Reboot Alberta

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Congratulations Steven Truscott – too long in coming but Free at last, Free at last!



“[776] For the reasons set out above, we are satisfied that the fresh evidence and the new material before this court have significantly undermined the strength of each of the four factual pillars of the Crown’s case. In contrast, much of that material has given added force to the evidentiary foundation of the defence case.
[786] Finally, then as now, the crime scene continues to raise serious questions about the Crown’s theory as to how this crime was committed. While the evidence does not exclude the possibility that the appellant was the killer, aspects of the scene of Lynne’s death seem inconsistent with the theory that the appellant was the perpetrator.
[787] For these reasons, dealt with in considerably more detail above, we have concluded that, while it cannot be said that no jury acting judicially could reasonably convict, we are satisfied that if a new trial were possible, an acquittal would clearly be the more likely result. Having regard to the highly unusual circumstances of this Reference, we have determined that the most appropriate remedy is to enter an acquittal. Accordingly, in the words of s. 696.3(3)(ii) of the Criminal Code, the appeal is allowed, the conviction for murder is set aside and an acquittal entered.
[788] We wish to thank all counsel for their assistance in this unique and difficult case. We have already referred to the determination of Mr. Truscott’s counsel, who diligently pursued every possible avenue and presented their case with candour and great skill. Likewise, Crown counsel were extremely thorough and, as one would expect, candid and helpful in their presentation of the Crown’s case."

Damn I love it when the system works. We citizens all owe a debt of gratitude to Steven Truscott and David Milgard before him for their persistence and patience and especially their strength of character in pursuing justice.

Is Elections Canada Investigating a Conservative Party "Adscam?"

It looks like there is another Adscam brewing in Ottawa these days. This time it is not to save the country from another Referendum over Quebec sovereignty. This time the allegations are about the Harper Cons apparently “conning” the public and effectively beating the system.

Even if Elections Canada finds the scheme was legal, the Cons 2006 election advertising spending trickery sure doesn’t pass the sniff test. This kind of allegation is not the stuff of a trustworthy government with indisputable integrity. Doing indirectly what you can't do directly is great old school politics but bad modern governance.

Here is a summary of what I understand is being investigated by Elections Canada. The issue is did the Harper Cons use a campaign spending loophole and if they did, have they exceeded their $18,300,000.00 campaign spending limits in the 2006 election, and then, if so, have they broken the law?

The trick Mr. Harper’s Cons have apparently used was, after they spent the full allowable campaign limit $18,300,000.00 they discovered some local candidates had not used up their spending limits. The central party apparently “gave” the local candidates some $1,200,000.00 in total to “use up” the remaining spending limits.

The clever party apparatus puppies in Con-land then had the local candidates “give” back the money on the very same day. The central party operators then spent the “new” local candidate “donations” on targeted regional election campaign advertising.

This scheme apparently involves 37 individual candidates whose financial officers are now in a court case with Elections Canada about if this was a systematic and deliberate attempt evade election campaign spending laws or just old fashioned politics as usual.

As a taxpaying citizen of Canada, you actually kickback 60% of any party’s candidate election campaign spending, we are talking about your hard earned tax dollars. In close races, regional advertising spending, in excess of legal limits, may have had an impact on outcomes. We can’t ever tell. But we should not have to even ask that question.

The question I now have is, are Mr. Harper’s Cons worthy of our trust and respect as government? Are they worthy of our vote and our consent to be our governors? Are Mr Harper’s Cons capable of governing in a responsible, democratic, accountable, open and transparent manner AND with integrity when they would pull off such a stunt?

I wonder what other tricks Mr. Harper’s Cons have up their sleeves we don’t know about yet?

More Good News On Alberta Tobacco Control

More good news on the tobacco control front in Alberta. Alberta Health and Wellness and Minister Dave Hancock have been hard at work over the summer writing regulations on the necessary phasing in of Bill 45 (prohibiting smoking in public and work places). Bill 45 is expected to pass Third Reading in the fall session of the Alberta Legislature this November. Starting in the New Year as this legislation gets implemented; things will change for the better and a healthier Alberta.

There are some terrific video interviews on Policy Channel (http://www.policychannel/) with Ken Kobly (Alberta Chambers of Commerce) and Gil McGowan (Alberta Federation of Labour) on the reasons why a workplace ban is a good idea. Full disclosure - I do work for a coalition of heath agencies and organizations in Alberta who are lobbying for tobacco control legislation and Policy Channel is an affilate site of my firm.

Stats Can has been releasing new data showing smoking bans work showing an impressive 27% of people who can’t smoke on the job end up quitting within 2 years of the bans coming into force.

Today Stat Can released another report on cigarette manufacturing. Again showing the trends are in the right direction but it excluded imported tobacco products but that can’t be a large enough portion of the Canadian market to affect the overall trend downward. Here is an excerpt from the report. More encourging news., productino is down and inventories are up...meaing we are making and selling fewer cigarettes.



Total cigarettes sold in July by Canadian manufacturers increased 13.7% from June to 1.7 billion cigarettes, down 22.6% compared with July 2006.

Cigarette production in July decreased 30.5% from June to 1.2 billion cigarettes, down 32.5% from July 2006.

At 1.6 billion cigarettes, the level of closing inventories for July was 23.4% higher than in June and 4.8% higher than in July 2006.

Note: This survey collects data on the production of tobacco products in Canada by Canadian manufacturers and the disposition or sales of this production. It does not collect data on imported tobacco products. Therefore, sales information in this release is not a proxy for domestic consumption of tobacco products.

Monday, August 27, 2007

More on Peter Lougheed and the Looming Constitutional Crisis

I had the Peter Lougheed remarks to the recent Canadian Bar Association meeting taped off the recent CPAC broadcast and viewed it on the week end. I was right about the former Premier of Alberta’s capacity to frame an issue. Watching him you can see that he is a master communicator - and dead serious about his concern about the looming constitutional conflict he foresees.

He make no bones about the depth of his concern over a looming constitutional crisis between federal environmental law responsibility and Alberta’s constitutional right in the Constitution Act, Section 92(A) (1) (b) about

“ development, conservation and management of non-renewable natural resources and forestry resources in the province, including laws in relation to the rate of primary production therefrom."


See my earlier postings of August 15, and 17 for comments on his presentation for background and context on Mr. Lougheed's remarks and their implications.

I will have more to say on it later. In the meantime, we are seeking permission from CPAC to run it on Policy Channel. (http://www.policychannel.com/)

Last Week of Public Consultation for Albertan's to Have Budget Input.

Albertans can have some input into the next Provincial Budget. The questionnaire itself is typically frustrating trying to simplify complex issues rather than clarify them. That does not mean it lacks value. It is a chance to have some views made clear to the "powers that be" about what you see as future fiscal priorities.

It is worth taking a few minutes to go over the background material first. That information is clear and concise. It will help you cope with the questions to follow.

Here is the link to the background and the survey is at the very end of this document. Take a few minutes and make your views known.