UPDATED: A Most Visible Sign Of Contempt

It is well-known among those who follow politics that governments frequently show contempt for the people that they 'serve.' However, rarely is that contempt telegraphed in advance of an election. Jerry Bance, who is running for the federal Conservatives in the Toronto riding of Scarborough Rouge Park, owns and operates XPress Appliance Service, an appliance repair company in the Greater Toronto Area. As you will see in the following video, he sets a new depth for disdain that I suspect few will want to emulate.

"I deeply regret my actions on that day. I take great pride in my work and the footage from that day does not reflect who I am as a professional or a person," Bance said when contacted by CBC News for comment.'

Response to the story on social media sites was nearly instantaneous. The hashtag "peegate" was soon trending on Twitter, as Twitter buzzed with disparaging jokes, comments and bad puns targeting Bance and the Conservative Party.

Bance's Dear Leader will be campaigning today in Toronto.

A media advisory from the Conservative campaign names two candidates who will join him, but does not mention Bance.

Happy Labour Day, everyone (excluding Jerry Bance, of course).

UPDATE: The errant Mr. Bance is no longer a Conservative candidate, a loss, to be sure. As Thomas Mulcair puckishly observed, “This must be someone who’s adept at Stephen Harper’s trickle down theory of economics.”

How Fed Up With Harper Are Canadians?

The answer to that could very well determine Dear Leader's electoral fate in 2015, according to Tim Harper's analysis in today's Star.

As well,

He must keep voter turnout low because his supporters are more committed and likely to cast a ballot. A flood of new, Trudeau voters will doom him.

Given their well-known voter suppression tactics, as well as the provisions of the 'Fair' Elections Act, we can be certain that the Harperites will be indefatigable in their efforts to ensure the above.

He must soften his stand on climate change and the primacy of energy and resource extraction. He is an outlier on the world stage and Canadians know it. Worse for Harper, his jobs-first, environment-second mantra makes him an outlier in his own country, even in the Alberta oilpatch, which realizes a little greening could help get their bitumen to market.

The success of the Harper cabal's attempts to 'green' their master, of course, will depend largely on the credulity of the Canadian electorate. One hopes that voters have paid more than scant attention to the ongoing duplicity of Harper on this file.

He must maintain the support of new Canadians who, Conservatives believe, will remain loyal to a government that creates the atmosphere for success, but stays out of their face.

This could be Harper's strongest suit, given his bellicose but essentially empty rhetoric on the world stage.

He must again convince Canadians that change is risky, champion his trade deals, and argue that putting the economy in the hands of an untested poseur or a job-killing socialist would bring ruination.

Anyone paying attention to the precipitous drop in oil prices should be able to question the myth of Harper as some kind of economic genius, given how he placed almost all of Canada's proverbial eggs in one basket.

Tim Harper ends his piece with some reminders that we all need to carry into the election:

Whether it is the Harper autocracy, his environmental record, his demonizing of opponents, Supreme Court spats, omnibus bills, back-of-the-hand treatment of natives, dictatorial treatment of the premiers, ethical stumbles, treatment of veterans or an unyielding lack of collaboration, the list of grievances against a government verging on 10 years in power adds up.

It is those crippling Harper-engineered failures of democracy that all of us have a responsibility to repeatedly remind often amnesiac voters before they go to the polls this October.

The Shape of Conservative Attack Ads To Come?

A new This Hour Has 22 Minutes song parody of Meghan Trainor's hit "All About That Bass" reveals possible Conservative pre-election attack strategies aimed squarely at the Liberal party leader.

Contempt Of The Electorate?

Tom, a friend of mine, posted the following on Facebook yesterday:

Kind of tired of all the polemical posturing in the latest election. However, can anyone provide one instance in history -- at least, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution -- where, corporate or business tax cuts, the basis of trickle down economic policy, have been primarily responsible for an upsurge in hiring or the oxymoronic fictional concept of job creation.

I replied:

Tom, you are asking a question that the media refuse to ask. Considering who owns most of the media in this country, this is perhaps not so surprising.

To which Tom replied:

I think that's partially true, Lorne. However, how come politicians and supporters of those on the other side [of the] argument don't keep asking the question and insist upon an answer. I've been looking for such an historical antecedent and can't find anything.

I wrote back:

A good question. Perhaps it reflects their belief that the attention span of the average citizen is short, and boring them with facts is counter productive? Sound bites do seem to rule the day.

Tom makes an excellent point about the dearth of questions asked about the right's underlying premises. Indeed, the Liberals have only gone so far as to ridicule the accuracy of the job-creation numbers Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak claims will ensue from both his gutting of public service jobs and reduction in corporate tax rates. Nowhere is his philosophical foundation questioned.

Kim Campbell, in her short career as Canada's first woman prime minister, once infamously observed that political campaigns are not the time to discuss policy. She was much pilloried for that comment, but perhaps it was simply an oblique expression of disdain for the very people whose support politicians seek on their road to power. That contempt seems to be more and more the default position of those who lead us or aspire to.

In his column this morning, Martin Regg Cohn laments the fact that Tim Hudak will not be taking part in the Ontario leaders' debate in Thunder Bay, attributing crass political calculation to his boycott, and not the 'scheduling conflict' Team Hudak claims.

Cohn calls his decision a disrespect for democracy, and yet I have long given up on such debates, reflecting, as they do, the very contempt that is the subject of this post. Far too frequently, instead of engaging in the thrust and parry a real debate entails, politicos are all too content either to simply rework their stump speeches into their responses or answer the questions they wished had been asked, rather than the actual queries. Avoidance and obfuscation seem to rule the day, and the journalists moderating the panels rarely seem to hold them to account.

How we arrived at this sad state is not an easy question to answer, but undoubtedly the pernicious influence of the Harper regime and its worship of ignorance is a factor.

Two brief letters in today's Star make this point:

Gutting Statistics Canada is a pound-foolish strategy, Opinion May 19

Anyone with brains could see that gutting Statistics Canada would be a disaster for future governing of this country. To me, it represented one of the first major steps of Stephen Harper’s “secret agenda” of remaking this country into his little fiefdom of conservative domination into the future ruled by ideology not evidence-backed policies.

It will be the ruination of this once small but proud country.

Ann Goodin, Burlington

I don’t think money is the main motivator behind gutting StatsCan, although it’s a great excuse. It’s been obvious for years that the Conservatives don’t like pesky facts getting in the way of their ideology.

They’ve also figured out how to data mine us so they have info we’ll never see (those pesky facts again).

Ellen Bates, Toronto

That is not to see that any of us gets a free pass when it comes to embracing ignorance. Far too many have stopped taking the political process seriously, seeing it more as a source of soap-operish entertainment than as fundamental to the health of our country. Anyone who doubts that need only refer to the antics of a Rob Ford and the tenor of so many reactions to them. Or ask yourself this: What comes to mind when you think of Maxime Bernier and the misplaced government documents?

I will end what has been perhaps a bit of a meandering post with one final letter from today's Star. During this Ontario election campaign, both Mr. Hudak and Ms. Horwath have made much about our hydro rates. It is taken as undeniable that we pay some of the world's highest rates thanks to Liberal incompetence and corruption. Here are the facts:

Business shifts election focus to power prices, May 15

Most people realise that just because a politician (or party rep) says something, it doesn’t mean it’s true. The latest scuttlebutt is the “sky-high” prices we pay for electricity in Ontario making us uncompetitive and putting a strain on working families.

Let’s face it: nobody wants to pay more for anything, but before voting for political parties who are promising to lower your hydro rates, consider the fact that electricity prices in Ontario are actually not high at all.

Hydro Quebec routinely surveys electricity rates for consumers/small business and large industrial customers across North America. In 2013 it may surprise many people to know that at a kw/h price of $0.1248, Toronto has lower hydro rates than Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Halifax, Charlottetown, and St John’s. In addition, it has much lower rates than Boston (0.165), Detroit (0.1554), New York (0.2175), and San Francisco (0.2294).

If one looks further abroad, a 2011 comparison of electricity rates (all in U.S. dollars per kw/h) world wide indicates that after adjusting for relative purchasing power, Canada has the lowest rates in the entire world. Not adjusting for purchasing power, we have the fourth lowest rates in the world at $0.10, just above India and China at $0.08 each and tied with Mexico and South Africa.

The average price in the U.S. in 2011 was actually $0.12, more than we pay in Toronto. The top five? Denmark: $0.41, Germany: $0.35, Spain: $0.30, Australia: $0.29, and Italy: $0.28. Even Brazil has higher rates at $0.17.

Ontario has a massive electricity grid to maintain relative to its population. Part of this cost is offset by relatively cheap hydro electric power and the artificially low cost we pay for nuclear power, but maintenance on a system this large requires substantial and on-going investment.

Before voting for a party promising to cut prices, ask yourself this question: Who is going to pay for them?

Rob Graham, Toronto

UPDATED: Unfit To Govern

I have to admit that even though I am now in my sixties, I have never before witnessed the kind of behaviour on the part of a Canadian government as I have of the Harper regime. Contemptuous of opposing views, ready to vilify opponents at every turn, the regime has taken even me, an inveterate cynic, by surprise in its latest salvo. In a word, Harper's the attack on the Supreme Court is unprecedented in a healthy democracy.

To say that Stephen Harper is mentally unhealthy is to state the obvious. To say that his twisted psyche sees enemies everywhere is not news. What may not be so obvious to the casual observer is the contempt he holds for Canada itself, given his most recent attack on Beverley McLachlin. As other observers have already noted, to call into question, out of mere spite, the probity of the Supreme Court's Chief Justice is to undermine Canadian's faith in our judiciary.

And of course, this follows a long Harper pattern of sowing doubt and disaffection among Canadians toward so many of our country's institutional underpinnings. Harper's disdain for Parliament is legendary, from his marginalizing the opposition to proroguing the House to avoid defeat. The robocall scandal attests to how much the notion of fair elections offends him. The 'Fair' Elections Act is itself a giant middle finger directed at democracy.

In his latest column entitled PM’s enemies list? Here comes the judge, The Globe's Lawrence Martin reflects on the strangeness of Harper's Supreme Court attack:

This is Stephen Harper’s court. He appointed a majority of the justices on it. He named five of the eight, with one more pending. Another, Beverley McLachlin, was named to the court by Tory Brian Mulroney. The Harper appointments, as could be expected, have been more conservative in their orientation than liberal.

Yet these facts have not prevented the Prime Minister from his full frontal assault on the court.

Says Martin:

The Prime Minister’s enemies list, which includes Mr. Cotler and so many others, keeps growing – and reaching higher levels. Must everyone submit to Mr. Harper’s will or face retaliation? Do we have, as his former adviser Tom Flanagan maintains, a predator as prime minister? Does he not think there will be a reckoning?

Harper's much vaunted and exaggerated strategic 'genius' does not seem to be the motivating force here, either. Martin recalls,

... interviewing David Emerson, who had a unique perspective because he served in both the cabinets of Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. There were things he preferred about the Harper operation. But one difference that alarmed Mr. Emerson was the degree of visceral contempt he saw from Mr. Harper and his top lieutenants toward those opposed to their beliefs. He’d never seen anything like it. How could they harbour, he wondered, so much venom?

What goes on in the Prime Minister's head is not realy my concern. All I know is that Stephen Harper and all of his acolytes have betrayed what should have been a sacred trust, the leadership of our country. The country I know and love cannot survive another term of his hateful, divisive and destructive rule.

UPDATE: It would seem that even Conservatives are beginning to see the truth about Mr. Harper:

More Evidence Of The Devil

If the devil is indeed to be found in the detail, then Star letter-writer Geoffrey Kemp of Mississauga has done an exorcist's job of ferreting out the wily one.

Enjoy his well-considered thoughts on an aspect of the 'Fair' Elections Act that has gotten relatively little attention owing to the grave and justifiable concern being widely expressed over its voter-suppression implications. (The bolded parts are mine):

Stephen Harper’s need to hastily do an end run around democracy is doubtless caused by the dubious actions of those he chooses to surround himself with, other examples of his poor judgment and the declining Conservative poll numbers.

If passed unchanged, Bill C-23, the Fair Elections Act, will allow MPs to sit in the House while their election expenses are contested. It exposes and compounds a weakness in the Canada Elections Act, at times when a majority government may be elected with a very small plurality or the combined opposition have a small majority.

Currently, if an MP and the chief electoral officer disagree on an MP’s election expense return, the Canada Elections Act provides that the MP can no longer sit or vote in the House of Commons until the expense return is changed to the chief electoral officer ’s satisfaction, although the report is not due for several months after election day.

Bill C-23 allows the MP to continue sitting until a judge has ruled on the dispute and further states: “The removal of a democratically-elected MP reverses the decision of tens of thousands of voters. No one should have the power to reverse a democratic election without first convincing a judge.” If an MP’s election expenses are found to be non-compliant with the election act, by definition they were not democratically elected and have deprived tens of thousands of voters their representation of choice.

Peter Penashue, Dean Del Mastro, Shelly Glover and James Bezan are four of Harper’s MPs who faced exclusion from the House having failed to comply with or refused to supply information required under the Canada Elections Act.

In close minority government situations, the ability of “false MPs” to sit in the House while their validity is being questioned could be the factor deciding who forms the government and becomes PM. One seat can make the difference. Remember how important Chuck Cadman’s legitimate single vote was perceived by Harper.

Instead of slowing down the review of a candidate’s election expenses, someone who is truly interested in removing the possibility of election fraud would be making changes to speed up the validation of those expenses. Bill C-23 should be withdrawn.

On Democracy And Political Leadership

I have a somewhat busy morning ahead, so for the time being I offer the following:

Is the answer to things like this,


this?

Re Manning Takes Aim at Tory Election Bill (March 3):

The Conservatives’ Fair Elections Act is anything but. Instead, it’s about ensuring they’ll form another majority in 2015. There’s only one realistic way to ensure that won’t happen: co-operation among the opposition parties.

Here’s a novel idea: We need leaders who will lead. Elizabeth May has already figured it out; Justin Trudeau and Thomas Mulcair need to hold their noses and go for one-time-only co-operation. Kindergarten students understand the rules that ensure fair play/good outcomes for one and all. For Canada’s sake, Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Mulcair need to take a lesson from the sandbox.

Debra Rudan, Meikle Turner, Kingston

Another Nail

As I have expressed in this blog previously, it is my sincere belief that the Harper cabal, indeed, the hard right in general, does not want us exercising our democratic rights, especially as they pertain to voting. The less participation there is, the easier it is for the true believers, aka, the base, to keep their party in power. Up to this point, however, that democratic discouragement has been engendered incrementally, through Harper's general contempt for Parliamentary democracy, disdain and attacks on those with a differing ideological bent, the muzzling of scientists, etc.

Now, however, for the first time we have a piece of legislation, ironically entitled the Fair Elections Act (and which, as of today, faces a time allocation motion limiting debate to three further days), that will make it more difficult to exercise our right to vote.

Promoted by that pusillanimous puppet Pierre Poilievre, the Minister for Democratic Reform, the bill, despite its name, requires strict new identification at the polls, prevents Elections Canada from trying to promote greater participation by reaching out to disaffected groups or investigating electoral fraud, and discourages the development of innovative ways to engage younger voters, among other things.

Astute political commentator Chantal Hebert has drawn the same conclusions about the bill:

At a time when most comparable jurisdictions are looking for ways to reverse a decline in turnout the legislation put forward on Tuesday nudges Canada in the opposite direction.

According to Elections Canada the 2011 turnout rate among voters aged 18 to 24 stood at a dismal 38.8 per cent. Across Canada some of the outreach campaigns that the bill would outlaw federally are specifically tailored to them.

...one does not need to read between the lines of the bill to come to the conclusion that the Harper government is more inclined to see a higher voter turnout as a threat than as an ideal outcome.

Yet another nail in the coffin of our democracy, brought to you by the usual suspects.

Hee Hee Hee

Despite the misspelling in the caption, I rather like this cartoon, probably for obvious reasons.



As well, you may enjoy these letters from Star readers who have an even less flattering view of Mr. Harper as it pertains to his northern junket, escaping the heat via prorogation, and his ongoing senate 'problems.'

Harper's Tricks Are Getting A Tad Tiresome

Sure, I could write reams on what the old trickster is up to in proroguing Parliament yet again. I think the following, though, brought to you by our friends at Citizens Rallying To Unseat Stephen Harper, sums everything up nicely:

Lessons Learned From Totalitarianism

Reflecting upon a recent visit to Berlin, Toronto Star columnist Edward Greenspon had this to say:

I was particularly struck by the lessons to be drawn from 1933 and 1934, when the Nazis were not yet at full swagger. Arguably, as the depths of their hatreds quickly surfaced, they could have been tripped up by foreign pressures and a modicum of domestic spine. But elite opinion and statecraft took the passive course of hoping the accidental chancellor would fall to his own excesses. When he didn’t, foreign powers sought to mollify rather than confront him.

He goes on to write:

Berlin reminds us that democracy is a precious and a complex garden that requires constant care. It consists of much, much more than free and fair elections. It is everything that happens afterward: constitutional solidity, rule of law, an independent judiciary, checks and balances, a free press, protection of human rights, particularly for minorities.

In writing the following, Greenspon was thinking of Russia:

Societies that chip away at human rights and democratic principles, as with Russia today, must be confronted and challenged. Opposition and dissent must be respected. We owe it to history to call out concentrations of power — political and economic — and even minor incursions on the normal course checks and balances.

Ever astute, some Star readers feel he should be looking closer to home:


Re: Berlin’s Nazi ghosts, Opinion Aug. 4

Edward Greenspon’s column, reflecting on a visit to Berlin after a 20-year gap, finds “The Berlin of the present is an effervescent city. But the Berlin of the past, particularly the Nazi past, has bubbled back to the surface.”

Later, he cautions, “Societies that chip away at human rights and democratic principles, as with Russia today, must be confronted and challenged. Opposition and dissent must be respected. We owe it to history to call out concentrations of power — political and economic — and even minor incursions on the normal course of checks and balances.”

I agree entirely. But I can’t help thinking that had Greenspon substituted Canada for Russia in that sentence, he’d have presented a much more relevant warning as we endure, under Stephen Harper, arguably the most aggressively and enthusiastically anti-democratic government in our history: corporatist, militaristic, secretive, mendacious, evangelical, oppressive and repressive (just ask the peaceful demonstrators at the Toronto G20 gathering), anti-science, anti-environment, punitive of dissent and even debate, defunding any group that dares question its agenda, and dismissing all checks and balances on its authority — including our elected Parliament.

If Greenspon is concerned about creeping fascism, he needn’t look abroad.

Terry O’Connor, Toronto

I would like to draw attention to the following paragraph: “Berlin reminds us that democracy is a precious and a complex garden that requires constant care. It consists of much, much more than free and fair elections. It is everything that happens afterward: constitutional solidity, rule of law, an independent judiciary, checks and balances, a free press, protection of human rights, particularly for minorities.”

We have only to pay close attention to the state of our own “garden of democracy” to observe the creeping weeds already afoot growing from the policies of the Harper Conservatives. So many of the jewels in Canada’s crown have turned to thorns under their watch, we must find the means to protect our nation’s standing in the world community as a fair and compassionate land or we too will slide into the same moral and economic chaos our neighbours to the south now find themselves.

Michael Sherman, Toronto

The message, as always, is the same. If we truly want a healthy and dynamic democracy, we have to be willing to fight for it. Disengagement, complacence or passivity, just like the appeasement advocated so many years ago by Neville chamberlin, are not options.

And Speaking Of Contempt For Democracy ...

Does anyone remember this gem from 2011 when Mr. Harper essentially said that parliamentary democracy is of absolutely no consequence?





H/t Citizens Rallying To Unseat Harper

David Suzuki On Harper's Contempt For Democracy

David Suzuki has a thought-provoking essay in today's Globe and Mail that also serves as an excellent precis of some of the things the Harper government would like us to forget, including its promotion of ignorance/contempt for factual data, its demonization of environmentalists, its arrant hypocrisy, and its general contempt for voices that express disagreement with its ideology.

I hope you will read it and disseminate it widely; constant reminders of this cabal's war on democracy and informed discussion will be, I think, crucial, if we are to have a chance of ousting it in 2015.

The Unbearable Lightness of Being (Shelley)

I see that Shelley Glover, the Conservative M.P. for St. Boniface riding, is in a spot of trouble. It seems that the lady who practically levitates out of her House of Commons seat to lead a standing ovation each time her dear leader deigns to speak could be suspended from that seat should Elections Canada have its way.

Somewhat reminiscent of the campaign irregularities that forced the resignation of Peter Penashue and later led to his defeat in a byelection, Glover, along with fellow traveller James Bezan, the Conservative MP for Selkirk-Interlake, failed to file campaign documents from the 2011 election. Letters sent to the Speaker of the House advised "that an elected candidate shall not continue to sit or vote as members of the House of Commons pending the filing of complete and accurate returns”.

Glover has filed an appeal, explaining the problem this way:

“This is an accounting dispute between the campaign and Elections Canada.”

Predictably, party-loyalist-masquerading-as-impartial-Member-of-Parliament Andrew Scheer, the Speaker of the House, said he is awaiting the court decisions before taking any action.

Meanwhile, I thought readers might enjoy a 'greatest hits' compilation video of the 'honourable' member from St. Boniface:

But Can It Be Mixed With Kool-Aid?

Is it possible that at the start of their political careers, Stephen Harper and Rob Ford consulted with Cornelius Grouppe for campaign advice and recruitment methodology?

A Democratic Expression of Our Discontent

Oh, this idea I like very much. And the tactic is easily adaptable in situations that could best be described as 'fluid':





H/t Sylvia Wilson Canadians Rallying To Unseat Stephen Harper

Remembrances Of Things Past (A.K.A. Harper's Empty Promises, A.K.A Lies)

I trust these pictorial efforts speak for themselves:


H/t Piper McKinnon - Canadians Rallying To Unseat Stephen Harper


H/t The Toronto Star

Your Sunday Smile

Plus a sobering rebuke of Mr. Harper in this morning's Star editorial:

"This sordid saga of improper Conservative behaviour, high-level secrecy and winking at wrongdoing has infuriated Canadians, disgraced the unelected Red Chamber, and spurred renewed interest in its abolition."

Growing Public Cynicism

I can only hope that the growing public cynicism evident in these Star letters translates into a deep and abiding anger that lasts until at least 2015. Here is a sampling:

Beyond money, audit reveals a bigger problem for Duffy, May 15

This column described Mike Duffy’s problem but the Senate-appointed auditors might have used terminology that was more fitting of the crime, instead of “inappropriately claimed” expenses it might have said “fraudulently claimed.” After all, Duffy’s problem is not much different from that of Harold Ballard when the latter did time for fraudulently using funds from Maple Leaf Gardens to pay for renovations to his house and cottage.

Apparently under the Harper government there are two laws in Canada, one for politicians and the other for the public. Stephen Harper’s democracy is not the one that I served to defend in World War II.

Bill Tuer, Cobourg

Duffy's sweet deal, Editorial, May 16

“According to Harper's staff . . . Harper knew nothing of the Wright/Duffy arrangement.” Sure he didn't. How stupid do we all look? Sadly, if we cannot count on honesty and integrity from the PMO, then we really can't expect it elsewhere in their government. For sure, Canadians deserve a way lot better than this. For a change, how about some real action from the prime minister — not just words — to clear out the cheats and buffoons?

Don Dorward, Pickering

When Sen. Mike Duffy said on the news a few weeks back, “The old Duffer is a man of his word,” I believed him. He went on to say that after a discussion with his wife, in order to put this distraction behind them, they would pay back the money that people were saying he should not have claimed. I was really surprised, though, to learn that his wife is Nigel Wright.

Bob Larocque, Carrying Place

Gated Democracy in Calgary

Last June, I wrote a series of posts about the lack of constituency representation I and many others were receiving from our local Conservative M.P. David Sweet, the catalyst being his obsequious though not unexpected uncritical acceptance of the budget Omnibus Bill C-38. As a consequence, we conducted demonstrations at his constituency office until the police were called and interdicted our entrance into the strip mall where the office is located.

It seems that that anti-democratic trend is spreading westward, right to the strip mall housing our Prime Minister's constituency office:

Just one more very obvious sign of something I think the majority of Canadians are coming to realize: the absolute contempt in which the federal government holds both ordinary citizens and their 'rights.'

H/t Ugottabekiddin