Are Reforms You Call "Paltry" Really Worth the Price?

So apparently the NDP have decided to prop up Stephen Harper till March (as the EI reforms go through committee, 2nd, and 3rd readings) SOLELY in return to what NDP MP Pat Martin flatly calls “paltry improvements to EI.” Well the NDP seem to have quite a sense of priorities because by propping up Harper till March (when he pulls the plug himself and perhaps before these EI reforms even receive royal assent) that means:
- There will be NO MORE significant enhancements to benefits or fixing regional disparities for the hundreds of thousands of unemployed workers NOT covered by the Conservative reforms (the reforms are said to affect at best 60,000 people a year) (so much for helping the little guy)
- Canada will be sending Harper the obstructionist to the most important climate change negotiations in history this December who will go with the goal of torpedoing the whole thing (so much for the environment)
- Canadian citizens will continue to languish in foreign prisons with no help from their government (so much for human rights)
- Government stimulus funds will continue to go predominantly to Conservative held ridings that actually have lower relative unemployment rates (so much for fairness)
- Harper will bring in ever more right-wing legislation knowing you will pass whatever he wants until the EI reforms are passed into law as you are promising (so much for principles)
- Harper gets an election at his preferred time and you will be giving him what you in your own words called a "de facto majority" (so much for electoral strategy)
- Harper will give you no credit for these EI reforms he was already going to do, he will throw in some mockery and more humiliations here and there and you will have no real accomplishments to go to the electorate with in March (so much for pride)

And that's just a short list and it's all so Tom Mulcair can hold his seat a little longer and Jack Layton can hold the NDP leadership a little longer.

When the two of them lose them both as a result of the election Harper triggers post-Olympics, I somehow doubt their supporters will look back on it and think it was all worthwhile. Even though I think the Liberals still stand a good chance of winning then too, it will be after more damage was done to our reputation and finances that will have to be repaired thanks to NDP short-sightedness.

Now these EI reforms that Pat Martin calls paltry are worthwhile, but I'm sure they could have been applied retroactively after an election and are far from all the reforms that should be made or even that the NDP said must be made. And it should have been obvious to the NDP that leaves Harper in office for the next 6 months means NO MORE "results for people" beyond what their own MP said was paltry while having all the negative consequences above and more.

But I guess protecting Jack and Tom matters more. That's really some leadership the NDP have isn't it?

The irony is that by extending the government till March and giving us an election on Harper's terms, IF Harper actually won I wonder if the NDP would even survive to fight the election after that? First chance Harper would get post-election he will cut public financing of political parties, which no doubt will be a big thank you to Jack from Steve for the 6 months or so Jack helped HIM survive.

In the meantime, should the NDP grassroots just fall in line with Layton and Mulcair's wishes and not force them to back down, then we must just resign ourselves to six more months of spiraling deficits, more debt, more unemployment (without any new significant assistance), more division, and no leadership or vision at home or abroad. And then we can get an election exactly when Harper wants.

I think we can do better.

Recommend this Post

Obama's Budget Plan Shows He and Harper Really are Ideological Twins

Because a "pronounced move to redistribute wealth" is a Conservative idea right? Darryl Wolk - one of the few Conservatives that actually supported Obama before he was elected President - has tried to argue that Harper and Obama are so alike and that Canadians will see this and give Harper a majority as a result. Well I think if Canadians actually looked at the actions of these two governments they just might come to a different conclusion. Let's take a look at what Obama's $3.55 trillion Budget Plan proposes:
--------------------------
"Mr. Obama's proposal signals a radical change of course by redirecting enormous streams of deficit spending toward programs like health care, education and energy, and paying for some of it through taxes on the rich, pollution surcharges, and cuts in such inviolable programs as farm subsidies.... The Obama administration will attempt to close the large fiscal gap even while starting a major health-care initiative meant to substantially extend coverage; to do so, it foresees increasing taxes on the wealthiest Americans and using revenues from a new program: selling carbon credits (read: taxing carbon) to manufacturers as part of a cap-and-trade plan meant to slow climate change....The combined effect of the two revenue-raising proposals, on top of Mr. Obama's existing plan to roll back the Bush-era income tax reductions on households with income exceeding $250,000 a year, would be a pronounced move to redistribute wealth by reimposing a larger share of the tax burden on corporations and the most affluent taxpayers. "
------------------------
Sounds just like what Harper ran on in the last election doesn't it? Carbon taxes (coupled with cutting taxes for the low and middle income earners as the Green Shift did), raising taxes on the rich and corporations, redistribution of wealth from rich to poor, true blue Conservative policies.

Oh wait those are the sorts of policies Harper said would destroy the economy!

To be honest I think some of Obama's proposed policies go even a bit too far for my tastes, I don't support increasing corporate tax rates for instance, but I'm interested to see how the Blogging Tories portray this budget as in sync with the budget they put forth here in Canada.

I think they'll have a pretty tough time.

On the environment Canadians saw a budget here in Canada that completely ignored the issue, whereas in the U.S. it's seen as one of the central issues to address.

On human rights Canadians see a government still defending the "process" at Guantanamo Bay, whereas in the U.S. the government is shutting it down and banning torture.

On poverty Canadians see a government here that can't even bring itself to mention the word, whereas in the U.S. the government is taking major efforts to help the most vulnerable.

On post-secondary education Canadians see a government that treats it as an after thought (it received ZERO mention in their last election platform), whereas Obama is placing making his country a world leader on this issue a top priority of his first term.

On partisan co-operation, Stephen Harper can’t help but constantly pick fights wtih the opposition, while across the border Obama reaches out to his rivals for consensus.

On transparency and accountability Canadians see a government that becomes more and more secretive versus one in the U.S. that is opening more windows on how government is operating by the day.

And I could go on. So Conservatives can try to latch themselves to Obama all they can, but their actions (or lack of actions) speak far louder than their words and I don't think Canadians will be fooled.

If Conservatives like Darryl wish we were actually taking the kinds of bold of approaches in Canada as Obama is, I'd strongly encourage them to join them to join the Liberal Party to help make that happen :).

-------------------------------------
(h/t CanPolitico for the NY Times link)
For more info on Obama's Budget Plan for the 2010 Fiscal Year see here and here.

Recommend this Post

A New Voice of Hope

Today, 8 long years of mismanagement and disappointment came to an end and a new era has begun (see inauguration/speech video and other photos below). Barack Obama faces impossible expectations and no doubt he cannot meet them all and no doubt he will make some decisions that I disagree with and that he obviously won't still have an 80% appproval rating in 2012. But as I’ve been saying for a for a long time now the United States and the world desperately need a major overhaul from the approach of the last 8 years. But in these trying times the world also doesn’t just need change, but hope and optimism. And nobody embodies change and hope better than Barack Obama. As Nelson Mandela said today in a letter to the new President: “Your election to this high office has inspired people as few other events in recent times have done. Amidst all of the human progress made over the last century the world in which we live remains one of great divisions, conflict, inequality, poverty and injustice…You, Mister President, have brought a new voice of hope that these problems can be addressed and that we can in fact change the world and make of it a better place” I share the hope of Mr. Mandela and so many others today…

The hope that the United States will stand up for human rights and not against them.

The hope that the United States will engage the world and embrace multilateralism instead of unilateralism.

The hope that the United States will tackle the crisis of climate change instead of denying it.

The hope that the United States will provide health care for all its citizens instead of being the only western nation that doesn’t.

The hope that the United States will truly become an accountable government by and FOR the people instead of a government consumed by secrecy.

The hope that the United States will look after the impoverished and help left them out of poverty instead of seeing the poor as a burden to be looked down upon.

The hope that the United States will do its part to solve the economic crises instead of being an enabler of the policies that started it.

The hope that the United States President will work to heal the divides at home and across the globe rather than exacerbate them.

The hope that the United States will play a more positive role in the world than it ever has before.

I may not be an American but I can say I’m as optimistic about America’s new direction as I was the election night I won't forget in Chicago.

The Chase for Change is now over. Change has arrived and while actions will speak louder than words, I hold out hope that 4 years (and even 8 years) from now Barack Obama will still represent change we could all believe in.

Recommend this Post

Thank You Stéphane Dion

It’s definitely been the craziest two weeks in Canadian politics I’ve seen in my lifetime. But lost in all the recent developments is that were Stephen Harper not such a coward and suspended Parliament in the middle of an economic crisis simply because he had no ideas on how to solve it (except for beating up his opponents and pandering to his base), Stéphane Dion would have become Prime Minister earlier today due to Stephen Harper losing the confidence of the House the day before. With Stéphane officially relinquishing the leadership shortly I thought it appropriate to give him the appropriate due as he goes. He's certainly had a formidable career.

Stéphane Dion didn’t choose to go to Ottawa, but when he was called I don’t think anyone could deny that he gave everything he could to his country and his party.

As Intergovernmental Affairs Minister he put Lucien Bouchard in his place, beat back the separatists, advanced federalism, and drafted the clarity act so that should the PQ hold another referendum they’ll have to fight it fairly. Yet despite Dion’s now universally approved performance he was dropped from the Paul Martin cabinet. But he never complained, he remained a party stalwart through and through and in the end he was credited with saving several Quebec ridings from defeat in the dying days of the 2004 election. Dion got another chance to prove himself as Environment Minister and again he didn’t disappoint. He brought forward a plan to meet our Kyoto targets (much of which the Conservatives scrapped and later re-instituted after wasting a year) and brought together over 180 countries at the Montreal conference to come to a consensus agreement on a way forward post-Kyoto. As Elizabeth May has said, "anyone who says he was anything other than an excellent Environment Minister is simply making it up".

In his race for Liberal leader he managed to go from getting snide remarks like “even Stéphane Dion has entered the race” to coming out on top in the end, which considering who he was up against was no small feat. As Liberal leader he made lots of mistakes (as every leader does), almost of all of which he has owned up to (something it seems we'll never see from Stephen Harper) but many other problems were beyond his control (such as being heavily outmatched financially as the Conservative attack ads flooded the airwaves). I'll leave it for others to dwell on his mistakes though. Less often talked about is how despite not getting the electoral results we hoped for, we enhanced the Liberal brand on 3 issues that we were not exceptionally known for before: infrastructure, poverty, and the environment. While in the midst of the economic crisis everyone is talking about the first as a way of helping us out of it, no one can doubt the Liberals put forth the strongest plan in the last election. While we aren’t hearing as much about fighting poverty and combating climate change these days Stéphane Dion’s championing of these issues has ensured that no Liberal leader will possibly do anything other that keep them central in our future platforms. When the environment comes back to the fore again as it surely will thanks at least in part to Dion’s efforts the Liberals will no doubt have a strong environmental platform that puts other parties to shame.

Dion also stood up strongly for human rights in a way that will set the bar high for all future leaders. It wasn’t popular but he defended Omar Khadr’s right to fair trial. He also spoke out strongly against the death penalty, for ratifying the UN Treaty on the Rights of Aboriginal Peoples, and he put in his platform a vow in implement a Corporate Social Responsibility Framework for Canadian mining companies operating overseas (an issue I had championed in the past). These issues may not be in the forefront of Canadians minds but I’ll always respect any leader willing to stand up for them as strongly as Stéphane has.

We all know how the election turned out, but I do think in the debates he put all the caricatures of him to shame. It’s too bad Canadians couldn’t see the real Stéphane more often, but such is the political game.

Since the election I think he performed well in the House and I believe ALL Liberals should be incredibly thankful that he stopped Stephen Harper’s attempt to remove public financing dead in its tracks. Had he not negotiated the coalition Harper may not have backed down and we could have been right back into another election or been forced to support his fiscal update . I’m really not sure if anyone else could have pulled off the kind of agreement Stéphane did that didn’t really sacrifice ANY Liberal policies or principles whatsoever in the coalition accord with the exception of the Green Shift (that it was clear could not be implemented when the two parties that supported did not receive more than 1/3 of the votes in the last campaign). If he had stepped down after the campaign then I think the Liberal Party and its future might be in much greater jeopardy today. Instead, with the coalition in place we actually have a possibility to form government should Stephen Harper continue his reckless approach to the economy and fail to substantially reach out to the opposition parties in the presentation of his budget. I do hope the coalition holds and since I don’t think Stephen Harper has it in him to actually meaningfully compromise and govern based on the policies a majority of Canadians voted for, I hope the coalition does vote him down and take power on Jan. 28. If that comes to pass then I think Stéphane Dion would be pleased to know that one of his last acts as leader was to put together an agreement that did in the end bring Liberals back to power. I'm sorry that Stephane couldn't lead the coalition in government for even a few months, but he stepped down in order to better ensure the coalition could be successful and accepted both by the Governor General and the general public. Once again Dion put the interests of the country ahead of his own.

If the coalition doesn't take power and Stephen Harper is able to continue governing we can at least know that because of Stephane’s efforts with the coalition, Stephen Harper has been chastened and finally forced in govern in the interests of a majority of Canadians.

But unfortunately despite all the good I feel Stéphane Dion did, I really think there are few politicians who’ve taken as many hits as he has. He's admitedly not the best retail politician but I question how many others could successfuly withstand the onslaught he's faced. First from the separatists and the Quebec media who literally did everything they could to savage his reputation and then the Harper Conservatives who tried the same but this time unfortunately with millions of dollars to be able to do it more effectively and in some ways with help from the media who never missed an opportunity to savage Dion when they could. Dion took the bullet on the Green Shift, a policy that would have likely been our policy in the last election even if Stephane wasn’t our leader. I still believe in that policy, but I guess we found out there’s still much work to be done to convince Canadians of it. Stéphane Dion took a beating form the Con and the media though because of it. But through it all, no matter what was thrown at him, Dion never wavered in his commitment to his country and his party and retained his honesty and integrity until the end of his leadership.

Right now most of the pundits and even many Liberals may look poorly on Stéphane’s time as leader, but I’ll leave any of those criticisms to others. Regardless, I do think (and hope) history will in the end see him much better and come to see the positive contributions he made in a much better light. It was nice to see such a positive acknowledgement from Jack Layton, I guess it was too much to expect the same from someone with as little class as Stephen Harper.

I hope we won’t have seen the last of Stéphane Dion as a prominent figure in Canadian politics, I believe he still could make great contributions, but if he decides in the next several months to retire from political life I do think he leaves with a lot to be proud of. Politics is so often a thankless job and I’m sure Stéphane has come to that realization as well, but I know I’m far from alone in being proud of what he accomplished. People of his character are definitely a rarity in politics.

So thus ends one chapter and begins a new one. Very shortly we will have a new leader in Michael Ignatieff and we can all turn our focus back where it belongs: on the appalling government Stephen Harper leads and on rebuilding our party together in the ways it needs to in order to be the strongest national party again. Canadians expect and desire no less.

Recommend this Post

My Questions for the Liberal Leadership Candidates and Other Musings on the Race Ahead

Grassroots Outreach

- Each Liberal candidate has talked about a 308 riding strategy for the next election, but what specific steps would you take from an organizational, membership and fundraising perspective to actually turn this new catch phrase into reality?

Balance of Powers

- Do you believe this country should have a stronger central government (i.e., more national programs with uniform standards) or stronger provinces (i.e., federal government sticks to its own constitutional jurisdictions) than we have presently? If you had to choose between one or the other which would it be and why?

The Environment

- The Liberals have seen many bold plans proposed on the environment in recent years. I was very pleased to see Michael Ignatieff propose tax shifting (taxing pollution and cutting other taxes to compensate) in his last leadership platform and put that issue on the table and later see Stéphane Dion adopt a similar Green Shift for the last campaign (with a promise to institute a cap-and-trade system at a later point). I, along with many other Liberals still support this approach, but what do you believe is the best approach for meaningfully reducing our greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 and being a world leader on the environment: a cap-and-trade system, tax shifting, or a mixture of the two? When would you aim for such an approach to be put in place and how would you sell it?

Aboriginals

- What specific steps would you plan to take to improve the lives of Aboriginal Canadians beyond re-committing to the Kelowna Accords?

Women

- What specific steps would you take within your first year as leader to see the Liberal Party achieve gender parity in its election candidates, MPs, and internal party positions?

- Will you pledge to keep the commitment for Commissioner for Gender Equality in the next Liberal platform?

Poverty

- Will you commit to putting in place the 30/50 poverty plan (and finding the needed funding whether it comes from a carbon tax or not) contained in the last Liberal platform if elected Liberal leader and Prime Minister? If not, what you would change from the original plan and why?

Human Rights

- We all agree that Canada and its representatives should stand strongly for the protection and promotion of human rights abroad. Unfortunately, many Canadian mining companies operating abroad have been associated with human rights abuses in many countries in the developing world. I was heartened to see the Liberal platform contain a commitment on page 59 to “establish and promote a Canadian Corporate Social Responsibility Framework for all Canadian extractive-sector companies operating in developing countries.”

Will you pledge that such a commitment will remain in the next Liberal platform should you become leader? If not, why not?

Electing the Leader

As you know the way in which we currently elect our leader is through a delegated convention, in which approximately half the elected delegates are men and half are women, and one third are youth, and there are spots reserved for Aboriginals and seniors, in addition to ex-officio delegates. Do you support changing this system to that of one-member one vote? If so, how would you propose the system operate in a way that still protects the voices of youth, women, Aboriginals and seniors in the party?

Party Unity

- Should you be victorious in the Liberal leadership race, what specific steps would you take, upon assuming the leadership, to unite the party (and members of all camps) that were not undertaken by past leadership victors?
--------------------------------------------

With the Conservative Convention wrapped up and my official blogging duties from the ground coming to a wrap up, it's now time to go back to familiar territory - the Liberals. And all the Liberal news is about leadership lately. While its important, I hope it doesn't overshadow the issues at hand in the House of Commons. So in case you are wondering, the questions I've sent to friends of mine working on each campaign in hopes that each leadership candidate will answer them promptly, and with honesty.

Gold star to the candidate who answers them first, and all! I will post the responses the minute I get them. But I strongly request that the candidate at least reads them, and answers them, and that its not staffers/volunteers. I do in all reality know that a staffer will probably proof, or go over the questions with their leader, which I just accept.

As for my thoughts on the race so far, I have to say I'm surprised (and just a bit saddened) to see so many Liberals rush to support one candidate or another without those candidates actually spelling out many of the things they would actually do as leader to rebuild the party or what kind of government they would lead. I do fully respect all those who’ve already come to a decision and I know they’ve done so for their own honest reasons, but I also know I'm not alone in wanting to make as informed of a decision as possible before endorsing anyone. I also know I'm not alone in NOT wanting to decide based on who has the least baggage (nor will I be talking about such negatives on this blog) or base it on who is supporting who - friends or big Liberal names.

And I know I'm not alone in wanting this race to be about which candidate has the best ideas and abilities for the FUTURE of this party and this country. We tried to make an election in 2006 about Stephen Harper's past writings and actions and it didn't work, if Stephen Harper wants to try the same strategy against us in the next election it won't work either. So while inevitably others will be tempted to trash competing candidates, I'll do my small part to try to make this race about hope for the future rather than fear mongering based on the past. I hope others will too (I'd say Steve V sets a pretty good example here, apologies if I’ve missed others like this promoting all candidates, feel free to put a link to your own in the comments). For me getting the answers to the questions above is just the start.

And I hope we'll see the discussion in the months ahead revolve around reasons to vote FOR each candidate rather than reasons to vote against another one. But if someone wants to remain neutral in the end let that not be held against them either, as everyone will be needed to chip in to bring us back to power after this race is over no matter who they supported. And finally we can't forget that the process of rebuilding the party financially and organizationally needs to begin NOW, aside from this race, so let's not let that most crucial task fall by the wayside either.

This race and its immediate aftermath could leave us more united and stronger than ever before or the opposite, so let's get this right.

Recommend this Post

Stephen Harper is NOT on YOUR Side

So the Cons are exploiting our elections laws by running an ad the week before Harper officially calls an election. The ad is false on so many levels, but honestly it’s a well done ad to be tailored to an audience that they are hoping has never actually seen Stephen Harper in action over the past 2.5 years. I guess the Cons just hope people watching this ad haven’t seen the Stephen Harper who talks about everyone being screwed and who insinuates his opponents support terrorists. But if you watch CTV they are ALREADY completely swallowing the ad’s spin, so Liberals should be careful not to dismiss this and instead fight back. So what’s wrong with this ad? Well essentially every line. But it appears the Liberal media has struck again so it’s left up to others to do the real analysis. So let’s cover each of these “ordinary Canadians”…

“Stephen Harper knows where he stands, he’s a straight up guy”
- Should we be saying that about a guy who’s broken upwards of a hundred promises from the last election, from income trusts, to accountability, to his own fixed election law? Does “knowing where you stand” and being “straight up” mean lying to Canadians to get more votes or changing where you stand based on political convenience? Or lying repeatedly in the House of Commons?

“He’s doing a good job”
- Seriously? How’s the economy these days? How’s our standing on the world stage?

“He’s the steady hand we need when the world’s economy is so uncertain”
- Even more ridiculous. They spent the cupboard bare and put us back into deficit. Meanwhile Harper has NO economic plan to put us back on track. Is that the hand we want?

“I like the fact that he’s lowered taxes for all of us”
- Except NO ONE thinks they were the right taxes to lower and the GST cuts are what put us back in deficit (yes I know we are not currently in deficit, but we were quite recently and would be again with another Harper mandate)

“I appreciate the support for our troops”
- Yes, like cancelling crucial contracts for the Navy

“Finally someone has toughened up our justice system”
- Yes because building more prisons, following the U.S. mold and putting 10 years olds in prison is the way of the future

“I’ve never been more proud to be a Canadian”
- I would be shocked to learn this guy didn’t either work for the party or was a paid actor (well maybe all of these “ordinary Canadians” are but especially this guy). But I’d love to know what makes this guy so proud – is it our “leadership” on the environment? Human rights? Foreign aid? At the last G8 Summit? Personally I’m not proud that we’ve become an international pariah.

“I like the idea that he’s a family man with young children”
- Apparently Stephane Dion can’t be trusted because he’s a family man with an older child!

“He’s in it for the right reasons”
- Yes just as Tom Flanagan says, I’m sure that’s what this girl meant.

Proud guy again: “He’s on the right track”
- If you count having no plan for the environment or the economy the right track sure.

Picture of Harper with slogan: “Stephen Harper: Strong Leadership On Your Side”
- If they were really gonna go all out his cat is missing from the picture, I think that really might have sealed the deal. More on the slogan below.

“I’ll be voting for the first time and I’ll be voting for Stephen Harper”
I hope that girl lives in Calgary Southwest or she might have some trouble doing that... Newsflash to Conservatives: we don’t have a Presidential system as much you might wish we did.

But back to the slogan “On Your Side”, how can anyone who has paid any attention (I’m looking at you media) hear that without laughing? Is he on YOUR side when his government is busy meeting with oil executives, pandering to to his base, and mocking a serious health crisis that is the ultimate result of his “leave it to the market” ideology? When his government attacks provinces, doctors and anyone else who challenges them even when all the evidence says the CONSERVATIVES are the ones that are wrong?

Stephen Harper is NOT on your side unless you are in one of his key target demographics that he is hoping gets him enough votes to eek out a majority so he can do whatever he wants. Even then Harper would surely throw any group that helped him win under the bus if what he promised them didn't fit his ideological vision. It's very telling I think that the ad features mostly men and the main woman featured just speaks of tax cuts and crime - makes the picture very clear that Harper's record on the major women's issues and advancing gender equality has been abysmal and that he doesn't even care to put on a front that he's a friend of women (as we know the rest of the ad was full of enough fabrications).

Liberals must get the message through in this election that only they want to govern for ALL Canadians and I’m sure when both the Conservative and Liberal platforms are released it will be clear who has more Canadians’ interests at heart. Stephane Dion has shown consistently that he will put his country before his party and Stephen Harper has consistently shown he will do the opposite.

So who’s really on YOUR side?

Recommend this Post

Not Content to be Slammed for Our Own Human Rights Record, Harper Decides He Wants to Cover Up Abuses for Others

We’ve already been slammed over and over again for going from a leader to a pariah on human rights - by supporting the death penalty, dropping support for the international treaty on indigenous rights, turning a blind eye to torture in Afghan prisons, and voicing strong support for Guantanamo Bay. In every case we’ve stood virtually alone in the Western world, with our only ally usually being the Bush Administration. Now Harper’s government is trying to cover up the records of other countries? NO other western country does this! It wasn’t good enough to be on level with the Bush Administration, I guess we just had to do worse.

And Peter Van Loan wants to claim the Conservative government has been “second to none” on human rights?

Why don’t the media just call these guys for what they are – liars. Not only do the Conservatives have an extreme problem with telling the truth, in just 2 and half years, they have set back Canada’s international reputation on every major issue – a reputation that has taken decades to build up. For those voters in Guelph, St.-Lambert and Westmount Ville-Marie who want that proud Canadian reputation back, there’s a clear chance to send a message that you’ve had it with Canada’s backsliding – Vote Liberal on September 8th and put Harper on notice.

Recommend this Post

Canada’s Reputation Cannot Afford Another Year of Harper at the Helm

This week was another black eye for Canada on the world stage. On foreign aid, the environment and human rights it’s clear that Stephen Harper is charting a path even more right-wing than the current Republican Presidential candidate, who as I’ve said before, is extremely Conservative himself. As Harper continues to isolate Canada further from the rest of the world on the key issues of the 21st century, and as he follows in the mold of a President despised everywhere except in the Conservative Party caucus, I’m sure this is just one more week where more Canadians have to come to realize that Harper is far off-side from our values and is taking Canada down a path we don’t want it to go.

Harper’s had many chances to redeem himself, to chart a better course, to realize that it’s time to stop being one of the lone voices against 2020 emissions targets, time to stop being the ONLY Western country supporting Guantanamo Bay at a time when each Presidential candidate says they’ll close it, and time to realize Africa needs our help more than ever and that it’s not time to walk away as we have been. However, each time an opportunity comes to change his ways Harper has failed, each time he ventures overseas it’s a new disappointment and a new round of global condemnations. Is it any wonder now Harper believes that Portugal will beat us for a Security Council seat that just 3 years ago Canada seemed most likely to get? Is this what we really want in a Prime Minister? A Prime Minister who’s seen as part of the problem rather than part of the solution? Canada can do much better.

Only one party is going to restore Canada’s image on human rights, be a world leader on the environment and work to meet the commitment of 0.7% of GDP going to foreign aid. The other has taken us backward on all 3 fronts and give them another term neither we, nor the rest of the world, will likely recognize the Canada we’ve taken for granted for generations. That’s the choice in the next election and the stakes perhaps have never been higher. It’s a message I hope all progressives get loud and clear - we need a new government more than ever and Stephane Dion happens to be the kind of authentic leader that will bring us the change we so desperately need.

Recommend this Post

Conservatives Vote No Confidence in the Fabric of Our Democracy

This government has shown no respect for human rights, no respect for our civil servants, and now they give a formal declaration of non confidence in the organization that ensures our elections are free and fair?

I don't think anyone can underestimate the magnitude of this. The international community puts enormous faith in Elections Canada and we send their officials overseas to monitor elections in developing democracies. Elections Canada has an impeccable international reputation and yet our government formally impugns them?

What message does this give to the world? That the government no longer trusts Elections Canada to keep our elections free and fair? Stephen Harper has A LOT of questions to answer now and I request for the millionth time that the media do its job in holding Harper to account.

But regardless Harper should be ashamed of his government's unprecedented actions today. Before the Conservatives came to office Canada was seen as a world leader on human rights and its democratic institutions were revered. And now we have reports like this showing our reputation on human rights has dropped to historic lows and we have the government doing a deliberate hatchet job on our own democratic institutions in an attempt to bring them down to a similar lower level.

This is a disgrace and Canadians won't forget just how much damage this government has done to our reputation and institutions.

When you don't have faith in the very fabric of our democracy you don't deserve to govern it any longer.

Recommend this Post

Some takes on Recent News

---Conservative Priorities: Party Hard! Human Rights…leave it for the morning after...if there's time.

FYI: There is a rally on Parliament Hill this Saturday March 29 from 2-5 to encourage the release of Brenda Martin, who is being held in Mexico without charges.

----Being “disappointed” and “urging” for a judgment to be overturned is very weak language compared to “death by beading”, which is the sentence given to a Canadian in Saudi Arabia. Harper said his Conservative government would fight for Canadians’ lives who would be facing the death penalty from states which aren’t democratic or open. Well here is another opportunity for them to stand up for (Canadian) human rights. Let’s not let them forget about it.

----Don’t we have a right to know? Not disclosing this info could potentially be putting people in harm, including myself.

----Get to know some of the new MPPs

---I think this was a story with an unfortunate result. The police should not have shot the cow. Yes it’s a cow, but they shot it because they got impatient with it. The animal was loose due to human error, not cow error. It was scared and didn’t know better – and if you were in its hoofs you would be running around too. If that was a criminal on the run, that would never have happened, and if it did, there would be public outcry.

---You can bet this will be a case that will be used by those who think that signing an organ donor’s card will encourage their ‘early’ death.
Glad to see; however, that this is a story with a happy ending for this family, which is what any family in this situation would want.

Recommend this Post

An Issue for 2008: Enforcing Standards of Practice for Canadian Mining Companies Operating Abroad (Liberal Policy Series #1)

This is something that I've wanted to post about for awhile, but I believe with the new year, it's about time something finally get done on this issue.

I have been a supporter for some time of the idea that much more must be done to ensure “Canadian” mining companies (many solely claim Canadian status for the tax incentives) uphold the same environmental and human rights standards that they would if they were mining in Canada.

Specifically, I authored a policy on this issue that my Brant Young Liberals put forth that calls for the Government of Canada to implement the March 29, 2007 recommendations of the "National Roundtables on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the Canadian Extractive Industry in Developing Countries." The recommendations were derived from a series of national roundtables involving the public and governmental and non-governmental experts that were originally commissioned by the former Liberal government in the fall of 2005. The full report can be found here. For shorter summaries of the recommendations and how they came about, please see: here and/or here.

In short, Canada could become a world leader on Corporate Social Responsibility if the federal government and other stakeholders acted on these recommendations. The Brant resolution also noted that if the Government of Canada refused to implement the recommendations, then the Liberal Party of Canada should make it official party policy that they will try to implement them should they form the government in the near future.

This policy is extremely important as it relates not only to upholding basic human rights and environmental standards, but also to protecting and enhancing Canada's international reputation. When these mining companies, (which, at often times are only Canadian for the tax incentives that Canada offers to companies), are responsible for major human rights and/or environmental abuse abroad (of which there are countless examples), it reflects poorly on our country and can even breed resentment in some of these countries of Canadians in general. The recommendations of the March 29 2007 report merely ask that Canadian mining companies adhere to similar practices abroad as they do here at home and a series of incentives and punishments are advocated to ensure compliance. This is an instance where Canada can once again take the lead on an important issue and be a role model to the rest of the world, much as it has been with countless other efforts, such as the Responsibility to Protect doctrine, for example.

This resolution was passed at the OYL Summer Fling as one of the top 3 policies favoured by young liberals and it is my hope that it will be lobbied successfully to the senior party. So far there is much work to be done in that regard; however, this is really is an issue the Liberal Party of Canada should take a clear stance on. The NDP has also taken some interest in this issue and I applaud them for that and I would actually be quite happy if the two parties worked together to get something done on this issue.

That said, I welcome any and all feedback or advice you could provide to improve upon the resolution that was passed to ensure what goes forward from this point on is as sound as possible.

This issue affects a huge number of people in the 3rd world and we can no longer turn a blind eyet to it. The time has come to help ensure Canadian companies don't tarnish our good name and operate responsibly overseas.

UPDATE: I noticed the link to the full report was broken. It's been fixed.

Recommend this Post

Harper’s world allies down to one

This could not have made Mr. Harper very happy. Australians have just given the boot to one of Harper’s biggest allies. After all, Mr. Howard was the first major foreign dignitary Harper invited to address the House of Commons and it’s well-known that Harper was even advised by Howard on election strategy. Just take a look at the Liberal Party press release on this and I think you’ll see that the new Australian PM doesn’t exactly share the same world view as our Conservative Government (something tells me there won’t be anything nearly as glowing coming from the mouth of Mr. Harper).

This is nowhere more true that on the environment. While Australia joins the Western world consensus on Kyoto, Canada moves away. While Harper blocks progress on the environment on the world stage, he will now find there is essentially no one in the Western world (except George Bush) to back him up.

How can you say you are “leading the world” when no one agrees with you? Care to answer that Mr. Harper?

Canadians want their country to be leading the way on issues such as human rights and the environment. Harper continues to take us backward instead. No independent group and now no other Western nation (except the U.S. who’s President who long ago reached lame duck status) thinks he’s doing a good job on these issues.

He’s certainly on pace with his track record to meet the same fate as his good friend Howard once his record goes under the microscope in the next election campaign.

Recommend this Post

Tories & Dippers, Sitting in a Tree...K-I-S-S-I-N-G

The NDP have been going around town trying to keep up appearances and convince us that they’re behaving as an opposition party. They’ve even been accusatory towards the Liberals abstaining, allowing the Conservatives to continue their right wing agenda. While they complain, lately they seem very content with the arrangement. The NDP will not rock the boat. They like things they way they are now because they feel there’s opportunity there to show the public that they can be the official opposition or actually even govern one day. They are seriously mistaken though that this will bring them benefits of any kind. The reality is that the Conservatives are using them and are laughing all the way. Jack and his team need to wake up, smell the coffee and start acting like the opposition they want and claim to be (hint: the Liberals aren’t the government anymore).

The NDP have no right to criticize the Liberals anymore. Their silence on the issue of the death penalty is worse than the Liberals waiting to bring down the government on an issue brought to the floor that they disagree with rather than vote against a vaguely defined agenda or tax cuts they 95% agree with. The NDP’s “nays” mean nothing when they don’t have any real importance to change something, it just gives them blank excuses to make themselves seem principled.

Take a look at ndp.ca. What do you see? Any mention on the main page of the Tories abandoning Canadian’s human rights on the issue of the death penalty? No of course not, instead there’s bashing of the Liberals (who have been very vocal on this issue unlike Jack and his friends) and the NDP’s unfeasible idea to abolish the Senate (which requires a constitutional amendment which won’t happen).

You would have thought the issue of the death penalty would be an issue that the NDP would be up in arms about. The death penalty is a serious social issue, which discriminates against the poor who often don’t get proper legal access and end being the ones on death row. Not only is the new Canadian position abominable from a human rights perspective and turns back 30 years of Canadian foreign policy (and puts us COMPLETELY ALONE IN THE WORLD in our stance) as it stands now it is inconsistent in its treatment of Canadians over Americans, as Americans get protected by this government from the death penalty while Canadians don’t.

The Tories are turning their back on the UN, the Charter of Rights & Freedoms and Canada’s international reputation. Where’s the NDP criticism? NO WHERE.

Jack Layton has decided instead that the issue of senate reform is a much more important issue to the NDP than the UN Charter and the poor and potentially-wrongly accused Canadians who wind up facing the death chamber. And the Tories are all too supportive of their new found relationship. They can continue to bond over bashing the real opposition – the Liberal party, who I believe does the right things at the right time for the right reasons.

Recommend this Post

Harper: Standing up for Americans, but not Canadians on the Death Penalty

This Government Continues to Disgrace Canada. This story is getting more insulting every day. I’d love to hear Conservative supporters leap to defense on this one.

The Conservatives have now said that they will continue to uphold the traditional Canadian policy of not extraditing AMERICANS to the USA if they face the possibility of execution…and yet Harper will allow his fellow Canadians face the death chamber nonetheless!

The death penalty should be opposed on all grounds EVERYWHERE, but what the heck is wrong with these people? First of all, they won’t help Canadians sentenced to death in the United States or elsewhere. That was supposedly because the US has a “fair, democratic justice system” (one in which dozens and dozens of innocent people have been put on death row).

FURTHERMORE, the Conservatives decide that that stance isn’t good enough they have to go farther. So now they no longer sponsor a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty at the UN, something sponsored by 73 nations and that Canada fully supported until now. Apparently it’s too difficult for this government to raise a hand at a meeting to stand up for human rights abroad. I bet when the donoughts get passed out at meetings Harper has his hand up for one right away though.

Why the change of heart on this fundamental issue? Why the lack of debate in the House?

You wanna know what the difference is though with this latest episode on extraditing Americans? Well we happen to have a law on the books that forbids sending suspected criminals abroad to possibly face execution. The Conservatives want to kill any debate on this issue while they still have a minority, so the law still stands because they'd have to bring this to the House to change it. But talk about inconsistent, Americans can live, Canadians can die under this policy. A cowardly approach might I add too. One that cannot stand. PLEASE Mr. Harper just restore 30 years of Canadian foreign policy on this issue, OPPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY EVERYWHERE. If not, you MUST bring this issue to the House for debate.

With each passing day, Canada is made to look to the world like a chicken with its head cut off. How Harper can defend such an inconsistent approach that now stands up for one group of people and not another, especially his own, is beyond confusion. Is it too much to ask that Harper might actually stand up for Canadians' human rights abroad? DISGRACEFUL! Canadians deserve answers from the Conservatives on this issue and should really question what Conservatives next plan is. They have shifted Canada’s internationally renowned public policy position on this issue to one that is unclear and inhumane in an undemocratic, private way. He’s pushing his agenda down the majority’s throat who would disagree with him. He’s turned his back on Canadians, the right to life under the UN Charter and at the same time has stood up for Americans.

Canada’s reputation is going down the tubes the longer the Conservatives remain in power. With each passing day, Harper is giving us more ammunition. So continue Mr. Harper, giving us hints of your true right wing, American agenda and at the next election we’ll give your keys back to Stornoway.

Recommend this Post

Harper turns Canada's back on (Canadians') Human Rights, snuggles closer to U.S.

Harper slowly turning Canada into an international pariah on human rights

This story is shocking. I guess their next desired step is to bring the death penalty back here at home. Why else would they reverse 30 years (both Conservative and Liberal) of Canadian foreign policy on this issue? They clearly believe the death penalty is a just and humane way of dealing with crime (of course there’s no evidence it works, but these Conservatives don’t listen to any real evidence so there’s no use trying to convince them).

This quote from Amnesty International-Canada really says it all:

It puts Canada in the unenviable position of being the only country in the world that's abolished the death penalty that now refuses to seek clemency on behalf of its death-sentence citizens abroad.

That’s right the ONLY country in the world. Add to that that Canada is the ONLY western nation in the world that refuses to lobby to have its own citizen in Guantanamo Bay returned home to stand trial. Even staunch conservative John Howard in Australia who supported the Iraq war and all lobbied successfully to have his citizens returned home for trial. This is not a Conservative-Liberal issue here. The Harper government is going against standards shared by every other Western country (Liberal or Conservative) minus the United States and wants to reverse decades of Liberal and Conservative foreign policy.

How can we be proud of this? (I'm sure Tory supporters will in their own twisted way somehow try to bash the Liberals over this)

So Canada now stands alone in the Western world next to the United States on both the death penalty and Guantanamo Bay.

This is scary and makes me wonder what is next…. For the sake of Canada’s reputation, Conservatives must be beaten in the next election.

Recommend this Post