Michael Moore: The Evolution of An Activist

Having suffered one of my fairly frequent bouts of insomnia last night, the blog post I had hoped to make is not yet complete, so just a quick entry here. I recently completed reading Here Comes Trouble, Michael Moore's memoir that takes us from his childhood to the world premier of his first documentary, Roger and Me. It is a book I highly recommend.

Although I initially had no particular interest in reading it, I happened to see the book in my local library branch one day and was pleasantly surprised by its drolly amusing, self-deprecating and very informative content. I realized that heretofore I actually knew little about Moore, other than his success in the film world. That success, and the activism behind it, I discovered, were clearly presaged very early in his life, only one indication of which I will deal with here.

When he was 17, he was invited to take part in a mock state government. Housed in a dorm at one of the universities, Moore actually had little interest in partaking in the process, but one day when he was going to the vending machine for a snack, he saw a notice inviting entries into a contest sponsored by The Elks on the subject of why Abraham Lincolm was a great president. Knowing that The Elks, a private club, at the time excluded non-whites from membership, Moore, in a moment of teenage outrage, was truck by the hypocrisy of the essay topic. He therefore wrote an essay, not about Lincoln, but about the fraternal order's hypocrisy. Having to deliver the speech the next day with some trepidation in a room filled with other entrants, he was shocked to learn that the judge, a high school teacher and a non-member of the Elks, declared him the winner.

His victory required that he give the speech again at the awards ceremony, where he would be presented with the trophy by the Elks' president. When he gave the speech ...., well, you'll have to read the book to learn of the immediate result, but I will tell you that he next received a call from CBS requesting an interview with him, to be shown on Walter Cronkite's evening news. Moore declined the opportunity, but the event was a pivotal formative moment in what was to become his destiny, and the publicity resulting from his speech had a real influence on legislation that was later enacted outlawing racial discrimination in private organizations.

Many people frequently get annoyed or outraged by Moore's antics, but Here Comes Trouble does a very nice job in providing some real insight into the passions that drive the man.

The Star's Reader Reaction to Bill C-309

As promised in my previous post, I am reproducing letters from yesterday's Star in which readers offer their own trenchant insights on the implications of the abhorrent Bill C-309:

Re: Government backs bill aimed at masked protesters, May 7

This week the Harper government party threw its support behind Bill C-309 (Preventing Persons from Concealing Their Identity during Riots and Unlawful Assemblies Act) put forward by Wildrose MP Blake Richards. Owing to this support, Bill C-309 will almost certainly become law. But like so many recent Conservative initiatives, the bill is vindictive and manipulative.

Riding a public wave of unease after the riots in Vancouver and those in the U.K. in the summer of 2011, Richards drafted the bill in order to add ammunition to the police toolkit to respond to public assemblies. The bill aims to increase the punitive capacities of the law when reacting to people participating in the already illegal acts of rioting and unlawful assembly.

Let’s be clear: the deplorable behaviour of rioters in Vancouver was the act of vandals that should be punished. The problem, however, is the potential for this proposed amendment to the Criminal Code to be used in situations of legitimate protest, given the subjective criteria for determining riots and unlawful assemblies.

At the most basic level, a law of this nature will increase the risk of participating in even the most docile of events because all emotion-laden public gatherings, even of the most peacefully minded participants, hold the potential for violence.

There are many good reasons why people wear masks during public gatherings. To begin with, mask-wearing is a long-standing method of symbolic expression and political solidarity. Most often mask-wearing is innocuous and involves no risk to public safety such as when participants in Free the Children’s Vow of Silence Campaign cover their mouths with a small mask to symbolize the silencing of children or when Greenpeace activists don orangutan masks to publicize the destruction of rainforests. But Bill C-309 has the potential to criminalize those harmless acts.

Global protests, such as the G20 meeting in Toronto in 2010 have also drawn our attention to the fact that as the tension between police and protesters has risen in recent decades even the most peaceful protesters have been subjected to the use of pepper spray. In these instances, protective masks have become a commonly used method of protecting one’s physical well-being while expressing political views. Bill C-309 would almost certainly be used in these circumstances.

But there is also a question of political privacy and minimizing personal risk; for the same reason that we uphold the right of citizens to keep their vote private for professional and personal reasons, many people who engage in political dissent are not eager to publicize their political views. Canada’s legendary Cold War defector, Igor Gouzenko wore a hood covering his entire head during public appearances until his death in order to protect his family from the ramifications of his political choices.

Bill C-309 has very real consequences for Canadian civil liberties. At present, the bill conflates violent behaviour with mask wearing; the problem is that not all people wearing masks are intent on committing violent acts.

As a historical precedent, Britain’s Black Act of 1723 illustrates the dangers associated with such legislation. The Black Act was first designed to deal with poaching on private land. Being found in a park or on private property with a weapon and a disguised or blackened face could mean death by hanging.

The act became notorious however, because over time it was extended to cover an increasing number of behaviours, most of which involved the poor, including protest. As the historian E.P. Thompson wrote, the act “signalled the onset of the flood-tide of 18th century retributive justice.” Increasingly impossible to rationalize, the act was repealed in 1827. In as much as a democracy relies on a range of modes of engagement and expression, a watchful citizenry cannot leave undue powers in the hands of the police to decide when and how political assemblies will have their say.

By criminalizing legitimate political dissent, we can expect to achieve two things. First, we undermine a form of political action that is increasingly a favourite form of engagement among youth under 25. In an era where we decry the political apathy of youth, this is deplorable.

Second, we create an opportunity for greater extremism. For instance, the Black Bloc tactics — dressing in black, covering one’s head and face and causing targeted property damage during protests — have become an international phenomenon. The Black Bloc only gained momentum and notoriety after the German government banned masks in the mid-1980s as part of an effort to quash social movements.

News coverage treats the Black Bloc as a group of individuals, but more importantly it is an aesthetic and a credo symbolizing reactionary politics that escalates the tension between participants and police.

Police already possess the necessary power to deal with vandalism and violence. Make no mistake, this bill is not about crime. It is another attempt in a long line of conservative efforts to target the heart of our democratic rights to expression and to freedom of assembly.

Kathleen Rodgers and Willow Scobie, Department of Sociology, University of Ottawa

The Harper government is backing a back-bencher’s bill that would provide harsh penalties for protesters who wear masks at a demonstration. In considering this bill, I hope that MPs recognize that many protesters wear masks to protect themselves from tear gas.

I would also hope that, if this draconian measure should become law, it will apply equally to police officers who conceal their identities when policing demonstrations.

This practice by many members of the Toronto Police Service was much in evidence and well-recorded in Star photos taken at demonstrations against the G20 conference.

Bill Howes, Toronto

Does this mean the police can’t wear shields to conceal their identities as well? Or are they to protect their eyes? Maybe protesters should wear plastic face shields as well — tinted ones. Last time I checked, a plastic face shield does not a mask make. Protects the eyes though.

Richard Kadziewicz, Scarborough

Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announces that anonymous protesting leads to, “Destructive and reckless behaviour [which] damages communities and should not be tolerated.” Interesting, when you compare this to certain members of Toronto’s police force at the G20 summit, who executed their “duties” with faces hidden by masks, adorning shirts with no ID badges.

“Quelle difference,” indeed.

Edward P. Swynar, Newcastle

I applaud Stephen Harper Inc. for backing Conservative backbencher Blake Richards’ private member’s bill giving police the power to arrest anyone hiding their identity during a riot or unlawful assembly. There must be a clampdown on anarchists who disrupt peaceful protests.

But what about police officers who hide their identity while disrupting protests as was done during the June 2010 G20 Toronto summit? Or will this be yet another Harper Inc. case of “do as I say not as I do”?

Alan Pellettier, Scarborough

In speaking of the proposed new Conservative bill to make it illegal for protesters to wear a face-mask (though police who beat such protesters cover up their name plates), Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said, “Destructive and reckless behaviour damages communities and should not be tolerated.”

He’s just summed up his government’s daily effect on this country since coming to power. And he’s right — their behaviour damages communities and should not be tolerated.

Peter Dick, Toronto

I suspect the government will be able to count on broad support for this bill assuming: a) it only targets those masked protesters caught committing acts of violence; and b) it also deals with police officers who remove or cover their own identification tags during demonstrations.

Michael Lennick, Toronto

When Does An Assembly Become Unlawful?

Because we were rather busy yesterday preparing a small celebration marking my sister-in-law's retirement at an enviably young age, I am just getting caught up on my Saturday newspaper reading. One of the issues that caught my attention is the private member's bill making its way through Parliament as an amendment to the Criminal Code. Introduced by Alberta Conservative Blake Richards, Bill C-309 is the preventing persons from concealing their identity during riots or unlawful assemblies act.

While the proposed amendment presents itself as a strong response to the violent depredations of anarchists like the Black Bloc during the 2010 G20 Summit demonstrations in Toronto, many infer a more sinister motivation behind Richards' initiative. Curious as to the truth in this matter, I checked out the Criminal Code's definition of unlawful assembly:

Unlawful assembly

63. (1) An unlawful assembly is an assembly of three or more persons who, with intent to carry out any common purpose, assemble in such a manner or so conduct themselves when they are assembled as to cause persons in the neighbourhood of the assembly to fear, on reasonable grounds, that they

(a) will disturb the peace tumultuously; or

(b) will by that assembly needlessly and without reasonable cause provoke other persons to disturb the peace tumultuously.

You can perhaps appreciate the ominous implications of this definition, most notably the subjective nature of fear that demonstrators will disturb the peace tumultuously, an elastic definition if there ever was one. As my wife pointed out to me, does that mean that if three people were picketing their M.P.'s office, their behaviour, whether masked or not, could constitute criminal behaviour based on someone else's reaction to the assembly?

Bill C-309 does indeed carry ominous implications, epecially since existing law already gives police all the power they need to arrest rioters and those committing crimes while masked.

As outlined in Section 351 of the Criminal Code,

Every one who, with intent to commit an indictable offence, has his face masked or coloured or is otherwise disguised is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

So yes, I think there is much merit in the argument that this private member's bill is just another move by the Harper regime to stifle dissent. That is also the view of many Star readers, who have responded to this issue with their usual vigour and thoughtfulness. I am posting a link to those letters here, but because access to readers' letters on the Star website is frequently of limited duration, I am going to later put up a separate post that reproduces several of them for your consideration.

Repression 2.0

Given its evolution, so to speak, the state of Tennessee's new attempt to control and criminalize people's thoughts and acts can hardly be seen as astonishing.

John Baird, A Friend Indeed

Want $1 million of taxpayers' money for a project that fails to meet government criteria? If he is your 'dear friend,' call Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird for intervention that hardly qualifies as 'divine'.

The Powerful Stench Of Obsequiousness At The CBC

With the polls revealing that the NDP, under leader Thomas Mulcair, is enjoying 34% of popular support while the Harper Conservatives languish at 30%, it is probably no surprise that the CBC is once again polishing up its apples in yet another desperate and misplaced effort at appeasing its political masters. Having recently had its budget gutted, I guess it was too much to think that the Corporation would have found its spine and at least proceeded with a measure of dignity and integrity toward its ultimate doom under the Harper regime. Last night's At Issues Panel revealed that to be a forlorn hope.

With the right ably represented by both Bruce Anderson and the National Post's John Ivison, challenged in small measure by Chantal Hebert and the Huffington Post's Althia Raj, we were told how much of a mistake it was for Tom Mulcair to be critical of the inflationary effect of the Alberta tarsands on the Canadian dollar, a high dollar making it more difficult for Canadian manufacturers to compete. There was much tut-tutting on the divisiveness of such a pronouncement, the subtext being, I think, that Mulcair surely can't be considered Prime Ministerial material. Of course, nothing was said of our current Prime Minister, the master of national division.

This panel was followed by Rex Murphy's screed against Mulcair which, I must confess after listening to for about one minute, I turned off.

Should you deem yourself constitutionally strong, you can watch the panel discussion here; mercifully, the Murphy jeremiad does not yet appear to be on the website.

UPDATE: I'm sorry to report that Mr. Murphy's tantrum is now available via The Huffington Post. This time I made it to the 1:30 mark. If Rex does not get a Senate seat out of his unrepentant toadying, there clearly is no God.

Memo To Peter Mansbridge: Peter, you really have passed your best before date.

Are Workers Paying For The Globe and Mail's Sins?

UPDATE/CORRECTION: While I strive to be as accurate as possible in this blog, the second paragraph of this post contained an inaccuracy, which I have since rectified.

I have to say that my heart rejoiced yesterday when I saw the news that Torstar, the parent company of The Toronto Star, has increased its quarterly earnings over the year by about 100%, an unequivocal confirmation that quality, in-depth journalism for the social good can still very much be a profitable enterprise in the 21st century.

I also have to admit to an almost equal delight in the news I received from my son that the Globe and Mail, by contrast, is not faring so well. The Earnings Per Share (EPS) profit that the Globe and Mail contributes to Bell Canada, its parent company, is off by 0.23.

I interpret this profit reduction as an indictment of the direction in which John Stackhouse has taken the paper since assuming the mantle of editor-in-chief. It is a direction that has seen such betrayals as unequivocal editorial endorsements of the Harper regime, an inhouse apologist for all things Harper named John Ibbitson, and the continued employment of unoriginal thinkers like Neil Reynolds and Margaret Wente who, one suspects, would have great difficulty recognizing an original thought, should one occur to them, an admittedly unlikely event.

The one group for whom I feel sympathy at the Globe is the rank and file, who are now being asked to take unpaid leaves this summer in an attempt to temporarily reduce costs.

Oh, and I almost forgot. In either a very desperate grasping at straws for financial salvation or a very public display of delusions of grandeur, The Globe announced today that it is instituting a paywall. If you read the article, I strongly encourage you to also peruse some of the readers' comments that follow, comments of such withering contempt that one might infer that this 'Hail Mary pass' from the Globe is too desperate by anyone's standards.

Are You Watching the Polls, Mr. Harper?

Oh, how I hope this news shakes up Harper's arrogant smugness.

The Sad Saga Of Our Declining Democracy Continues

During the past year I have written many posts on the sad spectacle of a Canadian democracy in decline, citizen cynicism and apathy rather than vigorous engagement becoming the default position of more and more Canadians. I have also offered the opinion that this is in large part the result of practices purposely pursued by our political 'masters', most egregiously by the Harper regime, so as to leave the field pretty much clear for the 'true-believers' to exert a disproportionate influence on election results when they turn out and the rest of us tune out.

Extreme partisanship has relegated the public good to an afterthought, an example of which is highlighted in Martin Regg Cohn's column today in The Star. He writes about how the clash of politics has impeded anti-bullying legislation that was supposed to proceed smoothly as a response to the suicides of gay students, but has instead degenerated into open displays of bigotry, taunting, tweeting, sulking and shouting (or heckling, as parliamentarians call it).

An even more penetrating assessment of the price we all pay for the debasement of the political process is to be found in Chantal Hebert's column today, also in The Star. Entitled Ballot box seen as dead end rather than means to an end, Hebert first uses the ongoing Quebec student unrest to advance her thesis that our elected representatives are no longer looked upon as a viable source of representation, a notion which, when you think about it, strikes at the very heart of democracy:

Their movement increasingly boils down to an extreme manifestation of a widespread disenchantment toward Canada’s elected institutions; one that is leading alienated voters of all ages and in all regions to see the ballot box as a dead end rather than as a means to an end.

Hebert then turns her sights on the Harper regime:

In the national capital, a government elected with barely four in every 10 votes a year ago has since been going out of its way to disenfranchise the majority that did not support it.

Over the opening year of their majority mandate, Stephen Harper’s Conservatives have moved to discourage civic dissent — in particular but not exclusively on the environmental front.

They have replaced federal-provincial dialogue with diktats and adversarial litigation.

They have placed themselves on a collision course with the courts over the place of the rule of law in the exercise of ministerial discretion.

The concept of ministerial responsibility has been reduced to a quaint historical footnote and parliamentary accountability is on the same slippery slope.

In the House of Commons, the government has moved to stifle the input of its opposition critics at every turn, systematically curtailing debate on bills or more simply subtracting legislation from competent scrutiny by cramming it inside inflated omnibus bills.

It should surprise no one that governments who treat the rule of law as a pesky inconvenience will eventually breed the same attitude in those that they purport to legislate for.

Hebert ends her piece by referring to ours as a debased democracy.

I have one questions that burns in my soul - Is there anyone or anything that can reinvigorate us at this point to reclaim our birthright?

Mayor Rob Ford Won’t Attend Gay Outreach Event

But then again, would anyone really want this clown to attend their function?

Vic Toews Strikes Again

Apparently dissatisfied with the way society currently holds criminals to account, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has decided that its high time to make them literally pay for their crimes.

In a move that will save $10 million per annum and leave more for Bev Oda's special travel requirements, The Star reports that prisoners will now have to pay up to 30% of their income toward room and board, leaving them less for the frills they often purchase inside, such as cough medicine and aspirin.

Given that the top earners make the princely sum of $6.90 a day, this latest move is sure to teach them, as their incarceration clearly has not, that crime does not pay.

Fear And Loathing From The Right

The other day I wrote a brief post linking to a site developed by the Conservative party that seeks to sow fear about Thomas Mulcair's 'shadow' cabinet. That campaign of demonization against the most serious threat the Harper regime has faced for sometime is now ramping up, as reported by Tim Harper in his Star column today.

Reading Recommendation

If you're like me, you harbour a certain fascination with Stephen Harper. Never before has there been a Prime Minister who so publicly displayed an anal retentiveness that has become emblazoned across the land, a man who, while frequently described as a policy wonk and a winner-take-all politician, appears to many as simply someone who has known little joy or pleasure in his life.

So Stephen Harper's psyche is there for all to ponder and speculate about, existing privacy laws notwithstanding. Couple that awareness with the fact that one of the Globe and Mail's few remaining journalists of integrity has written a piece pondering the Prime Minister's future, and I think you will find an article worth perusal.

Thwarting Democracy, Ontario-Style

I recently linked a post to a story from the Star detailing how Dalton McGuinty, Ontario's Premier, has reported to his caucus the wooing of at least two more members of opposition parties in the hopes of securing the majority government denied to him by the electorate in the last provincial election.

It is perhaps not surprising the the response to Dalton McGuinty's corrupt gambit has been decidedly muted. With the national political landscape littered with politicians lying about the true cost of F-35 jets, election-tampering through misleading robocalls, and Harper-imposed limitations on debate over an omnibus budget bill that will covertly dismantle environmental regulation and lower the living wage, anything going on within the provinces must seem like pretty small potatoes to our intrepid journalists.

None of this, of course, excuses what is happening, which is nothing less than an attempt by Dalton McGuinty to achieve voter nullification/suppression, an insidious, corrupt and probably illegal pursuit under the Criminal Code of Canada. As reported in The Star, the following section is likely applicable:

“Every one who … purports to sell or agrees to sell an appointment to or a resignation from an office, or a consent to any such appointment or resignation, or receives or agrees to receive a reward or profit from the purported sale thereof … is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.”

Don't expect any arrests anytime soon, as the Premier continues to quite openly show his contempt for the will of the electorate that withheld a majority from his party in the last provincial election. Instead, expect more defections soon as politicians follow Liz Witmer's decision to abandon the political ship for a more comfortable ride on the gravy train.

Expect as well new depths of political cynicism from the public as a result of these self-serving decisions.

See Stephen, See Stephen Run

While the purpose of this Harper-initiated site may be to inspire fear of the NDP under Thomas Mulcair, I think it suggests a measure of, shall we say, nervousness, on the part of Mr. Harper and company.

H/T Kady O'Malley

Another Fatuous Neil Reynolds Column

Despite the fact that I hold The Globe and Mail in very low esteem, I do periodically check its website to find out the latest in right-wing thinking. Such was the case today when I read Neil Reynolds' latest, entitled, Why the ‘sacred’ still matters to voters.

Like his colleague Margaret Wente, Reynolds rarely seems to be visited by an original thought, content instead to rely on the scribblings of others to form the basis of his own pieces. In his latest effort, drawing extensively upon the work of University of Virginia psychologist Jonathan Haidt, Reynolds echoes his thesis that conservatives possess “a broader set of moral tastes” and that liberals are embarrassed by talk of sacred things – such as Ronald Reagan’s patriotic reverence for God and country.

Nowhere in his 'analysis'/summary does Reynolds attempt to explore the implications of that alleged disdain for the sacred. Nowhere does he attempt to understand why a progressive thinker, as opposed to a conservative one, feels impelled to question the objects and traditions that are frequently simply a means to extort mindless and widespread obeseisance to authority. Indeed, in the same vein as Reagan we can see the Harper regime trying to cultivate a more complacent populace as it elevates the prominence of certain symbols heavy with mythological import: the military, the monarchy, sports, the North and Diefenbaker.

And of course we already know that to question the actions of something as 'sacred' as the military is to invite denunciation from the Harper crowd. So While Mr. Reynolds may be happy to imply the superiority of an unquestioning acceptance of things, I and countless others will continue to think for ourselves.

Union Democracy Should Not Be An Oxymoron

Yet for the Labourers' International Union of North America, (LIUNA) that quickly seems to be emerging as the reality. I have written previously about some of the problems besetting that organization, not the least of which appears to be a decidedly dictatorial penchant on the part of its executive.

The latest evidence of this lack of respect for its membership is reflected in a story carried in today's Star, detailing how LIUNA has denied thousands of workers the right to elect leaders in one of its biggest locals for 15 years. According to Joe Mancinelli, Canadian manager and a vice-president of the union, the problem resides with the Ontario Federation of Health Care Workers Local 1110, which, even after 15 years, still has what is known as provisional status.

Mancinelli, who has supervised Local 1110 and appointed most of the top officials over the years, says the local has problems of instability and poor management, accusing its long-time former business manager Paula Randazzo of “ineffective, sloppy management” and lack of servicing to members.

Hmm ... I suspect such accusations could be hurled at LIUNA executive members themselves, given their sometimes heavy-handed practices in Local 183.

Why A Budget Omnibus Bill?

It's the best way to hide your real purpose, which, according to Thomas Walkom, is this:

It is aimed at eliminating regulations — particularly environmental regulations — that interfere in profit-making. It is aimed at reducing wages (which is why the Conservatives take swipes at unions whenever possible). It is aimed at scaling back any social programs — from Old Age Security to Employment Insurance — that help keep wages up.

The revolutionaries dream of a day when the elderly, energized by the reductions in their pensions, will be vying for jobs at Walmart.

But it is a stealthy revolution. The country must remain complacent. Otherwise, we might object.

You can read his full analysis here.

McGuinty Continues His Campaign To Subvert Democracy

Conservative MPP Peter Shurman (Thornhill) said it proves McGuinty “will stop at absolutely nothing to make sure he brings this back into what he perceives is balance, which is a majority government for him.

You can read the full details of this crime against the will of the Ontario electorate here.

The Absurdity Continues

I feel just a tad guilty writing this post today, given that world events are of their usual dire nature, the slaughter of protesting Syrian students by a brutal and repressive regime not the least of them. Nonetheless, I will deal briefly with a more parochial issue, the brutal and repressive regime operating out of the Toronto mayor's office.

As I am sure the details of the confrontation between Rob Ford and Star reporter Daniel Dale are now well-known, I won't rehash them here. The mentality of the mayor, however, got me thinking about my 30-year teaching career, and I realized that Ford reminds me very much of some of the students I encountered during that career.

While the vast majority were good kids, there were always those who believed the rules weren't made for them, that the normal standards of decorum didn't apply, and that respect for institutional traditions was for others to follow; they laboured under the delusion of having a special dispensation from them. Needless to say, these tended to be kids for whom academic success was elusive.

The problem these students posed for the classroom dynamic were significant. Their presence tended to contribute to a lowering of the tone of discussion and in the behaviour of their fellow students. Oftentimes, their parents were enablers, attempting to bully teachers into accepting their rather warped view of reality. In short, they were the kind of people who attempted to exert a disproportionate influence over the classroom which is, among other things, a microcosm of society.

So in many ways, Rob Ford is like those errant students of yesteryear - he defines reality and the rules by his own worldview; like a wanton child, he is having a tantrum as he threatens to end the public's right to information about the goings-on at City Hall unless a reporter he takes exception to isn't removed from the City Hall beat; he is enabled by a family member, brother Doug; to conclude, the mayor is a disruptive influence on the rest of the citizenry.

It is sad that today when I opened The Star I was confronted on the front page by what should be a trivial matter, while important issues such as Dalton McGuinty's political machinations and Harper's move to limit democratic debate on the omnibus budget bill are pushed to the inner pages. Like those pesky students of my earlier life, Rob Ford is disrupting our larger classroom once again.

Rob Ford Issues Fatwa Against Star Reporter Daniel Dale

Now this is reaching absurdist proportions, even for the political circus that Toronto has become under its buffoon/mayor, Rob Ford.

The Hysterical Hyperbole of The Globe's Neil Reynolds

The other day I wrote a post about the right-wing propaganda machine going into high gear as a result of the McGuinty compromise with the NDP that will result in a two-point increase in income tax for those making over $500,000 per year. Never one to miss a good rally, The Globe's Neil Reynolds has predictably joined what will soon doubtless be a juggernaut of publicly-expressed fear and outrage on the part of the 'beleaguered' wealthy.

Entitled Ontario’s taxing march to socialism, (evokes rather inflammatory imagery, doesn't it?) Reynold's article laments this 'consumption of wealth' implying that it will soon continue voraciously, resulting in a decline in everyone's savings. He predicts that nothing good can come from any move that seeks to redress inequality, dismissing it as simply a manifestation of 'hatred of the rich.'

The vacuous screed continues as he suggests the following: As a matter of statistical fact, high-income earners are poorer, in many cases, than average-income earners (with, say, $100,000 in taxable income). He ends it by conjuring up a parade of taxpayers, the least-burdened ones standing erect while the high earners carry Sisyphean boulders equal to 60 per cent of their incomes.

It is a burden, I suspect, that many in our society would be more than happy to bear.

Freedom of Information: Turkey, Mexico and India, Yes - Canada, Not So Much

The Harper obsession with secrecy and control is well-known and the source of much international attention. However, it seems we now have new reason to be both embarrassed and outraged. According to the Canadian Journalists for Free Expression (CJFE), our country also lags behind other less developed nations in meeting freedom of information requests:

The Associated Press ... filed requests for information on terrorism charges and convictions in 105 countries that have freedom of information laws. Turkey supplied the information in a week, India in a month, Mexico in two months. Canada asked for a 200-day extension.

Canada was also ranked 40th out of 89 countries in world’s first Global Right to Information Rating, published last year by Access Info Europe and the Halifax-based Centre for Law and Democracy.

One cannot help but wonder what further enhancements to democracy Harper Inc. has planned for the coming years.

POSTSCRIPT: It took a freedom of information request by Canada's real 'newspaper of record', the Toronto Star, to uncover this inconvenient truth about how the public responded to Harper's decision to raise the age of entitlement for Old Age Security benefits. One imagines the bureaucratic that opened the lid has been severely disciplined by his/her political master.

The Irony Of Police 'Sensitivity'

Given the brutal manner in which some police officers discharge their authority, it always strikes me as just a tad 'precious' when they complain about how unjustly they are being treated whenever the press offers some criticism of their practices.

In responding to The Toronto Star's series, Police Who Lie, Mike McCormack, president of the Toronto Police Association, complains that the investigative project is a gross misrepresentation of police practices, and condemns it for using a presentation style disturbingly similar to the covers of tabloid magazines that grab your attention while you’re standing in the checkout line at the grocery store.

The sad truth is that the police have no one but themselves to blame when their behaviour is held up to public scrutiny and found wanting. And what McCormack fails to acknowledge is that the public has every right to know about misconduct which, in the case of the Toronto Police, has taken many forms, lying in court being only one of them.

Who, for example, can forget the wiretapping and surveillance conducted upon former Police Services Board Chair Susan Eng, done when Mike's father, William, was the Toronto Police Chief? Eng attributed this illegal activity to the fact that prior to becoming chair of the board, she had been a vocal critic of the police.

Then, as just another example, there was Craig Bromell, former head of the police union now being led by Mike McCormack. In cases of involving investigation by the SIU, Bromell told his members not to co-operate with its inquiries and threatened lawsuits against police critics. Such directives and threats hardly fostered an environment conducive to the public trust that the constabulary seems to believe is its due.

The infamous G20 misconduct, in which Toronto police played a key role, is well-knowned, attested to even by voices as credible as Steve Paikin's.

So I'm sorry that public scrutiny so-much disheartens Mike McCormack and his troops, but he is going to have to learn that because police wield so much power, they must be held to the highest standards, and if they want to avoid criticism, they are going to have to govern themselves by those standards.

When Is A Police Quota System Not A Quota System?

Apparently, when it is a 'performance standard.'

The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine Gears Up

Deeply affronted, perhaps even frightened by the recent change to the Ontario budget that will impose an increase of 2% on the income of those making over $500,000 per year, the right-wing has been busy cranking out its anti-tax propaganda. Lest anyone think that a return to some form of progressive taxation is a good idea, two groups with charitable institution status are most charitably taking the time to point out the error of our thinking.

The first out of the gate was The Fraser Institute, which recently released a 'study' telling Canadians that we are paying far too much tax as it is. According to that study, we hapless citizens are paying more in taxes at all levels than we are on the basic necessities of life.

Following in their footsteps, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute kindly informs us that the rich pay more than their fair share of taxes, and hitting them harder won’t solve all the problems of the poor.

While you can read both reports through the links provided, I'd like to offer a few of my own observations here. First, the Fraser report conveniently ignores the fact that in terms of total tax burden, Canada ranks in the middle of countries listed in a Forbes-commissioned study for 2009. Coming in at #33 out of 65 countries measured, the study provides some much-need context absent from the Frasier hysteria.

Next, the above-mentioned study shows that the United States, coming in at #21 in the rankings, has a significantly higher tax burden, much of it apparently allocated in ways that do not benefit the majority of people. (Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, on Terror, on Drugs and against Occupiers, corporate tax cuts and subsidies readily come to mind as quick examples.)

Despite that higher tax burden, U.S. citizens are mired in much higher costs for health care, the cause of 60% of their bankruptcies in 2009, thanks both to the occurrence of catastrophic illness and the absence of taxpayer-supported public health insurance.

In terms of education, while annual tuition for a basic undergraduate degree in Canada ranges from just over $2000 to about $6000, those in the United States are anywhere from about $13000 to over $41,000, excluding Florida, which appears to have the lowest tuition at $5700.

Of course, one of the key reasons for the disparity in educational costs is the proportion of taxation each country allocates to education; Canada sees subsidized education as a worthwhile investment since society as a whole stands to benefit.

Finally, the Macdonald-Laurier Institute avers that increasing taxes on the wealthy won’t solve all the problems of the poor. I can't think that anyone has suggested it will; what has been asserted, however, is that having a truly progressive system of taxation that is wisely administered will, in fact, allow for the continuation and expansion of programs to help the disenfranchised become fully-participating members of our society, something that those inhabiting right-wing towers seem to forget is a core value the majority of Canadians hold dear.

So no, speaking as a member of the middle class who wants to maintain and enhance the quality of life in this country, taxation is not a dirty word. Contrary to the fraught hyperbole of the so-called think tanks that are subsidized through my taxes, all I ask and expect is that my dollars be used for the betterment of all, not to simply bolster the net worth of the wealthy.

Another Victory For The Star

As a direct result of their investigative series, Police Who Lie, The Toronto Star is once more contributing to the social good. The following is reported today's edition:

Ontario’s chief prosecutor will probe the issue of police officers who are found by judges to have lied in court.

Attorney General John Gerretsen made the announcement Monday following a Toronto Star investigation that found more than 100 cases of police deception in Ontario and across the country.

“The most important thing is that people tell the truth in court. The question really becomes: if a judge makes a serious comment (about an officer’s testimony) what should happen?” said Gerretsen.

As a citizen, I am heartened to know that solid investigative reporting is still being done at a time when most journals have abandoned it as a costly and quixotic pursuit.

I Am Mayor, Hear Me Roar!

My question: Is anyone listening?

The Harper Perversion Of the Temporary Foreign Workers Program

In what looks like yet another invitation by the Harper regime to corporate thievery in Canada, Human Resources Minister Diane Finley last week announced that employers will now be able to pay temporary migrant workers less than would be paid to Canadians doing the same job.

What is especially alarming about this, beyond the obvious exploitation of foreign workers, is how migrant labour is being defined these days. As reported by The Star's Thomas Walkom,

The temporary foreign workers program began as a stop-gap measure in 2000, specifically to deal with a shortage of software specialists. But under pressure from employers — particularly in the Alberta oil patch — it has vastly expanded.

By 2011, there were some 300,111 temporary foreign workers of all kinds in Canada — 106,849 of them in Ontario.

He goes on to discuss how these workers are now doing a variety of jobs ranging from serving coffee to working in Maritime fish-processing plants, and of course, in Alberta's oil fields. Coupled with the latest changes in the rules governing Employment Insurance, the implications are worrying. Walkom writes:

[Jason]Kenney has warned that unemployed workers who refuse to take low-wage jobs will have their EI benefits cut off. If Canadians agree to work for less, he explains, Ottawa won’t have to bring in as many low-wage outsiders.

If the great Canadian slumber continues, watch for more regressive legislation from this 'Prime Minister.'

UPDATE: Here is a sector that appears to heartily approve of this downward pressure on wages.

Congratulations To The Harper Government

May the Prime Minister and his party enablers wear this award with distinction!

P.S. Check out some of the readers' comments on the site as well.

The Star Continues To Shine A Light On Some Very Dark Places

A taser to the scrotum 10-15 times. A 'rear naked choke hold' (an arm around the throat, another behind the head and a knee in the back). A beating in a ditch. The suspect's 'crime'? Leaning out his window and shouting “Hey, baby!” to several Niagara Regional Police officers.

Thus begins the third part of the Star's investigation into police officers who abuse their authority and subsequently perjure themselves in court, usually with no subsequent punishment from their departments.

You can read all of the sordid details here.

More Troubling News On The Police Front

I have the feeling that if I had both the time and the narrowness of purpose, I could devote this blog entirely to police and their abuse of authority and the citizens they are sworn to protect. It seems that one doesn't have to look far, be it on YouTube or the daily papers, to find new outrages committed by the constabulary.

The unfortunate pitfall of all of this, of course, is the danger of slipping into the fallacy of gross over-generalizations. The fact is, of course, that the majority of police do not abuse their powers (except in special circumstances such as the Toronto G20 Summit of 2010); it just seems that way thanks to a sometimes-vigilant press and some intrepid citizen journalists.

If you have the stomach for it, read about a Windsor police detective, David Van Buskirk, who has just been found guilty of viciously assaulting a visually-impaired doctor, Tyceer Abouhassan, and lying to cover up the assault. The Windsor Police Association, of course, is falling all over itself explaining away his aberrant and abhorrent behaviour and calling for understanding of the stresses he was under at the time of the beating.

No word yet about the stress Dr. Abouhassan experienced as a result of the assault.

Why The Star Is The Real 'Newspaper Of Record'

Those who regularly read The Toronto Star will hardly be surprised to learn that it has just won five National Newspaper Awards for the excellence of its reporting, reporting that often results in some real benefits to society. A new benefit appears to be emerging as a result of its two-part investigation into police who lie under oath.

While its response to the investigation could be cynically dismissed as a political one, the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police now says that

... the justice system should report police officers who are found by judges to have lied, misled the court or fabricated evidence.

“If a judge perceives that an officer has not fulfilled his oath of honesty, a judge should report it to a police service. The national association would naturally support mechanisms that would ensure this happens,” said association spokesperson Timothy Smith.

Despite the dismissal of the series by Mark Pugash, who has basically said that The Star doesn't know what it is talking about and can't be taken seriously, the chair of the civilian oversight Toronto Police Services Board, Alok Mukherjee, told the Star he is troubled by this “serious issue” and wants something done to stop the lies from eroding the public’s trust in his police force.

At a time when the majority of mainstream media seem to be constrained by the agenda of their corporate masters, it is reassuring that The Toronto Star continues in unfettered fashion to pursue important work leading to a better Canada.

The Sky Isn't Falling (The One-Percent Just Pretend It Is)

One thing you have to hand to the monied class - they are shameless and unconscionable in their hyperbole. Reacting to the imposition of a 2% surtax in Ontario on those making over a half-million per year, they are pulling out all the stops, even invoking the Holocaust as they shamelessly fight against paying a little more in a country and province in which the inequality between the rich and the poor is increasing with each passing year.

For a full accounting of this despicable tack, take a look at Gerald Caplan's piece in The Globe.

Who Looks More Dishonourable Here?

I suppose some would say it is simply canny politics on the part of Dalton McGuinty here, and that Elizabeth Witmer sold herself to the highest bidder. On the other hand, I hope the Premier's strategy fails, and Kitchener-Waterloo elects an NDPer in the byelection.

Police Who Lie Under Oath - Part 2

Part 2 of The Star series on the problem of police lying under oath is available on its website. Today's coverage examines the lack consequences for such behaviour, many departments seeming to prefer a see-no-evil, hear-no-evil kind of approach. And as per his function, the always pugnacious Mark Pugash, Toronto Police spokesman, accuses the Star of not knowing what they are writing about.

Police Who Lie Under Oath

The following suspects have walked free after officers lied in court: an accused pimp of a teenage girl, possessors of child pornography, a major ecstasy manufacturer operating out of a Scarborough house, members of an international data-theft and fake-credit-card ring, marijuana growers, and drug dealers carrying loaded handguns.

Judges have discarded as evidence at least $40 million worth of cocaine, meth, ecstasy and weed in recent years.

The above is just a brief excerpt from the start of another investigative series from The Star, the only Canadian newspaper, to my knowledge, that is upholding the best traditions of journalism in pursuing stories that really should matter to an informed populace, stories that have led to some very significance changes and reforms both locally and provincially over the years.

In reading the account in today's issue about police who lie in court about the circumstance leading to the arrest of criminals, I admit to feeling just the smallest amount of ambivalence, inasmuch as the lies were used to justify the arrests of some very bad people. On the other hand, I am very mindful of how easy it is for the police, in whom society have invested a great deal of authority, to abuse that authority. Countless videos by citizens, and the terrible violations of our Charter rights that took place during the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto, are ample testaments to that abuse.

I look forward to The Star's next installment tomorrow.

Have you Seen TED? The Possibilities of Enlightenment

We all lead busy lives (yes, even retired folk like me). Our desire for information and knowledge to allow us to intelligently interpret the world around us is limited by many factors, not the least of which are time constraints. Certainly, we may try to keep abreast of things by reading daily newspapers, pursuing ideas and imagination through books, even watching intelligently-designed television programs. Nonetheless, we really can grasp onto only a minuscule portion of the ideas and knowledge that pervade our world.

Nevertheless, there is a way to explore a wealth of ideas, within those constraints, in a fairly systematic and efficient manner. Recently introduced to it by a friend, I have found that TED Talks offer an opportunity too good to pass up.

The following blurb offers a good description of TED's mission:

Our mission: Spreading ideas.

We believe passionately in the power of ideas to change attitudes, lives and ultimately, the world. So we're building here a clearinghouse that offers free knowledge and inspiration from the world's most inspired thinkers, and also a community of curious souls to engage with ideas and each other. This site, launched April 2007, is an ever-evolving work in progress, and you're an important part of it. Have an idea? We want to hear from you.

Offering an amazing array of subject matter, the videos are of some of the best teachers and communicators in the world. I hope you can take some time to check it out.

Spring Signs of A Thaw In Our Political Passivity?

It's been a long time since I've seen in print the term 'Red Tory', used to describe an economic conservationism balanced by a social progressiveness. Yet it is included in columns today by The Star's Thomas Walkom and Chantal Hebert as both reflect upon the significance of Alison Redford's Progressive Conservative victory in Monday's Alberta election. Walkom goes so far as to suggest the term is also applicable to both Dalton McGuinty and Andrea Horwath, given their recent budget deliberations that yielded some real results.

As well, public editor Carol Goar writes on the growing backlash against the outrageously inflated salaries paid to so-called 'captains of industry.' A shareholders' meeting at one of Wall Street’s biggest banks, Citigroup, rejected the pay package awarded to Vikram Pandit, its CEO, a move she attributes in part to the growing awareness of the gross disparity that exists in North America between the privileged few (the 1% identified by the Occupy Movement) and the rest of us.

One can only hope that the movement for a more equitable distribution of wealth to restore and maintain some of the traditions and values Canadians hold dear will gain real momentum.

This Is Most Gratifying

I suspect that Adam Carroll, the Liberal staffer who established the Vikileaks Twitter account revealing embarrassing yet publicly-available information about Public Safety Minister Vic Toews was speaking for many of us today during his voluntary appearance before the Commons ethics committee today.

Despite the predictable bullying from member Dean Del Mastro, who insisted that Carroll must have been part of a Liberal conspiracy, Carroll said,

“I disagree with everything Mr. Del Mastro has said. To use his words ‘baseless smears’ or, in the acronym, B.S.”

You can read the entire satisfying account here.

A Solution to Our Political Apathy?

I would like to think that one needn't be a political junky to have at least a reasonable awareness of what our federal government is doing 'on our behalf.' Yet the fact is that we have political disengagement in this country that is reaching historic lows, if election turnouts are any indication. And we are confronted with the consequences of that disengagement on an almost daily basis with the Harper regime regularly showing its disdain, even contempt, for the citizens of Canada through its lies, profligate ministerial spending, and outright incompetence.

Of Harper's ongoing muzzling of our Environment Canada scientists, decried internationally, I will not even speak.

Some pundits suggest it is the very fact of these myriad abuses of democracy that have turned off many people from the entire process, something that I have opined on this blog is very much a part of the Tory agenda. In today's Globe Lawrence Martin, one of the few writers for Canada's self-proclaimed 'newspaper of record' that I have any respect for, has a suggestion that might address this problem, as well as give the federal NDP some staying power in its current momentum. Martin suggests the following:

The New Democrats need to show Canadians a new way, something at which the Liberals failed. Mr. Mulcair needs a far-reaching plan to reshape the way Ottawa works. A “restore democracy” charter that curbs absolute prime ministerial power, that clearly sets out checks and balances, that returns credibility to the committee system, that removes the Kremlin-like muzzle on government communications, that gives the Speaker new powers to end the Question Period farce, that limits patronage, and so on.

You can read his complete article here.