Another Portrait Of Engaged Citizenry

There are many causes worth fighting for. This is definitely one of them.

A Grim Reminder Of Who Is Leading Our Country

It's a dreary rainy morning in my part of the country, so this rather grim reminder of present political realities seems appropriate if one is familiar with the notion of pathetic fallacy.



H/t Scott Monette

Powerful Words From Cornell West

Although he is addressing an audience in NYC, Cornell West's words are equally applicable on this side of the border. They seem especially important given the Harper regime's many efforts to tear down Canadian values and the obligations we have to one another as both citizens and human beings.

If you want to see his full address, you can access it here.

H/t Jack Saturday

A Sad Truth Here

H/t Chris Andersen

More From Our Friends at Canadians Rallying To Unseat Stephen Harper

I doubt that any of this requires further explanation.

On Our Democratic Deficit

These Star readers, whether you agree with them or not, have some interesting perspectives to offer:

Re: Growing disconnect between Canadians and Parliament, May 2

Democracy is just a mirage, Letter May 5

Al Dunn is essentially correct in his characterization of democracy as it is generally practised today. But the fact that democracy is clearly the ultimate bait-and-switch trick pulled on us by the elites — keeping up the illusion of a fair say whilst actually holding us at arm’s length from the levers that could operate our share of the balance of power — doesn’t mean there is no hope for us or for democracy. It doesn’t have to be this way. The funny thing about democracy is that behind that veneer is an institution that can be reconfigured to actually work as advertised. The trick wouldn’t have worked otherwise.

Democracy can be a true and substantive system for the rest of us but only when each and every representative in our parliaments owes their seat and their allegiance to their electorate more than to their party and every voter gets a rep insofar as the number of seats in the House permits. This is achievable; it only needs a properly designed electoral system.

When voters are truly empowered to truly empower their representatives, democracy will no longer be an illusion. That is the “paradigm shift” our democracy needs.

And while our party elites have (unsurprisingly) seen fit to reject calls to cooperate for meaningful electoral reform the door is still open for individual candidates to respond to the challenge. What do you say, chaps: will you cooperate with us to empower each other or are you content in your role in maintaining the pretense in the face of our dire need?

Mark Henschel, Toronto

Growing disconnect between Canadians and Parliament, May 2

Over the past few weeks there have been numerous opinion pieces in your paper discussing the “disconnect” between Stephen Harper’s Conservatives and the general public. This is by no means an unplanned occurrence. Governments in general — Conservative ones in particular — have been changing the way that governments and the governed interact. They have done it through simple changes to the lexicon.

The most notable change is the words that governments use to describe those who are governed. We are no longer referred to by politicians as “residents” or “voters,” “citizens” or even “Canadians.” We are referred to as “taxpayers,” even by your newspaper and the media as a whole. To be fair, everyone pays taxes, whether it is on one’s salary, real estate holdings or a $2 bag of candy at the corner store. But being referred to primarily as a “taxpayer” by the government carries with it a certain understanding.

Taxpayers pay for goods and services provided by the government for personal use. It is a consumer transaction. As long as you get your money’s worth, there is no reason to expect more or to know how it got to you, as long as you received value for your dollar. If someone else cannot access these goods and services, it is because they cannot contribute as much as you can, not because the government won’t provide.

Moreover, your responsibility ends the moment you sign the cheque. There is no need for any additional input or concern. You can’t question Walmart’s foreign policy, environmental track record or how it deals with dissent from within or without either. After all, your only decision is whether you will purchase or not.

“Citizens.” on the other hand have both rights and responsibilities. Yes, they pay taxes, but their duties go beyond the financial transaction. They are expected to engage in public debate, care for those who need to be cared for, and concern themselves for the community at large. They often put the good of society before themselves. Unfortunately, from the government’s perspective, “citizens” tend to question agendas, complain on grounds of principle, and worst of all, vote … sometimes for other parties.

Many “taxpayers” are content to simply give up their rights as citizens if it means they pay their taxes and not be bothered beyond that; after all, the government has everything in hand, right?

Being a “citizen” is a lot of work, requires you to be passionate about mundane things and pay attention, but the citizenry develops the political power necessary to steer public discussion. Is it any wonder that these two aspects define the difference between a dictatorship and a democracy?

Neil McClung, Brampton

Your editorial and the excellent article a few days earlier by Bob Hepburn on the disconnect between Canada’s parliament and its people accurately indicates that something here does not work well.

I am familiar with the governance structures of both Germany and Sweden and both have far more involved and informed electorates and a far better relationship between their people and their governments, and what their governments do. They both have an electoral system based on proportional representation, where every vote counts.

Our system gave Mr. Harper a strong mandate to govern although only 24 per cent of the electorate voted for him, 76 per cent did not. If we had had PR at the last election we would have since had a Liberal-NDP coalition probably supported by the Greens and an overwhelming majority of the voters. I am sure they would have done many things differently than Mr. Harper, things both you and I would have supported.

The Star has always strongly opposed proportional representation and consequently we must thank you for giving us the current Conservative majority. It would be wonderful and a great blessing for Canada to fix our mess on Parliament Hill.

In your case it might be useful to fix your attitude toward what is a far superior and more democratic electoral system. We can really only fix ourselves.

Chris Smith, Toronto

Stephen Harper - He's Not Here For You

But of course I state the obvious here, don't I? Nonetheless, for those who like regular and ongoing illustrations of the fact that the Prime Minister and his acolytes are in the thrall of 'special interests,' one need look no further than a report in today's Toronto Star.

Currently, non-financial businesses are sitting on over $600 billion in cash reserves, thanks to a very favourable tax regime from the Harperites and similarly obeisant and compliant provincial governments. At the same time, however, these 'masters of the universe,' reluctant to spend their largess on research and development, new equipment purchases, or just about anything else, have gotten new incentive to hoard and count their cash:

The Conservative government says the National Research Council is now “open for business” and will refocus on large-scale projects “directed by and for” Canadian industry — a change some scientists call a mistake.

Part of the mandate of the NRC is to work with and help support industry, but what is new here is the fact that it appears this will now essentially be its exclusive mandate, dictated by the 'needs' of industry.

While one understands that it is difficult for the current government regime, looking as it does with grave suspicion upon critical and nuanced thinking, to comprehend, the words of Nobel laureate John Polanyi, who says that steering the NRC away from basic research is misguided, need to be heard:

“One should structure things so (scientists) have the freedom and responsibility to provide ideas to industry, not just receive commands,” ...

Queen’s University professor and Canada Research Chair in Environmental Change, John Smol, explains it this way:

“I look at science as a pyramid. At the bottom you have all this basic fundamental research and at the top you have the applied. But you can’t have the applied without the basic,” he said.

Smol goes so far as to see something quite sinister in the Harper decision to make the NRC the handmaiden of the corporate agenda:

Smol, a lakes ecosystem expert, believes the decision to recast the NRC is part of a Conservative pattern of cutting funding for basic science in favour of applied research that will generate a profit.

“What you find in environmental research are things that will cost industry money,” he says. In a recent study, Smol showed that lakes near Alberta’s oil sands are filled with contaminants.

One assumes that with its new orders, the National Research Council will not anytime soon be conducting such embarrassing studies that could hamper the ever-stronger march of corporate dominance.

Another victory for the Harperites. Another loss for the non-corporate citizens of Canada.

Are Canadians Experiencing Buyers' Remorse?

Many of us who blog, tweet, or post political views on Facebook cannot, I suspect, avoid the periodic and unsettling notion that we are simply 'preaching to the converted' instead of reaching a larger audience with our perspectives and commentaries. Yet we persevere, both as a catharsis for our own outrage over social and political injustices, especially (at least for me) those induced by the Harper cabal, and in the hope that our words may influence those who don't necessarily feel as we do. But it is always just a hope.

That is why I take such delight when I read things in the mainstream media that suggest our discontent is shared by a constituency much wider than our blogosphere, thereby offering reasons for renewed optimism that changes in Ottawa are indeed quite possible. Such is the case today in reading The Star's Chantal Hebert. Entitled Stephen Harper’s legacy in government may be nastiness, her column suggests that those who made possible the Harper majority are now feeling buyers' remorse:

The latest voting intentions sounding — done by Harris/Decima for The Canadian Press earlier this week — shows the Conservatives in second place, seven points behind the Liberals and more than 10 points down from their 2011 level.

While acknowledging that the results stem in part from Justin Trudeau's recent assumption of the Liberal Party leadership, Hebert suggests they are also a natural consequence of the politics of negativity that Harper and his functionaries have continued to embrace so rabidly, despite their majority:

With a consistency that would have been exemplary if only it had been exerted on the policy front, the majority Conservatives have treated Parliament and the country to [ongoing contempt].

At times it has seemed as if, having fought so hard to conquer a majority, they felt compelled to act like an occupying army rather than a government accountable to all.

Hebert makes the point that Canadians are used to their politics being rough, reminding us of some of the antics and abuses of power that characterized the Chretien reign. She does observe, however, that his government's saving grace was

a series of signature policies for which support extended outside the core Liberal base. A return to balanced budgets, the Clarity Act and a refusal to follow the Americans’ lead on Iraq are three examples.

By contrast, all Harper has left is his die-hard 'true believers', the rest totally alienated from his antics:

He promised to fix the democratic deficit that plagued Parliament. Instead Harper’s contribution to that deficit already surpasses that of his predecessors.

The Conservatives were going to end the culture of entitlement that pervaded previous governments. Instead, some of Harper’s senators and ministers have embraced that culture in relative impunity.

The prime minister also vouched to restore accountability to government. Instead, he has presided over increasingly opaque budgets and a Kafkaesque regime of communication designed to obscure rather than inform. The auditor general himself has trouble following the money through the federal system these days.

Despite my retirement, the English teacher within lives on. Upon reading Hebert's observations, my mind went to a scene in Shakespeare's Macbeth, when, near the end of his unjust and cruel rule, Macbeth is facing invasion from the English, who are helping Scottish patriots overthrow the tyrant. Someone asks about Macbeth's status:

13 Some say he's mad; others that lesser hate him

14 Do call it valiant fury; but, for certain,

15 He cannot buckle his distemper'd cause

16 Within the belt of rule.

ANGUS

Now does he feel

17 His secret murders sticking on his hands;

18 Now minutely revolts upbraid his faith-breach;

19 Those he commands move only in command,

20 Nothing in love. Now does he feel his title

21 Hang loose about him, like a giant's robe

22 Upon a dwarfish thief.

(Act 5, Scene 2)

I, and many others live in the hope that the dwarfish thief currently reigning in Ottawa is soon to experience a 'wardrobe malfunction' and lose his Prime Minister's robes. Hebert's article gives me renewed hope for that outcome.

An Anniversary Many Would Like To Forget

In his column today, Tim Harper reminds us that yesterday marked the two-year anniversary of the Harper majority government.

It is hardly an occasion that progressives take delight in as columnist Harper makes reference to some of the regime's retrograde policies and 'achievements':

- streamlined environmental regulatory reviews

- the formal withdrawal from the Kyoto protocol

- the radical overhaul of the Navigable Waters Act and the Fisheries Act

- the uncertainty over the future of the Experimental Lakes Area

- the shuttering of the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy

- cutting of scientific research

- muzzling of federal scientists

- compromising the independence of Statistics Canada

- abdicating the federal role in setting national health care policy

- raising the age at which Canadians are eligible for Old Age Security

- the odium and loss of international reputation Canada has experienced thanks to its uncritical and unwavering support of Israel in all matters

Tim Harper concludes with the following observation:

All of the above took a mere two years. It is also reads like a blueprint for continued support from the party base. As it turns the corner on this mandate, the real test will be how the Conservatives try to reach beyond that base heading to 2015.

My suspicion is, as I have mentioned before in this blog, that the regime hopes that the vast majority of Canadians will have lost all faith in government by 2015, in which case the election will be an unfettered opportunity for the 'true believers' to give Harper another majority, thereby enabling him to complete the task of dismantling whatever remains of the Canada that we still take pride in and cherish.

UPDATE: H/t Michael Scott for this sad but telling link to a new story about Harper muzzling of scientists.

A Change of Heart, Or A Change In Political Winds?

Much has been written and discussed about the Temporary Foreign Workers Program, both on this blog and in various other media; consequently, I suspect that the majority of well-informed Canadians will look with deep cynicism upon the announcement that the Harper regime intends to crack down on widespread employer abuses of the program that has seen Canadians displaced by immigrants being paid up to 15% less in wages.

Those whose acquaintance with Canadian politics is limited only to being able to name the Prime Minister of Canada and perhaps one opposition leader will doubtless feel that the Harper crew is being responsive to the needs of Canadians, now that these wholly unanticipated abuses of the program have become known.

In this, of course, they would be completely deluded.

Consider this about the TFWP:

Critics say it has been misused to recruit foreigners for many low-skilled positions that could have gone to Canadians. With 1.3 million Canadians out of work, the Conservative government was facing charges that it was making it too easy for companies to go abroad for their labour needs.

The article reminds us that the problem was well-known to the government, adding to the suspicion that its purpose all along was to lower labour costs for business. For example last year, HD Mining International Ltd. a Chinese-backed coal mining operation in British Columbia, brought in 201 miners from China under the plan.

Or Consider this observation:

NDP MP Chris Charlton said government’s record so far on the file makes her skeptical they have fixed the problems.

“The reality is that they have made an absolute mess of the temporary foreign workers program,” Charlton said.

“They have systematically loosened the rules to make it easier for employers to hire cheap foreign labour at the expense of Canadian workers.”

Advocates groups are similarly cynical that the Harper regime has experienced a sudden epiphany:

“We have little faith that they would result in anything meaningful,” said Naveen Mehta of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union Canada. “It’s just (smoke and mirrors).”

Using Ottawa’s bad employer list as an example, former live-in caregiver Kay Manuel, whose story of exploitation sparked off new migrant worker protection laws, said the federal government has yet to name a bad Canadian employer on its website since its 2011 launch.

Mehta's doubts are shared by many others:

“The changes announced today are mostly about rearranging deck chairs on a sinking ship,” said Chris Ramsaroop, a member of the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change, a coalition of grassroots advocacy groups.

Calling Ottawa’s reforms “political jockeying,” Deena Ladd, executive director of the Toronto Workers’ Action Centre, said Ottawa could enhance the migrant worker program’s transparency by publicizing Canadian employers using the program and the jobs migrant workers they are bringing in to fill.

Perhaps the final word should go to the business community which, quite predictably, is warning that the sky may fall as a result of these changes:

“One of the worst decisions this government has ever made,” said Dan Kelly, president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, said of the new rules. “They’re completing ignoring the needs of small firms and the needs of employers who are in need of entry level workers.”

“I’m very, very unhappy with this government for this decision,” Kelly added.

Or how about this apocalyptic morsel from a former Progressive Conservative politician:?

“It’s going to drive up costs and make it more difficult to use the program,” said Perrin Beatty, president and chief executive officer of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce.

“Nobody benefits from that,” Beatty said adding it could force come employers out of business.

One might tartly add, Mr. Beatty, that no Canadian workers have benefited from the TFWP in its current configuration.

Welcome to the real world, sir.

“This was an attack on the rule of the law.”

So said Crown attorney Elizabeth Jackson, who is seeking a sentence of 18 months in jail and three years’ probation at the sentencing hearing of George Horton, 24, whose crime during the 2010 Toronto G20 Summit was kicking the scout car of Staff. Sgt. Graham Queen as well as another cruiser and a CBC van.

The officer “wasn’t just anybody,” Jackson told court. “This was an attack on the rule of the law.”

While I in no way condone violence in any way, shape or form, it seems to me that insisting on a separate sentencing criterion because a police officer was traumatized by what was essentially a property crime does a grave disservice to, if not the rule of law, then respect for that law, given that thousands of protesters demonstrating democratically and peacefully were assaulted, traumatized and violated in myriad ways by the very police who are now suddenly such sensitive souls.

But, of course, I need to remind myself that Canada under attack is what our Prime Autocrat and his lieutenant Vic Toews want us to believe is the reality today as they continue to carry out their destruction of our traditions.

The Harper Attack On Canadian Values

As I have written elsewhere in this blog, for various reasons I have never believed that democratically elected governments are necessarily a reflection of the values or the will of the electorate. I have also written of my strong belief that governments do, however, have a potentially huge impact on the national ethos. By their policies, rhetoric and treatment of opposing ideas, governments can and I suspect do frequently deform the souls of nations.

The eloquent lead letter in today's print edition of The Star reminds us all of how far Harper Inc. has taken us down a road that darkly deviates from the things that our country has traditionally held dear:

Supposedly, our federal government acts in the best interests of citizens. Ample evidence proves otherwise. On matters of immigration, human rights and justice, they not only break faith, but act with an unbelievable lack of humanity and compassion.

When the Supreme Court decreed that Omar Khadr’s rights had been violated, that young man still agreed to plead guilty and face a longer sentence in order to return to Canada. The United States expected Canada to act immediately; the government has still stalled.

Only after extreme pressure from citizens has the government lived up to its obligation to give shelter to Afghan interpreter Sayed Shah Sharifi, even though his aid to Canadians was verified by the military and foreign correspondents. He has been told that he has a seat reserved on a flight to Canada on July 28. Again, the government moved with extreme reluctance.

In an unbelievably petty and cruel bureaucratic ruling, a Canadian woman who has lived here since the age of 4 and has taught generations of Canadian schoolchildren, is being denied Old Age Security because she could not supply landing papers showing the date that she arrived here from England. What absolute nonsense.

At one time, Canada had visitors from abroad to learn about our increasingly progressive prison system under Commissioner Ole Ingstrup. Sadly, we have regressed and are now considered below UN standards.

When Public Safety Minister Vic Toews passes on to the next world, I fervently pray that he is placed in a “perfectly appropriate” double-bunk situation for a minimum of one year. It will be too late to help current prisoners, but it is a sentence that I feel the minister deserves.

I resent intensely this government that to me represents ever more frequently a betrayal of Canadian values and that persists in diminishing the Canada that I love. When the next election rolls around, my vote will be ABC.

Shirley Bush, Toronto

More Brilliance From Montreal Simon

Many thanks to Montreal Simon, who created this trenchant attack ad:

Harper Refuses To Release Taxpayer-Funded Study On Pensions

The conclusion the cynic would draw (that's me) is that the report suggests no need for the changes Harper has made in the OAS.

H/t Brandon Laraby

Trans-Pacific Partnership: Harper To Surrender More Of Our Sovereignty To Corporations

As has already been reported, the price of admission for Canada's entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations is the acceptance of everything thus far negotiated. Although all of the talks are secret, with corporations but not citizens privy to its contents, this much is known: the TPP enhances corporate rights to sue governments when public policies interfere with how, when and where they make profits - in others words, a further abdication of our national sovereignty, a process that began under NFTA.

This link includes a video that offers some insight into what is going on behind our backs, and it is nothing less than an absolute and utter betrayal of all of us. Although spoken of from an American perspective, don't forget that the changes discussed will apply to all signatories.

Gated Democracy? - Protesting The Harper Omnibus Budget Bill - Part 2

Yesterday I got a glimpse of the kind of democratic expression that is considered acceptable under the Harper regime. It is one that I found profoundly disturbing.

Almost a week ago I wrote a post describing a march organized by Leadnow.ca to the constituency office of my Conservative M.P., David Sweet. Yesterday, another demonstration to protest Bill C-38, the Harper budget omnibus bill, took place, this one organized by the local chapter of the Council of Canadians and joined by a variety of groups and individuals.

Despite the short notice, this march from downtown Dundas up to Mr. Sweet's office in Greensville was well-attended, and I was very pleased by the healthy presence of young Canadians, each participant bound by a deep concern for the dark road Stephen Harper and his acolytes are leading us down.

However, young and old alike were in for an unpleasant surprise upon arrival at our destination. We were met with a No Trespassing sign at the entrance to the strip mall housing Sweet's constituency office, an interdiction authorized by the property owner, IPC Investments, we were told.

Not one to be satisfied with such an expedient and un-Canadian dismissal of democracy, I ventured onto the property to ask for the owner. Flanked by four Hamilton police officers (all of whom, I must say, discharged their perceived duties in a very professional and non-confrontational manner), I spoke to the owner, who refused to give his name. (I later learned his identity, but it seems pointless to give it here, as I suspect his is an attitude endemic in Harperland.)

I asked him why we were being denied access to the office of our M.P., and he told me it was private property. When I persisted in my questions, he said there had been an incident of property destruction a couple of months ago, at which point the officer told him he didn't have to answer my questions. Interestingly, a lawyer who was in attendance later contacted the property owner who "alleged that people in the past had caused damage by breaking foliage and walking on plants," none of which was in evidence in this concreted and rather sterile-looking strip mall.

Thus literally relegated to the street (also an apt metaphor for where this battle must be fought), many of the attendees spoke eloquently about their concerns over the omnibus bill. Representatives from labour, the environment, poverty and political action groups, as well as former politicians and individuals, all united by their love of this country and their compassion for its members, offered moving perspectives on the dangers inherent in the Harper push to fundamentally alter the values and traditions that I would like to think the majority of Canadians hold dear.

Many of yesterday's attendees were veterans of the battles to safeguard those values, maintain our democratic rights, and hold our politicians accountable to those they were elected to represent and serve. Many others were young and just beginning to take up those battles, but all were united in their passion and their determination to fight for the things truly worth fighting for in this life.

It is this spirit that the Harper regime can never really understand. It is this spirit that Harper and his followers would love to crush. But it is also this spirit that, as both history and contemporary world events amply demonstrate, is the one aspect of humanity that is truly invincible, and will never die.

Protesting The Harper Omnibus Budget Bill

I wrote a post the other day about a Leadnow.ca campaign promoting nation-wide demonstrations at the constituency offices of Conservative M.P.s to protest Bill C-38, the Harper government's omnibus budget bill that changes over 70 laws, eroding further our democracy, our labour laws, and our environmental safeguards, to name but three of its insidious contents.

Locally, a group of us gathered at the office of David Sweet, the Harper M.P. for Ancaster-Dundas-Flamborough-Westdale. Although disappointed that he wasn't there (and in fairness to him, I checked afterwards and found out that his constituency hours are only Monday through Friday), it was nonetheless a healthy gathering of people, many of whom shared the view that this was just a first step in organizing local opposition to the agenda that Harper Inc. is mercilessly pursuing at the expense of the well-being of all Canadians.

None of us, being mature adults, are under any illusion that the fight will be easy or of short duration. We all know the power of the Conservative propaganda machine; coupled with the fear that the regime inspires in various groups who still subscribe to the tenets of democracy, and the contemptibly divisive tactics employed by a government drunk with its own unholy power, the road ahead is littered with obstacles.

But at least the process is in place. And while I recognize that it is very often very difficult for people to take that first step outside of their 'comfort zone' to join a protest, I suspect most would say that once they have taken that step, they look forward to more opportunities to do what they can to ensure that the great country they have known throughout their lives offers the same values and the same opportunities for their children and their children's children, down through the generations.

The future is at stake!