On December 5th, I wrote about a transportation consultation/survey that I attended at Ottawa City Hall. In the entry I mentioned that answers given by the downtown core attendees seemed to be unanimous that the cure to Ottawa's transportation woes was to charge road tolls and higher parking fees to those gas guzzling, pollution spewing, grid-lock causing commuters that drove in from the (ugh) suburbs.
Guess what, the city is raising parking fees to $3/hour and eliminating free parking at meters for weekends and evenings. You would think that the centre town folks would be ecstatic including their generally left of centre politicians.
But no. Clive "I cycle to work" Doucet calls it a bone head move. "It's out of control," bellows he. He argues that parking meters were intended to keep traffic moving. His logic befuddles the best of us. I thought that Clive had always told us that we needed public transit to keep the traffic flowing.
"People are just not going to come downtown," cries Diane Holmes. George Bedard calls it "negative, bull-headed". He goes on to say, "If they want to kill downtown, they're certainly doing it."
I have a solution. Just eliminate those pesky polluting buses from the downtown core. They just impede traffic flow when I am looking for a parking spot. Plus those darn bus stops take up so much prime parking space on the roads. Finally, we subsidize the transit system to the tune of 50% of the cost to run it. Take the savings from the bus system and plough it into subsidized parking fees.
Hey, who says that the suburbanites can't come up with ideas for the urbanites?
Give me a call sometime, Clive... we'll do tofu!
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Catching up before Christmas
This is probably my last post before Christmas so I thought I would just comment on a few things in the news.
I decided not to weigh in on the Elmwood School Silver Bells fiasco. I would, however, like to point out something to those progressive persons who believe in inclusiveness. Inclusiveness, the way you go about it, is really exclusiveness. When you change the lyrics of a Christmas song (by the way Mr. L Green of CFRA, Silver Bells is a Christmas song not a Christmas Carol) to make non-Christians feel included, you run the risk of excluding Christians.
Second, there was an article in the Ottawa paper the other day that reported that a neurologist was suspended from practice for a year for calling a rather corpulent patient "fat". I do not condone that type of behaviour but it did remind me of an incident years ago when I worked in a hospital. About 7 PM one weekend evening the emergency department called in a Plastic Surgeon to sew up the wrists of a women who had tried to commit suicide. This was her third slashing and the third time that this particular surgeon had been called away from his dinner and family. He was pissed.
I remember him looking the women straight in the eye and yelling at her to do it right the next time. He showed her the correct technique to get at the artery. While I did not condone his behaviour either, I do know that that women straightened up and became a nurse, working ultimately at that same hospital.
Sometimes a good kick in the ass can be good medicine, too.
I decided not to weigh in on the Elmwood School Silver Bells fiasco. I would, however, like to point out something to those progressive persons who believe in inclusiveness. Inclusiveness, the way you go about it, is really exclusiveness. When you change the lyrics of a Christmas song (by the way Mr. L Green of CFRA, Silver Bells is a Christmas song not a Christmas Carol) to make non-Christians feel included, you run the risk of excluding Christians.
Second, there was an article in the Ottawa paper the other day that reported that a neurologist was suspended from practice for a year for calling a rather corpulent patient "fat". I do not condone that type of behaviour but it did remind me of an incident years ago when I worked in a hospital. About 7 PM one weekend evening the emergency department called in a Plastic Surgeon to sew up the wrists of a women who had tried to commit suicide. This was her third slashing and the third time that this particular surgeon had been called away from his dinner and family. He was pissed.
I remember him looking the women straight in the eye and yelling at her to do it right the next time. He showed her the correct technique to get at the artery. While I did not condone his behaviour either, I do know that that women straightened up and became a nurse, working ultimately at that same hospital.
Sometimes a good kick in the ass can be good medicine, too.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Blogger apologises to PM Harper
On December 17, 2007, I admit that I made a terrible error. Trying to be typically glib, as blogger usually are, I quipped that Canada's Greatest Government (copyright PM Harper), also known as CGG, was a little less than forthcoming on the AECL isotope controversy. I now know that I was incorrect when I gave the impression that AECL did anything improper or that the head of AECL, Michael Burns, was fired over the issue. For any reader who was offended, and I am sure there were many, by my comments; I apologize.
So let me set the record straight. Michael Burns is the greatest AECL chairman's ever. No one is, was, or will ever be, better than he. He must be, because after he left AECL, due, I am sure, to the undeserved pressure put on him (and I am certain, on his family and various household pets) by this blogger, his other company, NaiKun Wind Energy Group, was awarded $10,000,000 in grants by the CGG.
The fact that NaiKun has a Boardroom filled with well connected Cons, including two former assistants to PM Harper is just a coincidence. Anyway it is a private company and can have anyone it wants on its board! Not like that Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) that is filled with Liberal hacks according to PM Harper.
As further proof that everything is on the up and up at NaiKun, I point to their own Sara MacIntyre, who used to be a policy researcher in Harper's office when in he was Opposition Leader. One of Sara's specialities was Indian Affairs Canada (Did I mention that NaiKun is getting ready to do a big off-shore wind farm deal with the Haida peoples of BC?). She left Harper's office to become BC director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation; that dedicated group of tax-fighters that, for some reason, sprouts a huge number of Con candidates. Sara plays a selfless role in protecting the environment with NaiKun.
Enough of all that. The purpose of this entry was to apologize to Canada's Greatest Government. I stand in shame and will fully accept a teardown from John "the screamer" Baird, the federal environment minister, as my punishment.
So let me set the record straight. Michael Burns is the greatest AECL chairman's ever. No one is, was, or will ever be, better than he. He must be, because after he left AECL, due, I am sure, to the undeserved pressure put on him (and I am certain, on his family and various household pets) by this blogger, his other company, NaiKun Wind Energy Group, was awarded $10,000,000 in grants by the CGG.
The fact that NaiKun has a Boardroom filled with well connected Cons, including two former assistants to PM Harper is just a coincidence. Anyway it is a private company and can have anyone it wants on its board! Not like that Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) that is filled with Liberal hacks according to PM Harper.
As further proof that everything is on the up and up at NaiKun, I point to their own Sara MacIntyre, who used to be a policy researcher in Harper's office when in he was Opposition Leader. One of Sara's specialities was Indian Affairs Canada (Did I mention that NaiKun is getting ready to do a big off-shore wind farm deal with the Haida peoples of BC?). She left Harper's office to become BC director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation; that dedicated group of tax-fighters that, for some reason, sprouts a huge number of Con candidates. Sara plays a selfless role in protecting the environment with NaiKun.
Enough of all that. The purpose of this entry was to apologize to Canada's Greatest Government. I stand in shame and will fully accept a teardown from John "the screamer" Baird, the federal environment minister, as my punishment.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Big tax increases to come
Hey, you heard it here first!
There is a note on the MPAC (Municipal Property Assessment Corporation), the folks who establish the value of your property for municipal tax purposes, web site that reads:
"The assessment update of all properties in Ontario was cancelled for 2006 and 2007... Although the assessment updates for 2006 and 2007 have been cancelled, MPAC continues to inspect properties, update values and improve the accuracy of its information."
MPAC will report the updated assessments in 2008. You can expect that assessments, based on real estate sales reports over the past 2 years, will have increased by a minimum of 10 or 20%. Therefore, if your home is worth the Ottawa average of $250,000, your taxes will rise by about $400 in 2009.
That's a 15% increase in revenue without even changing the tax rate!
So here is the bottom line as I see it. City Council will bite the bullet in 2008 with a whopper of a tax increase (largest in their history) that will raise your taxes by about $180. Then in 2009 and possibly 2010, due to increased assessments from MPAC, they will freeze taxes at zero percent...
Just in time for the next election!
Je me souviens!
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Damn, I missed a meeting with Maria McRea
Ward 16 Councillor McRea held a town hall meeting this week to discuss the widening of Prince of Wales Avenue from Woodroffe to Fisher. I wanted to go but got held up at work. Was I working late, you might ask? No, Councillor McRea meeting to get citizen's input was at 4 o'clock in the afternoon. Good timing if you want to hear from the mases. Even better timing if you don't!
I wanted to bring to Maria's attention the fact that, if you twin Prince of Wales up to Fisher Ave, you do not clear up traffic problems... you just move them around. Also, if you drive the Prince of Wales traffic on to Fisher Avenue, the increased traffic passes by, or close to, four... count them... four schools, including three junior schools. This is a tragedy waiting to happen.
The problem with the whole mess is that it is a half-assed planning job. You twin Prince of Wales to Fisher but not the rest of the way to Baseline Road. As a result, you will move the traffic onto Fisher, which is a four lane road, but when they get to Dynes Road they get funnelled back into two lanes until they hit Baseline. Then they go back to two lanes through the Experimental Farm all the way to Carling Ave.
Sorry I did not make the meeting, Maria. Maybe next time you can make it at 10:30 when I take my coffee break.
I hope that you take note of my concern.
I wanted to bring to Maria's attention the fact that, if you twin Prince of Wales up to Fisher Ave, you do not clear up traffic problems... you just move them around. Also, if you drive the Prince of Wales traffic on to Fisher Avenue, the increased traffic passes by, or close to, four... count them... four schools, including three junior schools. This is a tragedy waiting to happen.
The problem with the whole mess is that it is a half-assed planning job. You twin Prince of Wales to Fisher but not the rest of the way to Baseline Road. As a result, you will move the traffic onto Fisher, which is a four lane road, but when they get to Dynes Road they get funnelled back into two lanes until they hit Baseline. Then they go back to two lanes through the Experimental Farm all the way to Carling Ave.
Sorry I did not make the meeting, Maria. Maybe next time you can make it at 10:30 when I take my coffee break.
I hope that you take note of my concern.
Monday, December 17, 2007
The Nuclear Conundrum
A conundrum is defined as "an intricate and difficult problem". Such is the case with the recent series of Canadian Political Bloopers tied to AECL, CNSC, Canada's Greatest Government (copyright PM Harper) and MDS Nordion.
The Atomic Energy Commission (AECL) is a crown corporation who designs and builds nuclear reactors for distribution around the world. They also do research into reactor technology and maintains a couple of their own reactors in Chalk River, Ontario. CNSC is the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, whose job it is to oversee AECL and to safeguard Canadians from nuclear accidents. Canada's Greatest Government (CGG) is... well, you know who they are.
MDS Nordion used to be part of AECL until it was sold off in 1991 (Mulroney era) to Medical Data Science, an Ontario based private company. Nordion buys radioactive isotopes from AECL, refines and packages them for sale (used in mostly diagnostic imaging and some treatment) across the world. About 93% of shipments are exports from Canada, according to Nordion.
OK, now that we know the major players, let's begin the tale.
AECL has a contract to deliver isotopes to Nordion. At this time, AECL uses a 50 year old reactor called the NRU for this job. This is the only job assigned to the NRU. Problem is that the NRU has some problems, including: in case of earthquake or terrorist attack, the NRU's cooling waters could leak out and set off a chain reaction that could wipe out multiple square miles of land and people, al la Chernobyl. Well, why not fix the reactor, you ask? Enter the CNSC.
The CNSC has been trying to get AECL to fix the problems for a couple of years but AECL keeps putting it off. In November of this year, AECL shuts down the reactor for some maintenance (not including the CNSC-required fixes) and CNSC jumps on the time frame and demands that AECL implement the fixes or they will not be re-licenced (another role of the CNSC) to bring the reactor back on line. In steps MDS Nordion.
With the reactor down, the supply of isotope flowing to Nordion begins to dwindle. Some of these isotopes have shelf lives of only days. MDS Nordion, and its customers, is crying that people are dying world wide because procedures and treatment are being delayed and cancelled due the shortages. In steps CGG.
"Safety be damned," bellows the government. "The CNSC are just a bunch of Liberal hacks, anyway," they continue to bray. "Get the reactor back on line and get those isotopes flowing!"
Yippee! The government, whose benches must be filled with nuclear scientists, as well as multiple space cadets, has come to the rescue of the downtrodden and the dying! All hail the CGG!
But hang on a bit... there seems a little bit more to this than meets the press. Seems that the problem is not the NRU or the CNSC, the problem is more to do with Nordion and AECL.
When MDS bought Nordion from AECL, the Mulroney government decided that, to sweeten the deal, two new reactors were to be built by AECL, to replace the ageing NRU. As part of the deal, the new reactors would be owned by Nordion! As well, AECL would look after (store, really) the waste products of the isotope production. AECL embarked on a plan to build the two new reactors called Maple for Nordion. Long story short - the Maples don't produce sap... they do not work. AECL has designed a reactor that is inherently unsafe and, having recognized that, Nordion sued the government, received $10 million in compensation and AECL had to take over ownership of the Maples.
So let's get this straight. AECL decides that they do not need to perform the safety upgrades to its NRU reactor in order to comply with the licence they have from the CNSC, the commission whose job it is to ensure that nuclear safety is job #1 at AECL. AECL are using the 50 year old NRU to deliver on their contract because the replacement reactors they designed do not work. Nordion and their customers complain when the reactor remains off line, with a campaign of "shock and ouch"! (It is never mentioned that a major complaint by Nordion is that their fourth quarter profit is taking a hit.) CGG steps up to the table and declares that they know better than the CNSC and the Liberal hacks that run it. (No mention is made of the fact that the head of the CNSC claims that she has no political affiliation and that before heading CNSC she has an illustrious career in the public service.) The NRU must come on line without its upgrades and start producing money making... oops, I mean, life saving isotopes for MDS Nordion.
Wow, that CGG! What a bunch of take-charge people. They put those stupid CNSC people in their place and then...
They fired the head of AECL.
The Atomic Energy Commission (AECL) is a crown corporation who designs and builds nuclear reactors for distribution around the world. They also do research into reactor technology and maintains a couple of their own reactors in Chalk River, Ontario. CNSC is the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, whose job it is to oversee AECL and to safeguard Canadians from nuclear accidents. Canada's Greatest Government (CGG) is... well, you know who they are.
MDS Nordion used to be part of AECL until it was sold off in 1991 (Mulroney era) to Medical Data Science, an Ontario based private company. Nordion buys radioactive isotopes from AECL, refines and packages them for sale (used in mostly diagnostic imaging and some treatment) across the world. About 93% of shipments are exports from Canada, according to Nordion.
OK, now that we know the major players, let's begin the tale.
AECL has a contract to deliver isotopes to Nordion. At this time, AECL uses a 50 year old reactor called the NRU for this job. This is the only job assigned to the NRU. Problem is that the NRU has some problems, including: in case of earthquake or terrorist attack, the NRU's cooling waters could leak out and set off a chain reaction that could wipe out multiple square miles of land and people, al la Chernobyl. Well, why not fix the reactor, you ask? Enter the CNSC.
The CNSC has been trying to get AECL to fix the problems for a couple of years but AECL keeps putting it off. In November of this year, AECL shuts down the reactor for some maintenance (not including the CNSC-required fixes) and CNSC jumps on the time frame and demands that AECL implement the fixes or they will not be re-licenced (another role of the CNSC) to bring the reactor back on line. In steps MDS Nordion.
With the reactor down, the supply of isotope flowing to Nordion begins to dwindle. Some of these isotopes have shelf lives of only days. MDS Nordion, and its customers, is crying that people are dying world wide because procedures and treatment are being delayed and cancelled due the shortages. In steps CGG.
"Safety be damned," bellows the government. "The CNSC are just a bunch of Liberal hacks, anyway," they continue to bray. "Get the reactor back on line and get those isotopes flowing!"
Yippee! The government, whose benches must be filled with nuclear scientists, as well as multiple space cadets, has come to the rescue of the downtrodden and the dying! All hail the CGG!
But hang on a bit... there seems a little bit more to this than meets the press. Seems that the problem is not the NRU or the CNSC, the problem is more to do with Nordion and AECL.
When MDS bought Nordion from AECL, the Mulroney government decided that, to sweeten the deal, two new reactors were to be built by AECL, to replace the ageing NRU. As part of the deal, the new reactors would be owned by Nordion! As well, AECL would look after (store, really) the waste products of the isotope production. AECL embarked on a plan to build the two new reactors called Maple for Nordion. Long story short - the Maples don't produce sap... they do not work. AECL has designed a reactor that is inherently unsafe and, having recognized that, Nordion sued the government, received $10 million in compensation and AECL had to take over ownership of the Maples.
So let's get this straight. AECL decides that they do not need to perform the safety upgrades to its NRU reactor in order to comply with the licence they have from the CNSC, the commission whose job it is to ensure that nuclear safety is job #1 at AECL. AECL are using the 50 year old NRU to deliver on their contract because the replacement reactors they designed do not work. Nordion and their customers complain when the reactor remains off line, with a campaign of "shock and ouch"! (It is never mentioned that a major complaint by Nordion is that their fourth quarter profit is taking a hit.) CGG steps up to the table and declares that they know better than the CNSC and the Liberal hacks that run it. (No mention is made of the fact that the head of the CNSC claims that she has no political affiliation and that before heading CNSC she has an illustrious career in the public service.) The NRU must come on line without its upgrades and start producing money making... oops, I mean, life saving isotopes for MDS Nordion.
Wow, that CGG! What a bunch of take-charge people. They put those stupid CNSC people in their place and then...
They fired the head of AECL.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
What to do about the Mulroney misunderstanding
First let me say that I was disappointed, but not surprised. with Brian's performance this week at the Ethics Committee. He could have simply stated that he did a stupid thing in accepting the cash payments, apologized for being so stupid and then stated, correctly, that this is a personal issue between Schrieber and himself.
After all the police have looked into this thing and found that nothing illegal has taken place... and they are probably correct.
But what did Brian do? He slighted every person he could think of, told the committee that they were sold a basket of dog crap by Schrieber and accused Schrieber of everything from lying to having weapons of mass destruction.
Mulroney's appearance before the committee took four hours, in which he lectured rather than answering questions. He could have done it all in 10 seconds by saying," I was wrong, I apologize and I am taking Schrieber to court to clear my name." Then, if the committee asked any more questions, he would then answer with, "I cannot comment on the issue as it is now before the courts!"
Hey... it works all the time for politicians.
After all the police have looked into this thing and found that nothing illegal has taken place... and they are probably correct.
But what did Brian do? He slighted every person he could think of, told the committee that they were sold a basket of dog crap by Schrieber and accused Schrieber of everything from lying to having weapons of mass destruction.
Mulroney's appearance before the committee took four hours, in which he lectured rather than answering questions. He could have done it all in 10 seconds by saying," I was wrong, I apologize and I am taking Schrieber to court to clear my name." Then, if the committee asked any more questions, he would then answer with, "I cannot comment on the issue as it is now before the courts!"
Hey... it works all the time for politicians.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
I have a bone to pick with "Eye on Ottawa"
After the last municipal election a group was formed to be a "watchdog" on the current Ottawa city council. I offered to join the team but was rebuffed because, as I was not a candidate in the election, I am a nobody. It is kind of interesting that when the team formed in 2006, there were a whole host of names of defeated candidates. Here we are in 2007, one year later, and the membership is one. Luc Lapointe was defeated in the downtown Somerset Ward (14), which is the 25 year (and counting) fiefdom of Diane Holmes.
I am less annoyed that I was not good enough for the "Eye on Ottawa"; I am more annoyed at all those former candidates that dropped away from the organization. If you are going to be a candidate for a council seat you had better be more than "just a candidate". You had better be dedicated enough to stick around, after your election loss, to act as a critic.
None of the original members of "Eye on Ottawa" who have since dropped out had better put their names forward at the next election. They have not earned the right.
But with all this said, that is NOT the bone I have to pick with the "Eye on Ottawa".
The "Eye", in its latest news release (December 13, 2008), slams the Ottawa Mayor for not delivering on his "Zero means Zero" election promise. Our "all wise" city council, not giving two hoots about fiscal discipline, is about to deliver a 4.9% property tax increase, plus a 2% surcharge for infrastructure maintenance, plus a 7.5% increase in bus fairs, abd including a 9% police budget increase... and they are not yet finished the process.
If the council had listened to Mayor Larry, and I do admit that Larry's message was not very succinct, they would have taken some firm stances on items such as the police budget and city staffing levels and forced some of the costs out of the system to save taxes. Could they have gotten to zero? Bloody right they could have!
The "Eye on Ottawa", and it appears that there is only one "eye", should be slamming councillors and backing the mayor rather than the other way around.
I am less annoyed that I was not good enough for the "Eye on Ottawa"; I am more annoyed at all those former candidates that dropped away from the organization. If you are going to be a candidate for a council seat you had better be more than "just a candidate". You had better be dedicated enough to stick around, after your election loss, to act as a critic.
None of the original members of "Eye on Ottawa" who have since dropped out had better put their names forward at the next election. They have not earned the right.
But with all this said, that is NOT the bone I have to pick with the "Eye on Ottawa".
The "Eye", in its latest news release (December 13, 2008), slams the Ottawa Mayor for not delivering on his "Zero means Zero" election promise. Our "all wise" city council, not giving two hoots about fiscal discipline, is about to deliver a 4.9% property tax increase, plus a 2% surcharge for infrastructure maintenance, plus a 7.5% increase in bus fairs, abd including a 9% police budget increase... and they are not yet finished the process.
If the council had listened to Mayor Larry, and I do admit that Larry's message was not very succinct, they would have taken some firm stances on items such as the police budget and city staffing levels and forced some of the costs out of the system to save taxes. Could they have gotten to zero? Bloody right they could have!
The "Eye on Ottawa", and it appears that there is only one "eye", should be slamming councillors and backing the mayor rather than the other way around.
Mulroney got it partially right.
When Brian Mulroney took the witness chair at the Ethics Committee today I noted that he passed on the offer to be sworn in. It was his choice but I wonder why he decided against it and then launched into a tirade of accusations that Mr. Schrieber lied, even though he, Schrieber, was voluntarily under oath.
But that is not important, it is just a question.
The real issue on the table is why Mulroney's former talking head, Lucky Luc, maintained that after Mulroney left office he was in dire financial straights and needed the $300,000, or $225,000 depending on who you believe, to keep his family happy and himself in Guccis? Now it turns out that Mulroney did not need the money at all. In fact the first $100,000 went into a New York safety deposit box and was used to pay the expenses for his international travel. It seems that of whatever money he received from Schrieber, he only used about $120,000 of it. Where is the rest of the money?
Also, Mulroney could not remember if he filed a US tax return on the $100,000 he stashed in New York. Maybe someone should look into that? And did he use any of that money to pay expenses that he claimed against his income tax here in Canada. Remember, it is illegal to bring more than $10,000 into Canada without declaring it, including if you wire it into Canada or write yourself a cheque.
What Mulroney did get correct is that when he first met Schrieber, he, Schreiber, was a well known business man with a large arms manufacturer and not subject to German legal charges as he is today. True enough; but Brian is not a stupid person. Why didn't his antennae go up when Schrieber offered him cash in small bills?
The soap opera continues.
But that is not important, it is just a question.
The real issue on the table is why Mulroney's former talking head, Lucky Luc, maintained that after Mulroney left office he was in dire financial straights and needed the $300,000, or $225,000 depending on who you believe, to keep his family happy and himself in Guccis? Now it turns out that Mulroney did not need the money at all. In fact the first $100,000 went into a New York safety deposit box and was used to pay the expenses for his international travel. It seems that of whatever money he received from Schrieber, he only used about $120,000 of it. Where is the rest of the money?
Also, Mulroney could not remember if he filed a US tax return on the $100,000 he stashed in New York. Maybe someone should look into that? And did he use any of that money to pay expenses that he claimed against his income tax here in Canada. Remember, it is illegal to bring more than $10,000 into Canada without declaring it, including if you wire it into Canada or write yourself a cheque.
What Mulroney did get correct is that when he first met Schrieber, he, Schreiber, was a well known business man with a large arms manufacturer and not subject to German legal charges as he is today. True enough; but Brian is not a stupid person. Why didn't his antennae go up when Schrieber offered him cash in small bills?
The soap opera continues.
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Liberal media? Bull feathers!
For years the Cons have been yelling and screaming that there is a liberal media in this country. Even the much-revered, voice of reason (copyright: L Green), L. Green at CFRA constantly spouts off about the commie-pinko mainstream media... those liberal-thinking, cappuccino-sucking, Birkenstock-wearing reporters and media outlets that are not part of CNN or working out of the "Broadcast Mega-Centre of the World (copyright: CFRA)
So why is it that a great majority of the media seem to think that Mulroney's crap does not stink and that Schreiber should not be believed. I would have thought that a liberal media's eye teeth would have been bared trying to go for Mulroney's jugular.
Why, for example, does the Ottawa Citizen buff-boy, Dan Gardner, suggest that the $300,000 cash payment Mulroney received from Schreiber shortly after leaving office and apparently negotiated while still in office is, "greasy and dubious but it barely raises the needle of public significance above zero." Sound liberal to you?
How about the liberal (must be 'cause he is with the CBC) Rex Murphy who asks, "Why are we listening to Schreiber?" Hey Rex, did someone forget to mention the $300,000 to you?
With a few notable exceptions, the media, who ignored this story for years, has rolled out the red carpet for the former Con PM. I hope that he does not disappoint them when he testifies on Thursday at the Commons Ethics Committee. I would hate to see so many pundits simultaneously swallow their chewin' tobacco.
And while we are awaiting Mr. Mulroney's testimony, I have a few questions that the Committee might want to ponder about asking the Great Man (copyright: B Mulroney) For example, "Mr. Mulroney, if you were so hard up for cash at the end of your tenure as PM, why did you not approach any number of companies to sit on their Boards of Directors and have them loan you $300,000?" I bet you that Quebecor would have helped out?
How about asking, "Given your poor state of finances, perhaps a multi-million home in Montreal, with a $600,000 face lift to it, might have been a bit extravagant expense and perhaps you would have been better off to use the $300,000 from Schreiber to put food on the table while living in subsidized housing?"
Better yet, let's get the non-mainstream media to ask the questions. There must one of you that would like to know the answers?
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Larry's charges?
An interesting turn of events here in the nation's capital. Mayor Larry was being investigated by the OPP for trying to entice a fellow mayoralty candidate to drop out the race. Up until now the big slam against His Honour was the $30,000 he purportedly offered to the diminutive Terry. Of lesser importance was an apparent offer to get him a seat on the Parole Board.
The charges are in and they read as follows:
What is most interesting is the second of the two charges. Mayor Larry, it is alleged, negotiated an appointment. Even though the negotiation ended with a obvious no (because Terry did not get an appointment), who did Larry negotiate with? The Eastern Ontario Con responsible for patronage, or whatever new term that the Cons have for patronage, was John "the screamer" Baird, the illustrious Minister of the Environment. He says he never discussed the issue with Mayor Larry. If Baird is telling the truth, I wonder who Larry did negotiate with?
By the way, before John became Minister of Green Stuff, he was the President of the Treasury Board. He was in that position when the Mayor Larry misunderstanding was alleged to have take place. Who, I wonder, was the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board. It is not possible that it could have been Ottawa Con Pierre P, whose name has obliquely been linked to this misunderstanding.
Hhmm?
The charges are in and they read as follows:
1. Pretending to have influence with the government orSeems that the $30 grand issue has disappeared.
a minister, contrary to Section 121(1)(d)(ii); and
2. Negotiating an appointment contrary to Section 125(b)
What is most interesting is the second of the two charges. Mayor Larry, it is alleged, negotiated an appointment. Even though the negotiation ended with a obvious no (because Terry did not get an appointment), who did Larry negotiate with? The Eastern Ontario Con responsible for patronage, or whatever new term that the Cons have for patronage, was John "the screamer" Baird, the illustrious Minister of the Environment. He says he never discussed the issue with Mayor Larry. If Baird is telling the truth, I wonder who Larry did negotiate with?
By the way, before John became Minister of Green Stuff, he was the President of the Treasury Board. He was in that position when the Mayor Larry misunderstanding was alleged to have take place. Who, I wonder, was the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board. It is not possible that it could have been Ottawa Con Pierre P, whose name has obliquely been linked to this misunderstanding.
Hhmm?
Monday, December 10, 2007
Larry's been charged
Mayor Larry O'Brien has been charged with two criminal counts with respect to the Kilrea misunderstanding. Should he step aside as mayor until this case winds its way through the courts?
According to the voice of raisins (correct spelling), Michael Harris at CFRA, he should resign. On his program this afternoon, Harris, cited case histories from Lower Podunk and East-Central Mongolia, to support his assertion that Larry is guilty until he is proved innocent.
I disagree, as usual. What Larry does is entirely up to Larry and only Larry.
While on the Larry subject, does anyone else notice the number of Cons being mentioned in this investigation.
John "the screamer" Baird's lunch habits are up for examination. He was apparently having lunch with a constituent at Hy's when he was seen in the presence of Mayor Larry. How come we can't know the identity of the constituent? And who paid for lunch?
Pierre Poilievre's communication guy's name has been raised as someone who might know something in the case.
Now it appears that Lisa McLeod, the mighty Con MPP, may be an accessory after the fact in this affair. According to the Ottawa Citizen, she knew about a $20 or 30,000 offer to Kilrea by Mayor Larry, but forgot to mention it.
I wonder if the Ottawa Citizen has calculated how many extra newspapers have been purchased since they broke this fetid story?
According to the voice of raisins (correct spelling), Michael Harris at CFRA, he should resign. On his program this afternoon, Harris, cited case histories from Lower Podunk and East-Central Mongolia, to support his assertion that Larry is guilty until he is proved innocent.
I disagree, as usual. What Larry does is entirely up to Larry and only Larry.
While on the Larry subject, does anyone else notice the number of Cons being mentioned in this investigation.
John "the screamer" Baird's lunch habits are up for examination. He was apparently having lunch with a constituent at Hy's when he was seen in the presence of Mayor Larry. How come we can't know the identity of the constituent? And who paid for lunch?
Pierre Poilievre's communication guy's name has been raised as someone who might know something in the case.
Now it appears that Lisa McLeod, the mighty Con MPP, may be an accessory after the fact in this affair. According to the Ottawa Citizen, she knew about a $20 or 30,000 offer to Kilrea by Mayor Larry, but forgot to mention it.
I wonder if the Ottawa Citizen has calculated how many extra newspapers have been purchased since they broke this fetid story?
Friday, December 7, 2007
$3.8 million goes poof!
There was a tiny little item in the Ottawa Citizen on Thursday. A total of 50 words on the second page of the City section. Seems that the City of Ottawa has not been paying OHIP fees for their 1,900 transit workers. That amounts to $800,000 per year and a back payment for four years of worker paid premiums to the tune of $3.4 million!
Now just hang on a second! This payment is due because an arbitrator ruled it to be so. But unless the collective agreement with transit workers is the most lucrative one in the whole wide world, this is surely a mistake on behalf of the arbitrator.
On the OHIP web site FAQ section there is a question asked and answered:
Q. If a collective agreement states that the employer would cover OHIP premiums, must the employer pay for the Ontario Health Premium?
A. Unlike the old OHIP premium, the new health premium would be a tax on individuals under the Ontario Income Tax Act. Unless employers have bargained to pay employees' taxes, we would not expect that this charge has been anticipated in collective bargaining agreements.
(http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/publications/healthpremium/healthfaqemp.html)
This means that unless the city has agreed in a collective agreement to pay the TAXES of the transit workers, they are not required to pay the OHIP premiums, As the answer says, the premium is treated as a tax on the individual.
So either the arbiter is wrong or the city was pretty dumb when it came to negotiations. Either way, the taxpayers are screwed again.
Now just hang on a second! This payment is due because an arbitrator ruled it to be so. But unless the collective agreement with transit workers is the most lucrative one in the whole wide world, this is surely a mistake on behalf of the arbitrator.
On the OHIP web site FAQ section there is a question asked and answered:
Q. If a collective agreement states that the employer would cover OHIP premiums, must the employer pay for the Ontario Health Premium?
A. Unlike the old OHIP premium, the new health premium would be a tax on individuals under the Ontario Income Tax Act. Unless employers have bargained to pay employees' taxes, we would not expect that this charge has been anticipated in collective bargaining agreements.
(http://www.fin.gov.on.ca/english/publications/healthpremium/healthfaqemp.html)
This means that unless the city has agreed in a collective agreement to pay the TAXES of the transit workers, they are not required to pay the OHIP premiums, As the answer says, the premium is treated as a tax on the individual.
So either the arbiter is wrong or the city was pretty dumb when it came to negotiations. Either way, the taxpayers are screwed again.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
Watson gets it right, while McGuinty gets it wrong
Jim Watson told the Ottawa City Council to get their act together on transit so that the provincial government can release promised funds to them. Jim got that one right.
Ottawa's transit plan is not a plan at all. It is a wish list masquerading as a plan. As is typical of this bunch of expired-best-before-date politicians, not one of them can see the city as a city. They still see it as an assembly of fiefdoms. They each care only what is good for their area and not what is good for the city as a whole.
For example, why do they still maintain that Riverside South needs LRT? To connect the LRT from South Keys to Riverside South means building the line around the airport, without connecting to the airport, a distance of a bunch of kilometres of barren wasteland devoid of LRT commuters. Why not express bus the Riverside South folks to Barrhaven (via the proposed Strandherd Bridge, thus making it part of the transit plan) or to South Keys. Or how about an express bus route along Riverside to feed them to Billings Bridge.
In the meantime, Dalton McGuinty blew the city off with his refusal to grant any special funding or taxing power to the city to address the rebuilding of the rapidly deteriorating municipal infrastructure. Is it going to take the collapse of a bridge or two to clear the view toward the problem?
Psst, Dalton. I have a suggestion for you. Cut the PST by 3% and give the right to raise taxes to the cities. You will look like a god when compared to PM Harper who only cut the GST by 2%. Then tell the cities that they are on their own for municipal infrastructure. If they want it, they pay for it.
Running a city, a province or, for that matter, a country is not rocket science. You look after the basic needs of the country, the basic needs of the people and the infrastructure needed to support the country and the people. It only gets complex when the politicians begin to play their silly games.
My consulting bills will be on their way to the city and the province next week!
Ottawa's transit plan is not a plan at all. It is a wish list masquerading as a plan. As is typical of this bunch of expired-best-before-date politicians, not one of them can see the city as a city. They still see it as an assembly of fiefdoms. They each care only what is good for their area and not what is good for the city as a whole.
For example, why do they still maintain that Riverside South needs LRT? To connect the LRT from South Keys to Riverside South means building the line around the airport, without connecting to the airport, a distance of a bunch of kilometres of barren wasteland devoid of LRT commuters. Why not express bus the Riverside South folks to Barrhaven (via the proposed Strandherd Bridge, thus making it part of the transit plan) or to South Keys. Or how about an express bus route along Riverside to feed them to Billings Bridge.
In the meantime, Dalton McGuinty blew the city off with his refusal to grant any special funding or taxing power to the city to address the rebuilding of the rapidly deteriorating municipal infrastructure. Is it going to take the collapse of a bridge or two to clear the view toward the problem?
Psst, Dalton. I have a suggestion for you. Cut the PST by 3% and give the right to raise taxes to the cities. You will look like a god when compared to PM Harper who only cut the GST by 2%. Then tell the cities that they are on their own for municipal infrastructure. If they want it, they pay for it.
Running a city, a province or, for that matter, a country is not rocket science. You look after the basic needs of the country, the basic needs of the people and the infrastructure needed to support the country and the people. It only gets complex when the politicians begin to play their silly games.
My consulting bills will be on their way to the city and the province next week!
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Select 1,2 or 3, unless you don't want to
I attended a consultation on Ottawa's Transportation Master Plan last night. The TMP, as it is called, is the blueprint that will carry (literally) Ottawans into 2031. That's well after I am dead and my body blown up by my kids.
There were questions about Light Rail (LRT) versus Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). There were questions about traffic congestion, how to clear it and, more importantly, how to pay for it.
But was I the only person in the room to roll their eyes at the way this consultation was carried out?
The session deteriorated from the very beginning. Two, count them, two City Councillors left the budget consultations to glad hand the crowd and tell us what great work they were doing. I would have preferred that Maria and Alex had stayed at the budget consult. It was also quite obvious, from the number of people that Maria recognized in the crowd of 77 or so, that this was not a random sampling of Ottawans.
Then on to the questions. An earnest pollster gave a bit of background to each question and then asked the assembled group to press 1,2 or 3 on our wireless keypads to give our choice.
It started with one guy who asked "what if I don't like the options you propose?" He wanted to answer the poll question with another question. Rather than the moderator saying "suck it up buddy and answer the question", she allowed the whole blessed two hours to turn into a criticism of everything from whether or not biodiesel fumes were safe to breathe to "we need a new poll question to determine if people think that this whole poll was comparing one fruit to another or not". What a waste of time.
One good "extra" question that was posed was "where do you live... urban or rural?" The answer to this was the most revealing of the whole tawdry affair and it was absolutely amazing to me that the pollsters did not have it on their list before they were nudged by an audience member. The majority of the attendees, who live in the core of the city, want commuters from outside the core to pay extra taxes and tolls for the right to drive to work or shop downtown. They could give a tinker's damn for the needs or realities of suburban and rural residents. I wonder what they would think if the Canadian government moved all of their offices to Barrhaven, Munster and Orleans and they, the cool and sophisticated core dwellers, had to commute to the burbs? Want to bet that the poll results would be different.
The city might also want to take a second look at Pace Consulting, the company that was hired to run this "consultation". They covered themselves by saying that this was a first of its kind consultation in Ottawa but does that mean that we have to pay them to test out their techniques? According to their web site, www.paceconsulting.ca, they are very experienced strategic planners with clients like: Ontario Hydro, Medtronic, TD Securities and many other names familiar to this blogger. I suggest that Pace regroup to get their message together before the next consultation.
There were questions about Light Rail (LRT) versus Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). There were questions about traffic congestion, how to clear it and, more importantly, how to pay for it.
But was I the only person in the room to roll their eyes at the way this consultation was carried out?
The session deteriorated from the very beginning. Two, count them, two City Councillors left the budget consultations to glad hand the crowd and tell us what great work they were doing. I would have preferred that Maria and Alex had stayed at the budget consult. It was also quite obvious, from the number of people that Maria recognized in the crowd of 77 or so, that this was not a random sampling of Ottawans.
Then on to the questions. An earnest pollster gave a bit of background to each question and then asked the assembled group to press 1,2 or 3 on our wireless keypads to give our choice.
It started with one guy who asked "what if I don't like the options you propose?" He wanted to answer the poll question with another question. Rather than the moderator saying "suck it up buddy and answer the question", she allowed the whole blessed two hours to turn into a criticism of everything from whether or not biodiesel fumes were safe to breathe to "we need a new poll question to determine if people think that this whole poll was comparing one fruit to another or not". What a waste of time.
One good "extra" question that was posed was "where do you live... urban or rural?" The answer to this was the most revealing of the whole tawdry affair and it was absolutely amazing to me that the pollsters did not have it on their list before they were nudged by an audience member. The majority of the attendees, who live in the core of the city, want commuters from outside the core to pay extra taxes and tolls for the right to drive to work or shop downtown. They could give a tinker's damn for the needs or realities of suburban and rural residents. I wonder what they would think if the Canadian government moved all of their offices to Barrhaven, Munster and Orleans and they, the cool and sophisticated core dwellers, had to commute to the burbs? Want to bet that the poll results would be different.
The city might also want to take a second look at Pace Consulting, the company that was hired to run this "consultation". They covered themselves by saying that this was a first of its kind consultation in Ottawa but does that mean that we have to pay them to test out their techniques? According to their web site, www.paceconsulting.ca, they are very experienced strategic planners with clients like: Ontario Hydro, Medtronic, TD Securities and many other names familiar to this blogger. I suggest that Pace regroup to get their message together before the next consultation.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
The gnashing of teeth in Ottawa
The gnashing of teeth, ripping out of hair and general cries of anguish are being heard all across Ottawa these days. KarlHans is a pariah, Brian's crap does not stink and Luc is not abandoning a sinking ship... he has time problems.
Lowell Green, the jovial CFRA host, says that he is tired of the whole affair and that it is old news... so drop it and get over it. Seems that most of his brain dead Green Beanies agree. After all, the RCMP found no crime.
Where was this kind of logic from good old Lowell when Gomery was digging in the dirt and not coming up with anything against the Liberals?
Conservatives are a complex beast. The Mulroney Misunderstanding is old news, even though he was awarded $2.1 million of our money after making misleading comments about his relationship with Schreiber. Drop it because it is not important or it's old news? Or is just embarrassing for Cons to find out that they have problems in their camp also?
What do you think, dear Cons, the Mayor Larry bribery allegations are old news and should be dropped also? What about the Air India enquiry... old news? How about the Pickton trial?
OK, maybe Pickton stretches the point but do you get it? Old news is no news is the mantra of the Conservatives only when they are on the receiving end of the stick.
Suck it up lads and ladies. When the Libs are back in power you get to stick it to them again!
Lowell Green, the jovial CFRA host, says that he is tired of the whole affair and that it is old news... so drop it and get over it. Seems that most of his brain dead Green Beanies agree. After all, the RCMP found no crime.
Where was this kind of logic from good old Lowell when Gomery was digging in the dirt and not coming up with anything against the Liberals?
Conservatives are a complex beast. The Mulroney Misunderstanding is old news, even though he was awarded $2.1 million of our money after making misleading comments about his relationship with Schreiber. Drop it because it is not important or it's old news? Or is just embarrassing for Cons to find out that they have problems in their camp also?
What do you think, dear Cons, the Mayor Larry bribery allegations are old news and should be dropped also? What about the Air India enquiry... old news? How about the Pickton trial?
OK, maybe Pickton stretches the point but do you get it? Old news is no news is the mantra of the Conservatives only when they are on the receiving end of the stick.
Suck it up lads and ladies. When the Libs are back in power you get to stick it to them again!
Friday, November 30, 2007
A note to Peter MacKay
Minister of Defence Peter MacKay told an audience of transportation security experts in Ottawa this week, "The greatest threat to North America right now is on the water."
I agree with Minister MacKay.
I argued last year in an article I wrote for a local newspaper that "the greatest threat to Canada will not be a 'rogue-nation missile'. It will be a device hidden in a shipping container or somebody carrying a briefcase filled with nuclear explosives."
So, Mr. MacKay, let me ask you the same question I posed in the article: "If the threat is terrestrial , why invest in the American Star Wars missile defence project?"
I will await his answer.
I agree with Minister MacKay.
I argued last year in an article I wrote for a local newspaper that "the greatest threat to Canada will not be a 'rogue-nation missile'. It will be a device hidden in a shipping container or somebody carrying a briefcase filled with nuclear explosives."
So, Mr. MacKay, let me ask you the same question I posed in the article: "If the threat is terrestrial , why invest in the American Star Wars missile defence project?"
I will await his answer.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
All hail the Poilievre
Well, hat's off to Pierre Poilievre, MP. He secured $35 million in funding for the proposed Strandherd Bridge project in Ottawa. The project has a total cost estimated at $105 million, so the federal money is welcome.
It is especially welcome since the provincial government won't pony up any money for the bridge because they claim, wrongly, that it is not part of a on-again-off-again light rail transit system.
But what's this? Turns out the federal money is not new money? The feds had already approved $200 million for the light rail project that Pierre's fellow Conservative, John "the screamer" Baird, helped to kill last fall. The $35 million is being taken from those yet unused funds.
Thanks Pierre.
It is especially welcome since the provincial government won't pony up any money for the bridge because they claim, wrongly, that it is not part of a on-again-off-again light rail transit system.
But what's this? Turns out the federal money is not new money? The feds had already approved $200 million for the light rail project that Pierre's fellow Conservative, John "the screamer" Baird, helped to kill last fall. The $35 million is being taken from those yet unused funds.
Thanks Pierre.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Fixing the First Nations
Patrick Brazeau, National Chief of the Congress of Aboriginal People, asks in his blog (http://brazman.blogspot.com) for readers to complete four statements. I completed them on his blog and these are my answers:
If I were the PM, I would negotiate with Aboriginals leaders to reduce the number of native communities, abolish the Indian Act and then close down Indian Affairs and redirect that money.
If I were the Indian Affairs Minister, I would carry out the directives stated above and then resign.
If I were the Premier of Ontario, I would demand that the AFN or CAP enter the negotiations with Mohawks in Southern Ontario to settle the issues.
If I were an Aboriginal Leader, I would demand that all Leaders implement an education, health and employment program for their community. And if they were unwilling or unable... then step aside and let someone else do it.
Seems straight forward enough.
If I were the PM, I would negotiate with Aboriginals leaders to reduce the number of native communities, abolish the Indian Act and then close down Indian Affairs and redirect that money.
If I were the Indian Affairs Minister, I would carry out the directives stated above and then resign.
If I were the Premier of Ontario, I would demand that the AFN or CAP enter the negotiations with Mohawks in Southern Ontario to settle the issues.
If I were an Aboriginal Leader, I would demand that all Leaders implement an education, health and employment program for their community. And if they were unwilling or unable... then step aside and let someone else do it.
Seems straight forward enough.
Thursday, November 22, 2007
You're a terrorist? Welcome to Canada!
We have been spending a fortune beefing up our border patrols, arming our border crossing guards and increasing our vigilance in looking for grandmothers "smuggling" a can of SPAM in from the US. At the same time, we let terrorists and undocumented "refugees" into the country without a question.
Ahmed Ressan, who tried to blow upon the LA airport and who is now in prison in the US, entered the US from Canada. He had been in Canada since being let in as a political refugee, with no background checks to find out why he considered himself at risk in his home country. He was at risk because he was a terrorist before he got here. But we let him in without question.
Here is the problem with our system. Canada has admitted almost 700,000 refugees in the past 20 years. In case you think this a typo, I say it again; 700,000 in 20 years. How many of these had security checks? According to CSIS, less than 10%.
So much for security. It is a bit like putting on your seat belt and then driving around with a sharp knife in your mouth. One slight accident and you are dead anyway!
Ahmed Ressan, who tried to blow upon the LA airport and who is now in prison in the US, entered the US from Canada. He had been in Canada since being let in as a political refugee, with no background checks to find out why he considered himself at risk in his home country. He was at risk because he was a terrorist before he got here. But we let him in without question.
Here is the problem with our system. Canada has admitted almost 700,000 refugees in the past 20 years. In case you think this a typo, I say it again; 700,000 in 20 years. How many of these had security checks? According to CSIS, less than 10%.
So much for security. It is a bit like putting on your seat belt and then driving around with a sharp knife in your mouth. One slight accident and you are dead anyway!
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
The ZENN has it
Who says the CBC is a waste of money?
Transport Canada has been dragging its feet over the ZENN car, a slow speed (50 kph tops) electric car being built in St Jerome, Quebec. It is being sold all over the US, but you cannot get it in Canada. Why not? According to TC it does not meet Canadian standards. The funny thing is that the Canadian standards are identical to the US standards.
Enter the CBC. On October 25, 2007, Reg Sherran does a story on the vehicle including a conversation with a TC spokesperson who contradicts himself repeatedly. Then Sherran reports that the company may have to shut in Quebec and move to the US, where their market is.
Well here we are a month later and Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon puts out a release saying that the ZENN is now approved for Canadians.
Thanks Lawrence and thanks even more to the CBC!
Remember the CBC when you save thousands of dollars buying a ZENN car and you breathe easier because the ZENN is non-polluting electric.
Transport Canada has been dragging its feet over the ZENN car, a slow speed (50 kph tops) electric car being built in St Jerome, Quebec. It is being sold all over the US, but you cannot get it in Canada. Why not? According to TC it does not meet Canadian standards. The funny thing is that the Canadian standards are identical to the US standards.
Enter the CBC. On October 25, 2007, Reg Sherran does a story on the vehicle including a conversation with a TC spokesperson who contradicts himself repeatedly. Then Sherran reports that the company may have to shut in Quebec and move to the US, where their market is.
Well here we are a month later and Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon puts out a release saying that the ZENN is now approved for Canadians.
Thanks Lawrence and thanks even more to the CBC!
Remember the CBC when you save thousands of dollars buying a ZENN car and you breathe easier because the ZENN is non-polluting electric.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Tasering in Vancouver is not the only issue!
Robert Dziekanski, a Polish immigrant to Canada, died in Vancouver after being "tasered" by the RCMP at the airport. There is a lesson to be learned here and I am not talking about the use of tasers.
Dziekanski was an unemployed coal miner (some reports say he was an unemployed construction worker) from Poland who spoke neither English or French. He had no job prospects and was coming to join his mother who was already in Vancouver. He had never flown before in his life and had never even been out of Poland.
This incident brings into question our immigration procedures as much as police procedures.
For instance, why was Dziekanski being allowed to immigrate to Canada when he had no employment agreements? After arriving he could have been a quick candidate for welfare.
Secondly, why was he not required to learn one of Canada's official languages before he came. Surely he had the time.
Third, if we knew he was coming, why was he delayed for 10 hours at the airport while immigration folks processed him? He must of had papers.
Fourth, in all of Vancouver there is no one who speaks Polish who could have helped out? Why was his mother, who I assume spoke Polish, told that Dziekanski was not in immigration?
By all means let us investigate the RCMP use of taser on this man but they are not the only questions to be asked. Immigration Canada and airport officials have some explaining to do also.
Dziekanski was an unemployed coal miner (some reports say he was an unemployed construction worker) from Poland who spoke neither English or French. He had no job prospects and was coming to join his mother who was already in Vancouver. He had never flown before in his life and had never even been out of Poland.
This incident brings into question our immigration procedures as much as police procedures.
For instance, why was Dziekanski being allowed to immigrate to Canada when he had no employment agreements? After arriving he could have been a quick candidate for welfare.
Secondly, why was he not required to learn one of Canada's official languages before he came. Surely he had the time.
Third, if we knew he was coming, why was he delayed for 10 hours at the airport while immigration folks processed him? He must of had papers.
Fourth, in all of Vancouver there is no one who speaks Polish who could have helped out? Why was his mother, who I assume spoke Polish, told that Dziekanski was not in immigration?
By all means let us investigate the RCMP use of taser on this man but they are not the only questions to be asked. Immigration Canada and airport officials have some explaining to do also.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Poilievre blows it again
Pierre Poilievre is the type kid that we all used to beat up in school. It is not the way he looks -he looks quite presentable - it is that he can't open his mouth without saying something stupid or insulting or both.
He was the Conservative who lectured MPs on decorum and then did a pixie dance behind the Speaker's chair in the Commons. Then the tiny mite became one of the more abusive hecklers on the Conservative side of the house, including making abusive hand gestures and swearing. Now he is lecturing senior politicians on the relevance of historical fact.
On Question Period this weekend, Poilievre lectured Ralph Goodale over the Mulroney affair... oops, excuse me... the Mulroney "misunderstanding". "Liberals 'are trying to 'modernize' a historical event", cries Pierre. Because Pierre was in diapers in Calgary when the Mulroney misunderstanding took place means that it is no longer important? Geez!
If I ever take a $300,000 payment, in cash, from a dodgy source, for a service I may not have even delivered, and then neglect to pay taxes on it; then lie to a commons committee and the RCMP about it; then sue and win $2.1 million on the basis of the lie - remind me to get Pierre as my lawyer. He can argue that since it happened last week or last year, it is history and not relevant to today and does not deserve to be discussed.
He was the Conservative who lectured MPs on decorum and then did a pixie dance behind the Speaker's chair in the Commons. Then the tiny mite became one of the more abusive hecklers on the Conservative side of the house, including making abusive hand gestures and swearing. Now he is lecturing senior politicians on the relevance of historical fact.
On Question Period this weekend, Poilievre lectured Ralph Goodale over the Mulroney affair... oops, excuse me... the Mulroney "misunderstanding". "Liberals 'are trying to 'modernize' a historical event", cries Pierre. Because Pierre was in diapers in Calgary when the Mulroney misunderstanding took place means that it is no longer important? Geez!
If I ever take a $300,000 payment, in cash, from a dodgy source, for a service I may not have even delivered, and then neglect to pay taxes on it; then lie to a commons committee and the RCMP about it; then sue and win $2.1 million on the basis of the lie - remind me to get Pierre as my lawyer. He can argue that since it happened last week or last year, it is history and not relevant to today and does not deserve to be discussed.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
New ways to do business!
Ottawa is an amazing place to live. Where else can you have 3 levels of government competing to do the least for their citizens.
Take the local government. The mayor, elected by voters across the city, wants to run municipal government with a bit more streamlined bureaucracy. The majority of councillors, elected by, in most cases, a minority of ward voters, tell the mayor not to bother trying; because the bureaucrats run the show. The senior bureaucrat, the city manager, says to the mayor; get stuffed.
Let's get serious in Ottawa. Our cupboards are bare and the kids are still hungry. Rather than stealing from the supermarket to feed the kids let's reduce the number of kids.
Better yet, let's put the kids on a diet!!
What does that mean?
It is financial pay back time for city employees, including the police department who seem to think that they are not city employees.
I propose that all salaries in the municipal civil service be rolled back between 10% and 20%. The overall budget of the city is $2.1 billion of which about 50% is salaries. That is a payroll of about $1 billion. (This number may be slightly off because it is difficult to determine the number by reading the 2007 or proposed 2008 budget. We do know that there are many thousands of full time equivalents, including the police, on the payroll.)
So assume the $1 billion payroll. A 10% cutback across the board means a saving of $100 million. That is enough to balance the 2008 budget without cutting a single job or program.
After that comes the hard part. You need to get rid of some of the kids in 2009.
Take the local government. The mayor, elected by voters across the city, wants to run municipal government with a bit more streamlined bureaucracy. The majority of councillors, elected by, in most cases, a minority of ward voters, tell the mayor not to bother trying; because the bureaucrats run the show. The senior bureaucrat, the city manager, says to the mayor; get stuffed.
Let's get serious in Ottawa. Our cupboards are bare and the kids are still hungry. Rather than stealing from the supermarket to feed the kids let's reduce the number of kids.
Better yet, let's put the kids on a diet!!
What does that mean?
It is financial pay back time for city employees, including the police department who seem to think that they are not city employees.
I propose that all salaries in the municipal civil service be rolled back between 10% and 20%. The overall budget of the city is $2.1 billion of which about 50% is salaries. That is a payroll of about $1 billion. (This number may be slightly off because it is difficult to determine the number by reading the 2007 or proposed 2008 budget. We do know that there are many thousands of full time equivalents, including the police, on the payroll.)
So assume the $1 billion payroll. A 10% cutback across the board means a saving of $100 million. That is enough to balance the 2008 budget without cutting a single job or program.
After that comes the hard part. You need to get rid of some of the kids in 2009.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
PR is no more?
The Fair Vote folks are telling us that the MMP debate in Ontario is not over. They claim that it was wrong that a democratic majority voted to keep what Fair Vote calls an undemocratic voting system.
Oh, pooh!
The government set up the Citizen's Assembly (CA), supposedly a random selection of people from across the province. How you do it randomly and still get 50% male, 50% female and all the minorities represented is beyond me, so I give them the benefit of the doubt.
What I marvel at is that the CA was able to make a unanimous decision, and I emphasize - they made a 100% agreement, on MMP to replace First Past the Post (FPTP). Unanimous agreement with anything in this country is hard to believe, let alone to replace a form of democratic voting that goes back over 300 years.
Let us accept that the process was open and good and the CA members made voluntary decisions. What happened next is what destroyed the chance for a vote on MMP to succeed.
I attended a meeting in the fall where the guest speaker was a member of the CA. At breakfast the gentleman sat across from me and we had a chance to exchange views. However, I should tell you that the exchange was not exactly equal. I listened as he told me about the CA and about MMP. (I should admit to you that I have written many times in other venues about MMP and the other forms of PR.) I also read his brochure. (Although I had already read it from the CA web site.) When I questioned the gentleman on various aspects of MMP I was somewhat surprised at his responses. Invariably, his comebacks to my comments were numerous forms of "That is irrelevant." Sure made my day and made me want to support him. NOT!
MysteryMan is a long-in-the-tooth marketer. He, or she, knows how to present stuff so that people want to buy it. MysteryMan recognized early in the conversation with CA-man that CA-man was no marketer. CA-man could not care less about what MysteryMan had to say unless it agreed with his (CA-man's) vision.
That was where the CA project's wheels fell off. Don't send a stockboy to do a marketers work.
If the CA had decided that the decision was worth marketing they would have made sure that their salespeople were marketers, not stockboys.
Proportional Representation has a place in our electoral system but there are four identified forms of PR, of which MMP is only one. You have to ask yourself; why did the CA decide on MMP when it is one of the weakest forms of PR?
I suggest to the Fair Vote folks that rather than make accusations about who scuttled your grand dream, take a look at the process and results that led up to the vote. The YES side was given a mandate and money to get their message out. The NO side had only logic on its side.
The NO side won.
But, hey, don't listen to me... whatever I say is irrelevant!
Oh, pooh!
The government set up the Citizen's Assembly (CA), supposedly a random selection of people from across the province. How you do it randomly and still get 50% male, 50% female and all the minorities represented is beyond me, so I give them the benefit of the doubt.
What I marvel at is that the CA was able to make a unanimous decision, and I emphasize - they made a 100% agreement, on MMP to replace First Past the Post (FPTP). Unanimous agreement with anything in this country is hard to believe, let alone to replace a form of democratic voting that goes back over 300 years.
Let us accept that the process was open and good and the CA members made voluntary decisions. What happened next is what destroyed the chance for a vote on MMP to succeed.
I attended a meeting in the fall where the guest speaker was a member of the CA. At breakfast the gentleman sat across from me and we had a chance to exchange views. However, I should tell you that the exchange was not exactly equal. I listened as he told me about the CA and about MMP. (I should admit to you that I have written many times in other venues about MMP and the other forms of PR.) I also read his brochure. (Although I had already read it from the CA web site.) When I questioned the gentleman on various aspects of MMP I was somewhat surprised at his responses. Invariably, his comebacks to my comments were numerous forms of "That is irrelevant." Sure made my day and made me want to support him. NOT!
MysteryMan is a long-in-the-tooth marketer. He, or she, knows how to present stuff so that people want to buy it. MysteryMan recognized early in the conversation with CA-man that CA-man was no marketer. CA-man could not care less about what MysteryMan had to say unless it agreed with his (CA-man's) vision.
That was where the CA project's wheels fell off. Don't send a stockboy to do a marketers work.
If the CA had decided that the decision was worth marketing they would have made sure that their salespeople were marketers, not stockboys.
Proportional Representation has a place in our electoral system but there are four identified forms of PR, of which MMP is only one. You have to ask yourself; why did the CA decide on MMP when it is one of the weakest forms of PR?
I suggest to the Fair Vote folks that rather than make accusations about who scuttled your grand dream, take a look at the process and results that led up to the vote. The YES side was given a mandate and money to get their message out. The NO side had only logic on its side.
The NO side won.
But, hey, don't listen to me... whatever I say is irrelevant!
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Is Health Canada trying to kill us?
There was an article in the Ottawa newspaper on Sept 12 stating that an Alberta MD was in Health Canada's (HC) bad books. Seems that the northern Alberta MD had noticed that there was a very high incidence of a rare form of cancer in the area around Fort Chipewyan, about 100 km downstream from Fort McMurray, the site of all the tar sands mining.
Dr. O'Connor recognized the cancer because his own father died of it in Ireland about 15 years ago and he raised an alert when he diagnosed it in 5 local patients.
So when Health Canada, whose mandate is to "help Canadians maintain and improve their health, while respecting individual choices and circumstances", heard of the alert... they made a complaint to the Alberta Medical Association and threatened Dr. O'Connor license to practice medicine. Why? Because according to HC, there is no risk of toxins and carcinogens spilling into the Athabaska River from the tar sands.
So rather than investigate the identified problem HC attacks the messenger. And what does Tony Clement, the Minister of Health, have to say? His office issued a press release commending HC for doing their job.
In the meantime, it seems that a new report was released only last week by an Alberta ecologist that seemingly contradicts HC. Kevin Timoney points to the "deformed fish with bulging eyes" as part of the evidence that the pollutants in the Athabaska River might be a problem. Since they cannot threaten the medical license of the non-doctor Timoney, maybe they will just send him to Guantanamo.
But this is not the first time that HC has protected the health of Canadians by ignoring evidence. A number of years ago, when lead was being eliminated from gasoline (because it was a health risk), a company from the US introduced a substance called MMT. MMT had a manganese base. MMT was introduced into gasoline as an anti-knock agent and octane raiser. The US, studying the effects of MMT decided to ban it. HC decided to ban it also. But in 1996 the manufacturer of MMT decided that the ban in Canada was contrary to the North America Free Trade Agreement. Health of Canadians be damned... the NAFTA was paramount.
"MMT does not pose a threat to either the environment or to human health and welfare," argued the company, which was being advised by Gordon Ritchie, a former top Canadian trade official who helped negotiate NAFTA. Canada was about to lose its sovereignty to NAFTA so it settled out of court with Ethyl Corp to the tune of multi-millions of dollars, so that there would be no judgment against it. But Ethyl Corp must have been right about MMT not being a problem because Grace Wood, senior evaluator in Health Canada's environmental health directorate and author of its MMT report, told us that; while manganese is known to be a "neurotoxic" linked to brain disorders such as Parkinson's disease, the level of manganese released by MMT in gasoline "is unlikely to pose a risk".
This was of course completely contrary to the science in the US that banned MMT and contrary to the physical fact that manganese in micro form can enter the human body through breathing and that manganese from vehicle exhausts can accumulate in the soil. HC also ignored the caution from Environment Canada that, while emissions from vehicles in pristine shape might not form a major risk, MMT can affect the functioning of a vehicle's exhaust system and result in the release of much higher concentrations of manganese into the air than pristine vehicles.
It took 10 more years for gasoline refiners in Canada to finally get rid of MMT, voluntarily. What does HC say today about manganese? There might be a slight problem with manganese, what with the rise in Parkinson's and AD/HD but, hey, we are just simple scientists. So what do we know?
Want to reduce taxes and protect your health? Get rid of, or at least reform, Health Canada.
Dr. O'Connor recognized the cancer because his own father died of it in Ireland about 15 years ago and he raised an alert when he diagnosed it in 5 local patients.
So when Health Canada, whose mandate is to "help Canadians maintain and improve their health, while respecting individual choices and circumstances", heard of the alert... they made a complaint to the Alberta Medical Association and threatened Dr. O'Connor license to practice medicine. Why? Because according to HC, there is no risk of toxins and carcinogens spilling into the Athabaska River from the tar sands.
So rather than investigate the identified problem HC attacks the messenger. And what does Tony Clement, the Minister of Health, have to say? His office issued a press release commending HC for doing their job.
In the meantime, it seems that a new report was released only last week by an Alberta ecologist that seemingly contradicts HC. Kevin Timoney points to the "deformed fish with bulging eyes" as part of the evidence that the pollutants in the Athabaska River might be a problem. Since they cannot threaten the medical license of the non-doctor Timoney, maybe they will just send him to Guantanamo.
But this is not the first time that HC has protected the health of Canadians by ignoring evidence. A number of years ago, when lead was being eliminated from gasoline (because it was a health risk), a company from the US introduced a substance called MMT. MMT had a manganese base. MMT was introduced into gasoline as an anti-knock agent and octane raiser. The US, studying the effects of MMT decided to ban it. HC decided to ban it also. But in 1996 the manufacturer of MMT decided that the ban in Canada was contrary to the North America Free Trade Agreement. Health of Canadians be damned... the NAFTA was paramount.
"MMT does not pose a threat to either the environment or to human health and welfare," argued the company, which was being advised by Gordon Ritchie, a former top Canadian trade official who helped negotiate NAFTA. Canada was about to lose its sovereignty to NAFTA so it settled out of court with Ethyl Corp to the tune of multi-millions of dollars, so that there would be no judgment against it. But Ethyl Corp must have been right about MMT not being a problem because Grace Wood, senior evaluator in Health Canada's environmental health directorate and author of its MMT report, told us that; while manganese is known to be a "neurotoxic" linked to brain disorders such as Parkinson's disease, the level of manganese released by MMT in gasoline "is unlikely to pose a risk".
This was of course completely contrary to the science in the US that banned MMT and contrary to the physical fact that manganese in micro form can enter the human body through breathing and that manganese from vehicle exhausts can accumulate in the soil. HC also ignored the caution from Environment Canada that, while emissions from vehicles in pristine shape might not form a major risk, MMT can affect the functioning of a vehicle's exhaust system and result in the release of much higher concentrations of manganese into the air than pristine vehicles.
It took 10 more years for gasoline refiners in Canada to finally get rid of MMT, voluntarily. What does HC say today about manganese? There might be a slight problem with manganese, what with the rise in Parkinson's and AD/HD but, hey, we are just simple scientists. So what do we know?
Want to reduce taxes and protect your health? Get rid of, or at least reform, Health Canada.
Harper again?????
Honest to gosh, I am trying to like PM Harper. I have been a federal Liberal all my life but I have worked for candidates of other stripes when I preferred the candidate over the party. I am trying my best to like Stephen Harper but he is making it tough.
His latest blooper is the agreement to settle out of court with Alan Riddell, deposed Conservative candidate in the last election. After declaring that there was no agreement to compensate Riddell for his costs of being a candidate, Harper's office issued a press release on Remembrance Day that they have paid Riddell off out of court. How do you pay off a settlement when no agreement existed? And on what basis was Justice Denis Power of the Ontario Superior Court able to decide that there was an agreement and that it was enforceable? There must have been some form of agreement.
Geez, I can hear it now. John Baird is going to scream at me and blame everything on the Liberals.
Maybe while he is screaming he can explain to me how PM Harper can promise in his 2006 election platform to "ensure that party nomination and leadership races are conducted in a fair, transparent and democratic manner" and "prevent party leaders from appointing candidates without the democratic consent of local electoral district associations.", and then turn around an replace two Toronto area candidates who were selected democratically by their riding constituents.
I am trying to like the PM.
His latest blooper is the agreement to settle out of court with Alan Riddell, deposed Conservative candidate in the last election. After declaring that there was no agreement to compensate Riddell for his costs of being a candidate, Harper's office issued a press release on Remembrance Day that they have paid Riddell off out of court. How do you pay off a settlement when no agreement existed? And on what basis was Justice Denis Power of the Ontario Superior Court able to decide that there was an agreement and that it was enforceable? There must have been some form of agreement.
Geez, I can hear it now. John Baird is going to scream at me and blame everything on the Liberals.
Maybe while he is screaming he can explain to me how PM Harper can promise in his 2006 election platform to "ensure that party nomination and leadership races are conducted in a fair, transparent and democratic manner" and "prevent party leaders from appointing candidates without the democratic consent of local electoral district associations.", and then turn around an replace two Toronto area candidates who were selected democratically by their riding constituents.
I am trying to like the PM.
Monday, November 12, 2007
So is the PM crazy? Or What?
How dumb can you be to portray yourself and your government as fighting for the rights and pocketbooks of Canadians, being the paragons of virtue and accountability, and be squeaky clean; and then you say you will not investigate the goings on with Brian Mulroney and the $300,000 that skipped his memory.
Rather than saying "I will get to the bottom of this!", you threatened the Liberals and past Prime Ministers with digging up dirt on them.
How dumb are you?
If a former PM Mulroney has done something wrong, he or she needs to be brought to justice. Did Paul Martin or Jean Chretien do something illegal as you seem to suggest? If so, have them investigated and taken to court also.
If Mulroney is squeaky clean then what does he have to lose by being investigated. His integrity? To late for that!
I suggest that you will lose a lot more than he will if you don't look into the issue, Mr. Harper.
Rather than saying "I will get to the bottom of this!", you threatened the Liberals and past Prime Ministers with digging up dirt on them.
How dumb are you?
If a former PM Mulroney has done something wrong, he or she needs to be brought to justice. Did Paul Martin or Jean Chretien do something illegal as you seem to suggest? If so, have them investigated and taken to court also.
If Mulroney is squeaky clean then what does he have to lose by being investigated. His integrity? To late for that!
I suggest that you will lose a lot more than he will if you don't look into the issue, Mr. Harper.
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
The Afghans must be quaking in their boots.
A bunch of years ago I complained bitterly that the same of names always seemed to pop up at the government trough when politicos went looking for "experts" to hire. Well, here we go again.
John Manley has been appointed to head the Canadian Afghan mission review. The goals of the review is to determine where we go next in the dog's breakfast we call the Afghan conflict. Specifically, the review team (it is not just a one person mission) will study four main options for the "mission". The options include:
To be fair, Manley is not alone. He has a team of very experience military-savvy people to back him up. They include:
Politics. Ya got to love it!
John Manley has been appointed to head the Canadian Afghan mission review. The goals of the review is to determine where we go next in the dog's breakfast we call the Afghan conflict. Specifically, the review team (it is not just a one person mission) will study four main options for the "mission". The options include:
- Option One -- continue training the Afghan army and police with the goal of creating a self-sufficient indigenous security force in Kandahar province so that Canadian troops can withdraw in February 2009
- Option Two -- focus on reconstruction work in Kandahar, which would require other countries to take over security role
- Option Three -- shift Canadian security and reconstruction efforts to another region in Afghanistan
- Option Four -- withdraw all Canadian military forces after February 2009 except for small contingent to provide security for aid workers and diplomats
To be fair, Manley is not alone. He has a team of very experience military-savvy people to back him up. They include:
- Derek Burney, Canada's former ambassador to Washington and former chief of staff to Brian Mulroney
- Respected broadcaster Pamela Wallin, who was Canadian consul general in New York
- Former Progressive Conservative cabinet minister Jake Epp
- Paul Tellier, former Clerk of the Privy Council and former president and CEO of Canadian National Railway and Bombardier
Politics. Ya got to love it!
Sunday, October 28, 2007
The Federal finance minister spews garbage
So, the Finance Minister wants retailers to roll back prices because the Canadian dollar has climbed to parity with the US. It is quite obvious that Flaherty either has no idea of how international commerce works or he has spent too much time staring at this navel to know what happens in business as a whole.
Recently I bought a specialty mirror in the US for a project in Canada. The wholesale price to me was $US600, the same price as is charged to US companies like mine . In the US the mirror retails for $US1000. The US retailer after paying shipping and taxes has a gross profit (before selling, warehousing, and other expenses) of $280.
If I retailed the same mirror in Canada at $1000, assuming parity with US pricing, my gross profit would be $65. In addition to similar shipping costs that the US dealer incurs, I pay broker fees, shipping to Custom inspectors (so they can make sure that it is in fact a mirror and not... I assume... meat or dope or something else), time spent to move the import around the bureaucracy and a higher corporate tax rate.
In order to make the same gross profit on the mirror as my US counterpart, I have to sell the mirror for $1330. So much for FREE TRADE. And so much for Jim Flaherty.
Recently I bought a specialty mirror in the US for a project in Canada. The wholesale price to me was $US600, the same price as is charged to US companies like mine . In the US the mirror retails for $US1000. The US retailer after paying shipping and taxes has a gross profit (before selling, warehousing, and other expenses) of $280.
If I retailed the same mirror in Canada at $1000, assuming parity with US pricing, my gross profit would be $65. In addition to similar shipping costs that the US dealer incurs, I pay broker fees, shipping to Custom inspectors (so they can make sure that it is in fact a mirror and not... I assume... meat or dope or something else), time spent to move the import around the bureaucracy and a higher corporate tax rate.
In order to make the same gross profit on the mirror as my US counterpart, I have to sell the mirror for $1330. So much for FREE TRADE. And so much for Jim Flaherty.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Arrogance of the politicos
I spent all last week trying to get a federal or an Ontario politician to listen to a visitor from California who was an expert in the area of researching the causes of action of violent offenders and AD/HD sufferers. Red Hodges is the Chairman of the Violence Research Foundation, a California-based non-profit organization which is trying to make a difference for people. VRF wants to raise the profile in Canada of what is being done in California, to help reduce the incidence of violent offenses and to help treat AD/HD children.
What is the response of Canadian politicos? It runs the gamut from "Let me put you on hold so that you can talk to my assistant.", which is political-speak for "bug off" to "Let me see if I can get the MLA to call you back.", which is political speak, again, for "bug off".
We just went through a provincial election in Ontario wherein the politicians slapped themselves on the back saying that crime in Ontario is down, but also that we cannot rest until we eliminate crime. We also heard that Ontario must do more for AD/HD and autistic kids. We also have a federal government saying jail is where all offenders need to be... not house arrest or lesser forms of incarceration or alternate forms of treatment... and throw away the key.
If that is the case, why not listen to people like Red Hodges. Maybe we can all learn something new. Maybe our newfound knowledge can help our fellow Canadians. If we can reduce violent crime by treating the criminals as more than just political fodder, then maybe, just maybe, we reduce the number of victims. And that would be a good thing.
Stick around for updates.
What is the response of Canadian politicos? It runs the gamut from "Let me put you on hold so that you can talk to my assistant.", which is political-speak for "bug off" to "Let me see if I can get the MLA to call you back.", which is political speak, again, for "bug off".
We just went through a provincial election in Ontario wherein the politicians slapped themselves on the back saying that crime in Ontario is down, but also that we cannot rest until we eliminate crime. We also heard that Ontario must do more for AD/HD and autistic kids. We also have a federal government saying jail is where all offenders need to be... not house arrest or lesser forms of incarceration or alternate forms of treatment... and throw away the key.
If that is the case, why not listen to people like Red Hodges. Maybe we can all learn something new. Maybe our newfound knowledge can help our fellow Canadians. If we can reduce violent crime by treating the criminals as more than just political fodder, then maybe, just maybe, we reduce the number of victims. And that would be a good thing.
Stick around for updates.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
John Tory blows another one
By now most Ontarians and likely most Canadians will know that the Liberals won the 2007 Ontario election. A great deal has been made of the failure of the Conservatives to make their anticipated breakthrough in Toronto and other areas of Ontario. The failure of the Conservatives, however, was not hanging their hats on a divisive and unpopular issue of private school funding. The real blooper was making John Tory their leader.
I am not talking about Blue Tories versus Red Tories. It is easy to say that the radical right wanted a Harris-clone as a leader and that they refused to follow a less foaming-at-the-mouth leader such as John Tory.
The blunder was to run an American-style election in Canada. Attack ads seems to work in the US. I'm guessing because the Civil War is really not over in the US. But in Canada, we have respect for other Canadians, even if we disagree with their views. To run an ad over and over calling McGuinty a liar in everything but name was fine for about a week but when the tactic wasn't seen to be working, it was time to change the tactic. All the attack ads did was turn people off.
Where were the positive platform ads? They were there but they got lost in the attack ads. The Conservative brand was lost in the fog of war.
But what did the Conservatives expect? You can argue that the yellow-ties in the back rooms of the Conservative campaign were inexperienced but, hey, the leader had all the election organizing experience in the world. John Tory had run the federal campaign for Kim Campbell. Remember Kim? No? That's OK, she wasn't around long enough to leave an impression. While she had the ignominious task of running as Conservative leader following the less-than-popular Brian Mulroney, her campaign finally crashed when John Tory authorized the ultimate attack ad mocking the result facial disfiguration from a medical affliction against Jean Chretien.
I wonder what would have happen if the Conservatives and John Tory had decided to run a positive campaign instead a negative one. I guess we will never know.
I am not talking about Blue Tories versus Red Tories. It is easy to say that the radical right wanted a Harris-clone as a leader and that they refused to follow a less foaming-at-the-mouth leader such as John Tory.
The blunder was to run an American-style election in Canada. Attack ads seems to work in the US. I'm guessing because the Civil War is really not over in the US. But in Canada, we have respect for other Canadians, even if we disagree with their views. To run an ad over and over calling McGuinty a liar in everything but name was fine for about a week but when the tactic wasn't seen to be working, it was time to change the tactic. All the attack ads did was turn people off.
Where were the positive platform ads? They were there but they got lost in the attack ads. The Conservative brand was lost in the fog of war.
But what did the Conservatives expect? You can argue that the yellow-ties in the back rooms of the Conservative campaign were inexperienced but, hey, the leader had all the election organizing experience in the world. John Tory had run the federal campaign for Kim Campbell. Remember Kim? No? That's OK, she wasn't around long enough to leave an impression. While she had the ignominious task of running as Conservative leader following the less-than-popular Brian Mulroney, her campaign finally crashed when John Tory authorized the ultimate attack ad mocking the result facial disfiguration from a medical affliction against Jean Chretien.
I wonder what would have happen if the Conservatives and John Tory had decided to run a positive campaign instead a negative one. I guess we will never know.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
