In this entry I am going to be extremely personal. I don't discuss my personal life with many people but in this case I find it necessary to do so.
I suffer from bi-polar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder and a myriad of anxiety disorders stemming from long-term violent sexual abuse as a child. It took me most of my life time to identify these things and to get the proper support that I need to deal with these mental and emotional problems. Currently I am on the Ontario Disability Support Program or ODSP.
Recently I discovered that @kathleen_wynne and the Ontario Liberal government is considering slashing the amount paid to ODSP and Ontario Works (welfare) recipients by almost half. This would cut ODSP income to around 600.00 per month. This is ludicrous. I live in Toronto, where that wouldn't even cover rent. never mind any bills I might have, not to mention food. There is also talk of slashing some of the special allowances like the special food allowance for those that need it and some of the other special allowances that are required by many of the most disenfranchised people in our society.
Already some allowances have been cut. Last January, the Start-up allowance was ended. That was the allowance that could be accessed once every two years if an ODSP recipient needed to move or needed to purchase new furniture like a bed if they developed a situation like bed bugs. Guess what, that allowance is gone. Many food banks also changed their rules last January, and ODSP recipients no longer qualify for food assistance.
If this cut happens, many more disenfranchised people will become homeless. You cannot even find a cheap monthly hotel room for that rate, and even if you do, it is bed bug, and roach infested and you would have no money left over for food.
Many ODSP and OW recipients share apartments to share their costs, or they have subsidised housing. The problem with subsidised housing is that the list can be up to 10 years long, and you have to remember to re-register every year. If you forget, you can be removed from the list.
The fact of the matter is, there is no political party in the legislature that cares about the poorest and most disenfranchised people in our Province. The Progressive Conservatives care about business and the upper middle class, the Liberal Party is all about the middle class, and the New Democrats are about the Unions. Nobody cares about the poorest most disenfranchised people in Ontario.
Mike Harris's Conservative Party cut the Welfare rate by over 21% in 1995 and it resulted in an increased homeless rate and poverty rate, and now the Liberal government (then a harsh critic of the move) is planning a similar move. Somebody has to stand up for the rights of those of us who do not have a voice in the legislature.
I have posted a petition on the right side bar, I hope you will sign it. (it has other petitions as well if you want to follow through the widget) Call your local MPP and let them know you do not support this move.
Sunday, 24 November 2013
Wednesday, 20 November 2013
A sobering afterthought on Monday's vote at Toronto City Council
In the previous post I talked about what happened on Monday at Toront City council. While I agree that certain things needed to be done to curb the Mayor's behaviour, and action needed to be taken to show #mayorFord that things could not continue as they were, there are a few things that in retrospect were probably detrimental to the City of Toronto.
With the passing of the motion, Mayor Ford still remains mayor, retaining all of the duties and responsibilities legislated to him by the Province of Ontario. He simply lost those powers granted to him by council.
In doing this however, the motion stripped the Mayor of most of his budget and most of his staff. There is an inherent problem here. The Mayor still has most of his duties. It is unclear whether he will be able to carry out his responsibilities with the minimal staff that city council left him, or with the extremely trimmed budget. Whoever put these numbers together probably did not think very clearly about what exactly goes on inside the Mayor's office on a daily basis.
There were also a few items in the motion that seem on sober reflection purely vindictive. Why for example does it matter if the Mayor chooses to speak first or last a a City Council meeting. I mean really? Was it necessary to include that in the motion?
One needs to remember that this was an amended motion that was quite complicated and put together over a weekend. It was also introduced at 12:06 pm, debated, and voted on by 17:00. It would have been much better if there had been a little more time for debate. (I am not disagreeing with the intent of the motion here, just pointing out a few flaws).
I do understand however why the motion was rushed on Monday. Watching the debate in Council, the Ford brothers were busy bullying other councillors and the meeting was quite heated. There were numerous disruptions from the visitor's gallery. Council probably simply wanted to get this over with.
There have been a few things that happened since then. @pmharper and the #pmo have distanced themselves from #mayorFord. Minister of Employment @kenneyjason spoke out openly and indicated that Rob Ford should now simply resign. The Ford brother's new television show on SunTV was cancelled after only one episode.
One thing however that happened yesterday that I totally disagree with is that the Province of Ontario announce that in dealing with the City, they will only deal with the Deputy Mayor, @councillorkelly
That is outrageous. If #mayorFord is still the Mayor, then he is still the Mayor and the Province should be dealing with him. It might be distasteful, but it how it should be.
Remember @councillorkelly said yesterday "The Mayor is the Mayor"
With the passing of the motion, Mayor Ford still remains mayor, retaining all of the duties and responsibilities legislated to him by the Province of Ontario. He simply lost those powers granted to him by council.
In doing this however, the motion stripped the Mayor of most of his budget and most of his staff. There is an inherent problem here. The Mayor still has most of his duties. It is unclear whether he will be able to carry out his responsibilities with the minimal staff that city council left him, or with the extremely trimmed budget. Whoever put these numbers together probably did not think very clearly about what exactly goes on inside the Mayor's office on a daily basis.
There were also a few items in the motion that seem on sober reflection purely vindictive. Why for example does it matter if the Mayor chooses to speak first or last a a City Council meeting. I mean really? Was it necessary to include that in the motion?
One needs to remember that this was an amended motion that was quite complicated and put together over a weekend. It was also introduced at 12:06 pm, debated, and voted on by 17:00. It would have been much better if there had been a little more time for debate. (I am not disagreeing with the intent of the motion here, just pointing out a few flaws).
I do understand however why the motion was rushed on Monday. Watching the debate in Council, the Ford brothers were busy bullying other councillors and the meeting was quite heated. There were numerous disruptions from the visitor's gallery. Council probably simply wanted to get this over with.
There have been a few things that happened since then. @pmharper and the #pmo have distanced themselves from #mayorFord. Minister of Employment @kenneyjason spoke out openly and indicated that Rob Ford should now simply resign. The Ford brother's new television show on SunTV was cancelled after only one episode.
One thing however that happened yesterday that I totally disagree with is that the Province of Ontario announce that in dealing with the City, they will only deal with the Deputy Mayor, @councillorkelly
That is outrageous. If #mayorFord is still the Mayor, then he is still the Mayor and the Province should be dealing with him. It might be distasteful, but it how it should be.
Remember @councillorkelly said yesterday "The Mayor is the Mayor"
Monday, 18 November 2013
A Chaotic Day in the Life of Toronto City Council
Today Toronto City Council is debating whether to remove some of the budget and staff from #mayorFord and reallocate it to the deputy mayor. Most of his powers would be given to the deputy mayor. He would only retain those powers legislated to him by the Province of Ontario. The debate has been heated since it started this morning and there have been several bizarre instances that are inexplicable.
The biggest part of this debate is whether or not this move is legal. Most experts seem to think that council is within their rights to do this, but the top Municipal Attorney in the country seems to be of the opinion that council operating outside their authority. Council is clearly split and it is unclear if there is enough votes for the 2/3 majority for the motion to pass.
From the moment the debate started the Ford brother's #bully show has been in high gear as they fight to keep Rob Ford fully entrenched as Mayor. Rob Ford seems to think he can go around #bullying councillors. He continues to degrade himself and degrade his city.
A couple of inexplicable events happened that certainly do not help his case. When Councillor Doug Ford was speaking (and councillor Paul Ainslie interrupted), #mayorFord made gestures as if he was driving drunk. This was in reference to councillor Ainslie being stopped at a RIDE stop for drunk driving. Mayor Ford is an idiot if he doesn't get the irony here. Councillor Ainslie did not hide the fact that the incident occurred, he accepted the consequences, (his license was suspended for 3 days) and there was never any indication he was being investigated by the police for any kind of involvement with gangs or drugs. Hmmm... #mayorFord on the other hand, lied about the #crackvideo and smoking #crack for six months, and then later admitted to numerous incidents of drunk driving. Mayor Ford was also the subject of a police investigation involving gangs and drugs and the alleged #crackvideo. Mayor Ford was behaving like a spoiled child. (I apologise that I had to come back and correct some factual errors regarding councillor Ainslie)
In another incident, a disruption occurred in the visitors gallery. This prompted #dougFord to ask the speaker to clear the gallery. Mayor Ford began taking pictures of people in the gallery and both Ford brothers began screaming at visitors in the gallery, screaming NDP and other names at them. Then Mayor Ford charged around the front of the chamber and knocked down Councillor Pam McConnell. He did not apologise to her until it was demanded of him.. He explained that he thought his brother was getting into an altercation with the crowd and was rushing to his aid.
In another development, Ontario PC party Tim Hudak has indicated that Rob Ford has to go and he will support Premier Kathleen Wynne in giving Toronto City Council whatever tools it needs to make this happen if City Council needs it. It is important to note that both the Ford brothers are conservatives, so this must come as a slap to them.
The debate continues, with chaos in the chamber. More to follow.
After the debate was over, the motion was voted on item by item instead of as a whole. Mayor Ford is now Mayor of Toronto in name only, with only the powers that are legislated to him by the Province of Ontario. The rest of his powers, and most of his budget have been stripped away by city council..
Some people may think that this is undemocratic, but when all is said and done, his behaviour over the last six months has been unpredictable and unforgivable as the Mayor of the City of Toronto,. What kind of message doe the mayor give when he smokes #crack, associates with gang members, and drug dealers, and goes on television and behaves in a lewd manner. He was asked numerous times to take a short leave of absence to get his act together and then come back stronger. Instead, he bullied the press, denied, denied, denied, and then finally exploded in a display of vile lewdness on television. The needs of the people of Toronto have been met, and Council has done it's due diligence.
The biggest part of this debate is whether or not this move is legal. Most experts seem to think that council is within their rights to do this, but the top Municipal Attorney in the country seems to be of the opinion that council operating outside their authority. Council is clearly split and it is unclear if there is enough votes for the 2/3 majority for the motion to pass.
From the moment the debate started the Ford brother's #bully show has been in high gear as they fight to keep Rob Ford fully entrenched as Mayor. Rob Ford seems to think he can go around #bullying councillors. He continues to degrade himself and degrade his city.
A couple of inexplicable events happened that certainly do not help his case. When Councillor Doug Ford was speaking (and councillor Paul Ainslie interrupted), #mayorFord made gestures as if he was driving drunk. This was in reference to councillor Ainslie being stopped at a RIDE stop for drunk driving. Mayor Ford is an idiot if he doesn't get the irony here. Councillor Ainslie did not hide the fact that the incident occurred, he accepted the consequences, (his license was suspended for 3 days) and there was never any indication he was being investigated by the police for any kind of involvement with gangs or drugs. Hmmm... #mayorFord on the other hand, lied about the #crackvideo and smoking #crack for six months, and then later admitted to numerous incidents of drunk driving. Mayor Ford was also the subject of a police investigation involving gangs and drugs and the alleged #crackvideo. Mayor Ford was behaving like a spoiled child. (I apologise that I had to come back and correct some factual errors regarding councillor Ainslie)
In another incident, a disruption occurred in the visitors gallery. This prompted #dougFord to ask the speaker to clear the gallery. Mayor Ford began taking pictures of people in the gallery and both Ford brothers began screaming at visitors in the gallery, screaming NDP and other names at them. Then Mayor Ford charged around the front of the chamber and knocked down Councillor Pam McConnell. He did not apologise to her until it was demanded of him.. He explained that he thought his brother was getting into an altercation with the crowd and was rushing to his aid.
In another development, Ontario PC party Tim Hudak has indicated that Rob Ford has to go and he will support Premier Kathleen Wynne in giving Toronto City Council whatever tools it needs to make this happen if City Council needs it. It is important to note that both the Ford brothers are conservatives, so this must come as a slap to them.
The debate continues, with chaos in the chamber. More to follow.
After the debate was over, the motion was voted on item by item instead of as a whole. Mayor Ford is now Mayor of Toronto in name only, with only the powers that are legislated to him by the Province of Ontario. The rest of his powers, and most of his budget have been stripped away by city council..
Some people may think that this is undemocratic, but when all is said and done, his behaviour over the last six months has been unpredictable and unforgivable as the Mayor of the City of Toronto,. What kind of message doe the mayor give when he smokes #crack, associates with gang members, and drug dealers, and goes on television and behaves in a lewd manner. He was asked numerous times to take a short leave of absence to get his act together and then come back stronger. Instead, he bullied the press, denied, denied, denied, and then finally exploded in a display of vile lewdness on television. The needs of the people of Toronto have been met, and Council has done it's due diligence.
Sunday, 17 November 2013
The most basic reason why Rob Ford must go
Rob Ford must go as Mayor of Toronto, and the most basic reason may not be what most people think. It has nothing to do with the alleged #crackvideo or his lewd behaviour on national television. It is much more basic than that. It is the message he sends with his incessant #bullying. The Ford Brother #bully machine has been in high gear since May when allegations arose in the Toronto Star that there was a video of Mayor Ford smoking crack. The bullying however goes much further back than that, and most often #mayorFord denies it until he can't deny it any longer.
As early as 2006 it was clear that then City Councillor Rob Ford was a bully. He was thrown out of a Toronto Maple Leafs game for being belligerent and bullying other fans, even so far as to call them communists. This behaviour continued. with many other instances, including giving one driver "the finger" for indicating to him that he shouldn't be driving while on his cell phone.
It is now common knowledge that he bullied his staff, other councillors (especially those on his executive that didn't agree with him), and as late as last Friday attempted to bully Councillor Minnan-Wong on the floor of Council, who felt he had to appeal to the Speaker.
Back to last May when the Toronto Star first reported the existed of the #crackvideo. The Ford brother #bully machine went on their weekly radio show and began verbally abusing the press. This went on for months. #mayorFord continued this abuse for months knowing full well that the existence of this video was truthful. At this point I will give Councillor Doug Ford the benefit of the doubt because according to #robford he did not disclose the existence of the video to his brother. This still does not really excuse the #bullying that the Ford brothers heaped upon the press.
Last week the underacted documents were released indicating that some of Mayor Ford's staff had cooperated with Police in the investigation of the Mayor's friend Alexandro Lisi. #mayorFord immediately in his bullish attitude indicated that he was going to sue those staffers who cooperated with the Police. Legal experts are of the opinion that this is just a #bully tactic because he can't win unless there was intended "malice" on the part those who gave statements.
Here is why this is important. We have a national #bullying crisis. Our kids are being bullied at school. They are subject to #cyberbullying outside of school. Many of our young people feel lost, hopeless and feel as if there is no way out but suicide. #bullying is leading to the deaths of our children. It is also leading to the criminalisation of others.
Professionals, like teachers and mental health experts are trying to do their best to stem this rising tide of #bullying. The Prime Minister of Canada, @pmharper has even introduced new legislation that would make #cyberbullying illegal.
If the government of Canada finds bullying such a sensitive issue, perhaps it is time that the city of Toronto did too. Perhaps it is time to for the mayor to go based solely on his behaviour as a #bully,
The children of the city don't need to hear and see this vile public display. The are constantly being told not to #bully, by their teachers and their parents. Yet, here is a Mayor who does it every day and it's all over the news. They hear their parents laughing about it sometimes (because let's face it, city hall at the moment is a circus), but it isn't really a joke.
As long as #mayorFord stays put, the more ridiculous it becomes and the more mixed messages our children get about what is right and wrong. The children of Toronto deserve better.
As early as 2006 it was clear that then City Councillor Rob Ford was a bully. He was thrown out of a Toronto Maple Leafs game for being belligerent and bullying other fans, even so far as to call them communists. This behaviour continued. with many other instances, including giving one driver "the finger" for indicating to him that he shouldn't be driving while on his cell phone.
It is now common knowledge that he bullied his staff, other councillors (especially those on his executive that didn't agree with him), and as late as last Friday attempted to bully Councillor Minnan-Wong on the floor of Council, who felt he had to appeal to the Speaker.
Back to last May when the Toronto Star first reported the existed of the #crackvideo. The Ford brother #bully machine went on their weekly radio show and began verbally abusing the press. This went on for months. #mayorFord continued this abuse for months knowing full well that the existence of this video was truthful. At this point I will give Councillor Doug Ford the benefit of the doubt because according to #robford he did not disclose the existence of the video to his brother. This still does not really excuse the #bullying that the Ford brothers heaped upon the press.
Last week the underacted documents were released indicating that some of Mayor Ford's staff had cooperated with Police in the investigation of the Mayor's friend Alexandro Lisi. #mayorFord immediately in his bullish attitude indicated that he was going to sue those staffers who cooperated with the Police. Legal experts are of the opinion that this is just a #bully tactic because he can't win unless there was intended "malice" on the part those who gave statements.
Here is why this is important. We have a national #bullying crisis. Our kids are being bullied at school. They are subject to #cyberbullying outside of school. Many of our young people feel lost, hopeless and feel as if there is no way out but suicide. #bullying is leading to the deaths of our children. It is also leading to the criminalisation of others.
Professionals, like teachers and mental health experts are trying to do their best to stem this rising tide of #bullying. The Prime Minister of Canada, @pmharper has even introduced new legislation that would make #cyberbullying illegal.
If the government of Canada finds bullying such a sensitive issue, perhaps it is time that the city of Toronto did too. Perhaps it is time to for the mayor to go based solely on his behaviour as a #bully,
The children of the city don't need to hear and see this vile public display. The are constantly being told not to #bully, by their teachers and their parents. Yet, here is a Mayor who does it every day and it's all over the news. They hear their parents laughing about it sometimes (because let's face it, city hall at the moment is a circus), but it isn't really a joke.
As long as #mayorFord stays put, the more ridiculous it becomes and the more mixed messages our children get about what is right and wrong. The children of Toronto deserve better.
Monday, 11 November 2013
Remembrance Day: A Lagacy and a Future
Today is Remembrance day in Canada. It is the time to reflect on those Canadian soldier's who fought, served and perhaps perished in service and defence of their country. What those men and women sacrificed for Canada needs to be honoured and remembered because it was that bravery and action that allowed Canada to thrive and flourish as a Free Nation.
This is a time of reflection of times past, and a time when we use words like Honour, Duty, and Valour. It is a time when we reflect upon those that we have lost, and those that have returned to us scarred by war. It is a somber time. We must honour the legacy that those that sacrificed so much have left us. We must never forget what they have done for us.
From battlefields around the world like Vimy Ridge, Ypres, The Somme, Passchendaele, Amiens, Dieppe, Sicily, Montecchio, Fosso Munio, Normandy, The Orne, Dunkirk, Calais, Kapyong, and Afghansitan to name just a few, to the many peacekeeping duties and emergency response duties, our men and women in uniform have served us with distinction. Their legacy is our freedom.
However, there is a future to be found from this legacy. It is up to all Canadians to live up to this future potential. It is up to all Canadians to educate each other, and to educate new Canadians about the significance of this day, and about the importance of our men and women in uniform. Unfortunately in too many countries, uniforms mean something entirely different, and we must ensure that all new Canadians understand that our servicemen are first and foremost soldiers of peace.
We must educate new Canadians and encourage them to remember this day with us, even if it does not directly relate to them. Make this day about them as well. After all, they came to a free Canada because of what Canadian servicemen and women have sacrificed.
There is another side that must be addressed as well too, That is the education of our young people. Many young people are totally indifferent to Remembrance Day. Not only that, but it seems that every year somewhere across the country there is at least one instance of vandalism at a cenotaph or memorial site. This has to stop. The desecration of these sites is obscene. We need to begin to re-educate our youth about our history. We need to make our youth understand that the wars of the past are not just things that happened a hundred years ago and now mean nothing. Those wars shaped how our country is TODAY. Because of those wars and the dedication of our servicemen, we are a free society.
At 11:00 every rise and salute for "The Last Post" and then two minutes of silence.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields
(John McCrae)
This is a time of reflection of times past, and a time when we use words like Honour, Duty, and Valour. It is a time when we reflect upon those that we have lost, and those that have returned to us scarred by war. It is a somber time. We must honour the legacy that those that sacrificed so much have left us. We must never forget what they have done for us.
From battlefields around the world like Vimy Ridge, Ypres, The Somme, Passchendaele, Amiens, Dieppe, Sicily, Montecchio, Fosso Munio, Normandy, The Orne, Dunkirk, Calais, Kapyong, and Afghansitan to name just a few, to the many peacekeeping duties and emergency response duties, our men and women in uniform have served us with distinction. Their legacy is our freedom.
However, there is a future to be found from this legacy. It is up to all Canadians to live up to this future potential. It is up to all Canadians to educate each other, and to educate new Canadians about the significance of this day, and about the importance of our men and women in uniform. Unfortunately in too many countries, uniforms mean something entirely different, and we must ensure that all new Canadians understand that our servicemen are first and foremost soldiers of peace.
We must educate new Canadians and encourage them to remember this day with us, even if it does not directly relate to them. Make this day about them as well. After all, they came to a free Canada because of what Canadian servicemen and women have sacrificed.
There is another side that must be addressed as well too, That is the education of our young people. Many young people are totally indifferent to Remembrance Day. Not only that, but it seems that every year somewhere across the country there is at least one instance of vandalism at a cenotaph or memorial site. This has to stop. The desecration of these sites is obscene. We need to begin to re-educate our youth about our history. We need to make our youth understand that the wars of the past are not just things that happened a hundred years ago and now mean nothing. Those wars shaped how our country is TODAY. Because of those wars and the dedication of our servicemen, we are a free society.
At 11:00 every rise and salute for "The Last Post" and then two minutes of silence.
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields
(John McCrae)
Sunday, 10 November 2013
A Government Amok: Conclusion: A Tale of Two Crises
What happened as a result of the expense scandal in the senate was the creation of two crises. One was purely political and took place in the PMO and the other could be considered Constitutional and took place in the Senate (although there appears to have been some influence from the PMO as well).
The Prime Minister's Office:
After the meeting in February between Nigel Wright, Senator Duffy and Prime Minister Harper, the Prime Minister claims that from them until mid-May he knew absolutely nothing. I would like to give the Prime Minister the benefit of the doubt, but either his staff kept him blissfully unaware or he was totally inept.
According to Senator Duffy there were two meetings, and according to the Prime Minister there was only one. What is clear is that the Prime Minister ordered that Senator Duffy pay back to the Senate of Canada his illegitimate expenses. If one is to believe Senator Duffy, the Prime Minister then indicated that Nigel Wright would "make the arrangements". If one is to believe the Prime Minister, he said no such thing.
What happened next is where the cover up begins. Senator Duffy still insisting he did nothing wrong because he had previously had his expenses ok'd by the Prime Minister, Senator Lebreton, and Nigel Wright continued to refuse to pay the expense back. A plot was hatched by Nigel Wright in which the Conservative Party Fund would cover those expenses (at that point around 32,000). (This is contradicted later by Senator Gerstein who is in charge of the fund who insists he never agreed to pay any of Senator Duffy's expenses). What is clear is that when Senator Duffy's expenses ballooned to over 90,000, the Party Fund refused to pay. At this point, and nobody has seen the cheque to confirm, Nigel Wright using his own funds paid Senator Duffy's debt to the Senate. Then the Conservative Party Fund paid for some legal expenses for Senator Duffy that he claimed were legal expenses surrounding the audit He was at this point still in the Conservative caucus so this was normal practice.
To cover up the fact that Nigel Wright paid Senator Duffy's expenses and Senator Duffy had paid nothing at all, Senator Duffy went on national television and lied to Canadians about taking out a mortgage on his house in Ottawa. In documents, and testimony he later tabled in the Senate, he accused the PMO of scripting the entire thing, and basically indicated that the 90,000 was a payment to keep his mouth shut. That could be considered a bribe. Bribing or giving gifts to a senator is illegal. He later submitted another set of e-mails (and paper trail) to the RCMP.
In May, the Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons, and made it clear that he was finally aware of what was happening in his office. The sole culprit, Nigel Wright. At that point, he stood by Mr. Wright. Five days later he announced that Mr. Wright had resigned as his Chief of Staff. Not long after that, his story suddenly changed and it was "a few people" who knew and were in on the entire scheme. Within a few weeks, it became clear that everyone in the PMO from Nigel Wright to staffers, attorneys, policy advisors and even Senator Gerstein were aware. Some how, as the Prime Minister, in his own office, he apparently from February until May, knew nothing.
In the fall, his story changed again. No longer did resign, but he was terminated. Under a barrage of questioning from the opposition his story continued to unravel. He began to attack Nigel Wright's character and began to demand vehemently in the house that Senator Duffy be removed from the Senate. He rarely spoke of Senators Wallin and Brazeau, even as their fates were being decided by the Senate. It is also worth noting that everyone in the PMO during this incident no longer work in the PMO but have been reassigned somewhere else. The Prime Minister was adamant that the three senators be ousted from the Senate before the Conservative Party Convention, but he didn't get his way. Some of his own senators were concerned about the process.
At the convention, the Prime Minister blamed his inability to reform the Senate on the opposition and on the courts. The fact of the matter is, it is a Supreme Court of Canada issue as there is nothing in our Constitution to allow for the removal of a sitting senator. Also at the convention, some senior MP's including Jason Kenney began to speak out against Steven Harper's demonization of Nigel Wright. Then Senator Gerstein gave his speech in which he spoke (contrary to Nigel Wright) saying that the Conservative Fund never at any point agreed to pay for Senator Duffy's expenses. Nigel Wright's attorney gave a statement that they would not comment on that at this point.
To sum it all up, there was some financial mismanagement, a supposed bribe to a Senator (to cover his misspending), and then a cover up. The Prime Minister was somehow miraculously untouched and unaware of all of it. Very few people know the entire truth. Nigel Wright isn't talking (probably on advice from his attorney), Senator Duffy seems to be cooperating with the RCMP in bits an pieces, and the Prime Minister's story seems to change weekly. What needs to happen is that all the players involved need to testify before a Parliamentary committee "under oath".
The Senate:
The crisis in the Senate does not involve a cover up or an illicit payment. It is purely constitutional. How to remove sitting senators. The Quebec Court of Appeals has indicated that it would take seven provinces representing fifty percent of the electorate to change the constitution to allow for such a provision. The government of Canada has referred this matter to the Supreme Court of Canada for a clear definition of the rules.
What happened in the Senate of Canada was shameful. Three senators were expelled without pay (but with benefits) for two years.
After the audit, and the Mike Duffy affair hit the public eye, the Prime Minister began demanding the expulsion from the Senate of Senators Wallin, Duffy, and Brazeau. Because Senators Olson, Lebreton and Tkachuk had all been somehow connected to the scandal in the PMO they were all removed from their positions.
The Senate debated and debated but could not find a way to remove the senators involved. A motion was before the Senate that would have had the senators expelled before the Conservative Party Convention. The problem was, there was no due process, and it precedent in rule of law. Basically it violated the Charter rights of the three senators involved. This was distasteful to many senators including some of Prime Minister Harper's own.
After much debate, the government motion to expel the senators did not pass before the Conservative Party Convention, as the Prime Minister had hoped. After the convention, there was a single motion with three different votes and all three senators were expelled with the same penalty.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the process. The senators involved were not given any due process. They did not get to present their case (with their attorneys present), or ask questions. The did however get to table evidence in the Senate, which is where Canadians learned that the Conservative Party Fund had paid Senator Duffy's legal expenses.
One must remember, they had been accused of misspending taxpayer monies, but no charges have been laid. There have been no formal charges. Each senator responded differently to the findings of their audit, yet they were all painted out of the Senate with the same brush. (In Part II of this blog I outlined how each senator responded to the audit and the Board of Internal Economies.)
So to sum up. Senators Wallin, Duffy, and Brazeau were expelled from the Senate without any charges being laid, without any due process, without any rule of law, and without any constitutional authority. This was all done by the order of the Prime Minister who seems to be constantly drawing more authority to the PMO and pushing the limits of that power.
Sidenote: in expelling the three senators, the Prime Minister and the Senate seemed to have forgotten about the dozens of staffers and workers that worked in the offices of those senators. They, like the three senators suddenly found themselves out of a job. Unlike the three senators who get to keep their benefits for the duration of the suspensions (and their pension time still counts), all of the staffers will get EI cheques, and benefits that continue only until the end of December. That is a really good way to recruit people into the civil service, yet alone people to work in the Conservative Party of Canada.
The Prime Minister's Office:
After the meeting in February between Nigel Wright, Senator Duffy and Prime Minister Harper, the Prime Minister claims that from them until mid-May he knew absolutely nothing. I would like to give the Prime Minister the benefit of the doubt, but either his staff kept him blissfully unaware or he was totally inept.
According to Senator Duffy there were two meetings, and according to the Prime Minister there was only one. What is clear is that the Prime Minister ordered that Senator Duffy pay back to the Senate of Canada his illegitimate expenses. If one is to believe Senator Duffy, the Prime Minister then indicated that Nigel Wright would "make the arrangements". If one is to believe the Prime Minister, he said no such thing.
What happened next is where the cover up begins. Senator Duffy still insisting he did nothing wrong because he had previously had his expenses ok'd by the Prime Minister, Senator Lebreton, and Nigel Wright continued to refuse to pay the expense back. A plot was hatched by Nigel Wright in which the Conservative Party Fund would cover those expenses (at that point around 32,000). (This is contradicted later by Senator Gerstein who is in charge of the fund who insists he never agreed to pay any of Senator Duffy's expenses). What is clear is that when Senator Duffy's expenses ballooned to over 90,000, the Party Fund refused to pay. At this point, and nobody has seen the cheque to confirm, Nigel Wright using his own funds paid Senator Duffy's debt to the Senate. Then the Conservative Party Fund paid for some legal expenses for Senator Duffy that he claimed were legal expenses surrounding the audit He was at this point still in the Conservative caucus so this was normal practice.
To cover up the fact that Nigel Wright paid Senator Duffy's expenses and Senator Duffy had paid nothing at all, Senator Duffy went on national television and lied to Canadians about taking out a mortgage on his house in Ottawa. In documents, and testimony he later tabled in the Senate, he accused the PMO of scripting the entire thing, and basically indicated that the 90,000 was a payment to keep his mouth shut. That could be considered a bribe. Bribing or giving gifts to a senator is illegal. He later submitted another set of e-mails (and paper trail) to the RCMP.
In May, the Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons, and made it clear that he was finally aware of what was happening in his office. The sole culprit, Nigel Wright. At that point, he stood by Mr. Wright. Five days later he announced that Mr. Wright had resigned as his Chief of Staff. Not long after that, his story suddenly changed and it was "a few people" who knew and were in on the entire scheme. Within a few weeks, it became clear that everyone in the PMO from Nigel Wright to staffers, attorneys, policy advisors and even Senator Gerstein were aware. Some how, as the Prime Minister, in his own office, he apparently from February until May, knew nothing.
In the fall, his story changed again. No longer did resign, but he was terminated. Under a barrage of questioning from the opposition his story continued to unravel. He began to attack Nigel Wright's character and began to demand vehemently in the house that Senator Duffy be removed from the Senate. He rarely spoke of Senators Wallin and Brazeau, even as their fates were being decided by the Senate. It is also worth noting that everyone in the PMO during this incident no longer work in the PMO but have been reassigned somewhere else. The Prime Minister was adamant that the three senators be ousted from the Senate before the Conservative Party Convention, but he didn't get his way. Some of his own senators were concerned about the process.
At the convention, the Prime Minister blamed his inability to reform the Senate on the opposition and on the courts. The fact of the matter is, it is a Supreme Court of Canada issue as there is nothing in our Constitution to allow for the removal of a sitting senator. Also at the convention, some senior MP's including Jason Kenney began to speak out against Steven Harper's demonization of Nigel Wright. Then Senator Gerstein gave his speech in which he spoke (contrary to Nigel Wright) saying that the Conservative Fund never at any point agreed to pay for Senator Duffy's expenses. Nigel Wright's attorney gave a statement that they would not comment on that at this point.
To sum it all up, there was some financial mismanagement, a supposed bribe to a Senator (to cover his misspending), and then a cover up. The Prime Minister was somehow miraculously untouched and unaware of all of it. Very few people know the entire truth. Nigel Wright isn't talking (probably on advice from his attorney), Senator Duffy seems to be cooperating with the RCMP in bits an pieces, and the Prime Minister's story seems to change weekly. What needs to happen is that all the players involved need to testify before a Parliamentary committee "under oath".
The Senate:
The crisis in the Senate does not involve a cover up or an illicit payment. It is purely constitutional. How to remove sitting senators. The Quebec Court of Appeals has indicated that it would take seven provinces representing fifty percent of the electorate to change the constitution to allow for such a provision. The government of Canada has referred this matter to the Supreme Court of Canada for a clear definition of the rules.
What happened in the Senate of Canada was shameful. Three senators were expelled without pay (but with benefits) for two years.
After the audit, and the Mike Duffy affair hit the public eye, the Prime Minister began demanding the expulsion from the Senate of Senators Wallin, Duffy, and Brazeau. Because Senators Olson, Lebreton and Tkachuk had all been somehow connected to the scandal in the PMO they were all removed from their positions.
The Senate debated and debated but could not find a way to remove the senators involved. A motion was before the Senate that would have had the senators expelled before the Conservative Party Convention. The problem was, there was no due process, and it precedent in rule of law. Basically it violated the Charter rights of the three senators involved. This was distasteful to many senators including some of Prime Minister Harper's own.
After much debate, the government motion to expel the senators did not pass before the Conservative Party Convention, as the Prime Minister had hoped. After the convention, there was a single motion with three different votes and all three senators were expelled with the same penalty.
There is something fundamentally wrong with the process. The senators involved were not given any due process. They did not get to present their case (with their attorneys present), or ask questions. The did however get to table evidence in the Senate, which is where Canadians learned that the Conservative Party Fund had paid Senator Duffy's legal expenses.
One must remember, they had been accused of misspending taxpayer monies, but no charges have been laid. There have been no formal charges. Each senator responded differently to the findings of their audit, yet they were all painted out of the Senate with the same brush. (In Part II of this blog I outlined how each senator responded to the audit and the Board of Internal Economies.)
So to sum up. Senators Wallin, Duffy, and Brazeau were expelled from the Senate without any charges being laid, without any due process, without any rule of law, and without any constitutional authority. This was all done by the order of the Prime Minister who seems to be constantly drawing more authority to the PMO and pushing the limits of that power.
Sidenote: in expelling the three senators, the Prime Minister and the Senate seemed to have forgotten about the dozens of staffers and workers that worked in the offices of those senators. They, like the three senators suddenly found themselves out of a job. Unlike the three senators who get to keep their benefits for the duration of the suspensions (and their pension time still counts), all of the staffers will get EI cheques, and benefits that continue only until the end of December. That is a really good way to recruit people into the civil service, yet alone people to work in the Conservative Party of Canada.
Saturday, 9 November 2013
A Government Amok (part 2 The Senate Scandal)
The Senate scandal is a creature of Prime Minister Harper's own creation. From his very first election campaign he campaigned on the platform of Senate reform, and promised he would never appoint senators to what he considered a dysfunctional body. To date he has appointed in the neighbourhood of 59 senators. He appointed the three star senators Pamela Wallin, Mike Duffy, and Patrick Brazeau. He appointed Mike Duffy as a Senator for P.E.I. even though he was aware that Mr. Duffy lived in Ottawa, an Pamela Wallin for Saskatchewan, even though she lived in Toronto.
According to the three senator, they cleared their housing expenses with then party leader in the Senate, Senator Lebreton as well as Nigel Wright, the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff. They were all assured that their expenses were fine. According to Senator Brazeau, he was told that the rules are, "whatever senators make them".
Then came this famous audit by Deloitte. According to the audit, there were a few issues but nothing that serious. It must be noted that nobody has seen this audit except the "Board of Internal Economies", and probably the PMO. The Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons and said that Senator Wallin's expenses were in line with other senators from Saskatchewan. The Deloitte audit also found concerns with two other issues.
First, there were no clear rules or guidelines. They noted that the audit was difficult because of this. Second they expressed concern over the treatment of Senator Wallin. She was being audited all the way back to her instalment as Senator, while Brazeau and Duffy were not. The audit also found that Senator Brazeau was the only senator that met all four criteria for expensing his housing allowance. This should have put a stop to all proceedings against Senator Brazeau, but it did not.
At this point there was some pont of contention between Senator Lebreton (the Conservative House Leader in the Senate), Senator Olson, and Senator Tkachuk (both on the Board of Internal Economies"). In documents submitted by Mike Duffy, Nigel Wright was aware of this, and suggested that he would use the PMO to put a stop to the behaviour Lebreton, Olson and Tkachuk.. This is the first indication that there was a problem in the Senate of Canada. It is also the first indication that the Senate of Canada was not acting independently and being influenced upon by the PMO.
Then the Board of Internal Economies reviewed the audit by Deloitte and decided that the three senators in question had misspent tax-payer dollars through their housing expenses. With the exception of Patrick Brazeau this is absolutely true. The situation with Senator Brazeau is still to this day a little unclear. The Deloitte audit, as indicated did find that he met all four housing requirements.
What happened next is senator specific as each reacted differently although as you will see, the end result was the same for each senator.
Senator Brazeau:
Senator Brazeau continued to insist that he had not mis-spent any taxpayers dollars and all his expenditures were legitimate. The Senate simply guarnisheed his salary.
Senator Wallin:
Senator Wallin continues to insist she did nothing wrong, and was treated more harshly than the other two senators, She did however go back over all her diaries and expenses and pay back to the Senate approximately 130,000.00.
Senator Duffy:
It is with Senator Duffy where the guts of the scandal come to life. Senator Duffy kept what appears to be a careful paper trail of most of these events, some of which have been given to the government, and others to the RCMP. The following is short summary of a conspiracy in the PMO (which the Prime Minister denies any knowledge)
In February after a caucus meeting there was a meeting between Senator Duffy, the Prime Minister, and his Chief of Staff Nigel Wright. The Prime Minister apparently told Senator Duffy that he had to pay the money back because the expenses would be "inexplicable to the base". Senator Duffy says there were two such meetings, and Mr. Harper says there was only one. Mr. Duffy alleges that the Prime Minster indicated that his Chief of Staff would "handle the details".
Senator Duffy insisted that his expenses had been cleared by the Prime Minster, and Nigel Wright and he would not pay them back. At this point, the cover-up was cooked up. Nigel Wright tried to get the Conservative Party fund to pay for the expenses (there are two versions of this story, Nigel Wright's, and Senator Gerstein's). What is not in doubt is that Senator Duffy's expenses ballooned to 90,000 and the Conservative Party Fund would not pay it.
What happened next is almost laughable if it can be proven. According to Senator Duffy, the Fund paid his legal expenses for the audit, and he went on television and lied to Canadians about where he got the money to pay back the expenses. He told Canadians that he and his wife took out a loan on their house to cover the debt. In reality, Nigel Wright (it is assumed) paid the debt for him.
To this date, Senator Duffy has paid absolutely nothing back to the Senate of Canada,
to be concluded in part three...
According to the three senator, they cleared their housing expenses with then party leader in the Senate, Senator Lebreton as well as Nigel Wright, the Prime Minister's Chief of Staff. They were all assured that their expenses were fine. According to Senator Brazeau, he was told that the rules are, "whatever senators make them".
Then came this famous audit by Deloitte. According to the audit, there were a few issues but nothing that serious. It must be noted that nobody has seen this audit except the "Board of Internal Economies", and probably the PMO. The Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons and said that Senator Wallin's expenses were in line with other senators from Saskatchewan. The Deloitte audit also found concerns with two other issues.
First, there were no clear rules or guidelines. They noted that the audit was difficult because of this. Second they expressed concern over the treatment of Senator Wallin. She was being audited all the way back to her instalment as Senator, while Brazeau and Duffy were not. The audit also found that Senator Brazeau was the only senator that met all four criteria for expensing his housing allowance. This should have put a stop to all proceedings against Senator Brazeau, but it did not.
At this point there was some pont of contention between Senator Lebreton (the Conservative House Leader in the Senate), Senator Olson, and Senator Tkachuk (both on the Board of Internal Economies"). In documents submitted by Mike Duffy, Nigel Wright was aware of this, and suggested that he would use the PMO to put a stop to the behaviour Lebreton, Olson and Tkachuk.. This is the first indication that there was a problem in the Senate of Canada. It is also the first indication that the Senate of Canada was not acting independently and being influenced upon by the PMO.
Then the Board of Internal Economies reviewed the audit by Deloitte and decided that the three senators in question had misspent tax-payer dollars through their housing expenses. With the exception of Patrick Brazeau this is absolutely true. The situation with Senator Brazeau is still to this day a little unclear. The Deloitte audit, as indicated did find that he met all four housing requirements.
What happened next is senator specific as each reacted differently although as you will see, the end result was the same for each senator.
Senator Brazeau:
Senator Brazeau continued to insist that he had not mis-spent any taxpayers dollars and all his expenditures were legitimate. The Senate simply guarnisheed his salary.
Senator Wallin:
Senator Wallin continues to insist she did nothing wrong, and was treated more harshly than the other two senators, She did however go back over all her diaries and expenses and pay back to the Senate approximately 130,000.00.
Senator Duffy:
It is with Senator Duffy where the guts of the scandal come to life. Senator Duffy kept what appears to be a careful paper trail of most of these events, some of which have been given to the government, and others to the RCMP. The following is short summary of a conspiracy in the PMO (which the Prime Minister denies any knowledge)
In February after a caucus meeting there was a meeting between Senator Duffy, the Prime Minister, and his Chief of Staff Nigel Wright. The Prime Minister apparently told Senator Duffy that he had to pay the money back because the expenses would be "inexplicable to the base". Senator Duffy says there were two such meetings, and Mr. Harper says there was only one. Mr. Duffy alleges that the Prime Minster indicated that his Chief of Staff would "handle the details".
Senator Duffy insisted that his expenses had been cleared by the Prime Minster, and Nigel Wright and he would not pay them back. At this point, the cover-up was cooked up. Nigel Wright tried to get the Conservative Party fund to pay for the expenses (there are two versions of this story, Nigel Wright's, and Senator Gerstein's). What is not in doubt is that Senator Duffy's expenses ballooned to 90,000 and the Conservative Party Fund would not pay it.
What happened next is almost laughable if it can be proven. According to Senator Duffy, the Fund paid his legal expenses for the audit, and he went on television and lied to Canadians about where he got the money to pay back the expenses. He told Canadians that he and his wife took out a loan on their house to cover the debt. In reality, Nigel Wright (it is assumed) paid the debt for him.
To this date, Senator Duffy has paid absolutely nothing back to the Senate of Canada,
to be concluded in part three...
Friday, 8 November 2013
A Government Amok
Ever since Steven Harper was elected to lead Canadian government in February 2006, his government has been plagued with scandal, misbehaviour, and down right cover-ups. The scandal in the Senate is just the latest and I will get to that last.
From his very first minority government there has been a series of misbehaviour by members of the successive Harper governments. Some of them have been as simple as Bev Oda charging tax payers for a 12.00 glass of orange juice (although to be fair she did have to change hotels because she smokes and she needed to be booked into a smoking a hotel), to much more serious issues. Members of Harper's cabinet have been seen throwing temper tantrums at airports, and have been caught lying to Parliament.
Not only have members of the Conservative Party been caught lying to Parliament, the Conservative Party has been found in Contempt of Parliament by the Speaker of the House. That is something that almost never happens.
Other issues that have arisen is that the Prime Minister has been drawing more control into the PMO and stripping certain aspects of Parliamentary Privilege from members of the opposition. He regularly denies access to documents to the opposition parties that they should have as part of their parliamentary privilege. One of those documents was as follows: Bev Oda (a former Harper minster), hand changed an official document, and then lied about it to the house. First she denied she changed the document, and then she said she did.
Prime Minister Harper has used the proroguation process whenever he feels threatened. He has even used it to by-pass a confidence vote. This completely circumvents the democratic process that exists in our Canadian democracy,
During the 2010 election, robo-calls were used to send voters to incorrect polling stations by the Conservative Party. This particular tactic actually suppressed some people's right to vote, although Elections Canada did not find that the effect was great enough to warrant any action.
After the 2010 election, one of the first things that the Conservatives did was to scrap the Long Gun Registry. He did this to appease his base (approximately 40% of Canadians). Most Canadians wanted to keep the registry, including many Chief's of Police. Quebec wanted to keep their data to create their own registry, but the Harper government fought them at every turn, showing his complete disregard for the Province of Quebec.
Prime Minister Harper also seems to have an issue with putting bills before the House of Commons. Instead of debating real legislation, he attaches many important issues to his budget bills, creating omnibus budget bills and then rams them through the House. Many of the items in these budge bills don't belong there and should be up for separate debate. Prime Minister Harper is not up for a real debate, so he uses the back door.
Recently, Peter Penashue lost his seat in Labrador in a by-election after it was discovered that he had accepted illegal campaign funds in the 2010 election.
Dean Del Mastro quit the Conservative Party in September after it was discovered he filed a false election document during the 2008 election.
CETA, the Prime Minister's latest achievement is not exactly what he touts it to be. It is not a free trade agreement with Europe. It is a FREE-er trade agreement. One of the details in this agreement is that the Europeans get a better discount on tariffs and duties than Canadians do. I don't know how that is helpful to Canadians, but it is not what Prime Minister Harper is claiming it to be.
... to be continued in the next post on the Senate Scandal
From his very first minority government there has been a series of misbehaviour by members of the successive Harper governments. Some of them have been as simple as Bev Oda charging tax payers for a 12.00 glass of orange juice (although to be fair she did have to change hotels because she smokes and she needed to be booked into a smoking a hotel), to much more serious issues. Members of Harper's cabinet have been seen throwing temper tantrums at airports, and have been caught lying to Parliament.
Not only have members of the Conservative Party been caught lying to Parliament, the Conservative Party has been found in Contempt of Parliament by the Speaker of the House. That is something that almost never happens.
Other issues that have arisen is that the Prime Minister has been drawing more control into the PMO and stripping certain aspects of Parliamentary Privilege from members of the opposition. He regularly denies access to documents to the opposition parties that they should have as part of their parliamentary privilege. One of those documents was as follows: Bev Oda (a former Harper minster), hand changed an official document, and then lied about it to the house. First she denied she changed the document, and then she said she did.
Prime Minister Harper has used the proroguation process whenever he feels threatened. He has even used it to by-pass a confidence vote. This completely circumvents the democratic process that exists in our Canadian democracy,
During the 2010 election, robo-calls were used to send voters to incorrect polling stations by the Conservative Party. This particular tactic actually suppressed some people's right to vote, although Elections Canada did not find that the effect was great enough to warrant any action.
After the 2010 election, one of the first things that the Conservatives did was to scrap the Long Gun Registry. He did this to appease his base (approximately 40% of Canadians). Most Canadians wanted to keep the registry, including many Chief's of Police. Quebec wanted to keep their data to create their own registry, but the Harper government fought them at every turn, showing his complete disregard for the Province of Quebec.
Prime Minister Harper also seems to have an issue with putting bills before the House of Commons. Instead of debating real legislation, he attaches many important issues to his budget bills, creating omnibus budget bills and then rams them through the House. Many of the items in these budge bills don't belong there and should be up for separate debate. Prime Minister Harper is not up for a real debate, so he uses the back door.
Recently, Peter Penashue lost his seat in Labrador in a by-election after it was discovered that he had accepted illegal campaign funds in the 2010 election.
Dean Del Mastro quit the Conservative Party in September after it was discovered he filed a false election document during the 2008 election.
CETA, the Prime Minister's latest achievement is not exactly what he touts it to be. It is not a free trade agreement with Europe. It is a FREE-er trade agreement. One of the details in this agreement is that the Europeans get a better discount on tariffs and duties than Canadians do. I don't know how that is helpful to Canadians, but it is not what Prime Minister Harper is claiming it to be.
... to be continued in the next post on the Senate Scandal
Thursday, 7 November 2013
Why Multi-Culturalism is a failure
Multi-culturalism, that grand idea from the 1970's has been an abject failure. There have been many reasons for this. It must be noted that the United States tried a different approach in which all new citizens were simply assimilated into the American melting pot and everybody simply became an American. Many countries in Europe did however try the "Multi-cultural" approach, and most of those countries have already discovered that this approach to immigration is a failure.
First we must understand what multi-culturalism actual is. It is an immigration process by which immigrants are welcomed to Canada and is it accepted that they are accepted under the condition that all cultures are equally valid and equally important to Canadian society. This is a laudable idea, but hardly practical.
Here are a few reasons why multi-culturalism is a failure. First, from the very beginning, the process was flawed. It was built around the idea that Caucasian males (European decent) were the privileged few and would always remain that way. In that spirit, programs were set up for new immigrants, youth, women, aboriginal peoples, women, and people with disabilities. While this was absolutely the right thing to do, the omission of any sort of government programming for white men in their 30's and 40's is now becoming apparent. As immigration numbers are changing, the dominance of those white males is beginning to decline, and there are no programs to deal with that segment of the population.
Our country is a Constitutional Democracy with 3 branches of government, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. Part of the Legislative body of government is the Senate. Many young people, and many immigrants have absolutely no idea about the historical significance and the duties of the Senate, and are calling for it's abolition. Few immigrants understand that without the Senate, there would be no Canada because Quebec would not be part of our Confederation. No Canada means they would not be here in a free society.
May other immigrants are calling for the abolition of the Monarchy. To be fair, many native born Canadians are calling for the same thing. This is a contentious issue, and is much more about historical significance than about immigration but the numbers are higher in the immigrant population. Again, it is because they do no understand the significance of the Crown and it's history to Canada.
The other day while I was going into the subway, a veteran selling poppies tried to sell a poppy to a Korean woman. She asked him why she should buy a poppy. He explained to her that the poppy symbolized the soldiers that had fought and fallen for Canada. Her response. "I am a citizen but I am Korean, what does that have to do with me?" He tried to explain to her that those fallen soldiers fell so that she could be here in a free society and say that, but she wasn't buying it.
That is the next issue with multi-culturalism. Many immigrants come to Canada and are quite correctly told that their culture is important and they should try to hang to it. The mistake often made is that they should maintain their culture identity first and be Canadians second. In the case mentioned above, the woman was Korean first, so anything Canadian didn't matter to her, because her she was only a Citizen of Canada. We need to make new citizens to our country feel as though they are Canadians first and foremost. It is important for the continuation of our country that all Canadians feel that way. What good is a Canada where citizens feel divided based along racial lines. Multi-culturalism, that was supposed to embrace all cultures has driven a wedge between many of them.
Another issue that arises from multi-culturalism is gang violence. More often than not, immigrants find their way to our biggest cities, and the ghettoization of immigrants begins. Quite often different immigrant groups end up crammed into the same space. There is quite often ethnic or even racial tension between some of these groups. This can spill over into the neighbourhoods and result in gang-violence and dead children. Even adult gangs, cartels and mafia groups move into these areas. Often they completely control the neighbourhoods.
One of the other things that happens as you cram different ethnic groups and cultures together is an increase in hate crimes and attacks based on religion/race or sexual orientation. That is not to say that these things don't happen in a homogeneous society, but it is much more prevalent in a mixed culture.
There is something much more sinister looming under the surface of some cultures. I know a guy that I worked with. He and his wife have been citizens for over twenty years. He does not allow his wife to vote, she does not go out without his consent, and his children must dress in traditional Muslim dress.
Another issue surrounds young girls. This includes arranged marriages, quite often between very young girls, as young as nine or ten and old men, quite often living back in countries like Pakistan or Afghanistan. Canadian youth have choices. They cannot be, nor should they be, bound by the marriage choices of their parents.
That is minor compared to some of the other more sinister things that have happened here in Canada. There have been honour beating of girls, and even honour killings. Yes, that's right, even in Canada, honour killings. We have been told that all cultures are equal and valid. I CANNOT accept that.
Another thing that is unacceptable is terrorism. Since September 11, 2001, there have been an unknown number of thwarted terrorist attacks in Canada. There has also been the recruitment of Canadian youth by Al-Quaida linked immigrants. The most recent being the 3 boys from London Ontario. If multi-culuralism is going to allow terrorists into our country, then the process needs to changed or be gone altogether.
Today in the Quebec legislature, Pauline Marois introduced the new "Quebec Charter of Values" This is a dangerous overreaction to multi-culturalism. This bill is a reaction to growing Islamophobia and a move towards a more "secular" state within the province of Quebec. It would ban provincial officials from overt religious officials from wearing overt religious symbols. It would also cater to minorities a restrict the Freedom of Religion provision in the "Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
Multi-culturalism has now been taken to it's extreme in Quebec, and that is where it could end up across the country. Add that to the negative effects that it has across our country (especially in our big cities) and it is clear it is not working. I am all in favour of immigration. It is immigrants that build our country and move our country forward, but multi-cullturalism has to go.
First we must understand what multi-culturalism actual is. It is an immigration process by which immigrants are welcomed to Canada and is it accepted that they are accepted under the condition that all cultures are equally valid and equally important to Canadian society. This is a laudable idea, but hardly practical.
Here are a few reasons why multi-culturalism is a failure. First, from the very beginning, the process was flawed. It was built around the idea that Caucasian males (European decent) were the privileged few and would always remain that way. In that spirit, programs were set up for new immigrants, youth, women, aboriginal peoples, women, and people with disabilities. While this was absolutely the right thing to do, the omission of any sort of government programming for white men in their 30's and 40's is now becoming apparent. As immigration numbers are changing, the dominance of those white males is beginning to decline, and there are no programs to deal with that segment of the population.
Our country is a Constitutional Democracy with 3 branches of government, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. Part of the Legislative body of government is the Senate. Many young people, and many immigrants have absolutely no idea about the historical significance and the duties of the Senate, and are calling for it's abolition. Few immigrants understand that without the Senate, there would be no Canada because Quebec would not be part of our Confederation. No Canada means they would not be here in a free society.
May other immigrants are calling for the abolition of the Monarchy. To be fair, many native born Canadians are calling for the same thing. This is a contentious issue, and is much more about historical significance than about immigration but the numbers are higher in the immigrant population. Again, it is because they do no understand the significance of the Crown and it's history to Canada.
The other day while I was going into the subway, a veteran selling poppies tried to sell a poppy to a Korean woman. She asked him why she should buy a poppy. He explained to her that the poppy symbolized the soldiers that had fought and fallen for Canada. Her response. "I am a citizen but I am Korean, what does that have to do with me?" He tried to explain to her that those fallen soldiers fell so that she could be here in a free society and say that, but she wasn't buying it.
That is the next issue with multi-culturalism. Many immigrants come to Canada and are quite correctly told that their culture is important and they should try to hang to it. The mistake often made is that they should maintain their culture identity first and be Canadians second. In the case mentioned above, the woman was Korean first, so anything Canadian didn't matter to her, because her she was only a Citizen of Canada. We need to make new citizens to our country feel as though they are Canadians first and foremost. It is important for the continuation of our country that all Canadians feel that way. What good is a Canada where citizens feel divided based along racial lines. Multi-culturalism, that was supposed to embrace all cultures has driven a wedge between many of them.
Another issue that arises from multi-culturalism is gang violence. More often than not, immigrants find their way to our biggest cities, and the ghettoization of immigrants begins. Quite often different immigrant groups end up crammed into the same space. There is quite often ethnic or even racial tension between some of these groups. This can spill over into the neighbourhoods and result in gang-violence and dead children. Even adult gangs, cartels and mafia groups move into these areas. Often they completely control the neighbourhoods.
One of the other things that happens as you cram different ethnic groups and cultures together is an increase in hate crimes and attacks based on religion/race or sexual orientation. That is not to say that these things don't happen in a homogeneous society, but it is much more prevalent in a mixed culture.
There is something much more sinister looming under the surface of some cultures. I know a guy that I worked with. He and his wife have been citizens for over twenty years. He does not allow his wife to vote, she does not go out without his consent, and his children must dress in traditional Muslim dress.
Another issue surrounds young girls. This includes arranged marriages, quite often between very young girls, as young as nine or ten and old men, quite often living back in countries like Pakistan or Afghanistan. Canadian youth have choices. They cannot be, nor should they be, bound by the marriage choices of their parents.
That is minor compared to some of the other more sinister things that have happened here in Canada. There have been honour beating of girls, and even honour killings. Yes, that's right, even in Canada, honour killings. We have been told that all cultures are equal and valid. I CANNOT accept that.
Another thing that is unacceptable is terrorism. Since September 11, 2001, there have been an unknown number of thwarted terrorist attacks in Canada. There has also been the recruitment of Canadian youth by Al-Quaida linked immigrants. The most recent being the 3 boys from London Ontario. If multi-culuralism is going to allow terrorists into our country, then the process needs to changed or be gone altogether.
Today in the Quebec legislature, Pauline Marois introduced the new "Quebec Charter of Values" This is a dangerous overreaction to multi-culturalism. This bill is a reaction to growing Islamophobia and a move towards a more "secular" state within the province of Quebec. It would ban provincial officials from overt religious officials from wearing overt religious symbols. It would also cater to minorities a restrict the Freedom of Religion provision in the "Charter of Rights and Freedoms"
Multi-culturalism has now been taken to it's extreme in Quebec, and that is where it could end up across the country. Add that to the negative effects that it has across our country (especially in our big cities) and it is clear it is not working. I am all in favour of immigration. It is immigrants that build our country and move our country forward, but multi-cullturalism has to go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)