Help me out here folks, but since when is having an affair with a fellow officer on the battlefield a crime? It's not like passions don't heat up in the flame of war, especially in a country where there are several factions who want to engage in femicide.
It's not clear whether Brig. Gen. Daniel Menard, scheduled to lead the NATO charge in and around Kandahar City this fall, was doing the nasty -- either with his wife (who is another officer under his command) or another female officer. But coming just weeks after he was fined $4000 for unlawful discharge of a firearm -- it doesn't look good.
Certainly we expect a higher standard of ethics from those men and women brave enough to wear the uniform. But isn't this just a bit unrealistic? Like, when was the last time a general or admiral went to the brig for having sex? Come on, there's more to this story than what we're being told. Another billion dollar boondoggle (Read: G-8 / G-20) the Harper Government doesn't want us to know about, perhaps?
Maybe someone who wears a uniform can explain why this would be detrimental to morale -- even if it was with wifey.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Be very, very careful about drilling in the Beaufort Sea
News that Plan Number 17 (or whatever we're up to) to stop the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico may finally be starting to work is welcome but it's worth pointing out that this disaster, significant as it is and damaging to fisheries and tourism for quite some time to come, happened in a subtropical climate. Remember Sarah Palin and her "Drill Baby Drill" chant during the 2008 election? Looks pretty bad now, especially considering she was still in university (on a basketball varsity scholarship) when the 1989 Valdez disaster happened in her home state, when the Arctic winter was just ending.
This naturally brings up the issue of what to do with the vast reserves of oil and natural gas in the Beaufort Sea. We know that approval of the Mackenzie Pipeline, considered at least since the 1970s, is almost a given now that most of the land claims in the NWT have been settled. One potential hangup is the still undemaracted sea border between the Yukon and Alaska -- Canada claims it should continue due north from the land border along the West 141st Meridian while the States claims it should be up to the 200 mile limit of the western coast of the Arctic Islands.
But setting that aside the real problem is the fact the continental shelf in the Beaufort drops quite suddenly just a few knots off shore, and during the winter months it is pitch black. We know how hard it was to find the leak off Lousiana -- but at least there was some light on the way down. Imagine a blowout a mile down, in February, when it's 50 below.
Certainly we need to become less dependent on OPEC oil and gas -- we still import quite a bit from Venezuela. And the less dependent the territories become from Ottawa the better.
But if we are going to permit drilling in the final frontier, we'd better know what we are doing and make sure that disasters like the one down South are prosecuted stiffly, including the cleanup costs. Otherwise, the Great White North will become the Black and Blue North in no time flat.
I'm just worried about the rush to start drilling ... I realize it's been talked about for decades but would another year or two to make absolutely sure really hurt all that much?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
This naturally brings up the issue of what to do with the vast reserves of oil and natural gas in the Beaufort Sea. We know that approval of the Mackenzie Pipeline, considered at least since the 1970s, is almost a given now that most of the land claims in the NWT have been settled. One potential hangup is the still undemaracted sea border between the Yukon and Alaska -- Canada claims it should continue due north from the land border along the West 141st Meridian while the States claims it should be up to the 200 mile limit of the western coast of the Arctic Islands.
But setting that aside the real problem is the fact the continental shelf in the Beaufort drops quite suddenly just a few knots off shore, and during the winter months it is pitch black. We know how hard it was to find the leak off Lousiana -- but at least there was some light on the way down. Imagine a blowout a mile down, in February, when it's 50 below.
Certainly we need to become less dependent on OPEC oil and gas -- we still import quite a bit from Venezuela. And the less dependent the territories become from Ottawa the better.
But if we are going to permit drilling in the final frontier, we'd better know what we are doing and make sure that disasters like the one down South are prosecuted stiffly, including the cleanup costs. Otherwise, the Great White North will become the Black and Blue North in no time flat.
I'm just worried about the rush to start drilling ... I realize it's been talked about for decades but would another year or two to make absolutely sure really hurt all that much?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Harper and the "Mexico City Policy"
As much as abortion upsets me personally, as much as I think the issue should be debated (as Canada is one of the few countries with no law whatsoever), the approach being taken by Stephen Harper -- that he won't rock the boat here but none of our foreign aid money will be used for abortions in Third World countries, or even to promote the procedure -- is disingenuous at best and outright stupid at worst. Can he really expect us to think we can have it both ways? Are we going to have our own version of the "Mexico City Policy" after all?
In a idealistic world, no unmarried person would have sex voluntarily and no person would ever be subjected to sexual assault. But this isn't an ideal world and abortion, while I think it is evil, has to remain a necessary and legal evil. Consigning 70,000 women in other countries to death sentences while thousands, even tens of thousands, of women here can get therapeutic reproductive services without question is a double standard.
Whose advice Mr. Harper has been taking, and why is he so bound and determined to undermine Canada's reputation in the world -- first for the environment, and now on women's health?
For that matter, why have governments of all stripes have taken contradictory positions on all sorts of issues -- asbestos, seal pelts, overfishing? Why the whole us versus them mentality? Isn't this the same planet we all share?
I do think the Liberals really dropped the ball on this one weeks ago when it didn't know how to crack the whip and when. Then again, if we're going to be discussing the issue, let's have a proper debate in Parliament and not a decision made by executive order without giving MPs a chance to even review the draft regulations.
We've already lost face with the Palestinians (the peaceful ones, that is), now with poor women. What is Harper's next move? Oh, let's see ... banning women from the workplace. Then taking away their right to vote. That'll really go over well.
We want and should have faith based politicians, but that doesn't mean that should lead to faith based politics. Canada hasn't been a Dominion for decades and we don't need Dominionism (i.e. "Kingdom Now") for the present or the future.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
In a idealistic world, no unmarried person would have sex voluntarily and no person would ever be subjected to sexual assault. But this isn't an ideal world and abortion, while I think it is evil, has to remain a necessary and legal evil. Consigning 70,000 women in other countries to death sentences while thousands, even tens of thousands, of women here can get therapeutic reproductive services without question is a double standard.
Whose advice Mr. Harper has been taking, and why is he so bound and determined to undermine Canada's reputation in the world -- first for the environment, and now on women's health?
For that matter, why have governments of all stripes have taken contradictory positions on all sorts of issues -- asbestos, seal pelts, overfishing? Why the whole us versus them mentality? Isn't this the same planet we all share?
I do think the Liberals really dropped the ball on this one weeks ago when it didn't know how to crack the whip and when. Then again, if we're going to be discussing the issue, let's have a proper debate in Parliament and not a decision made by executive order without giving MPs a chance to even review the draft regulations.
We've already lost face with the Palestinians (the peaceful ones, that is), now with poor women. What is Harper's next move? Oh, let's see ... banning women from the workplace. Then taking away their right to vote. That'll really go over well.
We want and should have faith based politicians, but that doesn't mean that should lead to faith based politics. Canada hasn't been a Dominion for decades and we don't need Dominionism (i.e. "Kingdom Now") for the present or the future.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Open the books, residents of the Château on the Rideau
Maybe I was joking back in October when I suggested Canada needed an expenses row of our own. But the refusal of MPs from all parties to even consider the idea of an audit of personal and parliamentary expenses, rallying behind the supersecret committee called the Board of Internal Economy, is nuts. In fact, it does suggest there may be in fact a degree of inpropriety even if there hasn't been. So what's the big deal?
This is a simple one. MPs and Senators should be required to declare all conflicts of interest and to place any companies they own into blind trusts. They certainly have a zone of privacy regarding "the games people play" (ahem!) but they should have no right of privacy when it comes to their income taxes -- they and their spouses or partners should be required by law to disclose federal and provincial returns for all calendar years for which they served at public expense, even for just one day. And the Auditor General should have the right to do a forensic audit of Parliamentary expenses -- in fact you'd think they (Senators and MPs) would welcome being scrutinized to know we're getting value for money.
Come on, it's a $500 million operation. This is a drop in the bucket considering the executive branch spends $200 billion + every year. A little openness wouldn't hurt, would it?
About five percent of Canadians get audited every year for income taxes -- that's 400,000 out of, say, 20 million returns filed. Most are just requests for more receipts (in the age of e-filing, that's understandable) and maybe only a few thousand get the full "screwjob" audit the IRS is notorious for (where the personal audit rate can run to as high as 20% in some years). We're talking about only 308 MPs and 105 Senators. What's the freaking problem? Who polices the police?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
This is a simple one. MPs and Senators should be required to declare all conflicts of interest and to place any companies they own into blind trusts. They certainly have a zone of privacy regarding "the games people play" (ahem!) but they should have no right of privacy when it comes to their income taxes -- they and their spouses or partners should be required by law to disclose federal and provincial returns for all calendar years for which they served at public expense, even for just one day. And the Auditor General should have the right to do a forensic audit of Parliamentary expenses -- in fact you'd think they (Senators and MPs) would welcome being scrutinized to know we're getting value for money.
Come on, it's a $500 million operation. This is a drop in the bucket considering the executive branch spends $200 billion + every year. A little openness wouldn't hurt, would it?
About five percent of Canadians get audited every year for income taxes -- that's 400,000 out of, say, 20 million returns filed. Most are just requests for more receipts (in the age of e-filing, that's understandable) and maybe only a few thousand get the full "screwjob" audit the IRS is notorious for (where the personal audit rate can run to as high as 20% in some years). We're talking about only 308 MPs and 105 Senators. What's the freaking problem? Who polices the police?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Adultery can pay -- sometimes
When I read this story the other day, I thought at first the woman was nuts -- you heard about this, I'm sure: A woman, who had a cell phone account under her maiden name, is now suing Rogers for contributing to the breakup of her marriage because when her husband bundled cable and Internet the company apparently also included the cell account and he discovered the affair by reviewing the combined bill and noticing three one hour calls -- which obviously weren't business related. The woman claims after her husband left her, her job performance sank to the point she was fired -- from a job that paid over $100k a year. The affair, it should be pointed out, was short-lived.
The damages she is seeking: $600,000.
Obviously, I don't condone adultery, except under one condition -- that the one cheating is a victim of his or her partner's serial abuse or drug use. Neither was the case here, far as I know. However, there is the issue of consent -- no one asked her if she wanted the cell phone included in the account, apparently it seems either her husband or Rogers did this unilaterally.
So, I think she has a case. Everyone has a right to privacy, and as far as I know adultery is not a criminal offence in Canada. But $600,000? A bit high under the common law. I'd award maybe half that. Too bad she's not in Québec -- she might have cleaned up under the Civil Code (though I could be wrong -- any civil litigators in La Belle who can clarify what damages she might be entitled to?).
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
The damages she is seeking: $600,000.
Obviously, I don't condone adultery, except under one condition -- that the one cheating is a victim of his or her partner's serial abuse or drug use. Neither was the case here, far as I know. However, there is the issue of consent -- no one asked her if she wanted the cell phone included in the account, apparently it seems either her husband or Rogers did this unilaterally.
So, I think she has a case. Everyone has a right to privacy, and as far as I know adultery is not a criminal offence in Canada. But $600,000? A bit high under the common law. I'd award maybe half that. Too bad she's not in Québec -- she might have cleaned up under the Civil Code (though I could be wrong -- any civil litigators in La Belle who can clarify what damages she might be entitled to?).
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Double standard in cartoons? (And the Tea Partiers, too)
Over the last few years, some of the most familiar cartoon characters have had makeovers. In particular, three female characters stand out. No one seemed bothered when Strawberry Shortcake ™ and Holly Hobbie ™, created by Muriel Fahrion and the real Hobbie respectively, got worked up to look like sassy and sexy teenagers. But a few months back, when Dora "The Explorer" Marquez ™ got a similar do-over, people flipped out. In fact, some people I know are still calling New Dora a "slut". Really.
Bit of racism, perhaps? It's okay for a white teenager to look sexy but not a Hispanic? What is wrong with parents these days? Must be the same gang that started the whole Tea Party movement in the States. Anti-immigrant, wants a Berlin Wall along the Mexican border, wants priests and ministers to check the ids of every congregant in the communion line. Guess it's the new crime down there -- DWH. Driving While Hispanic.
So ... how was your day.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Bit of racism, perhaps? It's okay for a white teenager to look sexy but not a Hispanic? What is wrong with parents these days? Must be the same gang that started the whole Tea Party movement in the States. Anti-immigrant, wants a Berlin Wall along the Mexican border, wants priests and ministers to check the ids of every congregant in the communion line. Guess it's the new crime down there -- DWH. Driving While Hispanic.
So ... how was your day.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Who cares about a new stadium anyway?
You know that when a city or region gets a major sporting event there will always be a way to screw things up. So it is with Toronto and the Pan-Am Games coming in 2015. Hamilton is supposed to host track and field, swimming and cycling. The track field is also supposed to be converted into a football stadium which would be the new home of the Ti-Cats to replace the decrepit Ivor Wynne. Hence the ongoing war of words between the team's current owner Bob Young and the city managers. Young claims the west end site currently being proposed -- a former air conditioning factory, next to a rail marshaling yard and near a major city park -- doesn't have nearly enough parking and even if public transit could be figured into the mix he'd still lose about $9 million a year.
Oh to have so much money that one could complain about losing so little an amount.
But here's the hilarious part. Of the alternate sites -- a few on the Escarpment, one near Confederation Park (where the campground is being decommissioned), these are also dissatisfactory to Young. So what did he suggest? The "Hamilton part" of Aldershot.
For those of you not familiar with Southern Ontario, Aldershot is the western part of Burlington, with the sole exception of a cemetery (Woodlawn) that is, since the closing of an arterial road last year that was turned into a pedestrian walkway, an exclave of Hamilton. The rest is pretty much filled in with a lot of the brown fields being turned into residential space, along with clearly designated greenbelt space and other cemeteries (Jewish and Catholic, mostly).
True, many homes in Aldershot have Hamilton phone numbers (I know this from my time working at the pizza call centre) but this goes back to the days when Burlington was a bedroom community of Hamilton and not Toronto as it is nowadays.
Time is running out. Already, the velodrome (cycling track) may be relocated to a sports park in Dundas and that raises its own problems as part of the park is on a closed landfill. If we don't get our act together, the organizing committee in Toronto may just decide Hamilton isn't worth it -- in which case all we'd be left with is bocci (and yes, there are bocci courts ready to go).
I am all too familiar with the white elephant syndrome.
But if we're looking for legacy facilities, we need to make a decision soon -- figure out what will become of the sports stadiums long after the games. It's been years since we've had an outdoor stadium concert -- why aren't we taking that into consideration? (Concerts have been banned at Ivor Wynne for more than three decades -- most of us remember the 1975 fiasco when Pink Floyd used up their remaining fireworks for the North American tour and wound up completely destroying the scoreboard and smashing the windows of houses blocks away, the 1979 Rush concert wasn't so much better. There was a lot of hope when Faith Hill and Tim McGraw wanted to do a show there but they backed off once they heard about the Floyd incident.)
Or demanding the province fast-track the LRT lines which would resolve a lot of the issues Young has brought up?
Oh, there's one other thing to consider -- many of the major sports showcased at the Pan-Am Games also have their world championships in odd numbered years and also act as qualifiers for the Summer Olympics the following year -- in this case the 2016 extravaganza in Rio de Janiero. Most of the A-list stars pass on the Pan-Ams to prepare for their worlds which means we'll be getting mostly the B-teams -- the university athletes not good enough to be world class. That's also something to keep in mind.
And in the long run, will people remember there even were the Pan-Ams here? Can you remember which city hosted in 1987? Quickly -- it was Indianapolis. What was the main event at the 1999 games in Winnipeg? A reunion of The Guess Who. Sure, it'd be nice to see Gordon Lightfoot perform "Canadian Railroad Trilogy" one last time -- when he's 77 (and hopefully still alive -- remember the death hoax back in February?). But most of us will see it on TV anyway.
If Hamilton loses its chance, it will be because the people that matter were too stupid to work something out. But let's not forget it wasn't until 2006 that taxpayers in Montréal finally paid off the Big Owe. Sydney and Beijing have barely used facilities left over. And the worst case -- Greece is paying a huge price right now for a whole bunch of fiascoes -- the 2004 Athens Olympics being just one of them. In the end, because the Government of Ontario is contractually bound to cover any losses, we'll lose no matter what.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Oh to have so much money that one could complain about losing so little an amount.
But here's the hilarious part. Of the alternate sites -- a few on the Escarpment, one near Confederation Park (where the campground is being decommissioned), these are also dissatisfactory to Young. So what did he suggest? The "Hamilton part" of Aldershot.
For those of you not familiar with Southern Ontario, Aldershot is the western part of Burlington, with the sole exception of a cemetery (Woodlawn) that is, since the closing of an arterial road last year that was turned into a pedestrian walkway, an exclave of Hamilton. The rest is pretty much filled in with a lot of the brown fields being turned into residential space, along with clearly designated greenbelt space and other cemeteries (Jewish and Catholic, mostly).
True, many homes in Aldershot have Hamilton phone numbers (I know this from my time working at the pizza call centre) but this goes back to the days when Burlington was a bedroom community of Hamilton and not Toronto as it is nowadays.
Time is running out. Already, the velodrome (cycling track) may be relocated to a sports park in Dundas and that raises its own problems as part of the park is on a closed landfill. If we don't get our act together, the organizing committee in Toronto may just decide Hamilton isn't worth it -- in which case all we'd be left with is bocci (and yes, there are bocci courts ready to go).
I am all too familiar with the white elephant syndrome.
But if we're looking for legacy facilities, we need to make a decision soon -- figure out what will become of the sports stadiums long after the games. It's been years since we've had an outdoor stadium concert -- why aren't we taking that into consideration? (Concerts have been banned at Ivor Wynne for more than three decades -- most of us remember the 1975 fiasco when Pink Floyd used up their remaining fireworks for the North American tour and wound up completely destroying the scoreboard and smashing the windows of houses blocks away, the 1979 Rush concert wasn't so much better. There was a lot of hope when Faith Hill and Tim McGraw wanted to do a show there but they backed off once they heard about the Floyd incident.)
Or demanding the province fast-track the LRT lines which would resolve a lot of the issues Young has brought up?
Oh, there's one other thing to consider -- many of the major sports showcased at the Pan-Am Games also have their world championships in odd numbered years and also act as qualifiers for the Summer Olympics the following year -- in this case the 2016 extravaganza in Rio de Janiero. Most of the A-list stars pass on the Pan-Ams to prepare for their worlds which means we'll be getting mostly the B-teams -- the university athletes not good enough to be world class. That's also something to keep in mind.
And in the long run, will people remember there even were the Pan-Ams here? Can you remember which city hosted in 1987? Quickly -- it was Indianapolis. What was the main event at the 1999 games in Winnipeg? A reunion of The Guess Who. Sure, it'd be nice to see Gordon Lightfoot perform "Canadian Railroad Trilogy" one last time -- when he's 77 (and hopefully still alive -- remember the death hoax back in February?). But most of us will see it on TV anyway.
If Hamilton loses its chance, it will be because the people that matter were too stupid to work something out. But let's not forget it wasn't until 2006 that taxpayers in Montréal finally paid off the Big Owe. Sydney and Beijing have barely used facilities left over. And the worst case -- Greece is paying a huge price right now for a whole bunch of fiascoes -- the 2004 Athens Olympics being just one of them. In the end, because the Government of Ontario is contractually bound to cover any losses, we'll lose no matter what.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, May 3, 2010
What I am not
It's been a few weeks since my last post ... I almost made a comment last week about Gordon Brown's comment calling a constituent "bigoted" but there's no need: Elections aren't won but lost and he lost it with that one, his apology notwithstanding.
But I do need to make a few things absolutely clear today because of some ugly things I learned offhand from a "source" the last few days about some things that have been said about me.
Let me be clear: I am by no means perfect. In fact, I have done some pretty lousy things which have gotten me into a heap of trouble and for which I am prepared to take full responsibility.
But amongst the most outrageous things, I categorically deny. So let's set the record straight. I am straight, not homosexual or bisexual (not that there's anything wrong with either). I most certainly am not a pedophile. I don't even know what it means to give off an "effeminate bearing" so I am not going to go there. I can be mean and put people off the wrong way at times, but the suggestion that I am evil or the devil incarnate or the Antichrist -- well, if that was the case, all the televangelists would have targeted me for assassination by now! (And it's not like there are already a whole bunch of candidates anyway already.)
I can't forgive myself for the wrongs I've done (although God can) but I won't apologize for the things I am not. I don't expect an apology either -- I just want to clear the air.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
But I do need to make a few things absolutely clear today because of some ugly things I learned offhand from a "source" the last few days about some things that have been said about me.
Let me be clear: I am by no means perfect. In fact, I have done some pretty lousy things which have gotten me into a heap of trouble and for which I am prepared to take full responsibility.
But amongst the most outrageous things, I categorically deny. So let's set the record straight. I am straight, not homosexual or bisexual (not that there's anything wrong with either). I most certainly am not a pedophile. I don't even know what it means to give off an "effeminate bearing" so I am not going to go there. I can be mean and put people off the wrong way at times, but the suggestion that I am evil or the devil incarnate or the Antichrist -- well, if that was the case, all the televangelists would have targeted me for assassination by now! (And it's not like there are already a whole bunch of candidates anyway already.)
I can't forgive myself for the wrongs I've done (although God can) but I won't apologize for the things I am not. I don't expect an apology either -- I just want to clear the air.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Old Age pension for child murderers
Not that I'm a big fan of Peter Worthington. But the Toronto Sun columnist raises a good point today about serial killer Clifford Olson, who got paid $100k nearly three decades ago in a plea agreement where he didn't necessarily have to tell the police about all the kids he brutually murdered and raped. Now, we learn that Olson has not only collected Old Age Security the last few years, but last year also became eligble for the Guaranteed Income Supplement -- even though he claims he has over a half million stashed away in a bank account in Australia.
To be fair, Corrections Canada does say that the law regarding OAS is that all Canadian residents 65 or over with at least 10 years of residency (or have the equivalent with a pension treaty country) get the pension, and that in Olson's case it is being held for him in trust in a bank account somewhere in Québec, near the pen in Sainte Anne des Plaines where he is presently serving his life sentence.
But something about that strikes me as quite wrong. This isn't your ordinary criminal we're talking about. This is a ruthless and psychotic child killer in a class of his own. It's almost as if we're paying him for the crimes he has committed. And the main reason he gets the supplement is that because all that time he's been in prison he hasn't had a job -- or if he did, one that didn't pay enough so he would have to pay into the CPP and / or the RRQ.
My much more conservative friends (including those who have kids) obviously are livid about this story, but to be honest so am I. It's not like he's ever going to touch the money because there's no way the Parole Board would even give him day passes (or maybe they would!). Shouldn't the money be going to compensation to the families (if they got any at all to begin with, from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board)? I remember the panic that struck Canada during the 1980s thanks to Olson.
I remain steadfast in my opposition to the death penalty even for cowards like him, but a pension is not like the right to vote. OAS is an entitlement, which is not a human right like suffrage is. And if you commit a crime that heinous you should forfeit the entitlement for at least that time while you're in jail. He's being taken care of at taxpayer's expense so why should he be double dipping?
My friends and I do find it amazing that the animal didn't kill his own child which makes it even more infuriating.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
To be fair, Corrections Canada does say that the law regarding OAS is that all Canadian residents 65 or over with at least 10 years of residency (or have the equivalent with a pension treaty country) get the pension, and that in Olson's case it is being held for him in trust in a bank account somewhere in Québec, near the pen in Sainte Anne des Plaines where he is presently serving his life sentence.
But something about that strikes me as quite wrong. This isn't your ordinary criminal we're talking about. This is a ruthless and psychotic child killer in a class of his own. It's almost as if we're paying him for the crimes he has committed. And the main reason he gets the supplement is that because all that time he's been in prison he hasn't had a job -- or if he did, one that didn't pay enough so he would have to pay into the CPP and / or the RRQ.
My much more conservative friends (including those who have kids) obviously are livid about this story, but to be honest so am I. It's not like he's ever going to touch the money because there's no way the Parole Board would even give him day passes (or maybe they would!). Shouldn't the money be going to compensation to the families (if they got any at all to begin with, from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board)? I remember the panic that struck Canada during the 1980s thanks to Olson.
I remain steadfast in my opposition to the death penalty even for cowards like him, but a pension is not like the right to vote. OAS is an entitlement, which is not a human right like suffrage is. And if you commit a crime that heinous you should forfeit the entitlement for at least that time while you're in jail. He's being taken care of at taxpayer's expense so why should he be double dipping?
My friends and I do find it amazing that the animal didn't kill his own child which makes it even more infuriating.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, March 15, 2010
I'm still here!
No, folks, I'm not dead. Just away from any computer for a while, while I'm in transition of sorts. Will start commenting again soon.
Robert
Robert
Friday, February 12, 2010
Europe "got back" of Greece, Canada should not of States
This week the EU countries agreed to Greece's austerity measures to try to cut its deficit. It couldn't have come at a worse time – not just Greece but Spain, Portugal and Ireland have been having financial crises of their own and it has put pressure on the Euro. This past week, it dropped five cents against the greenback to about $1.36 – and the markets are still nervous. For the currency that was poised barely a year ago to become the world's new reserve currency, and I still think it has that potential, it's been quite a ride.
While the common currency has made quite good sense for business and tourism for the 16 countries that use it – perhaps 17 next year if Estonia as expected joins in – its very genius is also its Achilles' heel. Since there is one currency there is only one monetary policy; in effect, the Eurozone countries are just one country as far as the world is concerned. In the past, if one member state overheated, interest rates would be raised to slam the brakes (tightening); conversely, if a state cooled down the rates would be cut (easing).
With the current scenario all countries have to abide by the policies of Frankfurt which may not necessarily be in their individual best interests; worse if a country really gets into trouble the others may be called upon to bail out their fellow member which is politically unpopular but absolutely necessary to prevent a run on their own bonds. Not to mention other countries which may denominate some of their bonds in euros – including Canada and the United States.
Kicking a country out of the Eurozone is pretty much unthinkable – once one is in they're pretty much in, period. But the downside of integration and open borders is now pretty obvious for all to see, and why any talk of a currency union between Canada, Mexico and the United States is just a bunch of hot air. An open border, at least along the 49th, should be pursued; but I wouldn't want to bail out the US out of its huge debt mess. Let them fix it.
What I would support is a review of NAFTA, to bring it up to date with current circumstances and recognizing that money can now flow across borders with a click of a mouse – even “bonds” are now actually virtual instruments, not really negotiable notes on paper. It also has to settle once and for all the remaining irritants – including lumber, farm supports, and whatever border disputes are outstanding.
I also support closer ties to Europe as is now being negotiated provided we continue to control our own money supply until such time that we are really ready for the next huge step.
The last trade deal we signed was with four relatively small countries – Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein – all developed countries that generally play by the world trade rules (for the most part) and still at least one party here voted against the treaty. Does a prince from a country the size of Washington DC really pose a threat to our jobs – especially when he's finally cooperating with the rest of the West on secret bank accounts after all these years? I mean, really. We're having free trade with Colombia and Costa Rica -- both corrupt in certain respects -- and we're afraid of a few rich Europeans?
The Europeans may have each other's back. But a customs union and a currency union goes too far. We should of course maintain trade and military ties to the States, and try to make tourism easier both ways. But they should not expect us Canadians to bail them out -- especially when they've chosen Beijing as their creditor of choice.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
While the common currency has made quite good sense for business and tourism for the 16 countries that use it – perhaps 17 next year if Estonia as expected joins in – its very genius is also its Achilles' heel. Since there is one currency there is only one monetary policy; in effect, the Eurozone countries are just one country as far as the world is concerned. In the past, if one member state overheated, interest rates would be raised to slam the brakes (tightening); conversely, if a state cooled down the rates would be cut (easing).
With the current scenario all countries have to abide by the policies of Frankfurt which may not necessarily be in their individual best interests; worse if a country really gets into trouble the others may be called upon to bail out their fellow member which is politically unpopular but absolutely necessary to prevent a run on their own bonds. Not to mention other countries which may denominate some of their bonds in euros – including Canada and the United States.
Kicking a country out of the Eurozone is pretty much unthinkable – once one is in they're pretty much in, period. But the downside of integration and open borders is now pretty obvious for all to see, and why any talk of a currency union between Canada, Mexico and the United States is just a bunch of hot air. An open border, at least along the 49th, should be pursued; but I wouldn't want to bail out the US out of its huge debt mess. Let them fix it.
What I would support is a review of NAFTA, to bring it up to date with current circumstances and recognizing that money can now flow across borders with a click of a mouse – even “bonds” are now actually virtual instruments, not really negotiable notes on paper. It also has to settle once and for all the remaining irritants – including lumber, farm supports, and whatever border disputes are outstanding.
I also support closer ties to Europe as is now being negotiated provided we continue to control our own money supply until such time that we are really ready for the next huge step.
The last trade deal we signed was with four relatively small countries – Iceland, Norway, Switzerland and Liechtenstein – all developed countries that generally play by the world trade rules (for the most part) and still at least one party here voted against the treaty. Does a prince from a country the size of Washington DC really pose a threat to our jobs – especially when he's finally cooperating with the rest of the West on secret bank accounts after all these years? I mean, really. We're having free trade with Colombia and Costa Rica -- both corrupt in certain respects -- and we're afraid of a few rich Europeans?
The Europeans may have each other's back. But a customs union and a currency union goes too far. We should of course maintain trade and military ties to the States, and try to make tourism easier both ways. But they should not expect us Canadians to bail them out -- especially when they've chosen Beijing as their creditor of choice.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Canadian donations to Haiti over $113 million
With two days left before the deadline for donations to Haiti to be matched by the federal government, Canadians have donated at least $113 million. This speaks so much to our generous nature and our willingness to help the neediest and we should applaud ourselves for that. But if the feds have enough to help people in a third world country, surely they have enough to raise the supplement on Old Age Security or to increase the child supplements to raise tens of thousands of children out of poverty.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Beyond reason and comprehension
This is simply beyond explanation. How the commander of an air force base, a Colonel on track to getting his first star as a general, well respected by the media and J-school students -- and trusted enough to fly the official plane of the Prime Minister, according to the Canadian Press -- not to mention a double major in political science and economics, how he of all people could be accused of double murder and double rape.
What does it say about this world when "Maple Leaf One" (I presume that's the PM's callsign -- Executive One is that of POTUS when he flies commercial), who's made supporting our troops a rallying call -- one of the few things uniting Canadians even if the political undertones are misplaced -- can't even trust his or her own pilot?
Presumed innocent until proven guilty, of course. But this is a huge black mark on those who serve the duty as "officers and gentlemen / gentlewomen" and, after having their morale finally boosted after so many years, have been shot back almost to where they were before.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
What does it say about this world when "Maple Leaf One" (I presume that's the PM's callsign -- Executive One is that of POTUS when he flies commercial), who's made supporting our troops a rallying call -- one of the few things uniting Canadians even if the political undertones are misplaced -- can't even trust his or her own pilot?
Presumed innocent until proven guilty, of course. But this is a huge black mark on those who serve the duty as "officers and gentlemen / gentlewomen" and, after having their morale finally boosted after so many years, have been shot back almost to where they were before.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Theatres and LRT -- life goes on in Hamilton (not)
A couple of observations about life in The Hammer:
First, the demolition of the old Century Theatre on Mary Street is basically complete save for some minor dusting and such, after the roof caved in a couple of weeks ago. What a pity. This vaudeville era theatre later became a movie house -- probably the largest in Hamilton with over 2000 seats. I remember seeing a few movies there, most notably A Passage to India, one of David Lean's best and right up there with his masterpiece Doctor Zhivago. Well, with the consolidation of the cinema industry it and a few other theatres (including the Tivoli on James and the Avon on Ottawa) were left to rot. Plans to renovate into condominiums just kept getting pushed back again and again. The Odeon was abandoned for a number of years, and while it has recently been turned into the Lincoln Alexander Center (a concert hall) it's just not the same anymore.
I can't help think about Stratford, which during the 1970s and early 80s had a winter movie series at various venues across the city, including the Stratford Festival venues, that made it second only to Cannes in importance. If Hamilton had kept its act together and bothered to spend a couple hundred thousand to restore the theatres, we could have had something that would have been as big as TIFF, the annual festival in Toronto. Instead, once again we're a joke.
Second -- as Metrolinx gets ready to announce what form of transit Hamilton will get to upgrade the B-line buses (either bus rapid transit, or the city's preference for light rail) shopowners are already starting to complain that the proposed route will kill off businesses because of the relatively few places drivers will be able to U-turn to get to the venue of their choice.
I do think the routing from the Delta to Paradise should be along Main and not King -- or it could be made so that on the one way segments it could run on each. But the idea that an LRT would be a business killer is not really borne by the evidence. In fact, by freeing up buses to run on the feeder routes there would be more frequent service and more passengers, therefore more traffic to stores. There are right and wrong ways to do this -- think of the contrast of the subways in Calgary and Edmonton, for example.
But whatever the choice, the line can't just end at McMaster in the west -- it has to go out to Dundas as present and even possibly Waterdown; and in the east there is a strong argument to extend the line from Eastgate to either the former Stoney Creek City Hall (presently a library and the Hamilton offices of the Mounties) or even Fifty Road in Winona. I also believe there also has to be immediate movement on the A line from the harbour to the airport, and both need to be completed in time for the 2015 Toronto Pan-Am Games, since Hamilton will be hosting a number of the events (including soccer and cycling). Things move at City Hall at a glacial pace -- compared to Peel or York Regions, where transitways are under construction; or in Ottawa where the existing dedicated express bus rights-of-way are always being extended due to popular demand and are well set up for light rail whenever that happens.
In the meantime, Hamilton gets the Presto card this fall -- the card that will eventually be used across this city and the GTA. At least we're now finally in the early 1990s. Twenty years late. Like, London, Hong Kong and NYC have had that at least that long. Dinosaurs we are -- or the government is, at least.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
First, the demolition of the old Century Theatre on Mary Street is basically complete save for some minor dusting and such, after the roof caved in a couple of weeks ago. What a pity. This vaudeville era theatre later became a movie house -- probably the largest in Hamilton with over 2000 seats. I remember seeing a few movies there, most notably A Passage to India, one of David Lean's best and right up there with his masterpiece Doctor Zhivago. Well, with the consolidation of the cinema industry it and a few other theatres (including the Tivoli on James and the Avon on Ottawa) were left to rot. Plans to renovate into condominiums just kept getting pushed back again and again. The Odeon was abandoned for a number of years, and while it has recently been turned into the Lincoln Alexander Center (a concert hall) it's just not the same anymore.
I can't help think about Stratford, which during the 1970s and early 80s had a winter movie series at various venues across the city, including the Stratford Festival venues, that made it second only to Cannes in importance. If Hamilton had kept its act together and bothered to spend a couple hundred thousand to restore the theatres, we could have had something that would have been as big as TIFF, the annual festival in Toronto. Instead, once again we're a joke.
Second -- as Metrolinx gets ready to announce what form of transit Hamilton will get to upgrade the B-line buses (either bus rapid transit, or the city's preference for light rail) shopowners are already starting to complain that the proposed route will kill off businesses because of the relatively few places drivers will be able to U-turn to get to the venue of their choice.
I do think the routing from the Delta to Paradise should be along Main and not King -- or it could be made so that on the one way segments it could run on each. But the idea that an LRT would be a business killer is not really borne by the evidence. In fact, by freeing up buses to run on the feeder routes there would be more frequent service and more passengers, therefore more traffic to stores. There are right and wrong ways to do this -- think of the contrast of the subways in Calgary and Edmonton, for example.
But whatever the choice, the line can't just end at McMaster in the west -- it has to go out to Dundas as present and even possibly Waterdown; and in the east there is a strong argument to extend the line from Eastgate to either the former Stoney Creek City Hall (presently a library and the Hamilton offices of the Mounties) or even Fifty Road in Winona. I also believe there also has to be immediate movement on the A line from the harbour to the airport, and both need to be completed in time for the 2015 Toronto Pan-Am Games, since Hamilton will be hosting a number of the events (including soccer and cycling). Things move at City Hall at a glacial pace -- compared to Peel or York Regions, where transitways are under construction; or in Ottawa where the existing dedicated express bus rights-of-way are always being extended due to popular demand and are well set up for light rail whenever that happens.
In the meantime, Hamilton gets the Presto card this fall -- the card that will eventually be used across this city and the GTA. At least we're now finally in the early 1990s. Twenty years late. Like, London, Hong Kong and NYC have had that at least that long. Dinosaurs we are -- or the government is, at least.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Is Six Nations asking for too much? No and yes ...
I don't know too much about this one -- I'm just sounding off so hear me out.
Last week, the Mississaugas of the New Credit, just outside of Hagersville (about a half hour drive south of downtown Hamilton) signed a tentative agreement with the feds regarding two land claims -- one to a large part of Toronto (from the Humber to Ash Ridges Bay) and the other to much of the land around Hamilton Harbour. The settlement -- about $185 million -- requires ratification but many see this as a formality.
It naturally raised the question as to why the neighbouring Six Nations can't "get its act together" and make a deal with the feds. Complicating the matter is the band is generally divided into two factions, those who support the Haudenasonee or "traditional" chiefs and those who support the elected band council and its elected chief -- who would be a mayor were it not for the fact that Ottawa can veto anything Oshweken does just as it can with any other band with which it hasn't made a "final" treaty.
The elected chief, William Montour, responded to these questions in the Hamilton Spectator with an excellent op-ed piece a few days after the New Credit deal.
The point of Chief Montour's essay is that Six Nations wouldn't be satisfied with just money. Their current reserve is just 5% of the original Haldimand Tract which stretches six miles on either side of the Grand River from its source at Dundalk to where it empties into Lake Erie at Dunnville They want more land and the ability to be self-sufficient -- but also do not want to sign away their claims to aboriginal title. That's something even I can agree on. I have also said quite a few times on this page I would like to see the matter go to binding arbitration -- and there are 27 land claims in particular the elected band wants to address.
But I have to wonder if there needs to be some reason involved. The feds under Chuck Strahl (the current czar of DIAND) has offered $27 million (give or take) to settle just one claim -- when lands were flooded in Dunnville to build the first iteration of the Welland Canal in the 1820s. Six Nations says not good enough -- they want $1 billion. Okay, I'll concede that the feds' offer lowballs what lands in that part of Haldimand and Niagara Counties are worth ... but a billion? The car parts plants and coat factories closed years ago and the only major plants left are a pickle cannery and a fertilizer factory.
In total, the elected band -- and I stress the elected band, not the Haudenasonee -- is asking for $82 billion as compensation for the land that they say was either stolen from them, or for the money that was misappropriated from trust funds when by choice or deceit the bulk of the tract was deeded back to Ontario. I can't speak for others who might think this is "blackmail" or something worse. I can only speak for myself but I have to say that were I arbitrator, I would say a much lower figure -- in a range of $5 to $10 billion.
What I think is needed is a comprehensive, province-wide agreement with all the Indian bands -- one that addresses title and land base issues and compensation and gives bands a level of self-sufficiency with a large share of income tax and GST or HST revenues (on a per capita basis) as is the case in the Yukon. (The Yukon solution basically redirects 75% of federal income tax and 95% of provincial tax to the respective authorities that manage the dozen or so global land claims -- and lets the bands keep GST collected; of course, this meant they had to give up their tax-exempt status and no doubt this would have to be a precondition for this to work in Ontario and it might not be popular at first.)
It will be expensive from the outset but giving natives a chance to contribute back to society across the board and to no longer be wards of the state would be an important step forward and would pay back dividends over the long run. Doing so will require a willingness from the feds and First Nations to be reasonable. And with all due respect to Chief Montour, the province cannot merely be a spectator -- after all, much Crown land which would have to be handed back is under provincial control. (Ontario owns 87% of the province, after all).
Perhaps a permanent mediation board, à la the Waitaingi Tribunal in New Zealand which deals with Maori grievances and tries to resolve them before court action, might be a possible way to move forward. (The Maori are also guaranteed representation in NZ's parliament, but while I like the idea of set aside seats for our First Peoples it may not go over well with some sectors of society.) I don't know what the ultimate solution should be, but the stalemate we have now is unacceptable. Again, reason is required on both sides -- from the feds as well as the band councils.
Some from the tribes is necessary, I think -- but a heck of a lot more is needed from DIAND. It's time to put that stupid agency out of business once and for all and to let natives, and people of all races who live in the territories, run their own show.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Last week, the Mississaugas of the New Credit, just outside of Hagersville (about a half hour drive south of downtown Hamilton) signed a tentative agreement with the feds regarding two land claims -- one to a large part of Toronto (from the Humber to Ash Ridges Bay) and the other to much of the land around Hamilton Harbour. The settlement -- about $185 million -- requires ratification but many see this as a formality.
It naturally raised the question as to why the neighbouring Six Nations can't "get its act together" and make a deal with the feds. Complicating the matter is the band is generally divided into two factions, those who support the Haudenasonee or "traditional" chiefs and those who support the elected band council and its elected chief -- who would be a mayor were it not for the fact that Ottawa can veto anything Oshweken does just as it can with any other band with which it hasn't made a "final" treaty.
The elected chief, William Montour, responded to these questions in the Hamilton Spectator with an excellent op-ed piece a few days after the New Credit deal.
The point of Chief Montour's essay is that Six Nations wouldn't be satisfied with just money. Their current reserve is just 5% of the original Haldimand Tract which stretches six miles on either side of the Grand River from its source at Dundalk to where it empties into Lake Erie at Dunnville They want more land and the ability to be self-sufficient -- but also do not want to sign away their claims to aboriginal title. That's something even I can agree on. I have also said quite a few times on this page I would like to see the matter go to binding arbitration -- and there are 27 land claims in particular the elected band wants to address.
But I have to wonder if there needs to be some reason involved. The feds under Chuck Strahl (the current czar of DIAND) has offered $27 million (give or take) to settle just one claim -- when lands were flooded in Dunnville to build the first iteration of the Welland Canal in the 1820s. Six Nations says not good enough -- they want $1 billion. Okay, I'll concede that the feds' offer lowballs what lands in that part of Haldimand and Niagara Counties are worth ... but a billion? The car parts plants and coat factories closed years ago and the only major plants left are a pickle cannery and a fertilizer factory.
In total, the elected band -- and I stress the elected band, not the Haudenasonee -- is asking for $82 billion as compensation for the land that they say was either stolen from them, or for the money that was misappropriated from trust funds when by choice or deceit the bulk of the tract was deeded back to Ontario. I can't speak for others who might think this is "blackmail" or something worse. I can only speak for myself but I have to say that were I arbitrator, I would say a much lower figure -- in a range of $5 to $10 billion.
What I think is needed is a comprehensive, province-wide agreement with all the Indian bands -- one that addresses title and land base issues and compensation and gives bands a level of self-sufficiency with a large share of income tax and GST or HST revenues (on a per capita basis) as is the case in the Yukon. (The Yukon solution basically redirects 75% of federal income tax and 95% of provincial tax to the respective authorities that manage the dozen or so global land claims -- and lets the bands keep GST collected; of course, this meant they had to give up their tax-exempt status and no doubt this would have to be a precondition for this to work in Ontario and it might not be popular at first.)
It will be expensive from the outset but giving natives a chance to contribute back to society across the board and to no longer be wards of the state would be an important step forward and would pay back dividends over the long run. Doing so will require a willingness from the feds and First Nations to be reasonable. And with all due respect to Chief Montour, the province cannot merely be a spectator -- after all, much Crown land which would have to be handed back is under provincial control. (Ontario owns 87% of the province, after all).
Perhaps a permanent mediation board, à la the Waitaingi Tribunal in New Zealand which deals with Maori grievances and tries to resolve them before court action, might be a possible way to move forward. (The Maori are also guaranteed representation in NZ's parliament, but while I like the idea of set aside seats for our First Peoples it may not go over well with some sectors of society.) I don't know what the ultimate solution should be, but the stalemate we have now is unacceptable. Again, reason is required on both sides -- from the feds as well as the band councils.
Some from the tribes is necessary, I think -- but a heck of a lot more is needed from DIAND. It's time to put that stupid agency out of business once and for all and to let natives, and people of all races who live in the territories, run their own show.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)