Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Daily Digest November 8, 2006

Joe Hueglin wrote:


ST.JOHN'S TELEGRAM - Breaking promises

CHARLOTTETOWN GUARDIAN - Finding ways to keep our young people
Anything that can stem the flow of our youth to the west is worth trying.

HALIFAX HERALD - Constant crusade

OTTAWA CITIZEN - Keeping the faith

OTTAWA SUN - Bluster buster

NATIONAL POST - The GOP pays for its sins

HAMILTON SPECTATOR - The carnage has to stop

SUDBURY STAR - Money dealers have no reason to whine over income trusts =

CALGARY HERALD - Coughing up a hairball

CALGARY HERALD - Mad science marches on

CALGARY SUN - We must remember

LETHBRIDGE HERALD - Will $65M alter drivers’ destructive ways?

OUVER SUN - Armed border guards won't increase security

VANCOUVER PROVINCE - Sexist hair remark gives greens a big, black mark


Military spends $19 million on army-navy amphibious assault exercise

Forces gear goes AWOL

Bomber kills 42 Pakistani troops

U.S.-Canada economic integration must go forward

Democratic surge could mean trade woes for Canada

Security hindering free trade, biz leaders say

Nato soldier dies in Afghanistan

Central Canada to struggle in 2007, Conference Board says

Trusts delaying financings in wake of tax switch

Retroactive trust policy is confiscatory

Trust phase-in should be longer

Trust taxes done deal
Executives unable to convince Tories to allow tax exemption

Analyst finds a few gems beneath income trust rubble

Income-splitting, age credit changes to help most seniors

Move on income trusts violates principle of no double taxation

Energy future dim

Ottawa plays hide-and-seek with EU on Kyoto

Murderers to serve a minimum of two years in maximum security jail


Quebec to promote French from coast to coast

Quebec is heading to Kenya for climate change talks

Quebec negotiating with Ambrose over Canada's position in Nairobi

What PM, premier discussed at secret talks

Tories led nationally but trailed Grits everywhere outside Alberta: poll

Poll finds income trust levy won't hurt Tories

Rae, Kennedy sighting hint of political courtship

Republican defeat a lesson for Conservatives, says opposition

Dion's wife wades into Quebec nation debate

Slings and arrows aimed at senator

Tories walk Grit path

NDP lets 'er rip on lumber

Grits try new track in Baird complaint

Ambrose's AWOL approach
Environment Min
ister absent when duty calls

Terror and toothpaste
An open letter to public safety minister Stockwell Day Pat Carney

Liberals say U.S. election serves as warning for Harper

Earlier discussion
John Ibbitson on f
ederal politics

Dion camp says support rising among party officials

Liberals plan changes to their constitution

Minister cancels bash over lobbyist's role

Tory bill to toughen gun laws under fire

Rae-Kennedy chat raises eyebrows
Aides quell speculation of deal-making
Say pair discussed Liberal party future

NDP MP fighting softwood agreement

Dion 'confident' about win

Republicans assess damage, Rumsfeld resigns

Set carbon targets soon, Ottawa urged
Top Quebec companies urge action; Greenhouse gas emission rules must be set before Canada loses out on market

$400-million federal deal bungled twice, auditor says

Harmonized taxes sound possible
Another GST cut could be part of bigger Tory plan

Income trusts: an international perspective

Chemicals impair kids' brains in 'pandemic' proportions

Rising above the climate confabs<
Ports 'Trojan horses' for terrorists, drug smugglers, Senators warned

Attorney-General must provide witness statements to Khadr

Click here: Progressive Islam

Flaherty's choice: The Finance Minister must come up with a tax-cut agenda to improve productivity
and competitiveness

U.S. must get out of Iraq — now
Iraq taught him that the West has overestimated the influence of the coalition and underestimated Iraqis,

Trust busting means never having to say you're sorry

Putting Canada's Afghan policy in perspective

Jobs need to be preserved

River of money, resources flows to oilsands heartland

portunity looms for national prosperity agenda
The clear message Ottawa should send is that Canada is a secure place in which to live, work, save and invest

Don't cry for Bay Street dealers now bawling over closure of tax loophole

Tax policy change hits retirees hard

Despite the damage, the market will recover

Barefoot and in the kitchen: A Tory woman?


Marché du climat: Harper confirme l'annonce d'Ambrose

Les députés adoptent en 2e lecture un projet de réforme de l'assurance-emploi

Les conservateurs toujours en tête, mais les libéraux menacent

Ignatieff prêt à adoucir la motion sur la nation québécoise

Les électeurs ont rejeté la politique basée sur l'idéologie, dit Bill Clinton

gnatieff moins résolu

Le français continue d'être menacé au Québec

Jean Charest et Benoît Pelletier présentent la nouvelle politique québécoise - Le Québec réintègre le giron de la francophonie canadienne

Contrôle des armes à feu: Day rejette les conseils des policiers

Béchard est prêt à laisser Ottawa parler pour le Québec

La déroute des républicains devrait servir d'avertissement à Harper, selon l’opposition

19 M$ pour une simulation de débarquement

La femme de Stéphane Dion intervient

Federal Byelection

A Canadian Action Party candidate is the latest to parachute into London North Centre.
And then there were . . . count 'em . . . seven


May looks to make history

Tory byelection candidate tied to U.S. faith-based diplomacy group


                 Yesterday these two articles were posted regarding consideration of a carbon trading exchange:

        This is the concept:

                          Under such a carbon exchange system, companies that can easily cut emissions sell surplus emissions room to other
                          companies for whom reductions would be more difficult, thereby reducing the overall impact on the environment.                    
        Following is a translation of an article in Le Devoir stating such an exchange is contemplated, though just how it will                   function I'm not sure.

                          Perhaps someone in the conservative movement can tell us after the shock of yesterday's events has worn off.

                          My apology for introducing politics but the defeat of the Bush neo-conse
rvative movers must be considered as not
                          auguring well for fellow True Believers in Canada so someone suggested tonight in conversation.


                                    Joe     &nbs
Market of the climate: Harper confirms the advertisement of Ambrose

After 24 hours of confusion, the Harper government confirmed yesterday that there will be indeed a market of the climate in Canada. The Minister for the Environment, Rona Ambrose, thus maintains the remarks that it was due to the Duty, whereas the Prime Minister supported his minister in Room. Rona Amb
rose also confirmed its intentions with its counterpart of Quebec, Claude Béchard, at the time of their meeting of Monday in Montreal.

 Ottawa -- Sown involuntary confusion the day before by the Minister for the Environment about the creation of a market of gas appropriations for purpose of greenhouse to the country seemed to have been dissipated yesterday. Questioned in Room by the liberal Party and the Québécois Block, Rona Ambrose made the same remarks as at the time of the interview published Monday in the Duty. “Our government believes that any system must be based on the forces of the market for the exchange of the rights of gas emission for purpose of greenhouse and atmospheric pollutants”, the minister supported.

Rona Ambrose however repeated that it was not question which the government buys or sells of the gas appropriations for purpose of greenhouse (GES) on this market or the international scene. “
;Contrary to the liberals, our government does not believe that it must maintain a market with the money of the taxpayers. The pollutants must pay the full price”, affirmed the minister.

The Stephen Prime Minister To grip, absent from Communes the day before, just like the Minister for the Environment, entonné the same refrain in answer to a question of Gilles Duceppe. “The chief of the Québécois Block will solve the problem by reading the opinion of intention relating to the Canadian Law on the quality of the air. He recommends the possibility of a Stock Exchange relating to the market of carbon. However the government is clear on this subject: industries, and not the taxpayers, will have to assume the costs”, has it says. The Ambrose minister also has it refers to the bill on the quality of the air, which mentions the creation of a market of carbon. “I invite the opposition to read the sections 27, 29 and 33 of the Ca
nadian Law on the quality of the air, which allow a system of North-American exchange. Moreover, it will be easier to develop bonds with the European market”, has it says.

The Minister of Industry, Maxime Bernier, and the Foreign Minister, Peter MacKay, who supported the day before which it was only about one “option among so much of others”, did not answer the questions of the journalists yesterday. The press attaché Stephen To grip, Dimitri Soudas, who held of the similar remarks, simply affirmed yesterday that “the words of the Prime Minister are very clear”.

Ambrose confirms in Béchard

Moreover, of the sources in Quebec supported with the Duty that this subject had been tackled at the time of the meeting of Monday between Rona Ambrose and Claude Béchard in Montreal. The minister federal then confirmed the news of the Duty to his counterpart. However, she did not want to advance on the cho
ice of Montreal like site of the market of carbon, since even if the metropolis has very good lucks and is largely favorite, “all the strings are not attached yet”, has it says. The advertisement could on the other hand take place later, in spring.

The chief of the Block also questioned the Prime Minister on the targets to come. “So that there is a carbon Stock Exchange, targets of reduction of gas emissions for purpose of greenhouse are necessary. However, in the plan of the Minister for the Environment, there are no targets before 2011. Does the Prime Minister realize that the spring which comes, it is spring 2007, not 2011? ”, Gilles Duceppe launched.

Stephen Harper retorted that targets will be fixed at the beginning of 2007, whereas all the regulation is in force in 2011. “It is the intention of this government to fix targets during the next year. Since 2011, we will have a system for all the Canadian economy. It is a
major projection, it is the first time that a Canadian government is given so that that is to say application the reduction of the pollutants and gases for purpose of greenhouse”, has it says.

The Québécois Block judges however that the clarifications of the government do not dissipate all the doubts yet and do not explain the confusion of the day before. “One does not know too much where they from go away, Gilles Duceppe said to his exit of the period of questions. Whereas for us, it is important, not only on the level of the environment, but also economically.” The Block diffused an official statement besides to claim that the market of exchange of appropriations is well set up at Montreal and not elsewhere at the country. According to Gilles Duceppe, it is necessary to act quickly for not that the Canadian companies “miss the boat”.

With the liberal Party, one estimates that the choice of Montreal is “
;logical”. “That takes this Stock Exchange of carbon to us and it must be in Montreal”, supported with the Duty the deputy Pablo Rodriguez. According to him, as long as the minister will not make a true advertisement, “any very theoretical remainder”. “The only thing that they succeeded in making, it is to mix everyone.”


John Halonen

In Reply to Don Keir:
         Don, I am in agreement with you.  We have a
major problem.   I am very concerned that our Government is promoting a Union with Mexico and the US, without advising it`s citizens.  This is an item that all Canadians should have participation in, as it will affect them greatly.
North American Union that promotes security as a common item will affect us all, such as an attack on one or attacks by one will likely mean that all are affected.  Not to sure our citizens
would be willing to participate in a war that they did not see as their concern.  Security is an item that we all share as a requirement in Canada, but to have a common structure with the US and Mexico would require massive changes on our part.

WHAT concerns me most, is that there is even a possibility that monies, needed to support the promotion and support by our elected politicians of a "North American Union", has been provided by another country. 

PS:  The comment "
Who's ever heard of thia North American Union thing? Who Cares ?" was not mine, as it surely is an item that I care about.

Where have you been John ? Believe me. It will be important to you.

Our federal government has been and is now negotiating with representatives from the US and Mexico to unite the three coun
tries legally, economically, commercially, and militarily, under one administration before the end of 2007.

An agreement to that effect was signed by Bush, Martin and Fox in Waco Texas on March 23, 2005 and by Bush, Harper and Fox in Cancun, Mexico on March 31, 2006.

A meeting attended by approximately 100 government, business, and military leaders from Canada, Mexico and the US was held in Banff on 12 to 14 of this past September, to promote the finalization of these plans for the North American Union.

Our noble business leaders are apparently planning it as a surprise for us. Isn’t that nice of them ? And the leaders of all our major political parties have somehow been convinced to promote this union without telling us what they are doing.

Dale Swirsky

To Ian Berg Re: Wheat Board.
face="arial" size="2"> 
Government owned?
  • It is run by grain producers who vote for 2/3 of board members.
  • It is neither run by nor subsidized a single penny by the government.
  • The Conservatives have gagged a democratic institution that’s supposed to be arms length from the govt.
Jails people?
  • Not 100% inaccurate but hardly accurate either.
  • Penalty for violating its democratically instituted rules (as opposed to those of the non-democratic robber barons you erroneously compare it to) is a fine.
  • Jail was for those few who refuse to pay the fine and refuse to do community service in lieu of fine.
  • What do you usually recommend for those who break democratically instituted laws t
    hat have been upheld as constitutional?
Prohibits Farmers from Selling Own Wheat?
  • Nope.
  • All a farmer has to do is show that they can sell their wheat at a higher price than what the CWB provides, and then they are free to sell it.
  • It does not prohibit a farmer from being entrepreneurial or seeking a better price.
  • It does prevent farmers from undercutting his/her neighbour by selling at a lower price b/c that results in the impoverishment of all farmers who would then be at the mercy of the small number of grain cartels.
If the Harper govt really believes this is what grain produces want, then it should submit a fair question to a fair voting process. However, anyone in their right mind knows the govt would lose
this and the only way they’d ever submit it to a referendum is if they contorted voters list, process, and question to virtually guarantee the outcome in their favour. Perhaps they’ll just gag and bully and demoralize the opposition.
By all means, make a valid case for a dual marketing board system, but factually inaccurate far-right hyperbole doesn’t build much credibility ---look what it’s done for the Republicans!!!

PM risks being left adrift, exposed ... With the Republicans set to lose seats in the U.S. mid-terms and with Bush's waning influence, the Prime Minister will have few allies to press his neo-con agenda

Pffftttt! You know, papers having a political slant doesn't bother me as much as it used to because most  people now discount pretty much discount whatever's in the papers these days. That being said, the (ahem) less-than-acute journalist, who writes in a Liberal-leaning paper (the Red Star, as it's known), impugns the Conservatives of slavishly following the Republican agenda. 1. T'ain't so since we have plenty of things to think about  without worrying about what the Americans will think. 2. Since we're by nature tied to them, we'll often share common interests. 3. The fine Liberals supported by the Red Star make it a point ... to portray themselves as standing up to the US at every convenient occasion (and thus being under it
s direct influence. Number three is the one that gets in my throat.
Most still wary of liberals
60 % say party not ready. Leader who wanted to recognize Quebec would cost Grits dearly, survey finds
And rightly so. having a single individual come out of nowhere, run for Leader, and start spouting ideas that no one had thought of is autocratic and most times the short road to electoral disaster. In cases like this, I get anxious. On the one hand, such a setup increases the chances that a responsible Tory government will get elected. On the other, the Liberals might get elected and the country's in for a rough ride.
="#0000ff">(Case in point: what if Sheila Copps had become Liberal Leader? Great for the Tory cause of the Alliance and the PCs had been united but ruinous for the country if she were to win an election).

Tory supporters use loophole to donate

So do Liberal ones, I presume. Oh, no one's GIVING then any money? How did that happen?

Don Keir

In reply to John Halonen:
Who's ever heard of thia North American Union thing? Who Cares ?
Where have you been John ? Believe me. It will be important to you.
First thing: I'm the one who made the Who's ever heard and who cares comments above.

Our federal government has been and is now negotiating with representatives from the US and Mexico to unite the three countries legally, economically, commercially, and militarily, under one administration before the end of 2007.
An agreement to that effect was signed by Bush, Martin and Fox in Waco Texas on March 23, 2005 and by Bush, Harper and Fox in Cancun, Mexico on March 31, 2006.

A meeting attended by approximately 100 government, business, and military leaders from Canada, Mexico and the US was held in Banff on 12 to 14 of this past September, to promote the finalization of these plans for the North American Union.

Our noble business leaders are apparently planning it as a surprise for us. Isn?t that nice of them ? And the leaders of all our major political parties have so
mehow been convinced to promote this union without telling us what they are doing.

Right. For the US, negotiations would be under Presidential responsibility. Last I looked, Congress hasn't given him fast-track negotiations authority, which means that it can pick apart any agreement that's been reached and delete any clauses that it doesn't agree with. In the past, Canada and Mexico have, without exception, never undertaken any negotiations with the US President having fast-track authority, for obvious reasons. And yet Canada and Mexico have both decided to do otherwise this time around .. and all without anyone noticing anything.
Also, the present Conservatives have been in power (sort of) for less than a year and yet they've been able to develop this grand idea, to get the US and Mexico to agree, and to strike this momentous deal in a few months. And again, without anyone noticing.
In addition, no party in any of the countries has campaigned on the Union issue, let alone brought it up.
So, let's see now ... 300-odd MPs in Ottawa, 435 Representatives and Senators in Washington, and who knows how many federa legislators in Mexico. Throw in three armies of civil servants and ever-shadowy "business leaders". Now, among these 1,000+ people, NOT ONE has squealed to the press about his own country's impending doom.
Sound realistic to you? Uh-uh. Hence my point: we live in a democracy and NO government can commit its country to anything like this in such a manner. Also, NO population in North America is advocating, nor will accept, such a Union.
Fair warning: this is where I leave argumentation aside and resort to invective. The "obviousness" of a North American Union being in th
e works and about to be sprung on unsuspecting populations is so GROSSLY stupid that it deserves to be invectivized. Based strictly unsubstantiated scare stories (who attended the meetings? who negotiated the agreements (consider how well-publicized the much-less-important Free Trade Accord was)? when will it come into effect? what laws will apply? will the political systems be presidential or parliamentary? etc., etc., etc.), a complete mythology of men and monsters with godlike powers has been synthesized. And oh, even if no one's ever heard anything about it, zero hour is in a year or so. Uh-huh. And hearts are aflutter about income trusts right now.
Still need convincing, gentlemen? Consider the possibility that you may be wrong on this, hmmm?

Randolph Dove, Financial Post
Published: Wednesday, November 08, 2006

It is often noted that Canada and the United States are each other's biggest trading partners, to our mutual benefit. But it may be more important for the economies of both countries that we are working as an integrated region.

Today's reality is that, together, Canada and the United States, and in many cases Mexico, are competing against other integrated economies that may have a lower cost base. What that means is that we rely on each other for a great many things in our just-in-time world. Those things -- supply chains, two-way-investment, global product mandates -- enable us, as an economic unit, to compete effectively with other regions of the world, such as the Europ
ean Union and the Asia Pacific region. To continue to do that successfully, we have to mitigate the barriers between our two economies and find ways to work together more closely.

In the post 9/11 world, the relatively smooth flow of goods across our shared border has been slowed by legitimate security concerns, while at the same time doing much to diminish our economic security.

We can't have prosperity without security and we can't have security without prosperity. Of course we want our citizens safe and our borders secure. But the co-operation between our two governments on those issues is already extensive. There's a lot that goes on every day that we don't see. We don't need to build real or rhetorical walls or fences between our two countries to enhance security. We need to build more bridges. And that should be easy for two of the most advanced, sovereign countries in the world.

Earlier this year, the Canadian American Business Council
conducted a survey on energy attitudes in the United States. Only a very small percentage of Americans could identify Canada as the Unites States' largest supplier of energy. However, a majority of those same Americans said they would pay a premium price for energy if it came from a secure source such as Canada. Energy security is an area where we can and must work better together.

We also need to expand our regulatory harmony. Currently, the European Union is doing a better job. By presenting a united front, it has been creating a common infrastructure that makes it easier to compete. We have to do a better job of removing regulatory barriers, including barriers that affect our workforce and our infrastructure. The North American Competitiveness Council has identified many areas where we can work better. Let's get at those suggestions now.

Consider the movement of jobs and people. At a time when lower-value jobs are leaving our two countries, we must
do more to increase the education of our workforce to win or retain higher-value jobs. The number of engineering graduates in many other countries, for example, especially in emerging markets such as China, is far ahead of where the United States and Canada are today.

In the past, both countries invited well-educated people from around the world to come in, become citizens and make economic contributions. We're not doing such a good job of that anymore.

In addition to recognizing foreign academic credentials, we also need to bring people into our countries and educate them. The quality of our education systems is a major competitive advantage. If we bring people from around the world to our countries and give them access to our educational institutions, half will want to stay and put their education to work or create jobs. Those who return to their countries of origin will take back with them a favorable view of the United States and Canada, and a willi
ngness to do business with us.

Today, the Canadian American Business Council is recognizing two companies -- one Canadian, one American -- for their collaborative development of a product that can benefit people around the world. Virox Technologies and JohnsonDiversey will receive the council's highest award as an example of cross-border economic co-operation.

There are huge opportunities out there and we, as integrated economies, have to be ready to seize them. We need to embrace the fact that we should be greater players in the world economy, and we need to be looking outward rather than inward. If we are continuously looking inward, one day we will see that there's a lot more competition than we ever thought and it will be harder to maintain our position.

Randolph Dove is the chairman of the Canadian American Business Council. He is also executive director of Global Government Affairs for EDS.

py; National Post 2006