More On Ulmar Zameer

H/t Graeme MacKay 

Yesterday's post highlighted the rush to judgement many people embraced when Ulmar Zameer was charged with murdering a police officer. People like Doug Ford, John Tory and Patrick Brown condemned the fact that he was granted bail. A publication ban prevented the reasons for the bail from being published, but anyone could have gone down to court to find out why bail was granted. Justice Malloy had declared the evidence very weak, and hence the bail.

But populism has its own reasons, and it is generally more politically profitable to stoke the fires of rage and bitterness than to be reasonable. Witness PP's meteoric rise in the federal polls.

Nonetheless, public opinion is variable, and there were many, including me, very much relieved that Zameer has finally achieved justice, often a rare occurrence in this fractured world. Of those who stoked the fires, many are demanding accountability.

Congratulations to Justice Anne Malloy. She analyzed the evidence in the complex Umar Zameer case thoroughly. She instructed the jury in a clear and concise manner. Through her efforts, the jury came to logical conclusions and acquitted. To top it off, Justice Malloy had the good grace to apologize to Zameer and his family on behalf of the public for the ordeal through which they had been put. She demonstrated a fine example of how justice should be administered. Truly a class act.

Bill Howes, Toronto

My faith in the Canadian justice system has been restored. Notwithstanding the deep hurt suffered by the family of Toronto police Const. Jeffrey Northrup, it is clear this was none other than a tragic accident. What we need to now see is an apology from those politicians — Premier Doug Ford, and former Toronto mayor John Tory and Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown — who so quickly and publicly assumed Umar Zameer’s guilt without knowing the full facts of the case. 

Jack Fearnall, Owen Sound

John Tory states all we can do from this experience is “learn.” Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown completely avoids the issue, Premier Doug Ford, as usual, remains silent. Not one has the decency to admit their error and apologize. But there is something each of us can do, donate to the Zameer GoFundMe program. Money cannot bring back all that the Zameer family has lost, but it can help erase the enormous financial burden. It can also reinforce the fact that Canadians actually do care.

Keith Perrott, Toronto 

Given how Mr. Ford has recently been demanding judges who will bring down the hammer on those those accused of serious crimes, a reader offers this thought:

First, I would like to address the profound need for public apologies to Umar Zameer from Premier Doug Ford, former Toronto Mayor John Tory and Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown for their unfounded accusations when he was released on bail. This should be front page and detail what they said so that the public is aware. As Zameer’s lawyer, Nader Hasan pointed out, we expect more of public officials than their stoking of hatred and tribalism when they pretend to know the facts and we, the public, do not. 

Related to Ford’s words in this case, is his desire to fill the judiciary with his “like-minded” judges whom he believes will “get tough” as their first priority, rather than seek a fair and just trial based on the facts and reasonable truths, as we observed in this trial.

We, the public, need to challenge, along with those of the legal professions, Ford’s efforts to undermine our judiciary, one of the foundations of democracy. And, reflecting on what Zameer said after the trial, we want to be able to say, in the future, that we are a fair and just country, for all. 

I wish the Zameer family peace going forward.

Penny Sartor, Toronto 

Look Before You Speak

It is obviously just human nature to sometimes react with outrage and certitude when confronted with something that seems to beggar common sense. We have likely all experienced such a response at one time or another. The recent acquittal of Ulmar Zameer, charged with murdering a police officer, is an object lesson in caution.

You will likely recall that when the charge was brought down in 2021, prominent politicians like John Tory, Patrick Brown and Doug Ford reacted with very public disgust and outrage over the granting of bail to Zameer. It seemed inexplicable to many that a man charged with first degree murder of a police officer should not be vegetating in jail until his trial. The problem was that the judge had placed a publication ban on the reason bail was granted.

While Tory has expressed some regret over his comments, neither Brown nor Ford (the later not known for either introspection or humility) have spoken a word. At least the judge in the trial, Justice Anne Malloy, expressed her apologies for the costly ordeal that the Zameer family underwent. 

While apologies might seem a mere pro forma gesture, I suspect it can do a great deal to help assuage the trauma of the family and rehabilitate Zameer's reputation; the charges led to the losss of his job, his house, and his freedom (house arrest pending trial).

Referring to Justice Malloy's apology, Andre Phillips writes that Tory, Brown and Ford should do the same:

Those politicians ought to do at least that much. They ought to apologize to Zameer for getting it so wrong and stoking public hostility toward someone who was ultimately found to be no more than a participant in a tragic series of mistakes.

They should have known better. They were clearly pandering to public opinion, which was understandably outraged by the death of an on-duty police officer. In the absence of any actual evidence about what happened that day in the parking garage under Toronto City Hall, it was all too tempting to play the “jail, not bail” card.

Two of them (Tory and Brown) are lawyers. They should have been particularly sensitive to the importance of the presumption of innocence — the foundation of our system of criminal law. It’s also the underlying reason why people charged with crimes have a presumptive right to bail in most circumstances.

It’s not a matter of “coddling criminals,” as grandstanding politicians often claim these days. It’s a basic principle that people shouldn’t be deprived of their freedom until it’s proven in a court of law that they actually committed a crime.

And there was another factor at work in the entire ordeal, say Phillips.

 All these leaders whipped up public opinion against an innocent man. The fact that Zameer is from Pakistan made it worse, exposing him to xenophobic hatred. The system eventually worked, but no thanks to politicians and others who jumped to conclusions before the facts were in.

They — and the rest of us — should learn some lessons from that. The first is: when you don’t really know what happened, just shut up. 

On that I'll end, with just one more note. A Go Fund Me Campaign exists for those wishing to help the Zameer family defray their legal costs.

They Sing As One.

Quite predictably, the rich have reacted with great bitterness to the new budget, in particular the part requiring them to pay more tax on capital gains that exceed $250 thousand. To hear their tune, sung in unison, financial Armageddon is upon the country.

A chorus of Canadian entrepreneurs and investors is blasting the federal government's budget for expanding a tax on the rich. They say it will lead to brain drain and further degrade Canada's already poor productivity.

In the 2024 budget unveiled Tuesday, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said the government would increase the inclusion rate of the capital gains tax from 50 per cent to 67 per cent for businesses and trusts, generating an estimated $19 billion in new revenue.

Capital gains are the profits that individuals or businesses make from selling an asset — like a stock or a second home. Individuals are subject to the new changes on any profits over $250,000.

The government estimates that the changes would impact 40,000 individuals (or 0.13 per cent of Canadians in any given year) and 307,000 companies in Canada.

In my view, this timid attempt by the federal government to look like they are holding the moneyed to account is little more than political theatre, designed to help distract from Mr. Trudeau's long-time love and admiration for financial titans. But even a bit of performative politics is too much for so many. 

Despite the fact that the changes affect almost no one, 

some members of the business community say that expanding the taxable amount will devastate productivity, investment and entrepreneurship in Canada, and might even compel some of the country's talent and startups to take their business elsewhere.

Not all agree with this assessment.

 Lindsay Tedds, an associate economics professor at Carleton University, said the tax change is one of the most misunderstood parts of the federal budget — and that its impact on the country's talent has been overstated.

"This is not a major innovation-biting tax change treatment," Tedds said. "In fact, when you talk to real grassroots entrepreneurs that are setting up businesses, tax rates do not come into their decision."

As for productivity, Tedds said Canadians might see improvements in the long run "to the degree that some of our productivity problems are driven by stresses like housing affordability, access to child care, things like that."

However, don't expect such sober analysis to fork much lightning with the hysterical. Indeed, even doctors have been infected with this particular virus:

Family doctor David Edward-Ooi Poon said, “If the government intended to tax physicians after we were pushed to the edge during the pandemic, this shows doctors, particularly young ones, that our work is not valued, that if we work harder we should be taxed more,” said Poon. “Many of my colleagues are considering moving to the U.S. or other countries where physicians make more, or lowering their hours to reduce the tax burden. For our strained health-care system to improve, I would hope that physician retention is a priority.”

To believe those in financially advantageous positions, it is never a good time to increase taxes. In good times, they say that success is being punished. In bad times, they say that kicking someone when they are down will only exacerbate problems.

Meanwhile, for those in actual need of government assistance, well, they should just learn to pick themselves up by their bootstraps (a physical impossibility, when you think about it) and stop bothering the rest of us.

Some things never seem to change.

Perhaps They'll Ease Their Pain With A Free Cup Of Coffee?

Well, Tim Horton's has done it again - disappointed their customers. Of course, that's nothing new, but I'm not referring here to the mediocre coffee that is inexplicably a national icon. Nor am I referencing their disturbing and bizarre forays into food innovations they have no business experimenting with. There is something off-putting for example, about offering flatbread pizzas alongside their downsized donuts and paltry breakfast wraps. But maybe that's just me.

What is indisputable, however, is that the best this multi-billion-dollar operation can do when it screws up is to offer a mere oops. This has happened yet again with their much hyped and cruel annual Rrroll Up The Rim to Win contest.

A technical error by Tim Hortons led coffee drinkers across Canada to falsely believe they had won a $55,000 boat as part of the franchise's Roll Up To Win promotion.

It's unclear how many people were impacted, but the chain told CBC Hamilton in an email it was an "unfortunate error" and some customers were sent an email with incorrect information.

 Darren Stewart-Jones of Hamilton said he opened an email on Wednesday morning from Tim Hortons that recapped all the prizes he won this year and it included one he didn't recognize: a 2024 Tracker Targa 18 WT boat and trailer, which retails for $39,995 US (about $55,000 Cdn) — the only one available to participants.

"I thought, 'Wow, this could be really awesome,'" Stewart-Jones told CBC News in a phone interview.

But his initial burst of excitement turned into questions as he scrolled through his emails to find out when he'd won the boat. 

After learning others had also received such an email, he began to suspect his good fortune was not what it seemed.

And he was right, as Tim Horton's facilely and callously pointed out: 

Tim Hortons sent customers an email with instructions to "disregard" the recap email they received, saying "technical errors" may have allowed for some prizes they didn't win to end up in the recap email.

"We apologize for the frustration this has caused and for not living up to our high standards of providing an exceptional guest experience," read the letter, which Tim Hortons shared with CBC. 

Shamefully, this is not the first time 'technical problems' have hobbled the emporium.

Just over a year ago, the Tim Hortons app mistakenly informed users they'd won $10,000.

Chris Rivett,  another 'winner' from Edmonton, is considering all of his options.

Rivet said he has filed a complaint with the Competition Bureau of Canada and is considering filing a lawsuit.

On Wednesday afternoon, a Facebook group formed with over 200 people expressing outrage about the mistake and threatening to file lawsuits.

"NOPE. Not taking this as an answer!! Two words: CLASS ACTION," read a post from Christiane Marie.

Will the fine print under contest rules insulate Tim Horton's from legal retribution? Perhaps. But in the  court of public opinion, they are already on trial and it looks like a guilty plea is pending. 

One hopes that the coffee giant won't add insult to injury by offering a free cup of coffee to the winners/losers of this latest fiasco.

 

 

More About Doug The Slug

In my previous post, I wrote rather scathingly of Doug Ford and his refusal to put back into the building code a requirement for new home builds to have a plug built in to facilitate EV chargers. To clarify any confusion left by that post, the extra $500 charge to new homes would have been for the infrastructure, not the actual charger.  Unfortunately Ford, who takes his direction from developers, refused at their behest this simple requirement, disingenuously citing his desire to make life more affordable for Ontarians burdened by his benighted 'leadership.

Toronto Star readers, a generally perceptive group, were quick to point out the error of Doug's ways:

Setting homes up for EVs makes sense

Ford government won’t make electric vehicle chargers mandatory in new homes despite championing EV industry, April 11

The Ford government’s position on the inclusion of roughed-in wiring for EV charging stations in new homes is disingenuous and short-sighted. An additional $500 cost will not deter the buyer of a new home, with average costs approaching $1 million in major markets. It is literally a tiny percentage of the overall cost, and will be amortized over 25-30 years. In comparison, pre-wiring during construction would eliminate over half the cost of installing an EV charging station. It seems obvious that our government is happy to spend our money to entice EV component manufacturers, but totally unwilling to assist Ontarians in future-proofing their new homes, to reduce our carbon footprint and lessen the impact of our changing climate. Did past governments argue the same way against requiring electric dryer circuits in the building and electrical codes?

Doug Lewis, Clarington, Ont.

The Ontario Conservatives won’t make house builders install plugs for electric cars. Putting another plug in a million dollar house would have little or no effect on the price of the house. Builders put in plugs for microwaves, stoves, clothes dryers, et cetera. Putting in one more plug for an electric car charger is not a big deal. It becomes a bigger deal if the plug has to be installed once the house is built. The homeowner still has to buy a charger to plug into the plug but at least the house is not ripped apart to install the plug. Like many of the Ford government’s policies, this call does not make any sense.

Wolfe Erlichman, Godfrey, Ont.

Doug Ford's illogic and hypocrisy are manifest. The question, however, is whether enough of the electorate notices or even cares.

The Curse Of News Literacy

There are some days I almost wish I weren't a newspaper reader. That way I wouldn't be confronted  daily with the world's stupidity and perhaps not constantly haunted by a jaundiced view of humanity.

In my previous post I wrote at some length about the buffoonery that defines the Doug Ford government here in Ontario; while I briefly return to that subject now, I shall also take a look at my disappointment over Jagmeet Singh's recent pronouncements. Just bear with me, if you are so inclined.

First, a peek at our Pavlovian premier, Mr. Ford. The previous government, under Kathleen Wynne, mandated charging plugs for all new house and condo builds in 2018. Mr. Ford, in 2019, stripped that provision out of the building code. Despite his heavily investing in EV battery plants for Ontario, he will not reverse that decision.

... after lobbying from developers who said the plugs added $500 to the cost of a new house, Ford stripped them from the code. He also ended rebates of up to $14,000 for buyers of EVs and scrapped chargers from GO Transit stations and other public locations.

Why, when EV investment is so important to the Ontario economy, would he continue to hang tough?

Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Paul Calandra, who tabled legislation modernizing the building code on Wednesday, warned that keeping new home costs low is more important than mandating EV chargers.

“Look, I think homeowners can make that decision on their own. If you’re wanting to buy a EV, we encourage you to do it — that’s why we’re making massive investments in that,” Calandra told reporters at Queen’s Park.

“But if that’s something that you want to do, then the homeowner themselves can undertake that. We want to keep costs of building new homes down,” he said.

The price of installing an EV charger in an existing home can be between $1,000 and $3,000 — much more than putting one in during construction.

 Green Leader Mike Schreiner said the Tories “are ideologically opposed to building the infrastructure we need for electric vehicles” and that has economic consequences.

“Is Ford Motor Company delaying the building of their plant and retooling their plant in Oakville because they know we don’t have the infrastructure in Ontario to facilitate the adoption of electric vehicles?” said Schreiner.

I leave you to draw your own conclusions as to the 'soundness' of the government's 'thinking'. 

Things are not much better on the federal scene. I must confess to my surprise and disappointment with NDP leader Jagment Singh, who now seems to be waffling on the carbon levy and thereby succumbing to the siren call of populism.

The federal New Democrats no longer believe a consumer carbon price is necessary to fight climate change, Jagmeet Singh suggested Thursday.

The new position, which appears to break with the NDP’s previous support for the policy, was outlined in a speech Singh delivered at the Broadbent Institute’s annual policy conference in Ottawa on Thursday. In it, he distanced his party from the federal Liberals’ flagship climate policy, which has drawn criticism from across the country as the levy and its accompanying rebates increased this April.

Singh condemned the approaches of both Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to the climate crisis, and said tackling it “can’t be done by letting working families bear the cost of climate change while big polluters make bigger and bigger profits.”

Sadly, this move lends legitimacy to the prattle of PP and the provincial premiers, who seem to speak as one in denouncing the levy as a burden on all of us, despite the fact that most come out ahead with the feds' quarterly rebate checks. 

I will give Singh credit for one assertion, however.

Referring to a March report that concluded industrial carbon pricing systems were far more effective than the consumer levy on fuel, Singh told reporters that the New Democrats “want more attention on the policies that are the biggest drivers of lowering emissions,” such as the industrial price on pollution and methane regulations. 

Industrial carbon pricing systems would be a reference to such protocols as cap and trade. Yes, the very same system that Doug Ford dismantled when he came to power, a move that led to Trudeau imposing the carbon levy on all of us. Interestingly, even as Mr. Ford and others rail against the levy, no one seems to have any interest in bringing back cap and trade. Why not? You would have to ask Mr. Ford and his friends in high places for the answer.

I also don't have a direct answer as to why the electorate cannot make the journey from A to B and connect the dots that would show the arrant hypocrisy of people like Ford when they indulge in the political theatre of fed-bashing.

Hence my jaundiced view of humanity.

Small Minds And Big Power

It will probably come as no surprise to regular readers of this blog that I have a rather low opinion of our species. There are too many small-minded people thinking they are the smartest people in the room, reflecting the classic Dunning-Krueger effect. Nothing can be done about this reality, as they seem wholly incapable of taking any semblance of instruction.

The real problem, however, is when politicians target that audience for their political support. We see it, of course, in the U.S. as Don Trump cultivates his MAGA morons. Unfortunately, the problem also occurs closer to home. We see it in PP's simplistic aphorisms like "spike the hike' and "axe the tax", his answer to climate change mitigation efforts. And here in Ontario, Doug Ford has no doubt provided sociologists and political analysts all manner of fodder when it comes to populism. Indeed, he has made an art out of promulgating the picayune.

Ford, our very own arrested development premier, has made a virtue out of small-minded policies at the expense of constructive, long-term ideas. As you know, thanks to his 'magnanimity', we no longer have to pay licence plate renewal fees, at an annual expense to revenues of $1.2 billion. Add to that the ongoing gas tax 'holiday', and you are left with a substantial gap in the provincial treasury. And perhaps you have heard of Ford's latest scheme to force the LCBO to bring back paper bags to spare the expense of having to buy a reusable one if you have forgotten yours at home, all in the name of making life more affordable.

One of the problems when you concentrate on the 'needs' of the 'little guy' is that you think you can fool everyone and ignore those who want real intelligence in decision-making. Take, for example, his latest scheme. Because his government is woefully behind in the goal of building 1.5 million homes by 2031, Ford's solution is to count the rooms in Long-Term Care homes and dormitories. 

It's an idea being met with ridicule in the legislature. Rob Ferguson writes:

“What are they going to count next … jail cells?” New Democrat Leader Marit Stiles said Tuesday as she criticized Ford for fighting fourplexes as a way to improve the housing supply.   

Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister Paul Calandra — who on Wednesday will announce new measures to “cut red tape and help municipalities build” — pushed back at critics with his own argument.

“Obviously, student housing is very important,” he said.

“Every time we build new housing, or a college or university campus builds new housing, that is more housing that is available in the community. I don’t think that’s a very difficult concept to follow.”

Why such transparent fraud?

To meet its 1.5-million target, the province needs to build an average of 150,000 new homes annually.

But the last two years, the actual numbers were well below that, with 109,111 in 2023 and 80,300 in 2022. Soaring interest rates and higher building costs driven by inflation were factors.

 Liberal Leader Bonnie Crombie, a former three-term mayor of Mississauga, accused the government of “trying to prop up their numbers with dorms and retirement units because they’re not meeting their (housing) targets.”

“It’s misleading, and it’s just a shell game,” she told a news conference at Queen’s Park. 

“You can’t even have a microwave in a dorm room. My goodness, that is not a home,” Stiles said in an exchange with Calandra in the legislature’s daily question period.

 Green Leader Mike Schreiner mused whether the government might go further.

“At this point, the government is going to start counting tents,” he quipped.  

Stiles's, Crombie's and Schreiner's objections are based on an assumption that the electorate is not stupid. That is likely a miscalculation on their part. In any event, people who know things, read papers and keep up with events are clearly not the target audience the Ford government has in its sights. Quite the opposite, in fact.