Federal Politics – Page 110

Can O’Leary cow Canadian conservatism?

December 26, 2016 by Peter Lowry

This is pathetic. This guy Kevin O’Leary thinks he is the Canadian hope for conservatism. Waving a kitchen scraper, he is asking people to endorse him as Canada’s answer to Donald Trump. Frankly the best instrument for the job to be done in Ottawa is still a pitchfork.

You would think that O’Leary at 62 would already know what he wants to be when he grows up. His biography is particularly amusing when you find that most of what he learned about investing, he learned from his mother. The Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario does not seem to get any credit. In his books on investing, the credit could be shared. Never having appreciated his television persona, his books have little appeal for us.

And MP Kellie Leitch has already co-opted much of the Trump-style vote. Her thinly cloaked appeal to the bigots among us has struck a chord. Maybe we are hearing from more of her followers than we would wish for but they are a particularly vocal brand of malcontents. They even have some right-wing Liberals asking us to slow down on immigration. It makes you wonder if they think you only have a right to be Canadian if your ancestors have been here for more than 20 generations?

O’Leary will have his hardest time with opponents such as Michael Chong and Maxime Bernier. Both MPs know the party, speak its languages, know what is going on in Ottawa and have at least a reasonable base of support. You hardly expect O’Leary to jump into the fray and start slamming the motley crew of contenders.

Mind you, it is the very nature of the current lot of contenders that is attracting O’Leary and his backers. So far nobody is excited. Maybe it is just the nature of conservatives that they can all be boring.

The exception seems to be Chris Alexander. The very fact that he is a former MP is a hurdle that is tough to overcome. He seems to have one strong political faculty—he can lie with a straight face. Did you seem him directing that mob in Edmonton shouting to lock up Premier Notley and as soon as he realized it looked bad, he said he was trying to think of a way to stop them. He might have tried harder.

When starting this commentary, we were trying to think of a way to segue to Mrs. O’Leary’s cow who did everyone a favour and burned down Chicago back in its early days. It is the reason Chicago is such an attractive, bustling and well planned city today. Regrettably, we see no such future for Ottawa with Mrs. O’Leary’s kid at the helm of the Conservative Party of Canada.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Ottawa’s Ghost of Christmas Future.

December 24, 2016 by Peter Lowry

When Marley’s Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come came to see Canada’s Prime Minister, the ghost looked a lot like American President Elect Donald Trump. Justin Trudeau had many questions for him but the ghost never spoke a word. He just kept on twitting.

The ghost took the Prime Minister to breakfast with the Calgary Board of Trade. The members welcomed the PM and listened to him while he spoke of his efforts on their behalf. They applauded the expansion of the Kinder Morgan pipeline to Burnaby, B.C. and he assured them that not all B.C. residents would resist. He bragged of the planned expansion of Line 3 that would take diluted bitumen to the American pipeline networks.

Later in a question and answer session with the business people, Trudeau assured them of his support for the Keystone XL pipeline and that the new American President would approve. All he wanted in return for all this bounty was for the reluctant Albertans to pay their carbon taxes.

Maybe the Albertans knew more about tar sands exploitation than the Prime Minister. They must know that they could never pay enough in carbon taxes to offset the melting of the polar ice caps.

The ghost showed Justin the end result of a greying and dying world. The internment camps for pipeline protestors high in the B.C. Rockies, away from the encroaching Pacific Ocean, tell their story of resistance.

He showed the PM the results he can expect of a government that promises Sunny Days and delivers pipelines. He showed how neoliberalism is but a shadow of extreme conservatism—and Harper-lite has returned to Ottawa.

He also showed the PM, the results of his revisions in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). He had renegotiated and because he likes Canada he is willing to transfer the Mexican Maquiladora free trade zones to Sothern Ontario. Of course, Ontario will have to reduce its minimum wage to C$3.00 per hour.

And before he disappeared driving the last Canada-built GM truck, the ghost called out “Merry Christmas to all, and to all the best of luck.”

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Ottawa’s Ghosts of Christmas Past.

December 23, 2016 by Peter Lowry

When Canada’s parliament shuts down for Christmas, the old grey halls along Ottawa’s Wellington Street welcome the respite. They have seen much since their construction for the Parliament of Upper Canada in the mid 19^th Century. And they have been under constant repair since.

But it is the ghosts who wander those halls that own it on long winter nights. There is Sir John A. Macdonald vainly in search of a proper drink and Sir Wilfrid Laurier wondering where the crowds await his next speech. It is Mike Pearson, arm in arm with John George Diefenbaker, telling each other outrageous tales. William Lyon MacKenzie King searches in vain for an Irish Terrier who answers to Pat. He wants to tell his dog of the news from mother in his shaving mug that morning.

Oh, the stories these ghosts can tell. And it is not just the ghosts of Prime Ministers past but the ghosts of aides and secretaries, Ministers and MPs, cleaning staff and protective services, Senators and executive assistants, and the scribes of the National Press Gallery. There are many thousands of stories to be told that unfolded in these darkened halls. There have been liaisons for profit and liaisons for pleasure—in the ways of men and women across the years.

The untold stories of those who knew and loved these dank tombs of acts and rulings, speeches and words spoken only for Hansard. They know the ropes and pedals to pontification as the carrilloner knows his keys to ring the bells of the Peace Tower.

It will only be on New Years Eve that the residents of old Bytown will gather with the ghosts of Parliament Hill to sing our song: Oh Canada. We will light the night sky with fire works and good cheer.

And the Ghosts of Christmas Past will eagerly await the gathering of parliamentarians in the New Year,

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

The arrogance of Justin Trudeau.

December 21, 2016 by Peter Lowry

Weighing the pluses and minuses of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s first year in office was a tough job. He got off to a good start. How many refugees can claim they were welcomed to their new country by its Prime Minister? In person! And he kept his promise to fix what we used to call the Baby Bonus. Efforts such as that are worthwhile.

But he does not have to be so damn arrogant about it? Just the other day he told the Toronto Star’s editorial board that he was still going to do something about the way Canadians vote. Give us a break! Why should he also insult the special commons committee (including five Liberal MPs) who gave up their summer to study the question? They did an excellent job. They told him that his time frames were unrealistic. And they are. There is as much as two-years work needed by an expert committee to come up with anything that Canadians might buy. And then it will take more years to sell the idea to Canadians. Trudeau needs to listen to reason.

For him to crow about his success with the doctor-assisted dying file is also an embarrassment. He will deserve every word of criticism when the Supreme Court dumps that legislation back in his lap.

For many Canadians, it is his duplicity in regards to pipelines that sticks in their craw. Trudeau’s first problem is not the laissez-faire economics he is promoting but that he lies about the nature of these pipelines. They are not pumping oil. They are pumping diluted bitumen and that breaks every promise he has made about the environment.

Nobody can wash their hands of dangers of a spill or the extent of global warming that can be caused by sending that bitumen to be refined into ersatz oil in third world countries who cannot afford to worry about global warming. That is arrogant, And it is a sham. It is a serious insult to all Canadians who really care about our environment.

But what really annoys us is the changes he has made in the Liberal Party of Canada. It was never his party to screw around. He leads it. It is not his to abuse. It belongs to those who believed in it, tended it through the fallow years and kept it strong. He made promises to the party in his quest for the leadership. He promised not to interfere with riding nominations—and he immediately broke his word. He cancelled our memberships in the party and turned it into his crowd funding vehicle. He removed any controls party members used to have over the leader.

And you thought Donald Trump was arrogant. He should be taking lessons from Justin Trudeau.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

Lament for the CRTC’s Skinny Basic.

December 20, 2016 by Peter Lowry

It was over three years ago that we last travelled to the nation’s capital to talk with the Canadian Radio-Television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). When there, we faced the enemy and their henchmen. We saw Bell Canada and Rogers in action. We talked to the commissioners about ‘skinny basic’ service for cable, fiber and satellite television customers. All the while, the telecoms glared at us intervenors and said ‘no.’

It was a bravura performance by Canada’s telecoms. They knew they were destined to lose. They had resisted reason as long as they could. Their arguments were based on greed. They had used up their political clout. Their arguments were hollow. Their bags of tricks had been wasted. The fight was winding down.

We have certainly lived in interesting time. We were there for the establishment of the CRTC back in the 1970s. It was an argument many of us urged on the Pearson and Trudeau governments. We young turks had taken on the famed Hon. Jack Pickerskill when he tried to tell us not to abandon the out-of-date Board of Broadcast Governors. We wanted regulators with teeth to regulate broadcasting and the rapidly growing telecommunications empires. We wanted the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation to just be one of the regulated. We wanted all to have equal footing.

The industry has changed dramatically since those times. We have watched the carriers gobble up the broadcasters. We have allowed broadcast news to become nothing more than promotion for more profitable products. The news talent has gone from mentor to huckster. Today we rally to CBC News and Radio Canada for something to hold on to.

To get to the point, the other day we called Bell Canada and asked for the ‘skinny basic’ package for our Fibe TV service. “Of course sir,” was the immediate response. And then came the ‘buts.’

It seems that the $24.99 ‘Starter’ package is really a $34.99 (plus tax) package. So much for truth in advertising! Until we asked for the lower priced package, our Fibe TV was bundled with our Internet service. It seems that Bell penalizes customers for asking for the ‘skinny basic’ by taking back the bundle discounts. Oh well, if they do not have the bundle for us, we can always shop around for a better deal on the Internet.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

The rocky road to electoral reform.

December 19, 2016 by Peter Lowry

It seems obvious at this stage that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has still not gained any conviction on electoral reform. He hardly understood what he was promising when he said that the 2015 election would be the last federal election using first-past-the-post. He seemed to have no understanding of the alternatives. As the expression goes, he was shooting from the lip.

He compounded the confusion on the file when he appointed a naïve, newly elected MP as minister of democratic reform. They were a great combination; he knew little and she knew less. And there did not appear to be any knowledgeable staff to help her out.

Reviewing the principles Minister Monsef stipulated to the special commons committee, it was a wonder that they could do the job at all. When you ask people to advise on restoring the legitimacy and effectiveness of the voting process, you need to pose a benchmark for them to target. Encouraging engagement and participation by underrepresented groups is a completely different subject. Ensuring the accessibility and inclusiveness of an uncomplicated process while safeguarding the integrity of the process might tie some people in knots. Throw in preserving local representation and the task is impossible. And those are just the principles.

The mandate required the committee to identify and study viable reform options while getting experts to tell them all the constitutional, legal and implementation parameters. In their spare time, while calling on all these experts, they were to travel over the length and breadth of Canada to see what the people might want. And they were not to forget to include anyone who might feel left out!

Did we mention that the committee was to spend the summer—and were paid extra—so they were also asked to study such things as mandatory voting and on-line voting.

It was amazing that the committee actually did a reasonable job of what they were asked to do. It was when Minister Monsef stood up in the House of Commons saying that the committee had not done its job that the fecal matter hit the fan blades. It would have made more sense for the Prime Minister to fire her immediately but she got up in the House the next day and apologized for what she said.

Despite the Minister being so obviously unsuited to the job and the Prime Minister’s lack of understanding of voting reform, we are going to hear more on this subject. We might not all like what we hear,

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

You told a pollster the truth?

December 18, 2016 by Peter Lowry

It seems that the privacy watchdog in Ottawa is investigating the Liberal government’s survey on electoral reform. The privacy commissioner’s office is concerned that the Liberals should not have included collecting demographic information in the survey. It might be an invasion of privacy.

But since you decided not to give them accurate information, what is the problem? Does anyone give accurate demographic information on surveys anymore? It would probably be important to someone who rarely responds to surveys but anyone who knows surveys usually knows what is required for that survey.

Of course, answering the demographic questions was claimed to be optional. Mind you, your answers were not considered unless you did.

And think of it this way: you are not being all that helpful if you provide the truth. For example, even if you are over 65, you should tell the survey you are under 25. If you get lucky, your response will count double. (All surveys have a formula to account for lack of response from the under-25 age group.)

And you would never want to admit that you live in poverty. It is hard to get millionaires to do surveys. You can help by selecting the highest-level income.

A trick question is the provision of a postal code. If you are answering the same questionnaire multiple times, you should have a stock of interesting postal codes from across the country. Pick the ones that are most remote.

The wife sometimes gets annoyed when we have put the TV on pause to answer an automated telephone co-incidental survey. She knows what we are doing when she sees us hitting buttons on the phone at seeming random. It is always interesting to see who is surveying for what and you can usually figure it out. It also means we have to check Liberalist occasionally to find if we have misread a Liberal party call and make sure they do not have us down as a Green Party supporter.

It is also fun to do the mydemocracy.ca test a number of times to have the conclusion that you are each of the types they define. What the survey is apparently designed to do is provide the democratic reform ministry with a pattern of possible avenues of voting reform that might be accepted by Canadians. Good luck to them on that.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

The empty chair of Tom Mulcair.

December 15, 2016 by Peter Lowry

In a much condemned political schtick by actor-director Clint Eastwood at the Republican National Convention in 2012, he talked to an empty chair. The chair was supposed to represent President Barack Obama. We always thought it helped get Obama elected to his second term.

We were reminded of it recently when reading an op-ed piece by New Democrat stalwart Robin Sears. Sears was writing about failed promises of Justin Trudeau such as how Canadians vote. Sears would be far more productive at this time if he directed his supposed political smarts on the empty chair of NDP Leader Tom Mulcair.

New Democrat Leader Tom Mulcair is a lame duck. He has been found wanting by his political party and is serving out his term of office. It shows he has more intestinal fortitude and honour than Stephen Harper who could not wait to get out of Ottawa once the voters past judgement.

Unlike the temporary leader of the Conservatives, Rona Ambrose, Mulcair has been doing the opposition job with continued verve and flair. Ambrose only follows the Tory Book. Nobody really listens to her.

But when his time expires, will Tom Mulcair’s chair remain empty? Are there no believers left? Is Canada’s left bereft? Does nobody believe in the LEAP Manifesto? Does it matter?

Canada desperately needs a political party of the left. It hardly needs three on the right. It has always been our hope that the Liberals and New Democrats would combine into a social democratic party. That does not seem to be on Justin Trudeau’s agenda. While such an event would drive many so-called Liberals into the Conservative camp, our betting is that the social democrats would prevail at least through to 2050. And, as the expression goes, we should all live so long!

It was fascinating this past summer watching the New Democrats on the special commons committee on voting reform trying to manoeuver the other parties into supporting a proportional voting system. If they see that as their only hope to get more power in this country, they will be disappointed.

And while there are those who do not like our questioning of the Liberal party and its leadership, it is a small attempt to keep them honest. Robin Sears should direct some of his questioning inward to his own party. New Democrats also need to examine their future.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

The impoverishment of Sir John, eh?

December 12, 2016 by Peter Lowry

There is a very old saying that people who forget the past will probably screw up the future. It has always been very annoying to us that Canadians can be disinterested in the past. They fail to be aware of or appreciate the people who have given so much of themselves to create and build this country.

Case in point: Our first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald. This is the man who in many ways brought this country through the birthing process. It is hardly his fault that in those times, he swore a lot, drank even more and was somewhat high-handed with the country’s treasury.

But he got the job done and he earned his place in history. And it was nice to see a picture of where he was buried recently and it was obvious somebody had taken a weed-wacker to the family plot and repainted the little wrought-iron fence.

But to take Sir John off the ten-dollar bill is an insult to all Canadians. It denies our country and its origins. Our currency should be reserved for honouring those who have served our country and helped to make it great. We have waited long enough for the replacement of the Queen on the twenty-dollar bill. Mind you that honour should go to Pierre E. Trudeau, Lester B. Pearson or maybe even John G. Diefenbaker.

This is not to discourage the feminists. They can find another way to honour Viola Desmond. She was obviously a lady of great principles and we should all appreciate what she endured for Nova Scotia. When they get around to amalgamating the four Atlantic provinces into two viable provinces, they could name one after Ms. Desmond.

And if you really have to have a woman on a Canadian bill, we could do a run of three-dollar bills displaying the face of Kim Campbell, Canada’s first female Prime Minister. It might be best though to wait until after Ms. Campbell is deceased.

As we had to explain once to a politician who was outraged when we suggested that a new trail through one our parks not be named after his mother. We agreed with him that his mother had helped plan the trail and was instrumental in its development. In our opinion, it was just inappropriate to name it after her while she was still alive. Just think of the cost of repainting all the signs if she decided to augment her puny Canada Pension Plan payments by robbing a bank.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]

The worst fears of Justin Trudeau.

December 9, 2016 by Peter Lowry

It is hardly the spectre of Stephen Harper that keeps Prime Minister Justin Trudeau awake nights. It is the spectre of a democratic Liberal Party of Canada. It was something that was very real and credible to his father but for some reason haunts the son.

From day one of his winning the leadership of the party, Justin Trudeau has been trying to change the party. He started by breaking his word that he would not interfere with electoral districts selecting their Liberal candidates. He selected the candidates for a number of Toronto ridings and damn the consequences. Some of the choices were arbitrary and decidedly wrong. One of these was former police chief Bill Blair. The good news is that since being elected, Blair has disappeared into a cloud of marijuana smoke.

But since then, Trudeau has neutralized the Liberal Party. He emasculated it. He took away all rights and the ability to question his leadership. He took away membership in the party. He now defines who and what is a Liberal. The party lists are his Christmas card list. They are just his crowd funding.

And yet Justin Trudeau tries to play both sides of the street. He makes nice with the environmentalists while making deals with the tar sands exploiters. He picks and chooses the pipelines that might get some of Canada’s bitumen to the oceans—betraying promises to Canada’s first nations.

But, in the meantime, serious questions about Canada and its future get band-aids instead of repairs. His elitist solution to the Senate of Canada is a stop-gap at best. His senate appointments are a time bomb, ready to blow up at the first real controversy. And his elitist solution to Supreme Court appointments will not bring him any joy in the long term.

He tries to ignore the need to re-open the constitution despite that is where the majority of Canada’s problems are sitting. Just ask him about what to do about Canada’s constitution and he will run and hide under his bed. Instead he creates a farce of examining how Canada votes. He gives the job of democratic reform to a wet-behind-the-ears member of the cabinet and is surprised when she makes a mess of it.

It has been obvious since the overly long federal election of 2015 that the members of Justin Trudeau’s brain trust think too much like him. He desperately needs people with a knowledge of history and able to make clear plans for the future.

-30-

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to [email protected]