Daily Digest December 7, 2008

The DAILY DIGEST: INFORMATION and OPINION from ST. JOHN'S to VICTORIA.
ARCHIVED at http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/

EDITORIAL PAGEs

ST.JOHN'S TELEGRAM -
Coming home to roost

CAPE BRETON POST -
Role of parties lost in attack

HALIFAX CHRONICLE HERALD -
Zimbabwe's cry for help

AMHERST DAILY NEWS -
To spend or not is a hot question

TORONTO STAR -
Charest hobbled by Harper's folly

South Asia's terror test

Rewriting welfare rules

CALGARY SUN -
Surveying the damage

EDMONTON JOURNAL -
Small beer to pay for freedom
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/opinion/Small+beer+freedom/1043668/story.html

LETHBRIDGE HERALD -
Crisis has upside
http://www.lethbridgeherald.com/content/view/13810/56/

VICTORIA TIMES-COLONIST -

Put public first, not drug firms

Thumbs up/thumbs down

Dion and Harper should both go, now

Precedential politics: Canada at a crossroads


ISSUES

AFGHANISTAN -
Taliban destroy 100 trucks in biggest raid on Nato supplies bound for Afghanistan
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/08/afghanistan-taliban-nato-raid-pakistan

US force in Afghanistan must double
http://www.southasianmedia.net/News_today.cfm?category=frontend&country=Afghanistan

UN warns Afghanistan in jeopardy
http://www.southasianmedia.net/index_story.cfm?id=543155&category=Frontend&Country=AFGHANISTAN

US rises to Taleban's challenge
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7770463.stm

Inside US hub for Afghan air strikes
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7755969.stm


Deep in the land of the Taliban
Asia Times (12/07/2008)

"It's a tough situation there" - McCain
The Associated Press (12/07/2008)

Corruption fuels deep anger in Afghanistan
Chicago Tribune (12/07/2008)

Afghans beat Russians to lift Homeless World Cup
DPA (12/07/2008)

Women Wed to Addiction
Women's eNews (12/07/2008)

Dozens of NATO supply trucks torched in Pakistan
The Associated Press (12/07/2008)

Revamping Aid to Pakistan Is Expected in Bush Report
The New York Times (12/07/2008)

Homeless World Cup final pits former enemies
DPA (12/07/2008)

End of the Line for Islamabad
Newsweek (12/07/2008)

Kabul will only receive three hours of electricity per day during Eid
Quqnoos (12/07/2008)

In New Strategy, U.S. Will Defend Kabul Environs
The New York Times (12/07/2008)

New U.S. troops will focus on Afghan capital
Reuters (12/07/2008)

Kabul's Lost Tribe
FT.com (12/07/2008)

Obama to Explore New Approach in Afghanistan War
The Washington Post (02/06/2008)

The Two Faces of Lashkar-e-Taiba
Asharq Al-Awsat (12/06/2008)


CANADIAN FORCES
Memorial to fallen Canadians an 'oasis of peace' amid Afghan conflict

Crowds along 'Highway of Heroes' honour war dead returning from Afghanistan


CANUSA/USACAN
Defence says witness in Omar Khadr trial withdrawn to 'cover up' abuse


ECONOMIC AFFAIRS
"Made in China" label battered by product scandals
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/081208/canada/canada_us_china_safety


JUSTICE SYSTEM
Alberta wants Ottawa to amend Criminal Code to help police fight organized crime

Phony degree scam exposed

Organized crime a threat to markets: Report


POLITICS IN THE PROVINCES
Alberta, Texas singing same tune - Both warn of dangers of cap and trade system

FEDERAL POLITICS

CANADIAN PRESS
Liberals propose plan to speed up Dion departure
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081207/national/dion_leadership

Ignatieff closes in on leadership
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081207.wdion1207/BNStory/politics/home

Tories open door a crack on climate talks

Bill for parliamentary junkets tops $1 million for year

Rallies sparked by parliamentary crisis draw crowds across the country

SUN PAPERS
Merry Xmas, eh?

Using the 'S' word - The East treats the West the way K-Fed treats Britney

Ottawa 'experts' wrong again

PM's special delivery

NATIONAL POST
Rae and Ignatieff call for Dion to step aside
http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story.html?id=1044556

Dion expected to quit as leader in days
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1045427

TORSTAR
Rae steers coalition against Ignatieff

Bipartisan outrage in the West

Ignatieff said to be close to replacing Dion

Leadership AWOL as economy shudders

Toronto rally best turnout for coalition


PROGRAMMES
Afghanistan debate rages on for Canada


PRESSURE POINTS
Canadian native leader warns climate conference about changes in the North

Safety research on nuke burial plan lags: Watchdog

It's worse than you think
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/Its_worse_than_you_think.html


OPINION AND INFORMATION
Back door' Bob's piano-man blues

At last! A little passion in our politics

Their own agenda - Bloc only want to further the separatist cause

Ottawa melee poor excuse for history

Let's take cue from our southern neighbours
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/35673239.html

For the sake of the children
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/35673194.html

Blackwater guards told to surrender
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2008/12/20081279500225402.html


INFOS 
Ignatieff aux commandes dès mercredi?
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-canadienne/200812/07/01-808234-ignatieff-aux-commandes-des-mercredi.php

Le crime organisé menace les marchés financiers, selon la GRC
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/national/200812/07/01-808174-le-crime-organise-menace-les-marches-financiers-selon-la-grc.php

Députés et sénateurs ont dépensé 354 000$ en voyages payés
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/actualites/quebec-canada/politique-canadienne/200812/07/01-808183-deputes-et-senateurs-ont-depense-354-000-en-voyages-payes.php

Un témoin gênant?
http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/National/2008/12/07/001-omar-khadr-temoin.shtml

Plus que deux candidats
http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2008/12/07/002-leblanc-retrait.shtml

Réduction de GES: les conservateurs ouvrent la porte à des cibles variées
http://info.branchez-vous.com/Nationales/081207/N120769AU.html

Manifestation festive à Montréal en lutte contre les changements climatiques
http://info.branchez-vous.com/Nationales/081207/N120728AU.html

Des milliers de personnes manifestent pour ou contre la coalition
http://info.branchez-vous.com/Nationales/081206/N120675AU.html

BELOW(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)

Limited above BELOW (30)
Posts posted in order came in

____________________________________________________________________
Taliban storm two Peshawar trucking terminals, 160 NATO vehicles torched
NATO's supply line through Pakistan's northwest is under siege. The US military describes the attacks as "militarily insignificant."
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2008/12/taliban_storm_two_pe.php

«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»

From: Jim Erkiletian

Hi Joe,
   So why don't the elected Liberals, Bloc, NDP, and the two Independents go to Parliament Hill and begin meeting, after inviting the Greens to fill 23 of the seats vacated by the Conservatives, to represent the percentage of votes they received? Are they so convinced of their servile imperialist status that they can't take over our Parliament?

   If the Conservatives want to stay out, let them. And if the Governor General objects, we should remind her that as a former Haitian who did nothing when the democratically elected Aristide government was overthrown by American, French and Canadian troops sent by Paul Martin, her responsibility is not to the Queen of England. It's to the people of Canada. And that we are quite able to govern ourselves without her.

Jim Erkiletian
Nanaimo V9R 4W2

===================================
From: Marjaleena Repo
Subject: A pro-Harper rally in Saskatoon  and my leaflet

Hello Joe,

Below is a leaflet I prepared in a hurry this morning for a pro-Harper rally in Saskatoon. About a hundred "Conservatives" there, quite ignorant, aggressive, thuggish, particularly venomous­ surprise, surprise! ­ against Dion. Speeches against "separatists" with people wrapping themselves in huge Canadian flags. 

I went there by myself, planning to observe and take photos,  but then last minute decided to make and bring along a leaflet, too, for "by-passers." There were, however, no by-passers to leaflet ­ a very cold day and few people downtown in the city hall area where people usually demonstrate here in Saskatoon ­ so I offered it to the crowd. Quite an interesting phenomenon: most would not take it, or even look at it, as if their minds would be taken over by an evil force if they allowed themselves even to glance at it. A mother grabbed it from the hands of her teenage daughter and said: "We don't read this kind of stuff!" ­ as if I was passing out pornography!

I was immediately accosted by a big man who claimed to have been a soldier and "all his life" having fought separatists. "So you support separatists, eh!", he kept repeating. No chance of dialogue with him, particularly when he was trying to physically block me from taking photos. (I did, of him, and the crowd, and he took a very, very close-up photo of me, more as an act of intimidation, than interest in taking my picture.) A very polite pro-Harper man came over to take him away, and this man took the leaflet and neatly folded it and put in his pocket. Others who took it would crumple it and rip it up, but it did end up in a number of pockets, perhaps of people who thought it was one of theirs. They are going to get a shock of their lives, when they get home and start to read it!

There were Saskatchewan Party politicians in the crowd, and a couple of Conservative MPs, all riling up the crowd about "separatism" and Stephane Dion. A group of young coalition supporters gradually arrived, with their signs and slogans ("ABC" for "Anything But Conservatives" from Danny Williams'  battle against Harper, "62%," and others). They shouted slogans and sang "O Canada" in both languages, lustily. LOTS of O Canada singing there, so perhaps our national anthem will experience a real renaissance, with people actually learning the words! (A friend, a fellow Liberal party member, arrived at one point and got some good photos, I think, including one of the ripping up of my leaflet by some aggressive young men.)

Loud encounters between the more thuggish anti-everything crowd and the coalition supporters, one of pro-Harper man  challenging a  young coalition supporter to "meet him in the ally." He meant business.

The media present for the whole rally (which lasted for an hour or so), so there will be news reports in the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix and the local radio and TV (CBC and CTV). I was interviewed by the Star-Phoenix, so might or might not be quoted. I told the reporter that I was there to support our parliamentary democracy which the demonstrators seemed to know so little about and to support the coalition, and that I was just appalled that a mother had prevented her daughter from taking the leaflet and that so many were scared to take it at all.  (A young man who had accepted it, was told by another demonstrator, "You don't take that!", to which the young fellow replied, "I wasn't going to read it," and then to prove that he can be trusted NOT to become informed, ripped it to pieces! Way to go, for brainwashing the young, too!)

Below is the text of leaflet, 100 of which I and my friend gave out,  20 or so to the coalition  supporters, 80 or so to the demonstrators, a dozen or so which I found crumpled or ripped afterwards. I would LOVE to know how many were actually read by those who know so little about how our parliamentary system functions.  We have here, of course, a phenomenon of the willfully ignorant, encouraged in their ignorance by no lesser person than the prime minister of the country! I had a strong sense, particularly from the young men and women, that here we had Brown Shirts in the making.

Marjaleena Repo
Saskatoon, SK

----------------

A FEW THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE GOVERNING OF CANADA (BEFORE YOU WRAP YOURSELF IN THE FLAG!)

Canada is a parliamentary democracy and a monarchy. (We are NOT a republic!)

We don't elect a prime minister ­ he or she is only elected in his or her home riding.

The party that receives the most seats becomes the government and its leader becomes the prime minister.

The government rules as long as it has the confidence of the parliament. If it is a majority, it is safe, but if a minority, it is dependent on the support from the opposition parties. If it loses a non-confidence vote, it ceases to be a government and a new election is called, or other parties in the house might be able to form a government, with the approval of the Governor general.

A coalition government is formed AFTER an election ­ no one runs in an election as a coalition government, unless parties have formed an electoral coalition for that purpose. Both are legitimate ways of proceeding in our system.

A non-confidence vote is NOT "undemocratic" as Mr. Stephen Harper claims ­ it might be unpleasant, but is the essence of our parliamentary system

It is irresponsible and unacceptable for Mr. Harper to claim that a looming non-confidence vote is a coup d'etat! With this propaganda he is subverting our democratic system by misleading Canadians citizens.

FACT: In our latest election, Mr. Harper's party only received 36% of the vote, as opposed to 62% for the three other parties in the House. The majority has rights, too!

FACT: The coalition has two partners, the Liberals and the New Democrats, and the Bloc Quebecois has agreed to NOT to vote against it in a non-confidence vote for 18 months, thereby guaranteeing stability for the Coalition government. To claim that the Bloc Quebecois has "veto powers" is to perpetuate a deliberate lie!

For more on how our country is governed, PLEASE read Eugene Forsey's  How Canadians Govern Themselves. (All too many Canadians, of all ages, including the prime minister and his members of parliament, seem not have much of a clue!)

(For more information, contact Marjaleena Repo, 201 Elm Street, Saskatoon, SK, S7J 0G8,  306-244-9724  mrepo@sasktel.net )

===================================
From: Charles Tupper
Subject: Harper's Coup; Power grab in Ottawa

Harper's Coup; Power grab in Ottawa
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=20081205&articleId=11295

by Mike Whitney
Global Research, December 5, 2008

"We are in the worst crisis since 1929 and we have no government. How can this be good?" Stephen Jarislowsky, chairman of Montreal money manager Jarislowsky Fraser Ltd.

===================================
From: "Mark Garstin"
Subject: On a different topic away from all of this coalition stuff.

Joe,
 
I had an idea that is, admittedly still in the rough, regarding green initiatives that a government (any government or political party) could promote that makes way more sense than any carbon tax or cap or whatever.  It started when I heard some guy who had called in on a talk-radio program out here in Vancouver say that all of these government programs to subsidize the auto industry or the banks or the forestry industry, etc, were all wrong.  Governments should not be subsidizing production, they should be subsidizing consumption.  You can subsidize production all you want but if people aren't buying then the subsidy isn't worth a tinker's darn.  The expression is "you're pushing on a rope" (which doesn't get you anywhere).
 
But if you subsidize consumption then people will start to buy again and production will simply just take care of itself.  But how can you subsidize consumption (other than eliminating sales taxes or something else equally boring).  Well, this is what occurred to me.
 
The government offers a rebate program whereby if you go out and purchase a brand new car they will send you a rebate cheque based on the better gas mileage of the new car from the old one that you turn in.  Now, this doesn't work quite as elegantly if you use litres/100km but if you use miles per gallon then it works quite nicely (it's a mathematical thing I won't explain here, just roll with this).  Let's say you are driving a vehicle whose EPA rating is 20 miles/gallon and you trade it in for a brand new vehicle that gets 30 miles/gallon.  The government would then send you a rebate cheque for (let's say $100 for each mile/gallon or) $1,000.  However, if you were to purchase a different vehicle that gets 35 MPG then you would get a cheque for $1,500.  The program would allow for the cheques to be sent directly to the bank that was giving the purchaser the loan so as to ease their credit concerns.  Consumers would then start shopping for the vehicles that give them the better gas mileage so as to get a bigger rebate cheque.  It would stimulate consumers into purchasing again, it will help ease the credit crunch at the banks to start cash flowing again, it would pressure car manufactures into making more fuel efficient vehicles and it would get manufacturing going again.
 
Does this make any sense?  I'm certain that there could be other incentive programs like this devised to help out other sectors of the economy to recover.
 
My two bits worth,
 
Cheers,

Mark Garstin
Anmore, BC

===================================
From: "Rebecca Gingrich"
Subject: Guilty Parties?

Joe--today James Moore stated again that this 'coalition' had been planned long before the election.  To me that proves that Harper set this whole thing in motion because they knew what buttons to push..  They are planning the destruction of Canada.  All of them are guilty and must be stopped NOW.
becky

===================================
From: SL Judds
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Your response was excellent and I printed it out to use as a guide when formulating my political arguments.

===================================
From: Wendy watkins
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Hi Joe,  As one political junkie and democracy fan, I offer the following to you.  I've been following Bourque.org for a long time.  I mainly use him because he has all the media links globally.  But his commentary is terribly biased and usually National Post all the time. 

Well it's still Connie's paper most of the time, but since Friday the tone has shifted slightly.  Diane Francis wrote a scathing report on Harper in Financial Post:  http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/francis/archive/2008/12/03/stephen-harper-canuck-study-in-stupid.aspx

And there are others:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/12/06/kelly-mcparland-whoever-took-stephen-harper-s-blue-sweater-will-they-please-give-it-back.aspx

That's yesterday.  Hoping there's still hope and reading you daily,

Best and thank you so much for a sane voice,

Wendy

===================================
From: "John Halonen"
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Truly "NO GOOD" will come from this, but we have a GG that has been party to Harper.

What happens now?  Hopefully an election that will provide all Canadians with the right to choose a future.  LET US ALL HOPE THAT WE ARE NOT TO LATE before our economy goes into the tank.

It is probably best that the Government be defeated and an election called since Harper has set it motion not to work co-operatively with others.

John Halonen

===================================
From: Tom Muench
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Good day
 
Joe, I absolutely 100% agree with the outline by Real, but Joe, I am finding we appear to be a minority. 
 
Over the past 3 days, I have been communicating with various political interested individuals by phone, and have learned (which surprises me a great deal) that the debate is mostly Partisan in nature, less on facts.  
 
Thus emotion and issues unrelated to the current situation is allowing the public to create a frenzy that is going to make this resolution of it much more difficult.  The predominant argument by those supporting the Government actions from my sample are

1. The Coalition including the Liberals are power grabbing and saw this as an opportunity
2. Jack Layton and the Block premeditated the situation with a back room deal prior to the Financial Update
3. The Block are separatists and those that are working with their support are traitors
4. Mr. Dion is trying to gain respect when he lost the will of the people and his party
5. Liberals and the opposition parties have created this issue because they are in debt and they need the government to bail them out
6. The Coalition parties aren't accepting the will of the people and they are trying to hijack the government.

I will continue my dialogue for "responsible government" with the hopes of letting calmer heads prevail, but I am absolutely surprised at the lack of intellect from some that are very intellectual.
 
Monday I intend to call the Mr. Sinclair Stevens.
 
Talk to you soon.
 
Thank you and Best Regards
 
Tom
 
Tom Muench

===================================
From: Ron Thornton
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Hi Joe:

"What set the fiasco off?" Well, it was the Prime Minister threatening to force political parties to turn to their supporters, instead of the public purse, to raise their funding that began the parade. Why did he do it? Maybe he actually thought it a good idea to get their snouts out of the trough, as a majority of Canadians seem to believe. Maybe he knew of Jack Layton's hidden agenda, and sought to bring it out in to the open. While the pundits seem to believe Harper was rocked on his heels, my own observation would indicate otherwise. In the end, Harper's actions laid bare Layton's scheme with the separatists, then when Bob Rae convinced Stephane Dion to take part it brought all the chickens to roost.  In the end, it could prove to be Harper's most brilliant move ever, and if these boys and girls are smart enough, no one will admit it until the PM writes his memoirs.

Ron Thornton

===================================
From: Rubie Britton
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Hello Joe, I wrote GG last night and also  Doug Ferguson,who is president of the Liberal Party.I also e-mailed Stephane Dion telling him "Not to Cave into the Liberal Party.Manley has No Business telling the Liberals, that Dion must step down!
 
  Manley is the Chair of the Trilateral Commissions,Canadian Branch.He is acting in the "Interests of the U.States,not Canada!
 
   Believe me when I say,"Harper wants to divide this country,first and Canada will be "Part of the United States." We will no longer have "freedom of Speech,and the other things that have been taken away from our Neighbours!
 
 And here I quote another Liberal: "Motivation is Paramount,PARTICULARLY,Mr.Manley!"

===================================
From: "Robert Ede"
Subject: Understanding the Privy Council and differentiating between the Executive & Legislative Orders within Canada with the Senate tossed in too

Cabinet vs Privy Council --- What's the diff?
 
1) The Privy Council is part of the BNA Executive along with the Queen (in Council) and the Governor General (ss.9-16)
 
it is similar to the Upper Canada era's Executive Council, it is responsible to the Governor General and NOT to the Assembly.It was intended to be a permanent structure, independent of the democratic element (highly mistrusted, US War of Independence, Rebellions of 1837-38 etc, etc) supervising and guiding day to day operations, setting the budgets and advising the (often new and strange) Governor General.
From Wikipedia

The Executive Council of Upper Canada had a similar function to the Cabinet in England but was not responsible to the Legislative Assembly. Members of the Executive Council were not necessarily members of the Legislative Assembly but were usually members of the Legislative Council. Members were appointed, often for life. The first five members were appointed in July 1792. The Council was dissolved on February 10, 1841 when Upper and Lower Canada were united into the Province of Canada. It was replaced by the Executive Council of the Province of Canada in 1841.

After the War of 1812, the Executive Council was dominated by members of the Family Compact, an elite clique based in York. ...


2) The Cabinet is part of the Legislative Order (ss.17-57) it is the one of the collective names for the Members of the Assembly within the Prime Minister's "Governing Council, or Government". It is not specifically mentioned in the BNA/Constitution ... but neither is the term Prime Minister ... The Cabinet or Government is the Prime Ministers closest and/or senior associates and each normally is the titular head of a department (Defense, Transportation, Foreign Affairs etc) Since 1940 the Cabinet has populated all the posts on all the committees of the Privy Council.

3) Also part of the Legislative Order is the Queen/Monarch (represented by the GG) and an Upper House, styled the Senate,

it is similar to the Upper Canada era's Legislative Council these people were appointed by the Monarch, not to be responsible to the Assembly but to be a superior and double check on that Lower House. As in the British House of Lords, the Senators were intended to represent the propertied class (the only taxpayers). In the absence of landed gentry or nobles with titles, a dollar value for personal net-worth and free-and-clear property ownership qualification was established. Anyone who lost their money also lost their lifetime appointment. How much was the dollar amount? in today's money (multiplied by ~70 to account for inflation) it's approx $280,000, a not incredible sum, but no member of the working-poor would be qualified.

This net-worth and property-ownership aspect is often overlooked (the Triple E folks don't even talk about it), its significance rarely understood (affording equal-by-region representation to the taxpaying, property-owning class) because, as the only dollar amount in Canada that has never been adjusted-for-inflation, it's still only $4,000.00.

Hardly a restriction to the appointment of some broken-down old party faithful who's just lost his/her seat in the House (or worse).

The Legislative Council of Upper Canada was the upper house governing the province of Upper Canada. Modelled after the British House of Lords, it was created by the Constitutional Act of 1791. It was specified that the council should consist of at least seven members. Members were appointed for life but could be dropped for non-attendance. The first nine members of the council were appointed on July 12, 1792. The speaker was usually the Chief Justice of the Court of King's Bench. The Legislative Council was dissolved on February 10, 1841 when Upper and Lower Canada were united into the Province of Canada. Some members were reappointed to the Legislative Council of the united Province.

Preface to Plain Language Version of Canada's Constitution

Part 1-Plain Language Version of Canada's Constitution Acts 1867-1982 

===================================
From: HS Sims
Subject: Re: What set the fiasco off?

Hi Joe,

What happened? Simply stated, the internet. We all
have a voice!

Obama won the presidency appealing to the people.

Harper won a reprieve because of the internet and
the rapid dissemination of information.

I have read probably hundreds of news articles online
in the past week, for and against Harper and for and
against the Coalition.  These articles invited comments
and many received hundreds, pro and con. In essence
an online election. Harper won.

What angered most writers was the written accords
including the Liberals/NDP/Bloc coalition. And the
mainstream left leaning media attempting to minimize
the role of the Bloc.

What will resolve the Canadian differences? Only an
election in March if there is a non-confidence vote on
the budget in January.

There will be peace if the If either the Conservatives
or the Coalition (excluding the Bloc) win a  majority.

If the Bloc has the balance of power following the election
then a separatist equivalent will likely evolve in Western
Canada.

Hank

===================================
From: Rubie Britton
Subject: Harper Checkmated?


Hello,I received this about 2 hours ago.
 
  Please read:
 

Harper checkmated?
By David Orchard

At the Prime Minister's request, the newly minted 40th parliament of Canada has been prorogued, closed until January 26th, creating a situation unprecedented in Canadian history ­ a government has avoided defeat by dismissing the nation's lawmakers.

Over the next seven weeks, we will see a wave of propaganda and mobilization, amply funded, from the Conservative Party attacking the opposition leaders. This spending will take place outside the election writ period and thus, like the attacks on Liberal leader Stéphane Dion over the past two years, will be subject to no spending limits whatsoever.

At the end of January, on the date that he has chosen, Mr. Harper will meet Parliament and present a budget.

If his budget and/or throne speech fail to pass the House, Mr. Harper will seek ­ perhaps successfully ­ to dissolve parliament and go to a general election. He will have the momentum of seven weeks of wall-to-wall campaigning, without bothersome election spending restrictions, at his back.

If the Conservatives receive a couple of percentage points more of the vote (or if, for example, the Green Party takes one or two percentage points more), Mr. Harper may well receive the majority he has been desperately seeking.

With a majority, Mr. Harper will be able to move rapidly to do many of the things he has been restrained from doing so far ­ whether this means emasculating the opposition parties by removing democratic, proportional, public funding, completing the destruction of the Canadian Wheat Board, or undermining Aboriginal and women's rights.

If the Liberals and the NDP enter the next election competing against each other as usual ­ something Mr. Harper is counting on ­ they will divide once again the votes of progressive Canadians (the majority) and may well leave themselves, and our democracy, badly damaged.

One thing Mr. Harper may not have counted on is that, instead of falling apart, the coalition may solidify and take the initiative.

This could happen if the NDP and the Liberals (and, hopefully, the Greens as well) make a concrete agreement not to run against each other in any riding in the country.

If the opposition parties took this step, they could win a solid majority of the seats in the election Mr. Harper is hoping to take the country into shortly.

A clear agreement not to run against each other, made ahead of the election, would also have a salutary effect on Mr. Harper's actions in the House of Commons and may well cool his ardour for another election.

Professor John Ryan of Winnipeg has written a paper, "Canada needs a Liberal-NDP-Green coalition," in which he asks, how is it that a little more than a third of the voting electorate can decide who forms our government?

Proportional representation would give Canada a more representative government than our current first-past-the-post voting system, but in the meantime the opposition parties have the power to stop Mr. Harper and create a more democratic Parliament.

By forming an electoral coalition, in which the Liberals, NDP and Greens maintain their distinctive identities, but agree not to run against each other, Professor Ryan estimates the coalition could end up with almost twice as many seats as the Conservatives, and the will of the population would be much more accurately reflected in the House of Commons.

Last election saw a record number of Canadians abstain from voting. Many people, the young among them, are appalled at a system which regularly elects a prime minister and a governing party that most Canadians have voted against. Some ask, "Why should I waste my vote?"

The coalition formed in the House of Commons this past week has galvanized a great deal of interest and hope for an end to vote splitting on the centre-left.

Cooperation between the Liberals and the NDP in the past has given Canada some of its most progressive legislation, including national medicare, the Canada pension plan, a new flag and the establishment of Petro-Canada.

A Liberal-NDP electoral coalition that would see the Conservatives reduced to winning approximately one third of the seats in the House, i.e. roughly the percentage of their vote nationally, would re-energize all those Canadians who long for a more representative Parliament, one that more accurately reflects their views inside the House of Commons, rather than leaving them outside as a "wasted vote."

---------------
David Orchard is an author and fourth-generation farmer. He was the Liberal candidate in Desnethé-Missinippi-Churchill River in the last election and farms at Borden and Choiceland, Saskatchewan. 

===================================
From: "John Feldsted"
Subject: RE: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Hi Joe:

The coalition negotiations got underway on election night.  It appears some sore losers were not about to put up with the choice of electors or the failure of the ABC campaigns.

Keeping secrets in Ottawa is impossible.  On top of that, Jack Layton can hardly be described as circumspect, decorous or patient. Harper decided to use the fiscal update to smoke the bears out of the bushes and succeeded.  He played them like fish, withdrawing the controversial aspects of the fiscal update to see if there was any good will in the opposition ranks.  Dion, Duceppe and Layton made a public announcement of their political coup d'etat while the Governor General was out of the country.  The troika photo op took place before most of the MPs alleged to be part of this takeover had any opportunity to learn about the details. This from party leaders who have spent thirty months howling over Harpers alleged 'iron grip' over his caucus.  Form the outset, the idiot troika has made it clear that democratic governance is not part of their agenda.

The idiot troika is still howling that they will 'bring Harper down' when parliament resumes next month.  Quite frankly, I hope that they do. The loons have not thought through the howls of protect that will arise when the provincial and territorial premiers, who are fighting for survival, discover the extra transfer payments promised to Quebec, or the backlash from appointing separatist Senators.

They have not considered that residents of the common-law provinces and territories no longer give a rat's ass what Quebec wants or what Quebecers are upset about today.  Quebec's current contribution to confederation are needless complications, unjustified costs and constant threats.  We can survive without the howls of spoiled brats ringing in our ears.

Dion and Layton make much of their combined popular vote being higher than that of the conservatives.  The argument might have some validity if our system was based on proportional representation, but we work on a first past the post system. As far as the popular vote is concerned, the last election result was:

CPC – 37.63%

LPC – 26.24%

NDP – 18.20%

However, the seat count is quite different:

CPC – 46.43%

LPC – 25.00%

NDP – 12.01%

Just for fun, I counted the ridings where a party ran third place or lower in the last election:

CPC – 67

LPC – 106

NDP – 203

The numbers do not total 308 as in some ridings more than one of the three parties ran third or lower.

As for other ramifications of a troika takeover, Howard Galganov has set out the future of the troika better than I can:
http://www.galganov.com/editorials.asp?id=1073

Bruce Cheadle is dead wrong.  Canada will come out of this manufactured political temper tantrum stronger than ever.  Hundreds of thousands of Canadians have suddenly become aware of the dangers of taking politics for granted.  They realize, to their chagrin, that 30 Quebec separatist MPs, aided and abetted by the LPC and NDP can upset the vote of 10.2 million electors in the common law jurisdictions, who gave Harper and his conservatives 133 seats or a clear 57% majority of seats outside Quebec.

The BQ is skating on tissue-thin ice and risks alienating the people who write cheques to Quebec.

I have spent the best part of my life fighting for national unity and for Quebec's place in confederation.  That is now over.  I want Quebec, her separatist faction, bilingualism, transfer payments, hurt feelings, snotty superiority, and temper tantrums gone.  

I hope they go for it and that the GG lets them put their precious troika-led coalition in place.  We will send the resulting bills to the Bloc Quebecoise as they leave a renewed and stronger Canada.

Do please read Galganov's commentary: http://www.galganov.com/editorials.asp?id=1073

John Feldsted.

===================================
From: Randall Garth McGunigal
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Hello, Joe.

I just finished watching Bruce Cheadle on the Dale Goldhawk phone-in show, and he continues, as do most of the professional commentators, like Jeffery Simpson,etc, to refer to the economic statement as a "miscalculation, a "bungle", a "mistake", etc.

I have a different view. I have't been following the Digest much recently, so forgive me if I go over ground someone else has already covered. Feel free to publish this and pass it around to your media contacts.

Thanks,

Randall

In my opinion, the current situation/crisis we now find ourselves in was entirely planned and orchestrated by Mr Harper, probably beginning the day after the recentelection which did not give him the majority he wants so badly.

He delivered an economic statement he knew the Opposition could not accept. Of course, their rolling over and accepting it would have pleased him no end, but I suspect he knew very well that they would be provoked into rejecting it. He then delayed the vote for a week.

This accomplished two things. It allowed to him to unleash his communication strategy, which was essentially to stoke the rage of his base and beyond. Phrases like  "separatist coalition",  "coup",  "power grab", etc were not likely written on the back of a napkin the evening of the day the so called economic statement" was delivered. Nor were the raidio ads, etc likely produced overnight.  This has all the earmarks of a well-thought out, coherent plan.  The battle for public opinion was on, immediately after Parliament adjourned following the economic statement.

The second thing that delaying the vote allowed for was for the coalition to actually take shape and for Stephane Dion to be installed as its leader, really the only option the Liberal Party had, given that he was nominally still the leader and that the party was involved in a leadership race. Talk about an easy target!!

This is just a further example of Harper's cynical  (what, cynicism in politics??) exploitation of the awkward situation the Liberals have been in since the 2006 elelction.  Throw in the awkward coupling of the NDP and the Liberals and the involvement of the Bloc and you have a propagandist's wet dream.

In advance of the governor-General's return from abroad, there was outright intimidation of her in the messaging by the Conservative Party. Harper gambled that he could get Parliament prorogued, but I suspect that he was ready with a concerted campaign of outrage  had the GG decided to allow the coalition to attempt to form a government. So, he got his wish, and more time to fuel the sense of anger through which he wants to move public opinion in his favour.  Sadly, in my opinion, it seems to be working, at least in these early stages of this affair. His numbers are way up, as he has cast himself in the role of defender of the voter, who "did not vote for this coalition".

It disturbs me greatly that in his scheme to achieve both the destruction of the Liberal Party and a majority government, Harper has behaved so badly. The invective, the inflammatory launguage ("socialists, separatist coalition, coup), and the personal, ad hominem attacks would be bad enough. Worse, he has resorted to deception and outright falsehood.  He has distorted the reality of how our Parliamentary system works, by characterizing the coalition as wanting to "overturn the results of the last election".

Furthermore he has outright lied, and in Parliament  too, which should be enough to force him to resign.  But, since Parliament is not now in session, he cannot be held accountable in that body for his falsehood.

 The Lie? He stated, as did other of his ministers, that the coa;ition agreement was signed in a venue where there was no Canadian flag present. The implication was that the Bloc would not agree to sign on in the presence of the flag of our country and that the coalition partners acceded to this demand. Pure and utter fabrication! There were two Canadian flags in the room in which the coalition agreement was signed. But no matter, the lie gave support to the notion of a "separatist coalition", which has played well for Mr Harper.

So, that's an alternative take on the current situation, an opinion. A deliberately created political and now national unity crisis, pitting east against west, conceived, planned and executed by a newly-elected Prime Minister, head of a minority government, who was publicly pledging to work with the other parties in Parliament in order to deal with the most serious economic crisis in the past eighty years. What this Prime Minister wants is to create the conditions for another election and he seems willing to do anything to achieve his goals. Master tactician that he is and master of invective and loaded language, he  seems to be moving public opinion in his favour. What the cost to the country will be is anyone's guess at this point, but I speak as one worried Canadian

Randall McGunigal
Winnipeg

===================================
From: James Weseen
Subject: Re: Response to Real: What set the fiasco off?

Here's one voter's take on it, Joe. (Mine. Quote or excerpt by written permission only.)

Prime Minister: talking notes for visit to the Governor-General

(Note: items in italics are for context only and must not be said out loud.)

Your Excellency, things have gotten out of hand in Canada's Parliament.

Not really anything we didn't want to see, though, except this ridiculous coalition plan that caught us a bit unawares.

Some days ago I presented, through my Finance Minister, a fiscal update to Parliament. I believed it was too soon to define a stimulus package, given the unclear situation in the US re the Big Three automakers, in particular.

Which is why we presented it now, quickly, before a course of action involving subsidies and deficits, two things our grassroots supporters do not like, became unavoidable.

Appended to my fiscal update I included a number of measures that have caused surprising outrage in opposition ranks. I have since withdrawn all of them.

Two of the three were purely a sop to the loonier members of our caucus who have not as yet been appointed to the cabinet, and who have been remarkably restrained given what they see as the role of this government. The two are (1) the salary limitation and restriction on strikes in the public sector unions­ hey, nobody likes the public service and their entitlements anyway, right?  And (2) the removal of the equal-pay-for-work-of-equal-value principle­hey, nobody really thinks this can work in practice, and most women, Your Excellency included, are second-income earners anyway, right?

Nevertheless, and despite the pretence that the lack of a stimulus package was the main issue, the one now-withdrawn measure that seems to have generated the greatest outrage from your loyal Opposition was actually an attempt by your Government to foster Canadian unity. We proposed to do this by restricting the Bloc Quebecois' easy access to almost exclusively federal taxpayer funding in pursuit of their separatist agenda.

Secondarily, this would  issue a long overdue wake-up call to the opposition Liberals, whose then-leader Mr. Chretien several years ago introduced this political party finance initiative that restricted the access of all parties to massive donations from corporations, unions or other special-interest groups, and offered a bridge of public financing, at $1.95 per vote obtained, to  encourage all parties, with the ongoing assistance of sizable deductions under the Income Tax Act for individual political contributions, to seek financing from actual grassroots supporters whose lobbying interests were not so clearly manifest.

I would further note that our party has worked very hard to achieve Mr. Chretien's objective, in contrast to the Liberals, or the other parties for that matter.

Not to mention, though, that we ourselves did try to do an end run around the financing regulations during the last election, which is still before the courts and therefore, mercifully, not part of the current discussion.

 And further not to mention that, in addition to being essentially leaderless and therefore totally vulnerable on pretty well all fronts, the Liberal opposition, clearly unable to adjust to the new reality of actually having to earn and raise public financial support, are so far in debt they would never be able to conduct, let alone win, another election campaign in the foreseeable future, and therefore are even more powerless to oppose this severe though well-deserved and long-overdue ass-kicking at this point in time, leaving the field pretty well wide open for a few years for us to reshape Canada and its institutions in a leaner and more conservative mould.

There would have been protests from all opposition parties when we brought this measure down as part of the budget later this winter, but at that point we could have spun it as pure self-interest on their part, and forced them to eat yet a bit more crow.

Like, there was no downside for us, until this ridiculous coalition, which we will of course hereafter exclusively characterize as illegal, immoral and undemocratic, got cobbled together.

However, if the House  prorogues now, we will surely win the public-opinion battle, because we're organized up the wazoo, and everybody else is severely sucking wind in the face of imminent collapse of support. So, really, there's still no discernible downside. And the Liberals still haven't caught on. And by the time they do, it will be too late.

So, in the interests of peace, order, and good government, we earnestly request Your Excellency to grant us a prorogation of Parliament until cooler heads prevail and we can present the people of Canada with a clear action plan in the form of a budget, and offer our fellow parliamentarians a clear alternative upon which to vote either to defeat this government and force an unwanted and expensive election, or to acknowledge our fiscal responsibility and moral and economic leadership in these difficult times.

And we can go back to slagging the Opposition and telling the people little white lies, unburdened at last by the necessity of accounting for ourselves to the people's elected representatives.

©2008, James Weseen

===================================