Reflections, Observations, and Analyses Pertaining to the Canadian Political Scene
Saturday, August 25, 2012
One May Smile And Smile And Be A Villain
The above title, a quotation from my favorite Shakespearean play, Hamlet, is, I suppose, something of a truism in today's age of cynical politics. Yet it was the line that immediately occurred to me as I read this story from today's Star that reveals Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty's refusal to testify before the committee looking into the Ornge air ambulance scandal, a scandal that draws a number of bureaucrats, party functionaries, and government ministers into its web of deceit and self-aggrandizement.
Despite McGuinty's public posturing about wanting to get to the full truth about this tale of personal greed and government ineptitude, his refusal to testify raises even more questions.
For example did he, as he claims, meet with Ornge head Dr. Chris Mazza only once, or was it perhaps three times, as the latter claims?
If McGuinty has his way, we will never know the answer to this and many other troubling aspects of this sad tale.
Friday, August 24, 2012
Irish President Rips Into American Extreme Right
You can read the accompanying story here.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
CETA - Part Four - Trust No One
Ultimately, the critical thinker has an obligation to educate him/herself. To simply accept government 'assurances' that all is well is to surrender the responsibilities inherent in being a citizen in a democracy.
HARPER SAYS: CETA and free trade deals do not allow foreign investors and foreign companies to challenge Canadian laws and regulations.
WE SAY: NAFTA’s chapter 11 protections for foreign investors have allowed corporations to challenge dozens of Canadian laws and regulations simply because they interfere with profits. Canada is the sixth most sued country under the investor-state dispute settlement regime, which exists in around 3,000 bilateral investment treaties globally. Those corporate lawsuits have attacked environmental assessments, the failure to get approval for unpopular or environmentally dangerous quarries and dumpsites, measures to reduce the use of pesticides, research and development payments from offshore oil and gas production, the way hunting and fishing licences are distributed, and local content quotas in Ontario’s Green Energy Act. Canada has had to pay out or is on the hook for over $200 million in settlements or losses to investors under these extreme investor rights which countries such as Australia are now avoiding in their trade deals.
HARPER SAYS: CETA has been the most open and transparent trade negotiation in Canadian history.
WE SAY: So why did it take the government three years to try to explain the agreement to the public? The fact that the provinces are negotiating a trade deal for the first time says nothing about transparency since the provinces are being even more tight-lipped than the Harper government. There have been and will not be any opportunities to see or modify CETA before it is signed, perhaps as early as this winter. Once it is signed, the Harper government will block attempts to modify it in parliament. This is the antithesis of transparency. If CETA and agreements like it are supposed to be 21st century or “next-generation” free trade deals, they should be negotiated in 21st century ways — openly, transparently, and with broad public input.
Saturday, August 18, 2012
CETA - Trust No One - Part Three
Here are two more CETA myths being perpetuated by the Harper regime, according to the Council of Canadians, that we should be aware of:
HARPER SAYS: Free trade deals like CETA do not prevent governments from regulating standards that protect the public, including in the areas of the environment, labour, health care and safety.
WE SAY: CETA and free trade deals like it are designed specifically to limit opportunities for governments to introduce new rules and regulations that have an impact on trade and investment flows, even if the intention of the rules was to protect the environment or public health. The United States has just lost three World Trade Organization disputes involving meat labelling, a ban on flavoured cigarettes to discourage smoking among children, and voluntary measures designed to protect dolphins from tuna fishing. CETA and other trade deals include language on avoiding new regulation as the best and least trade-distorting option. CETA will provide Canada and the EU with tools to frustrate or delay the introduction of new standards. It will give corporations the right to sue governments in the event that regulations interfere with their profits.
HARPER SAYS: Canada’s FTAs do not force governments to privatize, contract out or deregulate water-related services.
WE SAY: European member states are so concerned about how CETA might affect their ability to deliver public water services that they have proposed to exclude drinking water from their side of the bargain. With only one exception in Yukon, federal government, provinces and territories have not asked for the same protection for water services, which leaves Canada’s public water systems vulnerable to claims by the EU or its large private water companies that their investment opportunities are being undermined either by local water monopolies, or, where there is already some level of privatization, by new water use or other standards.
Free trade? Everything about the CETA deal carries a very heavy cost.
Police Surveillance
Yesterday, Dr. Dawg provided a link to a story in The National Post written by Karen Selick, who discusses how it is becoming increasing the illegal practice of the authorities to prevent citizens from videotaping their actions and confiscating their equipment when these orders are ignored, some even being charged with obstructing police.
As Selick, the litigation director for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, points out, There is no law in Canada that prohibits people from openly photographing police.
Last week, Corey Maygard of Edmonton fell afoul of the constabulary there when he refused to stop filming an arrest they were making. He asserted his right to be present with his phone camera, but his knowledge of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms earned him a charge of police obstruction and the confiscation of his phone. The charges were withdrawn last Monday, and his phone was returned yesterday, after an initial song-and-dance about it being lost.
There are those who say we should never refuse a police officer's orders. I obviously do not share that sentiment because in my view, such blind compliance is simply one of the steps on the descent into tyranny.