What? Fox News isn't fake?

I say all this without access to cable, and admitting that since the arrival of the Canadian Publius, the Next Generation, I haven't found myself up to watch TV past about 9.30 pm anyway...

... but it appears that Fox News is planning their own version of the Daily Show with Jon Stewart tentatively called "Watch This Right Now?"

This is quite a surprise. I thought all of Fox was fake news.

And I am bewildered - can you make the Progressive wing of any party funnier than it already is... I mean this whole leadership race - that's just a satire ... right? I mean, it's not real, is it?

The J-Lo Senate reform proposal

CP reports:

Jack Austin and Lowell Murray served notice Thursday of their intention to introduce a resolution to amend the Constitution to significantly increase the number of western seats, particularly for British Columbia.

Under the proposal, B.C.'s Senate seats would double to 12, Alberta would get 10 and Manitoba and Saskatchewan would each get seven.

The central Canadian in me shudders at the thought of the J-Lo Senate proposal.

Don’t we already have a body that is elected and reflects representation by population? Isn’t it called, like… the House of Commons?

But that’s not the point.

You have to hand to Senator Jack, who has been a force in Canadian politics before Warren Kinsella could type type, he knows how set up a wedge issue.

What’s going on here is simple.

Harper has indicated he wants to move on Senate reform without amending the constitution. The weak link is that in BC, Senate reform without Senate redistribution to put more seats in BC is like putting Molson Excel on tap at a frosh party.

It’s more likely to cause a riot than selling the regular stuff.

Now Harper has a choice. Reform the Senate while continuing to disadvantage his Western base, or crack open the constitution and watch everything go to hell in Western breadbasket.

The sad part here?

My money is on the Mulroney protégé to crack open the Constitution.

Get ready to roll the dice.

Harper calls Canadians ‘Naïve”

Or so said our fearless leader on the program “Coulisses du pouvoir” last night stating,

«Je pense que beaucoup de monde au Canada est naïf, c'est vrai... La réalité, c'est que la menace terroriste est une menace mondiale et on ne peut pas y échapper en fermant les yeux.»

Or: “I think many Canadians are naïve. The reality is that the terrorist threat is a global threat, and we can’t avoid it by closing our eyes.”

Well, gee whiz willickers, thank be to heaven we have Big Daddy Harper to warn us all and keep us safe.

Calling Canadians naïve - there is a master politician. First insult your citizens, then spout a platitude.

You know, I think Harper has weird eyes, and looks like his mother dresses him, but I don’t run around saying that in front of a TV camera.

But what exactly should we all be doing to show Stephen we aren’t naïve?

Maybe I could put a guard hut at the end of my driveway?

Maybe I could snitch on my neighbours?

Mybe I could set up a neighbourhood terrorist watch group in my community?

Stephen, if you want us to take this situation seriously, start dealing with Canadians seriously, and stop patronizing us.

Anything else would be… well… naïve.

Soleberg on Clement's shares...

Tony Clement owns shares in a private pharma company. Some people think that puts him in a conflict of interest.

According to PoliticsWatch.com, Tony thinks it's "none of your business!" Tony says he has taken the advice of the Ethics Commissioner and that he shouldn't be taking ethics lessons from Liberals.

A bit odd though.

Only a few months ago, his boss Harper was calling the Ethics Commissioner a "liberal appointee."

So I guess, Tony is taking ethics lessons from a liberal... but I digress...

Me? I think he should keep his shares. He's followed the Ethic Commish's ruling, and we should all get on with our lives.

But no-one voted for me. What do our duly elected leaders have to say...?

"The one way to clear this thing up is to get rid of the company, " said Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Monte Soleberg to Louise Elliot at CP.

Ooops, I am sorry, Monte was talking about CSL and Paul Martin's kids owning the company on February 6, 2004.... what a difference an election makes...

Uh-oh ... here come the "principles of convenience" again ...

Here is a blogger challenge - let's see who can come up with another Tory urging a liberal to sell due to risk of conflict of interest....

Tories flip the bird and other acts of Parliamentary decora

While most of Canada was asleep last night, Parliamentary Secretary Jacques Gourde was busy debating a fascinating opposition motion on milk proteins in processed food.

Truly the stuff of empassioned debate, particularly given Mr. Gourde farms on the South shore of the St. Lawrence himself.

At one point in the debate M. Gourde became so inflamed with passion on the issue of milk protiens in processed food that while the myriad of captivated observers in the gallery were busily reaching for their heart pills, he responded to the BQ with the 'doigt d'honneur' (flipped the bird) or so reported Canadian Press last night.

Lors du vote sur une motion du Bloc québécois portant sur l'utilisation de protéines de lait dans la nourriture transformée, Jacques Gourde, secrétaire parlementaire du ministre de l'Agriculture, s'est levé pour voter contre la motion en faisant un doigt d'honneur aux députés du Bloc.

Though the opposition demanded an apology, M. Gourde was immediately - and ably - defended by the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and milk protein afficinado, Pierre Poilievre who responded with his middle-finger as well.

This continued until Denis Coderre reigned them in.

You know, its the maturity displayed by our elected officials on issues of such importance that really builds my faith in government.

Thank God for Denis Coderre's sense of decorum.

You know, Denis, if you're reading this, I never thought I would ever write those words.... did you?

Gary Mason - worth reading & Fraser Institute - not so much...

Gary Mason deserves a hat tip for today's story in the Groan & Wail about Roosevelt Park School in Prince Rupert, and their ranking courtesy of the Fraser Institute who used the figures from BC's Foundation Skills Assessment (FSA) test. Those figures put Roosevelt in last place, with a score of, well ... zero.

On the other end of the scale, is the private school St. George's School, who scored at the top of the test with a score of ten out of ten

Worth noting, there is no website for Roosevelt.

Mason notes that the FSA scores are for basic reading, writing, and 'rithmetic. They don't account for incidence of FAS, number of years previously in school, home situation, etc. Not huge factors for the kids at St. George, but a bit more of an issue in Prince Rupert.

And it's all about learning, or so say the helpful folks at the Fraser Institute Think Tank (note: emphasis on the 'tank', not so much the 'think') in their release on the 'Report Card'

I'm always happy to see my free market friends use taxpayer-funded research, but it might have been nice to see some value-added here. Like what are the determinants at an individual level? What type of follow-up is needed to ensure the low-scoring schools can improve their score?

And what really surprised me here was that the Fraser Institute missed an opportunity to talk about more effective use of tax-dollars.

I mean, jeez, is it really an effective use of BC tax money to provide over $2000 per student to a private school like St. Georges, when a public school is in such straits?

And just how do the tax-paying parents of Prince George feel about that?

They must be all warm and fuzzy knowing some kids are getting a great education with their tax-dollars, even if its not their own children.

I suppose its the difference between between Prince George, and Saint George.

Who is afraid?

There is a movement afoot to together a Canadian website “I am not afraid”in response to the terrorists attempt to blow up… well, no-one is saying what, but three tons of ammonium-nitrate is a lot fertilizer.

The logic is that if we are afraid, then the terrorists win.

So I asked myself – am I afraid?

No, I am not.

But one of my friends is.

My friend is a lot like me. He’s married, he has children, he works in downtown Ottawa.

We are both first generation Canadians whose parents came here for a better life.

But I’m white. He’s not.

So if you ask me if I am afraid, I am not. I am not afraid of the terrorists.

But if you ask my friend, he may be just a little bit afraid.

Perhaps not of the terrorists, and he would never admit being afraid for himself, but he is afraid for his family, and friends, and of what would come after the terrorists.

Most Canadians shouldn’t feel afraid. Clearly, our security people are doing their job and doing it well.

Last Sunday night, we all saw the footage of vandalized mosques in Toronto. This morning, another man was threatened with a knife in Quebec City. When an attack succeeds, it is not unreasonable to think that the response will be more than broken windows.

And that makes some of us afraid.

And if Canadians - like my friend - must not only fear terrorism, but also our reaction to terrorism, well… they really do win, don’t they?

I will not be afraid, I wish I could say the same for others.

Noooosssse-Stretcher.

I am not sure what to call this.

I can think of a word, but the legal department doesn't let me use it. And my mom reads this stuff, and she still thinks I'm a nice person.

I flipped open yesterday's Globe & Mail to read:PM backs down on policy for fallen Hours after funeral, Harper lets families decide whether public can see arrival of bodies

I am not sure the headline writer got it right.

Commenting on Captain Nichola Goddard's funeral, and her father's criticism of the Ramp Ceremony media ban, the Prime Minister said:

"I had given fairly clear instructions that, when bodies were to come home, families were to be consulted," Mr. Harper said at a news conference in Victoria. "And if all families were agreed on making that particular ceremony public, that our government should have no difficulty with that. I'm not sure what happened in this case."

No, we're all 'not sure what happened in this case.'

As late as April 25th Harper himself defended the policy on House of Commons, saying "It is not about photo ops and media coverage, it's about what's in the best interests of the families."

On the same day, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor told the CBC that the Government had decided to ban all media coverage to have a consistent policy.

And it wasn't just 'this case.'

The Canadian Press reported the Coporal Matthew Dinning's father had spoken out against the ban last month, playing a home video of the arrival of his son's body at the funeral in Wingham, Ontario.

It appears that the instructions were quite clear to everyone -- except the man who apparently gave them.

The revolution will not be broadcast....

The media dissing match sunk to a new low this afternoon when Little Stevie told everyone he was picking up his marbles and playing with other kids...

Alex Panetta ran tonight's CP wire story on Harper announcing in London that he feels the national media are biased against him, so he's going to avoid them.

This stems from his demand that his staff assemble a list of reporters who are allowed to ask questions at press conferences.

Yesterday, a large number of journalists simply got up and left the Darfur newser when they refused to submit a list, and Harper refused to take their questions.

I'm not sure I blame the journalists on this one.

Certainly, the Story-Tories will say its our right, we're doing things differently, and the media are out to get us, so they can get stuffed. They will also point out that Harper's polling numbers are going up, that this is an Ottawa story, and that regional media will be pretty happy.

But it omits two small facts.

First, reporters don't go to newsers where they know they can't ask questions. Why would they? And if they aren't there, they are normally talking to some one else... like the opposition.

Second, regional media don't follow Prime Ministers around on election planes. Now you might think, but hey, we'll just deal with the regional media during the election.

But you've still got to worry about the kids on the plane.

And they can be very cruel.

Don't believe me?

Go ask my buddy Paul Martin about his Christmas holidays. He can tell you all about the liberal media and bias.

Better yet, ask Alex Panetta, who wrote tonight's wire story.

Alex is the guy who was told by Martin's staff that if he wrote a certain story, they'd never talk to him again. He wrote the story anyway.

Alex? He's still at the same desk, and Paul and his staff, well...they're not.

On being Fiscally Conservative

"Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives."

-John Stewart Mill

Friday's Mop and Pail editorial asked if the Conservatives would be fiscally conservative in their next budget.

Darn good question.

I certainly hope not.

It's a curious term, "fiscal conservative." If we look at the recent history of Fiscal Conservatives, it is a history of high deficits, public investment in capital intensive, and low-return public policy, while cutting social investment in things like education, welfare and healthcare.

Regan, Thatcher and Mulroney - all fiscal conservative in their day- ran up massive deficits and national debts. The result was that centrist governments who inherited these deificits found themselves fiscally ham-strung, it was left up the 'wet-kleenexes' to balance the books.

Here at home, there has been much hullaballoo about Bob Rae's fiscal record. He was, in the Thatcher/Regan/Mulroney tradition, a fiscal conservative, in that he managed to run up quite a nasty deficit.

In his defense, he did so in some pretty awful economic times in Ontario, driven prinicipally by a high-interest policy from the Bank of Canada and an inherited mess from Liberal David Peterson.

But what he didn't do was take a $5.5B surplus, and turn it into a $2B deficit in some most incredible growth periods Ontario has ever known.

No, if he'd managed that monetary nadir, he would not be running for Liberal leadership, he'd be Stephen Harper's new finance minister, Jim Flaherty.

And so will the Harper Conservative be fiscal conservatives?

For the love of God, I hope not.

Harper is right, even though he's wrong

There has been much discussion on allowing the media to record the arrival of Canadian soldiers who have been killed in Afganistan. The Harper government has decided to ban media from CFB Trenton when the bodies of the slain were disembarked and returned to their families.

Predictably, the media have taken great offense to this, suggesting it smacks of censorship, etc, and accusing the Harper government of fear that such images would reduce support for the war in Afganhistan.

But the ban is the right decision.

I cannot begin to imagine the pain that a family must feel upon the return of a slain sibling, child or spouse. It is a moment that belongs to them, and to those whom they invite to support them, not the uninvited lens of a camera.

Certainly there are some families who would like to have the arrival covered. However, there are others who do not. Unfortunately, often they do not arrive on separate flights. (In the event of a single casualty the families wishes should come first, but the government has chosed to ignore this exception.)

The embarkation of the bodies is done in full public view. The funerals and memorials are covered or not covered at the request of the families. There is no overarching need to compromise the desire for privacy for the 11 o'clock news.

That aside, it is interesting to note that you're hard pressed to find any commentator, conservative or other, who can credibly suggest that this is the reason for Harper's new policy.

And that is the sad part. The first hundred days have been so riddled with flip-flops, crass opportunism, principles of convenience, that the PM can't credibly make the case for decency.

And that is a truly sad state of affairs.

Fun with Harper and Photo Shop

I've been looking for an excuse to figure out how to put pictures in my posts, and well, also to figure out how photo shop works... I also enjoy taking the mickey out of Stephen.


Oh what fun... now if only I can figure out how to put it on my sidebar, I'll be set....

... and a big hat tip to Entozoan Film for the idea....

Who is Dalton's techie?

Because they should get a big fat raise.

Take a look at this.

It's the Premier's new interactive website. And it's quite something. In fact, it's a lot like watching TV - only better, which what the internet should be.

Of course I am on high-speed, I shudder to think what this will be like on dial-up, but who cares? Those dial-up dudes bug me...

I have no idea who did this, but Bill Graham, if you're reading this, go take a look.

I never thought I'd say this, Bill, but you need to be more like Dalton...

Constitutionally speaking...

The cat is out of the bag, Harper is setting the course for a constitutional debate.

This little trial balloon should be interesting.

Given that there was no discussion of this during the election and it's curious absence from the Conservative platform, it's a surprise to everyone.

It's a cynical strategy to set the table for the next election.

You don't need a Strategic Counsel poll to realize that the 5-P's aren't going to set anyone's passion on fire, in fact, they are likely to infuriate a lot of people.

So Stephen realizes he needs something else to talk about, and to corner the Liberal's into something which pits them against the provinces. Mulroney did this with free trade, and it worked.

Why do I say this is cynical?

Well, you woke up this morning, had breakfast, took the kids to school, and went to work.

What bugged you about today? Likely nothing.

But if something bothered you, what about your day so far required a constitutional change?

Likely nothing.

You might have wanted a better car (a tax cut), or less traffic (infrastructure), or a better school (provincial jurisdiction), a more challenging job (SDC) or maybe a prettier husband/wife (Wife Swop...)

But none of these require a constitutional amendment. Fixing them does have an important role for the federal government, but none require a constitutional amendment.

Unless you want to enshrine the right to hold secret cabinet meetings... yeah, that's what this is about...

Otherwise, rolling the dice with the future of the country is as nutty as it gets...

Bright Tory idea #457: Let's jail the press corp

No joke.

Tory Colin Mayes thinks it might be a good idea.

In a column mailed to constituents this week, the conservative MP suggested, "Maybe it is time that we hauled off in handcuffs reporters that fabricate stories, or twist information and even falsely accuse citizens.”

I guess liable laws aren't enough. I'm not sure which stories were fabricated or twisted, but hey, a conservative would know more about that than me.

As all government communications are required to be vetted, there is no doubt in my mind that Mr. Mayes cleared this through PMO communications.

But I've got a better idea.

Let's try out the "time for slime law" on MP's first and slide it in under the Accountability Act.

So if an MP suggested the government was involved in a billion dollar boondoggle for instance, and say it turned out that it was really less than 100k that went missing, then the MP would go to jail?

Is that "falsely accusing" enough?

Or maybe an MP promises that all senators will be elected, and then appoints his leadership campaign chair to the Senate, maybe that MP could do some time in the Pokey?

Is that "twisting" enough?

Or perhaps an MP who says he has a constitutional right to something which can't be found in the constitution should be driven downtown via the scenic route? Perhaps led away in chains and an orange jumpsuit?

Is that "fabricating" enough?

Or maybe an MP promises to scrap an entire government program, but then says no, it will stay in place. Maybe that MP should spend a few years on the chain-gang?

Again, is that "fabricating" enough?

Or maybe an MP thinks cutting the GST is a stupid idea, but then becomes (hypothetically) the Finance minister and sets about doing just that? Perhaps they should have their gang tatts photographed and spend a night in the county lock-up?

Is that "twisting" enough?

William Stairs, you are the luckiest Tory of them all....

Clement: Guarranteeing higher healthcare costs..

According to "Two-tier" Tony Clement the Conservative Wait Time guarrantees will have legal force, and failure to meet them means patients will be able to sue.

Sounds like a good idea, eh?

No hip replacement this week? Grandma is off to see the lawyer so they can sue the lazy doctor and incompetent hospital.

Well, Grandma won't be the only person rubbing their hands together, no these kids just saw a whole new business line develop.

Buy insurance stocks kids, they just found a whole new growth area.

And who will pay that insurance premium increase? Well, the doctors and the hospitals.

But hang on, where do they get their funding from? Why the taxpayer of course!

Congrats. Two-tier Tony just jacked up your taxes for health care, and not a penny in the new costs will provide one more hospital bed, physician or MRI.

Or maybe Tories will get tough, and tell hospitals to be more competitive, and not screw up or see their bottomline take the hit.

In which case, no worries about additional costs, they'll take out of their current budget. And you know, spend less on other things, like... uh, health care?

But insurance brokers, well, they'll be happy. Because the government always pays their bills on time... it's like, well, a guarrantee.

A health care guarrantee, if you like...

Nice.

Harper's constitutional crisis & the media...

All those years in politics, two university degrees, and access to the internet, and I missed it.

Apparently Trudeau slipped one by all of us when he patriated the constitution in 1982. While we were all reading the BNA Act, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Trudeau slipped in the now infamous -- and hard to find -- cabinet meeting clause.

I'm talking about Stephen Harper's claim to have a constitutional right to hold secret cabinet meetings.

I'd never heard of this right until today, and I don't think anyone except Stephen Harper knew about it, but apparently it's there.

I just can't find it.

Maybe Stephen has the copy of the constitution with the invisible ink that only conservative decoder glasses can seen...

What, you don't have the decoder glasses?

But they come with every blue lawn sign... along with the instruction for the secret handshake, and the location of the clubhouse...

Ah, I remember government concerned about the constitutional rights of the individual, of the people... silly rabbit...

Stephen's also concerned about constitutional rights... his individual rights... nice, but it's not what you expect from some one who wants to be Prime Minister.

Give Indians the vote.

It's time to give Indians the vote.

Of course, they can vote in federal, provincial, municipal, and band elections.

But not for the National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

Most people are shocked to find out that Phil Fontaine's mandate comes from the Chiefs, ordinary Indians are not allowed to vote for their national chief. They never have been.

As a result, much of the AFN policy reflects what the Chiefs want, not what their constituents want.

Matthew Coon-Come was elected on a platform of one Indian, one vote. It took the regional vice-chiefs about six weeks to beat that idea out of him

But Coon-Come was replaced by Phil Fontaine, or the "Silver Fox" to his friends. And Phil is a much more smooth operator. He launched the AFN renewal commission to produce a report called "A Treaty Among Ourselves."

Over the next 48 hours, the Chiefs are gathered at the Casino de Lac Leamy in Gatineau to consider the report which recommends essentially one Indian, one vote.

They should seriously consider voting to accept the recommendation, and for a number of reasons.

Firstly, gee, it's about freakin' time.

We can prattle on about tradition and custom, and the rest, but let's be clear: The AFN is a modern creature. It will create its own tradtions and customs, and there is no Aboriginal historical precedent. Get with the times.

Secondly, gee, it's about freakin' time.

The National Chief of the AFN has suffered traditionally from one major weakeness: The Mandate.

Time and time again, when faced with disagreements, other governments have poo-pooed the National Chief on the basis that the chiefs hold direct mandates from the people, and the National Chief does not. And it's true. Moving to a direct vote cuts the knees out from this argument.

Thirdly, gee, it's about freakin' time.

AFN elections and assemblies have been a mess for years. The rules are ignored, decisions reversed, then reversed again, and again, until no one knows what the Assembly's position on anything is.

A clear set of rules and a mandate will give the National Chief the clarity and the mandate to act, both externally and internally. And that's good thing for everyone.

Finally, gee, wouldn't it be fun to turn the tables on the Federal and Provincial governments?

I mean, hell, no one has ever voted directly for a Prime Minister or Premier. Enjoy the opportunity to say, "Whitey - hey, where's your mandate?"

Tell me that wouldn't be fun.... just once...

The Press needs to put their money where their mouth is...

... or maybe where their camera lense is.

Yet another story tonight about Harper muzzling the media like he muzzles his caucus.

Today, Harper tripled security and barred the media from a photo-op (a bit of a strange tactic for a photo-op).

What was the high-risk, post 9/11 dangerous photo-op that required the national guard in an Ohio-like state?

It was children giving the PM daffodils for national cancer awareness month. It appears the PMO wanted to take their own pictures...

This is the umpteenth story about censoring the media, but by far the most ridiculous to date, but jee whiz willickers... enough.

"I don't think the average Canadian cares as long as they know their government is being well run," said Sandra Buckler, the PM's Directed of Communications.

If the media is so ticked about this, then stop running the stories.

Cut off the oxygen of politics: coverage.

Black out Harper just like he blacks out the press and his caucus.

Stop covering the feel-good, nicey-nice stuff... stop running footage of announcements. Simply provide an editorial synopsis, and run the other guys responding.

I figure it should take about 24 hours to see an change in attitude from the PMO... But until then, don't expect any change, why would he?

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Other planned changes to restrict access and muzzle the media:

• Withholding basic announcements of visits by heads of state and premiers.
• Issuing in-house photos of closed meetings between public officials, such as visiting premiers and heads of state, rather than allowing news photographers access.
• Refusing to use the national press theatre, where simultaneous translation is provided, in favour of a more prime ministerial podium in the House of Commons foyer.
• Making lists of media wishing to ask questions during availabilities, then picking and choosing which reporters get to ask those questions.
• Allowing only technical staff, but not the customary two "pool" reporters who relay events to the wider press gallery membership, into photo-ops.

Jim Prentice: The Waterboy

Earlier this week, Jim Prentice moved on First Nations water quality with a no-money and no-resources announcement aimed at improving the situation on reserve.

He is an excellent choice as minister, with solid experience in dealing with First Nations issues and an approach which is very similar to Bob Nault, the longest serving INAC minister since Chretien vacated the post back in '74.

But he has drank the departmental kool-aid on the water issue, we can only hope it was bottled and not tap-water.

Indeed, his announcement looks a lot like this announcement, from back '04.

Prentice pushed the notion of making it mandatory for FNs to have certified plant operators. And the backgrounder says that this will be the responsibility of the FN.

But I sure hope Prentice didn't pay much for the consultant to write his backgrounder, which bears a striking resemblance to this backgrounder in '04. I could go on, but.... well, doubtless the department mentionned this in the briefing...

I'm all about re-announcing stuff if you can get away with it, but I'm not sure I'd be re-announcing a Liberal program if I were new Conservative minister.

However, it's a legitimate question that if the Libs had been working on this for almost two years, why no change?

Well, if you read Prentice's list of high-risk communities, and the list from two years ago, you'll notice they don't label the same communities as high-risk. Things are improving.

But the real issue here is not money - or a mandatory code which is already mandatory - it's a human problem.

First, an operator first needs a high school diploma to qualify for the training and certification. Unfortunately, First Nations have the lowest number of high school diplomas of any group in the country, so the talent pool is limited.

Second, if you live on reserve, a place where there is regularly inadequate housing, no jobs, and little opportunity, but you have a high school diploma... do you really want to stay? And if you stay, don't forget you've also got to drink the water.

Third, if you've got the certification and the diploma, you are hot commodity in the job market my friend. So maybe you get more than one offer, maybe an offer for a reserve that's closer to the city and a modern health care, that pays more, has a better school for your kids, where you don't lose you job when the chief loses the election... etc...

There's no easy solution to those challenges. It's hardly a question of a mandatory code. It will require real investment and not necessarily in water quality.

But the Kelowna Accords are off the table ... right?