An Embarrassment To All of Us

Like the dotty uncle no one wants to invite to family dinners anymore because of his wildly inappropriate comments, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver is fast becoming an international persona non grata.

With the passion of a senescent zealot, Oliver has drawn unfavorable attention to Canada in recent weeks over his attacks on those who disagree with his unbridled enthusiasm for Alberta's dirty oil. There was, for example, his visit last month to Washington in which he lambasted a leading climate scientist, James Hansen, denouncing him for “exaggerated rhetoric,” that “doesn’t do the (environmentalists’) cause any good.” For good measure, he dismissed the much-respected Hansen for spouting "nonsense' in his warnings about the Alberta tarsands, adding that he “should be ashamed.” His followup interview with Evan Solomon could only be described as 'cringe-worthy.'

His next target was Al Gore who, in a recent visit to Toronto, offered a withering assessment of the tarsands similar to Hansen's. Again, our 'Uncle' Joe denounced him vigorously. Once more drawing upon his limited repertoire, he accused Gore of making "wildly inaccurate and exaggerated claims" about the Harper record on climate change.

But wait, there's more:

On Wednesday in Brussels, Mr. Oliver said Canada would consider filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization, the global referee for trade disputes, if the EU proceeds with its so called fuel-quality directive which singles out crude from Canada’s oil sands as the most harmful to the planet’s climate.

Yesterday, in an apparent rare moment of lucidity, Oliver backed down on the threat, saying that the issue is separate from the European trade deal much desired by the Harper regime.

The antics of our antic Natural Resources Minister have not escaped notice. Yesterday, a group of 12 prominent Canadian scientists wrote a letter to Oliver, essentially asking that he and his government show some maturity on the climate change issue. The letter also offers to help Minister Oliver to understand the data on climate change. No word of a response, withering or otherwise, from the cabinet minister.

Finally, in today's edition, The Star's Rick Salutin has an interesting take on the whole issue, saying that our version of classics like Death of a Salesman, Glengarry Glen Ross, or the current British series Mr. Selfridge would be Mr. Bitumen, the story of a salesman peddling a blatantly faulty, unneeded product.

One of the marks of the enlightened mind is the ability to process new information that can alter one's perspective. Joe Oliver shows no such capacity. Guess that's why he's a member of the Harper Conservative government.

Another Face Of Integrity

This kind of sterling courage and integrity is what keeps me from abandoning hope:

H/t Salon.com

Why Is This Man Smiling?

Could it be because Senator Duffy was tipped off by the man investigating him for expense improprieties?

Or could it be because once more, an errant staff member is to blame for Conservative 'irregularities'?

The Insular World Of The Police Mentality

I have written several posts in this blog about institutions and their many shortcomings, shortcomings that seem directly proportional to their age. The longer one exists, the more prone an organization seems to becoming increasingly insular, self-referential, and self-reverential.

One of the institutions most frequently targeted here is law enforcement. Whether examining local or national forces, it is clear that the temptation to overstep, misuse and abuse authority is too much for some to resist. Failure to seriously acknowledge that fact only leads to a greater likelihood it will recur, often more frequently or on an even larger scale.

Perhaps the most notorious instance of police abusing their authority and subsequent organizational inertia in responding to it was the G20 Summit of 2010 in Toronto. The details of that infamous weekend are well-known, and I have posted about it numerous times; in the aftermath of that weekend of mayhem, a G20 Criminal Investigative Project was formed to pursue and bring to justice the non-police criminals who contributed to the violence of that weekend.

As The Star's Rosie DiManno reports in today's edition, despite the legacy of illegalities perpetrated by the police and their commanders, that Project is today to be given a team award originating with Professional Standards:

[It is] being presented to some of the 82 members of the Toronto Police Service who are being honoured on Thursday along with a handful of officers from other law agencies

As Ms DiManno tartly observes:

There is little to feel proud about in the aftermath of that weekend of wreckage and trampled rights. Goodness, a slew of lawsuits against police for alleged abuse of force are still winding their way through the courts. And much of this city lost faith in its upholders of law and order, unprepared as they were to avert the chaos that erupted, then overly zealous in response to top-down orders that they “take back the streets.”

But that reality doesn't seem to exist in Policeland, it would seem.

The authorities, however, should be aware that it has not been forgotten in the larger world of public opinion.

Durham Police Abuse Of Authority

I'm not sure what is more disquieting, the conduct of constable James Ebdon or the very timid sanctions Durham Police Chief Mike Ewles imposed on the errant officer. Neither exactly cultivates confidence or trust in those who 'protect' us.

Guest Commentary From the Salamander On The Harper Regime

The other evening I put up a post on Kellie Leitch, the erstwhile physician turned Conservative M.P., enthusiastic sycophant and prominent apologist of all things Harpereque. As he occasionally does, The Salamander, in a comment on the post, offered his own observations of Ms. Leitch and a host of other Harper acolytes.

Always unsparing in his excoriating assessments, I am reproducing his offering below for readers to enjoy:

.. the pedantic and simplistic rhetoric keeps on churning.. that's the hallmark of Stephen Harper, the Harper Government, the Harper Political Party, the Harper Bureaucracy, the Harper Young Harper Party initiates, the Harper Electoral Volunteers, the Harper Data Miners, the Harper Live & Robo Call service bureaus, the Harper Ad Agency, the Harper Polling Companies .. the Harper Think Tanks, the Harper University Democracy Fronts

A ways back I described Ms Leitch as a 'dead end' .. when I should have been more illuminating. Although Kelly Leitch is yet another 'star' MP in the decaying Harper low orbit layer of ethically spaced out junk bond vote collectors.. she is merely a messenger.. and dull programmed echo.. As some might say.. a red herring .. a beep meep sputternik

But why shoot down such a useful sample specimen.. or 'carrier' that has the Harper political animal DNA staggering rabid dinosaur embedded ? She reminds me of the large Dean Dean Del Mastro who was equally capable of getting that big eyed glossy evangelistic Harper fervor in front of the cameras... 'the fact is in fact.. that the NDP carbon tax.. is in fact' .. and that oily pompadoured smug gelding idiot spouting 'the root cause of terrorism is terrorists !' And let's not forget the loyal warthog Peter Van Loan drone..

Hell .. while ol Dean n Poilievre & Van Loan, Hamilton, de Loray & Jennie Byrne was denying, plugging, denying, plugging the leaks from electoral fraud.. the ministerial creep jackasses such as Kent were endorsing the poisoning and shooting of boreal wolves, Clement was sanitizing his back trail form the G20, Ashfield was obstructing marine biology to promote farmed salmon and Joe Oliver was painting his skinny millionaire stockbroker/lawyer arse into the dangerous corner its frying in now.

Joe Oliver .. he's toast - a Canadian quisling, the Benedict Arnold, General Custer tar sands fall guy either before or after Harper resigns or is fired or goes into hiding with his trusty aide Ray Novak and at least one panda. One of many with no conscience, no common sense, no glowing heart, standing on guard with forked tongues, financiers, foreign energy consortiums, ideologues carpetbaggers and charlatans.. Why ? Good question ... What drives these sellouts ?

I like the Kelly Leitch's.. and the duplicitous and vicious pedantic MP secretaries like Michelle Rempel.. and Poutine Poilievre .. if we see them as lab rats and look for a cure.. an antitoxin .. a vaccine .. for the infection they carry .. while we try to deal with the really serious 'carriers' of the toxins .. Harper, Mackay, Baird, Flanagan, Kenney, Manning .. the list just is shocking ...

Stephen Harper - He's Not Here For You

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kellie Leitch Speaks Again In Her 'Master's Voice'

Like the good yeo(wo)man she is, Ms Leitch never deviates from the Harper regime script as she 'answers' Evan Solomon's questions about the Temporary Foreign Worker's Program. One only hopes that her collar is not pulled too tightly; given Canada's doctor shortage, it would be sad to lose a trained practitioner who will, one hopes, be returning to the medical field after the next election.

Hmm... I wonder if Ms Leitch and the ever-faithful Pierre Poilievre get together on occasion to share some kibble and compare talking points?

The Silver Lining

Now that the weather has markedly and rather consistently improved over the past week in my part of Ontario, yard work beckons, so for now I offer this perceptive nugget from a Star reader, who sees some benefit to the Harper regime's estrangement from the United Nations:

Canada not up for UN Security Council seat, May 2

I'm relieved that Canada is not seeking a UN Security Council seat since, if we got it, the Harper government would only use it to lobby for international sanctions against Justin Trudeau.

Steve Morris, Toronto

What Is Democracy?

The other day I wrote a post on the decline of democracy under the Harper regime. Included was reference to Bob Hepburn's recent piece on the same subject. Although I am not quite as cynical as the letter-writer, Star reader Al Dunn of Kingston, in responding to Hepburn, expresses the view that democracy is, in fact only a mirage. See what you think. Here is his letter from today's edition:

Growing disconnect between Canadians and Parliament, Column, May 2

David Herle is supposedly deep in thought about our fading democracy, looking for answers to fix the status quo. He feels installing a new government will not create meaningful change. Duh! Look at the failed promise and dashed worldwide hopes of Barack Obama's election. The “old boys” would not allow him any success; it might initiate a series of challenges to their rigged game. The failed democracy in Canada is but a small part of a global phenomenon. Democracy is a mirage, a fiction the “1 per cent club” allows to continue. No, Mr. Herle, searching within the smoke and mirrors political game will yield no useful answers — people already know this, even if they don't fully comprehend why, and that is why they feel that elections don't matter. And they don't. Big money, lobby groups, etc. run the game. Any new developments on repatriating any of those billions in tax havens so recently made public? No. Politicians are there to please the plutocrats, not the serfs.

The Harper Government's Legacy of Death

Checking my blog archive, I found that I have written a total of 22 posts on asbestos. Here is number 23.

Two years ago, Canada was the sole nation to oppose adding chrysotile asbestos to the list of hazardous products under the Rotterdam Convention. Such a listing would not have banned the export of the deadly substance, but would have required proper labelling and explicit instructions as to its safe handling. Such labelling would have enabled

developing countries — where asbestos and most hazardous substances are shipped nowadays — to be informed of the dangers. They thus have the right to refuse the product or, at least, have a better chance of protecting their population from harm.

At the time, the Harperites hypocritically insisted that it was a safe substance (even though, of course, it is listed in Canada as a hazardous substance) if handled properly, but then prevented the possibility of safe handling by preventing its inclusion under Annex 111 of the Rotterdam Convention.

The government's rationale for its immoral act was both chilling and mercenary:

"This government will not put Canadian industry in a position where it is discriminated against in a market where sale is permitted," Harper said.

As reported in today's Star, this week the Rotterdam Convention will meet in Geneva, and this time, when the vote is called to place chysotile asbestos on the convention’s list of hazardous substances, Canada will not oppose it.

Has the Harper government experienced an epiphany? Hardly. Since the Parti Quebecois cancelled a $58 million loan to Canada’s last asbestos mine, the Jeffrey Mine, it will not reopen, effectively ending Canada's export of death and disease. It is noteworthy, however, that the Harper regime will be graceless and petty to the end. Instead of voting to add chrysotile to the list of hazardous materials, it will remain silent.

Not that it really will make any difference one way or the other. Unlike two years ago, when Canada was single-handedly responsible for the substance's exclusion from Annex 111, this year Russia, the world’s biggest asbestos exporter, and Zimbabwe, attending for the first time and eager to reopen its asbestos mines and resume asbestos exports, will play the spoiler roles in preventing its proper labelling.

So Canada must bear the exclusive responsibility for the ongoing suffering, disease and death that is chrysotile's legacy. While I'm sure Harper and his many disciples will not lose any sleep over this ugly and immoral truth, those of us with any semblance of humanity just might.

A Glimmer Of Principle

Laurie Hawn, Alberta

Brent Rathgeber, Alberta

Kevin Sorenson, Alberta

Mike Allen, New Brunswick

Joe Daniel, Ontario

Larry Miller, Ontario

Stephen Woodworth, Ontario

What do all of the above M.P.s have in common? In addition to being members of the federal Conservative caucus, each, it seems, has some surprising integrity. Each has refused to participate in the Harper plan to use taxpayer-funded mailouts to attack Justin Trudeau.

In that, they have earned my respect, which, in itself, I suppose, is a pretty sad commentary on the Conservative Party of Canada. After all, they are only doing what is morally, ethically, and fiscally right in refusing to participate in another Harper-led scheme of character assassination.

I can only hope others will join in this 'palace revolt.'

Are Canadians Experiencing Buyers' Remorse?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

15 He cannot buckle his distemper'd cause

16 Within the belt of rule.

ANGUS

Now does he feel

17 His secret murders sticking on his hands;

18 Now minutely revolts upbraid his faith-breach;

19 Those he commands move only in command,

20 Nothing in love. Now does he feel his title

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

22 Upon a dwarfish thief.

(Act 5, Scene 2)

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

For The Regime In Ottawa So Convinced Of Its Competence....

A few reminders that the truth is otherwise from our friends at Canadians Rallying To Unseat Harper

An Anniversary Many Would Like To Forget

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

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

- streamlined environmental regulatory reviews

- the formal withdrawal from the Kyoto protocol

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

- the uncertainty over the future of the Experimental Lakes Area

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

- cutting of scientific research

- muzzling of federal scientists

- compromising the independence of Statistics Canada

- abdicating the federal role in setting national health care policy

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

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

Tim Harper concludes with the following observation:

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

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

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

On Harper's Fiscal Ineptitude

Since the story has been covered in the mainstream press, and The Sixth Estate has done his usual fine and thorough job of analyzing its implications, I have nothing to add to the tale of the missing $3 billion from the Public Security and Anti-Terrorism (PSAT) Initiative.

Not only does the story further erode the myth of Conservative fiscal competence, however, it also provides an opportunity for some lacerating humour, as evidenced by today's Star editorial cartoon. Enjoy:

An Appealingly Democratic Concept

Although I am a retired teacher aware of the potential drawbacks of this concept, I find it appealingly democratic:

H/t GB

Leaf Nation, Or Just More Tired Rabid Harper Partisanship?

Some may think this clever. I just think it is pathetic (and I'm not even a fan of the Liberals).

The Dominoes of Democracy - Part 2

What is one of the chief effects of the Harper regime's preference for an ideologically-based policy model over one premised on logic, facts and empirical evidence, as explored in my earlier post? The decline, perhaps even the demise, of a healthy democracy in which citizens are engaged and informed participants, thereby allowing an ideologically-driven government to pursue its agenda largely unimpeded.

In today's Toronto Star, columnist Bob Hepburn writes about the state of our democracy and the growing gap between Parliament and Canadians. An interview with David Herle, former Paul Martin campaign strategist and principal partner at The Gandalf Group, a Toronto-based research and consulting company, yields a portrait of a population deeply disaffected with politics in general and Parliament in particular.

And there are ample studies and surveys to back up that portrait:

For example, a poll last fall suggested barely 27 per cent of Canadians believe Ottawa is dealing with issues we really care about.

Most people are worried about daily issues, such as their children’s education, looking after aging parents and getting decent health care. But other than writing cheques to the provinces, Ottawa has opted out of health care, education, transportation and other issues that affect our normal lives.

Instead, there is a narrow set of issues that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is pursuing and for the most part the opposition parties are adhering to them. Because voters have stopped looking to Parliament for help, Ottawa has stopped responding to their needs, Herle believes.

“People are no longer putting demands on government (bold type mine) and aren’t flocking to politicians who claim they can help them,” he says. “They’ve simply given up on Ottawa altogether.”

Although I am not a person given to conspiracy theories, I have written extensively on this blog about both democracy and democratic participation, and long ago concluded that one of the secondary goals of the Harper regime is the discouragement of an engaged electorate, thereby making it easier to push through an agenda in which the role of government in people's live is minimized, one of the chief beliefs of the reactionary right. What better way to pursue that goal than to convey to people, via policy pursued through the very narrow prism of ideology and rabid partisanship, that their voices mean nothing and their engagement in the democratic process is both unnecessary and unwelcome?

Conservative MP Michael Chong, the only former member of Harper's cabinet who has ever displayed real integrity, puts it this way:...if voters have given up on Parliament, it means they have lost faith in politicians to look after their interests.

Part one of this post dealt with causes, and I would argue that Chong's observation is precisely the effect that the Harper regime so avidly desires.

The Dominoes of Democracy

Cause and effect. Sometimes the relationship is obvious, as in, for example, a cigarette left smoldering on a couch and the subsequent conflagration that destroys a house. Other times, to see the relationship requires some digging, some thinking, some connecting of the dots. To its shame the Harper regime, as retrograde and benighted as it is, has proven quite adept at obscuring such relationships. Thanks to this Machiavellian bent, we are all the poorer.

In a recent address to the Alberta Federation of Labour, one that, curiously, was not reported in the mainstream Alberta media, former Tory pollster and strategist Allan Gregg gave another version of his Assault on Reason speech he gave at the opening of Carleton University’s new School of Public Affairs.

Gregg made the following unassailable assertion to the group:

..."effective solutions can only be generated when they correspond with accurate understanding of they problems they are designed to solve. Evidence, facts and reason, therefore, form the sine qua non not just of good public policy, but of good value."

He went on to lament the steady decline of these criteria under the Harper government that began with the elimination of the long-form census, followed by

the destruction of the national long-gun registry, despite the pleas of virtually every police chief in Canada that it be saved. After that, under cover of an austerity budget, there were massive cuts to Statistics Canada, Library and Archives Canada, science and social science activities at Parks Canada, the Parliamentary Budget Office, the CBC, the Roundtable on the Environment, the Experimental Lakes Area, the Canadian Foundation for Climate Science and so on.

Gregg notes that these assaults on evidence-based decisions were followed by a multi-billion-dollar penitentiary-building spending spree which flew directly in the face of a mountain of evidence that suggested that crime, far from being on the rise, was on the decline.

Gregg draws the following conclusions:

"This was no random act of downsizing, but a deliberate attempt to obliterate certain activities that were previously viewed as a legitimate part of government decision making," Gregg stated. "Namely, using research, science and evidence as the basis to make public policy decisions.

"It also amounted to an attempt to eliminate anyone who would use science, facts and evidence to challenge government policies," he added.

So, beyond the obvious consequences of flawed government policy that is based on ideology instead of empiricism, what is the effect of all of this?

To be continued later today...

Depraved Indifference - UPDATED

The term 'cultural divide' does not begin to explain this. Depraved indifference, on the part of both the company and the parents, perhaps does.

UPDATE: This piece on Slate, which includes a 'charming' video on 'My First Rifle,' is well worth a look.

Much Deserved Mockery - Part 3

A bit of a busy morning ahead, so for now something more from our friends at Canadians Rallying To Unseat Harper that amply attests to the fact that the spirit of resistance and dissent is alive and well in Canada:

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

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

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

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

Consider this about the TFWP:

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

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

Or Consider this observation:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mehta's doubts are shared by many others:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Welcome to the real world, sir.

More Much-Deserved Mockery

From the folks at Canadians Rallying To Unseat Harper:

Revisiting The Past

In this blog, I try as hard as possible not to repeat myself. True, that is often a difficult objective to achieve when, with the same fascination that train wrecks and natural disasters exert over some people, I have an ongoing obsession with the political outrages embodied in people like Stephen Harper and Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak.

But for this post, I have to revisit my teaching career, something I rarely do because it is part of the past, a completed chapter of my life. In today's Star, there is a story on a report from People for Education, a group that has been headed for many years by Annie Kidder that works toward monitoring and improving public education.

While the report admits that the roots and patterns of inequality are complex and interconnected, it makes the following observation:

... teens from low-income homes make up the bulk of those taking non-academic credits ... The numbers show the lower the average family income at a particular secondary school, the higher the percentage of students taking “applied” math.

In schools where families earn an average of $110,000 a year, fewer than 10 per cent of students take that course.

While I have no reason to question these statistics, they really do not tell the full story, rife as it is with the implication of some kind of class discrimination colouring the advice students receive from educators on their course selections:

Charles Ungerleider, an education professor at the University of British Columbia, said the government must pay attention to the findings. “Mathematical ability, like other abilities, is normally distributed across the population …. Why are youngsters being slotted into applied courses in disproportionate numbers?” said Ungerleider.

As my policy-analyst son has reminded me on more than one occasion, issues and problems are never simple, outward appearances notwithstanding. And it is this truth, I think, that needs to be applied to the above report.

A constellation of factors influence a student's academic performance: language skills (for example, whether or not the student is a newcomer to English), general intelligence, behaviour, attendance, home situation, and social-economic status are among them. In my own experience, although not invariably true, those whose parent are reasonably affluent can better advocate for their kids, but that doesn't mean that none of them are in the applied courses. Yet it seems to be true that those from homes of poverty or little affluence are over represented in applied programs, but one of the reasons for that is that they tend to be homes where parents, having less education, value education less themselves and transmit that attitude to their children, and often provide little oversight of their study habits, etc. Again, this is not intended as a gross over generalization, but merely an observation borne of my own teaching experience.

When a respect for the goals of education is weak, there are consequences that combine to detract from student achievement: lack of self-discipline, low completion rate on assignments, tardiness and absence, and disruptive classroom behaviour. Despite the public perception that teachers are trained and competent to deal with all of these variables and still deliver the desired educational outcomes is more myth than reality. Some teachers are better in such situations than others; in all frankness, I rarely felt that I did a particularly good job in the applied classes that I taught.

Hence, the problem itself becomes one of not only addressing the problem of growing poverty and income inequality in our society, but also of how to impart an appreciation of the importance of education to recalcitrant families and their children, and motivating them accordingly, no easy tasks, I can assure you.

Sadly, in my mind, there are no simple solutions to this problem, but I write this post only as an effort to balance what seems to me to be the temptation of People For Education to interpret the issue as a form of class warfare.

On Harper's Cyberbullying and Hypocrisy

Since I arose uncharacteristically late this morning, I am still working on today's post. In the interim, I take the liberty of reproducing some letters from Star readers on a topic dear to the heart of progressives: Harper's attack ads:

Re: Tory ad war drowns out debate over free speech, April 25

The federal Conservative party professes to decry the repugnant act of cyberbullying. Definition: “when the Internet, cellphones or other devices are used to send or post text or images intended to hurt or embarrass another person.” The recent Conservative attack ads against Justin Trudeau seem to fit this definition. Considering that we are not in the midst of an election campaign, these spiteful attack ads on a fellow Member of Parliament sure look a lot like cyberbullying to me.

Garth Dynes, Unionville

Bravo to Justin Trudeau for leaving the Conservative attack ads in his dust by taking a positive approach to his campaign strategy. I’ve always wondered if in my lifetime I would ever see a politician promote his or her (party’s) own worth through positive ad campaigns based on integrity.

While the Harper government considers implementing changes to federal laws that address and prevent cyberbullying, would it not be a good time for it to reflect on its own negative and extremely juvenile bullying tactics when it comes to the direction that its “promotional” material is taking?

Anne Chisholm, Salt Spring Island, B.C.

Tim Harper suggests that the Prime Minister's “softer side” was on display in his recent meeting with the Nova Scotia mother of a victim of cyberbullying. Your columnist can't be serious. For the man ultimately responsible for the repulsive attack ads that are relegating Canadian political conversation to the sub-basement to commiserate with anyone on the subject of bullying surely redefines hypocrisy.

Ray Jones, Toronto

So Justin Trudeau took his shirt off in public for a charity — so what? The Tories won't let Stephen Harper take off his shirt because the stuffing would fall out.

Stephen Adams, London, Ont.

More On The Online Community Experience

Earlier in the month, I wrote a post in which I reflected upon the affinity and sense of community I feel in the 'progressive blogosphere.' Prompted by the Internet connectivity problems I was having at the time, I wrote about how I felt a surprising sense of loss in not being able to read the people I follow, and discussed how I derive comfort and strength from the knowledge that a community of shared values exists, and that I am by no means alone in my desire for a better society.

This morning, I made a rather rare foray to church, accompanying my wife in her usual Sunday attendance at a local United Church service, prompted by the knowledge that the minister, a very progressive former Baptist, was going to talk about his recent trip to the Middle East occupied territories. While waiting for him to talk, I perused the church bulletin, and found something that I think is relevant to my deliberations about communities. The writer, Matthew Heesing, who is serving in Columbia, offered his reflections on the importance of 'presence,' something of real significance for me, I think, in the online community of which I am a part.

I reproduce the piece below, with no further comment.

April 28-Not Alone

When people ask me [why I am here in Colombia], I usually respond by saying that I'm here to build solidarity with the people and United Church partners of Colombia. But the phrase "build solidarity" seems to leave people with more questions than answers. And I understand why-it's more of an abstract concept than a tangible response ....

But now I realize that simply having someone stand with you can make all the difference in the world. And if you've ever been through an extremely rough time, or had someone close to you go through a life-shattering experience, you know what I mean. When you are going through a divorce, or have lost your job, or have had to say farewell to a loved one, or have been through any number of similar experiences ... you don't need someone with all the answers ....

There is such a power in presence. In just being with someone, whether it means standing with them, or walking with them, or sitting with them in silence, or just being with them, sharing life. Presence is powerful. When I arrived at the office of CEP ALC, my first full day in Colombia, I found a sign waiting for me in my office: "MATTHEW HEESING: Welcome to Colombia. Welcome to CEPALC. Thank you for your presence."

I don't for a moment pretend like I fully understand the complex realities of Colombia .... I can't even fluently speak the language. But, many times in life, that's not what is needed. Many times in life, what's needed even more is presence. Someone standing with you, walking with you, being with you ... helping you to know that you are not alone.

Some Thoughts From An Ontario Perspective - UPDATED

While acknowledging that Ontario politics is likely of little interest to those living outside the province, I think there is much wisdom in former U.S. Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill's observation that "All politics is local." If it affects a constituent 'where he or she lives,' either in the physical or the mental/philosophical sense, I regard much of what occurs in our country politically as local.

For example, it was local politics when, in his ongoing attempt to hobble scientific study and muzzle voices of reason and expertise that demonstrate his policies to be fraudulent, retrograde and dangerous, Stephen Harper ended federal funding for the Experimental Lakes Area. A world-renowned facility conducting peerless research on global threats to the environment and to ecosystems, its defunding/closure affects all of us due to its negative impact on most people's values and the pervasive nature of environmental degradation.

And it is here that the Ontario connection becomes relevant. This week, Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne announced that Ontario will provide funding to keep the research facility open for the rest of this year, and is reaching out to Manitoba and others to try to ensure its long-term viability.

With this context in mind, I am taking the liberty of reproducing a letter from a Star reader found in today's edition that I think speaks for many across the country:

Premier Kathleen Wynne cautions NDP, Tories against ‘unnecessary’ election, April 24

I was moved to write for the first time to Premier Kathleen Wynne on Thursday. I wished to congratulate and thank her for her intention to spearhead the saving of the Experimental Lakes Area research facility from death by federal funding cuts. I’m sure there are many thousands of people across the country who, like me, are greatly relieved to hear this news.

Stephen Harper’s decision to cut off funds to this invaluable research facility has been widely denounced in Canada and abroad. The federal government’s foolish (and dangerous) move comes as no surprise, following as it does upon the heels of a lengthy list of examples of the wilful gouging of Canada’s environmental protections. The apparent reason for shedding responsibility for any part of the ELA research facility is so the Conservatives can save money to be returned to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Canada, both of which have been robbed by the Conservatives in the first place. But in this decision our Prime Minister’s motive is transparent. We all know that he will not allow successful scientific projects, especially those connected to the study of effects of climate change, to carry on with any kind of government support.

So thank you, Premier Wynne.

As reported Wednesday morning in the Vancouver Sun, the founding director of the Experimental Lakes Area facility, David Schindler, expressed his thanks by saying “the premier’s intervention is ‘like a ray of sunshine in the Dark Ages.’ ” How true.

Patricia Morris, Toronto

UPDATE: This morning's Toronto Star has an interesting editorial on the situation, which you can read by clicking here.

Leading Climate Scientist Responds To Joe Oliver And His 'Neanderthal Government' - UPDATED

The other day I wrote a blog post on one of our national disgraces, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver. While in Washington recently promoting the proposed XL Keystone pipeline through the United States, Oliver took the opportunity to insult and denigrate one of the world's leading climate-change scientists, James Hansen.

In an interview with the CBC's Evan Solomon, Hansen uses the occasion to set the record straight and offer his own opinion on our federal government, which he terms 'neanderthal' on the topic of climate change. The video of that interview is available below:

UPDATE: Read Sorry, Jim: Apologies from Canada about Oil Minister Joe Oliver, written by John Bennett at rabble.ca.

H/t Penny Mills

A Classy Apology

Regular readers of this blog may be aware of my almost boundless enthusiasm for The Toronto Star. I deeply admire its progressive mission, and I find its roster of excellent columnists informative and thought-provoking. I have come to regard it as a trusted source of news and opinion.

It was therefore a bit of a shock to realize how badly below acceptable journalistic standards it recently fell when it published a story about Ontario Liberal MPP Magaret Best who, after being dropped from her cabinet position in the new Wynne government, took a medical leave, which she is still on. The story was accompanied by a photo of Best and her daughter vacationing in Mexico. As I supposed most readers did, I drew what seemed to be some obvious conclusions about Best's behaviour.

There was only one problem, however, with the story; the photo in question was taken, not recently, but in 2008, from a picture posted on Best's Facebook page.

Upon realizing the error, the Star printed a full correction, directing readers on Page 1 to go to A2 for the complete apology. In this morning's edition, there is a full column by The Star's Public Editor, Kathy English, explaining and apologizing for what she calls the paper's egregious error; without any equivocation or self-justification, English makes it very clear how far below standards the paper fell.

I have to respect the fact that the paper is holding itself fully accountable for this terrible mistake, and has even gone so far as to remove the offending article from its website. In my mind, this contrasts sharply with the temporizing and vague explanations issued by The Globe and Mail's Sylva Stead and editor-in-chief John Stackhouse when Margaret Wente's plagiarism became known.

If anyone wants to see an apology that really isn't an apology, read the Globe links above, or better yet, look at Wente's own 'explanation' for her failure which, it turned out, was only one of several instances of plagiarism, all of which the Globe has excused.

Despite the decline of the print medium, in my view it still plays a vital role in protecting our increasingly precarious democracy. Showing disdain for that public trust, as I believe the Globe did, does nothing to advance that mission. Because of its unequivocal, classy and very public mea culpa, the Toronto Star retains both my trust and my subscription.

Some Well-Deserved Ridicule

I suspect only the party faithful and the 'true-believers' would find these pictures objectionable:

Is this A New Crime In Harperland?

While the word commit has several meanings, when it is used without the preposition 'to' (as in, He is committed to her cause), it is invariably associated with something heinous (John committed arson; Shelley committed fraud; Lorne committed murder). It is therefore not likely a slip of the tongue when the man who heads our government (sorry, I can't bear to refer to him as our Prime Minister) says, at about 1:20 on the following video, that this is not the time to "commit sociology" when asked about the arrests of two men this week who are accused of conspiring to carry out a terrorist attack on a Via train:

Never one to miss an opportunity to denigrate a political rival, in this case, of course, Justin Trudeau, who last week talked about the need to find the 'root causes' of terrorism, something very much a priority for the United States, Harper apparently sees such concern as only fodder for scorn, ridicule, and political opportunism.

And then there is Harrper's faithful pet parrot Pierre Poilievre, never one to add an original thought to political discourse, content to simply repeat what he has been told to promulgate by his master. Take a look at the following video where he is in full plumage; especially noteworthy is what he says at about 2:20, which seems to leave interviewer Evan Solomon almost speechless:

Stephen Harper and his minions have always been quite adept at offering simple solutions to the simple-minded and those who prefer their thinking and world-views to be uncluttered by nuance.

For those sufficiently reflective to understand that complexity is a part of the very nature of existence, the man and his machine have nothing to offer, and can expect nothing from us except our continuing contempt.

An Embodiment Of The Transcendent

Adrianne Haslet and Beth Roche are two faces of the human spirit I was trying to talk about the other day.

I am in awe.

Something To Make You Smile

Apropos of nothing except that I am a huge jazz fan and today would have been Ella Fitzgerald's 96th birthday, an event being commemorated with a Google Doodle, I invite you to take a few minutes to watch one of her renditions of Mack the Knife. I can almost guarantee it will make your day better, and it will probably also make you smile:

A Bit More About Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver

Late yesterday afternoon, I wrote a post on one of our more shameful politicians, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver and the embarrassment we all should feel over his performance in Washington in a speech to a carefully-screened audience pushing the XL Keystone pipeline. In it, he rebuked and ridiculed leading climate-change scientist James Hansen for his warnings about the Alberta tarsands.

In a comment on yesterday's post, which you can read in by clicking the above link, The Salamander offered his usual penetrating analysis, this time assessing the Natural Resources Minister and providing a link to Franke James' site. An environmental activist, writer, and game designer, James provides a transcript of a meeting she had with Oliver on March 3/12 at his riding office in Toronto.

I hope you will take some time to peruse the transcript, as it offers even more insight into the man who, in my view, has a decidedly twisted view of what his role as Natural Resources Minister is.

Oh, Joe Oliver, Have You No Shame? UPDATED

In denouncing a leading climate change scientist, the coward, Resources Minister Joe Oliver, showed his complete lack of character, insisting that his message be delivered to a carefully screened audience to avoid any embarrassment from those who favour truth over propaganda.

As Canadians, we should all feel ashamed by the way we are being misrepresented in other countries by this man and his government.

UPDATED: Perhaps you will agree that this interview with Oliver by Evan Solomon can only compound our collective embarrassment over his lies/ineptitude:

This Can't Be Healthy

As deeply suspicious and cynical as I am about institutions, it is probably not surprising that I view with a jaundiced eye the events surrounding the arrest of two terror suspects accused of a plot to blow up a Via Rail train. Many have asked questions about the sudden urgency of Harper's rearranging the parliamentary agenda so that his terror bill could begin to be debated on Monday, coinciding with the RCMP announcement of the arrests.

Coincidences happen, but I am always suspicious when they do. And given the well-known politicization that the RCMP has undergone in recent years, any person with a modicum of critical-thinking skills is bound to wonder if this is not yet another example of our national police force allowing itself to be used by its political masters, something undoubtedly unhealthy both for democracy and general trust in government.

In his column today, The Star's Tim Harper implies an element of manipulation:

Governments have long used fear to their advantage.

The former George W. Bush government in the U.S. used to change the colour of its “terror threat” if it was marching into headwinds on other matters. In this case, by abruptly changing gears last Friday and deciding to move on its long-neglected anti-terrorist legislation, Conservatives immediately faced charges of using the Boston Marathon bombings for political expediency.

Security expert Wesley Wark believes there was a degree of opportunism in the Conservative move to bring the anti-terror debate to the Commons floor Monday...

But no one Tuesday wanted to try to connect the other dots. It had become too perilous with two terror suspects in custody.

The Star's Heather Mallick is less opaque in her accusations, stating bluntly about the RCMP,

I do not trust them, just as I no longer trust Toronto police after the G20 debacle and do not trust a Harper majority government. Its calling card is to warn us non-stop of “Muslim terrorists,” which might not offend were this government neutral on religion.

Mallick reminds us of the terrible erosion of civil liberty the Conservative's anti-terror bill entails:

... “preventative detention” would mean that any Canadian could be arrested and held for three days on suspicion of terrorist involvement with no charge being laid.

“An investigative hearing” means that someone suspected of knowing about a terrorist plot could be imprisoned for up to a year if they refused to answer questions.

She points out that another provision of the bill is that it makes it a crime to leave Canada to commit an act of terrorism, and raises the specter of a false arrest abroad:

Do you trust Stephen Harper and the Conservative government and the RCMP to do the ethical, informed, reasonable thing in your case? Or do you expect them to follow a hard-right ideology, to overreact as the Americans do?

The answer for many of us to that question is sadly negative. And such a complete loss of faith and trust in one's government can't be healthy, either for individuals or for our democracy.

Union Betrayal At Nanticoke

Threatening to withhold strike pay, The United Steelworkers International is forcing the members at Nanticoke to vote on a contract demanding concessions to U.S. Steel. Surely this is an illustration of what Chis hedges has to say in his book, Death of the Liberal Class.

On FIPA, Justin Trudeau, and Chauncey Gardner

Last night while checking my Twitter feed, I noticed several people expressing their deep disappointment over the fact that Justin Trudeau led his Liberal Party to vote with the Harper regime against an NDP motion to inform China that it will not ratify the Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA). While much has been written about the pact, the chief objections seem to revolve around the following:

- it will severely circumscribe our ability to regulate our environment, since any such measures that lead to loss of corporate profit would result in compensation demands from the aggrieved businesses;

- lawsuits will take place in secret tribunals outside of Canada;

- the negotiations have been conducted in secret, completely devoid of transparency;

- as opposed to NAFTA, which can be cancelled with six months' notice, FIPA will have a lifespan of 31 years

- China will be able to circumscribe local preferences on suppliers and employment.

To be fair to Trudeau, the Liberals are on record as saying they oppose some of the provisions of the deal, but were not prepared to side with the NDP motion to definitively declare the deal dead, banking instead on the possibility of changing some of the treaty's terms.

Nonetheless, the reaction of disappointment toward Trudeau's vote got me thinking about his dearth of policy pronouncements and the fact that in the run-up to the leadership convention, so many were projecting their own hopes and interpretation onto the blank canvas that he touts as a strength, since he claims to want to talk to Canadians about their concerns and priorities. Indeed, all we know about where he stands comes from his announcements about concerns for the middle class, youth unemployment, and similar platitudes.

Which got me thinking about a book I read several years ago, later made into an outstanding film featuring the peerless Peter Sellers in his last performance. Entitled Being There, it told the tale of a simple man, Chauncey Gardener, a gardener who is forced out into the world upon the death of his employer. In some ways a savant, he knows nothing except the world of gardening, but is mistaken for a well-educated, affluent upper class man, and ultimately his 'counsel' is sought by the high and mighty of society, who infer deep meaning, never intended by the speaker, from his literal and simplistic observations.

Clearly, Justin Trudeau is no savant. But then, the movie was not so much about Chauncey than it was a sendup of the credulity and shallowness of the people around him, searching for meaning and wisdom where there was none.

Perhaps these two clips best demonstrate my point:

Finding The Light Amidst Despair

During my teaching days, in the aftermath of 9/11 a student came to see me to discuss her feelings of helplessness and despair in the face of such monumental evil. While I had no special wisdom to offer her, I did say that although I had been witness to some terrible world events in my lifetime, I had never lost complete hope for one particular reason: if evil truly prevailed in this world, we would have destroyed ourselves by now. The fact that we haven't attests to something that the truly vile and depraved amongst us never acknowledge or admit to themselves – the human capacity for goodness, selflessness, and resilience.

I reminded her of the literature we had studied that attests to those qualities. John Steinbeck, in his best-known novel, The Grapes of Wrath, explored the concept of Manself, his term for the human spirit, a spirit that may certainly suffer setbacks, whether through violence in its many forms, beaten strikes or economic injustice, but remains alive, even in defeat, as long as people continue taking the steps necessary to oppose oppression in its many forms:

... Fear the time when the bombs stop falling while the bombers live- for every bomb is proof that the spirit has not died. And fear the time when the strikes stop while the great owners live – for every little beaten strike is proof that the step is being taken.

And this you can know- fear the time when Manself will not suffer and die for a concept, for this one quality is the foundation of Manself, and this one quality is man, distinctive in the universe.

During the recent bombings in Boston, that spirit was very much in evidence. People, despite not knowing where or when the next bomb might go off, instead of fleeing to the safety of shelter, tended to those who had sustained such grievous injuries. Whether doctors, passersby or marathon watchers, they thought of others before themselves:

This is why, whether we are talking about evil on a large or small scale, whether we are talking about suffering that seems to arbitrarily visit us either collectively or individually, hope remains alive, reminding all of us that every one of these moments of grace point the way to something greater, something that some would call transcendent, or to paraphrase Steinbeck, distinctive in the animal kingdom.