In what has become almost a routine posting to my blog, the Toronto Star has revealed yet another violation of rights arising from last year's federally and provincially supported G20 Summit. An article entitled Police wrong to question man with crossbow near G20 fence, judge rules, a few quotes will be enough, I hope, to persuade readers to peruse the article:
“The law makes clear that an investigative detention of that kind gives rise to a right to counsel,” provincial court Justice David Fairgrieve said Wednesday.
The judge also agreed with defence criticisms of Toronto police for continually denying McCullough’s rights to counsel while he was held at the Eastern Ave. detention centre for G20 detainees.
Just a timely reminder to all of us before we cast our vote in the Ontario election to carefully consider which political leaders have told us an inquiry is not necessary into what was the biggest breach of Charter Rights in Canadian history. No amount of political posturing diminishing its significance can alter the truth.
Reflections, Observations, and Analyses Pertaining to the Canadian Political Scene
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Such An Eloquent Letter
I have several times made reference to the enjoyment we derive in subscribing to The Toronto Star, a progressive paper with an official agenda that includes issues of social justice. Like the journalists in their employ, The Star's letter-writers tend to express thoughtful and well-reasoned views, a refreshing contrast and antidote to the mindless screeds that use stereotyped labeling and vile ad hominems to try to bully their point across.
I was especially impressed by a letter that appeared in yesterday's edition on the issue of pensions, a polarizing topic if there ever was one. Because of the ephemeral nature of readers' letters on newspaper websites, I am taking the liberty of reproducing in its entirety one by Tom Legrady of Toronto :
Re: Meagre earnings can’t fund retirement, Letter July 15
Sandra Snyder, unable to salt away a retirement on her meagre earnings, objects to teachers salaries and pensions. I find it unacceptable that people have to struggle to live on subsistence government pensions, but blaming workers who have done well is not the solution.
The rich and powerful have always deflected anger on to scapegoats. Poor southerners hated blacks for not being worse off than they, especially after the end of slavery put an end to the inferiority inherent in property. European and Russian anger was redirected on to Jews.
Do not hate unionized workers for having a decent living. Instead wonder why non-unionized workers are kept in abject poverty. All of us, union and not, can thank unions and the CCF and NDP for Medicare, the Canada Pension Plan, Unemployment Insurance.
Labour campaigned from early in the 19th century for 16-hour days to be reduced to 10, and later eight, for weekends and for vacations. Do you think the owners extended those benefits out of generosity, because they felt they were too rich?
Their grandchildren certainly have no such compulsion to share their wealth, when they want to terminate union position and replace them with generous contracts to their industrialist buddies employing minimum wage labour.
Tom Legrady, Toronto
I was especially impressed by a letter that appeared in yesterday's edition on the issue of pensions, a polarizing topic if there ever was one. Because of the ephemeral nature of readers' letters on newspaper websites, I am taking the liberty of reproducing in its entirety one by Tom Legrady of Toronto :
Re: Meagre earnings can’t fund retirement, Letter July 15
Sandra Snyder, unable to salt away a retirement on her meagre earnings, objects to teachers salaries and pensions. I find it unacceptable that people have to struggle to live on subsistence government pensions, but blaming workers who have done well is not the solution.
The rich and powerful have always deflected anger on to scapegoats. Poor southerners hated blacks for not being worse off than they, especially after the end of slavery put an end to the inferiority inherent in property. European and Russian anger was redirected on to Jews.
Do not hate unionized workers for having a decent living. Instead wonder why non-unionized workers are kept in abject poverty. All of us, union and not, can thank unions and the CCF and NDP for Medicare, the Canada Pension Plan, Unemployment Insurance.
Labour campaigned from early in the 19th century for 16-hour days to be reduced to 10, and later eight, for weekends and for vacations. Do you think the owners extended those benefits out of generosity, because they felt they were too rich?
Their grandchildren certainly have no such compulsion to share their wealth, when they want to terminate union position and replace them with generous contracts to their industrialist buddies employing minimum wage labour.
Tom Legrady, Toronto
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
The Barbarians' Threat
Libraries have been a vital part of my life since I first learned to read. When I married and had children, my wife and I made sure to inculcate a love of reading in our children, and again, libraries were a vital part of that process. Even today, I will visit a library at least once a week to check out books, videos, etc.
For anyone who loves them and recognizes their immense community value, the threat of library closures is akin to waving the proverbial red flag in front of the bull. Therefore, the response to the barbarians who have breached the gates at Toronto City Hall is hardly surprising.
Yesterday, in an unseemly dispute with Canadian literary icon Margaret Atwood over the prospect of closing libraries, Doug Ford, the Toronto mayor's brother and councillor representing Etobicoke North, said,
“Tell her to go run in the next election and get democratically elected,” the Etobicoke councillor said, adding as an example that it “wouldn't bother” his constituents if the Northern Elms library branch at Kipling Ave. and Rexdale Blvd. were closed.
One should be aware that the branch singled out by Ford serves a rather poor part of the Toronto populace that has a high proportion of immigrants. It is perhaps not surprising that the forces of the extreme right, as they are wont to do, are targeting that segment in its search for 'new efficiencies'.
In today's Star, patrons of that particular branch respond passionately to Mr. Ford's assertion.
For anyone who loves them and recognizes their immense community value, the threat of library closures is akin to waving the proverbial red flag in front of the bull. Therefore, the response to the barbarians who have breached the gates at Toronto City Hall is hardly surprising.
Yesterday, in an unseemly dispute with Canadian literary icon Margaret Atwood over the prospect of closing libraries, Doug Ford, the Toronto mayor's brother and councillor representing Etobicoke North, said,
“Tell her to go run in the next election and get democratically elected,” the Etobicoke councillor said, adding as an example that it “wouldn't bother” his constituents if the Northern Elms library branch at Kipling Ave. and Rexdale Blvd. were closed.
One should be aware that the branch singled out by Ford serves a rather poor part of the Toronto populace that has a high proportion of immigrants. It is perhaps not surprising that the forces of the extreme right, as they are wont to do, are targeting that segment in its search for 'new efficiencies'.
In today's Star, patrons of that particular branch respond passionately to Mr. Ford's assertion.
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
The Cowardice Of Anonymous Online Commentary
Over the decades I have written many letters to the editor and articles that have appeared in both local and national publications; never once have I hesitated to use my complete name, as required by almost all publications, my logic being that I am not ashamed of anything I write for the public record.
Since the advent of online newspaper commentary, there has been a debate raging over whether people should be allowed to hide behind pseudonyms, the argument in defense of such practices being that anonymity ensures full and vigorous debate of a plethora of issues without fear of sanctions or reprisals.
I have never been in favour of anonymity or the use of pseudonyms because they frequently allow the cowardly to post vile and hateful comments with little restraint, the main reason I rarely even bother reading online remarks anymore.
Jack Layton's announcement of yesterday that he is facing a new cancer battle is the catalyst for this post. While the overwhelming majority of online comments have been positive, supportive, and sympathetic, a minority has issued forth with hate-filled attacks on the NDP leader, wishing him nothing but sickness and death because they disagree with his politics. I can't help but wonder how many of these cowards would have posted such a vile stream had they been required to identify themselves.
At a time when many newspapers are changing their policies governing online commentary, is is time for Canadian publications to follow suit.
Since the advent of online newspaper commentary, there has been a debate raging over whether people should be allowed to hide behind pseudonyms, the argument in defense of such practices being that anonymity ensures full and vigorous debate of a plethora of issues without fear of sanctions or reprisals.
I have never been in favour of anonymity or the use of pseudonyms because they frequently allow the cowardly to post vile and hateful comments with little restraint, the main reason I rarely even bother reading online remarks anymore.
Jack Layton's announcement of yesterday that he is facing a new cancer battle is the catalyst for this post. While the overwhelming majority of online comments have been positive, supportive, and sympathetic, a minority has issued forth with hate-filled attacks on the NDP leader, wishing him nothing but sickness and death because they disagree with his politics. I can't help but wonder how many of these cowards would have posted such a vile stream had they been required to identify themselves.
At a time when many newspapers are changing their policies governing online commentary, is is time for Canadian publications to follow suit.
Monday, July 25, 2011
How Useful Are Food Banks In The Longterm?
As a volunteer at one of the local foodbanks for the past few years, I have often felt ambivalent about their existence. While there is no question that they are heavily, even exhaustively used, they were never intended as a long-term solution to the problem of hunger in our society. And while I have met many people sincerely dedicated to feeding the poor, I can't help but wonder if there aren't better ways of addressing the problem, if we have the political will to do so, a big question given the current selfish emphasis by the right on the good of the individual over that of the collective.
Skimming over the Globe website, I came across an article written by Elaine Power entitled It's time to close Canada's food banks, which makes for some instructive reading.
Skimming over the Globe website, I came across an article written by Elaine Power entitled It's time to close Canada's food banks, which makes for some instructive reading.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Star Readers 'Weigh In' On Rob Ford's Performance
Although not a resident of Toronto, I always find it difficult not to pay attention to the goings-on in 'The Big Smoke,' as its citizens are fond of calling their city. Much has already been written by bloggers evaluating the disparity between the rhetoric and the truth of Ford's much-bruited 'gravy train,' but a series of letters in yesterday's Star under the heading of Where's the beef? which I have just gotten around to reading, are well worth perusing.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Stephen Harper: Pay No Attention To The Stats Can Man Behind The Curtain
The other day I wrote about the fact that statistics show serious crime in Canada to be at a 40-year-low. Despite this, of course, the Harper Government is marching headlong in its pursuit of measures to combat crime, including, of course, the building of super prisons that we neither need nor can afford.
In today's Globe, Jeffrey Simpson, in an incisive column entitled Tories judge evidence of falling rates inadmissible, explains why such statistics have no impact on our Conservative overlords. If you get a few moments, check it out.
In today's Globe, Jeffrey Simpson, in an incisive column entitled Tories judge evidence of falling rates inadmissible, explains why such statistics have no impact on our Conservative overlords. If you get a few moments, check it out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)