Another Informed Star Reader

Christine Penner Polle of Red Lake offers some observations that I suspect few but the most ardent ideologues would dispute:

Re: Ottawa plans cuts to climate programs, March 12

Have we Canadians fallen down the rabbit hole? We are living in a Mad Hatter world where our federal government is slashing funding to Environment Canada’s climate change efforts at the same time scientists are raising the alarm about the threat of an unstable climate to our civilization, and where even staid, small “c” conservative institutions such as the IMF and the IEA are urging swift action to decrease emissions from fossil fuels.

This kind of cost-cutting is false economy, for the longer we delay in addressing climate change the more expensive – and dangerous – it becomes.

The federal government could address the climate crisis by putting a straightforward and transparent price on carbon through a carbon fee and dividend policy that (finally!) charges industry the true cost of carbon pollution, and rebates the money back to Canadian households, helping us all make the shift toward the clean energy economy of the 21st century.

At the same time, the market will be allowed to pick winners and losers in the energy race, rather than government through inefficient sector-by-sector regulation. Sounds like a solution that might get Canadians back to a saner, safer reality.

This Just In!

And it is very encouraging, in that it appears Canadians are beginning to wake up to the true nature of the Harper regime:

Nearly two-thirds of Canadians believe that the ruling Conservatives are settling political scores with their Fair Elections Act, a new poll has found.

You can read all about it here.

Andrea Horwath: Labour's Fair-Weather Friend?

In light of her refusal to say much about anything, a political disease she may have caught from her federal cousins, Ontario NDP leader Andrea Horwath is being viewed increasingly as little more than a political opportunist. Probably the most recent example of this sad state is her reticence to articulate a position on Ontario's minimum wage.

Two weeks ago, Martin Regg Cohn offered this:

When did the party of the working poor lose its voice? Listen to the sound of Horwath clearing her throat when she finally emerged from the NDP’s Witness Protection Program this week — nine days after the panel’s exhaustive report, and nine months after its work started.

“Well, look, I respect the work of the grassroots movements that have been calling for the $14 minimum wage, but I think that what our role is right now is to consult with families that are affected, as well as small business particularly that’s also affected,” she told reporters Tuesday.

But as an acerbic Star editorial yesterday pointed out, the burning issues of the day demand that she start offering some real articulation of policy:

Horwath’s recent suggestion of consulting with business on wage increases is clearly redundant, given the fact that a panel of business and labour leaders just filed such a report — after months of discussion.

In the absence of ideas, it’s unclear what the so-called party of the people favours. Wage increases tied to inflation, like business owners? The $14-an-hour minimum wage pushed by anti-poverty activists? Given the fact that a decent wage for the lowest-paid is a key part of building a healthier society, Horwath’s silence is inexcusable – even if understandable as a short-term political tactic.

The editorial goes on to include other of the NDP leader's sins of omission. Absent is any commentary on:

- how to deal with gridlock in the Greater Toronto-Hamilton Area

- Premier Wynne's proposal for a made-in-Ontario pension plan

- plans for a sustainable provincial energy plan

Perhaps Ms Horwath was brought up to respect the proverb, "Silence is golden." At this stage in her life, however, considering the position of trust she has been given, she should also realize that to avoid the accusation of cynical political opportunism and expedience, it is an adage more honoured in the breach than the observance.

Then again, maybe her answers are blowin' in the wind.

Heather Mallick And The Climate Of Fear

Toronto Star columnist Heather Mallick has a lacerating assessment this morning of the political landscape we now inhabit, thanks to the machinations of the Harper cabal. Owen, over at Norther Reflections, has a post on her piece that is well-worth reading.

I shall only add this from her column:

What an extraordinary thing to live a pleasant life in a western nation and yet fear your own government. But the Canada Revenue Agency’s new audits of environmental charities like Tides Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation and Environmental Defence in the midst of their continuing warnings about the effects of the climate-poisoning Alberta tarsands project are terrifying.

Harperites are sessile, “rooted to the ground and unable to pick up and move ... when conditions turn unfavourable,” as the New Yorker put it recently in a rather dismissive piece about plant IQ. They can’t adapt to the news of climate change so they lash out at those who have.

I have praised David Suzuki to the skies, most recently in a column about a performance staged at the Royal Ontario Museum about the damage done by the tarsands. Am I to be audited next?

Extraordinary, indeed, that we are witness to, and in many cases abettors of, an ongoing process of democratic subversion directed by the Harper cabal, culminating in a very real and justifiable fear of the government.

Economic Fact Check

Contrary to what our self-described economist Prime Minister would have us believe, the jobs that are being created in Canada today are but a pale echo of what once existed. Responding to a January report about the creation of 29,000 new jobs, Star readers have this to say:

Jump in jobs eases economy fears, Feb. 8

The article begins by saying “the labour market started 2014 with a bang adding 29,400 jobs,” presenting a positive tone regarding unemployment. This is misleading. From 2004 to 2008, according to Statistic Canada, nearly 350,000 well-paying manufacturing jobs disappeared, to be replaced by a number of service jobs that paid minimum wage or less. Every sector was hit: the automotive industry, auto parts manufacturing, textile product mills, all industries related to wood and paper. Along with these jobs went the unions, and suddenly we were seeing the rise of food banks.

By 2010, manufacturing employment had fallen by an additional 375,000 workers. All courtesy of free trade agreements that allowed companies to leave Canada for cheap-labour countries.

Then there were other job losses: Sears, 1,600 jobs gone; public sector workers: 20,000; and major Canadian banks, in the thousands. The construction industry in northern Alberta, which generates the best paying jobs in the country, has been laying off workers and replacing them with temporary foreign workers earning as little as half the prevailing wage.

“They called the guys (Canadian workers) into an office, told them that they were gone, and they literally walked past the replacements on the way out,” Alberta Federation of Labour Gil McGowan said.

Job losses over the past 10 years add up to well over a million. The number of jobs listed in the article, 29,400, doesn't even wipe out the job losses of the month previous, 49,500.

And it does nothing about the million jobs already lost.

Bert Deveaux, Toronto

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty should have chosen ballet slippers instead of steel-toed shoes the way he dances around the reality Canada is rapidly becoming a part-time economy. Will that be fries with your budget, Sir?

Richard Kadziewicz, Scarborough

No doubt these facts will be viewed as just a tiny challenge to the Harper propaganda machine.

UPDATE: A Shameful Minister With No Shame

I can think of not one positive thing to say about Julian Fantino. Apparently, Toronto Star readers can't either:

Fantino ‘absolutely regrets’ clash with veterans, Jan. 30

There is no possible excuse for the shameful treatment of our veterans by the federal Conservative government. Veterans Affairs Minister Julian Fantino’s arrogant and disdainful behaviour with a delegation of veterans who met with him to lobby for keeping eight regional Veterans’ Affairs offices open is another low point of his career. He should resign or be fired.

These veterans put their lives on the line for our country without questioning whatever political motives sent them into hellish battlegrounds. At the very least, we owe them our gratitude, certainly our respect, and whatever medical, personal and mental-health care that they require.
Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has already taken a terrible toll with eight veterans’ suicides within two months. The government now callously wants to claw back $581 in disability benefits from the husband of a service woman suffering from PTSD who committed suicide. And now they are closing eight regional offices that veterans depend on for health, mental health and service-based issues.

Is this any way to treat those who fought and were prepared to die for our country? This shameful betrayal of our veterans may well tip the balance of Harper’s government losing the next election.

Simon R. Guillet, Guilletville

The cutbacks to Veterans’ Services, as outlined by Julian Fantino, are not only unacceptable, but are shameful. The individuals affected by this ill advised decision are not just your normal “run of the mill” citizens, but are men and women who this country holds in its highest esteem. Making their life more difficult, after their sacrifices to make make ours better is, disrespectful and irresponsible. Mr. Fantino’s attitude in this matter is also disrespectful. I agree with former soldier Bruce Moncur, that this decision will reflect in the ballot boxes in 2015.

Dave Summerton, Allenford

The Harper government’s treatment of veterans is unconscionable. It does not support young vets returning from war with PTSD, leading to far too many suicides. Now it is closing service centres for our older veterans. And on top of that they send a letter to a grieving husband demanding a clawback of benefits for his newly deceased wife. Where is their compassion? Where is the promise to take care of all our veterans? This behaviour is inhumane and their words are empty.

I felt awful watching our older veterans on television tear up and choke on their frustrations. Fantino has no heart just like the government he serves. We need a government that puts people before the economy. These guys don’t care how many people are hurt by their budget cutting.

June Mewhort, Woodville

UPDATE: Meanwhile, if Retired Sgt. Major Barry Westholm is any indication, the backlash has begun.

I Shop, Therefore I Am

First and foremost, how do you see yourself? Are you a citizen more than a consumer, or vice-versa? Are high-minded principles and vision your defining characteristic, or is how to get the best value for your money what drives you?

The questions that I just posed are, of course, on one level ludicrous, inasmuch as they suggest an either/or answer. Realistically, or at least ideally, we can be both. Yet to examine the rhetoric of our political 'leaders', our lives are defined by angst over cable selection, gasoline prices, and cellphone bills, and little else.

One of the books I am currently reading is Susan Delacourt's Shopping For Votes: How Politicians Choose Us And We Choose Them, which examines the kind of 'retail politics' that has been shaping the political landscape for decades. Beginning in the 1950s with early polling and focus groups, the process has become so refined that groups are now targeted in political campaigns with their 'issues' at the forefront.

Here is an excerpt from the inside cover of Delacourt's book:

Inside the political backrooms of Ottawa, the Mad Men of Canadian politics are planning their next consumer-friendly pitch. Where once politics was seen as a public service, increasingly it is seen a a business, with citizens as the customers. But its unadvertised products are voter apathy and gutless public policy.

One needn't look far to see egregious evidence of political debasement. As recently noted by The Mound of Sound, neither Justin Trudeau nor Thomas Mulcair offer any distinct difference to Harper, other than perhaps in style. Neither has the political integrity to question the tarsands, nor, to my knowledge, are they heard to ever offer an opinion on or strategy for dealing with climate change. In answer to Mound's question of why either of them wants to be Prime Minister, I opined that they perhaps just think they should be. No passion, no vision, just the politics of expedience seems to be their political raison d'être.

In his piece today in The Toronto Star about the upcoming federal budget, Les Whittington says it will be consumer-oriented:

The government says it wants to take aim at cable-TV packages that don’t allow consumers to pick and choose, payday loan companies, lack of competition among wireless providers and price differentials on the same goods between this country and the U.S.

And while Justin Trudeau sings an amorphous tune about the middle class struggling, Thomas Mulcair has this to offer:

He says the Harper government raises consumer issues but hasn’t followed through with action.

“So we’re going to talk to Canadians about how we can end the rip-offs at ATM machines, at the gas pump, and how we can ensure more Canadians have access to a low-interest credit card”.

Not a word about climate change. Not a word about carbon. Not a word about poverty. Not a word that reflects the semblance of a vision.

I'll close on a note that I hope demonstrates I am not some sort of ethereal idealogue. Yes, I think we get ripped off on cable, and I don't like it. Yes, more should be done to ensure fair business practices. But those concerns do not exclude larger ones, like growing inequality, the plight of the working poor, and a world in real climatic peril. No amount of political legerdemain can alter some larger, very inconvenient truths.

A World Badly In Need Of Inspired Leadership

Since he was elected to the position, I have written several posts related to Pope Francis; several of them express a renewed hope that the plain-speaking pontiff can generate some hope in a world badly in need of inspiring leadership, something almost wholly absent in our current crop of politicos, obsessed as they are first and foremost with the attainment and retention of power.

In response to a recent article by the Star's Carol Goar, readers offer their perspective on what politicians could learn from Francis:

Goar: World leaders respond to Pope’s message, Opinion Jan. 12

Carol Goar’s piece on Pope Francis highlights the amazing influence that Pope Francis musters — not only with key global political leaders but also with his unlikely admirers such as the influential gay rights magazine The Advocate, that praised the Pope’s impressive “stark change in rhetoric.”

It is befitting that this simple, humble, affable lead pastor, who has successfully focused world attention on the worsening plight of the poor and the marginalized, was placed fourth on the list of the world’s most powerful people by Forbes, the leading American business magazine.

This is clearly a clarion call to politicians, globally and especially in Canada. Such timely notice, that immediate steps must be taken to heed public opinion and address inequality in a responsive and progressive manner, will not be lost on our politicians. It is easy to see that “trickle down economics” has not worked, except for the top 1 per cent who conveniently help to promote this mantra, ad nauseum.

Let us hope that the political pendulum will swing in unison with the aspirations of Canadians going forward. The will of the electorate should result in welcome winds of change — shaping a better and gentler Canada.

As Winston Churchill famously said: “If one does not bend with the wind, one will end with the wind.”

Rudy Fernandes, Mississauga


Canada is in the final stages of creating a national holiday to honour Pope John Paul II. Yet it is Pope Francis who recently called us to pay attention to the extreme poor whose plight is often ignored. He has decried our indifference towards those who die of hunger and suffer as a result of malnutrition, while we have the tools and the resources to end hunger and poverty in a single generation.

In fact, over 1 billion people live in extreme poverty, earning $1.25 or less per day. And 400 million of the world’s extreme poor are children.
We need the voice and moral force that Pope Francis and all leaders from the world’s faiths can provide. We also need an economic plan that is equal to the task.

Canada has established one leg of the stool — the Muskoka Initiative, which Prime Minister Stephen Harper presented in 2010. It aims to reduce maternal and infant mortality and improve the health of mothers and children in the world’s poorest countries by strengthening health systems, preventing and treating the leading illnesses and diseases that kill women and children and improving nutrition.

Canada should ensure the Muskoka Initiative is extended and expanded into a legacy program deserving of a national holiday.

Randy Rudolph, Calgary


A very good article, and an eye opener to those political leaders whose eyes are still “closed” and minds shut — “fixed” on doing only what will bring them back into power.

A quick comment/suggestion I would offer is a review of our tax system. Yes, keep taxes low for the low-income earners, however, the marginal tax rate should be increased dramatically for the higher income earners — CEOs and other executives who are paid salaries and bonuses that are way, way, way beyond what they need to live extraordinarily luxurious lives.

The marginal tax rates for these people should be increased, incrementally, from the current maximum of 46 per cent up to 70 per cent (and this will not hurt their lifestyles).

And the revenue generated should be used to pay for proper child care, further education, the homeless in our society, seniors’ benefits, our First Nations and veterans benefits.

Al Mathias, Mississauga

Narrowcasting And The Internet

Narrowcasting can be defined as the process of aiming a radio or TV program or programming at a specific, limited audience or consumer market. While it is a term that is applied to traditional media, Noah Richler suggests in an interesting article in today's Star that increasingly, the Internet, by the choices people make, is quickly becoming a medium that is narrowing, not expanding, our capacity for critical thought.

While his article perhaps does not constitute a fresh insight, Richler points out that we are becoming increasingly susceptible to what he calls the tyranny of measurement, our propensity toward counting hits and likes as the barometer of just about everything we do now. In other words, we are letting what we read, and the sites we visit, be inordinately influenced by how many 'likes' a Facebook posting may have, how many 'hits' an article gets, etc., thereby reducing the marketplace of ideas to, well, a marketplace driven by the force of popularity.

Richler points out that the arbiters of ideas worth pursuing formerly had certain criteria by which things were evaluated and deemed worthy. Although now the process may be much more democratic in a sense, choices are now influenced by what he calls a pendulum of approval that has swung extremely towards that which is vindicated by the masses.

We are living in a period of gross aberration marked by a giddy counting that has seen us forget other ways to calibrate our common sense. We post a picture to Instagram, Facebook or Twitter, and count the number of “Likes” and “Retweets” and “Comments” and compare.

The barometer is instant, just as it is for companies evaluating the content of their websites with their own easily tabulated scale of hits, or for political parties reneging on a lot of good ideas that, not so easily enumerated, are of less worth in the pursuit of power.

Such a trend can have insidious effects:

When it comes to the news, a smaller number of stories garner ever more massive amounts of attention before the reverb to which our own viral sharing pushes us to forget them. And, in the political sphere, the web’s herding of us into like-minded crowds means that we ignore even the smallest of contradictory arguments and conduct ourselves as ideologues.

Richler links the tyranny of numbers to something that we are all familiar with:

This tyranny of numbers, distracting from more far-sighted views, goes hand in hand with the “selective exposure” that the Internet encourages.

The Internet’s illusion of proximity to the like-minded, no matter how dispersed — the fellowship it creates in the virtual sphere that affects our behaviour in the real one — is one of its most distinctive properties. In the digital age, we gather all too easily alongside those whose messages are consonant with our own.

I think we all know how the verification and validation of our own views and philosophies is made easy by the Internet. For example, while I read a number of progressive blogs, it is rare for me to seek out a conservative one, although I justify it to myself by asserting that there are very few of the latter worth reading, given their proclivity for screeds, rants, and character denigration. But is that simply a comforting excuse for me to be less expansive in my perspectives?

Richler has much more to say in this provocative article; you can read it in full here.

A Lion In Winter

Like a bloated, aging and wounded lion who realizes his hold over his pride is at an end, Conrad Black is lashing out. Still licking his wounds from lacerations received at the hands of the CBC's Carol Off, Black used his column in Saturday's National Post (which as a rule I do not read, but more about that later) both to justify his journalistic ineptitude and to strike back at his growing list of adversaries who include Star editor Michael Cooke, Star columnist Rosie DiManno, The Star itself, and well, just about anyone else who finds fault with him.

With false leonine pride, in his column Black maintains the fiction that it was not journalistic ineptitude but rather the show's format that explains his toothless interview with disgraced Toronto pretend-mayor Rob Ford:

As co-host of the Vision Channel television program Zoomer, I invite people to sit down with me in civilized conversation, which often included unwelcome questions. But I do not conduct an antagonistic debate. This is a format that viewers seem to enjoy, and it was on this basis that guests — including Mayor Ford, last week — have agreed to speak with me.

He goes on to dismiss the controversy over Ford implying that Daniel Dale is a pedophile as a sideshow, and then launches into what can only be described as a screed against The Star and its staff, most notably its most prolific and acerbic writer, Rosie DiManno, whom he describes as a feminoid who is so disconcerted by my wife’s timeless appearance that she refers to the frequent praise of her as a form of “necrophilia.”

Which brings me to how I wound up reading Black's piece. This morning, The Star's own lioness, Rosie Dimanno, still apparently in her prime, extrudes her own claws as she responds to the Black attack.

Here is her opening salvo:

Mrs. Conrad Black is the most gorgeous septuagenarian on the planet.

And, while hardly a kitten with a whip any longer, Barbara Amiel remains quite the dominatrix in print, a polished writer who can stick a stiletto heel into any subject’s jugular. A far better wordsmith than her husband, too. Indeed, Black isn’t even the best writer from among her five spouses.

I mention the Baroness only because hubby has specifically accused me of not appreciating her timeless beauty. I do. And maybe at some future date, Amiel can give me the name of her plastic surgeon.

Lest you think her column is simply a catty attack on Mrs. Black, she soon turns her attention to her real target:

We now know also why disgraced newspaper baron and felon Connie (Con, for short) devotes himself to producing remainder-bin biographical doorstoppers about dead people — because he doesn’t have to interview them. His singular lack of skill in this most basic reportorial function was on grotesque display last week whilst “chatting” — Black doesn’t call these puffball exchanges interviews — with Toronto Mayor Rob Ford on his Zoomer show, an excruciatingly embarrassing episode that should be shown to J-students as instructive lesson on how not to do it.

There is much more in her piece which, depending upon the exigencies of time and interests, you may wish to check out.

While there are admittedly much bigger issues that need to be addressed and pursued in the world today, sometimes there is an innate satisfaction to be had when bullies, whether of the physical or verbal kind, are soundly and roundly put in their place. And while many may lament the fact that age eventually diminishes all of us, we do no one any service by using that to excuse the effete roaring of a lion in winter.

A Lesson In Humility For The Good Lord?

While I readily admit to not having wasted my time watching Conrad Black's interview with Toronto's pretend-mayor, I did take special delight in the dressing-down he received at the hands of As It Happens' Carol Off, as noted yesterday. One hopes that he learned something about real journalism from the encounter.

Today, two Star letter-writers offer their comments on the actual interview. Short version: they were not impressed. And given the fact that Star reporter Daniel Dale has decided to sue Vision TV, Zoomer Media, and Rob Ford, perhaps Moses Znaimer will have reason to reconsider his decision to employ Conrad and give the job to a qualified Canadian citizen?

Ford stands by on-air comments to Black, Dec. 11

I guess the all-consuming nature of the Rob Ford fixation is responsible for the fact that there appears to have been almost no comment on Conrad Black’s own performance during his so-called interview with the mayor on ZoomerTV. This was presumably an opportunity for Rob Ford to give his side of the controversy, but did anyone notice that if that was the purpose, the mayor needn’t even have been there. Black was doing the job more than adequately on his own. Indeed, he seemed so intent on whitewashing the mayor’s questionable, often bizarre behaviour that he barely let Ford respond to his oh-so-gentle questions and took to answering most of them himself — and in a manner that made Ford seem a victim. In fact, Black frequently laid the blame for the Ford fiasco on the media and the police, missing no opportunity to beat up on those institutions that he blames most for his own clashes with the law. No, this certainly was not an “interview.” A satire of one, perhaps, rendered all the more laughable by the smarmy, onscreen follow-up in which Black’s co-host proclaimed ZoomerTV’s commitment to the highest standards of journalism.

Marvin Schiff, Toronto

What a disappointment to watch Conrad Black throw lob balls to our disgraced mayor. It has become obvious that Black was not a wise choice to interview Rob Ford and he clearly chose to not ask any difficult questions of relevance. Perhaps they should have re-aired the Matt Lauer interview. At least that was informative and entertaining.I am disappointed in Moses Znaimer for allowing this to air on his network. His audiences deserve better content. That was 30 minutes of my life I’m not getting back.

Tome Brazier, Unionville

We Are All To Blame

Here is a letter from today's Star that puts responsibility for the proliferating problem of deceitful, inept, corrupt and demagogic political leaders where it belongs: on all of our shoulders:

Re: How to cover a deceiver without airing mistruth? Opinion Nov. 6

Publisher John Cruickshank’s wonderful piece addresses what should be a deep concern in our society: the prevalent and amoral use of “spin.” In the 1960s, when I was being raised in Toronto, we called “spin” what it was: a lie.

The temerity of many people in our society, most notably those with whom we should have the greatest trust — politicians and political parties — lie on a regular basis. While there are some individuals (in what should be a noble profession) who avoid spin aka lies, it has become all to common to lie as a means to an end. We have witnessed this in spades over the past six month, both in Ottawa and in Toronto.

Mr. Cruickshank makes an excellent point. By printing the spin, aka lies, the press is enabling this disgusting behaviour. He is absolutely correct in stating that quotes from people-who-lie become, de facto, truth.

These lies have become so much a part of our culture that some people accept behaviour such as that of Mr. Ford and Mr. Harper as “acceptable,” dismissing the lies under the umbrella of “everyone makes mistakes” or “he is saving me tax dollars.” How anti-social and self-serving.

While many politicians have lost their moral compass, so has our society. We, as members of civilized society, are complicit in allowing them to get away with spin aka lies.

It is time for us to take back our compass. For a start, let us call these people what they are: liars. Let’s not allow them to get away with it. Like bullies, spin-people cannot stand the light of day. They prefer to crawl around under rocks, in the slime and in the dark.

David Bourque, Scarborough

A Debt Owed To The Media

As fashionable as it is to denigrate the mainstream media for their frequent timidity and conservatism, public knowledge about both Rob Ford's disgraceful performance as Mayor of Toronto and the current Senate scandal embroiling Stephen Harper, impeaching the integrity and honesty of both politicians, would not exist were it not for a diligent media, especially the press.

I have often stated in this blog that I am both proud and pleased to subscribe to The Toronto Star, given the integrity of its work and the fact that many of its investigations have resulted in change at both the local and the national level. These changes have included rigorous restaurant inspections whose results are now publicly posted to its most recent accomplishment, a promise from Minister of Health Rona Ambrose to remediate the situation after The Star brought to light the tragic death of Marit McKenzie, killed by a blood clot caused by an acne medication. At the time, Health Canada said that the drug safety review information was classified due to "confidential business information."

Yesterday, during an interview about her role in exposing the video apparently showing Rob Ford smoking crack, Star reporter Robin Doolittle encouraged people to take out a subscription to a newspaper, the implication being that the work they do is crucial in a democracy, and that work cannot be accomplished without the financial support of engaged readers.

Were it not for the diligent work of CTV reporter Robert Fife, who was instrumental in exposing Senategate, followed up by the efforts by other dedicated reporters, a corrupt and disdainful Prime Minister would be able to spin his tales of fancy without challenge. Instead, Stephen Harper and his cabal face what is likely their greatest crisis, one that may very well reverberate until the next election and could even result in criminal charges.

Watergate may have set the standard for investigative journalism, but the need for curious reporters with a passion for the truth will extend far into the future. No, whether we acknowledge it or not, a healthy press is a linchpin of a healthy democracy, augmented by social media and blogs, no doubt, but never to be replaced by them.

To reiterate Doolittle's message, "Get a newspaper subscription." The health of our political system may very well depend on you.

More On Quebec's Purity Charter

If the above interests you, you may wish to take a few minutes to check out Haroon Siddiqui's column in today's Star. Entitled Pauline Marois issues fatwa on Quebec secularism, his thesis can be summed up in his final paragraph:

Marois is engaged in an ugly cultural warfare of the rightwing Republican kind. She is using religious minorities to fire up her base constituency. She figures that the more English Canada reacts strongly, the better for her. But we cannot fall into the trap of abandoning fundamental Canadian constitutional values.

While Siddiqui concentrates on the damage the Quebec purity charter would do to those living within Quebec, there is growing evidence that the fallout, even if the odious legislation never passes, is spreading to other Canadian jurisdictions. Now inexplicably absent from its website, Power and Politics' Ballot Box Question of the Day for September 10 was Should public employees be banned from wearing religious symbols? A resounding 69% agreed they should be.

Given the generally progressive nature of CBC viewers, that number is a bit shocking and is perhaps also an indicator of the appeal such legislation has for those who are either latently or overtly intolerant. Having a government that is willing to enshrine discrimination offers the veneer of legitimacy to prejudice.
While it might sound like hyperbole, one needs only look at the history of the Rwandan genocide to realize that it all started with the Hutu government fomenting discontent against the Tutsis.

And, of course, Hitler's systematic stripping away of Jewish rights on the road to genocide needs no recounting here.

Will the Quebec Charter lead to genocide? Of course not. But it will encourage those are prejudiced to be more vocal in their prejudice, more intolerant of differences within our society, more disdainful of the rights of those with whom they disagree.

Even for a country as blessed as Canada, history and human nature make no exceptions.

P.S. You may also be interested in reading this Star editorial: Quebec’s proposed Charter of Values fails the decency test

On Tasers And Tim

As usual, Star readers offer their penetrating commentary on recent events and the benighted Tim Hudak. Enjoy!



80-year-old woman tasered a day after rules changed, Sept. 4

I find it extremely disturbing that Peel Region police officers called to Thomas St. and Erin Mills Parkway on Aug. 28 around 3:30 a.m. were unable to “talk down” an obviously anguished 80-year-old woman. According to the article, the woman was “walking along the road,” which is not at all busy with traffic at that time of the morning. Surely, even if they could not get her off the road of her own volition for safety reasons, they could have easily overpowered this senior citizen.

Instead, they tasered an 80-year-old, causing her to fall, at which time it seems that she fractured her hip, as well as incurring other injuries. In view of all of the unfavourable publicity regarding how police appear to rush to use force above all other methods, this does not bode well for our citizenry, young and old.

Grace A. Taylor, Streetsville

Really? Tasering an 80-year-old woman? Did Peel Regional Police feel so threatened by her that they felt their only option was to use a Taser?

Mary Smart, Kingston



Collision course for Hudak, labour, Column Sept. 5

The Conservative party in Ontario is ready to self-destruct and one big reason is that Tim Hudak, Randy Hillier and other dinosaurs in the party want to “deunionize to reindustrialize,” medievalize not modernize labour in Ontario. This backward vision whereby the province transforms itself into Mississippi or Arkansas in order to attract exploitive employers who treat their employees like dirt instead of paying living wages and providing fair benefits is a non-starter with the Ontario public. It is one of the main reasons the Tories are tanking in the polls.

We don’t need political leaders who take us backward. We deserve leadership that moves us forward, by following successful examples like Germany. Attacking unions might throw some red meat to the dinosaurs in the Conservative party, but the quicker they become extinct, the brighter Ontario’s future will be.

David Lundy, Merrickville

Re: Proposed bill would help building firm, hurt unions, August 31

Bill 74, a private members bill introduced by London-area Tory MPP Monte McNaughton, to overturn a Labour Relations Board decision re: the use of unionized workers caught my attention. This strikes me as another “race to the bottom” for Canadian workers.

The Labour Relations board gave the giant construction company, EllisDon, whose head office is also in London, two years to lobby Queen’s Park for a change.

A couple of questions: Did EllisDon become a giant company without the help of Canadian education/training programs/Canadian infrastructure/benefits and resources? Benefits that support the growth and success of Canadian companies are also due to Canadians.

If companies from other countries can bid for jobs here with complete freedom to hire non-union workers, isn’t that a sure sign that Canada and Canadians have been sold out by our governments?

If I were the head of EllisDon, I would exert pressure on the federal government to establish a level playing field, rather than try to undermine the workers who have made EllisDon profits possible.

If Canadian companies lost their right to a level playing field due to the free trade sell out, why should the most vulnerable workers be bullied and sacrificed?

Donna Chevrier, Mississauga

A Restaurant To Avoid: Richtree Produces Bitter Fruit*

Were I a Toronto resident, Richtree Market, a restaurant located in the Eaton Centre, is a business I would refuse to patronize. Its union-busting tactics should appall anyone who cares in the least about workers' rights.

As reported in The Toronto Star, Richtree Market began its dark anti-union journey in January, when it terminated all of its employees and closed the business. For Nazrul Islam, their chef for 25 years, it was a devastating blow:

“It was my first job in Canada and it had good benefits,” said the 57-year-old man who came from Bangladesh. “I was king of the kitchen.”

However, Islam's shock was compounded upon discovering Richtree is reopening at the Eaton Centre on Sept. 9, metres away from its previous spot, without him or any of the other 49 workers who were laid off.

According to the union representing the employees, Unite Here 75, this is a major violation of Canadian labour law.

“They are opening at the same location, same concept, same company, same owner, but we don’t get our jobs back,” said Islam, who’s had no luck finding a new job. “I have five family members to feed. How can we survive? I cannot afford next month’s rent.”

Richtree, for its part, claims that it has done nothing wrong:

“In January, Richtree was no longer in operation and successfully completed the process of collective bargaining with Local 75,” said a company representative, who agreed to read a statement but not be named. “The severance packages were greater than the minimum and each associate accepted those packages. Each and every one of them.”

The problem with the severance packages is that the employees had no knowledge that the restaurant was planning to reopen later in the year. They were, in fact, lied to:

It’s legal to shut down a business to avoid unionization, said labour lawyer Sunira Chaudhri but only if the closure is genuine and final.

“What’s illegal is superficially shutting down and severing ties (to the union), just to do business next door,” said Chaudhri. “Clearly that’s what Richtree seems to be doing, which likely wouldn’t be in line with the current labour law landscape.”

Boycotting this upscale eatery may not get Narzul Islam or the 49 other workers their jobs back, but it will send a strong message that Canadians of conscience reject such reprehensible behaviour and will do nothing to reward it.

P.S. I notice that Richtree's website states, It's always good to hear from you. If you are so inclined, you can send your thoughts on their practices by clicking here.

* Many thanks to LeDaro for his excellent suggestion of an amended title to this post.

The Problem With The Police Starts At The Top

Leadership is a word that evokes many associations; strength, vision, determination and resolve are a few of the positive ones. Selfishness, careerism, expediency and cowardice are but a few of many negative associations. In my own working life, I had perhaps three administrators I looked up to, the ones who put the good of education above personal ambition, pettiness and self-centreness. They were people I would have done anything for.

The rest I merely endured because I had no choice.

As I have often written in this blog, I see Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair as a failed leader, one who must bear a large portion of the responsibility for the democratic debacle of the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto and its aftermath, which saw virtually no consequences for the massive and widespread police abuse of charter rights. In my view, Blair should have been fired afterwards. Sadly, the effects of his failed leadership, like poison dropped in a reservoir, continues to ripple outward, affecting those he 'commands'.

An exceptionally well-crafted letter in today's Toronto Star by Rick Owens of Toronto explains why:

Re: SIU head blasts Toronto police chief for co-operation failures, Aug. 29

That Toronto police Chief Bill Blair is not directly accountable to the SIU is clear in law. But that is not the issue. What is at issue here is whether the chief ought to have the courtesy to respond directly to a legally mandated body that investigates matters involving the consequences of the use of force by his staff. Courtesy or rather the problem with discourtesy is the issue here.

I can recall no time in the last 40 years when regard for the police in Toronto was this low and widespread. Whether it’s the G20 fiasco, the series of charges and allegations about dishonesty in court or outrageous misjudgments such as the Sammy Yatim shooting, some police in Toronto have done much to undermine the credibility of and trust in the Toronto Police Service. And it is the sort of defiance and fundamental discourtesy that the chief demonstrated in this matter that seem to be the common theme across the past decade.

That Blair feels no need to be even remotely courteous to Ian Scott is akin to the disregard by some police to the rights of citizens or their own responsibility to abide by the law. One recent example of this disregard is the officer who parked his personal car illegally while on a paid duty assignment. All he had to do was put a police vest on his dash and he was exempt from paying the fees that every other private vehicle is required to pay. That was his expectation; it’s not the law. This is at best a discourtesy to those of us who abide by the law and pay the penalties when we don’t. At its worst, it is quite simply corruption. But why should that officer think he’s accountable to the rest of us if his chief doesn’t think he is?

The chief sets both the tone and example for the thousands of women and men in his (our) employ, and his response to Scott was most certainly the wrong one. The police service has a lot of work ahead of it in repairing its image and relationships with the people it serves and to whom it is accountable. This was a step back. It is my (admittedly distant) hope that the Police Services Board will hold him to account on this matter.

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.'

If Your Name Is Tim Hudak, This Can't Be Good

When you are leading a major provincial political party, it is never a good sign when the country's largest-circulating newpaper makes editorial sport of you:

Memo to Tim Hudak: Please stay as Ontario PC leader: Editorial

You lost an Ontario election in 2011 that you were to supposed to win; failed in two byelections last year; and dropped four out of five this month against a tired and scandal-prone government. But so what? You’re Tim Hudak, head of the Ontario Progressive Conservatives, and winning isn’t everything.

Ignore the growing number of Tories worried they’ll never achieve power as long as you’re at the helm. Naysayers. They’re troubled by your persistent and well-documented failure to connect with Ontario voters. The electorate doesn’t seem to trust you.

Never mind. People of good judgment realize Ontario is best served by having a leader with your special touch continue to steer the PC party. Yes, Tory petitions are circulating calling for a leadership review, with the aim of dumping you. But cheer up. The good news is they are likely to fail. With any luck, Ontarians will have the option of not giving Tim Hudak their vote for a long time to come.

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.