Category: Federal Politics

Toronto’s Yonge Street Subway bisects Toronto from Union Station at Front Street to 15.7 kilometres north at Bishop Avenue, just above Finch Avenue. It is at this northern terminus that the Enbridge Line 9B crosses Yonge Street. This is the 30-inch crude oil pipeline that used to carry crude oil from eastern ports to Ontario refineries. It is now proposed that the line be reversed to carry bitumen slurry to eastern seaports. Constructed over 20 years ago, Enbridge proposes that it now carry a higher volume of heated bitumen at higher pressures.

The pipeline, at this location under Yonge Street, has already endured heavy and constant vibration and compression. The concrete in the area will have developed cracks and crevices and the logical direction of leaking or spilled bitumen slurry at this point will be down into the Finch Subway station. Any spill of large volumes of hot bitumen slurry into the subway would be a disaster of major proportions.  During morning or evening rush hours, the loss of life would be measured in the thousands.

In the confined space of a subway, bitumen itself can cause severe eye, skin, gastrointestinal and respiratory irritation. Also, in the confined space, poisonous hydrogen sulphide gas can accumulate. That will not matter after the first subway train applies its brakes and skids over rails coated with bitumen. This will be the ignition point of a fire that will kill everyone on the train and others trapped on subway platforms.

Without a comprehensive study of the grades in the subway construction and the flow characteristics of the now burning bitumen, it is hard to say how far the bitumen would run before pooling at a low point. The most likely pooling point is Sheppard Avenue station 2.3 kilometres south of the Finch station. It would certainly pool if it reached the York Mills Road station another 1.9 kilometres south in the bottom of Hoggs Hollow.

It is estimated that during the business day, a fire of this magnitude in the subway, will require the full evacuation of more than 50,000 office workers, office visitors, retail employees, retail customers, condominium and home owners and tourists from an area comprising more than 30 city blocks. Toronto’s Emergency Services would also have to consider evacuating possibly another 20,000 persons living and working in the Hoggs Hollow area.

A serious concern at this stage will be those who do not know the source of the heavy smoke from the bitumen fire. Any attempt to use water on a bitumen fire will have serious consequences. It requires carbon dioxide or dry chemical foam to suppress the fire. Firefighters will require full bunker gear with positive pressure, self-contained breathing apparatus with full-face mask.

Only the Toronto Transit Commission would be able to determine the requirements of repairing the subway after such a disaster but smoke damage alone to surrounding office buildings, condos, retail establishments and homes would likely tie up the courts for the next five years. We have no idea how Enbridge is prepared to handle the resultant wrongful death and injuries suits.

(NOTE: Hazards of bitumen as described are taken from the Material Safety Data Sheet on Bitumen from Syncrude Canada Ltd., Fort McMurray, Alberta.)

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

You do not necessarily think of Prime Minister Stephen Harper as a quiet person. When you see television news clips of him in the House of Commons or addressing a Conservative crowd, he is talking. That is your image of him.

But that public image is wrong. We were presented with a much more accurate picture of Harper in the 2008 and 2011 election campaign debates. He was not totally silent but, in the English-language debate, we saw a man who was completely contained and who stuck tightly to his prepared talking points.

In 2008 there was a proverbial 600-pound gorilla at the table in the form of the looming economic crisis. Harper was fully aware of the seriousness of the financial crisis that we faced. Yet when Green Leader Elizabeth May repeatedly asked him about it, he never replied to her questions. And their failure to add fuel to the economic concerns cost the other leaders any chance to gain on him.

His lack of communication was even more pronounced in the 2011 English Leaders’ Debate. In that debate, Harper kept his gaze steady and off camera. By ignoring his opponents and sticking to his preplanned dialogue, he set himself apart from the fray. The Conservative attack advertising had firmly locked in Liberal Michael Ignatieff’s academic credentials and it was Jack Layton’s common-man approach that did all the damage. Ignatieff did not seem to have a planned response to what Layton was doing.

Tackling a weak and disorganized Liberal Party through 2006, 2008 and 2011 was what finally put Stephen Harper in the driver’s seat with a majority government. It is his silence in how he handles his office, his cabinet, his caucus, the Senate and the government that will deny him further terms as Prime Minister. While he can be a deft manipulator, he is no leader. He is now reacting instead of setting the agenda. He is putting out fires instead of challenging Canadians. He is reaching into the past for solutions instead of looking forward. He continues to try to sell an economic action plan that now lacks any credibility. He has made no pact with Canada’s environmentalists. His acceptance by women is crumbling. His attacks on Liberal Justin Trudeau fall flat.

By early 2014, Stephen Harper will be a lame duck Prime Minister. He will have little choice but to resign to give his successor time to try to rescue the party’s position. If he stays for the 2015 election, he will be defeated.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

The political middle in Canadian politics is a ghost. Many speak of it but nobody has ever found it. Instead, we are a country that compromises in extremes. It remains easy to locate the Conservatives, Libertarians, Communists and New Democrats in the political spectrum but, to many, the Liberals remain a mystery.

Determining the political location of the Liberal Party really depends on where you are standing. If you are standing to the far right of the spectrum yourself, then the Liberals are clearly to your left. You can then rail at them as being lefty lunatics.

If you are more of a Marxist-Leninist, you would then perceive the Liberals as being to the far right. Would it therefore surprise you to learn that the Liberal Party of Canada has people of both right and left wing persuasion? It was this conflict of philosophies that caused the Liberal Party to take so long to implement social programs such as Medicare and the Canada Pension Plan, to fight internally over control of foreign investment and to renege on cancelling the Goods and Services Tax.

The dominance of the Toronto-based philosophical left of the Liberal Party that coalesced around people such as Law Professor Mark MacGuigan in the 1960s saw themselves as reformers. It was their efforts behind Pierre Trudeau’s campaign that enabled him to succeed Lester B. Pearson as Prime Minister. Much of that momentum was lost in 1972 when Prime Minister Trudeau decided that a campaign was a dialogue with Canadians and he almost lost the election because of the lack of direction.

The strength of the Toronto Liberals in the party was destroyed in the 1980s by the ethnic takeovers of many key ridings in the city. At the same time, Paul Martin’s influence on budgets under Prime Minister Jean Chrétien in the 1990s left the party standing as the party of business and it lost its connection to reform and the Canadian voters.

It is this political middle that Justin Trudeau now needs to find. He can hardly run on youth alone—he has to have a reform program. And he has to ask the party to develop this reform program as he restores democracy to the Liberal Party. The door is open.

What will form this reform program has yet to be determined. It can certainly solve the problems created by the Conservative Senate. It can tackle the erosion of higher-paying, meaningful employment across the country. It can address the need for stronger federal involvement in higher education and lowering fees for those with the grades to succeed. It can strengthen women’s rights. It can assure fair trade with other countries as well as free trade. It can return our country to peace-keeping. It can protect our borders rather than buy attack aircraft. And the list goes on.

If the Liberal Party of Canada can return to its beginnings as the party of reform, it will win the support it needs from Canadians.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

From that first explorer’s trip against the current of the St. Lawrence River, Canada began the transition to a country. And our ancestors came to build it. We were the detritus of Europe, the scoundrels of Asia, the displaced of Africa and we created a new north for the Americas. We have created a homeland worthy of standing on its feet and proclaiming: We are Canadian.

The weak and obsequious British North America Act of 1867 opened the gates to a maturing country but bound us to the constricts of a repressive time. It created artificial divides in a land that needs to labour together. It saw a country of vast resources but gave little thought to the people we would become.

There is lots of idealism in how Canadians show their love for this country. There is just little consensus. We only seem to agree on the awesome beauty of our nation, our belief in civility and tolerance and the smooth mellowness of our beer. About that, we can sing and rant enthusiastically.

But what is Canada other than an ideal? Are we living up to what nature has handed us? Are we protecting this heritage for our children and their children? Or are we hedonists, taking, raping and despoiling for today’s gratification and pleasures? What is our expectation of this wonderful land?

Canada is a country of many realities. We should take this one day each year to admire those realities. Canada is the harsh beauty of the Rock. It is the majesty of Labrador. It is the forests of Quebec, the rugged coastlines of Nova Scotia, the rocky soil of New Brunswick and the tranquillity of PEI.

And do not forget the cities. It is St. John’s in Newfoundland and Saint John in New Brunswick. It is the harbour in Halifax, the steep cliffs of Quebec City and the mountain of Montreal. And Ottawa, that always makes you ask “Why?” As for Toronto, you almost have to be born there to understand our love for its cultural cauldron.

But drive from Wawa, west above Lake Superior to the Winnipeg winter. Regina is a bit boring but Saskatoon is fun. Edmontonians stay in at night and Calgary whoops it up in the summer. And everyone wonders what Vancouver has until it stops raining and the sun comes out and you fall in love again. And you remember Victoria for its flowers, a lonely drive to High Prairie from Edmonton, Prince Albert for its people, the lakes of Muskoka, the ski hills of Quebec and the hospitality of the Atlantic Provinces.

There are many views of Canada. It takes a lifetime to learn about them and it takes a second lifetime to visit them again.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

When you live in a country where most of the news media is controlled by friends of the government, do you think you should believe all the news? Do you believe that Big Brother loves you? Do you believe that the managed media are on your side? Do you believe that the large corporations who own Canada’s news media care what you think? If they are supporting the government’s plan to pipe bitumen across Canada, do you expect them to tell you the truth? No, but you know that Big Brother loves you.

Did you notice the other day that Bell Canada can go ahead with a $3 billion purchase of Astral Media. Maybe that does not mean much to you. Maybe you do not care if Bell Canada now controls a third of Canada’s broadcast media. It has taken Bell Canada several years to pull off this level of control and the company’s good friend Big Brother seems to have helped the company do it. Bell Canada loves Big Brother.

It is not that Bell Canada does not have competition. More than 25 million Canadians every week see shows and specialty programs from Shaw Communications. Shaw is based in Calgary, Alberta. Shaw Communications loves Big Brother.

In fact, when you think of it, three huge corporations—Bell, Shaw and Rogers are earning massive amounts of money from Canadians because they control most of the airwaves. Have you ever tried to negotiate a better rate from one of these companies–when you have no choice as to which one? And why do Canadians have to pay more than anyone else for their cell phones and Internet and television services? It really pays to love Big Brother.

That leaves the newspapers, but do you know how few people control Canada’ print media? There are people like Paul Godfrey of Postmedia in Toronto. Paul Godfrey is a big fan of Big Brother. There is Pierre Karl Péladeau of Sun Media who seems to be torn between his love for Big Brother and his love for Quebec separatists. Judging by his print publications in both English and French, he must think all Canadians move their lips as they read.

Of course there are a few voices of dissent out there but ones like the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation keep losing funding for not loving Big Brother.

So why is it that Enbridge–the pipeline people—are so confident that they can convert an old pipeline running through Toronto into a reversed, high-temperature, high pressure line to take bitumen slurry east to the sea lanes.

Enbridge can do it because Big Brother loves bitumen. And Big Brother believes that he can handle any dissent and the news media will sit back and allow it. They have so far.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

It was National Post political columnist Andrew Coyne who used the term. He wrote that “Toryism, in its current incarnation, resembles less an ideology than a pathology.”

If too many Conservatives look up those big words, Postmedia Publisher Paul Godfrey will be getting demands to fire Coyne. Obviously this guy is smarter than he let’s on. We have noted various times that news reader Peter Mansbridge brings out the best in Coyne when he appears on the CBC 10pm newscast. It is just as an apologist for the Conservative Party of Canada, that you figure he is intellectually dishonest. This latest statement is redemption.

But if he puts down people who use the political labels of ‘left’ and ‘right,’ by suggesting they are quarantining themselves. He is wrong. This writer is proud to declaim his left-wing beliefs and usually finds that people who ridicule the labels are extremists of the right wing.

According to his biography in Wikipedia, Coyne and this writer agree on only one thing: we both believe in a strong federal government. Like most London School of Economics graduates, Coyne wants more market based economic solutions but does not seem to know how that is done. He rattles sabres in support of the War on Terror without seeming to know much about the enemy. And in promoting proportional representation for the Canadian parliament, Coyne should be careful what he wishes for. He can bend his loyal knee to the Brit royals if he wishes but it just shows how some people need an occasional reality check.

Yet, Coyne knows that the current conservatism in Canada, as practiced by Stephen Harper and his friends, is more of a disease than a philosophy. That seems to be fair comment. He also stipulates that none of the other parties are disease free. That also seems fair.

But there are writers who are trying to do something about it. Sure, writing a blog is a long way from having much influence on world affairs but we bloggers are often read by people who agree with us. We have the e-mails to prove it. As much as there are Liberals who do not like this blog for knowing too much about the Liberal party, they are stupid to think that the party could not be better.

It is too bad that Andrew Coyne has laboured for Péladeau’s Sun Media and now works for Godfrey’s Postmedia. Both media chains are dishonest with their readers. They have a strong editorial bias that corrupts both news and editorial. Keep writing honest stuff like this recent article Coyne and you might get a better offer from the Globe and Mail.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

There was a wonderful picture of Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau and resigning MP Bob Rae as they walk down a corridor in the Centre Block of Parliament the other day. The picture was of the two men from the rear. You did not need the caption to tell you who they are. They had their arm around each other as comrades. The picture said far more than a thousand words. Bob is headed for his next career. Justin is headed for the summer barbeque circuit with the Liberal Party. He has a tough schedule to keep.

But you cannot go out on that summer barbeque circuit with just platitudes. The Liberals that Justin will be talking to across Canada want meaty stuff. Justin is the party leader now. He has to get his party motivated, organized, determined and focussed. Anyone foolish enough to believe the positive polls today for the Liberals is kidding themselves. We have, at the most, two years to get decent candidates, captivating programs and motivated workers. Justin’s job is to tell people to get to work or get out of the way.

The Liberal Party has three opponents in the coming election. The most serious opponent is inertia and the Liberal Party has got lots of that. It’s time to get off your asses, folks. And then we have Tommy Mulcair and his New Democrats. They think they are the alternative to the Conservatives and we have to dissuade voters from deluding themselves on that issue. The third opponent is Stephen Harper and the Conservatives. They have all the money they need and it has already been proved that they are fully prepared to lie, cheat and steal the votes needed to stay in power.

And, on top of that, we have millions of turned off voters whom we have to motivate and deliver to the polling places come election day. That requires new ideas, new energy, new workers and new funding.

One of the issues that Justin will have to get off the fence on is Alberta’s bitumen. This is the centre piece of Prime Minister Harper’s economic policy and it is going to blow up this summer. The National Energy Board is holding hearings in Calgary in August about running bitumen to the east coast. The focus will be on Enbridge’s old crude oil pipeline (Line 9) that runs right through the City of Toronto. Enbridge wants to run hot bitumen slurry through that pipe at high pressure. This is a disaster on its way to happen.

While politicians think it is safe to kiss babies, the royal baby due this summer is going to focus attention on doing something about the entire question of English royalty in addition to the lingering bad smell from the Senate. That opens up the Canadian Constitution and Justin desperately needs the right talking points. He can hardly hedge on the issue and expect to attract younger voters.

There will be much more on this over the summer.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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