The DAILY DIGEST: INFORMATION and OPINION from ST. JOHN’S to VICTORIA.
HALIFAX NEWS - Microcredit has macro impact
HALIFAX HERALD - Executing Saddam
MONTREAL GAZETTE - Overseas havens favour the wealthy
MONTREAL GAZETTE - Enough hypocrisy to go around
OTTAWA CITIZEN - Driving while drugged
Canada's Parliament should protect us from drivers whose judgment is impaired. It must also protect us from bad laws.
OTTAWA CITIZEN - We have to be honest about pathologies plaguing reserves
OTTAWA SUN - Rules of the road
NATIONAL POST - A Question of Privacy
SUDBURY STAR - Anti-global feeling
CALGARY SUN - Picking judges is no dark art
Law enforcement officials should have say in selections
VANCOUVER SUN - Opening up the skies to foreign airlines is the only way to fly
VANCOUVER PROVINCE - Ottawa's crackdown on drugged drivers is just the ticket
VANCOUVER PROVINCE - Give us a break from this brazen charmer
Who gets the band home when the marriage fails?
Energetic First Nations aim to flex financial muscle
See business as best way to wean themselves off federal subsidies
Support grows for vets' honour
Opposition MPs say G-G should visit Kandahar
Reservists’ civilian jobs, benefits must be protected
Canada mentors Afghan troops battling faulty weapons and inexperience
Canadian troops needed past '09, Afghan official says
Former freedom fighter wants Afghan people to speak out against Taliban
Military seeks help in environmental challenge
I just read that the U.S. intends to expand its inspection of Canadian fruits and vegetables in November and have Canadians pay for it.
What’s going on? http://www.extension.iastate.edu/foodsafety/news/fsnews.cfm?newsid=15637
Thumpin' not so good for Canada
Waiting too long to save threatens retirement
Canadians may be forced to go on working as they grow older
China hungry for energy
expert: Beijing determined to get bigger share in Alberta oilsands production, former ambassador says
Oilsands tapping Canada's freshwater supply dry
Trusts: 'The focus is now on 2011'
Income splitting offers tax break for seniors
No end to mess created in Iraq
U.S. policy on China heads down a bumpy road
HEALTH CARE RELATED
Heart failure study reveals cholesterol 'paradox'
Extremely low levels prove nearly as dangerous as high levels, researchers find
The mind; it matters
The things we tell ourselves inside our heads may be a form of self-sabotage.
Ottawa in the dark on dual citizenship numbers
Expat Canadians spark fears of cash drain
They're estimated to number close to 3 million Lebanon war has put issue in the spotlight
Refugee aided abuses: court
Deems Angolan civil servant stayed silent too long
So, is everyone ready for a federal election?
The opposition has to pull the plug before the Tories table their re-election budget
Harper's first trip to Asia will put spotlight on relations with China
Liberal calls for investigation into alleged spying on defence committee
Turner promising to shake up Ottawa once again
Garth Turner to make 'important' announcement
Independent MP Garth Turner coy about reasons for Tuesday news conference
Independent Turner to `clarify' his future
Speculation ex-Tory MP to go Green
To reveal `disturbing' conduct by PMO
Ambrose in Kenya to defend climate change policy
Ambrose could face hostile reception at climate talks in Africa
Ambrose faces pro-Kyoto shadow group at climate talks
MPs, environmentalists plan media blitz to get Canada to live up to its 'obligations'
Canada criticized as environmental 'fossil'
Flaherty hopes to eventually reduce capital gains taxes for individuals
MacKay won't increase loans to world's poor
Rae tells Liberals his leadership will stifle NDP
Quebecers paying attention to Liberals again
The honest Liberal?
Liberal leadership contest lacks class
Feds to dole out anti-terror loot
Blair is 'playing to a tabloid agenda' in terror fight
Ottawa gives $80M to fight transit terror
Canadians concerned about intrusiveness of anti-terrorism laws
Canada plans to shield its offshore oil rigs
Regional agencies to be given more authority
OPINION AND INFORMATION
'Al-Qaida exists inside'
Grown-up solutions needed
Northern residents fuming over smoking ban
Impending halt to indoor smoking impractical in colder regions, critics say
'Innovate' a dirty word in Ottawa
Hair comments cut both ways
Seeds of violence
Débat au Parti libéral - Le Québec nation? Il y a, c'est certain, une meilleure avenue!
Un partisan du microcrédit se dit déçu que l'aide canadienne n'augmente pas
La relation Canada-Chine sera au coeur du premier voyage de Harper en Asie
Les délégations québécoises se font entendre
Rona Ambrose dit qu'elle était prête à collaborer avec ses détracteurs
Des intellectuels québécois se mobilisent autour de la souveraineté
Les députés fédéraux se font courtiser
Conférence de Montréal - Oda plaidera la cause de la diversité culturelle
La Défense veut réduire ses émissions de GES
The article "Débat au Parti libéral - Le Québec nation? Il y a, c'est certain, une meilleure avenue!" . I 'phoned Le Devoir but got the ubiquitous answering machine that now intercepts most calls we make. A message was left but there has been no response to my inquiry concerning there being an English language copy extant. Should anyone see an English original published I'd much appreciate it - the Google translation while
conveying the thought does so very poorly.
NCC: Allow Longer Phase In Period for Income Trust ChangesThe National Citizens Coalition says the Conservative government should change its proposed Income Trust Legislation to allow for a longer phase in period.
"While we support the government's attempts to fix potential long term problems in the Canadian economy, the proposed income trust changes will have a negative impact on the investment portfolios of seniors and other hard-working Canadians," says NCC president, Peter Coleman.
"That impact could be minimized by increasing the phase in period from four years to ten years, meaning no new taxation on existing income trust until 2016."
Coleman says such an increased phase in would not undermine what the government is trying to accomplish with its proposed income trust legislation in terms of preventing tax avoidance, but would give income trust holders time to make appropriate financial adjustments.
"We hope Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty will consider this recommendation before his scheduled November 23rd economic statement," says Coleman.
Please forward this e-mail to your friends, family, neighbours and coworkers. Help pass on this message to ensure our government listens to the opinions of hard-working Canadians.
E-mail the MinisterDo you agree that the federal Income Trust legislation should increase the phase in period from 4 years to 10 years? Click here to e-mail the Minister of Finance.
And the surprise is?
Any of us who have a basic understanding of the history of the reform/alliance/conservative party should not be surprised by the NAU. The only thing I wonder about is whether there will be a single maple leaf on the "star spangled banner" or 1 for each provincial state to be added to the union.
If the governor's allegiance is to the bush whitehouse, then is it treason? Remember pretty boy mackay. He became leader of the former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada on the strength of a vow of 'no merger', but his allegiance was to the reform/alliance. So, was he treasonous?
No wonder the new-cons do not want someone like Garth Turner in caucus. He could upset their plans to de-confederate Canada.
One last little observation, canada's governor even has his candidate for secretary of unification running as candidate in the London North Centre by-election.
Can it get any better?
a Progressive Canadian
Rene Moreau (416-489-8347)
re November 2, 2006, Daily Digest, The Canadian Wheat Board, as a problem?
The letter, on the value of free choice for farmers, from Becky. Could someone please enlighten me? No mention was made therein of the power that the megacorp entities like Cargill and Midland -Archer Daniel can apply! (among others.) In making use of the similarity to communism, did that come from south of the border?
Why would we ignore the simple examples we have been given in history of the bundle of sticks (unfortunately a fascist story), about how 1 stick can be broken, even three together can be broken, but a bundle of sticks can be almost unbreakable. Or, united we stand against opposition, divided we fall. Again, look at what the unions have attained against the more greedy of our corporate entities.
One could say that those who will not learn from history are condemned to repeat it. Considering all these samples of the power of unity, how, pray tell can we so easily forget it when faced with the most powerful corporations, that know how to use corporate unity to divide and conquer us?
I suspect that in the states, the farmers would love to have a public body that could stand up to the mega agriculture corporations.
We have it , and we are willing to let it go to please the lobbyists from the really big corporate guys, who only want to remove competition from a united Canadian source?
Becky, where did the ideas come from? It would really help to know. Say, just for the hell of it, the source of the ideas was farmers who are getting a financial consideration for planting lies and opposition to the Canadian Wheat Board in Canada, like the kind of stories we get from Randy Koback in David Anderson's office, (deputy agriculture minister and part of the Wheat board) about how the Canadian Wheat Board has to go! These days one must watch for such things as such tactics are only considered ASTUTE BUSINESS PRACTICE!
No entity that size is infallible, but consider the corporate alternative!
Especially when we're starting to realize the need for a leash on corporate/financial entities, before they get completely out of hand, and call for corporate-controlled Continental Integration now that they have used up the U.S.
Rene Moreau (416-489-8347)
North American Union
For many this is a very serious item where Canadian Politicians have led citizens astray
in the pursuit of their individual desires. Hopefully, we as citizens of Canada will prevail and
determine the future of our Country.
There is however, a greater tragedy that will affect us forever. We are all partly to blame
and that is letting our Press be controlled by so few. The mainstream Press are no longer the
distribution method of unbiased, truthful news. They are setting their own agendas to the detriment
of what is required in a free and democratic society. The dissemination of all information is required
for our Nation to exist and when it becomes hidden or not told, then our freedoms will no longer exist.
Today we have lost that freedom, and must move forward. We can be thankful that there
is an Internet where individual freedom still allows one to still communicate and voice views.
To quote Jim Travers, a Toronto Star columnist
"What it means is columnists get to pick their own topics on which they express their own opinions"
Subject: SSM - Beyond Notwithstanding .... there's Disallowance.
To: torstar <firstname.lastname@example.org >, Chip Martin < CMartin@lfpress.com>
Cc: Rt Hon Stephen Harper < email@example.com>, Governor General < Info@gg.ca>, Wilfert.B@parl.gc.ca , Keddy.G@parl.gc.ca, Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca, Moore.J@parl.gc.ca, Simard.R@parl.gc.ca, Chamberlain.B@parl.gc.ca, Cuzner.R@parl.gc.ca, Matthews.B@parl.gc.ca , Patry.B@parl.gc.ca, Bouchard.R@parl.gc.ca, Gaudet.Ro@parl.gc.ca, Cannis.J@parl.gc.ca, Karygiannis.J@parl.gc.ca, Bains.N@parl.gc.ca, Chan.R@parl.gc.ca, Emerson.D@parl.gc.ca, Volpe.J@parl.gc.ca, Dion.S@parl.gc.ca, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Dear TorStar Editors, Members of Parliament and cited Organizations,
Not mentioned in Andrew Chung's article of Nov 12/06 Revisiting same-sex marriage , remains another Constitutional remedy to explore for 1) those opposed to Canada's new/first definition of Marriage and 2) for all Canadians (irrespective of their view on this specific issue) who believe an error at law cannot stand unchallenged.
The BNA/Constitution Act 1867 contains section 56, captioned Disallowance by Order in Council of Acts assented to by Governor General which describes the last stage of final approval of every Bill of a Canadian Parliament.
Notwithstanding the changes made in 1982, this provision is still valid and in full effect, in the very same way as section 26 (captioned Addition of Senators in certain cases) was used by PM. Mulroney to add the "GST Senators" - once everyone checked the 'rule book', they had to stop being outraged.
The 2 year time-frame of the Disallowance power means Royal termination of the Marriage for Civil Purposes Act can occur any time before July 20, 2007.
So be of good cheer, remembering that no matter the game, knowing the rules is always a good idea.
London North Centre By-election - Nov 27/06.
There is no shame in turning back, when you find yourself on the wrong path.P.S. & N.B.
The Queen, as an individual, holds this power, i.e without HRH being compelled to follow the advice of Her Privy Council (who removed themselves from influence over Canada with their own Canada Act 1982, (U.K.) 1982, c. 11 )
Extensive Backgrounder & commentary in
HomoSex Marriage Act Saves Canada or, How I stopped worrying and learned to love the Constitution.
With the liberal Party - Quebec nation discusses? There is, it is certain, a better avenue!Edition of Monday November 13, 2006
Key words: Confederation, nation, Nationalism, Culture, Canada (Country), Quebec (province)
In 1900, at the time of the World Fair in Paris, Canada distributed a commemorative bronze medal carrying the inscription “Canada is a nation”. It was a great pride for this young 33 year old country, at the dawn of this new century, to join its voice to the concert of the “nations”.
This new nationality had a single origin and a quite particular direction. Its founders had a vision, best expressed by George Étienne Cartier in 1865, at the time of the debates preceding the Confederation: “One made objection with our project because of the words “news nationality” which meet there. If we unisons, we will form a nationality political, independent of the national origin and religion of the individuals. [...] As for this objection, which we cannot form a great nation, because Low-Canada is mainly French and catholic, that High-Canada is English and Protestant, and that the seaboard provinces are mixed, it is, in my opinion, of the last futility.
“[...] We are different races, not to make us the war, but to work together with our characteristic and common wellbeing…”
This vision to bring closer the people of various origin cultural, which had been made the war during centuries in Europe, was daring and to tell the truth without precedent for the time.
Much more, it is a vision which was widened by Wilfrid Laurier in 1890, some 25 years later, at the moment when immigration supported the growth of the country: “We form here, or we want to form, a nation made up of the most heterogeneous elements -- Protestants and catholics, English, French, Germans, Irishman, Scottish -- each one, that it is not forgotten, with its traditions, with its prejudices. In each one of these opposed elements, however, there is a common point of patriotism, and the only true policy is that which dominates this common patriotism, and carries all these elements towards the same goal and common assertions.”
Bay-tree knew the contrary forces that Canada would have to make coexist: tensions enracinées in the differences which would push us in opposed directions, our aspiration with a greater freedom and prosperity which force to us to recognize and respect our differences, because we divide our humanity in the common shape of government.
This vision wanted that people in good faith can overcome their historical selfishness and live a human experiment of greater value than that to cultivate the characteristics of their respective cultural origin. Nobody however would have to give up his identity, and each one could take part in the joint project to build this new country.
Genius of the Constitution
In fact, the genius of the Constitution of Canada (of 1867 to 1982, until our days) is to guarantee and enrich, like principle founder of the political régime and in the middle of our identity like nation, the recognition and the protection of the rights of the minorities.
The idea that this new country could make coexist in its centre of the French and the English was a revolutionist, if not bold. This project occurred at the time when the Americans were empêtrés in a bloody civil war which aimed at maintaining the capacities of the States and the legality of slavery. Our ancestors for conviction that the human ones of language, religion and culture different could, had joined together by the will to build a country as large as a continent, to agree as their common freedom and their prosperity transcended all their particular differences. What they had human in common as nobody was a more effective guarantee of their personal freedom and their prosperity.
In this new Canada, the majority would not seek to dominate the minority. The Constitution would be inspired by a more generous and more humanistic vision; it recognizes the civil rights to preserve their particular character, and would prevent the majority to use its force and its capacity all to standardize.
The guarantee of the personal freedom thus finds its source in the protection of the minority. Which best incarnation of the minority than the individual himself which must be able to think and choose for itself what it aspires to being? Here is the vision which built Canada and can better guarantee the future of the country.
The search of political profits
During the 140 years of note history like nation, this vision did not always inspire the successive generations of politicians. The false step, the prejudices, mistrust, and the small ambitions were as many traps on the way of the largest respect of the rights, left brake to the maturity of the new country.
When the majority seeks to impose its political weight, economic and cultural, it disguises the vision which constitutes the true nature of Canada. It was perhaps inevitable that politicians cannot resist temptation to quarrel on the financial and natural resources, while proposing all kinds of political arguments to seek to increase their capacity.
Thus they supported various theories to make political profits. Oliver Mowat, Prime Minister for Ontario of 1872 to 1896, was the first champion of the fight for more provincial capacities, early imitated by Honore Mercier, Prime Minister for Quebec. According to them, the Confederation was a kind of “pact” between parts. It was a type of open contract similar to a commercial agreement. Thus could it be denounced and renegotiated. A part could thus seek to obtain more, and to even threaten to cancel it if it concluded that it was not advantageous any more for him.
For others, it was rather of the nature of a “treaty” between two nations founders. It was the doctrines married by the Prime Minister Maurice Duplessis, his successors, and some their federal supporteurs. According to this argument, a “nation” being at this point different from the other, it should have a “particular statute”, enraciné in its irreconcilable differences.
In 1981, in the Reference on repatriation, the Judge in chief Bora Laskin concludes: “That it is about the absolute theory of the pact [relating to the Canadian Constitution] [...] or of a theory of the pact modified, as certain provinces, it pleads it acts of theories which come under the political field, of the study of political sciences. They do not put the right concerned.” The theory of the “treaty” between of the two nations was thus rejected by the courts like organizing legal principle of the Constitution. However there is wisdom in this conclusion: the political plays should not call into question the true nature of our institutions, only guarantors of our freedom.
When the theory of the “treaty” had completed to live its useful political life, it was moulted in the concept of “distinct company”, another expression with contours vague and vague which, after to be repeated thousand times, became a kind of ritual incantation. Today, it makes a little retro and lost its mobilizing capacity. Insistence is not so much any more on the nature of the bond which gathers us only on the irreconcilable character of the various elements which make Canada.
The return of isolationism
In spite of two world wars, economic depressions and all kinds of misfortunes, Canada reached the highest levels of respect and appreciation of its two languages and its cultural characteristics. It developed a complete net of social security, a success which receives with international recognition quasi without precedent.
Our country knew to compose with its regional, linguistic and cultural tensions; it adapted and learned from its errors; and from this experiment one of the most humanistic companies emerged, where the respect of the rights and freedoms of its citizens became the element determining of its progress. Vision of our founders perdure; it was right, the passage of time confirms it.
During this program with the leadership, isolationist ideas reappeared, which would cause to divide us into an indefinite number smaller “nations”. They would cause to undermine the vision which makes the size of our country.
Ressusciter the idea that Canada is a bunch of several nations, that they are civic, sociological, political or legal is a self-destroying aberration. It is a trap of which nobody can extirpate himself if it is not like balkanized company. In its substance even, applied to all the groups which exist on our premises and which would claim with this statute, it is a concept which conveys division; and in the worst case political dead end.
In January 2006, after more than two years of hearings and debates, the 35 Member States of the Council of Europe, the continent even which saw being born the concept of nation, concluded that the concept of nation is impossible to define in constitutional terms. Why, in Canada, would persist in we pushing such a tortuous initiative? Which advantage would we have to draw from this mirror to the larks which returns us our differences, at this point deformed which they can to only isolate us? Wouldn't it be better, during this countryside, to insist rather on the values, the principles and the policies which bring closer us and cause of magnifier more our potential of humanistic company?
Like Bernard Landry, the former chief of the Québécois Party wrote recently, Quebec already has much more capacities than several State-nations. Of how much more can we stretch the wire which link us without Canada arriving at becoming that a simple letter-box?
To redefine our political principles founders in such a way that we would set in motion the perpetual wheel of the transfer of capacities, would lead us to the bankruptcy of the Canadian project. It is the receipt assured towards the cultural insulation which would make null and void and meaningless any adhesion to construction the ideals which made this country.
Why idolâtrer its particularisms?
Canada was born and defined its true nature mainly thanks to the vision of Québécois inspired: Lafontaine, Cartier, Bay-tree, the St. Lawrence, Trudeau, Mulroney, Christian and Martin. As well with XIXe as at the XXe century, they assumed the leadership of the country and worked it according to values' which the modern Québécois defend and carry in them: diversity, the tolerance, solidarity, peace and stability, the respect of the differences, and the support for the least affluent.
The Québécois can do better than to cultivate their anxiety and idolâtrer their particularisms. During all their history, the Québécois showed not only that they could invent and build Canada, but which they could also make it in union with the Canadians and the autochtones of the other areas. The contemporary challenges connected to the environment, poverty, and the total market can much more effectively be faced if we face there by joining our forces and by trusting us mutually.
The model thought by our ancestors, who chose to link at the time the four colonies, and which thereafter attached the other disparate areas of the country, gave rise to a dynamic nation which makes the desire of the whole world. Their original vision contained the leaven of a new type of political company, a company which can make right to the fundamental aspirations of its citizens, while respecting their own identity and character.
The Québécois always knew to be proof of the force and the capacity to widen the Canadian vision, to make this country the democratic, independent and humanistic company that it is, and to promote peace in the world. Of course, they succeeded in building Quebec with the avant-garde, but their greater success was their full participation in the common creation of Canada, the country which we idealize and which the world admires.
Those which aspire to the leadership of the liberal Party should not dilute their engagement to serve the principles founders of the country and the part which the Québécois played in the advent of this great nation. Are we too often embarrassed to be proud and to recognize what we created of single?
Let us build on the basis of of the values and the principles which gathered us, and let us not exchange this generous vision for the risks of frustration, division and the tensions to be finished moreover it. There is, it is certain, a better avenue.
Claire the Happyone
Judge with the retirement of the supreme Court
Ex-professor in political science, Laval University.
Ex-professeure in linguistics and didactic of the languages, University from Quebec in Montreal
Jerry S. Grafstein, Q.C.
David E. Smith
Highly skilled professor in political science, University of Saskatchewan
Monday, November 13, 2006
Daily Digest November 14, 2006
Joe Hueglin wrote: