Andrew Francis, tweeted Tuesday. “It’s likely this is the last Federal election with the current NDP & LPC leaders.”

You may ask: Just who is Mr. Traynor? The short answer is he’s an articling student at law with an Edmonton legal firm. 

But he’s had a long involvement in NDP politics and I fondly remember the day in 2012 he and a few others met in my living room in St. Albert and formally re-established an NDP constituency association in the riding. Soon, he was president of the constituency association. 

It seemed a bit like tilting at a windmill at the time, but who knew there’d be an NDP government in less than three years and that St. Albert would be represented by a good New Democrat MLA, Marie Renaud, ever since?

So I give Mr. Traynor some credit for good political instincts, and his tweet prompted these musings. 

“After three campaigns for government and even more as MLA, it’s totally fair to decide to pack it in and cap off a legendary career,” he went on. “But there *is* a potential path to Prime Minister Rachel Notley.”

Now may seem to you to be unlikely. As Mr. Traynor admitted, he was just “throwing it out there with a massive grain of salt.”

Still, think about it. 

After almost a decade, the country sure feels like it’s had enough of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Despite recent bad polls, he still might win in a year or two, though. As veteran political commentator Michael Harris put it yesterday in The Tyee, “there are few things less relevant than a mid-summer poll with no election in sight.” 

And it would seem that for every Canadian who can’t stand the PM, there’s one who finds Conservative Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre repellent. As Mr. Harris pointed out, the Conservatives’ record in office is even worse than that of the Liberals. 

In May 2011, the natural place for Canadians who couldn’t abide the Conservatives and felt no love for the Liberals to turn was the NDP, led by Jack Layton. It nearly worked, and had Mr. Layton survived, he might well have been prime minister soon enough.

After Mr. Layton’s death on Aug. 22 that year, the party chose Thomas Mulcair, perhaps the most effective federal Opposition leader of the modern era, but too Liberal, it would seem, for many NDP activists. 

The best that can be said about their successor, Jagmeet Singh, is that he has been underwhelming. And what kind of an alternative is an NDP that supports the Liberals at every turn and keeps their government afloat? That strategy has its proponents, but at this point it’s turning into not much more than an effective talking point for angry Conservatives.

And where did the NDP gain a seat in the last federal election in 2021? In Edmonton – a victory, arguably, that the federal party owes more to Ms. Notley than to Mr. Singh. 

One way or another, the NDP risks a drubbing in the next federal election – probably at the hands of the Liberals as voters who abhor the Conservatives hold their noses and vote for Mr. Trudeau’s party. 

But considerable numbers of NDP voters in Western Canada could hold their noses and vote for Mr. Poilievre as well – it’s happened before, in 1993 and 1997, when anti-establishment New Democrats in the West voted for Preston Manning’s Reform Party. 

To be blunt, if the national NDP is going to survive it needs a leader stronger than Mr. Singh.

Who, in Opposition, would be more like Mr. Mulcair than Ms. Notley? 

And who would be more like Mr. Layton in the minds of Canadian voters than Ms. Notley? 

And wouldn’t it be nice to see former Alberta Premier Jason Kenney’s dream come true that, finally, the premiership of Alberta could be a stepping stone to the Prime Minister’s Office? Only just not for him.

The Canadian government released a detailed document last week outlining the specifics behind its draft Digital Services Tax Act. No actual legislation has yet been passed, but the government is providing guidance on how the potential law would be interpreted assuming it takes effect next year. The document has sparked criticism from business groups and the U.S. government given that it envisions a retroactive three percent tax that will hit a wide range of businesses. Further, the Canadian plan is facing significant opposition from many OECD countries since it may jeopardize a global agreement that is designed to address the digital services tax issue. While the digital services tax (DST) is typically framed as a tax on big tech, the reality is that the Canadian version extends far beyond just companies such as Google and Facebook, potentially including major Canadian retailers such as Canadian Tire, Loblaws, and others.

My view is that unlike Bills C-11 and C-18, which create cross-industry subsidy models funded by tech companies to support government policy, appropriate taxation models is the far better approach to ensure that companies “pay their fair share”. While a DST may be a good approach (particularly if part of a global system), the Canadian plan to implement the tax retroactively next year creates some significant risks. In fact, our current approach raises the prospect of U.S. tariff retaliation, opposition from many allies at the OECD, and expanded news link blocking in response to Bill C-18.

First, the Canadian DST is exceptionally complex, covering a wide range of digital revenues that occur in Canada. The baseline applicability is for companies that generate 750 million euros (about C$1.1 billion) in global revenue of which at least $20 million is digital services revenue in Canada. Digital services revenue can arise from (1) online marketplace services revenue (which would cover an Ebay, Airbnb or Uber), (2) online advertising services revenue (Google or Microsoft), (3) social media services revenue (Facebook or TikTok), and (4) user data revenue (any company that collects and sells user data). Because the threshold involves general global revenues and Canadian digital service revenues, the companies likely to be caught by the DST involve far more than just U.S. Internet companies. 

The rules for each of the digital service revenue categories gets very complicated very quickly. For example, consider the guidance related to the need for the digital services revenues to occur in Canada. The law requires that the user be located in Canada, which the government says will be based on a reasonableness test. Take targeted advertising revenues, which would require that the user be physically located in Canada at the time. But what if the user uses a privacy tool to limit the tracking? Those ads are excluded:

A social media platform has a user who uses a privacy filter that prevents any personal information from being collected by the interface. Additionally, the content posted by the user on the social media platform does not indicate the user’s location. As the social media platform has no data by which to determine location, this user is not considered located in Canada or outside of Canada. As such, the user is not a user of determinable location.

What if the user ships goods from an online marketplace to Canada but the billing address in the U.S.? The government says that revenue is treated as Canadian:

An online marketplace has a user that participated in multiple transactions on the marketplace. Their shipping address is in Canada and their billing address is outside Canada. In such a case, it may be reasonable to conclude that the user is in Canada and outside Canada. Because of the default rule, such a user would be considered a user located in Canada (and a user of determinable location).

These are just two examples. Since the law applies retroactively to all transactions since the start of 2022, it involves reviewing literally billions of transactions and advertisements to determine location, revenues, and more. This is certainly isn’t disqualifying, but it’s complicated.

Second, the political situation associated with the Canadian DST creates some very significant and potentially costly risks. At the bi-lateral level, the U.S. has stated unequivocally that it will retaliate against a Canadian DST, raising the spectre of billions in retaliatory tariffs. The U.S. tariffs would not necessarily target Canadian tech companies, but could be used to target anything such as steel, dairy, or lumber. In other words, it can target the most sensitive areas for maximum impact. If the U.S. does indeed impose retaliatory tariffs, the net gain from the DST could be largely wiped out. The Canadian gamble appears to be a replay of Bill C-18, where it bet that companies such as Meta would not go ahead with news blocking. In this instance, the bet is that the U.S. will not retaliate. Yet with the Canadian DST undermining President Joe Biden’s plan for a global tax deal and the DST to take effect during a U.S. presidential election year in which domestic policy is likely to play a major role, that appears to be a risky bet.

Third, the Canadian approach also creates global risks with leading allies since it may undo an agreement at the OECD to address the proliferations of DSTs. Canada has said it would only impose its DST if the OECD model does not take effect. While the original start date of the end of 2023 no longer seems realistic, virtually all other countries agreed to extend the deadline by a year. Canada stands virtually alone in opposing the extension, which has raised tensions with other countries. 

Fourth, the Canadian DST approach may also have implications for Bills C-11 and C-18. While those laws stand apart from the DST, the bottom line is that hundreds of millions in DST tax liability combined with mandated payments of hundreds of millions for Cancon or news links from the same pot of money is going to have an impact. The retroactive application of a DST seems likely to increase consumer costs in Canada as the tax liability is passed along to Canadian consumers, lead to a challenge of Bill C-11 costs, and make a deal with Google on mandated payments for links far less likely. If that is the case, the DST would increase the chance the company complies with Bill C-18 by following the Meta model of removing links to Canadian news and canceling existing news deals. In other words, it will be Canadian news outlets and the Canadian public that bear the brunt of those costs. The government may still insist that it does not want to wait any further on the DST, but Canadians should at least recognize the costs and risks associated with the decision.

The post It’s Complicated: Unpacking the Risks Behind Canada’s Digital Services Tax Plan appeared first on Michael Geist.

Blocking of news links on Facebook and Instagram in Canada has becomes increasingly widespread in recent days, leading to a growing number of public comments from media outlets and reporters expressing surprise or shock about the scope of the link blocking. Indeed, outlets with blocked links include university student newspapers, radio stations, and foreign news outlets. While there may have been some errors (Facebook has a page to seek review of any blocked link decision), the inclusion of a very wide range of Canadian and foreign news outlets is no accident. Rather, it reflects the government’s Bill C-18 approach, which effectively covers all news outlets worldwide whose links are accessed in Canada. The Canadian government could have adopted a more targeted approach – for example, limiting the scope to news links from those news outlets eligible to negotiate agreements with Internet platforms under the law – but it instead went for the broadest possible approach that includes foreign news outlets with little or no connection to Canada.

Understanding why Bill C-18 covers news links from outlets who are not “eligible news businesses” under the law requires unpacking several provisions. First, start with the definition of a “digital news intermediary”, which states:

digital news intermediary means an online communications platform, including a search engine or social media service, that is subject to the legislative authority of Parliament and that makes news content produced by news outlets available to persons in Canada. It does not include an online communications platform that is a messaging service the primary purpose of which is to allow persons to communicate with each other privately.‍ 

This definition is critical since the only companies that are subject to Bill C-18’s requirement to negotiate agreements with news outlets are (1) those that qualify as DNIs under this definition and (2) meet the requirements found in Section 6 on a significant bargaining power imbalance. The absence of significant bargaining power imbalance is why companies such as Twitter, Microsoft or Apple are not subject to the law. That leaves Google and Meta, provided that they qualify as DNIs. The key phrase in the qualification requirement is that the companies “make news content produced by news outlets available to persons in Canada.” If the companies do not make news content produced by news outlets available to persons in Canada they are not DNIs and are not subject to the law.

So what does “make news content produced by news outlets available to persons in Canada” mean? First, making news available includes:

(a) the news content, or any portion of it, is reproduced; or

(b) access to the news content, or any portion of it, is facilitated by any means, including an index, aggregation or ranking of news content.

Government officials have confirmed that facilitation by any means includes linking to the news content.

Since linking is sufficient for the purposes of making news content available, the remaining two relevant definitions involve “news content” and “news outlet.” News content is defined as:

content — in any format, including an audio or audiovisual format — that reports on, investigates or explains current issues or events of public interest and includes such content that an Indigenous news outlet makes available by means of Indigenous storytelling.‍

This broad definition covers all news content in any format, which helps explain why everything from newspapers to podcasts are covered by the law.

Second, a news outlet: 

means an undertaking or any distinct part of an undertaking whose primary purpose is to produce news content and includes an Indigenous news outlet or an official language minority community news outlet.‍

This notably does not limit the geographical scope of news outlets, which means the news content that a DNI makes available through linking can come from any news outlet anywhere the world. The law includes a separate definition for “eligible news business” (defined at Section 27), which are news outlets that qualify for the law’s negotiation and arbitration system. The government could have provided that DNI’s “make news content produced by eligible news businesses available to persons in Canada.” If it had done so, only links to news from eligible news businesses would result in an Internet platform being treated as a DNI. The news link blocking would have therefore been limited to eligible news business content and left alone most foreign news links and some Canadian news outlets.

Yet the government’s choice was to try to bring Meta and Google into the scope of the law by virtue of any news links to any news outlet anywhere in the world, even if those outlets have nothing to do with Canada or with the Bill C-18 system. Given Meta’s stated goal of complying with Bill C-18 by removing links to news content that would render it a DNI, the government’s legislative choice of covering all news links from all news outlets therefore effectively requires it to block all of those news links. 

The post Why Is Meta Blocking All News Links? Because Bill C-18 Covers All News Outlets appeared first on Michael Geist.

Police services across Canada are grappling with how they will relay emergency information, including breaking news and details of missing persons, once Meta begins permanently removing news from its social media platforms.