I was under the presumption that it was illegal to advertise in foreign markets for Canadian elections -- the exception being Elections Canada to ensure Canadians living abroad can exercise their right to vote absentee. Perhaps this prohibition only applies to foreign broadcasters and not print media.
So imagine my surprise when I saw a web ad for the NDP at the NYT this morning. I'm sure all the other parties have done this as well. Now, as some of you commented previously on my beef about CBC Radio 2 putting up a web ad on a British web site, the host server treats likely siphons offshore readers through country-specific "channels" so they get customized content.
Still, isn't this something that needs clarifying, especially when one or more web ads could sway undecided voters? My opinion is that the Internet, like the phone company, is a common carrier and therefore not subject to normal broadcasting rules -- that's how many routinely get around publication bans that apply to the old school press. However, some could rightfully accuse participating parties of cheating -- and a court challenge is almost likely to ensue.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Saturday, September 27, 2008
Another poll call; morning thoughts (Sept 27)
First things first: I got another call from Ekos last night -- guess they're tracking prior subjects and seeing if we've changed our minds. I haven't, of course. But an interesting question came up as to who would be a stronger leader for the Liberals right now -- Dion, Bob Rae, or Michael Ignatieff? I have to concede, I said Iggy (he was my first choice at the delegate selection vote) -- but when asked who among the current leaders running was the strongest, I still said Dion.
Second: Can I take a moment to say something that's been on my mind?
The way things have been going the last few weeks, we've seen a campaign in Canada where the incumbent is high on style and short on substance; his opponents the exact opposite. And through it all, a very subtle hint from Steve Harper that he is the only one to "defend" Canada's interests and to vote against his ticket is un-Canadian. Of course, he'll never say it out loud but he knows exactly what he's trying to do and his core supporters do as well.
The most interesting thing is his implying that he stands the most for individual freedom while his opponents would stymie it. That Canadians should be free to make their own decisions and the marketplace left to its own vices to ensure food safety, a clean enviornment and so forth.
Interesting plan, except for a major hitch. The first three words in our Constitution are not "We the people." They are "Whereas the provinces." The underlying principle in our Constitution is not "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," it is "Peace, order and good government." While our Basic Law does contain the phrase "life, liberty and security of the person" it is well understood that personal freedom does not ensure good government as in the States, it is good government that ensures personal freedom -- and that no one party has the monopoly on this.
Even before we had a Charter of Rights, it was all three parties that sought to ensure that free religion, free press, free speech was a matter of course if not absolutely guaranteed -- and the way it was done was to ensure government was part of the solution where the private sector failed. That's why we have universal health care. We consider good health a right, not something to be purchased only if the sellers wanted to sell to us -- and it's our general better health than Americans that helps ensure our personal security and freedom.
I have nothing against Steve personally, although I'm sure by this time he'd like to take it out on me personally as well as many of my fellow progressives. But it's just the feeling I have that unless we have an activist government we will wind up less free, perhaps even less so than our American cousins. We pay higher taxes for a reason -- we want to make sure the least of us and the best of us have the same chance in life. Harper is committed to essentially turning everything over to the provinces -- give them a block grant and let them deal with social programs. And to hell with the poor. We saw Clinton and Gingrich team up to do that back in 1995. And the consequences have been a calamity and have made the current financial situation even worse.
When we consider many EU states and their even more comprehensive social programs, something is to be observed. They have generally greater peace of mind, stronger families and -- interestingly -- they still have a free marketplace for goods as well as ideas. And, funny thing, they're also actually happier than we are on this side of the pond. Then, there is the United States. Do we really want to be like our American allies? Or do we want a system based on practical ideas and practical solutions, and perhaps setting a best standards practice that Americans might want to follow?
Do we want a foreign policy that is a carbon copy of the US State Department? Or do we chart our own course and reclaim the honest broker status that Harper destroyed two years ago?
It wouldn't really matter if I was a Liberal or an independent. The fact remains, Harper's Canada is not the Canada I believe in, nor that many others would believe in. Under him the true north, strong and free, would be way less so.
As Kim Campbell said once, "Charisma without substance can be a dangerous thing." Dion may be totally uncharismatic, but I'll pick his substance over Harper's slickness any day.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Second: Can I take a moment to say something that's been on my mind?
The way things have been going the last few weeks, we've seen a campaign in Canada where the incumbent is high on style and short on substance; his opponents the exact opposite. And through it all, a very subtle hint from Steve Harper that he is the only one to "defend" Canada's interests and to vote against his ticket is un-Canadian. Of course, he'll never say it out loud but he knows exactly what he's trying to do and his core supporters do as well.
The most interesting thing is his implying that he stands the most for individual freedom while his opponents would stymie it. That Canadians should be free to make their own decisions and the marketplace left to its own vices to ensure food safety, a clean enviornment and so forth.
Interesting plan, except for a major hitch. The first three words in our Constitution are not "We the people." They are "Whereas the provinces." The underlying principle in our Constitution is not "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," it is "Peace, order and good government." While our Basic Law does contain the phrase "life, liberty and security of the person" it is well understood that personal freedom does not ensure good government as in the States, it is good government that ensures personal freedom -- and that no one party has the monopoly on this.
Even before we had a Charter of Rights, it was all three parties that sought to ensure that free religion, free press, free speech was a matter of course if not absolutely guaranteed -- and the way it was done was to ensure government was part of the solution where the private sector failed. That's why we have universal health care. We consider good health a right, not something to be purchased only if the sellers wanted to sell to us -- and it's our general better health than Americans that helps ensure our personal security and freedom.
I have nothing against Steve personally, although I'm sure by this time he'd like to take it out on me personally as well as many of my fellow progressives. But it's just the feeling I have that unless we have an activist government we will wind up less free, perhaps even less so than our American cousins. We pay higher taxes for a reason -- we want to make sure the least of us and the best of us have the same chance in life. Harper is committed to essentially turning everything over to the provinces -- give them a block grant and let them deal with social programs. And to hell with the poor. We saw Clinton and Gingrich team up to do that back in 1995. And the consequences have been a calamity and have made the current financial situation even worse.
When we consider many EU states and their even more comprehensive social programs, something is to be observed. They have generally greater peace of mind, stronger families and -- interestingly -- they still have a free marketplace for goods as well as ideas. And, funny thing, they're also actually happier than we are on this side of the pond. Then, there is the United States. Do we really want to be like our American allies? Or do we want a system based on practical ideas and practical solutions, and perhaps setting a best standards practice that Americans might want to follow?
Do we want a foreign policy that is a carbon copy of the US State Department? Or do we chart our own course and reclaim the honest broker status that Harper destroyed two years ago?
It wouldn't really matter if I was a Liberal or an independent. The fact remains, Harper's Canada is not the Canada I believe in, nor that many others would believe in. Under him the true north, strong and free, would be way less so.
As Kim Campbell said once, "Charisma without substance can be a dangerous thing." Dion may be totally uncharismatic, but I'll pick his substance over Harper's slickness any day.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Tolerance for intolerance?
When a Liberal candidate gets caught saying so outlandish it doesn't fit the most basic sense of reality, that candidate is rightfully asked to step down. Such was the case with Lesley Hughes of the Kildonan-St. Paul section of Winnipeg, who was caught saying that Jewish people knew the 9/11 attacks were coming so they vacated the Twin Towers in time. This lie continues to persist in the Middle East but it's amazing that some still believe it to be true here even though dozens of the victims were Jewish, including 5 citizens of Israel. Stéphane Dion was absolutely right to kick her off the ticket, although of course it is now too late to name a replacement.
Yet Gerry Ritz wishes Wayne Easter dead and a guy from Calgary blames crime on immigrants, and Steve Harper says they're welcome to stay in the race.
Again ... doesn't this tolerance for intolerance show the kind of person Harper is?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Yet Gerry Ritz wishes Wayne Easter dead and a guy from Calgary blames crime on immigrants, and Steve Harper says they're welcome to stay in the race.
Again ... doesn't this tolerance for intolerance show the kind of person Harper is?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
WaMu Bye-Bye; one of the Big Six next?
Late last night, Seattle-based Washington Mutual, the largest savings and loan in America (setup not unlike a credit union) was seized by federal authorities and some of its core assets then immediately sold to JP Morgan, the parent of Chase Manhattan Bank. The move now makes Chase the largest bank in the US, surpassing Bank of America.
In so seizing then flipping, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was saved from having to bail out customers to the tune of $31 billion -- the FDIC will cover depositors' first $100,000 and Morgan has promised to cover the rest. The trust fund had been at $45.2 billion before IndyMac collapsed in June then a series of other bank failures or fire sales followed.
This collapse is way bigger than the 1984 collapse of Chicago-based Continental, which Canadians will probably remember since its sudden emergence and then disappearance of a branch plant here around that time was seen at the time as a challenge -- then vindication -- to the Big Six here.
It also sends a sobering sign to both investors and ordinary depositors. WaMu is bank # 13 to fail in the US this year. One report I read not too long ago suggested that as many as 1000 banks could either be seized or sold to bigger banks as part of an industry-wide consolidation. A good opportunity for people looking for values but bad news for investors who had bonds or stocks and will now be wiped out.
We tend to be smug about the whole thing in Canada given the relative strength of our banking system. However, the old saying is true, when America sneezes, Canada catches the cold sooner or later.
But it's entirely possible for one of the Big Six, or Desjardins Credit Union, to run into major trouble in the near future. Most if not all have had to write off some assets related to bad mortgages in both Canada and the US. What affect will that have on the trust fund of our deposit insurance system? Consider this: While the CDIC insures $466 billion in deposits, it only has $1.55 billion cash on hand. That's up from about a billion a couple of years ago but that's it. If one of the smaller member banks -- about 80 in total -- wound up, no problem. One of the big guys -- huge problem. Provincially chartered banks don't have that much back up either from provincial bodies. Neither do the 500 or so member institutions that make up Desjardins, also backed by the small funds in the provincial deposit trusts.
The CDIC makes it clear that where it acts jointly with its provincial counterparts to save someone's deposits, the combined total is $100,000 per person -- period. That might unnerve some investors who think they've got their butts covered twice and for twice that total.
And keep in mind, too, that on the other hand banks often split themselves up into several dummy companies so depositors can get around the $100,000 per institution rule -- often the insured amount can be a half million or more. In the end deposit insurance is merely a safety cushion. We're really being set up for a huge crisis when the shoe finally drops. Not if, but when.
Also, silence about this from all party leaders here. Why? The silence from Harper, who keeps insisting that our fundamentals are "strong" is especially telling. We've heard that lie in the States, many a time before.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
In so seizing then flipping, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was saved from having to bail out customers to the tune of $31 billion -- the FDIC will cover depositors' first $100,000 and Morgan has promised to cover the rest. The trust fund had been at $45.2 billion before IndyMac collapsed in June then a series of other bank failures or fire sales followed.
This collapse is way bigger than the 1984 collapse of Chicago-based Continental, which Canadians will probably remember since its sudden emergence and then disappearance of a branch plant here around that time was seen at the time as a challenge -- then vindication -- to the Big Six here.
It also sends a sobering sign to both investors and ordinary depositors. WaMu is bank # 13 to fail in the US this year. One report I read not too long ago suggested that as many as 1000 banks could either be seized or sold to bigger banks as part of an industry-wide consolidation. A good opportunity for people looking for values but bad news for investors who had bonds or stocks and will now be wiped out.
We tend to be smug about the whole thing in Canada given the relative strength of our banking system. However, the old saying is true, when America sneezes, Canada catches the cold sooner or later.
But it's entirely possible for one of the Big Six, or Desjardins Credit Union, to run into major trouble in the near future. Most if not all have had to write off some assets related to bad mortgages in both Canada and the US. What affect will that have on the trust fund of our deposit insurance system? Consider this: While the CDIC insures $466 billion in deposits, it only has $1.55 billion cash on hand. That's up from about a billion a couple of years ago but that's it. If one of the smaller member banks -- about 80 in total -- wound up, no problem. One of the big guys -- huge problem. Provincially chartered banks don't have that much back up either from provincial bodies. Neither do the 500 or so member institutions that make up Desjardins, also backed by the small funds in the provincial deposit trusts.
The CDIC makes it clear that where it acts jointly with its provincial counterparts to save someone's deposits, the combined total is $100,000 per person -- period. That might unnerve some investors who think they've got their butts covered twice and for twice that total.
And keep in mind, too, that on the other hand banks often split themselves up into several dummy companies so depositors can get around the $100,000 per institution rule -- often the insured amount can be a half million or more. In the end deposit insurance is merely a safety cushion. We're really being set up for a huge crisis when the shoe finally drops. Not if, but when.
Also, silence about this from all party leaders here. Why? The silence from Harper, who keeps insisting that our fundamentals are "strong" is especially telling. We've heard that lie in the States, many a time before.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
Again with the non-apology apologies
Maybe it's me, but what is it with these Conservative candidates who don't know when to start talking -- except at the prompting or instructions of head office? Then again, there are the loose lips. Such as Lee Richardson from Calgary Centre, who blamed the "increase" in crime on "immigrants."
The GOP and the racist local media in the US have been getting away with that trick for decades. Not that all the Con candidates are racist or even misinformed, of course, but too many loose lips ... you know the saying. We can't let the Con artists get away with it here. There may be two and a half weeks left but there's still time to stop Harper.
From CanWest News:
Uh, yeah. Regret the comment. Again, the classic non-apology apology. If a Liberal or NDP or Green Party candidate said something xenophobic like that, they'd be off the ticket faster than you can say Jumping Jack Flash. Harper however seems content to keep Richardson on his team. That says more about Harper than it does abour Richardson.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
The GOP and the racist local media in the US have been getting away with that trick for decades. Not that all the Con candidates are racist or even misinformed, of course, but too many loose lips ... you know the saying. We can't let the Con artists get away with it here. There may be two and a half weeks left but there's still time to stop Harper.
From CanWest News:
Opposition parties are demanding Calgary Conservative incumbent Lee Richardson immediately resign for controversial comments that suggested immigrants are to blame for much of the crime in Canada.
In an interview with a Calgary weekly newspaper published Thursday, Richardson is quoted as saying many crimes aren't committed by people who "grew up next door" and immigrants aren't as law-abiding.
"Particularly in big cities, we've got people that have grown up in a different culture, and they don't have the same background in terms of the stable communities we had 20, 30 years ago in our cities. . . and don't have the same respect for authority or people's person or property," Richardson told Fast Forward Weekly, when asked about recent gun violence in Calgary.
"Talk to the police. Look at who's committing these crimes," added Richardson, the Tory candidate in Calgary Centre. "They're not the kid that grew up next door."
Richardson later said he regretted the comments and that he misspoke.
Uh, yeah. Regret the comment. Again, the classic non-apology apology. If a Liberal or NDP or Green Party candidate said something xenophobic like that, they'd be off the ticket faster than you can say Jumping Jack Flash. Harper however seems content to keep Richardson on his team. That says more about Harper than it does abour Richardson.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
There's no BUSINESS like show business, STEVE
Steve Harper's contempt for the arts is so great that he somehow needs a huge reminder that a large group of Canadians are directly employed by the business or keep their employment through direct spin-off benefits. By the estimate of the actors and singers themselves, 1.3 million Canadians earn their bread thanks to the entertainment business. That works out to 7.2% of our GDP.
If Steve needs proof that this is not a minor complaint, he only has to look at one obvious example: the Stratford Festival. The première showcase for drama in Canada is much more than the acting company we see on stage in repertory. 800 people work behind the scenes, from costume and set design to security and working the call centre that sells tickets and books accomodations for guests. The spin-offs for other jobs in Stratford and Perth County, from dentists and physicians to boutiques, auto sales and everyday sundry items cannot be measured except to say it's in the tens if not hundreds of millions.
And here's a newsflash for Steve: People pay income taxes on those jobs! Much more than if they were on EI (taxed) or on welfare (not but affecting entitlement to entitlements).
The subsidy the Festival gets from the federal and provincial governments is very small compared to its overall budget -- about 4%. The payback in income and sales taxes is many-fold. It's that subsidy that in part prices tickets at a level that makes it available to a greater part of the population and not just the "elite" to which Harper, ironically, is actually a part of.
Now, imagine all the community theatres across Canada. The nightclubs. The public and private art galleries and photo studios. And the benefits they create. And of course, radio and television. The spinoff effect for Ontario alone is $20 billion. It's even higher in Québec which actually has a real film industry and a festival of some kind of other going on in Montréal and other cities every week. Every province, every territory, gets a tax windfall from providing seed money to the arts. Get rid of them, then there's no need for CanCon rules -- we may as well be Hollywood North for real.
No ... I don't think it's the arts that's his problem. It's that the direct employment is mostly union labour and he has nothing but contempt for organized labour. One of his most ardent supporters, Mario Dumont of the ADQ, wants to get rid of the Rand Formula that guarantees union security and equal treatment of employees who want in the union and those who want out.
You want to throw away over a million jobs when we're in the start of a recession? Then you don't deserve to be PM, Steve. Because entertainment is a business, and there's no business like show business.
$45 million that has been cut out by Steve works out to about a buck thirty for each and every Canadian -- about double what it takes to run the Governor General's office. The total arts subsidy, including the CBC and the Canada Council, is about $25 to $30 per capita. That's a subsidy I and many others are more than happy to pay to send our message to the world. It's certainly way less than the mandatory license fee that nearly every household in the EU has to pay -- in the UK it's £139.50, and in the Eurozone it can be as high as €300 depending on the country you're in.
Gee, Steve, what's next? Closing rural post offices which for many people in forests, farmland and the outports is the only place to meet people on a regular basis -- as well as be connected to the outside world?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
If Steve needs proof that this is not a minor complaint, he only has to look at one obvious example: the Stratford Festival. The première showcase for drama in Canada is much more than the acting company we see on stage in repertory. 800 people work behind the scenes, from costume and set design to security and working the call centre that sells tickets and books accomodations for guests. The spin-offs for other jobs in Stratford and Perth County, from dentists and physicians to boutiques, auto sales and everyday sundry items cannot be measured except to say it's in the tens if not hundreds of millions.
And here's a newsflash for Steve: People pay income taxes on those jobs! Much more than if they were on EI (taxed) or on welfare (not but affecting entitlement to entitlements).
The subsidy the Festival gets from the federal and provincial governments is very small compared to its overall budget -- about 4%. The payback in income and sales taxes is many-fold. It's that subsidy that in part prices tickets at a level that makes it available to a greater part of the population and not just the "elite" to which Harper, ironically, is actually a part of.
Now, imagine all the community theatres across Canada. The nightclubs. The public and private art galleries and photo studios. And the benefits they create. And of course, radio and television. The spinoff effect for Ontario alone is $20 billion. It's even higher in Québec which actually has a real film industry and a festival of some kind of other going on in Montréal and other cities every week. Every province, every territory, gets a tax windfall from providing seed money to the arts. Get rid of them, then there's no need for CanCon rules -- we may as well be Hollywood North for real.
No ... I don't think it's the arts that's his problem. It's that the direct employment is mostly union labour and he has nothing but contempt for organized labour. One of his most ardent supporters, Mario Dumont of the ADQ, wants to get rid of the Rand Formula that guarantees union security and equal treatment of employees who want in the union and those who want out.
You want to throw away over a million jobs when we're in the start of a recession? Then you don't deserve to be PM, Steve. Because entertainment is a business, and there's no business like show business.
$45 million that has been cut out by Steve works out to about a buck thirty for each and every Canadian -- about double what it takes to run the Governor General's office. The total arts subsidy, including the CBC and the Canada Council, is about $25 to $30 per capita. That's a subsidy I and many others are more than happy to pay to send our message to the world. It's certainly way less than the mandatory license fee that nearly every household in the EU has to pay -- in the UK it's £139.50, and in the Eurozone it can be as high as €300 depending on the country you're in.
Gee, Steve, what's next? Closing rural post offices which for many people in forests, farmland and the outports is the only place to meet people on a regular basis -- as well as be connected to the outside world?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Banned Books Week 2008
It's that time of year again -- Banned Books Week. It actually starts on September 27th and runs to October 4th. According to the American Library Association, more than 400 books were declared morally objectionable by various interests, some from the left (to be fair) but the vast majority from the right. here are the top ten most challenged books for the last year, 2007:
10: The Perks of Being a Wallflower, by Stephen Chbosky.
9: It's Perfectly Normal, by Robert Harris.
8: I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, by Maya Angelou.
7: TTYL, by Lauren Maracle.
6: The Color Purple, by Alice Walker.
5: The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain.
4: The Golden Compass, by Philip Pullman.
3: Olive's Ocean, by Kevin Henkes.
2: The Chocolate War, by Robert Cormier.
1: And Tango Makes Three, by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell.
When we ban books, we suppress the imagination. We tell children they don't need an imagination, just their Bibles and their preachers who misinterpret them. It's time to say enough is enough and to vote out politicians who are against books and the arts and stop lining the pockets of those who support censorship in all its forms.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
10: The Perks of Being a Wallflower, by Stephen Chbosky.
9: It's Perfectly Normal, by Robert Harris.
8: I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, by Maya Angelou.
7: TTYL, by Lauren Maracle.
6: The Color Purple, by Alice Walker.
5: The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain.
4: The Golden Compass, by Philip Pullman.
3: Olive's Ocean, by Kevin Henkes.
2: The Chocolate War, by Robert Cormier.
1: And Tango Makes Three, by Justin Richardson and Peter Parnell.
When we ban books, we suppress the imagination. We tell children they don't need an imagination, just their Bibles and their preachers who misinterpret them. It's time to say enough is enough and to vote out politicians who are against books and the arts and stop lining the pockets of those who support censorship in all its forms.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
"Gulag Archipelago"? We have one in Canada: It's called Childrens' "Aid"
I have been very reluctant to write this post. I've been sitting on it for months. But I can wait no longer.
What would you say to a government agency that has powers the police could only dream of -- that Steve Harper and others wish the police had? Of virtually unlimited and warrantless search and seizure? Except what was being seized wasn't money, or drugs or even paperwork, but children.
An agency that operates not on probable cause but mere rumour, even false leads given on a snitch line. An agency dedicated to ripping families apart, not bringing them together. An agency that does everything to discredit innocent parents no matter what they try to prove their innocence and no matter how much they try to work with the authorities, such authorities view attempts to get one's children back as being insubordinate and they make the parents' lives even more miserable.
That, in a nutshell, describes the child protection system. While in 99% of cases it does its job, there is always the 1% -- and I am right now trying to make sense of a case where a friend of mine, a single mom who's never hurt a fly and is owed thousands in alimony and child support by a father who has the means to pay up, had her children taken from her. And rather than the children getting better, they have gotten worse and less healthy in foster care while this mess is sorted out. And get this: The authorities think the deadbeat would be a better parent. Seriously.
The mother has never wanted to cut the father out of the children's lives, by the way. She just has asked for supervised access for him at least until he pays up.
For obvious reasons I can't name names. Due to some twists in circumstances, the odds are very good that things will eventually work out and that some will have to eat humble pie
That's not to say everyone who works in the system is bad. I personally know a few good ones, who were doing their jobs and continue to do so before and during this situation although to the best of my knowledge they are not involved in this particular file. I believe if they had been, they would have cut through the crap and this would have ended on day one and the children back where they belong -- with their mother, the rightful custodial parent.
But the fact is that too many families have been wrongly ripped apart, too many children have either died in foster care because of inadequate background checks or home studies and a lack of meaningful followup. Or the children have become so manipulated and conditioned to inconsistency that they become criminals, much more likely to become delinquents than those in stable households.
Do you hear Steve Harper addressing this -- or any other leaders? No. Because it's seen as a provincial responsibility. Do you hear any leaders discussing that foster care might explain some of why youth crime is allegedly so high? No, because it's "bleeding heart" to say that.
I'm no bleeding heart. I'm someone who wants to see things work better.
This is a national crisis, happening again and again in every province and territory. We need national leadership on this. We can't keep going on like this because it's driving people who don't deserve the grief crazy. We need the principles of due process and habeas corpus to apply to child protective services as it does to the criminal law system. In cases where parents are proven truly unreconstructable, deal with them appropriately, but where the parents have done nothing wrong they should get their children back and their legal expenses compensated by the Society in question.
We need a national adoption registry, not 13 separate ones -- and the red tape that makes it harder to adopt domestically rather than overseas must be eliminated once and for all.
And those who work in the system and only choose to see the worst in people rather than the best (as the majority of their colleagues do) need to work in other lines of employment. Given how much they're dedicated to destroying people's morale and sanity, they're much better suited to, say, the waterboarding team at Gitmo.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
What would you say to a government agency that has powers the police could only dream of -- that Steve Harper and others wish the police had? Of virtually unlimited and warrantless search and seizure? Except what was being seized wasn't money, or drugs or even paperwork, but children.
An agency that operates not on probable cause but mere rumour, even false leads given on a snitch line. An agency dedicated to ripping families apart, not bringing them together. An agency that does everything to discredit innocent parents no matter what they try to prove their innocence and no matter how much they try to work with the authorities, such authorities view attempts to get one's children back as being insubordinate and they make the parents' lives even more miserable.
That, in a nutshell, describes the child protection system. While in 99% of cases it does its job, there is always the 1% -- and I am right now trying to make sense of a case where a friend of mine, a single mom who's never hurt a fly and is owed thousands in alimony and child support by a father who has the means to pay up, had her children taken from her. And rather than the children getting better, they have gotten worse and less healthy in foster care while this mess is sorted out. And get this: The authorities think the deadbeat would be a better parent. Seriously.
The mother has never wanted to cut the father out of the children's lives, by the way. She just has asked for supervised access for him at least until he pays up.
For obvious reasons I can't name names. Due to some twists in circumstances, the odds are very good that things will eventually work out and that some will have to eat humble pie
That's not to say everyone who works in the system is bad. I personally know a few good ones, who were doing their jobs and continue to do so before and during this situation although to the best of my knowledge they are not involved in this particular file. I believe if they had been, they would have cut through the crap and this would have ended on day one and the children back where they belong -- with their mother, the rightful custodial parent.
But the fact is that too many families have been wrongly ripped apart, too many children have either died in foster care because of inadequate background checks or home studies and a lack of meaningful followup. Or the children have become so manipulated and conditioned to inconsistency that they become criminals, much more likely to become delinquents than those in stable households.
Do you hear Steve Harper addressing this -- or any other leaders? No. Because it's seen as a provincial responsibility. Do you hear any leaders discussing that foster care might explain some of why youth crime is allegedly so high? No, because it's "bleeding heart" to say that.
I'm no bleeding heart. I'm someone who wants to see things work better.
This is a national crisis, happening again and again in every province and territory. We need national leadership on this. We can't keep going on like this because it's driving people who don't deserve the grief crazy. We need the principles of due process and habeas corpus to apply to child protective services as it does to the criminal law system. In cases where parents are proven truly unreconstructable, deal with them appropriately, but where the parents have done nothing wrong they should get their children back and their legal expenses compensated by the Society in question.
We need a national adoption registry, not 13 separate ones -- and the red tape that makes it harder to adopt domestically rather than overseas must be eliminated once and for all.
And those who work in the system and only choose to see the worst in people rather than the best (as the majority of their colleagues do) need to work in other lines of employment. Given how much they're dedicated to destroying people's morale and sanity, they're much better suited to, say, the waterboarding team at Gitmo.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Poll numbers (Sept 23)
Today's numbers from Nanos (and change from yesterday)
Conservatives 38 (+3)
Liberals 27 (-3)
NDP 21 (-1)
Bloc 8 (+1)
Green 6 (0)
Margin of error ±3.1% nationally.
A bit surprising is the almost complete switch in support from Liberal to Conservative in Atlantic Canada (+9 Conservative, -8 Liberals), as well as the two parties now being tied in Ontario at 36 each. Mind you, today's news about a Conservative candidate having been cited three times by the real estate authorities in B.C. isn't going to help Harper much either ... and it's too late to drop and add now.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Conservatives 38 (+3)
Liberals 27 (-3)
NDP 21 (-1)
Bloc 8 (+1)
Green 6 (0)
Margin of error ±3.1% nationally.
A bit surprising is the almost complete switch in support from Liberal to Conservative in Atlantic Canada (+9 Conservative, -8 Liberals), as well as the two parties now being tied in Ontario at 36 each. Mind you, today's news about a Conservative candidate having been cited three times by the real estate authorities in B.C. isn't going to help Harper much either ... and it's too late to drop and add now.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Secret of Mr Nano's success?
One of the commenters yesterday wondered out loud why we Liberals are so enthused about the polling numbers from Nanos Research. To be clear, I'm not one to be enthusiastic. There's still three weeks to go from today and fortunes turn on a dime. Remember last time out, Nanos was showing trend lines against the Liberals but was consistently showing results that were much closer to reality -- I think the final numbers showed them 0.2% off.
Last night on CPAC, Nik Nanos explained part of his methodology. He said when his people ask poll subjects for polling preferences they are not usually prompted with a list of choices, even one that is shuffled up for the next caller. If you don't know who the parties are, Nanos said, you're not going to make a reasoned choice; whereas if you are given a prompt you might say, "Oh yeah, I like them."
If this explains why the Liberals are doing much better in the Nanos poll and the Greens worse than all the other tracking firms, it actually does sound a bit like hot air. There has to be a bigger reason why there's a gap between 5 in one poll and 16 in another. But Canadians are reasonable people who actually have the ability to think issues through. Who knows where it will end up -- heck, Nanos could be totally wrong this time around -- but if this guy gets it right again then you might see the networks give their preferred pollsters their walking papers.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Last night on CPAC, Nik Nanos explained part of his methodology. He said when his people ask poll subjects for polling preferences they are not usually prompted with a list of choices, even one that is shuffled up for the next caller. If you don't know who the parties are, Nanos said, you're not going to make a reasoned choice; whereas if you are given a prompt you might say, "Oh yeah, I like them."
If this explains why the Liberals are doing much better in the Nanos poll and the Greens worse than all the other tracking firms, it actually does sound a bit like hot air. There has to be a bigger reason why there's a gap between 5 in one poll and 16 in another. But Canadians are reasonable people who actually have the ability to think issues through. Who knows where it will end up -- heck, Nanos could be totally wrong this time around -- but if this guy gets it right again then you might see the networks give their preferred pollsters their walking papers.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Liberal platform: Game changer?
HT to Jan from the Bruce on the latest poll numbers from Nanos:
Conservative 35 (-1)
Liberal 30 (-1)
NDP 22 (+2)
Bloc 7 (0)
Green 6 (-1)
(margin of error ± 3.1%)
The most interest shift is in Ontario, where the Liberals are now in the lead 39-31 with Dion picking up three points from yesterday. With the economy continuing to slump, Jim Flaherty's announcement to the world that my home province is not a good place to invest may finally be starting to bite. Ontarians are a normally tolerant people but there's only so much we'll tolerate especially when it involves our pocketbooks.
On to today's major policy announcements. First, Steve Harper says he wants the identities of violent offenders as young as 14 who are convicted to have their names revealed. I actually agree on this in principle, but cannot say that it would have compelled me to change my vote. That's because Harper has offered absolutely nothing to fund rehabilitation programs or has cut back funding for them severely. You can't deal with youth crime unless you deal with the root causes and they are far too many to enumerate. He offers nothing other than $100 a month not indexed and taxed back at rates of 15 - 45% -- which stops being paid anyway once a kid turns six, way too young for the juvenile delinquent system to be involved anyway. That's not leadership.
Second, Stéphane Dion released his platform today, called Richer, Fairer, Greener and it reminds me a fair bit about the original Red Book back in 1993, except this time there is much more emphasis on everywhere we've regressed over just the last two and a half years under the Harper Administration and how we have to get out of it. That I think should be the first focus for the Liberals these final weeks -- hammer often what's happened under Harper. The second should be just how much more we'll be under the American sphere of influence if John McCain pulls off an upset in November; and that the Liberals will be just as tough against the Democrats as they were during the 1990s while Harper will continue to roll over for Big Lumber, Big Oil, and Big Finance no matter who's in charge in the White House.
In short, get in the face of the media (including the columnists) and the corporate interests who want Harper to win, day after day -- and don't give them the chance to hit the kill button. It ain't over until it's over.
UPDATE (4:44 pm EDT, 2044 GMT): Some of you pointed out the NDs are at 22, not 26. Duly noted, and corrected.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Conservative 35 (-1)
Liberal 30 (-1)
NDP 22 (+2)
Bloc 7 (0)
Green 6 (-1)
(margin of error ± 3.1%)
The most interest shift is in Ontario, where the Liberals are now in the lead 39-31 with Dion picking up three points from yesterday. With the economy continuing to slump, Jim Flaherty's announcement to the world that my home province is not a good place to invest may finally be starting to bite. Ontarians are a normally tolerant people but there's only so much we'll tolerate especially when it involves our pocketbooks.
On to today's major policy announcements. First, Steve Harper says he wants the identities of violent offenders as young as 14 who are convicted to have their names revealed. I actually agree on this in principle, but cannot say that it would have compelled me to change my vote. That's because Harper has offered absolutely nothing to fund rehabilitation programs or has cut back funding for them severely. You can't deal with youth crime unless you deal with the root causes and they are far too many to enumerate. He offers nothing other than $100 a month not indexed and taxed back at rates of 15 - 45% -- which stops being paid anyway once a kid turns six, way too young for the juvenile delinquent system to be involved anyway. That's not leadership.
Second, Stéphane Dion released his platform today, called Richer, Fairer, Greener and it reminds me a fair bit about the original Red Book back in 1993, except this time there is much more emphasis on everywhere we've regressed over just the last two and a half years under the Harper Administration and how we have to get out of it. That I think should be the first focus for the Liberals these final weeks -- hammer often what's happened under Harper. The second should be just how much more we'll be under the American sphere of influence if John McCain pulls off an upset in November; and that the Liberals will be just as tough against the Democrats as they were during the 1990s while Harper will continue to roll over for Big Lumber, Big Oil, and Big Finance no matter who's in charge in the White House.
In short, get in the face of the media (including the columnists) and the corporate interests who want Harper to win, day after day -- and don't give them the chance to hit the kill button. It ain't over until it's over.
UPDATE (4:44 pm EDT, 2044 GMT): Some of you pointed out the NDs are at 22, not 26. Duly noted, and corrected.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Quick morning notes (2008-09-22)
The Canadian election has gotten some notice this morning at HuffPo. Jeremy Jacquot notes the stark policy differences between Harper and Dion and how a carbon tax would work (putting emphasis on the fact the gasoline tax would not go up and diesel would not go up for at least a year); as well as the fact that the environment is getting almost no notice at all in the US campaign.
I also note Scott Tribe's referral to the daily tracking poll being done by Nanos. Yesterday's results showed that the lead the Conservatives have over the Liberals dropped from 11 to 5 in just two days. Since a tracking poll only interviews 300 per day and the announced totals show a four day rolling average of 1200 one does have to be careful. But I note that even out West, the heartland of Harper support, the Cons are being eroded at.
This weekend's past events, including the withdrawal of a Conservative candidate (BigCityLib deserves some credit for that!) at the last minute may not be a good sign either. There are still three weeks to go ... but there is reason to be optimistic now.
Last quick note, we know at least one element of the Dion platform: The Liberals are vowing to eliminate the tax on income trusts that the Cons vowed not to do then broke their promise. For seniors, many of whom were using the trusts to derive a low to no tax income, this will be a huge consideration. The Conservatives are proposing to increase the exemption on pensions to $3000 from $2000 which would mean a $150 tax cut; and many seniors got hit with a tax assessment much greater than that. Seniors also vote in greater numbers than us younger folk -- something pollsters often miss as well when they determine "likely voters."
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
I also note Scott Tribe's referral to the daily tracking poll being done by Nanos. Yesterday's results showed that the lead the Conservatives have over the Liberals dropped from 11 to 5 in just two days. Since a tracking poll only interviews 300 per day and the announced totals show a four day rolling average of 1200 one does have to be careful. But I note that even out West, the heartland of Harper support, the Cons are being eroded at.
This weekend's past events, including the withdrawal of a Conservative candidate (BigCityLib deserves some credit for that!) at the last minute may not be a good sign either. There are still three weeks to go ... but there is reason to be optimistic now.
Last quick note, we know at least one element of the Dion platform: The Liberals are vowing to eliminate the tax on income trusts that the Cons vowed not to do then broke their promise. For seniors, many of whom were using the trusts to derive a low to no tax income, this will be a huge consideration. The Conservatives are proposing to increase the exemption on pensions to $3000 from $2000 which would mean a $150 tax cut; and many seniors got hit with a tax assessment much greater than that. Seniors also vote in greater numbers than us younger folk -- something pollsters often miss as well when they determine "likely voters."
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
A boy named Sioux: Election rant week two
Yesterday, my father and I went to the returning office and voted by "special ballot" to get our civic duty out of the way. You simply don't know what could happen between now and October 14th ... and we felt it important that our voices were heard. I think you all know who I voted for; as for my father -- I didn't ask, it is after all a secret ballot.
Now to my thoughts about this past week.
Conservatives: Gerry Ritz. Doesn't he know that even in the secret society that Stephen Harper created, everything is recorded? This isn't about Wayne Easter, as repulsive as that death wish was. It's about the now 18 people who have died from listeriosis and the dozens more that could die in the coming weeks -- as one who commented in this blog earlier in the week pointed out, listeria can stay in a person's system for up to seventy days. While those who have weaker immune systems are at greatest risk, even people in their prime (20-50) who are relatively healthy could wind up dead.
It is true that some of the moves towards self-regulation began under the Liberals, not the Conservatives. It is also true, however, that the Cons want to go all the way with absolutely no oversight and no way to review results. No standards, either. Furthermore, the public health officer the Liberals set up as an independent agent who gives impartial advice was under the Conservatives made an employee of the Minister of Health serving at pleasure and dismissible without cause. (This is a similar situation in the States where the once independent Surgeon General's office -- who made waves in the 1960s when talking about the dangers of tobacco and in the 1980s by promoting condoms to reduce HIV infection rates -- has become a pawn of the Executive under the Bush Administration.)
Too, when Harper went to Welland earlier in the week, just as the city is reeling from the closure of the John Deere plant, he set up a photo op to talk about -- flavoured cigarettes. Is there some kind of disconnect here, or what?
Finally, about the tax credit for first time home buyers' closing costs: $5000 is actually $750. It would be useful if the actual tax cut was announced, not the unrealized amount.
Liberals: Stéphane Dion appeared to back away somewhat from the Green Shift, although he insists that it's still very much part of his platform, to be released as early as tomorrow. He also announced more money for infrastructure, farm subsidies and the performing arts -- the last one is very important in Québec, particularly Montréal and area where he absolutely does need to hang on to what he has and pick up a few more districts.
My concern is why he hasn't put out his team earlier to spread the word? Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff are outstanding voices, as is Ralph Goodale. My question is, where is Gerard Kennedy? Carolyn Bennett was nowhere to be seen until this morning on CBC-TV. Elections aren't stretched out as in the States, they're only five weeks here. Dion is going to need more than more verbal gaffes and leaks if he wants to go over the top.
The commercial about listeria that was released on Friday is a good start ... but they have to keep hitting it hard and often. Just stick to the basics. KISS -- keep it short and simple -- and ask Canadians to think what it would be like if the Cons had a second chance, majority or minority.
NDP: Layton stayed on message and continues to make his focus Harper, not Dion. But here's the thing: Last time out, he was literally begging people to vote for his party so he could act as a counterweight to the Conservatives. He was just a couple seats short of what he needed to get the balance of power. Now, he's not just fighting both the Liberals and the Greens but also the Bloc in Québec who have become the social democratic voice in that province, however increasingly irrelevant. Jack comes off as a really nice guy, but if we had proportional representation or a single transferable vote (i.e. a preferential ballot) his party would no longer be my second choice -- it would be the Green Party.
And another thing -- Layton may be truthful when he says there was no deal with the Marijuana Party, but a lot of Canadians won't believe it no matter how many times he says it. Losing two members from your ticket just before the nomination deadline isn't exactly an indication of a strong campaign.
As for the polls saying the NDP is gaining ground against the Liberals -- well, keep in mind it's a rolling poll. 300 people is hardly a reliable sample size.
Bloc: Hasn't the joke gone on long enough? Seriously, when the Bloc ran the first time, didn't Lucien Bouchard run under the slogan, "Let's give ourselves real power?" I have to admit, I remember their free time ads in English back in 1993, which was just white text on a black background scrolling upwards, but Bouchard was asking the questions the other leaders weren't -- about the deficit, the moribund economy, high unemployment. For the next five elections including this one, their leader has been Gilles Duceppe. Has Québec gotten any closer to independence? No. Have the provinces gained more powers? Well, on immigration perhaps, but immigration has always been a shared responsibility between the federal and provincial governments and the updated agreements deal more with provinces' role in immigrant selection and settlement money. There's also more money for shared cost programs, but there haven't been any special deals for Québec I can see other than the province setting up its own blood bank agency.
Duceppe is now fighting a battle for relevance. The Cons are picking up a lot of votes in rural Québec, once the bastion of the Union Nationale. The NDP has broken through in Montréal and I think could peel some seats from both the Bloc and Liberals. For him, anything less than 40 districts and he's toast.
Green Party: Elizabeth May apologized this week for not smoking pot, as she revealed her platform which calls for its decriminalization among other things. I don't know why she apologized, there was no need to.
On a more serious note, May does continue to get my respect. I think a lot depends on how well she does in the debates; but she's very feisty. And let's face it, about the THC thing -- if weed was taxed the same as tobacco, it could generate about a billion per year in revenue just for Ottawa. Now why hasn't anyone else thought about that? (Well, actually it has been said, but no one has taken it seriously until now.)
And one last thing, about all parties: Nothing about Aboriginals. Nothing. Aren't our native population Canadians too?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Now to my thoughts about this past week.
Conservatives: Gerry Ritz. Doesn't he know that even in the secret society that Stephen Harper created, everything is recorded? This isn't about Wayne Easter, as repulsive as that death wish was. It's about the now 18 people who have died from listeriosis and the dozens more that could die in the coming weeks -- as one who commented in this blog earlier in the week pointed out, listeria can stay in a person's system for up to seventy days. While those who have weaker immune systems are at greatest risk, even people in their prime (20-50) who are relatively healthy could wind up dead.
It is true that some of the moves towards self-regulation began under the Liberals, not the Conservatives. It is also true, however, that the Cons want to go all the way with absolutely no oversight and no way to review results. No standards, either. Furthermore, the public health officer the Liberals set up as an independent agent who gives impartial advice was under the Conservatives made an employee of the Minister of Health serving at pleasure and dismissible without cause. (This is a similar situation in the States where the once independent Surgeon General's office -- who made waves in the 1960s when talking about the dangers of tobacco and in the 1980s by promoting condoms to reduce HIV infection rates -- has become a pawn of the Executive under the Bush Administration.)
Too, when Harper went to Welland earlier in the week, just as the city is reeling from the closure of the John Deere plant, he set up a photo op to talk about -- flavoured cigarettes. Is there some kind of disconnect here, or what?
Finally, about the tax credit for first time home buyers' closing costs: $5000 is actually $750. It would be useful if the actual tax cut was announced, not the unrealized amount.
Liberals: Stéphane Dion appeared to back away somewhat from the Green Shift, although he insists that it's still very much part of his platform, to be released as early as tomorrow. He also announced more money for infrastructure, farm subsidies and the performing arts -- the last one is very important in Québec, particularly Montréal and area where he absolutely does need to hang on to what he has and pick up a few more districts.
My concern is why he hasn't put out his team earlier to spread the word? Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff are outstanding voices, as is Ralph Goodale. My question is, where is Gerard Kennedy? Carolyn Bennett was nowhere to be seen until this morning on CBC-TV. Elections aren't stretched out as in the States, they're only five weeks here. Dion is going to need more than more verbal gaffes and leaks if he wants to go over the top.
The commercial about listeria that was released on Friday is a good start ... but they have to keep hitting it hard and often. Just stick to the basics. KISS -- keep it short and simple -- and ask Canadians to think what it would be like if the Cons had a second chance, majority or minority.
NDP: Layton stayed on message and continues to make his focus Harper, not Dion. But here's the thing: Last time out, he was literally begging people to vote for his party so he could act as a counterweight to the Conservatives. He was just a couple seats short of what he needed to get the balance of power. Now, he's not just fighting both the Liberals and the Greens but also the Bloc in Québec who have become the social democratic voice in that province, however increasingly irrelevant. Jack comes off as a really nice guy, but if we had proportional representation or a single transferable vote (i.e. a preferential ballot) his party would no longer be my second choice -- it would be the Green Party.
And another thing -- Layton may be truthful when he says there was no deal with the Marijuana Party, but a lot of Canadians won't believe it no matter how many times he says it. Losing two members from your ticket just before the nomination deadline isn't exactly an indication of a strong campaign.
As for the polls saying the NDP is gaining ground against the Liberals -- well, keep in mind it's a rolling poll. 300 people is hardly a reliable sample size.
Bloc: Hasn't the joke gone on long enough? Seriously, when the Bloc ran the first time, didn't Lucien Bouchard run under the slogan, "Let's give ourselves real power?" I have to admit, I remember their free time ads in English back in 1993, which was just white text on a black background scrolling upwards, but Bouchard was asking the questions the other leaders weren't -- about the deficit, the moribund economy, high unemployment. For the next five elections including this one, their leader has been Gilles Duceppe. Has Québec gotten any closer to independence? No. Have the provinces gained more powers? Well, on immigration perhaps, but immigration has always been a shared responsibility between the federal and provincial governments and the updated agreements deal more with provinces' role in immigrant selection and settlement money. There's also more money for shared cost programs, but there haven't been any special deals for Québec I can see other than the province setting up its own blood bank agency.
Duceppe is now fighting a battle for relevance. The Cons are picking up a lot of votes in rural Québec, once the bastion of the Union Nationale. The NDP has broken through in Montréal and I think could peel some seats from both the Bloc and Liberals. For him, anything less than 40 districts and he's toast.
Green Party: Elizabeth May apologized this week for not smoking pot, as she revealed her platform which calls for its decriminalization among other things. I don't know why she apologized, there was no need to.
On a more serious note, May does continue to get my respect. I think a lot depends on how well she does in the debates; but she's very feisty. And let's face it, about the THC thing -- if weed was taxed the same as tobacco, it could generate about a billion per year in revenue just for Ottawa. Now why hasn't anyone else thought about that? (Well, actually it has been said, but no one has taken it seriously until now.)
And one last thing, about all parties: Nothing about Aboriginals. Nothing. Aren't our native population Canadians too?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Deal or no deal?
With apologies to fellow Canadian Howie Mandel -- but this is serious. If the accord between the Liberal and Green Parties is fair game, then Canadians also have the right to know if the NDP had a deal with the Marijuana Party, now or in the past. With not one but two NDP candidates having to withdraw from the election, Jack Layton needs to clear the air on this and fast -- especially with the deadline to register candidates coming up this Monday.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Hotel bombing in Pakistan
We cannot forget that the so-called War Against Terror is still very much on, after today's bombing of a hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan. The very definition of terrorism is to create fear in those who would fight against evil. While we can disagree about who is a terrorist and who is a freedom fighter, we must all agree that targeting innocent civilians and tourists is completely unacceptable. They are not legitimate targets -- never have been, and never will be.
We must love one another, or we must all die. Those who would not treat brother as brother or sister as sister must be tracked and hunted down. It's as simple as that. If creating fear is their goal, it will not work because we will not be afraid.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
We must love one another, or we must all die. Those who would not treat brother as brother or sister as sister must be tracked and hunted down. It's as simple as that. If creating fear is their goal, it will not work because we will not be afraid.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)