Harper the Deceiver! - The “report on human rights performance (meaning abuses) in other countries does not exist”...and then all of a sudden - voila here it is with the truth blackened out. Doesn't that make you want to reminisce about the "good old days" of the Bush administration in justifying Guantanamo prisoners without charges and no access to counsel and the final admission about other secret CIA prisons around the globe? Yup, and we western democracies are supposed to be the good guys.
We need to thank someone somewhere in or around the government for leaking to the Globe and Mail the complete unedited and unabridged version of the officially non-existent human rights performance report. Actually that is too euphemistic a way to describe what the Harper Cons have done here. We should call the Harper Cons "released" version of the newly discovered report for what it really is THE OFFICIAL CENSORED VERSION OF THE FACTS."
Harper and Co. can bring shame on themselves and their party (think Anders' "unanimous nomination" in Calgary West that was recently overturned by the courts twice, as a place to start) and I really don't care too much. Bring my country in disrepute and expose our military to war crimes accusations and the consequences and I care. Do it with such reckless abandon and with such and irresponsible attitude and I care. I really care.
The most generous explanation for this breach of trust and inexcusable dishonesty is wilful blindness and that is not governing, never mind good governing. Shame on the Prime Minister and his "brain trust" of Day and O'Connor. Foreign Affairs Minister MacKay is just lucky he was in China for much of this...and out of the loop, as usual!
We citizens are now being seriously played for fools by our federal government on this and so many other issues right now. I am including the Liberal and Bloc phony motion yesterday to force a pullout of Afghanistan on a deadline that ignores the reality of that situation too. The situational ethics of the NDP in this issue that was used to justify them supporting the Cons on this motion was also astonishingly cute by a half. We are not fools. We can see what is going on with our governance. It has to stop.
Get off the artificial sort-game election path and start governing for the future with a longer term sense of the difficult and serious situations we face in this country. Where is the honest leadership that will be straight with us and who will rise to the occasion with intelligence and wisdom?
Recommend this Post to Progressive Bloggers
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Don't Worry Harper is No Reptilian Kitten Eater.
I forget who was tagged as the “reptilian kitten eater” a couple of elections ago but the CPC official website wants to reassure us it is NOT Stephen Harper. Check out the Charming all new softer side of Steve Harper.
Next we shall see a sepia toned picture of him shaking hands with his kids. Yes sir…the softer side of Steve is on the make over. Does he want an election now or what?
Now if he could only raise some sincere interest in stopping the torture of prisoners we Canadians have some responsibility towards and may keep our troops out of a war crimes court it would be nice.
And another thing, is Gordon O’Connor turning into Canada’s Rumsfeld and is Stockwell Day turning into Canada’s Dick Cheney - or is it just me?
Recommend this Post to Progressive Bloggers
Next we shall see a sepia toned picture of him shaking hands with his kids. Yes sir…the softer side of Steve is on the make over. Does he want an election now or what?
Now if he could only raise some sincere interest in stopping the torture of prisoners we Canadians have some responsibility towards and may keep our troops out of a war crimes court it would be nice.
And another thing, is Gordon O’Connor turning into Canada’s Rumsfeld and is Stockwell Day turning into Canada’s Dick Cheney - or is it just me?
Recommend this Post to Progressive Bloggers
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Hancock Pushing Hard for Smoking Ban In Alberta
UPDATE APRIL 24: I have ameneded this post to correct a factual error. The original post indicated the new tabacco tax was $5 per pack of cigarettes. It is not. I am told the new tobacco tax is $5 per carton. I have changed the original post but thought people should be advised of the error.
The recent $5 per carton immediate tax increase in the April 19 Alberta Budget is the first step in an effort towards a province wide tobacco reduction strategy and is just part of the new Alberta Minister of Health and Wellness, Dave Hancock’s strategic efforts to promote wellness.
In addition to a tax increase, a proposal is being drafted by Hancock for a province-wide legislated ban on smoking in public places and work places. Further provisions will include a ban tobacco sales in pharmacies and to regulate so-called powerwall displays of tobacco products. Tax increases are as rare as hen's teeth in Alberta so this tobacco tax augers well for the political potential of a legislated ban of smoking in public and work places.
In addition to a tax increase, a proposal is being drafted by Hancock for a province-wide legislated ban on smoking in public places and work places. Further provisions will include a ban tobacco sales in pharmacies and to regulate so-called powerwall displays of tobacco products. Tax increases are as rare as hen's teeth in Alberta so this tobacco tax augers well for the political potential of a legislated ban of smoking in public and work places.
This public policy initiative is not new to Alberta. It has been tried 4 times before but never made it through the political policy development process. But with new leadership and the fact it is garnering significant public support, it may have a chance this time. It will still require the government Caucus support and there is still a hard core group of resistance to the policy. With good lobbying and good government, it could/should pass - ideally in this current session of the Legislature.
Premier Stelmach has said during the PC Leadership campaign that he agrees wit the ban but would support the Caucus decision on a legislated tobacco reduction policy. Four attempts in the past have failed primarily due to the objections of the former Premier and a block of MLAs who blocked the efforts. This time with new leadership and an evidenced based lobbying effort by a coalition of some 15 professional and advocacy groups (Smoke Free Alberta) and supported by polling showing 84% of Albertans support this policy it has a better chance of succeeding.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce are first group off the mark in pushing the current lobbying effort for the Alberta government to implement smoke-free workplace and public place legislation. Ken Kobly, the CEO of the Alberta Chambers of Commerce, says tobacco use and its related illnesses impact worker productivity.Kobly, in a video interview that will be on The PolicyChannel (http://www.policychanel.com/) Monday April 23, 2007, says that the time has come for a legislated province-wide workplace ban on tobacco use.
Kobly says Alberta is one of the few provinces that has not yet enacted province wide smoke-free legislation. And he says, while tobacco places a tremendous strain on our health care system and taxpayers, a large cost burden falls on employers as well. This is in terms of lost productivity, more worker compensation claims and the loss of employees in their prime due to smoking related illnesses.
If you support this policy initiative please take the time to contact your MLA and ideally meet with them, write to them or email them with details of your support. Website links to book mark to keep current on this initiative are at:
1. www.smokefreealberta.com/
2. www.abchamber.ca/
3. http://www.policychannel.com/
Premier Stelmach has said during the PC Leadership campaign that he agrees wit the ban but would support the Caucus decision on a legislated tobacco reduction policy. Four attempts in the past have failed primarily due to the objections of the former Premier and a block of MLAs who blocked the efforts. This time with new leadership and an evidenced based lobbying effort by a coalition of some 15 professional and advocacy groups (Smoke Free Alberta) and supported by polling showing 84% of Albertans support this policy it has a better chance of succeeding.
The Alberta Chambers of Commerce are first group off the mark in pushing the current lobbying effort for the Alberta government to implement smoke-free workplace and public place legislation. Ken Kobly, the CEO of the Alberta Chambers of Commerce, says tobacco use and its related illnesses impact worker productivity.Kobly, in a video interview that will be on The PolicyChannel (http://www.policychanel.com/) Monday April 23, 2007, says that the time has come for a legislated province-wide workplace ban on tobacco use.
Kobly says Alberta is one of the few provinces that has not yet enacted province wide smoke-free legislation. And he says, while tobacco places a tremendous strain on our health care system and taxpayers, a large cost burden falls on employers as well. This is in terms of lost productivity, more worker compensation claims and the loss of employees in their prime due to smoking related illnesses.
If you support this policy initiative please take the time to contact your MLA and ideally meet with them, write to them or email them with details of your support. Website links to book mark to keep current on this initiative are at:
1. www.smokefreealberta.com/
2. www.abchamber.ca/
3. http://www.policychannel.com/
Recomend this Post at Progressive Bloggers
Saturday, April 21, 2007
Why I Like Elizabeth May - Her Humanity.
Blogger Politque Vert provides a delightful interview with Elizabeth May done by a Law student at the U of S. Be sure you are not on medication – or other mind altering substances – when you look at this video…the camera work is pre-amateurish but the hearts are big and in the right place.
Dion Wants the Court Challenges Program Back
Dion calls for the reinstatement of the Court Challenges program cut by the Harper Cons. Good for him.
The Cons say “why would the government fund people who want to challenge official government policy through the Courts?” They also say the Court Challenges Program was not much more than a pool of cash for lawyers to access to irritate the government. That seems to be the extent of the rationale for Harper to cut the program. It has been cut before, by the Mulroney government and later reinstated.
The fundamental reason to have the program is to enable differing opinions to challenge government policy based on law and its interpretation, not political whims as the Cons imply. It is a very worthwhile program and one that reflects a mature democracy, not the stern disciplinary “father knows best stance” and Harper “is your daddy” of the current federal Bush-like CPC government.
In the spirit of full disclosure I have been one of the lawyers who have accessed the Court Challenges “pool of cash” in order to fight a government policy. We acted on behalf of a group of Franco-Albertans who wanted to exercise their Section 23 Charter rights for a minority French language school in Alberta. This action was contrary to the stated policy of the Government of Alberta, under then Premier, Peter Lougheed.
Lougheed’s government was one of the most enlightened of the day but the animus towards bilingualism and the sense that “French was being shoved down or throats” was still alive in Alberta in those days. The obvious political position of the Alberta government was taken and they argued that there were not enough French speaking people to pass the “where number warrant” test in the legislation.
The Alberta government fought us all the way to the Supreme Court. Our client’s, who were ordinary citizens and not independently wealthy, could not afford to continue the battle without the aid of the Court Challenges program. I believe we got the last funds from the program just before Mulroney killed it.
The “where number warrant” test in the legislation is what the case turned on. How to prove you had enough French speaking people to warrant a minority language school system was a big legal challenge to be sure. What was the minimum number of minority French language speaking people in an area that was needed to justify a school?
We had a stroke of genius one day and thought the maximum test for sufficient numbers should be the same number of students as in the smallest English speaking school jurisdiction in Alberta. Eureka! We found a mainstream school jurisdiction under Alberta law in Waterton Lakes National Park that had only 23 students but they had an elected School Board, a Superintendent and a full blown delivery system for only 23 student.
BTW, the Supreme Court agreed with us and we won the case. The francophone school system in Alberta is now well established, highly respected and thriving all over the province.
Recommend this Post to Progressive Bloggers
The Cons say “why would the government fund people who want to challenge official government policy through the Courts?” They also say the Court Challenges Program was not much more than a pool of cash for lawyers to access to irritate the government. That seems to be the extent of the rationale for Harper to cut the program. It has been cut before, by the Mulroney government and later reinstated.
The fundamental reason to have the program is to enable differing opinions to challenge government policy based on law and its interpretation, not political whims as the Cons imply. It is a very worthwhile program and one that reflects a mature democracy, not the stern disciplinary “father knows best stance” and Harper “is your daddy” of the current federal Bush-like CPC government.
In the spirit of full disclosure I have been one of the lawyers who have accessed the Court Challenges “pool of cash” in order to fight a government policy. We acted on behalf of a group of Franco-Albertans who wanted to exercise their Section 23 Charter rights for a minority French language school in Alberta. This action was contrary to the stated policy of the Government of Alberta, under then Premier, Peter Lougheed.
Lougheed’s government was one of the most enlightened of the day but the animus towards bilingualism and the sense that “French was being shoved down or throats” was still alive in Alberta in those days. The obvious political position of the Alberta government was taken and they argued that there were not enough French speaking people to pass the “where number warrant” test in the legislation.
The Alberta government fought us all the way to the Supreme Court. Our client’s, who were ordinary citizens and not independently wealthy, could not afford to continue the battle without the aid of the Court Challenges program. I believe we got the last funds from the program just before Mulroney killed it.
The “where number warrant” test in the legislation is what the case turned on. How to prove you had enough French speaking people to warrant a minority language school system was a big legal challenge to be sure. What was the minimum number of minority French language speaking people in an area that was needed to justify a school?
We had a stroke of genius one day and thought the maximum test for sufficient numbers should be the same number of students as in the smallest English speaking school jurisdiction in Alberta. Eureka! We found a mainstream school jurisdiction under Alberta law in Waterton Lakes National Park that had only 23 students but they had an elected School Board, a Superintendent and a full blown delivery system for only 23 student.
BTW, the Supreme Court agreed with us and we won the case. The francophone school system in Alberta is now well established, highly respected and thriving all over the province.
Recommend this Post to Progressive Bloggers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)