A Shield of Secrecy Protecting Toronto G20 Police Still Exists

Although two years overdue, the abuses of Charter Rights and police brutality that occurred in Toronto during the June 2010 G20 Summit are finally being recognized for what they were; this can't help but be a source of satisfaction to many. The comprehensive report by the Office of the Independent Police Review Director has at least started us down the road to long-overdue justice. However, not all is yet well.

The report's apparently comprehensive nature stands in sharp contrast to the tactics of the never-say-sorry Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, who has consistently temporized and qualified his comments to the point that were he the only source of information about the shameful and criminal acts committed by Toronto's finest, one would believe that an exemplary job had been done by all. However, it seems he is not the only one concealing the truth from the public.

A Star exclusive reports today that a G20 senior commander, Toronto police Insp. Gary Meissner, is facing disciplinary action for ordering the early-morning raid and unlawful mass arrests at the University of Toronto, an event that many will recall as a stark reminder of the fragility of our Charter rights.

Based on deductions befitting Inspector Gadget, Meissner concluded that a group of 100 people, mainly students from Quebec being billeted at a U of T gym, was shielding some of the black bloc anarchists who had wrought the deplorable property destruction the previous day, destruction that for some strange reason the police chose not to stop. Without a proper warrant, the police, under Meissner's command, swooped in with tasers pointed and rubber bullets at the ready, proceeding to shackle all of the arrested. Eventually, charges were dropped.

Most disturbing is that this information about Meissner was withheld from the public in the OIPRD report, and The Star was able to obtain the information only from one of the arrested people who complained to the arm's length agency.

It would seem that the public's right to know is yet another of our cherished freedoms that is more illusion than reality.

Thomas Walkom Opines on E.I. Changes

To this Conservative government, anything that might interfere with the mythical free market — and particularly with the market’s downward pressure on wages — is anathema.

The above is just a brief excerpt from Thomas Walkom's column in today's Star, additional food for thought as I continue trying to critically assess these recent changes to Employment Insurance rules.

The Butler Did It!

This report kind of reminds me of an old spoof on small-town newspapers I once saw, with the headline "Two Local Women Missing in Japan" with almost the entire front page taken up with the story. In a small space at the bottom, this headline: Massive Earthquake Kills Thousands in Japan".

Canada For Sale

At least that's all I can conclude given that the ineffectual Investment Canada Act is about to become completely impotent thanks to changes announced today; in a short time, the government will not even bother reviewing foreign investments in or purchases of Canadian companies worth less than $1 billion.

National borders? Economic sovereignty? Closures of branch plants? Completely irrelevant in the new Canada being formed by Harper Inc.

A Good Environment For Mushrooms, Not Democracy

Government policy conducted in dark secrecy, as I suggested in my last post, is difficult for the critical thinker to evaluate; that task is made even more arduous when it is hidden within an omnibus bill, as is the case with the reforms to Employment Insurance eligibility.

However, one piece of information has emerged that perhaps makes the job a little easier. The CBC's Allison Crawford reports that a new Social Security Tribunal will replace about 1,000 part-time members of the Employment Insurance Board of Referees and 32 umpires, and that same tribunal will also hear appeals from Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security claimants.

Under the current system, most appeals on denials of benefits are heard within 30 days. Under the new Tribunal, to be in place next year, it is difficult to see how complaints will be dealt with expeditiously, since it will consist of only 74 members, half of whom will hear the E.I complaints.

University of Ottawa law professor Lucie Lamarche says the new measure, which comes on page 196 of the more than 400-page budget implementation bill, is "well-hidden," and she fears that under the new system, applicants will have to hire lawyers. She says it appears that under the legislation, people will have to make more technical, legal arguments.

So, a little more information, ferreted out by diligent journalists and citizens, has perhaps helped in my quest to critically assess the 'new and improved' E.I. program.

What is Truth?

An age-old question without a firm answer, it is one I find myself regularly pondering as I continue striving toward an ideal I know I'll never attain, that of being a consummate critical thinker. Bombarded by information as we are, it is often difficult to separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff and arrive at satisfactory conclusions. And of course, there is always one's own biases to contend with as major filters of that information.

Take, for example, my deep antipathy toward the Harper Conservatives. So used to their tactics of denigration, disparagement, denial and deception am I that part of me strongly believes truth in any form is alien to them, that their actions are driven not by any concern for us as a nation, but only as the subjects of a grand neo-conservative experiment.

But to interpret everything they do according to that restrictive framework is also to deny true critical thinking and is simply to be as reactionary as the right-wing.

And so, in the spirit of honest inquiry, I seek to make an honest assessment of the changes to Employment Insurance announced yesterday by Human Resources Minister Diane Finley. Is it, as Star columnist Tim Harper suggests, a reform that curiously dovetails "with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation view that a bunch of lazy layabouts are milking the system and forcing more ambitious offshore workers to do the work they won’t do" ?

Or is it "all about matching Canadians hungry for work with employers hungry for employing Canadians instead of foreign workers," as the government insists?

Another question: what commitment does Ottawa have to improving and expanding access to retraining programs for those seeking to upgrade their skills? And how do the E.I. changes affect them?

Like all policy conducted in secrecy instead of collaboratively with the public, this legislation invites the worst of interpretations, whether or not those interpretations are wholly warranted. Such is the price to be a paid by a regime committed to restricting the flow of information and treating those it 'serves' with palpable contempt.

That kind of philosophy of government certainly doesn't make it easier to be a critical thinker these days.

Just a Coincidence?

Surely there can be no other explanation for the fact that at the same time that Human Resources Minister Diane Finley has announced new rules for those claiming E.I. benefits, her department has cut off the flow of some key employment data that the public has a right to.

Now being withheld from public scrutiny is information showing the total dollar amount of benefits paid to each province and the average weekly payments by province. As reported by the CBC, the official explanation involves some inconsistencies in the Human Resources raw data that were discovered over a year ago, but, strangely enough, inconsistencies that did not prevent Statistics Canada from doing its usual job of aggregating data over the past year. However, as of May, that data has been cut off by the Harper government.

One can only hope that these 'inconsistencies in data' are resolved soon, lest uncharitable thoughts should emerge to undermine this government's 'credibility'.