Alberta’s provincial court released documents Wednesday that provide insight into how Alberta’s unified Conservative government decided when to begin lifting the province’s COVID-19 restrictions last February.
The documents, which were previously confidential, were ordered by the provincial court to be produced after the parents of five immunocompromised children and the Alberta Federation of Labor sued the government over the decision to lift the mask mandate.
Premier Jason Kenney announced on February 8 that the province would end the vaccine passport system and just five days later end the school mask mandate.
The decision came shortly after the UCP COVID Cabinet Committee met and weighed options presented by Health Minister Jason Copping on how to move forward as Alberta moved from the pandemic phase of COVID-19 to the transition phase to the endemic phase .
The document states that Alberta will lead the way to the endemic phase with a “phasing out of public health measures” to reduce the risk.
However, the document cautions that “the lifting of restrictions should only begin once the pressure on the health system has reduced sufficiently and is likely to continue to reduce”.
Chief Medical Officer for Health Dr Deena Hinshaw made recommendations to the Government to move forward with lifting all restrictions, which included increasing the capacity of the health system. She warned that it would be overwhelmed and warned of additional waves as a result of increased exposure.
“She was right about all her warnings and they just ignored them. And now we’re paying the price,” said Gil McGowan, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour.
Hinshaw gave three options.
The first was to remove most restrictions, including removing masks in schools in Step 1. The second option kept more restrictions in place and kept the school mask mandate until Step 2.
The third option left all decisions to the cabinet, the option the cabinet chose.
“The big, big takeaway for me was just how focused this was on reopening as the key guiding issue of our pandemic policy,” said Lorraine Hardcastle, associate professor of law at the University of Calgary’s Faculty of Medicine.
“There is a lot of criticism that the government’s approach sometimes favors politics over what makes sense from a public health perspective. And I think we see elements of that in this presentation.
McGowan agreed.
“From my perspective, it clearly shows that their eyes were clearly on politics, especially their narrow self-interest and politics, and not where it should have been, which is public safety, especially for our children.”
The government denies that it ignored or overruled Dr. Hinshaw’s recommendations.
“The Minister of Health provided the cabinet with three options, presented together without a recommended option. Cabinet chose from those options,” Steve Buick, the health secretary’s press secretary, wrote in a statement Wednesday.
“We stand by our decision to lift public health measures, including ending compulsory face coverings in schools. It was the right choice for the children and did not pose an unnecessary risk to our communities.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published on July 13, 2022.
Add Comment