Wading Back Into The Fray

Having spent yesterday recovering from the temporal vicissitudes imposed by trans-Atlantic travel, my first post back will be brief and on one of my favorite subjects, The Man Who Would Be King, a.k.a. Dear Leader, the ersatz head of a country whose government, thanks to his contemptuous and heavy-hand ministrations, is at least as democratically dysfunctional as the one I just visited, Italy.

While away, I read about his office's attempt to ban CTV cameraman Dave Ellis from boarding Herr Harper's plane leaving for Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, for daring to try to pose a question to the Exulted One in New York, thereby running the risk of puncturing his carefully cultivated, orchestrated and, of course, completely false public persona while out of the country.

As usual, Toronto Star readers confront the issue with their usual perspicacity:

Re: When shot at, messenger fights back, Oct. 3

It is laughable that Prime Minister Stephen Harper thinks he can “set the rules” for engagement with the press, and pitiful that we’re letting him get away with it. Mr. Harper is our employee. He is bound to answer any question we ask, at any time or place, about anything at all.

He is not in charge. He is in service. And as a civil servant, his conduct is open to constant scrutiny.

When we can’t be in Ottawa, the investigators of the press are our stand-ins. And they may ask anything they please, on our behalf.

Mr. Harper and his claque have become overweeningly arrogant, imperial and dismissive of the citizenry and our press. We are his employers. He doesn’t set the rules of engagement. We do.

Here’s to this paper, and rest of our ink-stained wretches, for working to puncture Mr. Harper’s self-regard and hold his feet to the fire.

Peter Ferguson, Kimberley


Tim Harper’s report that Stephen Harper wanted to ban the sole TV cameraman from boarding the prime minister’s plane (more appropriately, our plane) for the trip to Asia, because he asked him a question, is appalling but not surprising.
Stephen Harper has a long history of threatening to sue journalists, avoids unscripted contact with Canadians at all costs and spends millions of tax dollars on Action Plan propaganda.

During a recent trip to U.K., I was amazed and impressed to see that David Cameron has the guts and ability to vigorously discuss and debate his policy, on TV, with an interviewer who was asking intelligent and aggressive questions.

This was not the “conversations with a deity” that pass for interviews with Stephen Harper.

Geoffrey Kemp, Mississauga

Blogging Hiatus

We are off for a sojourn in the Venice area. Since I will only be bringing my Blackberry Playbook with me, a pain to write with thanks to its electronic keyboard, I suspect I will be doing little or no blogging during that time.

See you in October!

Police Surveillance

For those interested in the best way of ensuring police behave themselves, the following is a timely reminder of what our rights are when filming them:



For more information, check out Canadian Privacy Law Blog.

More Thoughts On Muzzled Scientists

Last week I wrote a post on David Schindler, the retired scientist who wrote about the pernicious effects of the Harper regime's muzzling of government scientists.

These letters from today's Star offer readers' thoughts on the issue:

Re: Remove the muzzle from government scientists, Opinion Sept. 20

In this incisive article Dr. David Schindler has essentially said to our governments: “J’accuse.” Is there any doubt that our federal government is actively encouraging the dumbing down of Canada by following the principle that the less the people know, the better for the government?

To paraphrase the famous two rules about moms: Rule 1. Your government is always right. Rule 2. In case your government is wrong, refer to Rule 1.

Jaggi Tandan, Hamilton

Scientists, remove your own muzzles. Find the courage to speak freely; act together. Stephen Harper can’t fire you all. He would be an international laughing stock.

Terry Watkinson, Toronto

David Schindler is correct that science is being compromised because of political and ideological opposition. Those consequences do not apply to environmental issues alone, but also to scientific facts taught in our schools in regard to evolution.

I agree with the National Centre of Science Education (Scientific American, Oct. 23), which states: “Evolution is one of the most important ideas in human intellectual history and students have the right to learn it. The common ancestry of living things and the mechanism of inheritance explain why the things are the way they are. Students and adults deprived of this knowledge are scientifically illiterate and ill prepared in a global, competitive world.”

Our world is in fatal competition among the various religions. There should be a few restrictions. Those who are intolerent creationists or those who display a specific religious garb should not teach science in our schools because of their own distorted influence on our small innocent children in Canada.

Kurt Heinze, Scarborough

On The Minimum Wage And Tim Hudak's 'Bold' Plan For Ontario

Continuing on with the theme of the minimum wage, which groups in both Canada and the United States are demonstrating to significantly increase, The Star had a good letter in yeterday's edition that points out the hidden costs of having so many working for poverty-level remuneration.

Fight poverty, boost wages, Editorial Sept. 18

The Star underscored a bitter truth with its editorial call for a minimum wage increase: “a lot of people are working hard to remain in poverty,” due to a minimum wage that’s been frozen for over three years. And, as you note, a great many people are affected: more than half a million minimum-wage Ontario workers directly, along with their family members.

It’s important to realize that we all pay the price of poverty-level wages, in many ways. More than 400,000 Ontarians must rely on foodbanks and emergency meal programs to ward off hunger. Many of them are working, but don’t earn to pay rent and meet other basic needs, including food. A minimum-wage increase would enable more of them to buy their own food — and would ease the burden on foodbank volunteers and donors. It would also raise demand at local food stores and other local businesses, thus boosting the local economy.

A fair minimum wage is a basic issue of justice. It’s also a key element of Ontario’s poverty reduction strategy, which has shown disappointing results in recent years. The minimum wage should be set at a level that ensures that work is truly a pathway out of poverty.

If Premier Kathleen Wynne is sincere about her professed desire to be the “social justice Premier,” she needs to affirm her commitment to real progress against poverty and quickly implement a substantial increase in the minimum wage.

Murray MacAdam, Social Justice & Advocacy Consultant, Anglican Diocese of Toronto

On a related note, this video appeared on Alison's blog at Creekside, which I am taking the liberty of cribbing. Although 19 minutes in length, it is well-worth viewing, exposing as it does the kind of hollow and destructive policy advocated by Ontario Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak as he promises to bring in 'right-to-work' (i.e., union-busting) legislation should he become the next premier.

As the film shows, young Tim's promises about the prosperity that will ensue if we just get rid of 'those greedy unions that are hobbling the economy' have allure only if we choose to be willfully ignorant of the fact that such measures will lead to lower wages and even more precarious employment than currently exists:

Police Intimidation Tactics: The Knock At The Door And The Telephone Call

The other day I wrote a post based on Thomas Walkom's column detailing the intimidation tactics being utilized by the Ontario Province Police againt those in the Kincardine area opposed to their land being the site of a proposed nuclear waste dump. Many of those planning to make their opposition known at hearings into the matter received knocks on the door from the police asking if they were planning any demonstrations. No groups in favour of the site received such visits.

In today's edition of The Star, Thomas Walkom reports that the OPP is now exporting its tactics to the United States, but instead of the knock on the door they are using the jarring ring of the telephone:

Toledo, Ohio resident Michael Leonardi says he received a phone call at home from the OPP’s provincial liaison team asking about his scheduled appearance before the federal review panel looking into plans to bury low- and intermediate-level radioactive waste along Ontario’s Lake Huron shoreline.

In particular, police wanted to know if any protests were planned, he said.

“The officer was very nice,” Leonardi, a member of the Toledo Coalition for Safe Energy, told me Sunday. “He said there was some possibility that organizations like Greenpeace might demonstrate and that police didn’t want any fatalities.”

And yes, Leonardi insists that the word used was “fatalities.”

As Walkom notes, it is not unusual for the police to be proactive when large groups are planning demonstrations, working with them to coordinate traffic stoppages, etc. What appears to be unprecedented is their contact of people merely planning to attend a federal hearing to express their opposition.

Says American Michael Leonardi:

... he has testified at Ontario nuclear hearings before. But this is the first time he’s been vetted by police ahead of time.

“I was just kind of surprised,” he said. “The guy was nice enough on his own. But I couldn’t help but think the call was meant to deter me from testifying.”

But of course, that is surely a mistaken impression. Our police trying to interfere with our Charter Rights? That could never happen in this country. Of course not.

The Home Of Free Speech?

Guess it depends on what you have to say:

A journalism professor at the University of Kansas was placed on indefinite administrative leave Friday after he Tweeted about the Navy Yard shooting, saying “blood is on the hands of the #NRA. Next time, let it be YOUR sons and daughters.”

This situation is a case-book illustration of Chris Hedges' thesis in Death of the Liberal Class.