Showcase

Say "No" To Pensions

2009-04-14T20:13:00.000-07:00

A decade ago during the last recession, the provincial government passed legislation creating the Ontario Pension Benefit Guarantee Fund (OPBGF). As part of this legislation they also named a number of large companies 'too big too fail.' This meant that companies only had to contribute a minimum $5 million to the fund, and that no matter what happened; if they suddenly went bankrupt the province of Ontario would be responsible for part of their pensions.

General Motors was one of those companies; they used the 'too big to fail' loophole to underpay their pension and now retirees want the provincial government to pay up. Speculation grows that General Motors (GM) will claim some kind of bankruptcy protection as early as June. That leaves the province of Ontario on the hook for an estimated $6 billion in unpaid pension. That breaks down too an approximate $410/person for the entire population of Ontario. It's in an iffy position- even if GM goes bankrupt, and its assets are sold, it'll be $2 billion short in pension. The OPBGF only has $100 million in it- enough for each GM retiree to have $1 thousand each.

McGuinty's in a difficult position. Either he decides to live up to a deal struck by a government over a decade ago- this could mean likely raising taxes on an over-burdened province in order to raise the money. Or he lets them go, and puts the money that would be spent on topping up the pension towards retraining, and shoring up the social programs needed to take care of the unemployed.

I say, we let them go. I'm sick and tired of being responsible for corporate misspending- and that's what this is. When GM should've been paying into its pension plan it wasn't- that was a corporate decision, and one the Ontario government shouldn't have to pay for now. We also shouldn't have to pay for Bob Rae's stupid move in 1992, that in hindsight mortgaged our future.

So GM- I'm saying No to your request to top up the pensions. It isn't my fault your company didn't pay into their own pension plan. Your company chose to do that, now live with the consequences of your actions.

To learn more about this issue please see: Ontario: No Guarantees On Pension

New World Order

2009-04-03T15:56:00.000-07:00

In reading about the G20 summit a lot was mentioned about a 'new world order' being introduced. I wonder about Canada's role in all this- will it be as a leader? or in its current role as compassionate middle power?

I'd like to think this 'new world order' will put Canada near the top. The banking regulations put in place as part of the summit's final agreement were modelled after Canadian regulations. Our banks are among the top financial institutions in the world. On the military side, we have over two thousand soldiers serving in Afghanistan, which, I consider to be our mission above all others. Our Defense Minister may become NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization)'s first non-European Secretary-General.

Prime Minister Harper says nobody can replace the USA. That may be true, but I believe there is a chance to advance Canada to a higher place in the world. Harper has begun to raise his profile in the United States through various media appearances, and spreading the word about the Canadian economy as being among the more stable in the world. He's touting the advantages of world trade, and cautioning against protectionism- both positives to get the world's economy back on track.

Canada has always wanted a bigger role in the world. And now we have the chance- and it looks like we're taking it.

To read more about the G20 summit, see: G20 Summit Ends With $1 Trillion deal.

"What Dalton Giveth, Dalton Taketh Away"

2009-03-29T09:36:00.000-07:00

A part of interim Progressive Conservative Leader Bob Runciman's reaction to the Ontario Budget. In what I've read while researching an article it's an appropriate reaction. "What Dalton giveth": increased child tax benefit (from $600-1100). More infrastructure money at $27.5 billion in the hopes it will create jobs, money for Ontarians to deal with the tax harmonization ($1000 for families, $300 for single people). More money in the form of tax cuts for 93% of Ontarians, including a cut of 10% for those making under $80,000. Corporate tax income tax cuts to be cut from 14-10% by 2013, with small business taxes to be reduced to 4.5%.

"Dalton Taketh Away:" If you ask me, any illusion Ontarians can actually save money by harmonizing the sales taxes without cutting the PST. I kind of understand the corporate tax cuts- it's been shown those do help create jobs. There's going to be a 13% charge on a lot more things than we're paying for now like: haircuts, houses over $400 thousand, certain food items and that morning coffee from Tim Hortons. The policy is going to be in effect as of July 1st, 2010, so as of around 16 months from now the cost of living will have increased- thank you very much Mr. McGuinty.

Runciman admitted his party favours tax harmonization. But I think the way the PC's would have done it would be to have cut the PST to 5%, then harmonized it with the GST. A much more sensible thing that would have in effect lowered the sales tax to 10%.

Dalton taketh away money for transit. The provincial government set up a transit agency Metrolinx, designed to improve public transit throughout the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). That agency was hoping for $500 million in the budget, but got nothing. That contradicts the idea of a 'green economy.' It's sort of hard to be green when there's little to no public transit.

Dalton taketh away the minimum wage increase for next year? That one's only been hinted at. Less than 24 hours after presenting the budget he already wanted to break a promise. He said Friday that increasing the minimum wage would depend on the province's economy. Raise the cost of living via the sales tax, while freezing the minimum wage... brilliant, sounds like good economics to me. And on the backs of those who need jobs the most- wow just what we need. You can't raise the cost of living, and then not minimum wage!

Ontario is forecast to run a $14.1 billion deficit- higher than Bob Rae. It's reasonable to have a deficit- bad economic times often call for one. But there comes a point where instead of a deficit that a government can dig themselves out of, it becomes a case of throwing good money after bad. My fear is we're approaching that point.

To read more about the Ontario Budget, and Tax Harmonization see:
Ontario's Duncan Presents Budget
Ontario Moves Forward With Tax Harmonization

Tax Harmonization- A Bad Idea Whose Time has Come

2009-03-26T07:14:00.000-07:00

It looks like the Ontario Government is planning to harmonize the PST (Provincial Sales Tax) with the GST (Goods and Services Tax). This means Ontarians will be paying 13% instead of the 8% and 5% listed separately on a bill, and will be paying it on more products and services than we did before.

They argue it's a good idea because it means businesses will save up to $100 million/ year according to the Ontario Chamber Of Commerce, and supposedly will stimulate the economy. It may save businesses money but it will cost consumers more. According to the Ontario Homebuilders Association there's a possibility it could kill the housing market because suddenly builders will have to pay PST on construction materials for new homes, and of course those builders will have to pass it onto the consumer. That's just one sector of the economy.

It's rumoured to be implemented by July, 2010 by which point the financial experts all say we'll be recovering from this recession. If that turns out to be true, another tax will be the last thing we need- it may put us back into a deeper recession. It will as well I think be a boon to the underground economy. We'll see more small businesses offering a 'cash only' option, because they'll get away with only charging GST.

My prediction: A year from now sees us deeper into the recession than we are today. More jobs will have been lost, governments will be stretched to the limits, and spending will have slowed to a trickle.

A harmonized sales tax implemented as is will kill this economy. If I were in charge, and wanted to do this, I would knock a couple points off the PST then do it That might get people spending again. I'm not in charge, and those that are, only seem to have the guts to make the easy cash grab.

It won't be fully implemented until next July, meaning we still have time to stop it. At the very least we should remember this as we step into the voting booth next Provincial Election. Premier McGuinty should pay for this one with his job- maybe then he'll find out what lousy idea harmonization is.

To read more about this issue please check out the article: Ontario Moves Forward With Tax Harmonization.

Government Aid For Private Media- A Bad Idea

2009-03-20T14:50:00.001-07:00

Reports this week that the federal government is looking for ways to help the ailing broadcast industry through tax breaks, and relaxing some regulations dealing with Canadian Content. Canwest Global is mentioned as a company that may directly receive some financial support- discussions with government officials are ongoing, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper has met with Canwest Global CEO Leonard Asper once. It's a bad idea to directly aid Canwest. Any money given to them, singles them out as being above the other two private broadcasters, and gives them an unfair advantage.

Aiding Canwest opens the door to political meddling in editorial content- or at least leaves it open to the spectre of interference. When the Liberals were in power, it was said that one of Canwest's editorial policies was not to say anything negative about the Liberal Party. The same thing could potentially happen with Harper- and as someone who is trying to break into the business, it rubs me the wrong way. The thing is there are stories that need to be told, no matter who they offend and in my opinion the spectre of political interference in editorial content may stop some of those stories.

Canwest, and CTV Globmedia have suggested a fee-for carriage charge. This would see the private broadcasters charge cable providers for providing their station's signal. They suggest the charge at 50 cents/ subscriber, potentially making them an estimated $150/yr.

The folks at the CRTC have denied them so far, saying the companies haven't proven the economic need for it since they're buying up specialty channels. They're also afraid cable providers are going to pass it on to their customers at a possible additional $10/month. Personally, I think if the broadcasters can demonstrate they need the money, then I'll pay it. But, I want something in exchange. If I'm being charged for their signal, I'm going to want the ability to choose my own cable package; Charge people extra, but give them extra too- I think that's fair.

As for relaxing the Canadian Content rules for television stations: That's a whole other blog entry, but to make it short I don't think they should do it. Canada is a vibrantly beautiful place full of creativity. It's time we start telling our own stories.

The bottom line is government shouldn't interfere with privately-run media. Should they make it easier for these private companies to operate through regulations, and tax incentives: Yes. But do not directly bail these companies out. An independent, competitive media is vital to a democracy.

Want to know more?

See the article: Canada Looking To Aid Private Broadcasters.

John Tory- Gone, But Not Forgotten

2009-03-07T08:47:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, I felt as if I was at a Wake for John Tory's career. All day I mourned, and celebrated the death of his career in public life.

He was dogged by endless bad luck. First he won the Progressive Conservative leadership, and then a seat previously held by Ernie Eves. Then he decided to run in the riding where he lived, and was beaten by current Education Minister Kathleen Wynne.

He became a leader without a seat, but instead of that bringing him down he fought even harder as opposition leader. Then, finally a loyal MPP (Member of Provincial Parliament) stepped aside and a by-election for the riding of Haliburton-Kwartha Lakes was called. Tory ran his heart out, but couldn't beat Liberal Rick Johnson.

Through it all he always came across has a good person; someone with integrity and honour. He was always thoughtful on the issues, always honest with those he represented. He opposed McGuinty on some issues, while working with him on others- what a good opposition leader should do.

And now he's gone- leaving political life as soon as an interim leader can be found. I think he'll go down as the best Premier Ontario never had. And it's our loss. We had a chance to elect a good man Premier, somebody with integrity and honesty- two things sadly lacking in our elected officials. And we blew it. Now, he's walking away.

Whatever he does next, I think he will find a way to make a difference. Good Luck Mr. Tory, my fellow Ontarians and I shall miss you in public life. We'll never forget you.

Plains of Abraham

2009-02-17T21:08:00.000-08:00

I don't understand. We Canadians often complain we don't commemorate our history. So when an occasion like the 250th anniversary of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham comes along, and we have the chance to do just that, we cancel it.... Huh?? Did I miss something?

I love Canada, and I love Quebec; it adds a little bit of European flavour the place; something exotic. But we've been giving into separatists for too long, and honestly I'm sick of it. Every time they have wanted something: distinct society status, more money for this project, more money for arts we have given to them. Jean Chretien even started the sponsorship program in an attempt to make Canada more noticeable after the referendum; look how well that one turned out.

And in the last Election when it turned out arts funding was going to be a big issue in Quebec Prime Minister Harper promised more funding for it. This coming after Harper grants the province 'nation' status within the country. It didn't help him get more seats- as a matter of fact the seat count in Quebec shrunk in comparison to previous results.

The cancellation of the re-enactment of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham should have been the final straw. Instead of giving in, the National Battlefields Commission should have said: this isn't just French or English history, it's Canadian history. The re-enactment goes ahead.

Instead they bowed to pressure, and empty threats of violence. And they successfully politicized what should have been a celebration not of the battle itself but of the fact that for over 200 years French and English have been able to coexist on a single continent.

I love Canada, and I love Quebec. But it's time for the rest of us to stop giving in and stand up for ourselves.

The fact is: The British won, French lost. The battle happened 250 years ago. Isn't it time we let bygones be bygones and moved on with our lives?

Demanding Better

2009-01-21T08:32:00.000-08:00

It's done. History was made as Barack Hussein Obama took his oath of office yesterday at around noon. It was about him, but it was about so much more. It was about a country putting to rest some of the ghosts of its past- of slavery, struggle and oppression. It was about a country realizing the need for change, and freely choosing it. And it was about a people who sick and tired of not being heard by their elected leaders, demanded better- and they got it.

And that is perhaps what the whole American election, and the events of yesterday proved: when you demand better and when you are willing to work towards being better, you'll get better. And it has to start at the local level.

That brings me to events happening here next week. Our federal MP's are back to work, and will likely continue the games that brought about the suspension of Parliament. It's our turn to demand better. We should contact on our MP's and ask for better- demand they work together and remind them we voted them in, we can easily vote them out again in a year or so. Demand more cooperation between parties and that the Prime Minister lose the confrontational attitude. And if they don't hear our demands, we should keep stating them until we're breathless, with a hoarse voice, and even then we keep demanding. Because demanding better is the only way to get better leaders and a better nation.

If Americans can, then so can we.

Barack Obama

2009-01-17T16:39:00.000-08:00

Saying the name puts a smile on my face, and makes hope spring into my heart. But I wonder if we're putting too much pressure on him. His power of oration on the subject of change; the need for it, his description of the America he would make, capitalized on a spirit of change. And it also started setting up astronomically high expectations. We want him to be the saviour of America, we want him to be the hope to the world. What happens if he doesn't meet our expectations? Will we be disappointed? Or are we longing so much for change that we'll still adore him no matter what his actions?

I have to feel sorry for the man. History has placed an awesome burden on his shoulders- the first African American President. And one coming in at a time when his country is in the worst financial shape it's been in since the depression, and is involved in 2 unwinnable wars. He is powerful orator, and that probably plays into the high expectations- he believes what he is saying, and makes his listeners believe as well. But will he be able to live up to the hype?

I hope so. Because in choosing Obama, America allowed itself to hope again. And in that hope inspired the rest of world to say: 'if they can do it, so can we.' And maybe we affect change in our own country.

The answers to my questions will come with time. For now, like the rest of the world I wait and have faith in Barack Obama, and America's renewed hope.

Mats Sundin

2008-12-16T15:26:00.000-08:00

I must have one of the coldest hearts in the Toronto area right now. Because no matter how bitter Sundin says he is, how sorry he is that his employment with Toronto has ended I just can't feel for him. Maybe it's the 5 million for playing half a season? Or maybe it's the foot-dragging way he made his decision that's turned me off? I don't know.

There's a lot to be said for loyalty- not enough of it is shown in today's society. And Sundin showed it in spades, choosing to remain a Leaf even when he was offered the chance to go somewhere else- he took less money and a no-trade clause. And the Leafs did treat him badly- not even making him a token contract offer to at least on the surface show they honoured his loyalty. After 14 seasons he does deserve better.

But the bitterness he's now showing is mostly his own doing. In February at the trade deadline there were 4 leafs with no-trade clauses including Sundin. The three other players all refused to waive them. Sundin could've shown selflessness and given something back to his team by allowing himself to be traded. Instead he too refused to waive his no-trade clause.

Fast forward to summer. The Leafs trade his negotiating rights to the Montreal Canadiens, a move that caused many of the team's faithful to consider switching sides. Habs GM, Bob Gainey spoke with Sundin by phone, and in person. But in the end a deal couldn't be done. Several times including the New York Rangers, and Vancouver Canucks made offers. But Sundin continued to sit, wallowing in his indecision.

And as he wallowed, the season started. Life in hockey-mad Toronto went back to normal- a feeling of resigned acceptance at the fact Sundin wouldn't be back. Occasionally rumours of his return or retirement swirled, but there was nothing to it. Until yesterday, when he announced his decision to sign with the Vancouver Canucks.

Instead of the sadness I should feel at the departure of a beloved Captain, I'm relieved. This time of indecision is over, now the true rebuilding can begin. Sundin was a key part of the Leafs for many seasons, and will remain permanently linked to them via his captaincy. But it was time to let him go. There's nothing for him in Toronto but losing seasons for years to come. He shouldn't wallow in the bitterness- instead he should look at it as a chance to do something with his career other than Captain a team that has no chance of winning a Cup.

What the Governor-General Should do

2008-12-02T20:31:00.001-08:00

That question has been asked a number of times over the last few days. What should Governor-General Michaelle Jean do in this situation?

She should ask for meetings with Harper, and the other three. Ask questions of the opposition: What specifically are they going to do to stimulate the economy? What are their plans concerning Afghanistan? The environment? What is this coalition cabinet going to look like? How do Dion/Layton plan to handle the Bloc? All key questions, the answers to which are important to a stable long-term coalition. And if a coalition is her final decision

An important question of the Prime Minister should be: Besides the obvious reason of self-preservation why should I agree to porouging Parliament? The suspension of the house is an extraordinary power usually used when the government has finished the session's business and not for reasons of self-preservation after an epically stupid move.

After taking the answers into account, she should listen to the will of the people. It's clear Canadians are actually angry about this, and it's rare that we get angry about something. From coast-to-coast we agree that this is undemocratic, that we don't want Stephane Dion as our Prime Minister. We fear what the Bloc have demanded in exchange for support of this coalition.

The current state of the House of Commons is still another factor to take into consideration- Hopefully the GG's advisors are watching question period!
The Prime Minister and Stephane Dion have given up all attempts at civility. The atmosphere is poisionous, and no business is getting done while this is taking place. By suspending Parliament all that is being done is a stay of execution. The opposition maybe not in its current format, will seek to defeat him on the budget no matter what that document contains. I think Harper has irrevocably damaged his government, and his own political career.

After taking all these factors into consideration, she should send us back to the polls. It was a petty, vindictive decision he made- and the least he should have to do is face his people and justify it. We may loathe the idea, but it's better than a government being led by someone rejected by his own party, the people of Canada and held hostage by the Bloc.

Oh the Madness- a rant

2008-11-28T13:22:00.000-08:00

Yesterday Finance Minister Jim Flaherty presented his fall economic update. The contents included a motion to take away the $1.75/vote of taxpayers money the political parties receive and no stimulus package; but the door was left open on that. Before the end of Flaherty's speech yesterday the Liberals had announced that they wouldn't support it. Neither did the NDP, and Bloc. Now today the Liberals have said they are going to for non-confidence on Monday. They have a coalition all set to govern.

These guys just don't get it. The Liberals are pissed because they've just gotten cut off from their funding and they can't fundraise because nobody likes them and they have no leader. They're playing games, and now it's about to either cost us another 300 million, or give us an administration we never voted for- how is that democratic?? Causing an election now will make sure the Liberals won't see the government side of the house for the next 20 years or so and it will cost us very precious money that is needed in these tougher economic times.

When Canadians voted how we did 2 months ago we did so with a message. We said: we like Stephen Harper a little better than we did 3 years ago, but not enough to give him the keys to castle. And he accepted it. He seemed humbled, and now that the election was out of the way ready to work. It's the opposition parties that don't get it. They lost, Harper won- get over it, work with the stubborn man, and move on. The fall economic statement was never designed to include any kind of stimulus package- merely to update the people on how the nation's finances were doing. What's getting lost in all this is two things, one is that the cut in the party subsidy harms the Conservatives more than it does the opposition. They stand to lose $10 million because of this move. That alone shoots down the whole argument of trying to kill their opposition. If they were trying to do that, they'd cancel opposition days, or prorogue Parliament. The second thing is they left the door open on a stimulus package. They didn't say they weren't going to do it. They said it wasn't going to happen yet.

I agree with the way Harper is handling the economic situation. Canada's economy is in a stable position. The way to keep it that way is to take it one step at a time, one measure at a time. Too many people with the line of 'saving the economy' could cause more of a crisis than there already is. We need to hold tight and let the guy do his job. Because if Harper and his Conservatives spend 5 weeks out on the election trail when they could be working on a stimulus, I'll be pissed.

Stop the maddness- and get along.

Liberal Leadership

2008-10-31T11:53:00.000-07:00

The federal Liberal Party are going to choose a new leader. The two main contenders are of course Bob Rae, and Michael Igantieff. It is widely rumoured that both men never dismantled their leadership campaigns, and will have a head start when running for it. Only one other candidate has so far declared themselves, and that is Dominic LeBlanc. Expected to declare their intention to run include Martha Hall-Findlay, Gerrard Kennedy, and Scott Brison.

But who are we kidding here? Everyone who wants to can throw their hats in the ring, but it's expected to come down to a contest between Rae and Ignatieff. One last competition between two old friends with the prize being the leadership of the opposition, followed by a shot at the Prime Minister's office.

The Liberals are one of the oldest political parties in the world. The appearance that its leadership is being used in a personal competition between two former friends is horrible. It's bad for the party because the one that wins will be seen as selfish- and that's not a good trait for a perspective Prime Minister to have. It's bad for democracy because let's face it neither of these men will inspire us to get out and vote for them. Rae was one Ontario's worst Premiers in recent memory, and will fail to deliver Ontario. Ignatieff has the awkward personality of an academic and has just as much trouble connecting with voters as Stephen Harper. No Rae and Ignatieff aren't the answer for them.

The logical question then: who is?
The next Liberal leader has to be strong enough to stand up to Stephen Harper and nay-sayers inside the party. They should be young- because it could potentially be a long time before the party returns to power. They should have new ideas that will catch the imagination of Party Members and Canadians. They can't have ties with either Chretien or Martin factions for fear of continuing the conflict. But who is all this? Who can do it?

From within their ranks, is the intriguing possibility of Garth Turner for the leadership. He's shown himself able to stand up to Harper, and he has a lot of ideas concerning income-splitting and the M.P's role . His idea of MPTV adds a new layer of transparency to our government and makes citizens feel more in-touch. He's far removed from Chretien and Martin. The added benefit of seeing the look on Stephen Harper's face in Parliament would be worth it. Turner would certainly get the last laugh.

The name of Trudeau keeps coming up. He's just won his first election, and should have a few years to develop and learn the machinations of politics first. If he went for it now, it would be name recognition, and a feeling of nostalgia for the days of his father that got him the job.

I actually think it should be someone without a political background. Someone from outside the party because that's where you'll find new ideas that will appeal to Canadians. And that's what the party needs.

How Harper can lose

2008-10-13T09:05:00.000-07:00

There is the potential for Stephen Harper to lose tomorrow evening. If he does, it'll likely be due to his own arrogance and the fact that he has failed to connect with the all-important Ontarian voter.The arrogance is nothing new, and may be excused by simply saying you have to be arrogant to be a Prime Minister. It's the failure to connect with the average Ontario voter that could do him in.

The fact is the economy has eclipsed all other issues in this campaign as being the most important and that's reasonable. The manufacturing sector is collapsing, the stock markets are shaky as are the credit markets. And he came out last week saying in an interview with Peter Mansbridge that there are some good deals to be done on the stock market. While that's true, it doesn't matter very much to the GM worker who is about to lose their job. That remark made him look cold and out-of-touch with the citizens whose votes he is trying to get.

And then there was Stephane Dion's gaffe in a CTV interview where he asked the question be repeated three times because he didn't hear or understand. The Conservatives pointed to that and said it reflected badly on Dion's ability to lead the country. Language skills have nothing to do with his ability to lead. Jean Chretien led the country for 10 years and it could be argued that he mangled both official languages. It made Harper look like a bully, which, could lead to Dion getting a sympathy bounce that could make a difference.

The decision from the Conservatives yesterday came that Harper would not speak to the press until after the polls closed tomorrow night. That's a mistake because of the economy being the #1 issue, and with him in government it gives him a huge advantage. What I would do is have the last press availability be with him and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty. Let the P.M. make a brief statement, and introduce Flaherty. Flaherty would say something about his meeting in Washington. The last image would be one of unity, that would reassure Canadians and maybe connect with voters.

Right now it's too close to call. But with Harper's own gaffes he can lose this election.

The Big Debate

2008-10-03T13:32:00.000-07:00

The debate last night was entertaining, a lot more so than Biden and Palin. The clearest of the five leaders was Elizabeth May of the Green Party. She had the most to gain, and took every chance she could using the opportunity to her advantage. She was fact based, opinionated and stuck to the platform of her party while going after the others. She may have just given her party a few seats.

It was Stephane Dion's second language, and he was weaker than in the French debate. But he still had a very strong performance. He looked into the camera and spoke to the voter- one of the only leaders to do that. He came across as a decent, hard-working man who was genuinely likeable. And maybe too likable to be in federal politics. He did well as Chretien's cabinet minister. But that's different, you always have your boss to fall back on and in leadership the buck stops with you. I just wanted to reach into my television, give him a hug and tell him it was going to be alright.

Gilles Duceppe did well too. One of my favourite moments was when he admitted that he wasn't going to be Prime Minister, but neither were three of the others. When asked about it afterwards he said it was simple mathematics. He came across as being very calm and put together.

Jack Layton came across as a joke. He fell back on all of his old cliches that we've all heard before. It was annoying. The NDP have always had the ideas to debate, but it seemed like Jack was more interested in getting his digs in than debating them. He got a little personal with a comment about Harper hiding his platform under his sweater and about employment insurance. His highlight of the night was when he said that NDP government usually have good fiscal records. Someone actually said: accept for Bob Rae. Layton turned to Dion and said: "He's with you now."

Stephen Harper held his own, but I was a little disappointed with him. I give him that it was a four against one set up, and all he could do was defend himself. But he could have comeback with remarks that gave the voter a better idea of what this version of the Conservative Party was all about. And the little smirk was annoying; I spent half the time wanting to wipe it off his face. But again I can see where that's a coping mechanism with stress.

I still think Harper is going to be Prime Minister when this is over. But thanks to Elizabeth May, the choice of who comes in second has gotten a lot more interesting.

Harper's out of touch?

2008-09-24T10:07:00.000-07:00

Justin Trudeau. The name evokes thoughts of his father Pierre. He remarked to the show Question Period that Mr Harper doesn't understand Canadians. In an appearance on Tuesday's edition of Mike Duffy Live he continued the theme saying: Canadian identity is built around its creativity, its imagination, its vision. Our artists drive us forward."

While that may be paritially true it's not all that drives us forward. What about our scientific advancments? our love and pride of sport? What about the diverse nature of our people? What about our collective accomplishments in other areas such as international affairs- Lester B. Pearson created the concept of peacekeeping. And the UN Declaration of Human rights was a Canadian creation. Doesn't that drive for fairness and peace also allow room for forward motion?

As a country we are more than our artists. To say that insults us. I'll grant him the one point that Stephen Harper at times doesn't always understand Canadians. But on this one he is bang on target. As one of the average Canadians he represents, yeah I'd like art in my life; who doesn't like a bit of music, or go to an occasional play. But it's more important for me to be healthy to do that (Health Care) and to have a safe environment in which to do that (Public Safety, and Environment). Tackle those first, then talk about arts funding.

It's not Stephen Harper who is out of touch on this one. It's Justin Trudeau.

Harper's Ace??

2008-09-18T17:07:00.000-07:00

News broke today of a possible trade deal between Canada and the European Union (EU). It would use NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) as a template and go one step further integrating skilled workers as well as goods.

Under the final deal bilateral trade would increase by $40 billion. Trade would include services, and make movement easier for skilled workers. Negotiations are set to begin with a summit October 17th in Montreal. Now the interesting thing is, although this appears to have been leaked the Prime Minister has refused to speak about it.

It's interesting because this is a real issue, one that should be discussed in the campaign environment. It would re-focus the campaign from the contest which appears to be one of 'whomever can screw up least wins' to one of issues- Stephen Harper can win one of those.

From the little that has been released so far I have trouble seeing the downside. A free trade agreement with the EU would offset the unsteady influence of the US. It would set Canada up to be the economic power in North America and give both sides access to new labour markets. From the EU side, to ally itself with a country such as Canada- that has vast wealth in terms of natural resources (oil and fresh water) and is willing to share it for a cost would be a huge advantage.

I'm shocked Harper didn't release it before the campaign, and baffled he is refusing to discuss it now. It would have changed the whole complexion of the campaign if he discussed it beforehand; so much so that he'd be coasting right now. This agreement will mean an infusion of cash into Ontario's flagging manufacturing sector and Ontario+votes= seats. Ontarian seats= a majority government.

I can see why he didn't talk about it. Strategically speaking, these types of negotiations are best undertaken with a majority parliament because one wrong move at the bargaining table would mean the fall of a minority government. But because this does deal with the nation's finances and it would be better to speak of an issue instead of who is making mistakes today, shouldn't it be discussed?

Stephen Harper is a very analytical, strategic man. Mark my words, as we get closer to election day, and he sees there are seats to be won in Ontario we will again be talking about a free trade deal with the E.U...

It's the ace up his sweater sleeve.

Conservative Majority- Not going to happen

2008-09-13T14:38:00.000-07:00

According to the latest polls the Conservatives may win a majority government. I don't believe in polls. As one of my favourite talk show hosts John Moore pointed out Friday on his show in the last election the party that led early ended up losing the election.

This time around Stephen Harper is the seasoned veteran. He comes from a position of strength only because his was the governing party at dissolution. His policies were shaky at times. The environment, and Quebec as a nation were notable mistakes in my book- I'm surprised neither has yet been brought up. And since the official dissolution of parliament last Sunday morning, his has been a fairly gaffe-prone campaign. So much so that when he made the announcement that 2011 would see the end of Canadian troops in Afghanistan, we were talking about his suspended communications advisor instead of the announcement. It sure takes away from the debate, which, elections are allegedly for.

Another reason he won't win a majority: Canadians are still wary of the party. When he won in 2006 he didn't have the deepest talent pool to choose from for his cabinet. And his cabinet wasn't of the greatest quality, and so made a lot of mistakes. See Bernier, Maxime. That gentleman's mistakes alone should lead to questioning Harper's own leadership. Not to mention the mishandling of the Environment portfolio by Rona Ambrose, or the speak without a briefing antics by Gordon O'Connor. It's no wonder the majroity of us still don't trust him.

The Conservative Party is showing itself to be undemocratic. I know of at least two ridings (Halton, and Guelph) where candidates have been parachuted in much to the dismay of local riding associations who already had their own candidate in place. Talk about killing democracy.

The Liberals aren't going to win, and may in fact lose some ridings to either NDP or Greens. Dion has not only his party's campaign to worry about, but his own leadership should they badly lose. He is passionate about the environment, and that could carry him through a lot. His main flaw is his grasp of the English language- I know it's a lot harder to pick up a second language as an adult but if you're going to lead a major national party you should start learning it long before you ascend to that office.

The Greens I think will end up playing a major role in this election, perhaps even winning their first seat in Parliament. Elizabeth May's presence at the leaders debates signals that party's arrival as a force on the national stage. Many people could end up voting Green.

I feel rather sorry for Jack and his New Democrats. He has been forced to move his party from the far left, and will likely be squeezed for votes by the Liberals and Greens. The NDP will maintain its status as Canada's social conscience for the foreseeable future.

A Conservative majority isn't going to happen. Instead they will win an increased minority. Because despite all his flaws, Stephen Harper is the most stable thing going right now. And we're going to need stability if the economic forecasts turn out to be true.

Omar Khadr

2008-07-15T19:23:00.000-07:00

The Canadian Government is towing a fine line at the moment. On the one hand allegedly Khadr committed a crime against another country's citizen. This usually means facing that country's justice system. On the other hand, it's a lot more complicated than that.

But it's far more complex than that. The crime Omar Khadr allegedly committed was murder- he murdered an US army medic in Afghanistan when he was 15. That was 6 years ago, and in the meantime he was declared an enemy combatant and taken to Gunatanmo Bay where he is awaiting trial. Authorities have resorted to tactics that if not called torture, are in fact very close to being so. A judge has in fact declared his treatment has gone against international human rights law, including the Geneva conventions.

Other countries have all taken their prisoners back, and evenn put them on trial accept us. And yet Canada continues to drag her feet. Why??

Because of yet another complication: the rest of Khadr's family is to put it nicely, and in one word or less: despicable. They are hated, called uncanadian and considered traitors by many people. How else would you describe someone that supported the Toronto 18- a group of suspects on trial for their ideas to blow up targets in the G.T.A. and behead various politicans?

Despite his family, and despite whatever crime he may have committed, he deserves to face a trial of his peers. And that might mean bringing him home to face a Canadian jury in a Canadian courtroom. I'd be okay with that, and I think so would many of my countrymen because essentially I believe Canadians are a fair-minded people.

Omar Khadr has been mistreated, and no matter what his family is like, or what he believes he deserves some kind of redress for that. Like it or not, this guy is Canadian, and our government needs to stand up for its citizens.

The New Yorker

2008-07-15T16:02:00.000-07:00

I was shocked this morning when I found this picture from the famed New Yorker magazine. It was supposed to be satrical- the picture depicting the Obama's as terrorists, and the article says the exact opposite.

Instead I found the picture to be tasteless, tacky and not even remotely funny. I was surprised at the New Yorker- I would have thought they'd have gone for a different angle other than terrorism. I know some shady people have occupied the oval office, and that has caused the world in general, and Americans in particular to lose respect for the office of the President. The picture disrespects that office- and there's no reason for it.

He's black- so what?

His middle name is Hussein so what?

Neither thing makes him a terrorist, and it's wrong to depict the man as such. And I know there's free-speech advocates out there that are defending the choice. And usually I'd be one of them. But there's free speech- somebody choosing to publish or defend something that doesn't match my beliefs. And then there's this: an illustration so disprespectful it borders on the libellous.

Mats Sundin and Cito Gaston

2008-06-21T22:20:00.001-07:00

I've been working nights lately. Imagine my surprise when I'm laying in bed one afternoon listening to a newscast and find out that not only has Cito Gaston has returned as manager of the Toronto Blue Jays, but Leafs Capitain Mats Sundin has been given permission to speak with the Montreal Canadiens.

I thought I was living in some kind of bizzaro world. But I wasn't. It was still June 27, 2008. The signficance of the Leafs giving permission to their arch-rival to speak to their Capitain wasn't lost on me; nor was the return of the man who won the Jays two back-to-back world championships.

When I first heard about Gaston, I thought that it was either a Public Relations or that it might be crazy enough to work. Now, I've had time to think about it, the idea of Cito Gaston as Jays manager puts a smile on my face. I mean he's the man that won the Jays two back to back world series.

There are a lot of memories that go with that: I mean who doesn't remember where they were when Joe Carter hit the home run that won the 2nd one. I know where I was, in bed asleep. I was 11 years old, and it was past my bedtime. I couldn't wait any longer. I think I vaguely remember my parents waking me up to tell me they'd won.

There must be thousands of people with memories like that. Gaston's hiring is a throwback to the times when all was well with the Jays. If anyone can make a go of it, it's him.

Welcome Back Cito, We missed you.

And as for Mats: The man has been loyal to the Toronto Maple Leafs nearly to a fault. Of course it does help when the team throws millions of dollars at you, and adds in the no-trade clause. But despite the money and the fact he could make more elsewhere he still stays. Loyalty like that has to be commended.

But, there comes a time when when loyalty isn't enough. The Leafs are in a rebuilding period, to move a key asset like Sundin could potentially net them a young player and some picks. Sundin could've made the difference and won the cup for some team. And he'd deserve it. I think he should've waved the no-trade clause at the deadline last season and allowed himself to be traded. That would've shown leadership.

The Leafs are indebted to Sundin, and his years of service. And now with Montreal they have the chance to pay the debt- and Sundin has a chance at the Stanley Cup.

Good luck Mats, I'll be cheering for you- wherever you end up.