A Note Of Thanks To The Europeans

When I think about him at all, and it is admittedly only rarely, I imagine that Stephen Harper is spending some angry days and nights, probably silently seething. Not only is much of his 'legacy' being systematically dismantled by the new Trudeau government, but it seems that some of his much-cherished beliefs and passions are under attack from an unlikely source, the European Union.

Stephen Harper, I suspect, never met a trade deal he didn't like; the extollment of the corporate agenda through trade deals was and is something very close to his heart, certainly much closer than any concerns about loss of national sovereignty through investment dispute settlement mechanisms. His enthusiastic embrace of CETA, the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, provides perhaps one of the best windows into his dark soul, inasmuch as it would further erode signatory countries' abilities to pass, for example, environmental legislation that would result in a loss of corporate profits.

Like his predecessor, Justin Trudeau seems to have a Pavlovian fondness for trade deals, evidenced by his enthusiastic support for CETA, even when he was in opposition. He cannot be looked to for national salvation. However, a ray of hope has emerged from European countries to be affected by CETA. Always seemingly more aware of, engaged in and vocal about democratic threats, critics on the Continent have forced a revision of the investment dispute settlement system:

CETA establishes a permanent Tribunal of fifteen Members which will be competent to hear claims for violation of the investment protection standards established in the agreement. The Members of the Tribunal competent to hear investment disputes will be appointed by the EU and Canada and will be highly qualified and beyond reproach in terms of ethics. Divisions of the Tribunal consisting of three Members will hear each particular case. The CETA text now follows the EU's new approach as set out in the recently concluded EU-Vietnam FTA and the EU’s TTIP proposal.

The above represents a departure from what had been originally intended. Writes Thomas Walkom that in Europe,

politicians and interest groups were horrified by the idea of a trade regime that would allow foreign companies to override domestic environmental, animal welfare or labour laws.

Under intense political pressure at home, the European side forced Canada to renegotiate a controversial part of the agreement that would allow private firms to challenge and ultimately strike down laws that might interfere with profit-making.

Under the renegotiated terms, companies would still have this right. But the adjudicators who heard such cases would not be chosen, as originally envisioned, by the disputants. Instead they would come from a 15-member permanent trade tribunal appointed by governments.

There would also be a right of appeal. As well, the renegotiated text gives more leeway to governments to regulate in the public interest.

While a definite improvement, it may be far less than the gold-plated trade deal claimed by International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland, who proudly announced

that some amendments have been made to a controversial investment protection clause which had become a sticking point in negotiations between the two countries.

"I'm absolutely confident that Canadian investors and Canadian businesses will have their rights fully protected in this agreement," Freeland said.

What she fails to mention, of course, is that those same protections will be accorded to all the signatories, meaning that the often-litigious corporate world will still enjoy many field days either eroding our sovereign legislation or being paid billions in compensation.

Freeland's press conference, if you have four minutes to watch, seems, through my layman's eyes, to be an exercise in double-speak:



One, I believe, can honestly ask whether her claims of sovereignty protection and investor-rights protection aren't a tad contradictory.

It appears that Maude Barlow sees through this charade:

Not only do the proposed changes fail to address concerns about the investor-state provisions, they actually make them worse. The reforms enshrine extra rights for foreign investors that everyone else -- including domestic investors -- don't have. They allow foreign corporations to circumvent a country's own courts, giving them special status to challenge laws that apply equally to everyone through a court system exclusively for their use.

Even to call the new arbitrators "judges" is a misnomer, as these tribunals will not be taking into account environmental protection, human rights or other non-corporate considerations that a regular judge usually has to balance.

No doubt, our new government is counting on continued apathy and ignorance about this deal. A truly informed electorate, in my view, would never sanction it.

A Return To Sanity

I am currently reading a book by Tim Weiner entitled, One Man Against The World: The Tragedy Of Richard Nixon, and although I lived through that time, I am rediscovering what a nasty and paranoid piece of work the disgraced former President of the United States was. But what struck me most relevantly was the fact that he and Stephen Harper had a lot in common, most notably a disdain, suspicion and contempt for those who questioned their agenda. It is enough to make me wonder whether Harper was a student of Nixon's dark stratagems.

Nixon, for example, was merciless in his many abuses of power while in office; one of the more egregious instances saw him directing Internal Revenue audits against what he termed leftists and liberals. A take-no-prisoners attitude toward his own citizens betrayed the animus and paranoia of his tortured psyche. And while I have no insight into Harper's mind, his own abuse of power through Canada Revenue Agency witch hunts/audits against charitable groups voicing even a scintilla of opposition to his disdain for the environment and his extolment of the tarsands is well-known.

Today, however, brings news that the Trudeau government is winding down these politically-motivated audits.

As recently as November, when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau delivered public mandate letters to his new cabinet, [Federal Revenue Minister Diane] Lebouthillier was asked to ensure that Canada’s registered charities are “free from political harassment, and modernize the rules governing the charitable and not-for-profit sectors.”

“The results of the political activities audit program have shown that the charities audited have been substantially compliant with the rules regarding their involvement in political activities,” Lebouthillier said in the release.

“In light of these outcomes, the program will be concluded.”

Despite all the previous disclaimers that the CRA was taking no direction from government on the audits, the fact that the Federal Revenue Minister has made this announcement of termination belies that claim, of course.

Let us hope against hope that the era of dirty tricks in Canada is over.

Conservative Self-Delusion

These days I find I have little desire to think, let alone write, about the Harper regime. Despite the fact that we lived so long under its oppressive and toxic shadow, I prefer these days to think about future possibilities. However, the current 'introspection' the defeated party is undergoing merits some attention; it is a process that seems doomed to failure as revisionism about its sordid and dark record is rampant. Stoutly declaring that they got the 'big things' right, Conservative stalwarts seem doomed to a fruitless rebirth that will, at best, be cosmetic, at least until they are willing to confront some unpleasant truths, something I frankly doubt they are capable of.

In today's Star, Carol Gore offers them a framework for renewal that I doubt their hubris will allow them to entertain.

Since the Conservative were ousted on Oct. 19, former cabinet minister Jason Kenney has told anyone who will listen: “We got the big things right. We got the tone wrong.”

But the 47-year-old leadership aspirant is deluding himself if he thinks his party’s problems are only skin deep. The reason the Conservatives lost power is that Canadians no longer wanted a government obsessed with security, fiscal austerity and big oil. Harper’s relentless negativity only reinforced that.

Their 'sins were many; here are but a few of them:

Their Fiscal Record:

They spent the $13.8-billion surplus they inherited within two years, leaving Ottawa with no economic cushion when the 2008 recession hit.

On their watch, the national debt grew by $176.4 billion. Almost a quarter (24 per cent) of Canada’s accumulated debt was amassed since 2008.

Their Job-Creation Record:

Year after year, they brought down budgets that promised to increase employment and prosperity. When they took power in 2006, the unemployment rate stood at 6.4 per cent. When they lost power, it was 7 per cent.

Add to that the fact that many of the jobs are precarious and part-time, forcing more people into poverty.

Their Record On Political Accountability:

They shut off access to government documents, silenced public officials, denigrated or drove out parliamentary watchdogs, rolled dozens of legislative changes into book-length omnibus bills and refused to let opposition MPs examine their expenditures.

Their Record ON Advancing Canadian Values On The World Stage:

Jason Kenney was front and centre on many of these issues. He was the minister who banned niqabs at citizenship ceremonies; who opened the floodgates to a massive influx of foreign temporary workers; who insisted Canada had a great “skills gap” (based on a misreading of Kijiji’s jobs vacancy data); who boasted about defunding charities that criticized Israel; and who blasted a United Nations official for revealing that nearly 900,000 Canadians used food banks every month.

Carol Goar lists additional examples of how the Conservatives squandered their power during their reign, but I think you get the picture. It is one, I suspect, that will be forever beyond the grasp of a party that seems to prefer sweet lies to bitter truths, thereby likely dooming them to wander the political wilderness well into the future.

Setting the Record Straight

While the Globe and Mail continues on its blind path of extolling the fallen (a.k.a. the Harper regime), its readers seem adamant about setting the record straight. These two letters should give the powers that be some pause:

Brand: Conservative

Re Ambrose Buys Time Tories Must Use Wisely (Nov. 6): When most consumer-focused organizations lose a huge chunk of their market overnight, they research, retool, then redefine or reinvigorate their product to try to re-engage their customers and thus regain that lost market share.

Not so the Conservatives.

In her first (as usual, very short) press conference, interim leader Rona Ambrose offered not one “to do” that included any reflection – only that they would work hard to regain power. Most Conservatives who have been interviewed seem to think there is nothing wrong with the product itself – only the way they sold it.

Preserve us from those who seek power only for its own sake, not for the ability to help build a Canada that Canadians actually want.

Gavin Pitchford, Toronto

.........

Muzzled, unmuzzled

Konrad Yakabuski says the suggestion that government scientists “were muzzled or their science suppressed is an exaggeration” (The Grits Are Back In Charge, All’s Right In Ottawa – Nov. 5). He argues that scientists were allowed to keep publishing research in scientific journals.

Yes, but they were unable to issue press releases about those publications or to discuss them with the media, meaning the vast majority of Canadians were unaware of this research – and would have been unable to fully understand the heavily technical articles even if they had been aware of them.

If research results are at odds with what the government is doing, doesn’t the public have a right to know that?

It’s true that there were incidents of conflict between government policy and government scientists’ evidence before the Conservative government.

Perhaps the best strategy to avoid conflict would be for government policy-makers to listen to the evidence gathered by their own scientists.

Carolyn Brown, science writer/editor, Ottawa

On The Restoration Of Canada's Soul And Other Matters

There is a series of excellent letters in today's Star that I hope you will take time to read. I am reproducing the first two dealing with what the ejection of Harper means for Canada; the third, about the long-form census, is followed by a link to an As It Happens interview with Munir Sheik, the former chief statistician for Statistics Canada who quit over a matter of integrity and principle. Sheik talks about why a return to the mandatory long-form census is crucial if we are to have data that can be relied upon.

The dismissal of Stephen Harper and his Conservative government provides welcome and palpable relief for those Canadians they tried to browbeat, bully and frighten into submission. This election, more than any other in the past 40 years was about soul of our nation. Canadians came down squarely on the side of decency, fairness and inclusivity as the moral foundations of political leadership.

Mr. Harper now understands that federal democratic governments are not in power to abuse it. They are not there to frighten, intimidate and shut up our nation’s researchers and scientists; they are not there to value the lives of first nation women less than others; nor to marginalize and badmouth all refugees while ostracizing the physicians, nurses and others who care for them.

They are there to govern with respect and inclusion for all in this country. Bullying those Canadians whose opinions differ from theirs became the nasty, bulldozing hallmark of the Conservatives under the stamp of Harper. Thankfully, it is now this belligerence and oppositional defiant government behaviour that Canadians rejected.

I suspect the same feeling of release and relief is being felt by many across Canada today. Mr. Trudeau was bang on in his post election conversation with Canadians. Sunnier days!

Dr. Paul Caulford, Toronto

It’s not a new Canada as the Star’s Tuesday headline suggests. It’s still the same old Canada: relatively progressive and open-minded. But back to the future? Not quite.

Almost a decade of Harper’s rule failed to destroy this nation. His attempts to turn us into a country of fear, hate and discrimination didn’t work, as Monday’s results demonstrated. Despite its imperfections, the first-past-the-post system served us well.

And yet again the NDP’s move to the right cost them dearly and, as happened here in Ontario last year, they paid the price. When Canadians want change they vote for it, as they did last spring in Alberta and nationally on Monday.

Although I don’t expect a full-fledged just society to emerge under Trudeau the Younger, he does have a golden opportunity to restore Canada’s tattered reputation on the global stage, while jump-starting our economy through a welcome dose of Keynesian stimulus spending.

Where Canada goes now is up to the Liberals. They can start by following through on the promises that won them the election.

Andrew van Velzen, Toronto

On the same day as Prime Minister Trudeau is sworn in, he should instruct StatsCan to restore the mandatory long-form census, if possible in time for the 2016 census. This simple action would be widely popular, would help the economy, and won’t need legislation.

No single action taken by the Canadian government led by Mr. Harper has been so thoroughly discredited and condemned as making the long-form census voluntary. Manufacturers and marketers, property developers and professors, cities and school boards have repeatedly pointed to the serious economic and social damage caused by not having this data available. If Mr. Trudeau wants to signal that he is serious about creating real change, perhaps the best way to start is by making it clear that this parliament will use data, and not ideology, to make decisions, policies, and laws.

Howard Goodman, Toronto

Click here for Munir Sheik's thought on the census.

Guest Post: The Salamander

Responding to a post I wrote this morning commenting on a Lawrence Martin article, The Salamander offered the following trenchant assessment of what he predicts will be the Harper 'legacy.' Enjoy:

.. I find the fading tiger analogy problematic.. maybe its just me ..

Having a background in social work, with criminals, mood disorders,
addiction, maximum security prisons etc, I tend to adapt to new terminology,
diagnostic criteria, and trust evidence based medicine..
More and more I trust natural consequence .. history and observation..

Tom Flanagan, a man with his own issues, demons and fallacies
glorifies his apt pupil Harper.. as a 'predator' ? Some sort of animal ?
He could better have compared Harper to a pudgy 'jail house lawyer'
ie an incarcerated felon other felons recognize as adept at gaming the law.
So there's an analogy to consider

When considering the blight that The Harper Party & its conjoined and comorbid Harper Government represents.. I keep seeing and feeling a prison connection.
No.. I doubt Harper or any of his flawed partisans will end up in jail..
Its more that the so-called Harper 'Legacy' is actually the prison and 'record' that Harper himself is building each and every day.. cementing himself in

Harper seems to have no idea on how to back down or shut the whole flawed corrupted runaway train down.. Instead he employs ludicrous inept shallow characters to double down, defend the undefendable policies or ideologies. There is not a single' Minister' in the Harper Government that can actually rationalize or coherently defend what they are doing, enacting or obstructing or making up as they go.. or are told to go. Leona on Environment ? Laughable.. pitiful. Poilievre ? Canadians love this Act?

History won't be kind at all, won't be sparing...
Harper will be vilified by every associate, MP, robo geek he 'used' or abused
And those who called out Harper for betrayal, obstruction, deceit & arrogance
will pile on.. and take some revenge.. It won't be pretty
But that's the yard, cellblock and prison range Stephen Harper operated in.

Read Garth Turner 'Sheeple' .. to catch a polite and mild but wicked reflection ..
imagine the venom and ferocity from a Soudas, or Del Mastro
the polite damning testimony of a Nigel Wright.. defended by Guy Giorno who stunningly also represents The Harper Party now (What ?!?)
How about a jilted RCMP lover.. No.. not of Stephen ...
or what if Ray Novak goes renegade.. or Stephen Lecce.. ??

Whew.. !!

Welcome to your 'Legacy' Mr Harper
It was never Fight or Flight ..
It was never fair or honest in any damn way
certainly not Canadian.. as if .. !
Nope .. it was always Blight