Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Daily Digest December 13, 2011

ARCHIVED at http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/



Despite 'reprehensible' tactics against Cotler, Tories get off on technicality
Calls placed by the Conservatives to MP Irwin Cotler's riding to falsely inform his constituents
that he was preparing to leave politics were "reprehensible" but did not breach the veteran Liberal's parliamentary privileges,
the House of Commons Speaker has ruled.

Police go military: Video
An onslaught of attacks with pepper-spray, tear gas guns and batons are just the tip of the iceberg
when it comes to the arsenal of arms that the police are pulverizing peaceful protesters with.

>>>>>>>>>>INFOS <<<<<<<<<<
20h09 - Gouvernement conservateur · Ottawa a mis la démocratie au rancart, estime Bob Rae
20h05 - NPD au Québec · Brian Topp veut élargir la base électorale
19h31 - Religion · Les musulmans persécutés comme les Juifs, selon un imam
19h05 - Des sièges de plus aux Communes · Le scénario se concrétise
18h37 - Appels téléphoniques · Les conservateurs n'ont pas violé le privilège du député Cotler
18h30 - Registre des armes d'épaule · Québec s'adressera à la Cour
18h10 - Québec · Moins de délais pour les ingénieurs immigrés
17h35 - Kyoto · Le retrait du Canada sème la consternation
16h18 - Maintenant vieux de 30 ans · Les CF-18 peuvent voler durant encore une décennie
16h05 - Automobile · Toyota s'intéresse aux terres rares du Québec
15h58 - Femmes autochtones du Canada · L'ONU va se pencher sur les meurtres et disparitions
15h30 - Dépendance aux drogues · Akwesasne déclare l'état d'urgence
12h08 - Au pays · Le Québec affiche la plus importante proportion de policières
09h55 - Avortement et mariage gai · Jean Chrétien craint les intentions des conservateurs



Claudia sent in an article to-day
It relates to some call "banksters"
It's well worth the read.

From: "Claudia "
Subject: time to tell
Bankers are the Dictators of the West
Once again it is Robert Fisk who has the decency and courage to be honest with his readers

From: Robert Roehle
Subject: G & M article about 2 weeks ago about 1500 PR people employed by the Conservatives

Do any of you still have it? If so, please send it to me ASAP as a person on my list is looking for it as supporting information for a letter he is writing.


"Ask and it shall be given" (this time anyway) http://www.hilltimes.com/news/2011/11/21/pm-harper-takes-communications-strategy-to-new-level/28868

From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: KYOTO A NO GO   DD

Joe--I also agree with this move but I wonder what the government will do to continue to appear 'environmentally aware'?  I was hoping for GW to save on heating costs.  I wonder if the carbon tax is still on the paper but will be paid to the Canadian government rather than others?  If the past is any indication our government will come up with even harsher methods to clamp down on us re GW etc. 
I do not agree with the pipeline to the US.   Those jobs could be kept in Canada but since the majority of oil companies are owned by Americans, it is Americans that will profit from the jobs and the product will be shipped to other countries.  How does that help our dependency on fossil fuels?  Stelco et al is what really  happens when the Americans get their hands on our resources--and it isn't good for Canadians. 
As for the comments on chlorine--chlorine is a carcinogen and we are all being poisoned with this toxic element in our drinking water.  Governments keep allowing the land and water to be contaminated with sludge, pesticides etc and then expect us to believe that chlorine will save us.  Chlorine does not remove drug residue from the water, but just adds another dangerous element to it. 

ps--Ultraviolet light is a much more efficient way of clearing bacteria out of our drinking water than is chlorine.  And it is much safer than chlorine.  But governments will not allow UV to be used in this way.
Subject: Face time required to become Canadian citizen

Immigrants are also required to know more about Canada and its history than previously as part of the citizenship process.  This is a sentence from the above article.  About 30 years ago I was helping English friends study for their citizenship exam.  I learned more about Canadian history then than I ever learned before.  That is when I started teaching my kids Canadian history as they were not learning anything about Canada in school.

Subject: with Tesla's technology the world would be free of control of the evil banksters

The call to release Nikola Tesla's Research-Jan. 7th 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=q83LL3FsiGo #!

From: Mahmood Elahi
To: <ottsun.oped@sunmedia.ca>
Subject: Veils should be banned

The Editor
The Ottawa Sun
Veils should be banned
Re "There's no right to testify in guise," by John Robson (Dec. 11).
LIke all freedoms, freedom of religion is not absolute and no cruel practices should be allowed in the name of religion. In India, Hindus  practiced "sutte" or burning of the widows in the name of religion until British Governor General Lord William Bentinck banned it in 1828. Similarly, veil is a sign of cruelty against women and must not be allowed even if some women would like to wear it voluntarily. Many distraught widows in 19th century India wanted to be burnt. But Lord Bentinck rejected it out of hand as an example of what can be described as a victim's right to be victimized. The same applies to veil.

From: "S Booiman"

Bloc new leader,
The time is now for the government to lay down the law that bans
provincial parties in the House of Commons.
Tired of being confronted with the "WE WANT" blackmail pressure.

From: alan heisey <hize@earthlink.net>
Subject: "-worm" 11 12 11  sunday.

Editions emailed to 2,900+ email addresses. Publisher is Alan Heisey, 38 Avoca Avenue, L.P.H #6, Toronto, ON, Canada, M4T 2B9    Phone 416 923 5381, 239 513 0444, 705 756 3289. From T.O. ,S.V.P. pass along to political chums and let me know number!

Publisher comments
Why I stop worrying & now love the 2012 “party” calendar!

Policy committee rejuvenated, and I thirst/get a news story

FPTP leader pinpoints least scary part of prop. represent/ion!.
Gord Elliot quotes Acts to show we have to go to 338 mps

Avoca current events committee discussed the occupy-ers
To be removed from this mailing list:

Publisher comments
Why I stop worrying & now love the 2012 "party" calendar!

Your correpondent has finally evolved a peaceful reaction to the so-called Conservative "Party" calendar once again issued very much in the mode of previous editions under the current leadership. What brought this about is the reaction that indeed, face it, Stephen Harper and his family and the important figures he trucks with to the general public ARE the party, the whole party, particularly now that we face a delightful years-long period free of the ever-present electoral risks of being a minority government

I went through a period, yet again with the latest calendar that it reminded me of Jackie Gleason of the Honeymooner years ago proclaiming "I'm the King and you're nuthin!, the "nuthin" being the mass of the party ignored in this edition once again.  But I realize that in the backstreets of my own riding of St. Paul' the dedicated party activists are content to keep their morale up by working together to build a private organization which can, eventually, reach out into the community and share recognitions as an aspect of our parliamentary democracy with our take-charge leader and his fellow professionals in the capital.

And for now please remember that there is widespread understanding in the bowels of the party that our activities are largely closed, even secret, since the last thing we want to do is embarrass the leader with the kinds of blunders which amateurs can often do if given a live mike. Our ability to keep a very low profile is greatly aided by the new privacy regulations which mean that the only person who can give me a telephone number for a member of the executive, without fear of contravening these regulations, is the individual them self! The privacy shibboleth is so strong that while we list all 30 members of the board on our web site, there is only one email address and one phone number, signalling very clearly, that membership in the local organization is a personal and private matter. What shook me particularly after attending the recent sports focused beer blast at a local pub was that i now knew who the new president is, to say hello to, and what she looks like because in our organization month after month there are no photos or information on members of the board or the executive on the web site.

Our riding organization, like most in my opinion, is too preoccupied with the long term objective of electing a Conservative member of parliament to represent us, and not enough interested in all the many other pleasant aspects of political activity which enrich our lives and our neighbourhoods. 

Policy committee rejuvenated, and I thirst & get a news story

John Adams and I were given very nice consideration when the standing policy committee of the association scheduled on short notice a meeting of their committee to address the import of the new census and our party's approach to strengthening democracy. I had a previously locked business meeting out of town last Thursday evening but what seemed to be the whole board of 30 members + Hize were invited to address those questions and report out. I hope that a continuing subcommittee can examine at the local level some of those other big issues like immigration and native peoples which get George Macdonnell into action!

Chairman Jack Gurfinkel obliged my request for a note for this edition and advised:

"The St Paul's EDA Policy and Opposition Research committee decided that: Decreasing the riding population variance to 5% would be beneficial in two ways; it would increase the objectivity of the riding redistribution process by reducing the flexibility the redistribution commissions are given, and increase the fairness of representation to the individual voter.

I think it matters a lot how the committee and the board and the executive "work" this key element in strengthening urban representation in the house of commons. Our tendency seems to be to work within party processes but I sense that in the more rural areas of the country the pressure for 5% variances will get  a hard time and I, of course, think that Jack or his nominee should call the four T.O. dailies, CBC and broadcast and let them see it is a major issue

FPTP leader pinpoints least scary part of prop. representation!

Mike Ufford is a backstreets, modest Grit who had a big influence on our province by heading up the NOMMP committee for the provincial referendum with the election of 2007. His little committee of Tories, Grits and some Crats scored 63% negative for the proportional representation approach which Premier McGuinty put before Ontario voters. Being on the fringes of that group I think his comment about the least scary aspect of proportional representation being the abstract concept itself, rather than the complicated specific alternatives, is worth reporting here.

Thanks, Hize. I debated Deverell in 2007.  He's a committed PR guy.

You'll notice that he advises against specifying which PR system the Liberals should back, since the "concept" is less scary than any of the specific systems. Problem is that the Liberals are so desperate now they might buy into it, as they seem to be toying with an American style primary system to select their next leader.  Mike
Gord Elliot quotes Acts to show we have to go to 338 mps

11 11 25 email from gord elliott I have extracted the requisite articles from the Constitution Act, 1867.
Readjustment of representation in Commons
51. (1) The number of members of the House of Commons and the representation of the provinces therein shall, on the coming into force of this subsection and thereafter on the completion of each decentennial census, be readjusted by such authority, in such manner, and from such time as the Parliament of Canada from time to time provides, subject and according to the following rules:
1.     There shall be assigned to each of the provinces a number of members equal to the number obtained by dividing the total population of the provinces by two hundred and seventy-nine and by dividing the population of each province by the quotient so obtained, counting any remainder in excess of 0.50 as one after the said process of division.
2.     If the total number of members that would be assigned to a province by the application of Rule 1 is less than the total number assigned to that province on the date of coming into force of this subsection, there shall be added to the number of members so assigned such number of members as will result in the province having the same number of members as were assigned on that date.
Yukon Territory, Northwest Territories and Nunavut
(2) The Yukon Territory as bounded and described in the schedule to chapter Y-2 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, shall be entitled to one member, the Northwest Territories as bounded and described in section 2 of chapter N-27 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, as amended by section 77 of chapter 28 of the Statutes of Canada, 1993, shall be entitled to one member, and Nunavut as bounded and described in section 3 of chapter 28 of the Statutes of Canada, 1993, shall be entitled to one member.
Constitution of House of Commons
51A. Notwithstanding anything in this Act, a province shall always be entitled to a number of members in the House of Commons not less than the number of senators representing such province.
Increase of Number of House of Commons
52. The Number of Members of the House of Commons may be from Time to Time increased by the Parliament of Canada, provided the proportionate Representation of the Provinces prescribed by this Act is not thereby disturbed.
The Liberals are proposing to keep the number of MPs in the House of Commons at 308, the current number. To address the under-representation of the Canadians who live in ON, BC and AB, they propose to reduce the over-representation of the Canadians who live in QC, MB, SK, NS and NL as follows: QC would go from 75 MPs to 72; MB would go from 14 MPs to 12; SK would go from 14 MPs to 12; NS would go from 11 MPs to 10; NL would go from 7 MPs to 6, for a total reduction in the number of MPs in these 5 provinces of 9. These 9 MPs would be added as follows: ON would get 4 of them to go from 106 MPs to 110; BC would get 2 to go from 36 MPs to 38; and AB would get 3 to go from 28 MPs to 31.
The Liberals argue that Article 52 takes precedence over Article 51(1)2 so that as long as QC and the 6 least populous provinces are more than proportionately represented, their actual number of MPs can be reduced. Only the Supreme Court can decide whether Article 51(1)2 or Article 52 takes precedence. The Chief Electoral Officer will determine the number of MPs in each province on February 9. The government wants the new formula in place for then and there is no way the Supreme Court can decide this question by then.
The other problem is that Article 51A prevents the number of MPs in NS from being less than 10 as it has 10 senators and the number of MPs in NL being less than 6 as it has 6 senators so application of this formula in 2021 will necessitate taking MPs away from SK as only SK will have extra MPs to take away to put them at their proportionate representation and then only 2 of them. So the Liberal formula, even if it is constitutional, can be used only once.
I heard Tim Uppal say that the maximum number of MPs that can fit in the House of Commons is 374 so that is the ceiling. We should freeze the number of some point: 338 or some number between 338 and 374. Articles 51(1)2 and 51A prevent the achievement of the “fairest” representation of the Canadians who live in each province. Gord Elliott

Avoca current events committee discussed the occupy-ers

I report with enthusiasm on the monthly meetings of the Avoca Vale Condominium’s current events commmittee because there seems so few groups having their kind of unpartisan discussions about public policy issues. While I reported last issue about the two formal votes of the 12 participants I did not mention the extremely interesting discussion about whether the “occupy” movement had been a good thing. General consensus was yes, but it applied more in the U.S. than here. However, I had seen a most interesting article in the New York Times about the increasing disparities between the incomes of the wealthy few and the rest of us and now repeat it here since it covers a lot of important ground!

Public Opinion and Executive Pay
Published: November 22, 2011

One of the most puzzling British and American trends in the last three decades is the vast increase in the share of national income allocated to the very rich. The High Pay Commission, a nongovernmental body in Britain, which published a report on Tuesday, points out that the share of British national income garnered by the top 0.1 percent of earners has moved from 1.3 percent to 6.5 percent since 1979. The commission has a 12-point plan to change things.

The puzzle is twofold. First, what caused the shift? Companies may be bigger, but corporate bosses do pretty much what they always did. They’re just getting paid much more to do it. At BP, one of the few big British companies with clear records going back to 1979, the top boss received 16 times as much as the average worker in 1979. Last year, BP’s “boss-peon” multiple was 63.

Second, why has there been so little public indignation about the pay extravaganza? The report’s foreword says “the public is rapidly running out of patience,” but in fact this trend has been in place for decades, was not halted by the recession and has not fired up a mass protest movement. There are rhetorical expressions of outrage from politicians and at the public, but the British, like the Americans, seem remarkably complacent about the triumph of the elite.

While the why of high executive pay is a mystery, there’s no real puzzle about the how. Year after year, directors approve above-inflation pay increases. The commission’s proposals are all aimed at throwing grit in the fast-moving remuneration wheels. They are mostly worthy and reasonable — more disclosure, more say  from shareholders and employees and fewer conflicts of interest.

But the rich, a group that includes most board members and shareholder representatives, knows how to take care of its own. New rules can easily be skirted or neutered. A trend as well established as this can be halted only by a new social attitude. When pay-bashing becomes a serious vote-winning issue, things will change. Until then, reformers are unlikely to make much progress.

Replies-O-Gram #127,  write, if you are pleased or offended, or anything in between!

To be removed from this mailing list: You may unsubscribe at any time by clicking "Reply" and writing "unsubscribe" or “disconnect” or even “git” on the subject line.  It greatly facilitates removal if you can quote the exact time of transmission of last edition! I continue to have perhaps only 2 or 3 who have asked politely to “git” but are not yet cleared, but will be soonest. Next issue from Toronto!  Cordially,