Democracy in the Liberal Party is dead today. Bob Rae has dropped out, and Iggy will be crowned interim leader, to become permanent leader in May. He has not had to face a single vote from the membership of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Iggy is a right-winger, who believes that the invasion of Iraq was a good idea, and that torture can be justified. I have great qualms about the coalition going forward with him as leader. He is a clone of King Stephen on a lot of things, even down to the condescending attitude. The Liberals will be led by the Man Who Would Be Philosopher King. The man who sees the coalition not as a way to represent the will of 62% of Canadians but rather as a tool to extract concessions from the Conservatives.
I don't know if the coalition can go with Iggy the Hawk in charge of the Liberals.
Of course, Iggy leading the Liberal Party is in the partisan best interests of the NDP. He will draw CPC-LPC swing voters, and drive LPC-NDP swing voters to the NDP. This may help the NDP gain seats in Atlantic Canada and in Ontario. At the same time, the LPC can gain seats from the CPC in Ontario and maybe from the BQ in Quebec. It may be enough to knock King Stephen off his throne in the Dictatorial Republic of Canada.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 41
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Friday, December 05, 2008
National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women
On December 6, 1989 Marc Lepine entered L'Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal and killed Genevieve Bergeron, Helen Colgan, Nathalie Croteau, Barbara Daigneault, Anne-Marie Edward, Maud Haviernick, Maryse Laganiere, Anne-Marie Lemay, Sonia Pelletier, Michele Richard, Annie St-Arneault, Annie Turcotte and Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz. This event has become known as the Montreal Massacre.
Since 1991 we have marked the anniversary of this tragedy with the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. On this above all days we remember all women who have been killed and harmed by men. The fourteen killed at L'Ecole Polytechnique were killed because they were women, and because Lepine had a violent hatred of feminists.
We must stand against all violence against women, and take every possible action to ensure that no woman is killed by her partner or because she is a woman. We must also act to ensure that women are equal in all ways to men.
May the fourteen and all other women killed by men rest in peace.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 46
Since 1991 we have marked the anniversary of this tragedy with the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. On this above all days we remember all women who have been killed and harmed by men. The fourteen killed at L'Ecole Polytechnique were killed because they were women, and because Lepine had a violent hatred of feminists.
We must stand against all violence against women, and take every possible action to ensure that no woman is killed by her partner or because she is a woman. We must also act to ensure that women are equal in all ways to men.
May the fourteen and all other women killed by men rest in peace.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 46
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Pro-Coalition Rally in Halifax
There was a great pro-coalition rally in Halifax today at Maritime Hall.
Here are some of the pictures:
My sign for the rally:
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 47
Here are some of the pictures:
My sign for the rally:
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 47
The Governor General Has Sabotaged Parliamentary Democracy
The Governor General has allowed the Prime Minister to prorogue Parliament just a few weeks after the session began, without anything passing the House and simply to allow the government to escape the loss of the confidence. The Governor General has fundamentally sabotaged the nature of parliamentary democracy by allowing Harper to govern without Parliament. This is contrary to the basic nature of representative parliamentary democracy.
The government must be responsible to the Parliament, and must be able to sustain the confidence of Parliament. The Governor General by granting prorogation has allowed Harper to abrogate this principle, and ought to be ashamed of herself. She has allowed a lying, mendacious, cowardly and bullying Prime Minister to display contempt for Parliament and for the institution of the Constitution of Canada. She ought to be ashamed of herself.
This is absolutely unprecedented in Canada. The Governor General has effectively allowed Harper to do what he wants because he doesn't like what Parliament is up to. The institution of the Governor General has betrayed Canada. The Governor General has endorse a campaign of lies by the Prime Minister that is unprecedented in Canada. She has impeached the honour of her office by endorsing it. That she would allow Harper to display such craven cowardice as to suspend Parliament to avoid the loss of confidence is absolutely shameful.
No government without Parliament! Constitution now!
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 47
The government must be responsible to the Parliament, and must be able to sustain the confidence of Parliament. The Governor General by granting prorogation has allowed Harper to abrogate this principle, and ought to be ashamed of herself. She has allowed a lying, mendacious, cowardly and bullying Prime Minister to display contempt for Parliament and for the institution of the Constitution of Canada. She ought to be ashamed of herself.
This is absolutely unprecedented in Canada. The Governor General has effectively allowed Harper to do what he wants because he doesn't like what Parliament is up to. The institution of the Governor General has betrayed Canada. The Governor General has endorse a campaign of lies by the Prime Minister that is unprecedented in Canada. She has impeached the honour of her office by endorsing it. That she would allow Harper to display such craven cowardice as to suspend Parliament to avoid the loss of confidence is absolutely shameful.
No government without Parliament! Constitution now!
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 47
Tenterhooks
I can hardly take it. Harper's been in with the Governor-General for an hour now, and still nothing.
Harper has stirred up the greatest political and economic crisis in decades, and is deliberately fanning the flames of a national unity debate to save his own job. He has done this with LIES.
I'll have more once we find out if Harper got an answer from the G-G.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 47
Harper has stirred up the greatest political and economic crisis in decades, and is deliberately fanning the flames of a national unity debate to save his own job. He has done this with LIES.
I'll have more once we find out if Harper got an answer from the G-G.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 47
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
Will He or Won't He
The question now is whether Harper will prorogue Parliament to avoid an official loss of the confidence of the House. I really hope he doesn't, both because I want to see the coalition come to pass and because if he does it will be a huge blow to parliamentary democracy.
The fundamental principle of parliamentary democracy is that the government remains in office so long as it enjoys the confidence of the Parliament, and in Canada that means the House of Commons. The corollary of this principle is that the executive branch governs with the Parliament, so that if the confidence is lost, the Parliament may signal that that is so, and the government leaves office. If the Governor-General grants Harper a prorogation, the executive will functionally be governing without Parliament, in violation of the basic principles of Parliamentary democracy.
Prorogation, for those that don't know, ends the session of the Parliament, until it is recalled for a new session with a new Speech from the Throne. This kills all bills on the order paper and sends MPs back to their constituencies. Essentially, the legislative branch of government is dismissed, while the executive continues to govern. There is no precedent in Canada for a prorogation so early in a first session of a Parliament, and no precedent for a prorogation before anything other than the motion approving the Speech from the Throne has passed the House.
If Harper obtains a prorogation from the Governor General, it will be a blatant admission that the government no longer enjoys the confidence of the House, and will represent a brazen abuse of the Prime Minister's power to advise the Governor-General on the convention and dismissal of Parliament. If there is a prorogation, it will be a clear statement that Harper's government is illegitimate, and governing in an anti-democratic and anti-constitutional manner.
So the question now is, as I posed above, will he or won't he. In the House today, Harper said that his government would take all legal means to avoid defeat (and some of his supporters in Alberta are committing sedition by saying they will take up arms if he falls). I take this to mean that he is threatening the coalition with a prorogation. I still don't know if he would do it though, given how massively illegitimate it would render his government.
I want to hear from everyone who reads this, do you think he will or won't? I'm interested in what you think regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum.
By the way, there are going to be rallies across the country on Thursday in support of the coalition for change. I'll be out in Halifax. You can find information on the rallies, including whether there is one in your neck of the woods at http://www.makeparliamentwork.com/.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 48
The fundamental principle of parliamentary democracy is that the government remains in office so long as it enjoys the confidence of the Parliament, and in Canada that means the House of Commons. The corollary of this principle is that the executive branch governs with the Parliament, so that if the confidence is lost, the Parliament may signal that that is so, and the government leaves office. If the Governor-General grants Harper a prorogation, the executive will functionally be governing without Parliament, in violation of the basic principles of Parliamentary democracy.
Prorogation, for those that don't know, ends the session of the Parliament, until it is recalled for a new session with a new Speech from the Throne. This kills all bills on the order paper and sends MPs back to their constituencies. Essentially, the legislative branch of government is dismissed, while the executive continues to govern. There is no precedent in Canada for a prorogation so early in a first session of a Parliament, and no precedent for a prorogation before anything other than the motion approving the Speech from the Throne has passed the House.
If Harper obtains a prorogation from the Governor General, it will be a blatant admission that the government no longer enjoys the confidence of the House, and will represent a brazen abuse of the Prime Minister's power to advise the Governor-General on the convention and dismissal of Parliament. If there is a prorogation, it will be a clear statement that Harper's government is illegitimate, and governing in an anti-democratic and anti-constitutional manner.
So the question now is, as I posed above, will he or won't he. In the House today, Harper said that his government would take all legal means to avoid defeat (and some of his supporters in Alberta are committing sedition by saying they will take up arms if he falls). I take this to mean that he is threatening the coalition with a prorogation. I still don't know if he would do it though, given how massively illegitimate it would render his government.
I want to hear from everyone who reads this, do you think he will or won't? I'm interested in what you think regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum.
By the way, there are going to be rallies across the country on Thursday in support of the coalition for change. I'll be out in Halifax. You can find information on the rallies, including whether there is one in your neck of the woods at http://www.makeparliamentwork.com/.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 48
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
Coalition Bloggers
There is a growing network of bloggers out there who are supporting the Liberal-NDP coalition. I'm happy to be one of them.
Ordinarily, I have my qualms about working with the Liberals. They tend to govern as technocratic, corporatist and coldly capitalistic. Their history in government is distressingly similar on fiscal issues to that of the Conservative Party. The difference comes on social issues. While the Liberals may have to be dragged kicking and screaming to modern positions on issues like equal marriage and a woman's right to choose, at least once they get put in the right place on those issues they have a tendency to stay there. Whether this is reflective of the Liberal Party's congenital institutional inertia or not is hard to say, but at least it happens. The Conservatives may be temporarily dragged to a semi-modern position (i.e. equal marriage is a closed issue), but they have a tendency to back-track when we aren't looking, for example bill C-484, the attempt to bestow rights on the collection of cells known as as a foetus.
I find myself in a mirror image position to that of Jason Cherniak. He is a fiscal conservative, and self-identified blue Liberal. Yet he endorses the coalition because the alternative is Stephen Harper. I find myself thinking the same way. I am a socialist, and on the left of the NDP. But I support this coalition, because a) it gets us the most left-wing government we've had in a very long time, and b) because it isn't Stephen Harper.
Harper has done incalculable damage to the institutions of Canadian government, from turning standing committees of the House of Commons into three-ring circuses, to abusing the requirement of confidence to instituting sweeping policy changes without debate in the House through orders in council and the discretion of ministers of the Crown. If nothing else, the Liberals have a respect for the institutions of this country that the Conservatives lack. The NDP does as well. We (and I) may want to see the Senate abolished, as an example, but we believe that while it is in existence it has important work to do. We believe that the courts of this country should not be packed with partisan judges picked for their ideology. We believe that government can be a force for good.
If people from blue Liberals to socialists can support this deal, I believe that this is an indication that it will have wide support in Canada, Conservative hysterics and freeping of call-in shows and Internet forums notwithstanding. To show my support, I've added the badge that now appears at the top of the right hand column of my blog. Eventually, there will also be a website (coalitionbloggers.ca). If you want to contribute to the discussion about what that site should do or be, feel free to post comments either here, or on Dipper Chick. If you are a blogger supportive of the coalition, I urge you to add the badge to your blog as well. The code can be found at the link above.
We have to remember that what the coalition is doing is legal and constitutional, but more over it is both ethical and moral. We are faced by a regressive Conservative government instituting policy direct from the Reform Party platform of the mid-1990s, none of which was mentioned in the election campaign. The CPC may have withdrawn their attempts to eliminate public electoral funding and the right to strike of public sector workers, but they are still trying to legislate away the gains of a decade and a half for women employed in the public service, and if we let them off the hook this time, you can bet that those other measures will be back.
Now is not the time for half-measures. We must be resolute, and we must be strong. Now is manifestly the time for actions, and a better way forward is in our grasp. If we don't take it now, it will recede out of reach for years. Write to your MP and the Governor General (info@gg.ca). Let them know that you support the coalition. Remember the immortal words of Tommy Douglas: "courage, my friends. 'Tis not too late to make a better world." And never let anyone tell you it can't be done.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 49
Ordinarily, I have my qualms about working with the Liberals. They tend to govern as technocratic, corporatist and coldly capitalistic. Their history in government is distressingly similar on fiscal issues to that of the Conservative Party. The difference comes on social issues. While the Liberals may have to be dragged kicking and screaming to modern positions on issues like equal marriage and a woman's right to choose, at least once they get put in the right place on those issues they have a tendency to stay there. Whether this is reflective of the Liberal Party's congenital institutional inertia or not is hard to say, but at least it happens. The Conservatives may be temporarily dragged to a semi-modern position (i.e. equal marriage is a closed issue), but they have a tendency to back-track when we aren't looking, for example bill C-484, the attempt to bestow rights on the collection of cells known as as a foetus.
I find myself in a mirror image position to that of Jason Cherniak. He is a fiscal conservative, and self-identified blue Liberal. Yet he endorses the coalition because the alternative is Stephen Harper. I find myself thinking the same way. I am a socialist, and on the left of the NDP. But I support this coalition, because a) it gets us the most left-wing government we've had in a very long time, and b) because it isn't Stephen Harper.
Harper has done incalculable damage to the institutions of Canadian government, from turning standing committees of the House of Commons into three-ring circuses, to abusing the requirement of confidence to instituting sweeping policy changes without debate in the House through orders in council and the discretion of ministers of the Crown. If nothing else, the Liberals have a respect for the institutions of this country that the Conservatives lack. The NDP does as well. We (and I) may want to see the Senate abolished, as an example, but we believe that while it is in existence it has important work to do. We believe that the courts of this country should not be packed with partisan judges picked for their ideology. We believe that government can be a force for good.
If people from blue Liberals to socialists can support this deal, I believe that this is an indication that it will have wide support in Canada, Conservative hysterics and freeping of call-in shows and Internet forums notwithstanding. To show my support, I've added the badge that now appears at the top of the right hand column of my blog. Eventually, there will also be a website (coalitionbloggers.ca). If you want to contribute to the discussion about what that site should do or be, feel free to post comments either here, or on Dipper Chick. If you are a blogger supportive of the coalition, I urge you to add the badge to your blog as well. The code can be found at the link above.
We have to remember that what the coalition is doing is legal and constitutional, but more over it is both ethical and moral. We are faced by a regressive Conservative government instituting policy direct from the Reform Party platform of the mid-1990s, none of which was mentioned in the election campaign. The CPC may have withdrawn their attempts to eliminate public electoral funding and the right to strike of public sector workers, but they are still trying to legislate away the gains of a decade and a half for women employed in the public service, and if we let them off the hook this time, you can bet that those other measures will be back.
Now is not the time for half-measures. We must be resolute, and we must be strong. Now is manifestly the time for actions, and a better way forward is in our grasp. If we don't take it now, it will recede out of reach for years. Write to your MP and the Governor General (info@gg.ca). Let them know that you support the coalition. Remember the immortal words of Tommy Douglas: "courage, my friends. 'Tis not too late to make a better world." And never let anyone tell you it can't be done.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 49
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Coalition Deal Completed
The NDP and Liberals have reached a deal to form a coalition government, according to the CBC. According to this deal, the NDP will get 25% of the Cabinet seats, and will not get to name either the Deputy Prime Minister or the Finance Minister.
This is a good thing. I was hoping for a few more Cabinet seats (more like 33%), but this is good. This gives the chance to put in place a government working in the interests of Canadians unlike the hopelessly partisan and bully-boy Conservatives. Given the opportunity, this new government will bring in fiscal stimulus, and avoid the harms of a couple more years of Harper.
I'm not going to be focusing on the blatant illegalities of the taping of the NDP caucus meeting by the Conservatives. It is a sideshow they are setting up to try to distract from their completely flop of a fiscal update. I won't be distracted, and I urge the entire progressive community online not to get caught up in it either.
I'll have more information on the coalition deal as it emerges.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 51
This is a good thing. I was hoping for a few more Cabinet seats (more like 33%), but this is good. This gives the chance to put in place a government working in the interests of Canadians unlike the hopelessly partisan and bully-boy Conservatives. Given the opportunity, this new government will bring in fiscal stimulus, and avoid the harms of a couple more years of Harper.
I'm not going to be focusing on the blatant illegalities of the taping of the NDP caucus meeting by the Conservatives. It is a sideshow they are setting up to try to distract from their completely flop of a fiscal update. I won't be distracted, and I urge the entire progressive community online not to get caught up in it either.
I'll have more information on the coalition deal as it emerges.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 51
Canada Has Our Very Own Watergate
Buried in a CBC News story about how the Conservatives are moving up the date of the budget, we find this:
Even if criminal proceedings are not commenced against the dirty-tricks types in the Conservative Party, the Speaker should find the whole load of them to be in contempt of Parliament. Bugging the meetings of members is pretty much the definition of breaching the Parliamentary privileges of MPs.
The Harper government is inept, dishonest, desperate, and now criminal. When the Conservatives admit to a crime to cling to power, it is over. THROW THE BUMS OUT! COALITION NOW!
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 51
The Conservatives intercepting a telephone call is caught neatly under s. 184(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada which reads:The Conservatives, meanwhile, have released details of an NDP caucus meeting they say was held in the form of a conference call on Saturday.
The Tories say they released a portion of the transcript on Sunday because it shows the NDP was working very closely with the Bloc long before last Thursday's economic update to replace the government.
"Let's just say we have strategies," NDP Leader Jack Layton said during the call. "This whole thing would not have happened if the moves hadn't been made with the Bloc to lock them in early because you couldn't put three people together in … three hours. The first part was done a long time ago. I won't go into details."
NDP deputy leader Thomas Mulcair said at a news conference that nothing in the NDP-BQ talks is any different than the contingency planning Stephen Harper himself engaged in with the two parties during the last Liberal minority in 2004.
He said the meeting, whose co-ordinates were inadvertently given to a Tory, were illegally recorded and broadcast and that the party has consulted two experts including a legal specialist for an opinion on whether the Criminal Code was violated.
184. (1) Every one who, by means of any electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device, wilfully intercepts a private communication is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
This is the Harper Conservatives bugging their political opponents. And who knows how long they have been doing this for. This is criminal. This is Watergate-type. Clearly the high-level Conservatives knew about this, and authorized both the bugging and the release of the information. They knew about it, and by authorizing the release of the recording, they abetted the offence after the fact. If Harper knew about and authorized it, he is equally guilty and should go on trial.
Even if criminal proceedings are not commenced against the dirty-tricks types in the Conservative Party, the Speaker should find the whole load of them to be in contempt of Parliament. Bugging the meetings of members is pretty much the definition of breaching the Parliamentary privileges of MPs.
The Harper government is inept, dishonest, desperate, and now criminal. When the Conservatives admit to a crime to cling to power, it is over. THROW THE BUMS OUT! COALITION NOW!
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 51
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Harper Lies About the Constitution
Shame on Mr. Harper. Last night, at his specially constructed and pseudo-Presidential podium in the foyer of the House of Commons (does he really think he is too good to go to the Press Gallery as every PM before him has done?), Steveo lied to the people of Canada.
He got up on his hind legs and started spewing nonsense about how the opposition could not form a coalition and govern without an election. This is bullshit, and what is worse I'm sure he knows it.
The King-Byng affair, as well as numerous precedents in both the provincial legislatures and the British Parliament, affirms that the Queen or her representative has every right in a situation where the government loses the confidence of the House during the first sitting of the Parliament to ask an opposition party leader to try to assemble a government that can gain the confidence of the House. This is the whole point of our parliamentary system, and it is why the opposition is known as both "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition" and the "government-in-waiting."
Steveo has unleashed his con-bots across the Internet, all screeching the same lines about a coalition government being anti-democratic and even anti-constitutional. This is part of a coordinated attempt to politically undermine the coming coalition government, but it is being done by lying to the people of Canada.
Part of the reason for the ferocity, and mendacity, of this response to the looming collapse of the government is surely fear. The Conservatives very likely cooked the books in the financial statement if not before, and they are deadly afraid of the opposition getting into the Ministry of Finance and finding the documents to prove it. The Conservatives have, in their three years in control of the government, surely lied and covered up multitudinous sins. Once the opposition gets in there, they are all coming out, and the Conservatives know that it will be doled out piecemeal, and they will be completely sunk in the next election. And so they are afraid.
And the result of that fear is the lies being spouted to the Canadian public by Conservatives from Steveo on down. This government lies to the public, and if for no other reason it thereby renders itself unfit to govern.
Update: The Con-bots now have their talking points for call-in shows. The CPC has a whole site set up for their partisans who are apparently either too stupid to think what to say for themselves or too untrustworthy to be allowed to come up with their own lines. You can find the CPC talking-points site here. I got their talking-points for the coalition negotiations (yes I was bad and put in a fake postal code), and here they are:
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 52
He got up on his hind legs and started spewing nonsense about how the opposition could not form a coalition and govern without an election. This is bullshit, and what is worse I'm sure he knows it.
The King-Byng affair, as well as numerous precedents in both the provincial legislatures and the British Parliament, affirms that the Queen or her representative has every right in a situation where the government loses the confidence of the House during the first sitting of the Parliament to ask an opposition party leader to try to assemble a government that can gain the confidence of the House. This is the whole point of our parliamentary system, and it is why the opposition is known as both "Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition" and the "government-in-waiting."
Steveo has unleashed his con-bots across the Internet, all screeching the same lines about a coalition government being anti-democratic and even anti-constitutional. This is part of a coordinated attempt to politically undermine the coming coalition government, but it is being done by lying to the people of Canada.
Part of the reason for the ferocity, and mendacity, of this response to the looming collapse of the government is surely fear. The Conservatives very likely cooked the books in the financial statement if not before, and they are deadly afraid of the opposition getting into the Ministry of Finance and finding the documents to prove it. The Conservatives have, in their three years in control of the government, surely lied and covered up multitudinous sins. Once the opposition gets in there, they are all coming out, and the Conservatives know that it will be doled out piecemeal, and they will be completely sunk in the next election. And so they are afraid.
And the result of that fear is the lies being spouted to the Canadian public by Conservatives from Steveo on down. This government lies to the public, and if for no other reason it thereby renders itself unfit to govern.
Update: The Con-bots now have their talking points for call-in shows. The CPC has a whole site set up for their partisans who are apparently either too stupid to think what to say for themselves or too untrustworthy to be allowed to come up with their own lines. You can find the CPC talking-points site here. I got their talking-points for the coalition negotiations (yes I was bad and put in a fake postal code), and here they are:
Not only is it stupid and inane, it is full of lies.Opposition lacks mandate to take power
- Is anyone else outraged by what the Opposition Parties are doing in Ottawa?
- We’re not even two months removed from the last election, and a group of backroom politicians are going to pick who the Prime Minister is. Canadians didn’t vote for this person. We don’t even know who this person will be.
- Not a single voter voted for a Liberal-NDP coalition. Certainly not a single voter voted for the Liberals to form a coalition with the separatists in the Bloc.
- Add – what’s worse the Liberals even promised that there wouldn’t be a coalition with the NDP – this is all about power, all about money and they don’t even want to face the voters
- This is what bothers me the most. The Conservatives won the election. The Opposition keeps saying that the Conservatives have to respect the will of the voters that this is a minority and so on. …how about Liberals, NDP and Bloc respecting the will of the voters when they said “YOU LOSE”.
- And what’s this going to do to the economy. I’m sorry, I don’t care how desperate the Liberals are – giving socialists (Jack Layton) and separatists (Gilles Duceppe) a veto over every decision in government – that is a recipe for total economic disaster.
- Here is what is bothering me about all of this backroom opposition coalition talk.
- Sure it bothers me that parties Canadian rejected are trying to seize power through the back door.
- But how more phony could these guys be? I mean, I follow the news, virtually every single day you have Harper or Flaherty out there telegraphing exactly what they plan to do with the economy. And not once did you hear the Liberals, NDP or separatists talking about toppling the government in response.
- No – do you know what set this off. When Flaherty said he was going to take taxpayer-funded subsidies away from the opposition. Now there is a reason to try and overturn an election– because the Conservatives the audacity to say “Hey, it’s a recession, maybe you should take your nose out of the trough.”
- And I wish the media would be more clear on this point – the opposition aren’t being singled out by this fact the Conservatives stand to lose the most money of all. The only difference is that Canadians are voluntarily giving money the Conservatives, so they don’t need taxpayer handouts. The only reason the opposition would be hurt more is because nobody wants to donate to them. They should be putting their efforts towards fixing that problem.
- I don’t want another election. But what I want even less is a surprise backroom Prime Minister whom I never even had the opportunity to vote for or against. What an insult to democracy.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 52
Friday, November 28, 2008
Harper Scampers to Save His Government
Craven Stephen Harper, the true small-man of Confederation has pushed back the opposition day scheduled for Monday by a week in a desperate attempt to save his government that is suddenly on the rocks. Flim-Flam Flaherty's economic update included more poison pills than the opposition could ever have been rationally expected to swallow, including not only the elimination of public campaign financing, but also a frontal attack on collective bargaining rights and the equal rights of women.
Flaherty took union busting to the next level, declaring that the government would use the power of the Crown to roll back collective bargaining and arbitral gains on wage increases, and eliminate the right to strike over wages until 2010-11. Not only is this piece of legislation mean spirited in the extreme, it is quite possibly illegal in light of the Supreme Court decision made last year that overturned BC's Bill 29 which tried to do much the same thing. Workers have a right to the gains they have made, and they have the right to withhold labour over whatever they please.
The government has also made a frontal assault on the pay equity of women, by stating in the economic update that pay equity would not be retroactive, and the right to recourse to the Canadian Human Rights Commission would be removed. This is insane. In the years since the courts forced the government into pay equity, this is the biggest attempt to go back on what was ordered. I don't know where the government gets off trying to eliminate the rights of women retroactively.
This stuff is red meat right out of the reform party platforms of the mid-1990s. This is our "moderate" Prime Minister. The opposition parties were never going to accept this, and it was a red flag. This is our government's way of kicking their opponents when they are down, like a bully on the school yard. We are being governed by people who behave like maladjusted eight year olds.
Dipper Chick summed up my feelings about the coalition quite nicely:
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 53
Flaherty took union busting to the next level, declaring that the government would use the power of the Crown to roll back collective bargaining and arbitral gains on wage increases, and eliminate the right to strike over wages until 2010-11. Not only is this piece of legislation mean spirited in the extreme, it is quite possibly illegal in light of the Supreme Court decision made last year that overturned BC's Bill 29 which tried to do much the same thing. Workers have a right to the gains they have made, and they have the right to withhold labour over whatever they please.
The government has also made a frontal assault on the pay equity of women, by stating in the economic update that pay equity would not be retroactive, and the right to recourse to the Canadian Human Rights Commission would be removed. This is insane. In the years since the courts forced the government into pay equity, this is the biggest attempt to go back on what was ordered. I don't know where the government gets off trying to eliminate the rights of women retroactively.
This stuff is red meat right out of the reform party platforms of the mid-1990s. This is our "moderate" Prime Minister. The opposition parties were never going to accept this, and it was a red flag. This is our government's way of kicking their opponents when they are down, like a bully on the school yard. We are being governed by people who behave like maladjusted eight year olds.
Dipper Chick summed up my feelings about the coalition quite nicely:
A month or so ago, I never thought that there would be a set of circumstances that would make me supportive of the NDP forming a coalition with the Liberals. But here we are.This coalition is necessary, but Stephen Harper will do everything he can to avoid it. He's going to take the week of grace he fabricated for himself and try to turn the Canadian people against his bully-boy government. I have faith that the Canadian people will see through the thing tissue of rationalizations, excuses and lies that Harper is putting forth.
...
I am not feeling the slightest bit complacent about any of this. The Conservatives need to be stopped. I still don't trust the Liberals, and I still believe that an NDP government is what Canadians really need. But right here and now, with things being as they are, a Liberal-NDP coalition is the best option.
My apprehension comes from wondering if the Liberals can be fair while negotiating the terms of the coalition. I have a hard time believing that they can put their sense of entitlement aside and offer the NDP a significant enough role to form a true coalition. But if they can come to an agreement that is fair, I say take Harper down.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 53
Coalition Government Looks Increasingly Likely
The news is breaking today that Jean Chretien and Ed Broadbent have been brokering the coalition talks between the Liberals and NDP. These two elder statesmen are working together to produce a workable coalition government that will be supported by the BQ.
Various opposition MPs have been sounding increasingly sure that the government will fall next week, including a statement by NDP Deputy Leader and Finance Critic Thomas Mulcair during question period today. If the Conservatives don't blink, they will get voted out of power by the House.
Even if the Conservatives do blink on the campaign financing, they may get voted out anyway, due to the failure to provide fiscal stimulus in the economic update. At this point, a coalition is entirely preferable to any Conservative government at all.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 53
Various opposition MPs have been sounding increasingly sure that the government will fall next week, including a statement by NDP Deputy Leader and Finance Critic Thomas Mulcair during question period today. If the Conservatives don't blink, they will get voted out of power by the House.
Even if the Conservatives do blink on the campaign financing, they may get voted out anyway, due to the failure to provide fiscal stimulus in the economic update. At this point, a coalition is entirely preferable to any Conservative government at all.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 53
Coalition Talk Intensifies in Ottawa
The talk of a coalition government between the Liberals and NDP supported by the BQ is intensifying in Ottawa, with reports now surfacing of second-stage talks taking place, including between the opposition leaders personally. There looks to be one big bump on the road to a centre-left coalition government: the Dion factor. The NDP and BQ have signalled that they will not support a government that installs Dion as leader. This has led to an effort within the LPC to remove Dion as a leader early, and install an interim leader to see the LPC through until the May election. The problem is whether the country is prepared to accept an interim Prime Minister.
I see one way to resolve this problem, though it is admittedly massively unlikely to happen: have Jack Layton lead the government and become Prime Minister. He is a leader solidly in control of his party, and he isn't going anywhere. He has high positive ratings with the Canadian public, and is generally well respected. This is, of course, unlikely to happen because the Liberals know that letting Layton be Prime Minister is almost as deadly to their long-term interests as allowing the end of the per-vote subsidy. It would bestow huge legitimacy on the NDP federally, and cut further into the remaining base of left-liberals in the Liberal Party of Canada.
At the very least, the NDP needs to get Cabinet positions out of this deal, and Jack Layton needs to become Deputy Prime Minister and hold an important Cabinet portfolio (Finance would be good but is unlikely, Industry might be more reasonable). This is an opportunity to give a voice to the 62% of voters who did not choose the Conservative Party of Canada to govern this country. This is also a chance to prove that Parliamentary but not electoral coalitions can work as well, which is a key part of a proportional representation system.
As Dr. Dawg put it on his blog, "Form a coalition. That is all." As cliche as it is to say, the Chinese character for "crisis" incorporates both "danger" and "opportunity." And opportunity is knocking.
Update: CBC is running a poll on the cuts to democracy, which you can find here. It's currently being freeped (800+ anti-democracy votes in the past two hours, when it was running even just before then). I encourage everyone who reads this and cares about the issues to counter-freep it.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 53
I see one way to resolve this problem, though it is admittedly massively unlikely to happen: have Jack Layton lead the government and become Prime Minister. He is a leader solidly in control of his party, and he isn't going anywhere. He has high positive ratings with the Canadian public, and is generally well respected. This is, of course, unlikely to happen because the Liberals know that letting Layton be Prime Minister is almost as deadly to their long-term interests as allowing the end of the per-vote subsidy. It would bestow huge legitimacy on the NDP federally, and cut further into the remaining base of left-liberals in the Liberal Party of Canada.
At the very least, the NDP needs to get Cabinet positions out of this deal, and Jack Layton needs to become Deputy Prime Minister and hold an important Cabinet portfolio (Finance would be good but is unlikely, Industry might be more reasonable). This is an opportunity to give a voice to the 62% of voters who did not choose the Conservative Party of Canada to govern this country. This is also a chance to prove that Parliamentary but not electoral coalitions can work as well, which is a key part of a proportional representation system.
As Dr. Dawg put it on his blog, "Form a coalition. That is all." As cliche as it is to say, the Chinese character for "crisis" incorporates both "danger" and "opportunity." And opportunity is knocking.
Update: CBC is running a poll on the cuts to democracy, which you can find here. It's currently being freeped (800+ anti-democracy votes in the past two hours, when it was running even just before then). I encourage everyone who reads this and cares about the issues to counter-freep it.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 53
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Conservatives Pushing Forward With Cuts to Democracy
According to Norman Spector, the Conservative attempt to repeal democracy (and thanks to Devin Johnston for that wonderful phrase) will be put to a vote before the scheduled rising of the House of Commons on Dec. 12. The Conservatives are trying to take advantage of the short time frame since the last election to push through this assault on democracy.
Is this supposed to be yet another example of Stephen Harper's ability as a brilliant political tactician? He has forced the opposition parties into a corner, from which there is no escaping. This policy would cripple the NDP and finish the Liberals and BQ. No matter that it is confidence, they cannot vote for this, they cannot let it pass.
Harper is taking an awful risk with this proposal. He is gambling that:
If the opposition parties find some steel in their spines and fight this, they may force the government to back down and remove it from the economic update. That is the best possible result at this point, because we don't need a constitutional crisis at the same time as an economic crisis.
I encourage everyone who reads this to get in touch with their MP as I have done to let MPs know that this is not on, and that Canadians support public election financing, and that we support democracy.
Update: Talk of a coalition government is swirling around Parliament Hill in the wake of this plan. I will be very interested to see what comes out of this, since the government could fall on an unrelated Ways and Means motion as early as tomorrow.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 55
Is this supposed to be yet another example of Stephen Harper's ability as a brilliant political tactician? He has forced the opposition parties into a corner, from which there is no escaping. This policy would cripple the NDP and finish the Liberals and BQ. No matter that it is confidence, they cannot vote for this, they cannot let it pass.
Harper is taking an awful risk with this proposal. He is gambling that:
- The opposition parties don't have the guts to bring his government down over this; and
- The Governor General wont risk a repeat of the King-Byng Affair by refusing him dissolution and giving the Liberals a chance to govern with the support of the NDP and BQ.
If the opposition parties find some steel in their spines and fight this, they may force the government to back down and remove it from the economic update. That is the best possible result at this point, because we don't need a constitutional crisis at the same time as an economic crisis.
I encourage everyone who reads this to get in touch with their MP as I have done to let MPs know that this is not on, and that Canadians support public election financing, and that we support democracy.
Update: Talk of a coalition government is swirling around Parliament Hill in the wake of this plan. I will be very interested to see what comes out of this, since the government could fall on an unrelated Ways and Means motion as early as tomorrow.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 55
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Crass Conservative Games
Did anyone out there fall for the line from the Conservatives that they were looking for a new spirit of cooperation? Don't worry if you did, so did the whole media. Now, however, only twelve days into the new Parliament comes word that Harper is going to try to end the $1.95/vote/year subsidy to political parties that was intended to replace corporate and union donations, as well as to compensate for the cap on personal donations.
This is an astonishingly crass move from the Conservatives, since they stand to lose the least from this. Losing the subsidy would lose the Conservatives 37% of their income for the year, whereas losing it would cost the NDP 57% of their income, cost the Block a whopping 86% of their income, and (this is the critical one) the Liberals 63%. The Conservatives are trying to exploit the fact that they have a massive fundraising edge on the other parties to cripple them, in the name of austerity. This is, quite frankly, an attempt to apply the coup de grace to the Liberal Party of Canada by extra-electoral means. It is distinctly undemocratic, and in fact anti-democratic.
This is stupid. The subsidy supports a system that reduces donor influence in the political process, and only costs $30 million. This is another one of those mean spirited Conservative cuts, but this one is profoundly anti-democratic as well. The electoral financing system is not a tool to be used for partisan political advantage.
This is likely to be the beginning of a long list of cuts to progressive programmes that the Conservatives will propose in the name of austerity. They will use this as an excuse to cut programmes they don't like, while still handing over $50 billion in tax cuts to corporations. No economist in their right mind would suggest cutting corporate taxes in the middle of a recession like this. The correct response is spending, and deficit spending if necessary, to directly stimulate the economy, and create jobs for the unemployed. This puts money directly into the hands of the worst affected, as opposed to corporate tax cuts, which gives money to the most well off while cutting what goes to the poor.
Back to the main point however, this economic meltdown is being exploited for partisan and ideological gains by the Conservatives, and they should be ashamed.
Update: As Devin Johnston mentioned in the comment, he has started a Facebook group, which you can find here. As of the time of writing this, it has 45 members. I encourage everyone who reads this and cares about the issue, or about democracy in general, to sign up.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 55
This is an astonishingly crass move from the Conservatives, since they stand to lose the least from this. Losing the subsidy would lose the Conservatives 37% of their income for the year, whereas losing it would cost the NDP 57% of their income, cost the Block a whopping 86% of their income, and (this is the critical one) the Liberals 63%. The Conservatives are trying to exploit the fact that they have a massive fundraising edge on the other parties to cripple them, in the name of austerity. This is, quite frankly, an attempt to apply the coup de grace to the Liberal Party of Canada by extra-electoral means. It is distinctly undemocratic, and in fact anti-democratic.
This is stupid. The subsidy supports a system that reduces donor influence in the political process, and only costs $30 million. This is another one of those mean spirited Conservative cuts, but this one is profoundly anti-democratic as well. The electoral financing system is not a tool to be used for partisan political advantage.
This is likely to be the beginning of a long list of cuts to progressive programmes that the Conservatives will propose in the name of austerity. They will use this as an excuse to cut programmes they don't like, while still handing over $50 billion in tax cuts to corporations. No economist in their right mind would suggest cutting corporate taxes in the middle of a recession like this. The correct response is spending, and deficit spending if necessary, to directly stimulate the economy, and create jobs for the unemployed. This puts money directly into the hands of the worst affected, as opposed to corporate tax cuts, which gives money to the most well off while cutting what goes to the poor.
Back to the main point however, this economic meltdown is being exploited for partisan and ideological gains by the Conservatives, and they should be ashamed.
Update: As Devin Johnston mentioned in the comment, he has started a Facebook group, which you can find here. As of the time of writing this, it has 45 members. I encourage everyone who reads this and cares about the issue, or about democracy in general, to sign up.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 55
Monday, November 24, 2008
Shenanigans
I call shenanigans on the banks of Canada. You may recall that not that long ago, the government of Canada made $50 billion available to banks in case they were hit hard by the financial crisis in the United States. And yet today we get a statement from the CEO of TD Bank that it is highly unlikely that the bank will be cutting dividends.
This drives me nuts. For those of you that don't know, dividends are how corporations return profits to shareholders. The board of directors decides how much to return, and generally this is only supposed to be done when the company is profitable. These bastards are using public money to pay dividends to shareholders when the money was intended to help them survive a big hit from the financial crisis. These capitalists are robbing Canadians blind, and this crap flies under the radar, being mentioned only in coverage like the Report on Business.
Canadians should be up in arms that we are being fleeced, yet again, by the big banks. They must honestly think we're all stupid to pull this crap. Let's show them that we're not. Let's show them that they can't steal from the Canadian people. This is garbage.
How many people voted Conservative and not NDP in the naive belief that Conservatives would be better managers of the economy and the public purse? The NDP even ran ads telling people that exactly this would happen, including pictures of money being divvied up on boardroom tables. And that is exactly what we got. What is it going to take for people to realize that Conservatives are frauds?
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 57
This drives me nuts. For those of you that don't know, dividends are how corporations return profits to shareholders. The board of directors decides how much to return, and generally this is only supposed to be done when the company is profitable. These bastards are using public money to pay dividends to shareholders when the money was intended to help them survive a big hit from the financial crisis. These capitalists are robbing Canadians blind, and this crap flies under the radar, being mentioned only in coverage like the Report on Business.
Canadians should be up in arms that we are being fleeced, yet again, by the big banks. They must honestly think we're all stupid to pull this crap. Let's show them that we're not. Let's show them that they can't steal from the Canadian people. This is garbage.
How many people voted Conservative and not NDP in the naive belief that Conservatives would be better managers of the economy and the public purse? The NDP even ran ads telling people that exactly this would happen, including pictures of money being divvied up on boardroom tables. And that is exactly what we got. What is it going to take for people to realize that Conservatives are frauds?
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 57
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Harper, the Coming Deficit and Conservative Class Warfare
Stephen Harper continues to move away from his declarations during the election campaign that if we were going to have a recession here in Canada we would already have had one, and that the fundamentals of the economy are strong. Today at the APEC summit, he was, to use the Toronto Star's language, "[drawing] on memories of the Great Depression." Is it not strange, that he can change his tune so radically over the course of a month and a half, from excoriating Stephane Dion for refusing to absolutely rule out running a deficit, to making the arguments for why we should be deficit spending.
There are two explanations for this incongruity, when you take into consideration that many economists saw this recession coming down the pipes at least a year in advance, and some saw it coming longer away than that (Marx saw it coming 130 years ago). The first possible explanation is that Harper is fundamentally incompetent at the role of managing the economy. If he, with an MA in economics, was unable to see this coming 45 days ago, when the majority of the western world could, then he is entirely incompetent to be making the big decisions. Of we adopt this explanation, he was too focused on blind partisanship to actually see that the train was about to go off the rails. The second possible explanation is that Harper deliberately deceived the Canadian people, that he lied to us. This explanation is supported by the rapid about-face he performed when it became undeniably clear that the economy of the western world was headed into the shitter.
Harper has already committed the country to a $50 billion bank bailout, which when you consider the proportional sizes of the Canadian and American economies is actually a bigger bailout than the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. He wants to send the country further into debt to bail out the auto industry by handing them a no-strings-attached cheque. And mark my words, this deficit that he created to bail out failing capitalists is going to be used as an excuse to cut services for the working class. This is the Conservative modus operandi. Transfer wealth to capitalists. Use resulting deficit to justify programme cuts. Rinse. Repeat.
Now, I think that so long as we are operating under a market-capitalist system, Keynesian spending is a good way to stimulate the economy, but it has to be targeted correctly. Shovelling money into the gaping maw of transnational capital is not correct targeting. The best way to stimulate the economy is through direct transfers to the most impoverished. These are the people living pay cheque to pay cheque, and spending every cent that comes in on necessities of life like food, clothing and rent. These people will not take the transfers and squirrel them away. They will put every last cent back into circulation, thus getting maximum value for the government's stimulus dollar. Whereas transfers that benefit the rich wind up being saved, taken out of circulation and ultimately sent overseas to nontaxable Swiss bank accounts. Supposed stimulus measures targeted at the rich are a deception. They will not stimulate the economy because the money won't go into circulation, it will go into bank accounts to be inactive and gather interest.
I understand that many people are worried about the looming failure of the big three American automakers. So am I, since there are plenty of jobs that will be lost, with the resulting knock-on effects through the economy. That is why I support finding a way to save them, but not in their present form. The only way I would ever support a bailout is if it resulted in the public acquiring, on a permanent basis, majority equity and voting control over the companies. That way, the government can insure that the bailout money goes to the right places, not into paying dividends and obscene executive pay packages. The government can make sure that the companies are serving the public interest by building fuel-economical (not the same as fuel-efficient, though generally fuel economy requires fuel efficiency) vehicles for sale to the public, as well as retooling some plants to produce public transit vehicles like buses, street-cars, light-rail vehicles and trains to meet the longer-term requirement for effective, efficient and widespread public mass transit.
Nationalization is ultimately the best bet precisely because the nationalized companies can be made to serve the needs of the people, rather than the people serving the needs of the companies and their controlling capitalists. Government ought to be for the people, not for capital, but I can't call to mind a time when Canada truly had government for the people. In fact, the only government I can think of that was ever really for the people in Canadian history was the CCF government of Tommy Douglas in Saskatchewan that introduced many great programmes, built many strong Crown corporations, substantially increased the standard of living across Saskatchewan, and managed to do all of this while running 17 straight balanced budgets, making that government the most effective manager of public funds in Canadian history.
Conservatives like to wrap themselves in the mantle of sound fiscal management, but their version of sound management is transferring wealth to the wealthy, and making up for it by cutting services to the working class. That isn't sound fiscal management, that is the class warfare for which they so readily decry socialists. The only difference is that conservatives around the world wage class warfare on the working class. Since the capitalists and their political puppets on the right are waging class warfare on the workers already, it is time that the working class said "enough already" and started to wage class warfare back. Enough sitting around and passively taking it. It's time to organize and fight back.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 58
There are two explanations for this incongruity, when you take into consideration that many economists saw this recession coming down the pipes at least a year in advance, and some saw it coming longer away than that (Marx saw it coming 130 years ago). The first possible explanation is that Harper is fundamentally incompetent at the role of managing the economy. If he, with an MA in economics, was unable to see this coming 45 days ago, when the majority of the western world could, then he is entirely incompetent to be making the big decisions. Of we adopt this explanation, he was too focused on blind partisanship to actually see that the train was about to go off the rails. The second possible explanation is that Harper deliberately deceived the Canadian people, that he lied to us. This explanation is supported by the rapid about-face he performed when it became undeniably clear that the economy of the western world was headed into the shitter.
Harper has already committed the country to a $50 billion bank bailout, which when you consider the proportional sizes of the Canadian and American economies is actually a bigger bailout than the $700 billion Wall Street bailout. He wants to send the country further into debt to bail out the auto industry by handing them a no-strings-attached cheque. And mark my words, this deficit that he created to bail out failing capitalists is going to be used as an excuse to cut services for the working class. This is the Conservative modus operandi. Transfer wealth to capitalists. Use resulting deficit to justify programme cuts. Rinse. Repeat.
Now, I think that so long as we are operating under a market-capitalist system, Keynesian spending is a good way to stimulate the economy, but it has to be targeted correctly. Shovelling money into the gaping maw of transnational capital is not correct targeting. The best way to stimulate the economy is through direct transfers to the most impoverished. These are the people living pay cheque to pay cheque, and spending every cent that comes in on necessities of life like food, clothing and rent. These people will not take the transfers and squirrel them away. They will put every last cent back into circulation, thus getting maximum value for the government's stimulus dollar. Whereas transfers that benefit the rich wind up being saved, taken out of circulation and ultimately sent overseas to nontaxable Swiss bank accounts. Supposed stimulus measures targeted at the rich are a deception. They will not stimulate the economy because the money won't go into circulation, it will go into bank accounts to be inactive and gather interest.
I understand that many people are worried about the looming failure of the big three American automakers. So am I, since there are plenty of jobs that will be lost, with the resulting knock-on effects through the economy. That is why I support finding a way to save them, but not in their present form. The only way I would ever support a bailout is if it resulted in the public acquiring, on a permanent basis, majority equity and voting control over the companies. That way, the government can insure that the bailout money goes to the right places, not into paying dividends and obscene executive pay packages. The government can make sure that the companies are serving the public interest by building fuel-economical (not the same as fuel-efficient, though generally fuel economy requires fuel efficiency) vehicles for sale to the public, as well as retooling some plants to produce public transit vehicles like buses, street-cars, light-rail vehicles and trains to meet the longer-term requirement for effective, efficient and widespread public mass transit.
Nationalization is ultimately the best bet precisely because the nationalized companies can be made to serve the needs of the people, rather than the people serving the needs of the companies and their controlling capitalists. Government ought to be for the people, not for capital, but I can't call to mind a time when Canada truly had government for the people. In fact, the only government I can think of that was ever really for the people in Canadian history was the CCF government of Tommy Douglas in Saskatchewan that introduced many great programmes, built many strong Crown corporations, substantially increased the standard of living across Saskatchewan, and managed to do all of this while running 17 straight balanced budgets, making that government the most effective manager of public funds in Canadian history.
Conservatives like to wrap themselves in the mantle of sound fiscal management, but their version of sound management is transferring wealth to the wealthy, and making up for it by cutting services to the working class. That isn't sound fiscal management, that is the class warfare for which they so readily decry socialists. The only difference is that conservatives around the world wage class warfare on the working class. Since the capitalists and their political puppets on the right are waging class warfare on the workers already, it is time that the working class said "enough already" and started to wage class warfare back. Enough sitting around and passively taking it. It's time to organize and fight back.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 58
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Canada Signs Free-Trade Agreement with Colombia
Well, this isn't good news. It seems that Stephen Harper craftily, and without any fanfare, signed a free-trade agreement with Colombia today. That's right, the same Colombia that allows right-wing paramilitaries to kidnap and execute union leaders (see, for example, here, here or here) and journalists (see here, here or here). The same Colombia that tramples on the rights of women (e.g. this), the indigenous people (e.g. this) and LGBT folks (see here). This is not a government with which Canada should be consorting.
Free trade is also a deeply problematic notion for the working class on both sides of the equation. In Canada, we lose yet more manufacturing jobs to places where the companies can pay peanuts, and in Colombia they get goods dumped on their markets at very low prices, essentially forcing local competitors out of business. This is especially a problem in the market for food. History shows that free trade in food leads to market gluts and greatly depressed prices. This means that small farmers can no longer make the income they need to stay in business. They are forced off the land and wind up in the barrios of the big cities, living in the attendant squalor, because there are some meagre jobs to be had. This is a recurring problem all over the world, wherever the west gets to dump its surplus grains.
The only people that free trade works for are the capitalists. The Canadian capitalists get to slough of the expense of paying decent union wages in Canada in exchange for the pathetic wages that workers will accept in Colombia, and their profits go up. The Colombian capitalists get to find an increased market for the goods that they make in Colombia now that all the factories are moving down there, plus they get to force more and more small farmers off their land, clearing the way for large plantations growing cash crops for export. For them, it's a win-win.
The deal supposedly has a clause requiring respect for human rights, but the only penalty imposed for breaking the clause is payment into a fund for strengthening human rights. Ooh boy, what a penalty, a fine into a fund that they can probably tap themselves. That's a deterrent. And our hopeless leader, Stevie Harper, seems to think that such a pathetic clause "answers" all the criticisms. Well guess what Stevie. Not even close.
Oh wait, I get it. The Conservatives don't much care for women, aboriginal people or gays and lesbians. That would be why they don't care that Colombia stomps on the rights of all three groups. It's so obvious now.
Stevie, your little deal goes against Canadian values of tolerance and social justice. Shame on you.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 59
Free trade is also a deeply problematic notion for the working class on both sides of the equation. In Canada, we lose yet more manufacturing jobs to places where the companies can pay peanuts, and in Colombia they get goods dumped on their markets at very low prices, essentially forcing local competitors out of business. This is especially a problem in the market for food. History shows that free trade in food leads to market gluts and greatly depressed prices. This means that small farmers can no longer make the income they need to stay in business. They are forced off the land and wind up in the barrios of the big cities, living in the attendant squalor, because there are some meagre jobs to be had. This is a recurring problem all over the world, wherever the west gets to dump its surplus grains.
The only people that free trade works for are the capitalists. The Canadian capitalists get to slough of the expense of paying decent union wages in Canada in exchange for the pathetic wages that workers will accept in Colombia, and their profits go up. The Colombian capitalists get to find an increased market for the goods that they make in Colombia now that all the factories are moving down there, plus they get to force more and more small farmers off their land, clearing the way for large plantations growing cash crops for export. For them, it's a win-win.
The deal supposedly has a clause requiring respect for human rights, but the only penalty imposed for breaking the clause is payment into a fund for strengthening human rights. Ooh boy, what a penalty, a fine into a fund that they can probably tap themselves. That's a deterrent. And our hopeless leader, Stevie Harper, seems to think that such a pathetic clause "answers" all the criticisms. Well guess what Stevie. Not even close.
Oh wait, I get it. The Conservatives don't much care for women, aboriginal people or gays and lesbians. That would be why they don't care that Colombia stomps on the rights of all three groups. It's so obvious now.
Stevie, your little deal goes against Canadian values of tolerance and social justice. Shame on you.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 59
Thursday, November 20, 2008
The Liberal Leadership Race
Things seem to be firming up in the race to take over the most haplessly managed party in Canada, this side of the Greens. It's been a long time since we've seen a new entrant to the race since Iggy formally announced (and no-one was surprised). Indeed, there's been a veritable parade of notable, and not so notable, Liberals to declare that they will not be seeking the leadership.
The highest profile person to declare a non-interest in leading the Liberal Party of Canada is Gerrard Kennedy (sorry for the National Post link, but it was the first one that came to hand and I can't be fussed to look elsewhere). To that, I say "good", and wipe my brow, because if he had been Liberal leader there would be no chance to knock him off next election. Now there is. Also, he remains an empty suit with a good haircut, and unqualified to lead the Liberals.
It is increasingly looking like a three-man race, starring Dominic LeBlanc, Bob Rae and Iggy in what is already turning into an entertaining gong show, what with the debate fiasco last week. We know where Iggy and Rae stand, generally speaking (though with Rae you never can be sure), but LeBlanc is more of an unknown quantity, lacking much profile beyond his home province of New Brunswick. This is something like Alex Atamenenko (good guy though he is) theoretically running for the leadership of the NDP. He is a second generation politician, as his father was also a Liberal MP, and LeBlanc's highest position was parliamentary secretary to various ministers. There is not much information available that I could find with regard to his political leanings, but I have heard some mutterings (mostly from the bobbleheads on the CBC's At Issue panel) that he is trying to wrap himself up in the generational change flag hoisted by the victory of Barack Obama in the States.
Unless someone new and high profile joins the race, and aside from Dalton McGuinty I can't think of who that would be, this contest will come down to Rae and Iggy, with LeBlanc shouting from the sidelines. Both of these two major candidates have significant baggage though, and both of them will face attacks from both the right and the left should they get elected leader.
Something about Iggy, besides the right-wing policies really grates on me, and from what I can tell most of my political junky law school friends (who I should say are mostly Conservatives): his condescension. He spends most of his career in the States, and then deigns to come back and grace us with his presence and wisdom. I think he may well see himself in the mould of a Platonic philosopher-king, to some extent like Pierre Trudeau. Sorry Iggy, but that isn't what Canada wants or needs right now. And you've made quite clear where your ideas would lead us: American imperialistic aggression as tag alongs. So no, thanks, Iggy. If you get defeated one more time, why not go back to your position at Harvard. I'm sure they're still holding it open for you.
As for Rae, I just plain don't like him. He sold out the NDP when in government, betraying the principles of the party and our supporters in the labour movement. He governed ineptly, allowed a free vote on equal spousal benefits for same-sex couples (the measure failed), and blackened the name of the Ontario and federal NDP for the better part of a generation. He is a pro-Israeli hawk and shows a marked void of any sort of principles whatsoever. But then again, he is a high-profile Liberal. That comes with the territory.
In summary, and I'm sure surprising no-one, I don't like any of the contenders for the Liberal leadership. However, in my mind Iggy represents the best bet to kick Harper out of office while still allowing for further NDP growth, so I hope he wins. He won't get a majority, but if he gets a minority the NDP can wield some influence, and we can get better governance out of it. Yes, I know that's selfish and partisan. So sue me.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 61
The highest profile person to declare a non-interest in leading the Liberal Party of Canada is Gerrard Kennedy (sorry for the National Post link, but it was the first one that came to hand and I can't be fussed to look elsewhere). To that, I say "good", and wipe my brow, because if he had been Liberal leader there would be no chance to knock him off next election. Now there is. Also, he remains an empty suit with a good haircut, and unqualified to lead the Liberals.
It is increasingly looking like a three-man race, starring Dominic LeBlanc, Bob Rae and Iggy in what is already turning into an entertaining gong show, what with the debate fiasco last week. We know where Iggy and Rae stand, generally speaking (though with Rae you never can be sure), but LeBlanc is more of an unknown quantity, lacking much profile beyond his home province of New Brunswick. This is something like Alex Atamenenko (good guy though he is) theoretically running for the leadership of the NDP. He is a second generation politician, as his father was also a Liberal MP, and LeBlanc's highest position was parliamentary secretary to various ministers. There is not much information available that I could find with regard to his political leanings, but I have heard some mutterings (mostly from the bobbleheads on the CBC's At Issue panel) that he is trying to wrap himself up in the generational change flag hoisted by the victory of Barack Obama in the States.
Unless someone new and high profile joins the race, and aside from Dalton McGuinty I can't think of who that would be, this contest will come down to Rae and Iggy, with LeBlanc shouting from the sidelines. Both of these two major candidates have significant baggage though, and both of them will face attacks from both the right and the left should they get elected leader.
Something about Iggy, besides the right-wing policies really grates on me, and from what I can tell most of my political junky law school friends (who I should say are mostly Conservatives): his condescension. He spends most of his career in the States, and then deigns to come back and grace us with his presence and wisdom. I think he may well see himself in the mould of a Platonic philosopher-king, to some extent like Pierre Trudeau. Sorry Iggy, but that isn't what Canada wants or needs right now. And you've made quite clear where your ideas would lead us: American imperialistic aggression as tag alongs. So no, thanks, Iggy. If you get defeated one more time, why not go back to your position at Harvard. I'm sure they're still holding it open for you.
As for Rae, I just plain don't like him. He sold out the NDP when in government, betraying the principles of the party and our supporters in the labour movement. He governed ineptly, allowed a free vote on equal spousal benefits for same-sex couples (the measure failed), and blackened the name of the Ontario and federal NDP for the better part of a generation. He is a pro-Israeli hawk and shows a marked void of any sort of principles whatsoever. But then again, he is a high-profile Liberal. That comes with the territory.
In summary, and I'm sure surprising no-one, I don't like any of the contenders for the Liberal leadership. However, in my mind Iggy represents the best bet to kick Harper out of office while still allowing for further NDP growth, so I hope he wins. He won't get a majority, but if he gets a minority the NDP can wield some influence, and we can get better governance out of it. Yes, I know that's selfish and partisan. So sue me.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 61
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
