How The Harper Omnibus Bill Disrupted My Sunday

Yesterday started out pleasantly enough. After enjoying my wife's home-made cereal, a piece of toast and some coffee, I decided the weather was so fine that it warranted my going out on my bicycle to be among nature's delights. Returning home after about an hour-and-a-half, in an unusually serene frame of mind, it seemed like a grand idea to have another cup of coffee, watch the birds at my feeder and bird bath, and read the Insight Section of The Star.

It was that last decision that ended my hard-won equanimity, as I read an analysis of the Harper budget omnibus bill. Although I was previously aware of many of the bill's major contents, the stealthy scope of this grossly undemocratic legislation, and the palpable contempt for the Canadian people implicit in it was, to say the least, unsettling. Indeed, after I read the article, relaxing amidst the sylvan setting of my backyard while Rome burns seemed a bit of a guilty indulgence.

The following aspects of the bill were highlighted in the article:

• Cuts 19,200 government jobs amid $5.2 billion in spending reductions.

• Eliminates a wide range of agencies and organizations, from social policy-oriented agencies like the National Council of Welfare and National Aboriginal Health Organization to the watchdog responsible for monitoring the activities of Canada’s spy agency, CSIS.

• Sweeping changes to immigration law that will allow the government to delete the applications of some 280,000 people who asked to come here as federal skilled workers before 2008. Application fees will be returned. The legislation also refocuses immigration policy on economic needs with measures intended to attract younger, better-qualified workers to directly meet labour market demands.

• Changes the Temporary Foreign Worker Program so that foreign employees can be paid up to 15 per cent less than the prevailing local wage under certain circumstances.

• Alters the administration of parks, meaning shorter seasons and fewer services at parks and historic sites.

• Cuts spending on culture, foreign aid and future health-care transfers to the provinces.

Like the cowards that they are, the Harper regime has refused all opposition demands for a legislative breakdown of the omnibus bill that would allow full and public debate on each of its elements.

Like all evil that thrives, the Conservatives know that it is only through the shroud of secrecy and darkness that their vile efforts to reshape Canada can succeed.

And like the true betrayers of democracy's ideals that they are, Harper Inc. is doing everything within its power to keep the people who will be most affected by this reshaping, i.e., the majority of Canadians, as ignorant of its plans as possible.

If you want to know more, including some of the details of the bill's scrapping of environmental regulations that has prompted Greenpeace Canada spokesperson Keith Stewart to describe it as an attack on nature and democracy. It’s being done, basically, on behalf of the big oil companies, I hope you will check out the article.

New Disgrace For Both Harper And Kent

Environment minister’s office urged bureaucrats to blame media for recycling controversy

Nope, no surprises here in the depth of contempt both the P.M. And Peter Kent feel for the people they 'serve'.

The Purpose of Education

As a retired teacher who spent 30 years in the classroom, I long ago recognized how crucial the development of critical-thinking skills is to a good education. During my career, the cultivation of these skills was really an intrinsic part of literary exploration as we questioned, speculated upon and analysed the motivations of characters from some of the world's great works, whether it was Shakespeare's Hamlet or Macbeth, or Coleridge's protagonist in The Rime of the Ancient Mariner, to name but three.

However, for a number of years now, such pursuits have often become regarded as rather 'soft', not what is needed in a society where 'hard-skills' are increasingly in demand. Of course, I and countless others would argue that critical thinking is one of the most important hard skills that are crucial to any thriving society, imparting as they do the ability to think widely, deeply and nimbly, facilitating adaptation not only in the workplace but also in the demands of daily life.

I have many concerns for the future, not the least of which is that as a society we no longer recognize the central importance of these thinking skills, making us increasingly prone to easy manipulation by those who do not have our best interests at heart. It is for this reason that I found an article on Alternet.org of particular interest; although written for an American audience, it explores education from two perspectives, the conservative and the liberal, and while its bias is clearly in favour of the latter, it offers some real food for thought as we confront, in our own country, almost daily assaults on logic and reason as the Harper regime perfects its campaign of demagoguery and denigration against all who disagree with it.

Entitled How the Conservative Worldview Quashes Critical Thinking -- and What That Means For Our Kids' Future, you can read the article here.

He's Just Another Politician

Despite the ongoing and very critical coverage of Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair and his myriad leadership failures at the 2010 G20 Summit in Toronto, the truculent top cop refuses to both apologize and resign.

The most withering criticism I can think to make is that Blair is just another politician.

You know, a politician in the mode of incompetent and unethical public 'servants' like Bev Oda, Peter MacKay, Christian Paradis, and Tony Clement, all 'Honourable' in parliamentary title only, all betrayers of the public trust in many ways, none possessesing the personal integrity necessary to take responsibility for their misdeeds and resign.

Chief Blair has some wonderful models to inspire him.

'Dutch Disease' Confirmed By Harper-Funded Study

Despite the ongoing Harper-led campaign of vilification against Thomas Mulcair for his comments about the Alberta tarsands and Dutch disease, a Harper-funded study confirms the truth of his assertion.

As reported in The Globe, Industry Canada paid $25,000 to three academics to produce the lengthy study, which is about to be published in a prestigious journal, Resource and Energy Economics. The study concludes that between 33 and 39 per cent of the manufacturing employment loss that was due to exchange rate developments between 2002 and 2007 is related to the Dutch Disease phenomenon.

Despite that inconvenient finding, don't expect the character attacks on Mulcair to abate. If past practices are any indication, they will probably be taken to new levels as the party of national division, the Conservatives, seek to drown out rational debate with hysterical name-calling and finger-pointing, the chief weapons in their childish arsenal.

Christopher Hume on the G20

With a broad range of targets in his column today, including Dalton McGuinty, Harper, Tony Clement and Julian Fantino as additional architects of the 20120 G20 debacle in Toronto, the Star's Christopher joins in the chorus of those calling for the resignation of Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair. Of course, he is under no illusion that this will happen, as he tartly observes,

Perhaps Canadians can take solace in the fact that Harper, Clement, Blair, Fantino, McGuinty and the rest of this ghastly crew must recognize the full extent of their failure, however silently. They’re not about to admit anything, of course, that would require integrity and a degree of courage none possesses.

Amen, brother.

Deny, Deny. Deny

In the strange parallel world inhabited by Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, that seems to be the rule governing administrative oversight. When confronted with an authoritative and damning report on the behaviour of your officers, both frontline and senior, attempt to deal with its implications by refusing to apologize for the abrogation of Charter rights that took place under your command, defiantly assert that the rights of citizens were protected that weekend, maintain that 'most police carried out their duties in a professional manner,' and, when really pushed, admit that there are things that “could have been done better”

The apparent inviolable rule of this parallel world is to never, under any circumstances, accept personal responsibility for what happened under your command.

Fortunately, to set things right, both worlds have a Toronto Star which, in today's hard-hitting editorial, suggests that if Blair continues inhabiting that strange world where DENY, DENY, DENY is the ruling ethos, he should step down.

Senior Toronto Officers Facing Charges

The Star reports the following:

About five high-ranking Toronto police officers were informed last week they will face misconduct charges for their actions during the G20 summit, the Star has learned.

The CBC is reporting 28 front line officers have been charged with misconduct — including unlawful arrest and excessive force.

Regarding the G20 police abuse of Charter rights, the still-truculent Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair yesterday:

“Generally, I think the rights of our citizens were protected that weekend,” Blair said, except, he added, “in individual circumstances.”

“I am quite prepared to hold people accountable,” he said. “If there is misconduct, we’ll deal with that.”

Unfortunately, he is still excluding himself from culpability in that misconduct.

Accentuating The Positive

Perhaps he is a student of Norman Vincent Peale. Perhaps he believes that when you are handed lemons, you make lemonade. Perhaps he prefers to see the glass as half-full, not half-empty. Or perhaps he is just a politician intent on covering his professional rear end.

Whatever he is, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair is NOT going to accept the responsibility he bears for the policing and Charter Rights disaster that Toronto became in June of 2010 under his command during the G20 Summit.

Chief Blair's immediate public reaction to the excoriating report from The Office of the Independent Police Review Director was to comment that the report observes that 'most police carried out their duties in a professional manner.' When asked by CTV reporter Colin DeMelo whether he would consider resigning, the Chief looked at him and curtly replied, "No."

In any event, today's Star has extensive coverage of the report and a recap of the myriad wrongdoings of the constabulary under Blair. You can access that coverage here.

One final observation from me: Whether evaluating our federal or provincial politicians or police chiefs, much can be inferred about their character when they put their own careers above both personal integrity and the public good. We see it all the time, but just because it has become the norm hardly justifies their choice of expediency over principle.

Stating The Obvious

While this report from The Office of the Independent Police Review may afford some satisfaction for confirming the obvious, the fact that there were no consequences to the Toronto police or their chief, Bill Blair, for being key parts of this orchestrated violation of our Charter Rights renders it pretty much meaningless.

Death By Download?

Although a cliche, it is nonetheless true that knowledge is power, which probably explains why Canada is currently under the yoke of the most secretive and undemocratic federal government it has ever known.

The latest restriction on access to information is reflected in the Harper termination of the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy, a move which Tim Harper, in his Star column today, attributes to Conservative political ideology.

The group never strayed from its mandate, which was to study both the economic side and the environmental side of climate change, but never one at the exclusion of another. Apparently, however, as the Harper regime eliminates a variety of environmental regulations to fulfill its commitment to turn over the country wholly to the free enterprise 'masters of the universe', the Rountable's reports proved to be too popular a source of information for interested citizens.

As Tim Harper reports, Twin reports entitled Achieving 2050 were downloaded 51,605 times. A report on water sustainability was downloaded 33,565 times, another one entitled Climate Prosperity was downloaded 25,592 times and was linked from national and international media websites.

The NRTEE website gets more than 500,000 hits each year.

It has been said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Coupled with all of the other measures implemented by this regime to limit access to information, it is a safe bet to say that the current Prime Minister agrees.

Mulcair's Dutch Disease Comments: A More Rational Assessment

Despite the near-hysterical reaction of certain CBC broadcasters to the comments made last week by Thomas Mulcair about how tarsands developments are inflating the value of the Canadian dollar, thereby weakening our manufacturing sector, there are those who are able to more objectively assess his comments. One of them is Lawrence Martin.

In his column today entitled Ottawa’s industrial policy divides Canada against itself, Martin observes that we made progress in the decades before 2000 in moving away from an economy based on resource extraction. Using figures from Jim Stanford's research, he reveals that well over half of Canada’s exports consisted of an increasingly sophisticated portfolio of value-added products in areas such as automotive assembly, telecommunications, aerospace technology and more.

However, as of July 2011, unprocessed and semi-processed resource exports accounted for two-thirds of Canada’s total exports, the highest in decades,” Mr. Stanford wrote. “Compare that to 1999, when finished goods made up almost 60 per cent of our exports.”

So while the Conservatives and their apologists at the CBC (aka Peter Mansbridge and Rex Murphy) can wax apoplectic about the 'divisiveness' of this national leader's comments, Lawrence Martin ends his piece thus:

But let the debate roar on. The country needs a new industrial strategy, one based on more than corporate tax cuts, free-trade agreements and rampant resource exploitation.

What Do Bumper Stickers Reveal About Us? Part 1

Although I have never affixed a sticker to my car bumper, I am fascinated by those who do. When I was young, it was very common to see bumpers proudly proclaiming travel to lands both near and far, I Drove The Alcan Highway and Rushmore Aerial Tramway being just two examples. Then, over time there was a movement toward signs that raised awareness for causes or beliefs, such as Think Pink (breast cancer) and Honk If You Love Jesus (evangelical promotion)

However, the sticker that most intrigues and disquiets me is one I see with some regularity: If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free To Stand In Front of Them.

I saw it again just the other day, and my immediate desire, not acted upon, was to approach the driver to ask how he interpreted it. The first part may seem clear enough, the expectation that we will support the troops, but exactly what does supporting our troops mean in the minds of those who purvey this sticker?

Is it the equivalent of the tired absolutist phrase, America, Love It Or Leave It? If so, it is demanding that all citizens adopt an unquestioning, unthinking, uncritical acceptance of all things military including, one would have to assume, actions and policies that may violate personal values and norms, for example the euphemistic collateral damage that sometimes occurs in battle and is usually explained away by government and military command as 'a regrettable but unintentional event.'

Broadening the consideration, does a failure to support the troops include asking whether the loss of young soldiers' lives in a place like Afghanistan is worth it? Indeed, does a healthy debate about such matters constitute a betrayal of the sacrifice that they have made? That certainly seemed to be the mentality that earned Jack Layton the sobriquet 'Taliban Jack' for questioning the Harper regime about its military strategy in Afghanistan a few years back.

Moving to the second part of the sticker, Feel Free To Stand In Front Of Them, I assume, although I stand to be corrected, that we are being told raising any kinds of questions about the military is tantamount to treason and therefore warrants execution.

You perhaps begin to see that there are wider implications to this mentality, which I will address in Part 2 of this post.

Make That A Soya Burger For Me

If the Harper regime has its way, a rise in cholesterol levels may be the least of your worries when you make that next trip to Macdonalds.

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.