Posts Tagged ‘Prime Minister Stephen Harper’
When Conservative Isn’t
$90,000 “expenses”
Conservative Senator Mike Duffy’s idea of “expenses” is a little different than mine.
Meanwhile, the Senate’s internal economy committee wants to have another look at Duffy’s expense claims amid growing questions about his conduct, including new revelations that he filed claims for Senate business while campaigning for the Conservatives in the last federal election.
“Documents revealed that Duffy billed taxpayers for being on official Senate business while he was campaigning for the Conservatives during the 2011 federal election. If it is confirmed that Duffy attended eight campaign events and submitted Senate expenses, he could be in trouble for double-billing.”
— Damning findings removed from Sen. Mike Duffy’s audit report: documents
Wasn’t Prime Minister Stephen Harper going to reform the Senate?
$90,000 “gift”
Nigel Wright Resigns As Stephen Harper’s Chief Of Staff (TWITTER REACTS)
One might think “Harvard-educated Bay Street lawyer and banker” Nigel Wright would know better than to write a cheque to cover Senator Mike Duffy’s exense irregularities.
“It goes without saying that a cheque for such a large amount is far from a customary standard of hospitality, nor a normal expression of courtesy,” [MP Charlie] Angus wrote in a letter.
“The NDP MP also suggested that Duffy, Wright, or both may have breached section 16 of the Parliament of Canada Act which prohibits a senator from receiving compensation for any services rendered.”
— Mike Duffy Resignation: Senator Leaves Caucus, Will Sit As Independent
I’m always surprised when government tells us “throwing money at” education and health care are a bad idea. Properly funding social programs makes a lot more sense to me than covering up bad behaviour. I guess we just have different priorities.
$321,000 “expenses”
[Pamela] Wallin, a former journalist who now represents Saskatchewan in the Senate, has claimed about $321,000 in travel expenses since September 2010 that are the subject of an audit by an outside firm.
Consequences?
Senators Duffy and Wallin both claim to have withdrawn from the Conservative caucus, but both plan to stay on as “independent” senators.
Uh huh… Does anyone actually believe they will suddenly stop supporting Conservative interests? Seriously?
$170,000 “expenses”
Another Conservative Government appointee, Daniel Caron, the head of Library and Archives Canada has also resigned over $170,000 of dubious expenses.
Since LAC is the official government repository of Canadian heritage,this one bothers me in particular.
Coping with a $10-million federal budget cut, Caron oversaw major staff downsizing to the department, reduced funding to scores of tiny archives across Canada, halted most acquisitions of historical artifacts, closed the National Archival Development Program, and stopped a system of inter-library loans through which Canadians could access material from its vast collections.
— Library head Daniel Caron resigns as $170,000 in expenses found
When you consider that what Mr. Caron considers personal expenses would support as many as ten or fifteen families on social assistance for a year, it calls into question the word “conservative.”
Accountability
The National Post gets this one right: Andrew Coyne: Fear of audits led Conservatives to cover for Mike Duffy
Canada badly needs meaningful electoral reform. If we had a democratic system that actually represented Canadians ~ Proportional Representation ~ our government representatives and appointees could be held accountable.
What a difference that would make.
#Flanagan again
Is it just me?
Am I the only one angry that the current administration of the University of Calgary doesn’t think Tom Flanagan has done anything wrong?
In case you missed it, Tom Flanagan, formerly a mentor/adviser to our sitting Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, currently a Political Science professor at the University of Calgary, broke the law while on the CBC news program “Power and Politics with Evan Solomon” when he “counsel[ed] other persons to commit offences.” The indictable offence he advocated was the assassination of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
Some people think Tom Flanagan’s remarks are a joking matter.
Julian Assange does not
find this assassination threat amusing, particularly in light of other threats of physical harm leveled at himself and his family.
Some, like the National Post’s George Jonas, think Tom Flanagan can be excused because they say he intended it as a joke.
Maybe it could be taken as a joke if Tom Flanagan was a telephone lineman, a museum curator, or a manicurist.
But he’s not. The media is downplaying Tom Flanagan’s strong ties to the Canadian government. Flanagan wasn’t just “a Harper aid.”
Tom Flanagan was a chief of staff and policy adviser for the Prime Minister of Canada.
Tom Flanagan has been described as a mentor/adviser/strategist to the Prime Minister. He ran political campaigns and walked the halls of Parliament.
This is a man who most certainly knows better.
Tom Flanagan would very likely know and be known by the Canadian CSIS equivalent to Jack Bauer, and almost certainly have contacts within the American government security forces.
I do not know Tom Flanagan, but he comments regularly on CBC and Evan Solomon clearly took Tom Flanagan’s statements seriously, in fact giving Flanagan an opportunity to back down by making it a joke. That an astute political player like Flanagan did not strongly indicates how serious he was.
Evan Solomon was not soliciting a man-in-the-street opinion from a computer programmer or a supermarket cashier or a priest, he was conducting an expert interview with one of his “regular cast of star panelists“. Tom Flanagan was on the program to provide credible expert commentary.
Tom Flanagan’s commentary is credible BECAUSE he is a professor of Political Science, employed to teach some of the best and brightest Canadian students, at the University of Calgary.
Tom Flanagan’s commentary is credible BECAUSE of his strong ties to the sitting government.
THIS is what qualifies him as an expert, and this is WHY he must be charged for this crime.
ethics & reputation
The only response offered by the University administration has been this weak statement made December 7:
“The University of Calgary’s position remains that the opinions expressed by Dr. Tom Flanagan on CBC news last week were made as an individual. Dr. Flanagan spoke on a matter unrelated to the university, and his comments, for which Dr. Flanagan has expressed regret, do not represent the view of the University of Calgary. “
Yet the University of Calgary has declined to administer even a slap on the wrist to Tom Flanagan for his unacceptable behavior. The University’s position of refusing to make the barest of reprimands to Flanagan implies University support of Flanagan’s crime. A school that unquestioningly supports an educator who blatantly commits a crime television is simply not qualified to speak about “ethics.”
My child will not attend a school that condones assassination.
What does Tom Flanagan teach at the University of Calgary: Assassinate the opposition?
His words have certainly assassinated the University’s reputation internationally.
Left unchallenged, Canada’s reputation both at home and abroad is seriously damaged. As a citizen, I am furious.
If you have any doubt about whether there has been damage to our national reputation as a result of Flanagan’s crime, all you need do is watch the animated video titled Wikileaks Keeps Publishing despite arrest” published on YouTube December 7th, 2010. I first saw it on a Dutch web page. Two weeks later the video has had nearly 300,000 page views. That doesn’t count the web pages like this one that have embedded it. That’s a lot of of page views, particularly considering that it doesn’t top the WikiLeaks list:
For those with accessibility issues, I am also hosting the OGG version here.
Reading the comments on the YouTube page, and all over the Internet, citizens around the world have expressed dismay and outrage over this reprehensible incident.
U of C Community Outrage
Clearly, the University of Calgary community is not happy with the current state of affairs. 60 U of C alumni along with 25 others (current U of C students/staff/supporters across Canada & abroad) sent an open letter asking the University to address the situation. To date there has been none.
You can read their original letter and the follow up on the dedicated blog: Censure Tom Flanagan: Open letter to University of Calgary President Dr. Elizabeth Cannon regarding Dr. Tom Flanagan’s remarks
There is also an online Petition that anyone can sign here:
To: University of calgary
Dr. Elizabeth Cannon
University of CalgaryDr. Cannon,
The last time there was a live televised order to assassinate someone was the religious edict issued by Ayatollah Khomeini to kill Salman Rushdie, the Author of Satanic Verses. Unfortunately in November 2010, Dr. Tom Flanagan called for the assassination of Mr. Julian Assange, the Founder of the Wikileaks website. Based on Canada’s criminal code incitement to commit murder is a crime, not to mention a gross unethical and immoral act.
We, signatories of this petition, demand Dr. Flanagan’s immediate expulsion from University of Calgary. We hope that University of Calgary does not squander its reputation by associating with someone who condones murder in the name of politics.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
PETITION: Dr. Tom Flanagan’s immediate expulsion from University of Calgary
And there’s a FaceBook page:
Facebook Page: Investigate Tom Flanagan for inciting murder against Julian Assange
People feel strongly about the issue because the University’s implied support casts a pall on the reputations of staff, students and alumni. The institution’s inexplicable silence is only making things worse.
Peter Bowal: Double standard on free speech at U of C
If you wish to write a personal letter, you may do so by writing to:
Elizabeth Cannon, the President of the U of Calgary. Her email is
president@ucalgary.ca
and you might wish to CC this suggested list:
chair@ucalgary.ca
senate@ucalgary.ca
jim.dinning@senate.ucalgary.ca
alumni@ucalgary.ca
eosler@ucalgary.ca
Compounding the Situation
Because Tom Flanagan said these things on CBC, and because of who he is, his remarks have been heard around the world.
Canada used to have a reputation for being a good world citizen. Allowing these remarks to go unchecked makes us all look bad.
Tom Flanagan didn’t just make an empty threat on CBC, he didn’t just encourage the assassination of someone he disagrees with, he also threatened a woman who sent him an email he didn’t like. One may have been a mistake. Two makes it a whole different ballgame. I have to wonder, what other things has Tom Flanagan said or done that went away because of his powerful friends and allies?
Tom Flanagan’s “joke defense” goes up in smoke when you add the threatening email into the mix.
This is world class bullying.
Either Flanagan doesn’t get the point, or else is confident he may act as he pleases with impunity.
Apparently he’s right.
All he had to do is say “I’m sorry” and all is well with the world. Why do we waste money on a criminal justice system if all that’s necessary to get out of criminal charges is an apology? The Toronto Star reports that the Toronto Woman Gets Apology from former Harper Aid
So all is well, right? Except it is not.
The Pirate Party of Canada is planning a “Rally To Support Wikileaks”
Saturday, January 15, 2011 · 2:00pm – 5:00pm
Location University of Calgary, outside the social sciences building.
Calgary, AB
“Join with the Pirate Party of Canada and Pirate Parties around the world in peaceful assembly to support WikiLeaks, open government, freedom of the press, and freedom of speech. Take a stand against calls to assassinate journalists and whistleblowers.”
For more information contact mikkel@pirateparty.ca
https://www.pirateparty.ca/
implications of not charging Tom Flanagan
Friendly Media Relations
The law is written clearly and specifically to provide for prosecution whether or not the counseled indictable offence is ever carried out. Counseling assassination breaks the law as much as actually carrying out an assassination.
The media is downplaying Flanagan’s crime as a joke.
And perhaps his friends in our government don’t want him inconvenienced.
Was this “joke” was made with the blessing of our government. Was this a way to publicly threaten WikiLeaks with political deniability?
No one should be above the law.
Since politicians are the usual targets of assassination, I would have thought our governments would be very careful about allowing such cavalier advocacy.
Tom Flanagan has broken the law. That’s clear enough. Tom Flanagan should NOT be able to break the law on National Television with impunity.
Tom Flanagan must be charged. If he’s not, it makes a mockery of Canada’s criminal justice system.
A court of law must decide.
“Something has to be done to let the people who have received his message know that assassination is murder, and a crime in every country of the world,”
–Gail Davidson, The Montreal Gazette: Charge ex-Harper aide for ‘assassinate Julian Assange’ comment: lawyer
Image Credits:
Tom Flanagan at OPUS Hotel photo by Urban Mixer / Raj Taneja on Flickr released under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic
Julian AssangeThis photo by New Media Days / Peter Erichsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
“Jack Bauer” – Wallpaper by Tim Norris under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic License
University of Calgary Alumni photo by damclean under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License
Ayatollah Khomeini by travfotos / Terry Feuerborn under an Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic Creative Commons License on Flickr
Tom Flanagan at OPUS Hotel photo by Urban Mixer / Raj Taneja on Flickr released under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic
Tom Flanagan at OPUS Hotel photo by Urban Mixer / Raj Taneja on Flickr released under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic
OGG conversion via TinyOgg
Canada don’t need no stinkin’ DMCA
Canada don’t need no stinkin’ DMCA
(or DCMA)
Title amendment at June 1st, 2010
Michael Geist says that they are planning to call the new “copyright” law
the Digital Copyright Modernization Act or Canadian DCMA
I guess that ways they can say it isn’t a “Canadian DMCA” with a straight face…. llr
Yesterday morning I was just taking a quick peek at Twitter before getting back to revisions when I saw a tweet from The Electronic Frontier Foundation:
RT@BoingBoing Canadian Prime Minister promises to enact a Canadian DMCA in six weeks http://bit.ly/c8Re4h
That did not sound promising. In fact it sounded downright scary. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) is widely known to be a deeply flawed draconian copyright law. And that isn’t just a Canadian perception, that’s an opinion shared by many people around the world. It is reasonable to assume that a good part of the citizen resistance to A.C.T.A. is a direct result of seeing the DMCA in action.
You might wonder why I am so concerned. After all, this is just the announcement of a bill that won’t even be available for First Reading before June. This bill is so new it doesn’t have a number yet. But previous drafts of so called Canadian “copyright reforms” have been bad. And the fact that representatives of this government are involved in the fast tracked secret A.C.T.A. negotiations does not instill confidence.
being heard
It seems that increasingly our elected representatives choose to ignore Canadians. After all, more than eight thousand concerned Canadians made submissions to the copyright consultation. What we said appears not to have been heard by our government.
As a mother, I have a powerful stake in the future. As a creator and a consumer, copyright is also very important to me. But I am only a private citizen. One person. So it takes a lot to make my voice heard.
When my government demonstrates its willingness to ignore not just my voice, but the voices of thousands of my fellow citizens, then I need to do my best to encourage even more citizens to speak up. That means starting now, before the new bill is released to public scrutiny because there must be time to inform many more Canadians of the issue.
In 2007, the architect of the DMCA and the WIPO Internet Treaties admitted:
“…our attempts at copyright control have not been successful…”
—Chairman Bruce Lehman, International Intellectual Property Institute March 24, 2007
boingboing: DMCA’s author says the DMCA is a failure, blames record industry
Like most Canadians, back then I was so busy with my life that I wasn’t paying much attention. I was leaving politics and lawmaking to the professionals. After all, that’s what they’re paid for, right?
It seems that the politicians want Canada to ratify the WIPO treaties. But that can’t happen until we have enacted domestic laws to back them up. This is why first the Liberals, and now the Conservatives, are trying to put through copyright reform.
The thing of it is, according to Howard Knopf Canada has strong copyright Laws, maybe too strong. In many ways stronger than American Copyright Law.
Now, in 2010, the EFF has made this assessment of the DMCA:
- The DMCA Chills Free Expression and Scientific Research.
Experience with section 1201 demonstrates that it is being used to stifle free speech and scientific research. The lawsuit against 2600 magazine, threats against Princeton Professor Edward Felten’s team of researchers, and prosecution of Russian programmer Dmitry Sklyarov have chilled the legitimate activities of journalists, publishers, scientists, students, programmers, and members of the public.- The DMCA Jeopardizes Fair Use.
By banning all acts of circumvention, and all technologies and tools that can be used for circumvention, the DMCA grants to copyright owners the power to unilaterally eliminate the public’s fair use rights. Already, the movie industry’s use of encryption on DVDs has curtailed consumers’ ability to make legitimate, personal-use copies of movies they have purchased.- The DMCA Impedes Competition and Innovation.
Rather than focusing on pirates, some have wielded the DMCA to hinder legitimate competitors. For example, the DMCA has been used to block aftermarket competition in laser printer toner cartridges, garage door openers, and computer maintenance services. Similarly, Apple has used the DMCA to tie its iPhone and iPod devices to Apple’s own software and services.- The DMCA Interferes with Computer Intrusion Laws.
Further, the DMCA has been misused as a general-purpose prohibition on computer network access, a task for which it was not designed and to which it is ill-suited. For example, a disgruntled employer used the DMCA against a former contractor for simply connecting to the company’s computer system through a virtual private network (“VPN”).”— Electronic Frontier Foundation, Unintended Consequences: Twelve Years under the DMCA
Canada has been under heavy pressure from the United States to follow their legislative lead and create our own DMCA.
First, the Liberal Party of Canada gave it a try with Bill C-60. Fortunately for Canada, the Liberal Party had a minority government at the time and a non-confidence vote killed their Bill C-60. I have no doubt that this law would have passed had there been a Liberal majority.
Next, the Conservative Party of Canada put forth their own Bill C-61 in an attempt to create a Canadian DMCA. Canada was again lucky to have a minority government. There was an even greater outcry from the citizenry. Embarrassing articles in ars technica: “Canadian DMCA” brings “balanced” copyright to Canada and boingboing: Canadian DMCA is worse than the American one seem to have been prevalent. I have no doubt that this law would have passed had there been a Conservative majority.
Luckily for us, Bill C-61 was scrapped by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s first premature prorogation. The Conservatives promised to re-introduce Bill C-61 if they were re-elected. But although they were re-elected, it was without the majority they expected.
but we can’t bank on being lucky
With a minority government, the Conservative government took the reasonable path of addressing one of the chief complaints about the previous attempts — lack of meaningful public consultation. The Ministry of Industry mounted a Canada wide Copyright Consultation. They held “Town Hall” meetings across the country. Unfortunately complaints of “stacking” the speakers, incidents of interested parties being prevented from disseminating literature, or citizens being denied access to the “town hall” venues of these “public” meetings were leveled throughout this part of the process.
But this is the 21st Century. They don’t call this the Information Age for nothing. And to their credit, Industry Canada’s web site hosted an online consultation that would accept submissions from any and all Canadians who cared to speak up. As a citizen, I thought this a good use of technology. This is a prime example of just how democracy can be fine tuned to accurately reflect the will of the people in the 21st Century.
Isn’t the point of a democracy the creation of laws that reflect society’s mores?
How better than to assess the wants and needs of Canadian society than by soliciting the input of concerned Canadians?
More than 8,000 Canadians made written copyright consultation submissions answering the handful of questions posed by the Ministry. Michael Geist provided a nice breakdown and this rebuttal of Robert Owen’s analysis is a good too.
[Mixed up links corrected above]
The Canadian government asked for citizen input and they got it. Instead of the few hundred submissions that I gather are a more common response, they received thousands of submissions. Many Canadians assumed that our government might actually consider what we told them. After all, they asked us what we thought.
Was the copyright consultation all smoke and mirrors?
boingboing: Canadian Prime Minister promises to enact a Canadian DMCA in six weeks
Michael Geist: PMO Issues The Order: Canadian DMCA Bill Within Six Weeks
p2pnet: It’s official – the United States of Canada
Zero Paid: Canadian DMCA To Be Tabled Within Weeks
Forums » O Canada! » Canadian » Canadian Broadband
» PMO Issues The Order: Canadian DMCA Within Six Weeks!!
Millsworks: Canadian DMCA In 6 Weeks
ideas revolution: Canadian DMCA Bill Within Six Weeks?
Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights: Dear Canada, your voices don’t really matter. Canadian DMCA in 6 weeks. Regards, Stephen Harper
Apparently the phrase “Canadian DMCA” got so much play yesterday that it actually became a Twitter trending topic. Hmmmm, sure sounds as though Canadians actually care about this issue.
the boingboing comment that got to me was
CG • #9
said:
“…they didn’t listen to the consultation; why would they listen this time?”– boingboing: Canadian Prime Minister promises to enact a Canadian DMCA in six weeks”
If we look at it that way, and throw up our hands in disgust, THEY WILL HAVE WON.
How is the government looking at this? This is a protest by a “special interest group”. A mere handful of Canadians… less than 9,000… made submissions. Come on, out of 33 million? That’s only a tiny fraction. Do the math.
Prime Minister Harper doesn’t think it is enough opposition to make a difference. After all, it is ONLY some lowly radical tech people who are against it. And maybe a few of the musicians who have begun establishing recording careers without having to give record companies their copyright. [Did you know that 30% of the Canadian recording industry has gone independent? Is THAT the real reason the music biz wants to stop p2p?]
The problem is that the Government is correct. Most Canadians don’t understand what is happening or what this will mean.
Perhaps our government is counting on us getting angry at being ignored, and then frustrated beyond endurance, until we come to the point we have to give up and get on with our real lives, leaving them free to do whatever they want.
In this instance pandering to the American Government– who are in turn pandering to their own giant media corporations. Make no mistake– the American DMCA does not serve American citizens, it serves American corporations. You know the ones I mean. Corporations like Disney, who want copyright to never end. Corporations like the big music companies who used to control the entire recording industry of the entire world. In Canada, that’s the CRIA, the “Big Four” American branch plants that used to control 100% of the Canadian recording Industry.
Since the advent of the Internet, and p2p filesharing, Canadian musicians are going independent. Leaving the four CRIA record companies in control of only 70% of the Canadian recording industry.
That is probably the real reason Canada makes it onto the USTR watch list every year. That USTR list is one of the main reasons why Canada is perceived to be a haven of piracy when in fact there is far less infringement here than most places. Certainly less than the United States. On April 14th of this year, Michael Geist reported American government findings: U.S. Government Study: Counterfeiting and Piracy Data Unreliable, and on April 30th USTR’s Bully Report Unfairly Blames Canada Again. Yet the Canadian government didn’t even make an issue of this or make a submission to the USTR.
So the United States keeps putting Canada on their “watch list”. Our friendly neighbor to the south is accusing us — in the absence of credible facts — of being a pirate nation.
First they call us names, and malign our international reputation, but then they promise to stop if we give them what they want. Isn’t there a word for that?
All they want is our sovereignty.
This is why it so important to NOT GIVE UP.
Canadians can’t afford to give up in frustration. And there are things to do. If enough of us do them, we may be heard.
- 1. First: TELL everybody that you know. The mainstream news media isn’t talking about it, so we need to.
- 2. EXPLAIN the issues to everybody who will listen. If you can’t explain it, (after all, how many of us are IP lawyers?) send them to any of the links above, send them to Michael Geist, Howard Knopf, BoingBoing, p2pnet, zeropaid, wikipedia… wherever, whatever it takes.
- 3. Write letters to politicians.
- 4. Submit letters to the Editor to your local newspaper, or one of the national ones, or magazines like MacLeans. Comment online (where appropriate). Talk to your local radio station– great interview topic, make for a good phone in show… Or find a local Indie band. Chances are they will know exactly how important this fight is. Maybe they’ll play a free concert in the park to raise awareness.
- 5. Blog if you’ve got a blog. If you don’t, it’s really easy to start one. (most blogs are much shorter than this. Really.) If you really don’t want to start a blog, but you’ve got something to say, contact me (or another blogger of your choice) about doing a guest blog post.
- 6. Use Twitter, Identi.ca, Facebook, IRC channel chat rooms– or any other internet information sharing thing you are part of– to spread the word. (Michael Geist has a Fair Copyright for Canada group on Facebook, and the Facebook CAPP group is still out there.
- 7. There is also Fairvote Canada a grass roots non-partisan electoral reform movement which is growing local chapters across the country. On Wednesday May 12th the Waterloo, Chapter is hosting a debate Debate: Strategic Voting – What’s a voter to do?.
Michael Geist recommends sending an actual paper mail letter via snail mail postal mail. Right or wrong, politicians attach far more weight to paper letters than email. After all, anyone could say they were anyone on an email. (Like that doesn’t hold true for a paper letter.) But email is EASY. It takes so little effort for us to send that maybe it doesn’t mean we’re really serious. We haven’t showed our commitment to the issue by writing on actual paper and giving Canada Post something to do. Last year when I emailed politicians about an issue, some of them weren’t tech savvy enough to turn off the email confirmations. Of those, about half confirmed that my email was deleted without being read. So look at it this way, if you send them a paper letter, someone in the office has to at least open it before throwing it out.
If you don’t know who your representative is in your riding, this is a link to the MP postal code look-up. Find your MP and the first letter should go to your own MP, but don’t stop there. Send letters to:
Prime Minister
The Right Hon. Stephen Harper, P.C., B.A., M.A.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Minister of Industry
The Hon. Tony Clement, P.C., B.A., LL.B.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Minister of Heritage
The Hon. James Moore, P.C., B.A.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Liberal Leader
Michael Ignatieff, B.A., M.A., Ph.D.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
BLOC Leader
Gilles Duceppe
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
[*M. Duceppe would prefer communication in French, but I've heard that he's classy enough to respond to mono-lingual English speakers in English
(in other words, English would be better than a bad Google translation]
NDP Leader
The Hon. Jack Layton, P.C., B.A., M.A., Ph.D.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
NDP Technology Critic
Charlie Angus
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Unelected leader of the Green Party
Elizabeth May
http://greenparty.ca/contact
[The green party of canada only makes phone and web contact information available on their site. I guess that's a reasonable stance for an environmental party.
(Maybe I just couldn't find it since I'm tired, being up way past my bedtime to finish this.) You could call during business hours, but my guess is that emailing would be fine here.]
The Unelected Leader of the Pirate Party of Canada
Jake Daynes
Pirate Party of Canada
43 Samson Blvd #165
Laval QC H7X 3R8
[Since the Pirate Party exists to promote copyright reform, it's reasonable to assume they oppose any DMCA like legislation, but it wouldn't hurt to discuss the issues with them. One reason I plug them is because they legally distribute music from some great Canadian bands free online through their p2p Pirate Tracker. Great for Canadian heritage, eh? Last I heard the PPOC was expecting the official party status notification which will make them eligible to field candidates for the next Federal Election.]
It certainly wouldn’t hurt to ferret out any smaller political parties that may exist in your riding. Wikipedia of course has a list of canadian political parties which would be an excellent starting point. The more people we have talking about copyright, the better
It has taken so long to get this article done that it’s Thursday… and I’m just about to post this monstrosity but I thought I’d include a link to Michael Geist’s latest on the subject Covering the Return of the Canadian DMCA as he’s included many links to articles I haven’t had time to look at yet both online and (ahem) in the mainstream news media.
(If there’s enough buzz, the mainstream HAS to follow.)
Get involved. There are many ways to participate. It’s for our future.
Update May 9th, 2010
It wouldn’t hurt to add two more to the list of letter recipients:
Liberal Industry critic
Marc Garneau
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Liberal Heritage critic
Pablo Rodriguez
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
These late additions are courtesy of Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights. This group has a nice form letter on offer so you can Send A Letter To Ottawa To Stop The Canadian DMCA. You can customize the letter in their online form, and when you submit it, they will electronically submit your letter to an array of politicians (a less extensive list than mine, which is a kitchen sink approach) and then the CCER also undertakes to forward a hard copy to these same politicians.
Certainly it is less work to allow someone else to do the mailing for you, but that’s always a bit dangerous. One of the simplest ways to protect yourself online–a simple internet security safeguard– is to not give out any more personal info than you absolutely have to online. There are times when we haven’t a choice. When dealing with my bank, I HAVE to identify myself to them if I want to be able to access my cash. But then, I only access my bank through their secure (read encrypted) web page.
I wouldn’t use a form myself, partly because I’m a writer, and partly because, like email, politicians assign less weight to a form letter. On the other hand, a form letter is much better than no response at all. Of course, I might cut and past their form letter into Open Office to use as a road map for writing my own.
This is not to malign the Canadian Coalition for Electronic Rights. They are just trying to make it as easy as possible for concerned citizens to put their two cents worth in, because the CCER understands the importance of speaking out. But ANY time you fill in a form like this and send your unencrypted personal information over the Internet it can easily go astray or be harvested by spammers. Especially in Canada where the CRTC has given Bell Canada permission to use Deep Packet Inspection on Canadian Internet traffic. DPI makes it possible for Bell to see anything unencrypted that we put online. Bell Canada assured the CRTC that it would not abuse this process, but there is no oversight or any meaningful complaint procedure in place should your personal information be compromised in any way.
I’ll opt for caution.
P.S. The bill is scheduled to be tabled (introduced into the legislature, I think that means first reading but I may be wrong) this afternoon.
For breaking news check Michael Geist’s blog. Curerently this is the latest:
“We Don’t Care What You Do, As Long as the U.S. Is Satisfied”
They’re Baaaack… Canada and the Constitution
Prime Minister Stephen Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s premature prorogation is over. What did it accomplish? Lots of stress free face time at the Olympics? The public has forgotten all about prorogation, government waste, complicity in war crimes… Have we? I know I haven’t.
Amir Attaran, a Law Professor at the University of Ottawa emphatically states “The first thing is that the government should hand over the documents.”
University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran. Photo: Tony Fouhse
Attaran says that “National Security’ is not a legally allowable reason to deny Parliament to access the requested documents.
Parliament is guaranteed access to uncensored documents under the Canadian Constitution.
The government’s ploy to call in a retired judge to make a ruling is a ploy, because being retired he has no authority. In fact, since the Government is paying the judge, he is an employee.
This has ceased to being about Afghan Detainees and whether they are tortured. What is at stake here is extremely high constitutional principle, about whether we are a democracy in which Parliament is supreme, or whether we are inching towards something that is slightly dangerously tyrannical. In which a sitting government can say “parliament, Tough Luck, your priviledges, your constitutional powers don’t matter.”
– Attaran http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDJ1TCXyRY8&feature=youtube_gdata
The power to call for persons, papers and records is absolute
It is very clear. The government must comply with the law.
The Rights to Institute Inquiries, to Require the Attendance of Witnesses and to Order the Production of Documents
The power to send for persons, papers and records has been delegated by the House of Commons to its committees in the Standing Orders. It is well established that Parliament has the right to order any and all documents to be laid before it which it believes are necessary for its information. … The power to call for persons, papers and records is absolute, but it is seldom exercised without consideration of the public interest. The House of Commons recognizes that it should not require the production of documents in all cases; considerations of public policy, including national security, foreign relations, and so forth, enter into the decision as to when it is appropriate to order the production of such documents.[327]
–House of Commons Procedure and Practice – Second Edition, 2009
[note: the emphasis is mine.]
The Globe and Mail reports: Canadian spies interrogated Afghan prisoners, insiders reveal
Some people think that this is necessary because Canada is at war. Canadian lives are being saved. Does Canada have a reason to be at war besides the fact that President Bush told us to go to war? None that I’ve ever heard.
Canada is supposed to be a sovereign nation, and we should not BE at war without the clear backing of the populace.
Canadian soldiers are dying why?
Because they were stupid enough to join our military?
Not so long ago the Canadian military was respected around the world for peacekeeping. Not any more. Now, because of Canadian participation in an unjust war Canadian complicity in torture may be at issue. Is this how you want Canada to behave? I don’t.
Terrible and unconscionable as that is, what is worse is the fact that our government is placing itself above the law in not making the necessary documents available to parliament.
This is a clear and present danger to Canadian democracy.
Strategic Voting: Don’t Do It
Years back when walking home from the polling station, my husband commented on the fact that whoever we vote for doesn’t ever get elected.
Hearing this, our small son helpfully suggested that maybe if we voted for somebody else the ones we wanted WOULD get elected.
Now, you and I both know that it doesn’t work that way. Yet that’s essentially what happens when we are convinced to vote “strategically”.
Strategic Voting is often sold as a necessity to prevent certain candidates from being elected.
We are told that it would be best to cast our vote for someone not of our choosing.
Our current electoral system makes some votes count more than others, so it is even more important to cast your vote the way you think best.
Almost always “strategic voting” is proposed because it is so important to prevent someone else from being elected.
They advise us to vote strategically for the candidate they are trying to get elected.
Then of course, their candidate may very well get elected because of all those bonus “strategic” votes.
However if they wind up with a majority they will then boast of a “clear mandate” to do what they want.
So the next time anyone suggests that you cast a strategic vote for their candidate, explain to them that this time it is their turn to vote for your candidate.
Write to your Member of Parliament and tell them what you think about premature prorogation or anything else! You can find your MP with this lovely link – it will also help you find out who your MP is if you don’t know. It’s time that Canadians started letting them know what we think about how they represent us.
Find your Member of Parliament
Write to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and tell him too!
Prime Minister/Premier Ministre Stephen Harper <pm@pm.gc.ca>
The government gives more weight to postal mail: you can mail your comments without a stamp!!:
The Right Hon. Stephen Joseph Harper, P.C., B.A., M.A.
1600 90th Avenue Southwest, suite A-203
Calgary, Alberta
T2V 5A8
Canada badly needs electoral reform. Take a peek at the Non-Partisan Fair Vote Canada site to get information some ideas of electoral reform. All Canadians need to join in these non-partisan discussions.
NoProRogue: Signs
Signs of Democracy
No Prorogue Rally: Guelph, Ontario
We held grassroots rallies and marches across this great land in heartfelt protest against Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s shameless premature prorogation which he effected solely to avoid government accountability to Canadian citizens.
On the 23rd day of January, 2010 Canadians of all ages and political affiliations (or none) took to the streets in peaceful assembly.
Coming from the earlier Waterloo Rally, I was late arriving in Downtown Guelph, but I got there in time to see the Rally transform into a March.
These are some of the signs I saw on the Guelph NoProrogue march that day.
The gods smiled on our just cause: it was a mild day, although winter in Canada. Canadians of all ages turned out to give voice to our concerns through peaceful assembly.
Is it any wonder that a great deal of the outrage centers around the fact that the premature prorogation means that our hundreds of members of Parliament will not be at work due to the premature proragation… yet they continue to receive their paychecks courtesy of Canadian tax dollars paid by ordinary Canadians. That’s us.
For most Canadians no work means no pay. So this sounds rather like a prorogation vacation to many Canadians.
It took me a minute to “get” the sign (right) until the lightbulb lit and I realized it was picturing a perogie. I don’t know about you but I can always use a good laugh. Leave it to Canadians, not only are we polite, but we’ve long been world leaders in the field of humour. I rather like perogie-prorogue pun.
But the point is that the Canadian tipping point was the attack on democracy.
Who says Canadians don’t wrap themselves in the flag? We may be flawlessly polite, comparatively quiet and incredibly law abiding, but we love our country. It was inspiring to see all the people wearing Canadian flags in one way or another that day.
And heartening to see so many hand made signs. A great deal of passion — and effort — went into this day.
With government like we’ve got, we can all surely use a smile
Is it any wonder that this song was running through my head while putting this collection together?
So although this hasn’t got anything to do with the grassroots NoProrogue movement, or Canada as far as I can tell, this video has some of the funniest signs I’ve seen in a long time… accompanied by the Tesla song “Signs”
Write to your Member of Parliament and tell them what you think about premature prorogation or anything else! You can find your MP with this lovely link – it will also help you find out who your MP is if you don’t know. It’s time that Canadians started letting them know what we think about how they represent us.
Find your Member of Parliament
Write to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and tell him too!
Prime Minister/Premier Ministre Stephen Harper <pm@pm.gc.ca>
The government gives more weight to postal mail: you can mail your comments without a stamp!!:
The Right Hon. Stephen Joseph Harper, P.C., B.A., M.A.
1600 90th Avenue Southwest, suite A-203
Calgary, Alberta
T2V 5A8
Canada badly needs electoral reform. Take a peek at the Non-Partisan Fair Vote Canada site to get information some ideas of electoral reform. All Canadians need to join in these non-partisan discussions.
If I ran the zoo…: Advertising II
Part II: Party Advertising
When an election is called and the candidates are running for office, their platform is of interest to viewers and readers.
The news media will report what they say.
That’s called “news”.
Political parties don’t need to buy advertising. Or at least they shouldn’t have to.
Why do the political parties expend so much energy fund raising to purchase advertising when they can get news coverage for free?
What’s the difference between media news coverage and advertising?
News coverage
is supposed to present the facts. News coverage might cover a press conference and select key statements made by a politician to put in the broadcast, or perhaps make a documentary about an issue, candidate, party or a campaign. They might include a panel discussion, a public consultation, or a political debate.
What is covered and the focus is decided by the news media editorial department, not the political party.
Realistically, the news media is at least partially entertainment, and like anything else carries bias. The bias may be an official policy of the news outlet, or it might be handed down from on high, or it may have developed based on the bias of the people in editorial department, or even informed by the readership. When there is bias, and there is always bias (it’s only human) how the politician or issue is presented will be influenced by that bias to a degree. If the media takes a shine to a politician, they will be careful to present them in a good light, but if they dislike someone, they have the power to show only unflattering angles and emphasize verbal stumbling or contradictions.
The news media will report what they say. Good and bad.
Thus the politicians and/or the political party can not dictate the “spin”.
Advertising Coverage
To sell a product: in this case, the politician or the party, nothing works like advertising.
Facts are not necessary, the only goal is to make the politicians or the party look good.
Political Party advertising doesn’t have to actually say anything. In fact it is probably better if it doesn’t.
You want your candidate to look their best, and because you can take as long as you need to get it right, your candidate WILL look their best. Photo Ops are good… baby kissing, cuddling pets, whatever works.
Then there are attack ads designed to make the opposing candidate or party look bad. I think the assumption is that if the other guy looks bad, our guy looks good. Unfortunately, these ads don’t come across as “whistle blowing”, they look much more like bullying. I guess that might work for the bullies of the world, but I think this kind of advertising makes the party paying for it look bad.
I don’t need you to tell me what the other party has done wrong, I need to know what you will do right.
Advertising must be paid for. So yes, the parties need to find the money– this is what they are fund raising for.
Because they pay for the ads, they are the client. Thus the politicians and/or the political party have control over the “spin”. Advertisements only tell us what the party wants us to know. So advertising is good for the party, but not necessarily good for the voter.
Is this really how we want to select our government? Based on how good their advertising campaign is?
money and money
There are two different ways advertising money needs to be spent. The obvious part is the money that is spent on the creation of the advertising materials… the writers, producers, actors, camera men…
We don’t often think of the other place advertising money goes… to the media outlets. Space has to be purchased from magazines and newspapers to run print ads, while time slots must be bought from radio and television in order to broadcast commercials.
Political advertising represents an enormous revenue stream for media outlets. The income generated is what pays for the news media. Do you think maybe a TV network that receives a great deal of advertising revenue from a particular political party might be influenced in what news coverage that party receives? Is it unreasonable to think that large advertising budgets may lead to more favorable news coverage for the political parties?
Those are scary enough prospects to begin with, but the one that bothers me the most was the article I read in yesterday’s The Hill Times:
Right now the party is working on solidifying its policy positions, and boosting revenues from fundraising. The Liberals raised $9.6-million in 2009, which is vastly improved from 2008 when they brought in only $5.6-million. But while the Tories’ fundraising haul declined from $21-million in 2008, they were still light years ahead of the other parties, bringing in $18-million last year.
When Mr. Apps became president of the party last year he pledged to match the Conservatives in fundraising by June 30, 2011, and he said the party is on track to meeting that goal.
“In one year we’ve cut the gap in half. If I can cut it in half again this year, so the gap instead of being under $8-million it becomes $4-million, I think it’s very achievable to meet that goal in 2011,” he said.
But the Liberals are not there yet, and after four years in opposition, they have learned to fear the Conservative machine, said one insider.
—The Hill Times: Liberals not ready to defeat Tories in spring
The upshot certainly seems to be that The Liberal party is afraid to challenge the Conservative party and possibly trigger an election.
Not because they don’t think they are in the right. But for one reason only: they don’t believe they have enough money for advertising, and therefore believe that they cannot win.
Is it really true that our Canadian democracy boils down to the party with the biggest advertising budget will win?
More than anything that is a sign that political advertising needs to be stopped.
If I ran the Zoo er Country…
the only advertising I would allow political parties to engage in would be lawn signs. If the party wanted to appear in the media the candidates would have to do something newsworthy.
Maybe if we got beyond sound bites we could find out what the different parties actually stand for. Instead of throwing all their creative juices into fooling us into voting for them, maybe they could really find out about the issues, and maybe even engage in public consultations and come out with workable platforms.
That’s what I would do if I ran the zoo country.
Write to your Member of Parliament and tell them what you think about premature prorogation or anything else! You can find your MP with this lovely link – it will also help you find out who your MP is if you don’t know. It’s time that Canadians started letting them know what we think about how they represent us.
Find your Member of Parliament
Write to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and tell him too!
Prime Minister/Premier Ministre Stephen Harper <pm@pm.gc.ca>
The government gives more weight to postal mail: you can mail your comments without a stamp!!:
The Right Hon. Stephen Joseph Harper, P.C., B.A., M.A.
1600 90th Avenue Southwest, suite A-203
Calgary, Alberta
T2V 5A8
Canada badly needs electoral reform. Take a peek at the Non-Partisan Fair Vote Canada site to get information some ideas of electoral reform. All Canadians need to join in these non-partisan discussions.
If I ran the zoo…: Advertising I
at the Federal Level
Advertising
I was shocked when I first learned that the biggest Canadian advertising clients were our government and political parties.
Why is that, I wonder.
How much time, energy and money do our political parties and governments spend on advertising?
A lot.
Why do they do it?
Because it works.
Because a commercial advertisement is short fast and compelling. Its why corporations advertise. The more money spent on advertising, the more product you can sell. In this case, the greater the chance of being re-elected, or the more votes your party gets.
Part I: The Government and Advertising
Public Works and Government Services Canada handles advertising at the Federal level. Government advertising as a means of public notification is one thing. Advertising as a means of “selling” something to the electorate is something else again.
It offends me that my tax dollars are used by my government to “sell” their policies and ideas to me.
Governments should not HAVE to buy advertising… if any level of government has something to say, the media will cover it. That’s called “news”.
tax dollars
If it is a good and useful policy presented it in a reasonable way through the news media or on government websites or through mailings should be sufficient.
I don’t want my tax dollars squandered on glitzy commercials with sound bites or pretty print ads designed to gull me into thinking what they want me to think.
There are far better uses for this money.
Health Care for instance.
Think about it. If the Canadian government wasn’t squandering all those tax dollars trying to sell Canadians things we don’t want, they would save a ridiculous amount of money. They wouldn’t need PST/GST “Harmonization” to generate the extra income they are about to start wringing out of taxpayers, instead of adding yet more tax to beleaguered taxpayers during a recession the unspent advertising dollars could be used instead.
Using advertising to sell us policies we don’t want is bad enough (a practice often called “propaganda”) but the absolute worst is that that our government is using our tax dollars to sell us political parties.
The first egregious example of this I saw was the Ontario road construction signs during the Mike Harris government of the 1990′s. All the construction signs did double duty by advertising Mike Harris and the Conservative government. Adding his name to those signs turned information dissemination into partisan advertising – paid for by taxpayers.
That is down right wrong. Of course, Premier Mike Harris had a majority government af the time so there was no stopping it.
[One more reason I dislike majority government.]
False Advertising
Instead of censuring this bad policy, it seems that succeeding politicians have emulated and even “improved” on the model.
Just last year Prime Minister Stephen Harper had the Conservative Party Logo imprinted on Government of Canada grant disbursement cheques. Is this simply a case of misrepresentation? A Conservative party attempt to make the recipients think the finds disbursed were given thanks to Conservative Party largess? If so this is certainly False Advertising. The only legitimate way for the Conservative party logo to be on a cheque would be if the cheque was drawn from a Conservative Party bank account.
Or perhaps Prime Minister Stephen Harper is unable to distinguish between Conservative Party funds and Government of Canada funds. If the latter perhaps the RCMP ought to be considering investigating Conservative Party finances to ensure Canadian government funds have not been spent inappropriately.
It’s bad enough crediting a political party with government works, but it is even slimier to affix their partisan info to public works projects that predate their authority. They are not only advertising, but FALSE advertising — with our tax dollars! I discovered this example in the Hill Times: Sheila Copps: Optics of Conservative cheque scheme dodgy.
Conservative blogger Stephen Taylor counters by harking back to similar Liberal Party shenanigans perpetrated by the Liberal Party under Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Taylor is only one of many to defend the policy by pointing out the Liberals did this as well. I link to Stephen Taylor‘s blog since he includes the National Post story no longer online.
I am horrified that none of these very smart people seem to get the point.
What next?
The point here is NOT that since the Liberals did it when they were in power it makes it OK for the Conservatives to do it when they form the government.
The real point is that it was never OK.
It doesn’t matter who does it.
It is ALWAYS wrong.
[An anti-party person like myself might point out this is just another example of Liberal and Conservative party similarity. They truly are interchangeable.]
The thing is, the government should not be selling Canadians political parties.
Tax dollars are non-partisan. Using them for partisan aggrandizement is at best a misuse of public funds.
If I ran the Zoo er Country…
I would slash the advertising budget. Because the only advertising our tax dollars should pay for is advertising to inform Canadians, not to “sell” us.
That’s what I would do if I ran the zoo country.
Write to your Member of Parliament and tell them what you think about premature prorogation or anything else! You can find your MP with this lovely link – it will also help you find out who your MP is if you don’t know. It’s time that Canadians started letting them know what we think about how they represent us.
Find your Member of Parliament
Write to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and tell him too!
Prime Minister/Premier Ministre Stephen Harper <pm@pm.gc.ca>
The government gives more weight to postal mail: you can mail your comments without a stamp!!:
The Right Hon. Stephen Joseph Harper, P.C., B.A., M.A.
1600 90th Avenue Southwest, suite A-203
Calgary, Alberta
T2V 5A8
Canada badly needs electoral reform. Take a peek at the Non-Partisan Fair Vote Canada site to get information some ideas of electoral reform. All Canadians need to join in these non-partisan discussions.
ProRogue Bay
People like Michael Geist and Jesse Brown are tweeting about “ProRogue Bay”.
ProRogue Bay Image
Because the scurvy pirates over there in the Pirate Bay are a real hoot.
They’ve plastered the caricature (pictured at the right) of our very own Prime Minister Stephen Harper on the front page of their website and wittily re-titled the page ProRogue Bay.
Some people might (and I’m sure do) believe that the Pirate Bay the most wretched hive of scum and villainy because it is the most famous and most slippery file sharing website.
My Favorite Pirate
The Pirate Bay site has changed hands and jurisdictions to stay ahead of those who want — at the very least to shut it down — but would prefer — to imprison those knavish pirates running it. I imagine that it’s one of those high-burnout jobs… like being the Dread Pirate Roberts.
For myself, I worry that eventually the copyright lobby will succeed in killing file sharing as their incessant propaganda will eventually brainwash enough of us into thinking file sharing is bad. When in fact you can find out from my StopUBB blog that
Actually one of the biggest problems with the copyright mess facing not just us in Canada, but citizens of many other countries around the world, is that laws are being written and civil liberties assailed supposedly in the name of “copyright”. These changes to copyright law are designed to criminalize all copyright infringement, which was previously a civil matter.
Interestingly enough, the bar for the standard of evidence required in civil court is much lower than that in criminal court. It seems that the new criminal copyright laws will be transporting the lower standards to criminal court, along with adjustments such as removing annoying concepts like “innocent until proven guilty”.
These changes to the law are being driven under secret treaties called CETA and ACTA. In the driver’s seat you’ll find organizations like the MPAA and corporations like Disney who are telling governments how to draft the law these organizations want. Worse, the whole process is being carried on behind closed doors with such strenuous non-disclosure agreements being applied that most of the elected representatives of governments engaged in these negotiations aren’t even aware of the details.
Previously, laws in democratic nations were drafted according to the societal norms and ethics of the countries, not handed down from above like tablets from heaven… not in democratic nations anyway.
Seems things are changing.
Changing the name of Pirate Bay to ProRogue Bay is a brilliant bit of strategizing on behalf of the pirates, since this will surely drive a lot of traffic to their site, which is regularly de-listed by search engines like Google.
But interestingly enough, if you go to the ProRogue Bay page and click on Prime Minister Stephen Harper you will discover that it is a link to the No ProRogue website which has launched a new CAPP forum off Facebook. This will allow Canadians who don’t use Facebook to participate in the grass roots consultation process.
So in fact, the pirate bay pirates are assisting Canadians seeking answers to our own home grown questions about democracy in our home and native land. There is precedent after all… if I recall my history, famed pirate Jean Lafitte was quite a proponent of democracy in his day.
Arr arr.
UPDATE:
Courtesy of Andrew Davidson’s CBC Online: UPDATED: H(ar-r-r)per gets the Pirate Bay treatment (but don’t tell Ezra Levant…) article, I now know that The Pirate Bay’s “Prorogue Bay” Link has been discontinued. Of course as I was typing this my teenager came in and told me about it too. Go figure.
But the No Prorogue CAPP Forum is alive and well.
Go Democracy Go!
If I ran the zoo…er country…#2
[Essentially Canada badly needs electoral reform, and my head is full of nifty ideas on how to fix things. Since politics isn't going to go away (unfortunately) and the issues only dominate my life sporadically-- after all, I'm not a politician, only a citizen-- I've decided to blog my "how to fix Canada" musings in this
“If I ran the Zoo er Country...” series.]
This may sound pretty radical, but I think that it should be a crime for a politician to lie.
A friend of mine once told me about an alternate universe story where it was perfectly legal to shoot politicians for cause. Sorry, I can’t remember the name of it, and I never did manage to read it, but it was one of those crystalline ideas that lodge in one’s brain as a “good idea”. After all a system like that might elicit better behaviour from our elected representatives.
Alright, I admit it, I wouldn’t actually go that far, but for sure our elected representatives need to start being accountable. Now, I know this may sound pretty extreme, especially if you are a politician. Maybe lying should be just a misdemeanor, at least until they start getting into double digits.
But really, what are politicians selling us? Their words. We elect them – hire them – because of what they say. If what they say is a lie, that’s at the very least false advertising.
If a car manufacturer sells us a faulty piece of equipment Canadians have legal recourse.
Or if we buy any product based on false claims we have legal remedies.
Yet when politicians lie to us we’re supposed to suck it up and get over it. But if a politician lies to the citizens, it is nothing less than fraud. But they make the laws.
It’s high time we started insisting that politicians tell us the truth.
Because they work for us.
A few good links…
Pinocchio?
LIES THAT STEPHEN HARPER TOLD US
Stephen Harpers Broken Promises
Following Stephen Harper’s record of lies
Stephen Harper: What About Those Promises You Made to Canadian Women the Last Time Around?
Harper has broken promises to Quebecers: Duceppe
Harper: Promises Made, Promises Broken
Broken promises piling up for Harper
And my personal favorite:
MacLeans Magazine: Conservative Talking Points for the Decision to Cancel Spring Break for MPs
Stephen Harper Income Trust Promise
Write to your Member of Parliament and tell them what you think about premature prorogation or anything else! You can find your MP with this lovely link – it will also help you find out who your MP is if you don’t know. It’s time that Canadians started letting them know what we think about how they represent us.
Find your Member of Parliament
Write to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and tell him too!
Prime Minister/Premier Ministre Stephen Harper <pm@pm.gc.ca>
The government gives more weight to postal mail: you can mail your comments without a stamp!!:
The Right Hon. Stephen Joseph Harper, P.C., B.A., M.A.
1600 90th Avenue Southwest, suite A-203
Calgary, Alberta
T2V 5A8
Canada badly needs electoral reform. Take a peek at the Non-Partisan Fair Vote Canada site to get information some ideas of electoral reform. All Canadians need to join in these non-partisan discussions.
