King Stephen's Fondest Dream

H/t Project Democracy

Walmart's Shameless Anti-Union Propaganda

This epitomizes why I don't shop at Walmart. A training film was released yesterday showing the shameless propaganda the corporate giant uses to discourage those entertaining the seditious thought of starting a union drive at one of their stores. Originally located on You Tube, the video has been taken down, but another site offers it. Since I cannot embed the video on my blog, you will have to click on this link to view it.

Here are a few of the highlights:

"The thing I remember most about the union is, that they took dues money out of my paycheck before I ever saw it... just like taxes."

"I don't think Walmart associates should have to have someone to speak for them. It's just not that kind of place."

"We also know that most union members shop in our stores and clubs nationwide. I talk to them all the time and I hear them complain about their jobs and their union representatives."

"I'll tell ya, every job has its ups and downs...and a union can't change that.”

"In today's world, your signature means a lot. To be honest, I don't like handing my signature over to anyone... much less to unions who seem to be spending so much time trying to hurt my company."

Walmart's low tactics are something to think about the next time you are tempted by their 'low' prices.

More On Government Muzzling

Yesterday, I posted a video of recently retired Fisheries and Oceans Canada biologist Steve Campana speaking about the sad state of morale within bureaucratic ranks. The Harper regime's obsession with control and secrecy means that government scientists are forbidden to speak about their research without going through a labyrinthine series of communications protocols that often still result in denial of permission to speak to 'outsiders,' i.e., the public.

Here is how one government scientist responded to the post, anonymously:

I speak as a government scientist who knows of what Dr. Campana speaks. The squeeze comes from a couple of directions - benign budgetary neglect and active silencing. The budgetary issues are shared by most other government departments:

- attrition of critical personnel as scientific staff are lost to the private sector or retirement and are rarely if ever replaced,

- the similar loss of administrative staff and the downloading of their jobs onto scientific and technical personnel (it is shameful how much time some of us spend doing travel requests and administration)

- loss of program funding which results in decreased opportunity for data collection or equipment purchases

- loss of critical infrastructure - technical library closures, loss of oceanographic vessels, etc...

- loss of travel budgets that have essentially cut many scientists out of the conference loop. This might seem to the outsider like a perk, and in some ways it is, however conferences provide more opportunities to begin important collaborations than any other way I know.

As for the communications issues, I think Dr. Campana summed it up perfectly. As employees, we are generally allowed to publish scientific journals (with some restrictions to more sensitive projects, I presume), but we are basically not allowed to ever speak with the media, even on the most benign of subjects. This has been brought about by the establishment of the Orwellian-named "Communication" branches within each department whose jobs seem to be the restriction of communication at all costs, and through the establishment of a hush-hush environment that is established from the top down. Also, local regional directors are more and more frequently hired outside of their areas of expertise, as if management is a thing in and of itself and knowledge of the department being managed is of secondary importance.

I could go on, but you probably get the point.

Meanwhile, yesterday on Power and Politics, Biologist Katie Gibbs, founder of Evidence for Democracy, addressed the issue with Power and Politics' Evan Solomon:


Finally, today's Star weighs in with a hard-hitting editorial on the issue, observing how this government repression has not gone unnoticed both domestically and internationally:

In the past couple of years the New York Times, Nature magazine, the Guardian and The Economist have all written critical articles pleading for our scientists to be set free.

Federal Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault is investigating complaints that federal scientists have been muzzled by the government.

A survey from Environics Research last year found that 91 per cent of government scientists feel they cannot share their expertise with the media without facing censure from their bosses.

Our democracy continues to wither; it will take collective concern and strong electoral action from the wider public to reverse this sad state of affairs.

A Recently Retired Government Scientist Speaks Out:

This is sad beyond words.

A recently retired Fisheries and Oceans Canada biologist says the muzzling of federal government scientists is worse than anyone can imagine.

Steve Campana, known for his expertise on everything from Great white sharks to porbeagles and Arctic trout, says the atmosphere working for the federal government is toxic.

"I am concerned about the bigger policy issues that are essentially leading to a death spiral for government science," he said in an exclusive interview.

"I see that is going to be a huge problem in the coming years. We are at the point where the vast majority of our senior scientists are in the process of leaving now disgusted as I am with the way things have gone, and I don't think there is any way for it to be recovered."

What's That Sound I Hear?

Lesser mortals might baldly accuse Stephen Harper of cowardice. Editorial cartoonists have a better way:


H/t The Toronto Star

A Tireless Voice

A tireless voice for Canada and all of its iconic values, Maude Barlow urges us not to lose heart.

Her reminders of the terrible things the Harper regime has done to undermine civil society through funding cuts and tax audit witch hunts is truly sobering, and we should all be outraged, but her words should also galvanize us to stand up, defend, and fight for everything that makes Canada the unique and enviable country it is.

Otherwise, the barbarians will have won.

Stephen Harper and The Canada Revenue Agency: The Unholy Alliance Continues

I have written many times about the unholy partnership between Stephen Harper and the Canada Revenue Agency that takes the form of an auditing witch hunt of those charities that in any way offer criticism of Dear Leader's policies. The latest news offers further proof that official avowals of impartiality in selecting who will be audited are absolute lies.

The laest story involves the actions of the much-reviled and detested former premier of Ontario, Mike Harris:

A fundraising letter written by Fraser Institute senior fellow and former premier Mike Harris criticizing the Ontario government highlights a double standard in the way the Canada Revenue Agency audits charities, critics charge.

The letter takes swipes at the province for lacking a “credible plan” to balance the provincial budget within two years, and goes on to criticize Ontario’s debt and the province’s unemployment rate.

Especially troubling are the Institute's assertions that it doesn't engage in political activities, and that the Harris letter is not political.

Says its president, Niels Veldhuis:

“It’s written by a long time senior fellow of the Fraser Institute, Mike Harris. All of the data in the letter is based on Fraser Institute research..."

Progressive charities that have fallen victim to CRA audits disagree:

“It’s definitely political,”’ says Tim Gray, executive director of Environmental Defence, referring to the Fraser Institute letter.

“The Fraser Institute is clearly doing public policy work in the political sphere,” says Gray, whose environmental group is being audited by the CRA — a probe that began in 2011.

“They (Fraser Institute) should be reporting that (to Canada Revenue) and there’s no reason they shouldn’t be audited based on their compliance with that 10 per cent (political activities rule),” Gray says.

Gray adds that if they’re not being audited, then that raises the question — why not?

Two brief highlights from Harris' letter underscore the political nature of the missive (bolded areas mine):

“Credit rating agencies have further downgraded the province’s credit rating, primarily because it’s very unlikely that this government will reverse course and enact a credible plan to balance the budget within the next two years.’’

“Ontario has experienced reckless overspending by government, ballooning public sector salaries, increased red tape and more union-friendly labour laws.”

Environmental Defence director Gray asks why the Fraser Institute is not being audited. The answer, sadly, is all too obvious for anyone willing to see the pattern, and to understand the deep contempt with which the Harper regime regards anyone with the temerity to challenge its agenda.

The October election cannot come soon enough.