Is it Critical Thinking Or Political Bias? - Part One

I have written about the virtues of critical thinking many times on this blog, and I have also frequently observed the difficulty of achieving it; without question, I regularly fall short of the ideal. One of the impediments to such thinking is the task of separating one's biases from the process, or at the very least recognizing those biases in assessing people and situations.

Take Stephen Harper, for example. Few would dispute that his propensity for exerting control and influence is massive. His contempt of Parliament, the judiciary, and all those who oppose his views and agenda requires no recounting here. With that context in mind, I offer the following as part of that pattern. Whether the conclusions I draw are a result of critical thinking or my disdain for the prime minister and almost everything he stands for, I leave for the reader to decide.

Exhibit Number One: Today's Star reports that the the renovated Canadian Museum of History (formerly the Canadian Museum of Civilization, which I have visited) will not include a room devoted to the 1919 Winnipeg General Strike:

The exhibit, which opened in 1999, was modelled after a meeting room in the Labour Temple on James St. in Winnipeg, where union members met to debate, organize and vote in the months leading up to, and during, the massive strike.

There have been past accusations that the government is trying to rewrite history in the renovated museum. And of course there is the Conservative anti-union agenda to consider.

In the matter of eliminating this important piece of labour history, the museum adamantly rejects any suggestion of political interference:

“Government is certainly not telling us what to put into the hall. Nor do they know what we are putting into the hall. We are not reporting to them and they are not telling us what to do. There is a very high level of cynicism and paranoia out there,” said David Morrison, the director of research and content for the Canadian History Hall project.

Yet one could cogently argue that this decision is part of a much larger pattern, consistent with Mr. Harper's values and method of governance.

Exhibit Number Two: The elimination of home mail delivery is also part of a neoliberal agenda, which sees the fraying of government programs as an imperative. Despite the fact that Canada Post made a pre-tax profit of $194 million in 2014 and $24 million for the first quarter of 2015, it has no intention of reviewing its service cuts. Says Deepak Chopra, president and CEO of Canada Post:

"What we are trying to do is avoid becoming a burden on taxpayers for hundreds of millions of dollars if we don't act responsibly now."

"We don't want to wait until the problem has become so severe that the initiatives we will be forced to take would be even more difficult."

While the claim is that overall mail volume is down prompted the decision to end home delivery, no public consultations took place, nor were alternative plans, such as alternate day delivery, entertained.

Doesn't the autocratic nature of the move suggest the heavy hand of Harper was involved?

In Part Two, I will examine the curiously close relationship that seems to exist between the RCMP and the Harper cabal.

A Contemptible, Arrogant Martinet

The other day I wrote a post about the resurrection of Bill C-377, the Harper backed private member's bill that would wage war against unions in Canada. Toward the end of the post I made reference to Senator Don Plett's arrogant dismissal of witness Paul Cavalluzzo during Senate hearings on the bill after the latter suggested Conservative senators are probably the last people who should be lecturing anyone about corruption and transparency.

Plett insulted the witness by telling him he considered “your time and my time to have been wasted with you here today not answering my questions.”

Press Progress offers this video of the exchange:



As you can see, the pompous and arrogant Plett sanctimoniously offers himself and the Senate as exemplars of fiscal rectitude and transparency. To this, Press Progress responds:

The Senate is transparent? The Senate isn't corrupt? Really, Senator Plett?

Last year, Conservative Senators reportedly tried to whitewash an audit of Mike Duffy's expenses, deleting paragraphs detailing Senator Duffy's attempt to dodge auditors and hide his expenses.

Auditor General Michael Ferguson is slated to release what is expected to be a damning report on Senate expenses. At least 40 current and former senators recently received letters from Ferguson asking them to account for questionable expense claims. Several senators are said to have expensed over $100,000 with one reportedly billing taxpayers to the tune of $250,000.

Senator Plett himself appears to be among the Senate's highest rollers -- a CBC investigation in 2014 found Plett had the second highest expenses in the Senate, billing taxpayers over $12,000 (mainly for first-class air travel) during one five-week period in 2012 while the Senate was debating suspending Senators Duffy, Wallin and Brazeau.

Arrogance in public servants is always profoundly distasteful. When it is practised by pompous and contemptible martinets like Plett, it is intolerable.

The Harper War Against Unions Continues

So what else is new? In today's Star, Tim Harper tells a tale of the ongoing indefatigable contempt Canada's putative prime minister has for unions.

Like another Conservative entity, C-377 refuses to remain dead. The bill, proposed by a private member, Russ Hiebert, who is actually a front for Harper and Merit Canada, was actually severely amended/gutted by the senators (including 16 Conservatives), but when Harper prorogued Parliament,

instead of going back to the Commons in amended form, [it] remained in the Upper House, restored to its original form, where it is now up for second reading.

The bill would require unions and employee organizations to give the Canada Revenue Agency details of all transactions over $5,000, along with the salaries and benefits of union officials over $100,000 and a detailed breakdown of spending on political and lobbying activities. It would all be publicly posted on the revenue agency’s website.

That the game was rigged from the start is evident by what Tim Harper has uncovered. Terrance Oakey, the Merit lobbyist with a long association with the Conservatives, has been given preferential treatment and access to the upper echelon of the government:

As Merit’s man in Ottawa, Oakey had 117 meetings with public officeholders on the bill since November 2011, but it’s his level of access which sets him apart.

He had 13 meetings with [backbencher] Hiebert, but also 12 meetings with Harper’s (since departed) director of stakeholder relations, Alykhan Velshi, as well as a meeting with Rachal Curran, Harper’s director of policy. Harper’s former chief of staff Nigel Wright attended one of the meetings with Hiebert and Velshi. Oakey also had a separate tête-à-tête with Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird.

Contrast that with labour's access:

[T]he Canadian Labour Congress says the closest it got to Harper’s office in lobbying against the bill was an early 2013 phone conversation between then-president Ken Georgetti and Wright. Georgetti raised it briefly with the prime minister in an unrelated meeting.

The CLC was told there was no time for a face-to-face meeting.

Senate opposition leader James Cowan perhaps best sums up the Machiavellian intent behind Bill C-377:

“Bill C-377 is an anti-union bill,’’...“It is designed to bury labour unions in so much paperwork that they will not be able to represent their workers as fully and capably as they do now.’’

Unions are being punished for opposition to government measures, ... and “this is a message that if you disagree, then the heavy arm of the law can and will be brought down upon you.’’

Yet one more of the countless examples demonstrating the illusory nature of democracy under the Harper regime.

Poilievre Declares War on "Radical Unions"

Posted by MoS, the Disaffected Lib:

Pierre Backpfeifengesicht Poilievre has declared Conservative war on Canada's "radical" unions and their electoral meddling. The Parliamentary Punk has sent out a letter asking for 5-dollar contributions to help the CPC fight back the union menace in the next general election.

Poilievre has singled out Sid Ryan and the Ontario Federation of Labour as the Tories' arch enemy. The beggar's bowl letter begins:


Friend,

I’ll be blunt – the stakes have never been higher.

We’re not just fighting Thomas Mulcair’s NDP and Justin Trudeau’s Liberals.

This time, we’re also fighting a radical union agenda.

,,,What does this mean? It means that they will spend millions of dollars attacking our Conservative government – and to reverse all the progress we’ve made together.

...Please chip in $5 and help us prepare to fight off the big union attacks. Everything we’ve fought for is at risk.

Too Good Not To Share

This one's for you, young Tim.



H/t Union Thugs

The Insularity of Our National Leader

Yep. Certainly sounds like Harper's got a resounding mandate for change:

Cowardly Stealth - UPDATED

It has been said that at their core, bullies are cowards. Usually they set their sights on weaker targets, and when the time is propitious, unleash their fury. Stealth is often the preferred tactic, given their reluctance to have their deeds exposed for what they are. It is hardly earth-shattering to observe that Stephen Harper is a classic bully, his cowardice and his bullying capacity existing in almost equal measure.

While those Canadians with even the slightest interest in politics have been understandably transfixed by the increasingly dark revelations about the government's efforts to subvert the Senate by exercising its oppressive influence, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty introduced another omnibus bill the other day, Bill C-4.

Following the pattern established in previous Harper omnibus bills, Bill C-4 covers a lot of territory that has nothing to do with budgetary matters. And like previous bills, it is massive at 321 pages, the better to confuse and obscure some of its more anti-democratic elements.

What are those elements? In today's Star, Thomas Walkom identifies one of its most sinister, designed to amaze and delight his core, another attack on unions:

The bill would give the government the unilateral power to determine which civil servants are essential workers and thus disqualified from striking.

However, the most insidious aspect follows:

But the real bite in the government’s proposed changes to Canada’s Public Service Labour Relations Act has to do with arbitration. Most federal public service labour disputes are settled by neutral arbitrators without the need for strike or lockout action. The new law would permit arbitration only when the government agreed.

Even in areas deemed essential, the government could veto arbitration unless it had designated at least 80 per cent of the workers as ineligible to strike.

This bill also ensures that the arbitration process is rigged:

... in those instances where arbitration was permitted, arbitrators would be required to give a “preponderance” of weight to the government’s claims as to what it could afford.

The abrogation of basic bargaining rights, no doubt appealing to those who hate and envy unions, is striking inasmuch as it upends the customs and practices that have worked reasonably well in labour relations for many many decades.

As pointed out in today's Star editorial, just this small part of the bill deserves its own separate bill:

Canada’s lawmakers ought to have the chance to carefully study and debate the merits of handing the government such power, and the Tories should have to make a compelling case for its necessity.

Instead, of course, this and a host of other non-budgetary items ranging from Supreme Court appointments to workplace safety to immigration policy have been hidden, as is the practice of the cowardly, from open view.

Cowards always like to conduct their nefarious activities by way of stealth lest the light of day expose them for what they are. So far, Stephen Harper and his cabal are adhering to that classic pattern without deviation.



UPDATE: The sneering contempt of Tony Clement in a CBC Ottawa radio interview tells you all you need to know about Conservative arrogance regarding their attack on public sector unions.

Elizabeth Warren Speaks

In addressing a recent convention of the AFL-CIO, outspoken U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren, about whom I have posted several times, offered some stirring words. Although directed to an American audience, her sentiments are equally applicable here, given the anti-union and anti-people demagoguery and practices of Mr. Harper's regime at the federal level and Tim Hudak's at the provincial (Ontario) level.

Although this excerpt from a much longer speech is brief and short on specifics, it is the tone that is especially noteworthy, along with the reminder that the fight of the people is the country's fight. If the people do well, so does the country, a wisdom and truth that our current Ottawa cabal and others have conveniently 'forgotten'.

For All the Union-Bashers Out There

Ninety-year-old Joy Taylor asks all of us to 'be the voice':

Some Star Readers Respond To Anti-Unionism

I have to confess that my last few blog posts have felt singularly uninspired. I therefore yield to one of my favourite sources for perceptive analysis, the readers of The Toronto Star, who offer a panoply of thoughts on the dangerous anti-unionism trend evident in Canada at both the federal and provincial levels. All offer some excellent insights, which you can read here, and I am reproducing just one below:

History teaches us that when politicians wield public anger against an identifiable group, the casualty list usually includes those who allow their anger to be manipulated.

As a puppet of financially obese global investors, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney smiled broadly when he announced new immigration laws to facilitate a “new skilled trades stream” of foreign workers. Like foreign seasonal agricultural workers, these “skilled trades workers” will be grateful to leave home and family for much of the year and earn a fraction of what Canadian unionized workers in these trades currently earn. What proof confirms a shortage of electricians in Canada?

In the U.S., President Barack Obama warns that “right-to-work” bills are really politically motivated “right to work for less money” legislation, while in Ontario, Tim Hudak vomits out “right to work” rhetoric in his role as the prophet of blind hated for public sector workers.

It may take a year or two for the angry public to realize it was their hatred of teachers and other public servants that empowered federal and provincial politicians to bargain away all well-paying public and private sector jobs. As with all major renovations to the social structure of societies, the angry 99 per cent will inevitably rise up against the 1 per cent, including against those politicians who fatten their personal or business bank accounts with the profits from right-to-work legislation.

The French Revolution and the follow-up Jacobin movement illustrate the destabilizing consequences of following politicians who use hate to advance their agenda. If the angry public were to actually listen to what the teachers and public servants are saying about the governments’ assault against democratic rights, Canada and Ontario may avert the most dangerous consequences of the revolution that is already underway.

Now that the attack on electricians, welders, and other private sector workers has begun, perhaps their cries for help will be heard.

Cindy Griese, Barrie

What I Really Want For Christmas...

Were I given to the Christmas flights of fancy that prompt people to compile impossible wish lists that usually include a desire for world peace, the end of disease, and the termination of world hunger, I would add one more: politicians who show respect, rather than contempt, for the intelligence of the people they claim to represent.

That, of course, has about as much likelihood of achievement as the other three mentioned above. Too many examples abound of the arrogant assumptions politicians make about people as they abandon the interests of the collective to pursue policies that cater to only a certain segment of society. And what especially rankles me is the fact that they so shamelessly tell the most outrageous lies that betray their contempt for the majority of us.

Take, for example, Pierre Poilievre, that earnest old young man of 33 who is now in his fourth term as an MP and has found much favour with the Harper regime. As reported by the Star's Tim Harper, Poilievre, a staunch believer in the kind of 'right-to-work' legislation recently passed in Michigan, loudly, proudly, hypocritically and disingenuously proclaims it as

...“workers freedom,’’ legislation that would give federal workers the option of paying union dues and joining their colleagues in a work stoppage.

“I am the first federal politician to make a dedicated push toward this goal,’’ he says. “I believe in free choice for workers and I am going to do my part to see that happens at the federal level and I would encourage provincial governments to do likewise.

Ah yes, the famous Harper regime concern for workers' rights.

But perhaps the Christmas season will bring an unexpected gift. Despite the fact that the same prevarications are proclaimed regularly by that Ontario emblem of ineptitude, the Progressive Conservative Party's Tim Hudak, there is some evidence of nascent critical thinking on the part of the electorate. An article in today's Star by Robert Benzie and Richard Brennan suggest that young Tim's embrace of all things right-wing is beginning to hurt him in the polls. Now only two percentage points ahead of the NDP, his party, which seems perilously similar to tea-party ideology, is finding some resistance amongst voters, according to a recent Forum poll:

Forum president Lorne Bozinoff said the most recent survey suggests that some of Hudak’s right-wing proposals are not resonating beyond his diehard supporters.

For example, only about a third — 34 per cent — of respondents believe compulsory union dues should be outlawed while 45 per cent disagreed with that plan and 21 per cent were unsure.

Only 8 per cent of respondents agreed that Community Care Access Centres should be shut down with 61 per cent opposed and 31 per cent uncertain.

Bozinoff said a lot of the Tory planks are “just not authentic enough for people in urban areas,” which is bad news for a party with a caucus made up of mostly rural MPPs.

So, we can only hope that as 2013 arrives, more and more people will don their critical-thinking caps and subject all political rhetoric to the kind of thoughtful analysis that a healthy democracy both demands and deserves.

Unions After Bill C-377

In my favorite Shakespearian play, Hamlet, there is a scene wherein his erstwhile friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, explain that an acting company that used to enjoy great popularity has fallen on hard times. Thanks to a new craze in which troupes of child actors have become the rage, and "are most tyrannically clapped for", adults have had to go on the road to earn a living. Hamlet wonders about the child actors' futures, because their current success means they are in fact "exclaim[ing] against their own succession", since they will be out of work once they grow up.

I can't help but think about human nature's shortsightedness when I read those lines. We pursue things that aren't good for us, while we denigrate that which, in the long term, is of benefit. Take, for example, the public's attitude toward unions. More days than nought, there are columns and letters published condemning unions and their well-paid members, envy and resentment seeping through the pages, seemingly in a senseless quest to bring people down to the lowest pay and working conditions possible.

It is, of course, this irrational impulse to which Bill C-377, the thinly-disguised union-busting legislation passed on Wednesday evening by the Harper government, plays. Clothed in the rhetoric typical of a workers' rights-hating regime, the law will require labour organizations to provide extensive details, such as the salaries of top union leaders, to the Canada Revenue Agency, which will publish the information on its website.

All designed, of course, to stoke even more public contempt for those enjoying better working conditions and pay than those in non-union environments.

And yet, as observed by Thomas Walkom and David Climenhaga, unions themselves must bear some of the responsibility for this current sorry state.

Writes Walkom:

What’s really killing unions is not the political right. It is that, for too many workers, organized labour is no longer relevant.

In 2011, federal figures show, 31 per cent of Canadian workers overall were unionized. Of these, the vast majority are middle-aged or older. For younger workers between the ages of 15 and 24, the rate of unionization is just under 16 per cent.

Compounding the problem, says Walkom, is the fact that union membership is concentrated in the public sector, with only 16 per cent of private sector workers belonging to unions, largely due to the collapse of manufacturing jobs and the proliferation of part-time and contract work in North America.

He adds,

Unions — which understandably pay attention first and foremost to their own members — haven’t lobbied hard enough to tighten up the employment standards legislation that allows these low-wage practices.

Nor have most unions figured out a way to deal with a new kind of workplace, where people no longer labour in large factories and where strikes can be circumvented by technology.

Echoing this idea, in The Rabble David Climenhaga writes:

Ironically, while most unions don't do enough to represent working people beyond their own membership, what little they do to fight for the powerless in society is why authoritarian neoconservatives like Harper have such a hate on for labour and other groups that speak out for traditional Canadian values.

So one worthwhile response to the effort by the Conservatives to smother unions in red tape is to fight harder for real progressive causes, not to mention never again signing a lousy two-tier contract that leaves young workers with the short end of the stick to preserve the past victories of older workers. No, an injury to one remains an injury to all, people!

Perhaps the final consideration should be given to those who "most tyrannically clap[...]' for the kind of repressive legislative agenda epitomized by Bill C-377. In a jurisdiction near you, you can probably look forward to more of this.

Workers of the World Unite- You Have Nothing to Lose But Your Union Shackles!

That perhaps might have been the call in Michigan yesterday, as it joined 23 other states in enacting so called 'right-to-work-legislation' that 'liberates' workers from mandatory union membership and union dues.

Passed by a Republican-dominated House of Representatives, the new law was proudly proclaimed by Republican House Speaker Jase Bolger in the following terms:

“This is about freedom, fairness and equality” ... “These are basic American rights — rights that should unite us.”

Ah yes, those famous rights that allow workers to sell themselves to the lowest corporate bidder, a foregone conclusion in Michigan and the other 'liberated' states, a fact tacitly acknowledged with a wink and a nudge by supporters of the legislation, who say it will boost the economy by creating jobs, attract new companies to Michigan and give workers more choices for employment.

But then again, perhaps I am wrong, and that surge of expected new employment will result from corporations being attracted to states where the workers are revelling in their newly-acquired 'freedom.' After all, a happy and contented worker is a productive worker.

Lest Canadian workers feel left out, our federal overlords are laying the groundwork for similar serf-like satisfaction in this country. As reported in today's Star, Bill C-377, an alleged private member's bill about which I have previously written on this blog, is to receive the full backing of the Harper regime and is expected to be passed today in the House.

Says Labour Minister Lisa Raitt:

“Our government is going to support (the bill), with the amendments that have been brought in. It makes a lot of sense” ... “Workers want to know how their union dues are being spent.”

Of course, there are always naysayers when it comes to such liberating legislation:

Liberal interim leader Bob Rae said Bill C-377 “is an exercise in bureaucratic overkill that has nothing to do with transparency and everything to do with simply trying to punish trade union organizations.”

Rae said the bill, if passed, could be part of “the pattern in the United States” of limiting union rights. The next step, he warned, could by an attempt by the Harper government to eliminate the so-called Rand formula, under which workers in a bargaining unit must pay mandatory union dues.

Such carping criticism aside, can it be long before we are all living in a worker's paradise?

An Odious Servitude

In its ongoing and odious servitude to a reactionary constituency, the Harper regime continues to use the heavy hand of government to target and harass those whose ideology differs from its own.

I have already written several times about Bill C-377, the private members bill designed to flame discontent with unions in this country. Apparently, anyone who seeks to challenge that bill now becomes a victim of one of the favourite tools of the Harperites, name-calling.

As reported by The Star's Tim Harper, this childish and manipulative tactic, a sad substitute for reason (never a strong point with Harper and his ilk), was used to 'answer' what most would deem to be a reasonable question about Bill C-377:

Opponents of the bill wonder why the government is not forcing the same type of financial disclosure upon doctors, lawyers and others who, like union members, pay tax-deductible dues to professional organizations.

The answer was provided by Ottawa-area Conservative Pierre Poilievre after the NDP filibustered the Hiebert bill at committee.

“The NDP’s attempt to block this union transparency bill and block workers’ rights only strengthens our party’s resolve to support that member’s bill and its amendments,” Poilievre said. “The reality is that never before has one party in Parliament been so dominated by a single-interest group.”

He told the Commons that a third of NDP MPs are “past union bureaucrats or union bosses.”

Yet this unwarranted and unprecedented attack on unions is not the only way in which government power is being misused. As also reported by Tim Harper, Conservatives sitting on the natural resources committee have summoned Justin Trudean and David McGuinty to explain their anti-Alberta remarks. How long will it be before we see show trials in Canada?

Finally in his piece, the star columnist points out the egregious hyprocrisy of a government that insists that the principles of accountability and transparency are its sole motivation:

As the Conservatives cast their light of accountability about the halls of Parliament, they have ignored their own lack of accountability — on the true cost of the F-35 fighter jets, on spending on the G20 summit, on the use of a discredited marketing agency to spread lies about Liberal MP Irwin Cotler or on its recent fun-with-figures budget numbers aimed at delivering goodies in the 2015 campaign.

So far, the Canadian public has given no indication that its appetite for the government's reprehensible behaviour is reaching the saturation point. Until it does, expect more of the same.

Unions Under Attack: A Star Reader Writes

In two recent posts, I discussed Bill C-377, a Harper-driven anti-union measure disguised as a private member's bill. Introduced by Conservative MPP Russ Hiebert, it is designed to require full disclosure of all union expenditures, including monies allotted for various causes; while its ostensible purpose, according to government propaganda, is to provide full transparency, a concept Mr. Harper seems only peripherally acquainted with, its real purpose is to stoke the resentments and jealousies some feel toward unions and their members. If that resentment reaches a critical mass, making union dues optional, a favorite Trojan Horse tactic of the extreme right to weaken and ultimately destroy unions, will be that much easier.

In this morning's Star, letter-writer Jenny Carter offers her insights on the bill:

Thomas Walkom talks of Russ Hiebert's private member's bill, which is, he says, ostensibly a plea for openness but actually an attack on the automatic check-off of union dues, or Rand formula.

It's a funny thing, but I, and everybody with a taxable income, also pay automatic dues, also supposed to provide services and benefits to those who pay.

Bill C-377 says the public has the right to know how unions spend their money. But the government refuses to tell the public how their tax money is spent. Even Members of Parliament seem no longer to have a right to this information, which is very strange because one of the main functions of an elected parliament has always been to oversee the way in which tax money is spent.

REAL Women may not like expenditure on “left-wing causes,” but many taxpayers may feel that it is not in their best interests to have government money spent, for example, on subsidizing fossil fuel companies, building unnecessary jails and buying attack fighter jets, while starving provincial governments of funds for health-care and essential social spending, and failing to provide public housing.

We need trade unions as a counterbalance to business. If the Rand formula is abolished, I really don't see why I, or anybody who objects to the government's lack of financial transparency and the way it spends our money, should be expected to pay taxes, especially since the tax system in this country is extremely unfair.

The proposed bill is undemocratic and unjust, and another indication that Big Brother is trying to take us over.

Jenny Carter, Peterborough