Quick update on the Harper Cons attempt to change the channel on their election campaign Ad-Scheme . Jeff Jedras who blogs as a “A BCer in Toronto” has updated his explanation of the Con allegations that Dion "does it too."
Newspaper reports confirm his analysis of the Cons allegations about Dion’s election campaign. Again – for every citizen who cares about democracy and integrity in government - it is worth a read.
Dion's dealing are proven to be totally above board. The diversionary tactics that have become the trademark of the Harper Cons have proven false once again. These tactics are not honest mistakes. They are character flaws in a political party and the people who run it.
Friday, September 14, 2007
Mayrand of Elections Canada Stands His Ground - Canadians Owe Him Respect
Marc Mayrand, Canada’s Chief Electoral Officer will have done enough service to the country to earn the Order of Canada when the veil issue is completed and run its petty political course and our politicians shake their collective heads and do the right thing in the right way (for a change?)
As reported in the Globe and Mail today, a truly astonishing thing happened yesterday in the Commons Procedure and House Affairs Committee. All parties yesterday pressured the CEO as a bureaucrat to “adapt” the law they passed in order to force voters to show their face before being permitted to vote. This is so wrong at so many levels it boggles the mind as to how the collective ignorance of those Committee members could manifest itself in such a perverse way.
There is nothing wrong with a law requiring this requirement for citizens to be identified and to show their faces for voter. Even those in the Muslim community most impacted have seen the need for such accommodation. If only that was what our lawmakers required in the legislation they passed earlier this year then it should be implemented by the CEO and Elections Canada. BUT that is not what the law they passed said! And now the politicians seem to be trying to shift the blame to the bureaucracy and by doing so they abdicate their governance responsibility at the same time. Shame on them! AND REMEMBER WE ELECTED THEM!
Mayrand has put the ball back in the political and lawmakers court by telling them clearly and precisely that “One of the conundrums I have here is I am being asked to change the law that was just adopted by Parliament and was debated at length…I am being asked to change the law and forcing electors to choose between two fundamental rights.” WELL SAID SIR!
Mayrand is single handedly forcing the politicians to face up to the consequences of their sloppy work, fuzzy thinking or policy making cowardice. Politicians too often skirt the hard choices of choosing between competing fundamental rights. That at the end of the day is a big part of their job as ELECTED representatives in a mature and modern democracy. They too often try to duck the heavy political lifting and avoid serious philosophical thought on the major policy issues as they superficially pummel each other in Question Period or the media.
As reported in the Globe and Mail today, a truly astonishing thing happened yesterday in the Commons Procedure and House Affairs Committee. All parties yesterday pressured the CEO as a bureaucrat to “adapt” the law they passed in order to force voters to show their face before being permitted to vote. This is so wrong at so many levels it boggles the mind as to how the collective ignorance of those Committee members could manifest itself in such a perverse way.
There is nothing wrong with a law requiring this requirement for citizens to be identified and to show their faces for voter. Even those in the Muslim community most impacted have seen the need for such accommodation. If only that was what our lawmakers required in the legislation they passed earlier this year then it should be implemented by the CEO and Elections Canada. BUT that is not what the law they passed said! And now the politicians seem to be trying to shift the blame to the bureaucracy and by doing so they abdicate their governance responsibility at the same time. Shame on them! AND REMEMBER WE ELECTED THEM!
Mayrand has put the ball back in the political and lawmakers court by telling them clearly and precisely that “One of the conundrums I have here is I am being asked to change the law that was just adopted by Parliament and was debated at length…I am being asked to change the law and forcing electors to choose between two fundamental rights.” WELL SAID SIR!
Mayrand is single handedly forcing the politicians to face up to the consequences of their sloppy work, fuzzy thinking or policy making cowardice. Politicians too often skirt the hard choices of choosing between competing fundamental rights. That at the end of the day is a big part of their job as ELECTED representatives in a mature and modern democracy. They too often try to duck the heavy political lifting and avoid serious philosophical thought on the major policy issues as they superficially pummel each other in Question Period or the media.
The first duty of engaged citizenship is to be an informed voter AND be careful who you vote for.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Blogging Tory Dion Allegations Debunked
I promised to post on the allegations of a Blogging Tory on party campaign fund transfers between the Liberal Party of Canada and their leader Stephane Dion in his 2006 election campaign.
The issue has been covered so much better than I would have or could have done by the Blogger “A BCer in Toronto."
I commend you to his insight and analysis.
In summary it proves there is no tempest. No teapot and no hand in any cookie jar.
Proving only one thing – the CPC Blogging Tory blog-machine is merely reflecting the anxiety CPC brain trust and obviously nervous enough to make stuff up and then grab ant the manufactured straw to try and change the channel.
Kind of like the political bullying they are perpetrating on Elections Canada officials and the phony veil threats.
The issue has been covered so much better than I would have or could have done by the Blogger “A BCer in Toronto."
I commend you to his insight and analysis.
In summary it proves there is no tempest. No teapot and no hand in any cookie jar.
Proving only one thing – the CPC Blogging Tory blog-machine is merely reflecting the anxiety CPC brain trust and obviously nervous enough to make stuff up and then grab ant the manufactured straw to try and change the channel.
Kind of like the political bullying they are perpetrating on Elections Canada officials and the phony veil threats.
Imperial Tobacco Offers an Unsafe Alternaive to Cigarettes As An Exercise in Corporate Social Responsibility
Imperial Tobacco has chosen lucky Edmonton for the launch of test marketing of a new nicotine product “SNUS.” This is a chewing tobacco alternative that that replaces smoking and does not involve “chewing or spitting.” How charming.
Reader of this blog will know I have written on tobacco control often. I have worked in the area professionally helping get a smoking ban in Alberta legislated…something that is still in process.
The CEO of Imperial Tobacco was dong the run of the Edmonton Editorial Boards yesterday and is quoted as admitting the product is not completely safe but his justification for knowingly incurring risk by using it is – wait for it: “SNUS is the first real product we’re able to bring onto the market where there seems to be pretty compelling evidence that this product is significantly less risky.” (EMPAHSIS ADDED)
And the rational the CEO uses for Imperial Tobacco doing this is – wait for it: it is part of the company’s strategy to become a better corporate citizen by offering a product that research SUGGESTS poses lower risk than smoking.” (EMPHASIS ADDED).
He is also quoted as saying “harm reduction is what responsible companies do.” This is a company offering an unproven product positioning it as a safer alternative to another deadly product it legally sells under the guise of a public health campaign and call this corporate social responsibility.
The company refers to studies showing SNUS users experience significant smoking declines and anecdotal evidence (TRANSLATED AS MEANING GOSSIP) that SNUS is effective in keeping smokers from returning to cigarettes. They admit that the researcher have noted they did not placebo-based controlled confirmation studies that prove this. Spare us the hype and hypocrisy.
Sweden is offered as the shining example of the positive impacts noting only 13% of men smoke and 22% use SNUS. So the rational conclusion from this is that 35% of the male population of Sweden are nicotine users – and this is progress? There is the added bonus of SNUS studies showing a 100% increase in pancreatic cancer in non-smoking construction workers and it raises blood pressure and it is admittedly addictive.
The launch initiative in Edmonton is a test marketing effort to see how people respond to the purchase of the product – NOT the health implications of the product. If it is a product that is a “gateway product out of smoking” you would expect the company to be researching the positive health impacts on lung cancer and other diseases and health issues associate with the product. That would be some serious examples of a meaningful corporate social responsibility effort.
This entire idea is like Kafka meets Alice in Wonderland.
Reader of this blog will know I have written on tobacco control often. I have worked in the area professionally helping get a smoking ban in Alberta legislated…something that is still in process.
The CEO of Imperial Tobacco was dong the run of the Edmonton Editorial Boards yesterday and is quoted as admitting the product is not completely safe but his justification for knowingly incurring risk by using it is – wait for it: “SNUS is the first real product we’re able to bring onto the market where there seems to be pretty compelling evidence that this product is significantly less risky.” (EMPAHSIS ADDED)
And the rational the CEO uses for Imperial Tobacco doing this is – wait for it: it is part of the company’s strategy to become a better corporate citizen by offering a product that research SUGGESTS poses lower risk than smoking.” (EMPHASIS ADDED).
He is also quoted as saying “harm reduction is what responsible companies do.” This is a company offering an unproven product positioning it as a safer alternative to another deadly product it legally sells under the guise of a public health campaign and call this corporate social responsibility.
The company refers to studies showing SNUS users experience significant smoking declines and anecdotal evidence (TRANSLATED AS MEANING GOSSIP) that SNUS is effective in keeping smokers from returning to cigarettes. They admit that the researcher have noted they did not placebo-based controlled confirmation studies that prove this. Spare us the hype and hypocrisy.
Sweden is offered as the shining example of the positive impacts noting only 13% of men smoke and 22% use SNUS. So the rational conclusion from this is that 35% of the male population of Sweden are nicotine users – and this is progress? There is the added bonus of SNUS studies showing a 100% increase in pancreatic cancer in non-smoking construction workers and it raises blood pressure and it is admittedly addictive.
The launch initiative in Edmonton is a test marketing effort to see how people respond to the purchase of the product – NOT the health implications of the product. If it is a product that is a “gateway product out of smoking” you would expect the company to be researching the positive health impacts on lung cancer and other diseases and health issues associate with the product. That would be some serious examples of a meaningful corporate social responsibility effort.
This entire idea is like Kafka meets Alice in Wonderland.
Dealing With Delusions About a Fall Election in Alberta
The speculation in some circles around a fall election in Alberta is living proof of how delusional the human species can be sometimes. Premier Stelmach has given existing MLA notice they have until the end of November to get nominations over with and new candidates have to get nominated before the end of October.
Secondly the PCs have a Policy Conference scheduled for late October as part of a party revitalization – a real one this time. Not the fiasco that happened after the 2004 election. The Policy Conference is intended for the rank and file to consider and discuss what they want the future of the PC Party and the province to be all about.
Finally we have municipal elections that would be messed up if there was a fall election and it would not be smart to tick off local politicians any more than we have already.
The last time the PC called an early election was in the Getty days and we were appropriately punished for the tactic. There is no need for Alberta to pay for an election now and if it were motivated – or perceived to be motivated – the recent poll results – the PCs would deserve to be punished at the polls again.
A fall election is not going to happen. Notwithstanding the logic, Brian Mason’s NDP have “launched” their campaign in preparation for a fall election at the U of A is past week. This is a smart tactic for the NDP because they need all the lead time they can get. By starting their election campaign now they might be able to get to the starting line for when the real election will actually be called in the coming spring.
Secondly the PCs have a Policy Conference scheduled for late October as part of a party revitalization – a real one this time. Not the fiasco that happened after the 2004 election. The Policy Conference is intended for the rank and file to consider and discuss what they want the future of the PC Party and the province to be all about.
Finally we have municipal elections that would be messed up if there was a fall election and it would not be smart to tick off local politicians any more than we have already.
The last time the PC called an early election was in the Getty days and we were appropriately punished for the tactic. There is no need for Alberta to pay for an election now and if it were motivated – or perceived to be motivated – the recent poll results – the PCs would deserve to be punished at the polls again.
A fall election is not going to happen. Notwithstanding the logic, Brian Mason’s NDP have “launched” their campaign in preparation for a fall election at the U of A is past week. This is a smart tactic for the NDP because they need all the lead time they can get. By starting their election campaign now they might be able to get to the starting line for when the real election will actually be called in the coming spring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)