One of the gravest assaults on civil liberties by George Bush II was the idea of "free speech zones" in which protest would be allowed - in blatant violation of the right to free speech contained in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. And now these abominations on freedom have come to Canada.
For the G20 summit taking place in Toronto in late June, the Integrated Security Unit (a concretion of the Toronto Police Service, the Ontario Provincial Police and the RCMP have declared a "designated speech zone" for protests. This is obscene. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms declares that all of Canada is, subject to reasonable limits, a designated speech zone. The notion that only in certain areas are the people to be free to exercise their constitutional rights is antithetical to free expression. Protesters are supposed to be mollified by the fact that there will be a "live feed" to the convention centre where the high priests of capital will be meeting so that the protests will be "visible." A few monitors showing protesters does not recompense us for our lost liberty.
I was prepared to accept the idea that there might be an area in which protests would be prohibited. I wasn't happy about the idea, but I was prepared to go along with it. But the notion that the entire city, with the exception of Queen's Park, is going to be an area in which free expression is to be suppressed is intolerable. The G20 has the right to meet, but they don't have the right to meet out of sight and out of mind of the people objecting to them. Shame on the police for going out of their way to curb our liberty. What a great commitment to constitutional governance they have.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Friday, May 14, 2010
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Surprise! The Liberals are also Complicit in Detainee Torture
Up until today, the public evidence indicated only that Conservative ministers had known, and done nothing about, the fact that detainees were being tortured by the Afghan authorities. Well not any more.
CBC is reporting that a Canadian diplomat, Eileen Olexiuk, raised concerns that detainees were being tortured in 2005, while Mr. Dithers himself (Paul Martin) was still in office. And apparently her concerns were ignored. As Ms. Olexiuk put it, based on the response she got from the government, she didn't think that anyone cared.
Shame on the Liberals. There are MPs in the Liberal caucus now who were ministers in 2005. Why haven't they sounded the alarm? Oh right, because that would make their party look bad. I shouldn't have expected anything different out of the Liberals. Two leaders later and its still the same thing. I guess with the Liberals the old aphorism holds true: plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
CBC is reporting that a Canadian diplomat, Eileen Olexiuk, raised concerns that detainees were being tortured in 2005, while Mr. Dithers himself (Paul Martin) was still in office. And apparently her concerns were ignored. As Ms. Olexiuk put it, based on the response she got from the government, she didn't think that anyone cared.
Shame on the Liberals. There are MPs in the Liberal caucus now who were ministers in 2005. Why haven't they sounded the alarm? Oh right, because that would make their party look bad. I shouldn't have expected anything different out of the Liberals. Two leaders later and its still the same thing. I guess with the Liberals the old aphorism holds true: plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Prorogation, Again
So, prorogation, and my working myself into a stew over it, is what has dragged me back to blogging. I never intend to take breaks from it, but then the force of inertia keeps me quiet. Anyhow.
Harper has, as I'm sure everyone knows, prorogued the House and Senate again. After just a year. But I suppose this is longer than the 13 sitting days before the 2008 prorogation. Thank goodness for small blessings?
The decision to prorogue is crass, cynical political manipulation. Much of the speculation about the reason for the prorogation is that it allows the government to avoid the hideously embarrassing revelations that were coming daily from the Special Committee on Afghanistan. I have no doubt that this was a significant part of the decision, but I don't think it was the primary motivation. Those revelations, as terrible as they were (especially considering that they were leading down the road to a Somalia-like situation where Canadian troops will, one day, be shown to have been involved in the torture of Afghans) were not sticking the government. Frankly, and disgustingly, most Canadians do not care. We have become so insular and inward looking that we simply don't care that this government has been committing blatant violations of Canada's obligations at international law under the Geneva Conventions.
No, I believe that the primary reason Harper got our incompetent nitwit of a Governor-General to prorogue the Parliament was because Parliamentary committees are reconstituted after a prorogation. This is important because shortly Harper will be appointing five new Senators (all doubtless Conservative flacks and lackies) and will have achieved a working plurality in the Senate. This will be reflected in the composition of the new Senate committees, allowing the government to force items through the Senate and eliminate the ability for the Liberals to two-facedly support legislation in the Commons and delay it to death in the Senate. Because the Commons liberals are spineless little twits, and refuse to oppose Harper's legislative agenda on anything this now means that Harper's reactionary legislation will go through unobstructed.
As an aside, how did it only take four years of appointments for Harper to undo the effects of 13 years of Liberal appointments to the Senate? Were the Liberals appointing doddering old folks for most of that time?
Regardless of the motives, this prorogation is a baldly undemocratic move. Whether or not doing so was the primary intention behind obtaining prorogation, it did in fact wipe out the Special Committee on Afghanistan and its inconvenient daily revelations. But that is not out of the ordinary for this government. Whether it is muzzling public servants who are inconveniently serving the public rather than the Party (see, for example, Kevin Page the Parliamentary Budget Officer, or the entire Military Police Complaints Commission or the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission), stopping Olympic critics at the borders, proroguing Parliament, circulating a dirty tricks handbook to stymie the works of Parliamentary committees or bringing the House to a shamefully low level of decorum, this government has taken a dump on democracy at every turn. I don't know how long the Canadian people will stand for it. I can only hope that at some point they will say "enough!" Then again, socialists like me have been waiting for that kind of moment for a long time.
Harper has, as I'm sure everyone knows, prorogued the House and Senate again. After just a year. But I suppose this is longer than the 13 sitting days before the 2008 prorogation. Thank goodness for small blessings?
The decision to prorogue is crass, cynical political manipulation. Much of the speculation about the reason for the prorogation is that it allows the government to avoid the hideously embarrassing revelations that were coming daily from the Special Committee on Afghanistan. I have no doubt that this was a significant part of the decision, but I don't think it was the primary motivation. Those revelations, as terrible as they were (especially considering that they were leading down the road to a Somalia-like situation where Canadian troops will, one day, be shown to have been involved in the torture of Afghans) were not sticking the government. Frankly, and disgustingly, most Canadians do not care. We have become so insular and inward looking that we simply don't care that this government has been committing blatant violations of Canada's obligations at international law under the Geneva Conventions.
No, I believe that the primary reason Harper got our incompetent nitwit of a Governor-General to prorogue the Parliament was because Parliamentary committees are reconstituted after a prorogation. This is important because shortly Harper will be appointing five new Senators (all doubtless Conservative flacks and lackies) and will have achieved a working plurality in the Senate. This will be reflected in the composition of the new Senate committees, allowing the government to force items through the Senate and eliminate the ability for the Liberals to two-facedly support legislation in the Commons and delay it to death in the Senate. Because the Commons liberals are spineless little twits, and refuse to oppose Harper's legislative agenda on anything this now means that Harper's reactionary legislation will go through unobstructed.
As an aside, how did it only take four years of appointments for Harper to undo the effects of 13 years of Liberal appointments to the Senate? Were the Liberals appointing doddering old folks for most of that time?
Regardless of the motives, this prorogation is a baldly undemocratic move. Whether or not doing so was the primary intention behind obtaining prorogation, it did in fact wipe out the Special Committee on Afghanistan and its inconvenient daily revelations. But that is not out of the ordinary for this government. Whether it is muzzling public servants who are inconveniently serving the public rather than the Party (see, for example, Kevin Page the Parliamentary Budget Officer, or the entire Military Police Complaints Commission or the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission), stopping Olympic critics at the borders, proroguing Parliament, circulating a dirty tricks handbook to stymie the works of Parliamentary committees or bringing the House to a shamefully low level of decorum, this government has taken a dump on democracy at every turn. I don't know how long the Canadian people will stand for it. I can only hope that at some point they will say "enough!" Then again, socialists like me have been waiting for that kind of moment for a long time.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Tell Me Again how the Occupation is Going Well
The New York Times is reporting that in 2008 civilian deaths in Afghanistan rose by forty percent. 40%!
This should put the lie to the bullshit spun by imperialists and colonialists who support the occupation of Afghanistan. When we look at these numbers, we also need to bear in mind that the occupying powers routinely deflate the number of civilian dead by citing many of those killed by the occupation powers as suspected enemy combatants. Killed a child? He was holding a grenade. Blew up a wedding? It was actually a terrorist cover. Shot up a car full of kids? They refused to stop when you screamed at them in English which they don't understand.
The occupation is a colossal scam job. It is a neo-colonialist adventure inscribed on the bodies of the Afghans, whether it is those killed by high altitude bombs, or those tortured into psychosis at Bagram Airbase or Guantanamo Bay. Installinga former Unocal executive a man with highly limited experience (his highest post in any government before 9/11 being deputy foreign minister) as President, and then keeping him in place through elections organized and run by occupying powers is a sham. You can't have free and fair elections under occupation.
But of course, the interest in free and fair elections is part of the myth. If they tried to sell the occupation as securing a pipeline route for oil from the Caspian Sea or as a device to hand over colossal amounts of money to private contractors running a private war, the public would have none of it. Only by running a campaign of lies has public consent for the occupation been mobilized.
Bring the occupation army home now. No more death, no more lies for capitalism.
Thanks to anonymous for the comment below, and I've edited this piece to incorporate that, as well as for a few little spelling errors.
This should put the lie to the bullshit spun by imperialists and colonialists who support the occupation of Afghanistan. When we look at these numbers, we also need to bear in mind that the occupying powers routinely deflate the number of civilian dead by citing many of those killed by the occupation powers as suspected enemy combatants. Killed a child? He was holding a grenade. Blew up a wedding? It was actually a terrorist cover. Shot up a car full of kids? They refused to stop when you screamed at them in English which they don't understand.
The occupation is a colossal scam job. It is a neo-colonialist adventure inscribed on the bodies of the Afghans, whether it is those killed by high altitude bombs, or those tortured into psychosis at Bagram Airbase or Guantanamo Bay. Installing
But of course, the interest in free and fair elections is part of the myth. If they tried to sell the occupation as securing a pipeline route for oil from the Caspian Sea or as a device to hand over colossal amounts of money to private contractors running a private war, the public would have none of it. Only by running a campaign of lies has public consent for the occupation been mobilized.
Bring the occupation army home now. No more death, no more lies for capitalism.
Thanks to anonymous for the comment below, and I've edited this piece to incorporate that, as well as for a few little spelling errors.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Ignatieff Disgraces the Liberal Party, Harper Helps
I know it takes some doing, but Iggy has disgraced the Liberal Party of Canada once again. By voting in favour of the budget, he and his party voted in favour of the roll back of pay equity for women. The Liberals are now against equal pay for work of equal value. It's a sad day.
Pay equity is not some frill that can be cut in hard economic times. It is the absolute right of all women. The Harper-Ignatieff proposal cuts off women's access to the courts. Their alternative? The collective bargaining table. Bzzzt, sorry, try again. This proposal leaves behind all the women who work in non-union workplaces, a staggering 41% of all women who work outside the home.
Obviously, it would be nice if all women worked in unionized work places, but even if they did, denying access to the courts is not an acceptable approach to pay equity.
The Conservative-Liberal attack on pay equity also plays the ostrich when looking at the history of pay equity at the bargaining table. Federal civil servants negotiated pay equity almost twenty years ago, but since then have had to fight tooth and nail in the courts to force successive Liberal and Conservative governments to honour that pledge. Why would anyone be taken in and believe that now will be different. The corporate world is no more friendly to pay equity than our corporate government. They will fight as hard as can be to avoid pay equity obligations.
When pay equity is something to be gained at the negotiating table, it becomes something that can be negotiated away. That is an unacceptable possibility. Further, when pay equity is the subject of negotiation, it loses its rights-based aspect. It occurs to me that this is precisely what the Conservatives and their Liberal lackeys want. They want to move the discussion of equal pay for work of equal value away from a rights discourse. Because they don't seem to favour women's rights at all. Oh, the Liberals mouth the words when the camera is on, but their actions belie them. If they had any positive principles at all, they would have refused to vote for a budget containing the attack on pay equity, especially when they could have had it excised in exchange for their support.
The Liberals are lying, hypocritical assholes, at least their party brass is. We should be ashamed that our country has vacillated between dumb and dumber for better part of 150 years.
Pay equity is not some frill that can be cut in hard economic times. It is the absolute right of all women. The Harper-Ignatieff proposal cuts off women's access to the courts. Their alternative? The collective bargaining table. Bzzzt, sorry, try again. This proposal leaves behind all the women who work in non-union workplaces, a staggering 41% of all women who work outside the home.
Obviously, it would be nice if all women worked in unionized work places, but even if they did, denying access to the courts is not an acceptable approach to pay equity.
The Conservative-Liberal attack on pay equity also plays the ostrich when looking at the history of pay equity at the bargaining table. Federal civil servants negotiated pay equity almost twenty years ago, but since then have had to fight tooth and nail in the courts to force successive Liberal and Conservative governments to honour that pledge. Why would anyone be taken in and believe that now will be different. The corporate world is no more friendly to pay equity than our corporate government. They will fight as hard as can be to avoid pay equity obligations.
When pay equity is something to be gained at the negotiating table, it becomes something that can be negotiated away. That is an unacceptable possibility. Further, when pay equity is the subject of negotiation, it loses its rights-based aspect. It occurs to me that this is precisely what the Conservatives and their Liberal lackeys want. They want to move the discussion of equal pay for work of equal value away from a rights discourse. Because they don't seem to favour women's rights at all. Oh, the Liberals mouth the words when the camera is on, but their actions belie them. If they had any positive principles at all, they would have refused to vote for a budget containing the attack on pay equity, especially when they could have had it excised in exchange for their support.
The Liberals are lying, hypocritical assholes, at least their party brass is. We should be ashamed that our country has vacillated between dumb and dumber for better part of 150 years.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Coalition is Dead
Ignatieff has, today, killed the chance to remove the Conservatives from power. He has killed the coalition by supporting the Conservative budget, and that means that the NDP will no longer enter coalition with the Liberals. With the coalition option off the table, then the only choice when Harper falls is an election, which the Liberals are unprepared to fight and have no money to fight it with. This means we are set for a re-run of Milquetoast Dion propping up the Conservatives while they run roughshod over Canadian values.
Iggy has failed the test of leadership, and has ended that moment of hope that there was in late 2008.
Iggy has failed the test of leadership, and has ended that moment of hope that there was in late 2008.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
The Budget is a Bust
As I feared, there are major tax cuts in this budget. The Conservatives are cutting taxes by $1.9 billion this year, and $2 billion on a continuing basis by moving the tax brackets upward. I will admit, that these are not the worst tax cuts there could have been, there could have been corporate income tax cuts, or cuts for the top tax bracket. The cuts that are in this budget do help to fight bracket creep, and that is generally speaking a good thing. These cuts are not, however, targeted to help the poorest of the poor, and those earning the least, those for whom tax cuts flow directly back into the economy in the form of spending on staples like food and clothing.
Also bad, is $4 billion over two years in tax credits for home renovations. This is a stupid way of doing things. Firstly, the credit isn't tied to any environmental objective. Someone expanding their monster home to build a heated swimming pool would get this credit the same as someone who is renovating their home to put in solar panels, geothermal heat sinks and improved insulation. Secondly, this programme requires individuals to outlay, and then claim back on their tax returns. This is stupid and produces unnecessary paper shuffling. The better way is simply for the government to directly reimburse for costs of pro-environmental renovations.
A good thing is to see extended EI benefits, to fifty weeks. But very bad is that there is no expanded eligibility. Part of the problem with the EI programme now is that only a tiny percentage of people who pay into it will ever be able to collect. The government should have expanded eligibility rules to ensure that more laid-off workers have access to the plan.
The budget includes $4 billion over two years for new infrastructure projects. This is paltry compared to the demand that is out there, and the massive infrastructure debt that this country faces. Public transit projects alone could gobble up all of this money.
Where is the money for social housing? Where is the money for retraining programmes for laid-off workers?
The deficit for this year is expected to be $33.7 billion, for 2010-2011 $29.8 billion, for 2011-2012 $13 billion and for 2012-2013 $7.3 billion. That means that the government expects to lose $83.8 billion over the next four years. That undoes almost a decade of debt repayment that was bought with the suffering of Canadians from slashed healthcare transfers, cuts to education, the outright theft of the EI surplus and a myriad of other cuts.
This budget is a bust, and if the Liberals support it, as far as I am concerned the coalition is dead.
Update: On further review, this budget is even more garbage than I thought it was. It places a huge load on the provinces and the municipalities to provide matching funds for infrastructure projects, which is insane since cities can't run deficits. The feds can borrow at a much lower interest rate than provinces. Those jurisdictions that cannot come up with the matching funds will be unable to access the federal money. This budget is a sham. Further, it is based on the 2008 fiscal statement (you know, the one that produced the first major constitutional crisis in a decade), and therefore includes by reference the elimination of pay equity, the attack on workers' rights and the ending of public campaign financing.
With regard to EI, I should add that the lack of increased eligibility is a disgrace, since the government blatantly stole $50 billion from the EI surplus during the 1990s and 2000s to pay for corporate tax cuts.
For an excellent explanation of why this budget will not stimulate the economy, see The Progressive Economics Forum.
Also bad, is $4 billion over two years in tax credits for home renovations. This is a stupid way of doing things. Firstly, the credit isn't tied to any environmental objective. Someone expanding their monster home to build a heated swimming pool would get this credit the same as someone who is renovating their home to put in solar panels, geothermal heat sinks and improved insulation. Secondly, this programme requires individuals to outlay, and then claim back on their tax returns. This is stupid and produces unnecessary paper shuffling. The better way is simply for the government to directly reimburse for costs of pro-environmental renovations.
A good thing is to see extended EI benefits, to fifty weeks. But very bad is that there is no expanded eligibility. Part of the problem with the EI programme now is that only a tiny percentage of people who pay into it will ever be able to collect. The government should have expanded eligibility rules to ensure that more laid-off workers have access to the plan.
The budget includes $4 billion over two years for new infrastructure projects. This is paltry compared to the demand that is out there, and the massive infrastructure debt that this country faces. Public transit projects alone could gobble up all of this money.
Where is the money for social housing? Where is the money for retraining programmes for laid-off workers?
The deficit for this year is expected to be $33.7 billion, for 2010-2011 $29.8 billion, for 2011-2012 $13 billion and for 2012-2013 $7.3 billion. That means that the government expects to lose $83.8 billion over the next four years. That undoes almost a decade of debt repayment that was bought with the suffering of Canadians from slashed healthcare transfers, cuts to education, the outright theft of the EI surplus and a myriad of other cuts.
This budget is a bust, and if the Liberals support it, as far as I am concerned the coalition is dead.
Update: On further review, this budget is even more garbage than I thought it was. It places a huge load on the provinces and the municipalities to provide matching funds for infrastructure projects, which is insane since cities can't run deficits. The feds can borrow at a much lower interest rate than provinces. Those jurisdictions that cannot come up with the matching funds will be unable to access the federal money. This budget is a sham. Further, it is based on the 2008 fiscal statement (you know, the one that produced the first major constitutional crisis in a decade), and therefore includes by reference the elimination of pay equity, the attack on workers' rights and the ending of public campaign financing.
With regard to EI, I should add that the lack of increased eligibility is a disgrace, since the government blatantly stole $50 billion from the EI surplus during the 1990s and 2000s to pay for corporate tax cuts.
For an excellent explanation of why this budget will not stimulate the economy, see The Progressive Economics Forum.
The Budget, and the Coalition's Last Chance
Tomorrow, Finance Minister and Flim-Flam-Artist-in-Chief Jim Flaherty will deliver the federal budget for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Much of the budget has already been leaked, in defiance of long-standing trends of budget confidentiality. The Conservatives appear to be set to spend like drunken sailors on a variety of areas. The spending seems, for the most part, to be focussed on good things (though as the NDP has been pointing out all day, the Conservatives can't really be trusted to deliver on this stuff, since they keep re-announcing the same money over and over). Concerningly, however, is that it has been indicated that the budget will contain broad-based tax cuts.
As I wrote a while ago, tax cuts are not stimulus, no matter how much the government would like us to believe the Chicago School, neo-liberal orthodoxy that if you free the market, greater prosperity will follow. That has been proven time and again, from the Southern Cone of Latin America to the post-Communist economies of the former Soviet Block, to the former Asian Tigers. Neo-liberal orthodoxy produces fantastic riches for an elite few, but produces planned misery for the vast bulk of the population. Neo-liberalism produces a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich, and produces the most astonishingly unequal societies on the face of the earth.
If this budget includes broad-based tax cuts, those will not be stimulus, those will drag the federal curent accounts budget into a structural deficit. Reducing revenue is the most astonishingly inappropriate thing for the government to do when major fiscal stimulus is needed.
The Liberals have this one opportunity to prove that they have grown a spine. If they vote for this budget, and for the con artists who have put it together, they will have proven themselves cowards, shrinking in the face of Conservative lies and bullying. However if they vote against, they will have proven a willingness to find an alternative within our constitutional structures, and without forcing the expense of another election on the people of Canada. Of course, all of that depends on the Governor General not disgracing herself again when Harper asks her for dissolution and a new election.
If the Liberals knuckle under, that will be it for the coalition. There is no point in any kind of cooperation with a Liberal Party that is staggering drunkenly to the right under Michael Ignatieff who is quickly proving once again that the Liberals will say anything and stand for nothing.
Tomorrow will be interesting.
As I wrote a while ago, tax cuts are not stimulus, no matter how much the government would like us to believe the Chicago School, neo-liberal orthodoxy that if you free the market, greater prosperity will follow. That has been proven time and again, from the Southern Cone of Latin America to the post-Communist economies of the former Soviet Block, to the former Asian Tigers. Neo-liberal orthodoxy produces fantastic riches for an elite few, but produces planned misery for the vast bulk of the population. Neo-liberalism produces a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich, and produces the most astonishingly unequal societies on the face of the earth.
If this budget includes broad-based tax cuts, those will not be stimulus, those will drag the federal curent accounts budget into a structural deficit. Reducing revenue is the most astonishingly inappropriate thing for the government to do when major fiscal stimulus is needed.
The Liberals have this one opportunity to prove that they have grown a spine. If they vote for this budget, and for the con artists who have put it together, they will have proven themselves cowards, shrinking in the face of Conservative lies and bullying. However if they vote against, they will have proven a willingness to find an alternative within our constitutional structures, and without forcing the expense of another election on the people of Canada. Of course, all of that depends on the Governor General not disgracing herself again when Harper asks her for dissolution and a new election.
If the Liberals knuckle under, that will be it for the coalition. There is no point in any kind of cooperation with a Liberal Party that is staggering drunkenly to the right under Michael Ignatieff who is quickly proving once again that the Liberals will say anything and stand for nothing.
Tomorrow will be interesting.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Montreal to Ban Masks at Protests
Of all the foolish stupidness in the world, this may not rate that high, but it is pretty damn foolish and stupid. The Montreal Gazette is reporting that the City of Montreal plans to ban the wearing of masks or face coverings at public demonstrations (as a side note, why this is in the "Business" section of the Gazette is beyond me).
This bylaw is quite possibly unconstitutional on two grounds. First, and more questionably, this bylaw is potentially in violation of the constitutional division of powers. This law bans a behaviour and attaches a penalty, with no connection to any provincial head of power that I can think of under the Constitution. This risks a finding that the law is, in pith and substance, criminal law and therefore ultra vires the province (and therefore the city, which derives all of its powers from the province). This is more shaky, because a good constitutional lawyer can make arguments for connection to a provincial head of power surprisingly easily. Second, this bylaw clearly runs afoul of the guarantee of freedom of expression in s. 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Many people wear masks to protests to parody a politician or world figure with whom they disagree. That is clearly conveying meaning, and therefore it fits within the rubric of s. 2. There may also be an issue of denial of liberty without the principles of fundamental justice since a law like this is dramatically over-broad, and would catch far more people the occasional yahoo that starts trouble a rally. The real question is whether it would survive the s. 1 test of being demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
I don't see any real or pressing need for this ban. Sure, at some protests a few masked idiots decide to start violence, but many people who wear masks or face coverings do so only to convey a political meaning, without any sinister intent. This is a massive and unnecessary intrusion into the civil liberties of protesters in Montreal.
A tightly focused law is the only way this would be acceptable, and to write such a law would be almost impossible. Any such law gives enormous discretion in enforcement to police officers. Frankly given the behaviour of police officers in Quebec, most damningly the agents provocateur placed by the Surete du Quebec at the Security and Prosperity Partnership summit in Montebello a while ago, I don't see any reason to trust Quebec police with such discretion.
A law like this is also unnecessary. If the masked individuals are causing property damage or assaulting people, then arrest them and charge them with that. Arrest for wearing a mask is simply a form of guilt by association and preventative arrest. Our legal mechanisms have always been sufficient to deal with idiot anarcho-vandalists in the past, and they remain so now. This law is offensive, excessive and redundant, serving only to provide prosecutors with a means of loading the bill against defendants. The City of Montreal should see sense, and drop this law.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 1 (oh dear gawd, I can't wait for it to be over)
This bylaw is quite possibly unconstitutional on two grounds. First, and more questionably, this bylaw is potentially in violation of the constitutional division of powers. This law bans a behaviour and attaches a penalty, with no connection to any provincial head of power that I can think of under the Constitution. This risks a finding that the law is, in pith and substance, criminal law and therefore ultra vires the province (and therefore the city, which derives all of its powers from the province). This is more shaky, because a good constitutional lawyer can make arguments for connection to a provincial head of power surprisingly easily. Second, this bylaw clearly runs afoul of the guarantee of freedom of expression in s. 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Many people wear masks to protests to parody a politician or world figure with whom they disagree. That is clearly conveying meaning, and therefore it fits within the rubric of s. 2. There may also be an issue of denial of liberty without the principles of fundamental justice since a law like this is dramatically over-broad, and would catch far more people the occasional yahoo that starts trouble a rally. The real question is whether it would survive the s. 1 test of being demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
I don't see any real or pressing need for this ban. Sure, at some protests a few masked idiots decide to start violence, but many people who wear masks or face coverings do so only to convey a political meaning, without any sinister intent. This is a massive and unnecessary intrusion into the civil liberties of protesters in Montreal.
A tightly focused law is the only way this would be acceptable, and to write such a law would be almost impossible. Any such law gives enormous discretion in enforcement to police officers. Frankly given the behaviour of police officers in Quebec, most damningly the agents provocateur placed by the Surete du Quebec at the Security and Prosperity Partnership summit in Montebello a while ago, I don't see any reason to trust Quebec police with such discretion.
A law like this is also unnecessary. If the masked individuals are causing property damage or assaulting people, then arrest them and charge them with that. Arrest for wearing a mask is simply a form of guilt by association and preventative arrest. Our legal mechanisms have always been sufficient to deal with idiot anarcho-vandalists in the past, and they remain so now. This law is offensive, excessive and redundant, serving only to provide prosecutors with a means of loading the bill against defendants. The City of Montreal should see sense, and drop this law.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 1 (oh dear gawd, I can't wait for it to be over)
Saturday, January 17, 2009
We Get it CBC, There's a Deficit Coming
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm getting really tired of CBC's constant stories about how the upcoming budget is going to run a deficit. My reaction is generally something along the lines of "no shit, Sherlock." Everyone and her dog knew that a deficit was coming, except for the Conservatives well before the failed fiscal update that triggered a constitutional crisis. CBC seems determined to try to scare people with horrible economy stories. It's very reminiscent of Fox News and it's fear factory approach to reporting.
My message to CBC: give it a rest. We know the economy is bad, and we know a deficit is coming. You need to stop telling us to be afraid, to be very afraid, and start treating the Canadian public like a group of rational adults (no matter that we may not behave like it sometimes).
On a positive note, the window for George Bush to pre-emptively pardon his torture-cronies is closing quickly. He's only got eighty-two hours left as Preident.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 3
My message to CBC: give it a rest. We know the economy is bad, and we know a deficit is coming. You need to stop telling us to be afraid, to be very afraid, and start treating the Canadian public like a group of rational adults (no matter that we may not behave like it sometimes).
On a positive note, the window for George Bush to pre-emptively pardon his torture-cronies is closing quickly. He's only got eighty-two hours left as Preident.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 3
Thursday, January 15, 2009
A Momentous Time
As we approach the end of the reign of George Bush II, it becomes evident, to all but the most-close-eyed conservatives the hell to which we've been carried in Bush's hand-basket.
Human disasters are unfolding across the world. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the imperial west is brutally occupying, whether to extract oil or to protect pipeline routes. In Gaza the Palestinians are being slaughtered for political gain, in an appallingly crass, hubristic and hypocritical display. The genocide in Darfur continues to unfold, and American ally states from Lebanon to Pakistan to Georgia have been declaring states of emergency and clamping down on democratic opposition.
The great glory of modern capitalism, our globalized economy, is coming apart at the seams as economies across the world melt down, throwing workers out on the street, and bringing new protestations of Keynesian faith, despite the fact that the supposedly socialistic policy of bailouts simply enriches those already bloated with ill-gotten wealth. Bush and his wild-eyed acolytes of laissez-faire and the unfettered free market have proven to be unspeakable failures at managing the economy, as the ideological bankruptcy of their economic ideologies is proven to be matched only by its moral bankruptcy as in engages in one last orgy of upward redistribution of wealth. Executives get golden parachutes and workers get the soup kitchen line.
As laid out by the late, great, and incomparable Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose in their book Bill of Wrongs, the Bush regime has encouraged an all out assault on the principles of constitutional government in the United States, and this has had knock-on effects across the world. Canada puts in place Gitmo North and imprisons four men for eight years without charge, the opportunity to face their accusers or to know the evidence against them. Great Britain collapses into an agonized security state in which the average citizen of London is recorded on camera three hundred times every day, which would make Big Brother jealous. States in eastern Europe hold and torture men who have been kidnapped by the American government, in a practice called, with a chilling sterility, extraordinary rendition. American puppet regimes in the Middle East torture others, including Maher Arar who was confirmed to have committed no crime.
Bush and his flunkies have radically undermined the emergence of an international legal order, attempting to scuttle the International Criminal Court after securing major concessions. They have sabotaged attempts to save our climate from radical and disastrous change by recanting America's signature on the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. They have undermined the Geneva Conventions on the Law of War by creating the status of illegal enemy combatant that has no basis in law and is simply an excuse to hold the racialized other forever in a legal black hole.
This is but a brief and incomplete catalogue of the worst excesses, and high crimes, of George Bush, called Dubya. But not all is dark.
In the election on Nov. 4, 2008 Americans spoke resoundingly of a desire for change. While they likely will get only cosmetic change out of Barack Obama, Americans were mobilized and involved in politics in a way not seen since the election of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Americans have been jolted out of political apathy, and it is to be hoped that their awakening will be transmitted to the slumbering populations of the rest of the industrialized world.
In Latin America a radical transformation of both economics and politics is gaining steam. A truly democratic and socialist movement has arisen, and is demanding justice and equality for their people, and an end to the domination of their states by their wealthy paleo-colonialist elites and foreign corporations. The people of Venezuela resisted an American-sponsored coup in 2002 that was eerily reminiscent of the coups in the southern cone during the 1970s. The workers and the indigenous populations have reclaimed control of their countries in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador. Centre-leftists have been elected by wide margins in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay. South America faces a revolutionary moment, and it provides a template that can be followed across the South.
As the economy melts down, that defining revolutionary moment spreads into the industrialized economies. It is a self-evident failure of capitalism. Socialists must be ready with alternatives to present, or we will lose this moment, as we lost the moment of the Great Depression.
The last days of George W. Bush are a time for celebration, as the global tyrant leaves the scene. But we can't stop at celebration. We must push for a true revolutionary moment, to bring democratic socialism to all the people of the world.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 6
Human disasters are unfolding across the world. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the imperial west is brutally occupying, whether to extract oil or to protect pipeline routes. In Gaza the Palestinians are being slaughtered for political gain, in an appallingly crass, hubristic and hypocritical display. The genocide in Darfur continues to unfold, and American ally states from Lebanon to Pakistan to Georgia have been declaring states of emergency and clamping down on democratic opposition.
The great glory of modern capitalism, our globalized economy, is coming apart at the seams as economies across the world melt down, throwing workers out on the street, and bringing new protestations of Keynesian faith, despite the fact that the supposedly socialistic policy of bailouts simply enriches those already bloated with ill-gotten wealth. Bush and his wild-eyed acolytes of laissez-faire and the unfettered free market have proven to be unspeakable failures at managing the economy, as the ideological bankruptcy of their economic ideologies is proven to be matched only by its moral bankruptcy as in engages in one last orgy of upward redistribution of wealth. Executives get golden parachutes and workers get the soup kitchen line.
As laid out by the late, great, and incomparable Molly Ivins and Lou Dubose in their book Bill of Wrongs, the Bush regime has encouraged an all out assault on the principles of constitutional government in the United States, and this has had knock-on effects across the world. Canada puts in place Gitmo North and imprisons four men for eight years without charge, the opportunity to face their accusers or to know the evidence against them. Great Britain collapses into an agonized security state in which the average citizen of London is recorded on camera three hundred times every day, which would make Big Brother jealous. States in eastern Europe hold and torture men who have been kidnapped by the American government, in a practice called, with a chilling sterility, extraordinary rendition. American puppet regimes in the Middle East torture others, including Maher Arar who was confirmed to have committed no crime.
Bush and his flunkies have radically undermined the emergence of an international legal order, attempting to scuttle the International Criminal Court after securing major concessions. They have sabotaged attempts to save our climate from radical and disastrous change by recanting America's signature on the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. They have undermined the Geneva Conventions on the Law of War by creating the status of illegal enemy combatant that has no basis in law and is simply an excuse to hold the racialized other forever in a legal black hole.
This is but a brief and incomplete catalogue of the worst excesses, and high crimes, of George Bush, called Dubya. But not all is dark.
In the election on Nov. 4, 2008 Americans spoke resoundingly of a desire for change. While they likely will get only cosmetic change out of Barack Obama, Americans were mobilized and involved in politics in a way not seen since the election of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Americans have been jolted out of political apathy, and it is to be hoped that their awakening will be transmitted to the slumbering populations of the rest of the industrialized world.
In Latin America a radical transformation of both economics and politics is gaining steam. A truly democratic and socialist movement has arisen, and is demanding justice and equality for their people, and an end to the domination of their states by their wealthy paleo-colonialist elites and foreign corporations. The people of Venezuela resisted an American-sponsored coup in 2002 that was eerily reminiscent of the coups in the southern cone during the 1970s. The workers and the indigenous populations have reclaimed control of their countries in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador. Centre-leftists have been elected by wide margins in Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay and Paraguay. South America faces a revolutionary moment, and it provides a template that can be followed across the South.
As the economy melts down, that defining revolutionary moment spreads into the industrialized economies. It is a self-evident failure of capitalism. Socialists must be ready with alternatives to present, or we will lose this moment, as we lost the moment of the Great Depression.
The last days of George W. Bush are a time for celebration, as the global tyrant leaves the scene. But we can't stop at celebration. We must push for a true revolutionary moment, to bring democratic socialism to all the people of the world.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 6
Thursday, January 08, 2009
EI and Stimulus
On Wednesday, the Liberals decided to announce that they want the Harper government to improve EI as part of the budget in order to obtain their support. That's all well and good, but coming from the Liberals, it seems like a rather last minute trip along the road to Damascus. Liberals are the same party that effectively gutted EI in the 1990s to finance their deficit reduction. They stole billions from Canadian workers, and used it to pay down the debt and deficit. I'm glad they've finally seen the light, but it seems rather late.
Improving EI is an excellent way to stimulate the economy, because it keeps families who have lost jobs able to buy their essentials, and pay their bills, which flows money back into the economy. It's also the right thing to do, because these workers have been paying EI premiums for years, and deserve the security it brings, so that losing one's job does not mean an instantaneous disaster. Workers have given their sweat, tears and (far too often) their blood, for this county. It's time for the country to give back to them.
In their Alterative Budget, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives called for the injection of $3.4 billion into the EI programme, to increase benefits to 60% of insurable income, and coverage to fifty weeks. EI is the very definition of counter-cyclical spending, since it spends money when the economy is bad, and saves money when the economy is doing well (at least it saves when the feds don't steal its surplus).
Canadian workers deserve the support of their government, and enriching EI is a good way to give that support. If the Liberals want to get on the pro-worker train, the more the merrier. But they're going to have to prove that they have earned their seats.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 12
Improving EI is an excellent way to stimulate the economy, because it keeps families who have lost jobs able to buy their essentials, and pay their bills, which flows money back into the economy. It's also the right thing to do, because these workers have been paying EI premiums for years, and deserve the security it brings, so that losing one's job does not mean an instantaneous disaster. Workers have given their sweat, tears and (far too often) their blood, for this county. It's time for the country to give back to them.
In their Alterative Budget, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives called for the injection of $3.4 billion into the EI programme, to increase benefits to 60% of insurable income, and coverage to fifty weeks. EI is the very definition of counter-cyclical spending, since it spends money when the economy is bad, and saves money when the economy is doing well (at least it saves when the feds don't steal its surplus).
Canadian workers deserve the support of their government, and enriching EI is a good way to give that support. If the Liberals want to get on the pro-worker train, the more the merrier. But they're going to have to prove that they have earned their seats.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 12
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Tax Cuts Aren't Stimulus
The Finance Minister is an idiot. I'm going to put that out there now. He's also a liar and a crook, but that's a different story. This one is about how Jim Flaherty thinks that tax cuts are a form of counter-cyclical stimulus. He is talking about including tax cuts in the federal budget due at the end of January.
I'm sorry, this is a moronic move. The kind of tax cuts that Conservatives like are narrowly focused on the capitalist class, and emphasize trickle-down voodoo economics. Supply-side tax cuts are unequivocally not what we need in this economic climate. I don't think we generally ever need them, but that is, again, something for another entry, but we especially don't need them when our economy is staring massive over-production in the face. Providing tax cuts intended to increase capital investment is an inappropriate move in the current economic environment. If the Conservatives are bound and determined to have tax cuts in the budget, then cut marginal taxes for the lowest tax bracket, and maybe raise the basic personal exemption. This is the kind of tax measure that might be helpful. Those who would benefit from the measure are the people who live from paycheque to paycheque, and spend every cent they get. This money goes right back into the economy, and stimulates demand, easing the crisis of overproduction, without sacrificing jobs.
But I don't think tax cuts are the way to go right now. Tax cuts aren't a good method of counter-cyclical stimulation of the economy. Counter-cyclical stimulation, in the typical Keynesian mode, requires that the stimulation be capable of easing off when the economy no longer requires stimulation. Tax cuts cause a major problem in this regard, because in the current political climate it is very difficult to raise taxes, when the economy no longer needs the stimulation. We have seen a practical example of this in Canada. In the last election, Stephane Dion mused about the possibility of raising the GST back to 7%, and the howling across the country was deafening.
The best way to stimulate the economy is infrastructure spending. Infrastructure spending has five aspects that make it good for counter-cyclical stimulation:
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 14
I'm sorry, this is a moronic move. The kind of tax cuts that Conservatives like are narrowly focused on the capitalist class, and emphasize trickle-down voodoo economics. Supply-side tax cuts are unequivocally not what we need in this economic climate. I don't think we generally ever need them, but that is, again, something for another entry, but we especially don't need them when our economy is staring massive over-production in the face. Providing tax cuts intended to increase capital investment is an inappropriate move in the current economic environment. If the Conservatives are bound and determined to have tax cuts in the budget, then cut marginal taxes for the lowest tax bracket, and maybe raise the basic personal exemption. This is the kind of tax measure that might be helpful. Those who would benefit from the measure are the people who live from paycheque to paycheque, and spend every cent they get. This money goes right back into the economy, and stimulates demand, easing the crisis of overproduction, without sacrificing jobs.
But I don't think tax cuts are the way to go right now. Tax cuts aren't a good method of counter-cyclical stimulation of the economy. Counter-cyclical stimulation, in the typical Keynesian mode, requires that the stimulation be capable of easing off when the economy no longer requires stimulation. Tax cuts cause a major problem in this regard, because in the current political climate it is very difficult to raise taxes, when the economy no longer needs the stimulation. We have seen a practical example of this in Canada. In the last election, Stephane Dion mused about the possibility of raising the GST back to 7%, and the howling across the country was deafening.
The best way to stimulate the economy is infrastructure spending. Infrastructure spending has five aspects that make it good for counter-cyclical stimulation:
- It is capable of getting to work quickly, since most cities and counties have some kind of infrastructure project just waiting for funding to go into effect. An example is the Transit City proposal in the City of Toronto, envisioning many more streetcar lines to greatly increase the available transportation in the city.
- It puts people to work, both in the immediate construction industry and in the feed-in system, creating a ripple effect across the economy. By putting people to work, more money is earned, and that helps to ease the overproduction crisis.
- It stimulates demand for products manufactured in Canada, helping to keep well-paid manufacturing jobs in Canada.
- Building infrastructure leaves something that will be useful for decades. A new subway line can be used for a hundred years or more (see London and New York), a new streetcar line for decades. Building infrastructure is a part of long-term economic planning.
- It can be easily eased off when the economy recovers.
Days Remaining in Bush Presidency: 14
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Iggy to be Liberal Leader
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
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
