What Is Democracy?

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

Growing disconnect between Canadians and Parliament, Column, May 2

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

The Harper Government's Legacy of Death

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Glimmer Of Principle

Laurie Hawn, Alberta

Brent Rathgeber, Alberta

Kevin Sorenson, Alberta

Mike Allen, New Brunswick

Joe Daniel, Ontario

Larry Miller, Ontario

Stephen Woodworth, Ontario

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

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

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

Are Canadians Experiencing Buyers' Remorse?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

15 He cannot buckle his distemper'd cause

16 Within the belt of rule.

ANGUS

Now does he feel

17 His secret murders sticking on his hands;

18 Now minutely revolts upbraid his faith-breach;

19 Those he commands move only in command,

20 Nothing in love. Now does he feel his title

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

22 Upon a dwarfish thief.

(Act 5, Scene 2)

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

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

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

An Anniversary Many Would Like To Forget

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

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

- streamlined environmental regulatory reviews

- the formal withdrawal from the Kyoto protocol

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

- the uncertainty over the future of the Experimental Lakes Area

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

- cutting of scientific research

- muzzling of federal scientists

- compromising the independence of Statistics Canada

- abdicating the federal role in setting national health care policy

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

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

Tim Harper concludes with the following observation:

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

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

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

On Harper's Fiscal Ineptitude

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

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