A post-victory (finally) interview with Senator Al Franken, given to a smaller Minnesota organization, The UpTake, who apparently were quite active in covering his recount & legal battles for the past many months. Funny in parts and you get a sense of how great it's going to be to see Franken in the U.S. Senate. A breath of fresh air. He says he'll be sworn in on Tuesday by VP Biden.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has blasted the Conservative government for using attack ads that suggest the Bloc Quebecois is soft on pedophiles, saying such tactics are "unworthy" of Canadian politics.
The Liberal leader criticized the ads while speaking to party supporters at an event in Calgary on Saturday.
Ignatieff sided with the Bloc on Saturday during a speech to Liberal party supporters at a Calgary Stampede breakfast.Ignatieff addresses the other recent round of attack ads against him personally as well but that redress of the ten percenters being disseminated by the Conservatives in Quebec was well done. Highlighting Harper's negativity, appealing to a positive way of doing politics. There's a subtle national element to Ignatieff's remarks too, appealing for a heightened level of civil national discourse in our politics. Like it, think there's a very ripe opening here.
"They're basically accusing the Bloc Quebecois of being soft on pedophiles," he said.
"I'm in politics to defeat the Bloc Quebecois with real arguments, rather than slurs and vicious . . . personal attacks. This is unworthy."
He also repeated a similar message in French.
"I will never descend to that level of attack because when we do this, we fragment our country, we divide our country. We create suspicion and fear and hurt, where there has to be healing."
New Ontario PC leader Tim Hudak gets a warm welcome from the voters, as you will see in this round of letters to the editor of the Star today. Not much love for Mr. Hudak's "get a grip" blunt force remark directed at the Toronto city workers on strike at the moment.
But wait, there's more of the warm and fuzzy Hudak today. Yes, could be a whole new segment of the population ready to get ticked off. This time at Hudak's seeming indifference to his lack of French speaking ability:
"My French is very poor," Hudak acknowledged after winning his party's leadership last weekend, suggesting that learning Canada's other official language is not a top priority.Not feelin' the respect there! In fact, not hearing any expression of good will toward the French speaking citizens of Ontario. At least the new NDP leader is demonstrating that courtesy and is committing to learn the language. Sounds like she cares. Hudak, not so much.
"I've got a lot ahead of me. Certainly, that's on the list of projects, but we'll see what time allows in my new role," added Hudak, who must unite a divided party, come up with a policy platform and become better known to voters if he hopes to beat McGuinty at the polls in the 2011 election.
Caught this on my twitterfeed this week (upsides of Twitter). Had been totally unaware that OLP had a new album coming (see this site). Am a fan, always find myself listening to them when travelling especially...enjoy.
Global video link from previous post expired...why do they do that? Oh well. We have Buckets on the job who has kindly provided the above YouTube version of the PM's insertion of himself into the military salute properly reserved for the commander in chief, the Governor General.
Fascinating to see how this little incident has galvanized attention. The PM may have stepped into something big here. What the PMO may have thought was a minor shift, a little pushing of the limits here that they could get away with that few would notice might become a tipping point in people's tolerance for such Conservative innovations. Not every occasion is suitable for partisan manipulation yet nothing seems to be off limits for the partisan PMO. This subtle move to encroach upon a prerogative of the Governor General is symbolic of the power grab that's all too typical of this Prime Minister. (It's also symbolic of the Conservative effort that we've seen to align themselves with all things military, courtesy of the influence of their Republican friends, by engaging in numerous military photo-ops for Harper.)
The little salute also illustrated a problem in Mr. Harper's government courtesy of James Moore's comments. Here's a Minister of the Crown in the Canadian government, in fact, the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Exposed as totally useless in his role as a guardian of that heritage. A prime example of the Harper cabinet pool of inexperienced yes men and women, unable or unwilling to say no to him. Moore is defeatist in his comments, totally deferential to whatever the PM wants to do.
You can't help but think that maybe the actors here, the Moores, the Governor General's protocol staff, perhaps untold government bureaucrats have just given up in the face of a tremendous push from the PMO to do such alien things. Maybe there's the sense on any given request, such as this one with the Governor General, that it's not worth engaging in a battle with the PMO over Canada Day festivities. It's not really about that though, it's about the toll that the creeping political vandalism committed by this government takes. This salute incident may have seemed like a small thing, but it really wasn't. It's part of a bigger story. Ultimately, the Canadian people are going to have to put a stop to it at the ballot box.
Update (7:45 p.m.): Analysis at The Torch.
By the PM who stepped in and received the salute that is by protocol given to the commander in chief of the Canadian Forces, the Governor General. Video here of the Canada Day incident. (Update Friday p.m.: Go here for YouTube version of the video, previous link no longer operative.)
He's not an American President. Why won't anyone say no to this person?
Update (Friday a.m.): Letter to the editor of the National Post today with another perspective:
In watching the events from Ottawa on Canada Day, I was astounded to note that our Prime Minister took the salute from the military. This breach of protocol on our national day of celebration is an insult to our head of state, the Queen. In Canada, only the head of state or her representative, the governor-general, are entitled this honour. Michaelle Jean did receive a secondary salute; that should have indeed been the only one.
I've witnessed the erosion of royal prerogatives and protocol in the past three decades, but this latest infringement bears comment. We are a constitutional monarchy. If Stephen Harper wishes to emulate the protocol of our neighbour to the south and aspire to a quasi-presidential style of honours, I would suggest that he move to that republic. The term, "prime minister," in effect, states that the holder of that office is the first minister of the Crown and as such, he serves the Crown/the people.
My Canada includes the monarchy.
Regina Silva Robinson, Toronto.
Ann Douglas takes Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro to school. Please take the time to read this excellent post.
The referendum ballot that Del Mastro just conducted in his Peterborough riding, where he invested taxpayer funds to send ballots to 98,000 people in order to determine support for a private development project on Parks Canada lands is a stunning example of a sense of misguided priorities from this MP.
The referendum exercise meant barging in on a municipal process that was in place and functioning on its own, involving muncipal land.
It was conducted in utter ignorance of how a legally proper referendum should be run, i.e., independently of an interested party, to name just one aspect of the process that was problematic.
And it perhaps involved an attempt by the Conservative party to gather voter information for their database by requiring voters to include their names, addresses and telephone numbers on these ballots. What use has been made of these ballots?
Our MP either fails to recognize the implications of his actions - or he doesn't care. Either possibility is mind-boggling - and should serve as a wake-up call for citizens of this riding.Hope that wake-up call has been loud and galvanizing in Peterborough.
From a CBC report this afternoon, big news, there's discord in the Senate! The gang can't agree on travel dates to visit various sites in Canada and two Conservative senators in particular can't seem to stop talking and disrupting the committee's operation. That's what you'll see on these videos of the committee's "work" that have now appeared on YouTube. Perhaps this is a new tactic of the ongoing Conservative campaign to undercut the Senate's reputation, the YouTube flank. If you watch the videos, however, you may come away with the feeling that the CBC report is a tad overdone. This is a vigorous meeting and it definitely has trouble functioning but that's clearly due to the Conservative disruption. Watch Senator Tkachuk in action in particular. Somehow he manages to put the "i" in committee.
Preston Manning argues in an op-ed in the Globe today that "It's time for a fresh start in Parliament." I'd agree, although (predictably) not with some of the prescriptions Mr. Manning offers! It's just so difficult to accept criticism of partisan zeal from Conservative quarters. This is a government that knows few bounds in that regard. After the last few months of Conservative negative personal attack ads, we're now on to slimy 10 per centers being disseminated across the country. Remember that parliamentary manual on how to obstruct parliamentary committees, Mr. Manning? We could go on.
Some of Manning's appeal for a fresh start has to do with media coverage, he argues that legislative achievements are not getting their due in the press. I'm sure the appeal for the media to hold some kind of psycho-analytic retreat on how they can be more positive will go over swimmingly. If the media are negative, they're a symptom, not a cause. And media coverage seems to be a secondary consideration to many other more pressing issues in any event.
At first glance, his pitch on confidence votes might seem interesting to some. He suggests narrowing their usage as follows:
...some agreement to alter the “confidence convention,” so the only condition on which a government could be defeated in the House would be on an explicit motion of no-confidence moved for that purpose.It's interesting, once again, to see narrowing of defeat options being advocated from Conservatives, just as Mr. Harper did last week. That would be in their electoral interest, certainly. And this could be interpreted as a dig by Mr. Manning at Mr. Harper inasmuch as such a move would cramp Mr. Harper's style, the confidence vote having been used by Harper for partisan purposes, not for the good of the legislative body and its work. So in that respect, perhaps one might be tempted to consider such a move. But with so much of what Manning suggests, what's really needed on this issue is not a changing of the confidence rules, but a change in who is able to deem what is a confidence vote and what is not. For many years we've survived in this country with the confidence vote measure being typically restricted to budgetary matters and extended to some important measures that go to the heart of a government's mandate. We trust our leaders to handle these constitutional conventions according to the respected traditions. There's flexibility there that we shouldn't lightly discard. It's Mr. Harper's responsibility that he's made it into a partisan plaything.
Celebrate but with a sense of vigilance:
On this Canada Day, we celebrate, as the anthem puts it so well, this "glorious" nation — its history, its future, and its very nature as one of the world’s most stable democracies.Yes, we're envied but it doesn't mean that we shouldn't take time today to reflect on how our limits as a democracy have been pushed this past year, to an extent that was shocking. We don't need to rehash the historic events today, but I'm sure they'll cross quite a few minds.
What we take for granted, the right to vote and have it fairly counted, to live in a land protected by rule of law, is but a dream for far too many people in other nations.
It’s a sobering reminder, as we look around the world today — to the repressive dictatorship of North Korea, the vote-stealing theocracy of Iran or the takeover by military coup in Honduras — that Canada’s system of government, despite its many faults, remains the envy of many people on this planet. (emphasis added)
Once more, for old times sake with that stellar shot which said just ever so much. It spoke to the involvement of Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro and his role in advocating for a land development on Parks Canada land in the Peterborough area known as Little Lake. Del Mastro's ballot results came in today and the upshot is that it was a resulting NO. It failed to meet his self-imposed voting threshold of 60%. About 8,000 plus Peterborough area residents out of about 98,000 ballots sent out in total voted in favour of the land development, which would have included condominiums.
Watch the video here of Del Mastro announcing the results today. Sounds defensive, like he has totally backed off and has felt the heat, likely not only from residents who were opposed, but city officials who had their own planning process in place and perhaps Parks Canada too.
The spectacle of an MP running such a ballot, self-administering it in view of the municipal processes that are already in place to handle such projects seemed odd and interfering from the start.
Now we are left to contemplate how much of an impact this adventure will have on Mr. Del Mastro's political fortunes next time out...
Seems to be a bit of speculation going on as to where Elizabeth May will run in the next election. Won't cover the ground that's already been covered here, here and here.
But I will say that I hope May seriously considers the BC riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands as her best option. Knocking off Gary Lunn, a high profile Conservative would be preferable to taking on a Liberal given the parties' respective positions on the environment, one would think. Lunn was beatable in the last campaign and should be ripe for the picking with a greater anti-Conservative tide that will be rising in a coming election. May can hammer Lunn for his prior role as Minister of Natural Resources, exploit lingering weaknesses in his role as a result of the Chalk River shutdown and its continuing impact on the national isotope shortage. It's in her "wheelhouse." She has shown an inclination to take down the Conservatives before, I'd expect her to stick with that given the Conservative record on the environment. Isn't that the principal argument she'll want to make?
Secondly, Frank Valeriote, the newly elected Liberal MP in Guelph should not be underestimated. He's got roots there, he's a tremendous communicator and has made a splash in parliament as a vocal critic on the auto file in particular. To an extent, you can't just look at past party success in isolation. Sure there's a core of Green support to build on, but Valeriote is a solid MP and I'm betting he's grown on the folks in Guelph. He's very likable (met him at Vancouver convention, full disclosure, very impressed). So, factor that in, along with what could be the flip side of that anti-Conservative tide in a coming election. A more pro-Liberal one that will advantage Valeriote.
Go west, Ms. May, go west...
A little birdie (thx very much!) sent me this lovely photo of the Liberal forces in motion at the Pride parade in Toronto on Sunday...Ignatieff, Carolyn Bennett, Gerard right up front in his bright red shirt and I do believe that's the esteemed Bob Rae over Kennedy's shoulder.
Apparently Iggy is staring because, I am told, the photog was taking a little long with the shot. But a nod and wink ensued...:)
So there you go, da Liberals be strong at pride!
Update (Tuesday 5:30ish): Big City Lib being a devil, again...:)
Updated Tuesday aft., below.
Senator Mike Duffy, serving it up all summer long it appears! Highlights - with necessary corrections where required - from a report on his appearance in Vancouver last week at the Fraser Institute. Duffy's radical and lightning fast transformation to Conservative uber-partisan continues to amaze.
Most surprising about Mr. Duffy's talk was his partisanship after being a national political commentator whose party leanings were seldom seen or heard. No longer. He is a Stephen Harper fan through and through, defending vigorously the prime minister's leadership.About this repeated line, now making its way into Duffy's routine on the Conservative fiscal management:
He says Finance Minister James Flaherty was prescient in shutting down 40-year mortgages thereby reducing risks for lenders.Duffy omits that Flaherty opened Canada's door wide to the 40 year mortgage and was the one who permitted these risky products in the first place. Flaherty actually did not act so quickly in shutting them down at all.
While senators are unelected Mr. Duffy talked like a politician looking for votes when he reminded the audience that the first Chinese elected to parliament was a Conservative from Vancouver.He peddled the old Liberal Chretien-Martin feud:Some in the audience were unconvinced. They had difficulty with the view that running big deficits is ever consistent with conservative values. Mr. Duffy remained adamant that these are exceptional times requiring exceptional measures including fiscal expansion.
The two groups are so hostile that the PEI Senator believes the followers of Mr. Cretien may have urged their new leader Michael Ignatief to make an unpopular election threat just so he would be defeated making an opening for former Premier Bob Rae - a pal of Mr. Cretien.Ha, ha! Just off the charts, that one. Needs some new sources, methinks.
When questioned about the uneven reputation of the Prime Minister for openness Mr. Duffy defended the Conservatives and did not see any problem. Many in the audience disagreed. An animated discussion broke out at the end of the speech about Mr. Harper's communication style or lack thereof. The senator took sides with unquestioned support of the Conservatives and Mr. Harper. Recounting his recent travels with the Prime Minister in close contact for a week he said he was very impressed with Mr. Harper's down-home personality. Some wanted him to take special training to improve his public charisma. Mr. Duffy did not join this chorus and seemed more comfortable with the adage, "Beware of charisma....While the charismatic has an uncanny outside source of strength, the authentic is strong because he is what he seems to be."Yes, where does one get "special training" to improve one's public charisma? Is that what Mr. Harper will be doing this summer? Something to watch for, behavioural changes in the PM indicating specialized training has been undertaken.
On the issue of concerns about the sudden resignation of the Information Commissioner, Robert Marleau, the new senator firmly believes there are no political overtones about information issues and the resignation was indeed made for personal reasons.
The Prime Minister is a "radically normal" person concludes Mr. Duffy. Prime Minister Harper works very hard and likes to spend time with his family Saturday night rather than hobnobbing at dinners with the wealthy in Toronto or Vancouver.
From the site:
On June 24, Iranian Superstar Andy Madadian went into an LA recording studio with Jon Bon Jovi, Richie Sambora and American record producers Don Was and John Shanks to record a musical message of worldwide solidarity with the people of Iran.(h/t robertmcbean)
This version of the old Ben E. King classic is not for sale - it was not meant to be on the Billboard charts or even manufactured as a CD.....it's intended to be downloaded and shared by the Iranian people...to give voice to the sentiment that all people of the world stand together....the handwritten Farsi sign in the video translates to "we are one".
If you know someone in Iran - or someone who knows someone in Iran - please share this link:
http://www.MyDamnChannel.com/DonWas
It is an ironic situation in which we Canadians now find ourselves. We have no death penalty here in Canada. Yet Canada, courtesy of the Harper government, now formally supports its application to Canadian citizens in trouble abroad. This development has been perhaps overshadowed of late by the understandable attention on developments in the Abdelrazik case, but it's equally important. In fact, it's a historic reversal for Canada's clemency policy which should lead us to question whether the next step is the death penalty's reinstatement domestically. Here's how the policy was articulated by Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon in the House of Commons on June 19th:
An individual who is judged in a democracy that subscribes to the rule of law should not necessarily expect the Canadian government to intercede on his behalf, especially when he has been found guilty of serious or violent crimes.That is the position the Harper government has decided is appropriate in the wake of the Federal Court decision in the Ronald Smith case which ordered them to seek Smith's clemency in Colorado where he is facing the death penalty. Recall that in that case, the court zeroed in on the fact that Harper's policy of not seeking clemency for such Canadians abroad was not supported by any evidence. The policy was a product of various political statements made to the media by Conservatives. But it did not satisfy the court's standard of a "tangible and intelligible articulation" of a policy that could be applied to Mr. Smith's circumstances. The arbitrariness of the policy therefore led the judge to rule that on grounds of fairness, Mr. Smith had the right to know what the government's policy was. So in the absence of a formally articulated new policy, the Harper government was ordered to continue applying the longstanding one. You know, the one where Canada stands up for its citizens abroad and seeks clemency for them. The policy that is entirely consistent with our domestic policy, i.e., we don't apply the death penalty. The judge noted what had been Canada's longstanding policy in the Smith case:
[49] The evidence is clear that until various representatives of the Government of Canada began to publicly discuss Mr. Smith’s case in 2007 Canada’s official clemency policy was to support clemency for Canadians facing execution in a foreign state[5]. According to Mr. Graham, a former Minister of Foreign Affairs, this policy allowed for no exceptions and was founded on Canada’s principled objection to the death penalty – a view which evolved since the practice of execution was ended here in 1962. This is also a position that is consistent with Canada’s long-standing international policy to support the universal abolition of the death penalty.Faced with the Federal Court's criticism, the Harper Conservatives decided to formalize to a greater extent their new iteration of Canada's death penalty policy. In the following key exchanges in the House of Commons that occurred in the final week of the session, you can see the new policy and contemplate some of the difficulties it will pose. More on that below, as it is being currently manifested in the case of Mohamed Kohail, a Canadian facing beheading in Saudi Arabia. The "tangible and intelligible articulation" they are now offering of their death penalty policy for Canadian citizens abroad is one that will be made on a case-by-case basis, depending on the nation involved, the case, etc.. So much for correcting the arbitrariness.
Ms. Francine Lalonde (La Pointe-de-l'Île, BQ):The short answer to her first question...the Canadian in the U.S. will die. The two in China & Saudi Arabia may live, depending on diplomatic intervention, as we will choose to go to bat for those Canadians. You can imagine how other nations will throw back at us our inconsistent application of the policy to some nations but not others, undermining our efforts. You can also imagine that some nations might not take so kindly to being deemed undemocratic, non-rule of law abiding nations, even if they are. How would that help a Canadian facing execution in one of those countries?
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Foreign Affairs confirmed this week that his party feels that the death penalty is acceptable. However, the minister said he wanted to decide on a case-by-case basis.
What is the difference between being put to death by lethal injection in the United States, shot in China and decapitated in Saudi Arabia? Does the Minister of Foreign Affairs realize that he will now be determining who lives and who dies?
Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, once again, this statement is completely out of proportion.
An individual who is judged in a democracy that subscribes to the rule of law should not necessarily expect the Canadian government to intercede on his behalf, especially when he has been found guilty of serious or violent crimes.
The strong measures the government has taken to combat violent crime in Canada are based on these Canadian values: respect for freedom, democracy, human rights—
Mrs. Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ):Clemency must be earned. Suggesting some kind of reverse onus obligation on the Canadian citizen who may be facing a totally arbitrary process abroad to earn their government's support. Throw in that the government will also assess the status of the nation as a democracy and whether it subscribes to the rule of law. The upshot is that the government will pick and choose which Canadians facing the death penalty abroad will receive the luxury of the government's efforts to seek clemency. We'll let Canadians die in some nations, but not others.
Mr. Speaker, at the urging of Denmark and the Netherlands, the UN is calling on Canada to drop its policy of no longer seeking clemency on behalf of Canadians sentenced to death abroad.
Does the Minister of Foreign Affairs intend to act on the UN recommendations and thus choose not to abandon Ronald Smith, a Canadian who has on death row in Montana for over 25 years?
Hon. Lawrence Cannon (Minister of Foreign Affairs, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, in the case of Mr. Smith raised by the hon. member, the government will be subject to the decision of the courts, but in all other cases, and I will be very clear on this, clemency is not an obligation. It must be earned. We will study each appeal for clemency individually.
The judicial wrangling in Saudi Arabia over a Montreal man facing beheading is a good sign, says Trade Minister Stockwell Day, because it shows the country's top court isn't sold on a lower court's ruling.
Saudi Arabia's Supreme Judicial Council has reportedly asked a lower court to again rethink its decision on Mohamed Kohail. It's the latest volley in a game of judicial ping-pong between the two Saudi courts.
"The fact that it's been referred back to the lower court, that is the higher court saying 'There are some issues here that need to be reconsidered,"' he said. "We're taking that as positive ... but I don't want to be reading things into this decision."Incredibly, Day seems to be suggesting that Saudi Arabia's court system is comparable to Canada's. Is Day signalling that Canada will therefore defer to the judgment of that lower court based on his seeming approval of the higher court's referral? Because Kohail's case has been referred back to it 6 times! This is a problem, they're sending mixed signals, seemingly intervening yet perhaps deferring when this jurisdiction cannot be said to have provided a fair trial and it's not a democracy at all. The Saudis torture those in their jails, such as Canadian William Sampson a few years back. Their new policy would require full effort here yet Day seems to be undermining it. Doesn't seem to be the way to run a foreign policy that has life and death implications, does it?
Forcing the Jidda General Court to once more rethink its ruling may allow Kohail's lawyers to air concerns not previously heard, Day added.
"Any time an item is being appealed, there's always the potential for increased consideration on the points of concern," he said.
"That's why though their appeal process, like Canada's, can be extensive, it shows they are giving thought to the issues that have been raised."(emphasis added)
From now on, the death penalty will be acceptable for Canadians sentenced to death in democratic, sovereign countries which have a justice system based on the primacy of law.While the big issues in the next election will be economic, such issues are important too. They speak to the fundamental changes that are being made to our nation by the Harper government. The Harper Conservatives should answer for this flawed policy. And they should explain whether they intend to finish the job they've started, by bringing this pro-death penalty policy home to us.
That covers about half the 201 countries in the world, including Canada.
