The media has finally attended to the plight of Omar Khadr, the last western detainee in the American terrorist detention centre at Guantanamo Cuba. Looks like every other western country, except Canada, has repatriated their citizens from the American military justice system from the GITMO terrorist prison.
This travesty of politics over justice suffered by Omar Khadr ought to make every Canadian wonder if they have to fear their own government, not just the Bush-Cheney political regime. Makes you wonder if our government, and our political leaders, will be there to protect and assist us should we fall into such difficult circumstances in a foreign country.
That military justice system has been undermined by just about every civil court application made against it as of late, including many rejections by the US Supreme Court. Bush’s GITMO detention policy and approaches to justifying torture are not akin to the kind of the free, open and civil society we know American citizens continue aspire to.
Prime Minister Harper dodges and retreats on the Khadr crisis. He defaults yet again to his old saw that this is all the fault of the former Liberal government. This is typical of the half-truths of Mr. Harper’s form of leadership. He is right that the former Liberal government was equally as pandering to the US safety and security concerns post 9-11. But Harper has been in power for over two and a half years so blaming the Liberals for this continuing policy of pandering to the Bush White House is a little old – and dangerous.
It is time to protect the rights and rescue a Canadian citizen who we know has been tortured while detained and who was a child soldier at the time of arrest. He may have enough evidence to justify standing trial but as a Canadian and under our laws and not the Bush-Cheney version of “justice.”
Khadr was a 15 year old child soldier as the time of the alleged “terrorist” activity he is charged with. He has been tortured and left without some the most fundamental of legal protections as a Canadian citizen and that is reprehensible. If fact our intelligence and security agencies have been compliant in the mistreating of Mr. Khadr, a Canadian citizen and a minor, who is still in detention. He deserves a fair and speedy trial regardless of the odious opinions and utterances of his family and the terrorist fears of Bush and his boys.
When our government and its political leadership fails, refuses or neglects to protect the rights of Canadian citizens in foreign jurisdictions, it is time to refuse them our consent to continue to govern us. I believe that was true of the Chretien and Martin Liberals of their day. With the new evidence the Canadian courts have forced the authorities to release we now know about the abuse of Mr. Khadr’s fundamental human rights, mistreatment and torture at the hands of the American military “justice” system.
Bring this abused and tortured Canadian citizen home to face a fair trial in our justice system that still respects the rule of law Prime Minister Harper. To continue to allow Khadr to be subject to a discredited military tribunal process that has been found to be illegal even by American courts puts power and politics above the protection of Canadian citizens. Time to put away your posturing politics and pandering to the Bush government and do the right thing a citizen of Canada Mr. Harper.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Monday, July 14, 2008
Facts Behind Harper's Libel Action Get Murkier
The Cadman Affair is getting murkier as Prime Minister Harper puts more pressure behind his libel action against the Liberal Party of Canada. The latest audio expert from an FBI expert who dealt with the Nixon Watergate tapes and the Linda Tripp tapes around Clinton and Lewinsky. He can’t say if the tape recording of the Prime Minister was doctored.
Two earlier experts say it was edited. Another American expert concluded "with scientific certainty that this tape has been edited and doctored to misrepresent the event as it actually occurred.” Pretty bold statement and a very dramatic conclusion I’d say.
Tom Zytaruk, the author of a book on the Cadman Affair, and the person who recorded the interview with Prime Minister Harper has provided a plausible explanation. He said the tape was not edited but the recording was turned off when he believed the Harper interview was over. According to media reports the Prime Minister then continued to comment and the tape recording was started again by Zytaruk. Hardly and editing and doctoring designed “…to misrepresent the event as it actually occurred.”
Other contradictory allegations of fact are coming from Mr. Zytaruk and Mr. Cadman’s wife. What is adding to the murkiness of the facts is Mrs. Cadman apparently wants to run as a Conservative candidate in the next election for Mr. Harper. Will that have any impact on the weight a court will give to her version of the facts?
The libel action is also interesting because it is possibly a pure political and tactic device. Could this legal action be just another media strategy in the perpetual election campaign the Harper minority government has been conducting in the two and a half years since first elected? The Harper libel action against the Liberal Party is also easy MSM news fodder. It takes the media and public attention away from the more serious, significant and complex issue surrounding the Cadman Affair. It has the potential to push out media coverage on the Bernier-Coulliard Affair, the Mulroney-Schreiber Affair, the Conservative’s In-Out Campaign Advertising Affair, the Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation process, and ongoing concerns over the Air India Inquiry, the Maher Arar Affair and the Omar Khadr Affair, just to name a few.
I believe Canadians want to know what, if anything was offered to Mr. Cadman by the Prime Minister’s emissaries and what the Prime Minister actually knew about any such offer. What are the legal implications of such an offer, if it was made? What if the courts found there were such an offer and that it determined to be an attempt to “buy” Mr. Cadman’s critical vote. If this actually happened, is it influence peddling or vote buying? Where does this all this fit in relation to the provisions of the Criminal Code about such matters? Will the civil libel action get any answers to these questions?
CORRECTION: A READER (see comment by paulstuff) NOTED THE ORIGINAL POST WAS IN ERROR. I WAS CLAIMING THAT THE HARPER GOVERNMENT WAS ASKING MR. CADMAN TO VOTE TO BRING DOWN THE HARPER GOVERNMENT. THAT IS WRONG. THE REQUEST WAS ALLEGEDLY MADE TO MR. CADMAN TO SEEK HIS SUPPORT TO DEFEAT THE MARTIN BUDGET OF MAY 2005. MR. CADMAN SUPPORTED THE MARTIN BUDGET AND PASSED AWAY IN JULY 2005. MR. HARPER'S MINORITY GOVERNMENT WAS NOT ELECTED UNTIL JANUARY 2006. A GREAT SUMMARY OF MR. CADMAN'S LIFE IS ON WIKIPEDIA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Cadman
This libel action could go right to the personal integrity of the current Prime Minister and the integrity of the Office of the Prime Minister too. I think this all needs to be clarified for the sake of the Prime Minister’s reputation, and for the good of the country. Do we need to restore or retain the public’s confidence in the Office of the Prime Minister? Will this lawsuit afford Mr. Harper the opportunity to reassure the country of his continuing suitability to serve as our Prime Minister? I hope so.
Given the importance of these stakes to our democracy and our pubic confidence in our highest governing institutions, I welcome Mr. Harper’s libel action. I believe this libel action needs to go to court so we can determine the facts from testimony taken under oath and for a Judge to then weigh the veracity of the various parties involved. We need this libel action to be decided based on the rule of law not on the rule of raw politics or trial by media, as is currently the case.
Two earlier experts say it was edited. Another American expert concluded "with scientific certainty that this tape has been edited and doctored to misrepresent the event as it actually occurred.” Pretty bold statement and a very dramatic conclusion I’d say.
Tom Zytaruk, the author of a book on the Cadman Affair, and the person who recorded the interview with Prime Minister Harper has provided a plausible explanation. He said the tape was not edited but the recording was turned off when he believed the Harper interview was over. According to media reports the Prime Minister then continued to comment and the tape recording was started again by Zytaruk. Hardly and editing and doctoring designed “…to misrepresent the event as it actually occurred.”
Other contradictory allegations of fact are coming from Mr. Zytaruk and Mr. Cadman’s wife. What is adding to the murkiness of the facts is Mrs. Cadman apparently wants to run as a Conservative candidate in the next election for Mr. Harper. Will that have any impact on the weight a court will give to her version of the facts?
The libel action is also interesting because it is possibly a pure political and tactic device. Could this legal action be just another media strategy in the perpetual election campaign the Harper minority government has been conducting in the two and a half years since first elected? The Harper libel action against the Liberal Party is also easy MSM news fodder. It takes the media and public attention away from the more serious, significant and complex issue surrounding the Cadman Affair. It has the potential to push out media coverage on the Bernier-Coulliard Affair, the Mulroney-Schreiber Affair, the Conservative’s In-Out Campaign Advertising Affair, the Residential Schools Truth and Reconciliation process, and ongoing concerns over the Air India Inquiry, the Maher Arar Affair and the Omar Khadr Affair, just to name a few.
I believe Canadians want to know what, if anything was offered to Mr. Cadman by the Prime Minister’s emissaries and what the Prime Minister actually knew about any such offer. What are the legal implications of such an offer, if it was made? What if the courts found there were such an offer and that it determined to be an attempt to “buy” Mr. Cadman’s critical vote. If this actually happened, is it influence peddling or vote buying? Where does this all this fit in relation to the provisions of the Criminal Code about such matters? Will the civil libel action get any answers to these questions?
CORRECTION: A READER (see comment by paulstuff) NOTED THE ORIGINAL POST WAS IN ERROR. I WAS CLAIMING THAT THE HARPER GOVERNMENT WAS ASKING MR. CADMAN TO VOTE TO BRING DOWN THE HARPER GOVERNMENT. THAT IS WRONG. THE REQUEST WAS ALLEGEDLY MADE TO MR. CADMAN TO SEEK HIS SUPPORT TO DEFEAT THE MARTIN BUDGET OF MAY 2005. MR. CADMAN SUPPORTED THE MARTIN BUDGET AND PASSED AWAY IN JULY 2005. MR. HARPER'S MINORITY GOVERNMENT WAS NOT ELECTED UNTIL JANUARY 2006. A GREAT SUMMARY OF MR. CADMAN'S LIFE IS ON WIKIPEDIA http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Cadman
This libel action could go right to the personal integrity of the current Prime Minister and the integrity of the Office of the Prime Minister too. I think this all needs to be clarified for the sake of the Prime Minister’s reputation, and for the good of the country. Do we need to restore or retain the public’s confidence in the Office of the Prime Minister? Will this lawsuit afford Mr. Harper the opportunity to reassure the country of his continuing suitability to serve as our Prime Minister? I hope so.
Given the importance of these stakes to our democracy and our pubic confidence in our highest governing institutions, I welcome Mr. Harper’s libel action. I believe this libel action needs to go to court so we can determine the facts from testimony taken under oath and for a Judge to then weigh the veracity of the various parties involved. We need this libel action to be decided based on the rule of law not on the rule of raw politics or trial by media, as is currently the case.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Stelmach Goes Green - Big Time With Big Money.
I have not had a chance to digest the $4B scope and scale of the climate change policy announcement made by Premier Stelmach on July 8. Today I took some time and I have to say I am impressed on the Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and the significant public transit investment. The news release, backgrounder and video of the announcement are worth reading and watching.
The top GOA priority is to “Ensure Alberta’s energy resources are developed in an environmentally sustainable way.” The mandate bullets in that priority include to “Implement carbon capture and storage research and demonstration projects (and to) Implement the climate strategy, including conservation, energy efficiency and adaptation initiatives.”
This announcement not only aligns with and delivers on these priorities; it surpasses some of them by not merely doing research on CCS, it is getting right into the action and investing serious sums in projects. The value-add of enhanced oil recovery (EOR)from injecting CO2 into conventional wells is estimated to recover up to 2B barrels of oil without further drilling or fragmentation of the land with roads and seismic lines. I hope they only allow EOR for those producers that are the best stewards in the oil patch and who have the best records for reclamation of abandoned well site and roads as preconditions to playing in the EOR opportunities.
Some will be critical and others will be cynical but at least they are contributing to the conversation about conservation and mitigation of our carbon footprint in Alberta. I am a partisan and support the PC Party, most of the time, but not all of the time. On this one initiative I whole-heartedly applaud the effort.
I think this policy pronouncement will add to transferable technological innovations and new adaptations in energy production as well as addressing emissions issues. I heard Environment Minister Rob Renner say in the announcement video that Alberta will move beyond intensity emissions and “reduce real emissions by 2020.” That is the kind of serious and significant commitment we need to have our government take. He has said all along that intensity measures of GHG emissions were interim measures only and we would get to absolutes emission reductions. He has set the date to get that done and while it is 12 year out that is pretty impressive given the size, scope and scale of development going on in Alberta these days.
The public transit aspects are equally as exciting as they encourage creativity and adaptability in how we respond to the growing economic and population needs in our cities, large and small. Again we see a serious effort to shrink the carbon footprint of the province.
Dirty oil and dead ducks in toxic tailing ponds and a sense that Albertans are greedy and indifferent to the environment is the growing sentiment in many parts of the world. This announcement, if executed rightly and rapidly will not change that image by itself, but it will be a profound and resonant rebuttal of the damaging presumption about Albertans that exists in too many minds of too many people in the world today.
The top GOA priority is to “Ensure Alberta’s energy resources are developed in an environmentally sustainable way.” The mandate bullets in that priority include to “Implement carbon capture and storage research and demonstration projects (and to) Implement the climate strategy, including conservation, energy efficiency and adaptation initiatives.”
This announcement not only aligns with and delivers on these priorities; it surpasses some of them by not merely doing research on CCS, it is getting right into the action and investing serious sums in projects. The value-add of enhanced oil recovery (EOR)from injecting CO2 into conventional wells is estimated to recover up to 2B barrels of oil without further drilling or fragmentation of the land with roads and seismic lines. I hope they only allow EOR for those producers that are the best stewards in the oil patch and who have the best records for reclamation of abandoned well site and roads as preconditions to playing in the EOR opportunities.
Some will be critical and others will be cynical but at least they are contributing to the conversation about conservation and mitigation of our carbon footprint in Alberta. I am a partisan and support the PC Party, most of the time, but not all of the time. On this one initiative I whole-heartedly applaud the effort.
I think this policy pronouncement will add to transferable technological innovations and new adaptations in energy production as well as addressing emissions issues. I heard Environment Minister Rob Renner say in the announcement video that Alberta will move beyond intensity emissions and “reduce real emissions by 2020.” That is the kind of serious and significant commitment we need to have our government take. He has said all along that intensity measures of GHG emissions were interim measures only and we would get to absolutes emission reductions. He has set the date to get that done and while it is 12 year out that is pretty impressive given the size, scope and scale of development going on in Alberta these days.
The public transit aspects are equally as exciting as they encourage creativity and adaptability in how we respond to the growing economic and population needs in our cities, large and small. Again we see a serious effort to shrink the carbon footprint of the province.
Dirty oil and dead ducks in toxic tailing ponds and a sense that Albertans are greedy and indifferent to the environment is the growing sentiment in many parts of the world. This announcement, if executed rightly and rapidly will not change that image by itself, but it will be a profound and resonant rebuttal of the damaging presumption about Albertans that exists in too many minds of too many people in the world today.
Monday, July 07, 2008
Canadians Are Becoming More Unsure of the Harper Conservatives Ability to Manage the Key Issues.
Nik Nanos’ recent poll for the Sun newspapers is very telling and has to be a bit unnerving for the Harper Con-Troll types. With 2.5 years as Prime Minister, Mr. Harper has not gained any traction or more momentum with the Canadian electorate. He has had virtually total control over the public agenda and the political process. It is not as though he has not used these levers but they have gotten him nowhere since the last election.
I have been saying for some time now that Harper is past his best before date as PM. Nik’s recent poll results on who do you trust to manage key issues indicates that Harpers’ best days as Prime Minister of Canada may also be passed him.
The Con strong policy suits, so we are told, are the economy and Afghanistan. While the PCs are ahead of the Liberals (+8% on the economy and +6% on the war) on the economy they equal to the combined totals saying None of the Above and Unsure at 32%. As for the war in Afghanistan the Cons are -10% compared to the None of the Above and Unsure at 38% to the Cons at 28% confidence.
On the management of the other key issues on the minds of Canadians like Healthcare, Environment and National Unity, the Harper’s Cons are trailing the Liberals in every instance. On the Environment the Greens are seen as being the best issue managers buy 13% of Canadians. That has to be encouraging for Elizabeth May.
Comparing Harper to the combined None of the Above and Unsure again he is -10% on Healthcare, -16% on the Environment and -9% on National Unity.
So this means that while Dion is not yet a clearly acceptable alternative to Harper for the swing voters. They are also not particularly enamoured with the capability of the current Harper minority government to manage key issues. This all means no election in the near future, unless of course Harper voluntarily resigns himself. That kind of pre-emptive election strike by Harper could happen if he starts to fear that Canadians are starting get to know the Liberals and a viable alternative.
Harper has to be concerned if the Canadian voter starts getting serious about an election a year from now and concurrently discover the real Dion and get to know him better. I’m talking about getting to know the real Dion and not the phony Conservative attack ad characterization of Dion in last year’s television attach ads. Notice how quiet the Conservative’s have become over their recent failed and flailing pre-emptive attack advertising efforts to mislead citizens on Dion’s Green Shift plan - even before it was released. The last two years has seen Harper desperate for an election. The next two years will likely see him desperate to avoid one.
The times are a'changin' and it is all going to make for some interesting and unsettling times in Canada, economically, environmentally and socially. We will have to see what happens in the Presidential election this November in the States. What will Canadians be looking for as the ballot questions as the Conservatives approach their drop dead date for Harper’s fixed election timing of November 2009. All of this is very fluid but fundamental in what our next election will bring out in Canadians, regardless of when we vote.
I have been saying for some time now that Harper is past his best before date as PM. Nik’s recent poll results on who do you trust to manage key issues indicates that Harpers’ best days as Prime Minister of Canada may also be passed him.
The Con strong policy suits, so we are told, are the economy and Afghanistan. While the PCs are ahead of the Liberals (+8% on the economy and +6% on the war) on the economy they equal to the combined totals saying None of the Above and Unsure at 32%. As for the war in Afghanistan the Cons are -10% compared to the None of the Above and Unsure at 38% to the Cons at 28% confidence.
On the management of the other key issues on the minds of Canadians like Healthcare, Environment and National Unity, the Harper’s Cons are trailing the Liberals in every instance. On the Environment the Greens are seen as being the best issue managers buy 13% of Canadians. That has to be encouraging for Elizabeth May.
Comparing Harper to the combined None of the Above and Unsure again he is -10% on Healthcare, -16% on the Environment and -9% on National Unity.
So this means that while Dion is not yet a clearly acceptable alternative to Harper for the swing voters. They are also not particularly enamoured with the capability of the current Harper minority government to manage key issues. This all means no election in the near future, unless of course Harper voluntarily resigns himself. That kind of pre-emptive election strike by Harper could happen if he starts to fear that Canadians are starting get to know the Liberals and a viable alternative.
Harper has to be concerned if the Canadian voter starts getting serious about an election a year from now and concurrently discover the real Dion and get to know him better. I’m talking about getting to know the real Dion and not the phony Conservative attack ad characterization of Dion in last year’s television attach ads. Notice how quiet the Conservative’s have become over their recent failed and flailing pre-emptive attack advertising efforts to mislead citizens on Dion’s Green Shift plan - even before it was released. The last two years has seen Harper desperate for an election. The next two years will likely see him desperate to avoid one.
The times are a'changin' and it is all going to make for some interesting and unsettling times in Canada, economically, environmentally and socially. We will have to see what happens in the Presidential election this November in the States. What will Canadians be looking for as the ballot questions as the Conservatives approach their drop dead date for Harper’s fixed election timing of November 2009. All of this is very fluid but fundamental in what our next election will bring out in Canadians, regardless of when we vote.
Sunday, July 06, 2008
People Need to Read Dion's Green Shift Plan BEFORE They Comment
I wasn’t going to post today given other priorities. However, I am so frustrated with what it going on I had to comment on the superficial reaction I have been noticing for the Dion Green Shift Plan. Dion sure has his work cut out for him but with no need for an election until November 2009, there is enough time to get his plan understood.
GWYN MORGAN ON CROSS COUNTRY CHECK UP
I have just listened to most of Cross Country Checkup on CBC Radio One. Listening to a variety of callers to only talk about the Green Shift to gasoline and the inflationary costs it would cause make me wonder if any of those callers actually read the Green Shift Plan. Most notably fixated in this way was Gwyn Morgan, former CEO of EnCana. He said he would have agreed to a carbon tax to support Kyoto ten years ago but was silent on how vociferous the energy lobby was absolutely against Kyoto back then.
He also said the Dion $10 per tonne charge on CO2 would be inflationary but said nothing about the offsetting income tax cuts and allowances to help northerners, framers and low/fixed income earners in the Green Shift Plan. There was no comment on the use of the carbon levy to stimulate new technologies for cleaner fossil fuel extraction and refining processes and enable alternatives.
Morgan’s comments totally ignored the enormous windfall profits the energy sector is now making with $140 oil and the inflationary impact that is having on virtually everything in our lives. I found it not at all curious that he did not offer a cut in energy sector profits by suggestion a windfall tax to be used to reduce inflation, help the little guy.
GARTH TURNER'S BLOG POST
Then I scanned Garth Turner’s recent and oft reviled blog post. Garth is very thorough and thoughtful in his posts on the energy issues. He is apparently placing the blame for the regionalization resentments on a certain kind of person apparently a “…self-aggrandizing, hostile, me-first, greedy, macho, selfish and balkanizing separatist….” As an Albertan I did not find anything in his recent posts objectionable or inaccurate.
I smiled when he noted in his Blog he was “chewed out by Dion” for his comments. Good for him and good for Dion. Can you imagine any of the Harper Con-Trolls actually having an independent thought, then having the courage to express it openly and then publicly admitting his leader called him up and “chewed him out?” At least the Liberal Party is prepared to accept there is a representative democracy in the land AND with free speech rights, even for its MPs.
I am thankful for the fact Turner and Dion let us know that there is a range of thought in their caucus and even disagreement within the ranks. That is health for democracy and good for politics and even better for our confidence in their suitability to govern. It shows respect differences of opinion and gives some credit to the intelligence of citizens to consider the differences and to make more informed judgments about complex public policy issues. We Canadians can not only handle disagreement within a political party, we can appreciate and respect the fact not everyone in the Liberal Caucus has to genuflect to the absolute power of the Leader on all matters and all the time - like in the case of the Harper Cons.
LORNE GUNTER
I actually started out the day reading Lorne Gunter's column. I occasionally agree with Lorne but I find he mostly lives in a yesteryear time warp. I understand that it seems that he just can’t help himself. His facts are often wrong in this column, for example like claiming Dion is saying Alberta and Saskatchewan is “…deserving of a big hit from his new carbon tax.” That is not the Dion position and Gunter offers no authority for this accusation. Gunter’s commentary is definitely reflective of a hostile, macho, selfish and balkanizing political position as noted by Garth Turner. His framing of the issues on climate change is so passé and tired. This positioning and issue framing is typical of the old-style hard-core Conservative ideology that has no shame in being inaccurate, dated and misleading, so long as it speaks to the base, in their Party and otherwise.
He then has the cheek to write there is no separatist movement in Alberta while admitting “Yes, there are websites for parties claiming to be separatist.” He notes that there are “odd farmers” who may paint a separatist message on his barn and “occasionally a caller to a radio talk show” may make a separatist comment. But he notes Alberta has never elected a separatist government or held a sovereign association referendum, as if the acid test to say there is "NO SEPARATIST MOVEMENT IN ALBERTA.”
So, according to Gunter, there is no separatist movement here because we Albertan’s don’t share the same cultural difficulties in Confederation as Quebec does and we have not yet had our Quiet Revolution? Well Lorne we have our Firewall guys. They are public intellectuals largely from the University of Calgary Poli-Sci Department, the so-called Calgary School. The Firewall guys included Prime Minister Stephen Harper, but that was back in the day when he cared about Alberta. They could be the seeds of a Quiet Revolution, Alberta style, don't ya think?.
There is a separatist movement in Alberta and while it is small and fragmented they have received as much at 8% of the popular vote. They elected a guy named Kesler as an MLA under the Western Canada Concept banner in the early 1980’s. Less than two years ago, one of the popular Alberta Progressive Conservative Party leadership candidates made comments that if Alberta did not get its way with Ottawa we should perhaps look at our future in Confederation.
Fomenting separatist aspirations and regional resentments in Alberta has resulted form past policies like the NEP, that was ironically agreed to by Alberta and the Lougheed government of the day. That same reality is not happening today with Dion. Like so many hard-core Conservative political myths, the facts are rarely considered nor actually talked about openly and accurately in a public discourse. They just presume that they can govern us based on creating fears and excluding and dividing us based on perceived differences.
GWYN MORGAN ON CROSS COUNTRY CHECK UP
I have just listened to most of Cross Country Checkup on CBC Radio One. Listening to a variety of callers to only talk about the Green Shift to gasoline and the inflationary costs it would cause make me wonder if any of those callers actually read the Green Shift Plan. Most notably fixated in this way was Gwyn Morgan, former CEO of EnCana. He said he would have agreed to a carbon tax to support Kyoto ten years ago but was silent on how vociferous the energy lobby was absolutely against Kyoto back then.
He also said the Dion $10 per tonne charge on CO2 would be inflationary but said nothing about the offsetting income tax cuts and allowances to help northerners, framers and low/fixed income earners in the Green Shift Plan. There was no comment on the use of the carbon levy to stimulate new technologies for cleaner fossil fuel extraction and refining processes and enable alternatives.
Morgan’s comments totally ignored the enormous windfall profits the energy sector is now making with $140 oil and the inflationary impact that is having on virtually everything in our lives. I found it not at all curious that he did not offer a cut in energy sector profits by suggestion a windfall tax to be used to reduce inflation, help the little guy.
GARTH TURNER'S BLOG POST
Then I scanned Garth Turner’s recent and oft reviled blog post. Garth is very thorough and thoughtful in his posts on the energy issues. He is apparently placing the blame for the regionalization resentments on a certain kind of person apparently a “…self-aggrandizing, hostile, me-first, greedy, macho, selfish and balkanizing separatist….” As an Albertan I did not find anything in his recent posts objectionable or inaccurate.
I smiled when he noted in his Blog he was “chewed out by Dion” for his comments. Good for him and good for Dion. Can you imagine any of the Harper Con-Trolls actually having an independent thought, then having the courage to express it openly and then publicly admitting his leader called him up and “chewed him out?” At least the Liberal Party is prepared to accept there is a representative democracy in the land AND with free speech rights, even for its MPs.
I am thankful for the fact Turner and Dion let us know that there is a range of thought in their caucus and even disagreement within the ranks. That is health for democracy and good for politics and even better for our confidence in their suitability to govern. It shows respect differences of opinion and gives some credit to the intelligence of citizens to consider the differences and to make more informed judgments about complex public policy issues. We Canadians can not only handle disagreement within a political party, we can appreciate and respect the fact not everyone in the Liberal Caucus has to genuflect to the absolute power of the Leader on all matters and all the time - like in the case of the Harper Cons.
LORNE GUNTER
I actually started out the day reading Lorne Gunter's column. I occasionally agree with Lorne but I find he mostly lives in a yesteryear time warp. I understand that it seems that he just can’t help himself. His facts are often wrong in this column, for example like claiming Dion is saying Alberta and Saskatchewan is “…deserving of a big hit from his new carbon tax.” That is not the Dion position and Gunter offers no authority for this accusation. Gunter’s commentary is definitely reflective of a hostile, macho, selfish and balkanizing political position as noted by Garth Turner. His framing of the issues on climate change is so passé and tired. This positioning and issue framing is typical of the old-style hard-core Conservative ideology that has no shame in being inaccurate, dated and misleading, so long as it speaks to the base, in their Party and otherwise.
He then has the cheek to write there is no separatist movement in Alberta while admitting “Yes, there are websites for parties claiming to be separatist.” He notes that there are “odd farmers” who may paint a separatist message on his barn and “occasionally a caller to a radio talk show” may make a separatist comment. But he notes Alberta has never elected a separatist government or held a sovereign association referendum, as if the acid test to say there is "NO SEPARATIST MOVEMENT IN ALBERTA.”
So, according to Gunter, there is no separatist movement here because we Albertan’s don’t share the same cultural difficulties in Confederation as Quebec does and we have not yet had our Quiet Revolution? Well Lorne we have our Firewall guys. They are public intellectuals largely from the University of Calgary Poli-Sci Department, the so-called Calgary School. The Firewall guys included Prime Minister Stephen Harper, but that was back in the day when he cared about Alberta. They could be the seeds of a Quiet Revolution, Alberta style, don't ya think?.
There is a separatist movement in Alberta and while it is small and fragmented they have received as much at 8% of the popular vote. They elected a guy named Kesler as an MLA under the Western Canada Concept banner in the early 1980’s. Less than two years ago, one of the popular Alberta Progressive Conservative Party leadership candidates made comments that if Alberta did not get its way with Ottawa we should perhaps look at our future in Confederation.
Fomenting separatist aspirations and regional resentments in Alberta has resulted form past policies like the NEP, that was ironically agreed to by Alberta and the Lougheed government of the day. That same reality is not happening today with Dion. Like so many hard-core Conservative political myths, the facts are rarely considered nor actually talked about openly and accurately in a public discourse. They just presume that they can govern us based on creating fears and excluding and dividing us based on perceived differences.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)