Category: Federal Politics

Have you heard the latest solution the Prime Minister’s Office is suggesting to move the damn bitumen pipelines along? It is so simple, they should have thought of it a year ago. They are going to proceed with the pipelines under the system of royal warrant. By Royal Warrant of Appointment, Enbridge Pipelines will be Supplier of Bitumen to the British Royal Family. Think of it! Can anyone deny Enbridge the right to supply Mr. Harper’s dearly loved Royals the right to their supply of bitumen?

And do not forget, it is not just our Sovereign who has the right to sell Royal Warrants. Her Consort, the Duke of Edinburgh, and her son, the Prince of Wales also have the right to issue the royal privileges. That way, doubling the Kinder Morgan line to Vancouver can be sanctioned under the auspices of the old duke and Charles can issue the Warrant for reversing Enbridge’s Line 9 in Ontario. All the lines are needed to get the bitumen out of Alberta. Mind you, they are still looking for some lesser way for Billy and Kate to add their imprimatur to the Keystone XL Pipeline in the United States. Yanks are impressed with Royals too you know!

Can you just see the pomp and ceremony that the Royals can bring to the signing of the deals to bring bitumen to the sea? Prince Harry can fill in for his grandmother but she can always be trucked out if essential to cowing the First Nations into allowing the Great White Mother (Enbridge, not Her Majesty) to run pipelines through lands granted them by Queen Victoria.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s ally in all of this is Brit Prime Minister David Cameron who is also helping sell bitumen to the European Market. The other European countries are shying away from bitumen because of the extremely high cost and large carbon footprint involved in processing bitumen into synthetic oil. And Europeans are not all that impressed with Brit royalty.

But they are big sellers in Canada in Stephen Harper’s opinion. He thinks Canadians are happy that he has spent so much money relabeling the Canadian military and army regiments as Royal this, or Royal that. The truth is that Canadians are not too interested but tend to live and let live but they are not about to cross the street for the royals.

The fine point of all of this great thinking, is the quiet aside Her Majesty made to Prince Philip when briefed by Prime Minister Cameron: “Dear, what in bloody hell is bitumen?”

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

Whatever does Conrad Black have in mind? Since he got out of jail, he has come back to Canada and gone back to pontificating. He loves to show what an erudite writer he can be. He must still have some pull with the right-wing National Post. Last week he got a full page in the Post to lambaste New Democratic Leader Tommy Mulcair. It is what his intentions are that is not clear.

You would think that Stuffy Tommy Mulcair would be a lesser target for a wordsmith such as Lord Crossthepond, or whatever his title might be. The fact that Black is even back in Canada just goes to show you what nice people we Canucks can be. He gave us the finger to go play act at being a lord in England and we let him come back. It was the Americans who threw him in jail. Little did the Yankees care that a major piece of evidence came from his Toronto office where he and his chauffeur were taking the files out for a drive. Canadians just enjoyed the show. It was reality TV at its best.

But this does not explain why Lord Connie has a hard-on for Stuffy Tommy. Connie’s headline for his article in the National Post is: An insult to history’s REAL FEDERALISTS. (The mix of upper and lower case presented a nice two-line lead.)

Lord Connie, as usual, spends an inordinate amount of his 1000 words establishing his credentials as a writer and Quebec historian. While his book on Quebec Premier Maurice Duplessis was a snorer, it is still the definitive work on the subject. Those in the know, willingly acknowledge Lord Connie’s expertise in the subject area. It is just that he seems to lack a clear understanding of Canadians in general. He does not understand why some Canadians consider him an object of ridicule.

But as Lord Connie and his lady can explain, the very rich are very different from the rest of us. They only get in trouble because they can never be rich enough, never be honoured enough nor their wives thin enough.

While this might help understand Lord Connie, it is not clarifying why he should be defaming poor Tommy Mulcair. Tommy is really a Quebec Liberal and Quebec Liberals are not liberals in the normal sense. They are not liberal at all. Quebec Liberals have a direct linage from the political bleu through the Quebec Conservatives to the Union Nationale to today’s quasi-federalist, natural ruling Liberal Party in Quebec.

Lord Connie actually accuses Tommy Mulcair’s party of enticing Bloc Québécois separatists to vote NDP in the last federal election by being some sort of closet destroyer of Canadian unity. This, knowing Jack Layton, who led the NDP at the time, is a very strange claim. It is positively ridiculous. Maybe our Connie was in jail too long?

But that does not answer the question as to where Lord Connie is going with this. If by some chance he could renounce his lordshipness and get his Canadian citizenship back, will he then run for parliament? This question must be explored in more detail.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

Canadians used to have a good deal in basic research. It is the type of research that is stimulated by curiosity. It happens in university labs. It used to happen in facilities such as the National Research Council headquarters in Ottawa. Basic research  happens when people want to know why, or if, or maybe. Basic research is a quest for understanding. Basic research is the cornerstone of new knowledge.

But basic research is of no interest to the Harper Conservatives in Ottawa. They want to remain ignorant. They only want applied research. Applied research is what you do for example when you want an improved braking system for automobiles. With applied research you try different materials and designs for the system you already understand. If there is no new basic research, you find no new materials that might perform better. There are no new design ideas that might help. Without the basic research, your scope of innovation has been stifled.

But what do Harper’s Conservatives care? They do not see the profit in basic research. They fail to understand how it relates to industry needs. And many people in industry are just as ignorant. Unless they get to know the people interested in research at the local universities, business people see no connection between basic and applied research. And since business is the main funding source for the Conservatives, these politicians do not waste time digging into the facts.

Luckily basic health research is not so misunderstood. Health research has a much more hand-in-glove relationship between those supplying the applied research dollars and the researchers. More than 40 years ago, the writer took over as president of the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. There was no competition for the job. It was a volunteer role with a total national budget of $180,000 that first year. After seven years in the position, the budget for education, patient aid and research was over $5 million per year. By then there were new applied research projects underway across Canada and we had a world-wide network exchanging research ideas.

The only hiccup in those years was the time when the then federal Finance Minister thought he should save money on basic health research. There was a speech delivered to the parliamentary committee studying the question that was also read into Hansard.  It was a speech about hope and about the role of basic research for Canadians. The Finance Minister quietly found new money for basic health research.

There is a meanness to being an ideologue and we are seeing far too much of it in Ottawa today. When a government is elected, it has a responsibility to serve the needs of all Canadians. It accepts responsibility for the hopes and dreams and future of our citizens. You would think that the bastards would at least be embarrassed.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

A few readers have questioned Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s statement last week that “This is not a time to commit sociology.” One reader in particular could not figure out how you do that. It is quite easy, when you use the meaning ‘to take a course of action.’ It might not be the best grammar according to the latest edition of Fowler’s Modern English Usage. It is just that if it is your most serious grammatical confusion of the day, you must be an English professor.

It continues to prove that English is a dying language. We are all speaking American these days. And we do that badly. ‘Rd tht last txt U gt’ and you will understand the problem. The twits who tweet on twitter are worse. And what do you expect in a country that does not have any standards for one of its two official languages? (This is only a problem when you consider the French language is protected as though it is some sort of Holy Grail.)

Canadian news media people all have the same problem with Prime Minister Harper committing sociology. Who is there who will question him? The private television networks are so beholden to the Conservatives that their news crews take instructions from the Prime Minister’s Office on how to shoot his stand-ups. The CBC once got a back-shot (a camera angle from behind the subject being recorded) and the network lost another $100 million in funding.

Print media are marginally more literate than the broadcast media but they are afraid to push. They all seem to be reporting that sociology remark without comment. Sure, if you have a good memory and are old enough, former Prime Minister Kim Campbell’s remark in the 1993 general election about discussing serious policy during election campaign seems to fit the situation. That is only because Stephen Harper and his Conservatives are always campaigning, whether there is an election committed or not.

Liberal House Leader Dominic LeBlanc should have a chat one day soon with his NDP counterpart Nate Cullen. Nate might not be old enough to remember the 1979 episode in Ottawa that proved that Conservatives cannot count—and brought down the Joe Clark government. Who knows when Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition might find another of those rare opportunities to dump a sitting government? Canadians might welcome the opportunity to correct a foolish mistake they made in 2011.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

The high road is a wonderful road for politicians to take. It is blissful. It is fun. It is a pleasant Sunday drive through the Canadian country side. The only problem is that the political high road does not go anywhere. And that means that if Justin Trudeau is going to take the high road in the face of Stephen Harper’s attack ads, he will never get where he is going.

But this is not to suggest that crap should be answered with crap. What we have never understood about the Conservative attack ads is that they lack any production quality. They appear amateurish. They are humourless. They come across as something shot through a keyhole. They insult Canadians.

And the worst part of Conservative attack advertising is that there is no continuity. Every attack ad seems to be its own piece of garbage. There is no family resemblance other than the lack of quality. If these guys spend all their time putting together clips of unrelated statements, you would expect that they also would take time to think. Obviously thinking is not part of their agenda.

Those attack ads used at election time are in-your-face over just a two to three week period. To not spend a few bucks producing a higher quality ad is to say you have little respect for those who see it. Eventually, the voters are on their way to the bathroom as soon as it comes on for repeat hits. And decent quality is not all that expensive. There are always lots of good ideas. Sure, the objective is ridicule. You want to show the voters what a schlemiel your opponent is. You can do that better with humour than vitriol.

Some of the best political attack advertising we have ever seen used humour. Advertising experts worry about the staying power of humour but by its nature, political advertising is supposed to be used as a hit and run play. You really do not want the voters to be saturated with them. You are working just on impressions. You want the voter to see the ad, and agree with you that, yes, Stephen Harper is a klutz!

One of the problems with the current attack ads against Justin Trudeau is that you end the silly ad with a question. The question is “so what?” There is no action you can take. The ad has wasted your time. You also see it as money being wasted by people who claim they know how to manage money. Nothing positive has been said for any politician. We have just lowered the voters’ opinion of politicians some more.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

That nice Mr. Harper, we always knew he might be good for something. His efforts to help Justin Trudeau raise funds are really paying off. It is helped by that stupid attack ad that the Tories are running ad nausea on their favourite television networks. You know the one, the pixie dust around his name, the sexy underwear, and dialogue that you would expect from eight-year olds in the school yard. And now they are going to send it out in print via taxpayer funded householder mailings by the slavish Conservative MPs. That action alone should raise an extra $5 million for the Liberal Party.

Meanwhile, the NDP’s Thomas Mulcair is having fits because he cannot get any ink from the media because they are all so enamoured with Justin. After all, Stuffy Tommy is supposed to be the Leader of the Opposition, not Justin. He is jealous. He wants to know how he can get the Prime Minister to run attack ads against him.

But Stephen Harper is making a different kind of mistake these days. Two years before an election, he is stiffening his stance as the “law and order guy.” And he is particularly tough on terrorists. That is a position that could be like cutting off the tree branch while sitting on the wrong side of the branch. He fails to understand that he has already won most of the yahoos who will buy into that line. They even believed him when he said he had to build more prisons when crime statistics in Canada showed a decline in crime. (He solved that problem by cutting off funding to the statisticians.)

Harper’s classic comment last week was when he told Canadians that “this is not a time to commit sociology.” It was supposed to be a criticism of Justin for musing about the root causes of home-grown terrorism. It left many Canadians wondering when we are supposed to consider what to do about the problem.

Mr. Harper’s biggest problem with Canadians is too many of them can think. Not everybody will buy the Conservative Party extremist cant. They never have. The only way the Conservatives can hope to maintain a majority government is to help maintain some semblance of balance between the opposition parties. An electorate determined to get rid of the Tories will swing decisively behind the opposition party with the best chance to defeat them. He has to help maintain some balance.

Right now the Liberal Party and Justin Trudeau are basking in Harper’s attention.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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

Wellington Street in Ottawa, Ontario is where various important buildings are located. These include the Supreme Court, the Bank of Canada, the American Embassy and the Parliament Buildings. A jackboot is a military-style knee height leather boot derived from an earlier cavalry boot. It usually had a steel plate on the heel and when the wearer clicked the heels together, it could sound like a rifle shot. Until yesterday you would never have expected to find someone who might wear such boots on Wellington Street.

To the shame of all Canadians, a law was debated and approved by Parliament this week that was the equivalent of introducing jackboots on Wellington Street. It is a law that ignores citizens’ rights. It is a law that gives police forces in Canada powers that are not needed to keep the peace. It is a despicable and demeaning affront to Canadians.

Not since Billy Blair’s bully-boys ran amok during the G-20 meeting in Toronto in 2010 have Canadians witnessed this type of police activity. And they did not like it then.

What is particularly galling is Mr. Harper’s timing in bringing forward this bill. He moved the bill forward to Monday, moving the Liberal Party day to a day when Justin Trudeau was known to be expected in Labrador to support his candidate in the by-election. The only reason Mr. Harper could have had for his timing was that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police had kept him advised about the two suspected terrorists who were believed to be planning something to do with a VIA Train. The police must have told Mr. Harper on which day they would make the arrest. As the arrests did not seem overly urgent, maybe Mr. Harper or his office told the federal police when the arrest would be convenient for the government.

While the arrests were carried out in time for the government MPs to use the arrests as a talking point, no new police action was needed for the surveillance or arrest of the suspects. In effect, the police did not need to violate the rights of the suspected terrorists. They did not need to hold them for up to three days without charge. Nor did the security forces need to hold kangaroo courts where the accused either incriminate themselves or go to jail. These draconian measures in the bill were not needed.

It is also with disgust, we have to report that the Liberal caucus in Parliament supported the bill. All we can say about that is shame, shame, shame.

-30-

Copyright 2013 © Peter Lowry

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