Tag Archives: Alberta

Hmmm, #FordNation Clapping Seals fuel #Harper’s #DumpsterFire Yet Forgot #ProjectTraveller (2013) #DrugsnGuns. Yikes! #cdnpoli #elxn42

“Everyone keeps saying Rob’s a conservative,” Doug explains. “He’s a huge, massive social liberal. He loves Obama. The headlines of the papers when he won? ‘The White Obama.’ “ source: Reporter’s notebook: In the heart of Ford Nation with Toronto’s embattled mayor By Bill Weir, CNN updated 8:51 AM EST, Mon November 18, 2013

#cdnpoli Admission: #CPC & #FordNation
"Everyone keeps saying Rob's a conservative," Doug explains. "He's a huge, massive social liberal. He loves Obama. The headlines of the papers when he won? 'The White Obama.' "

Maybe it’s OK sometimes to “white” wash the “black” market so that drugs, guns and terror can remain accessible to the “white” suburban folks and punishment can be left to the broke and less-white folks or less politically connected. Not only that but this is a fantastic way to “cut” taxes by way of downloading the costs to the tax-payer through the crimes against society?

In other words, even though Rob Ford commits illegal acts and supports organized international criminal activity, being re-branded as a “White Obama” saves the tax-payers of certain areas of Toronto. One might wonder how much illegal activity the Toronto Police Services were really willing to allow Rob Ford to engage in. Not only that, but the bigger question, that has actually answered itself, may be if this is common practice, aka: status quo based upon quid pro quo.

Now one can fully appreciate the gravity that drugs and weapons are not exported to Windsor from Toronto and that they flow from the US through Detroit/Windsor to get to Toronto so that they may be redistributed, aka: trafficked, nationwide, via well organized criminal activity. As noted below, Project Traveller really made headlines because of its connection to Rob Ford and was dropped from the headlines like a scalding hot potato.

If the “Dixon’s” endorsement of the Harper Regime is not worth noting, nothing really is, eh?


Police believe gang hiding suspect By The Windsor Star January 3, 2008

A fugitive murder suspect from Windsor who allegedly shot a man in the back has disappeared into an underground world of gangs and criminals who may be helping him hide from police, say investigators.

Police believe Mohamud Abukar Hagi has ties to a criminal street gang from Toronto called the Dixon True Bloods, which branched out to other cities after police cracked down on their territory.

TORONTO CRACKDOWN

That Toronto crackdown has Windsor police dealing with a growing number of gangbangers.

“They’ve branched off to Calgary and, obviously, Windsor,” Det. Const. Mike Williams, with the Toronto police guns and gangs unit, said of the Dixon Bloods. “We pushed them out.”

continue: http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=b5e2147f-7552-448a-b2a8-40df1317b5b4

Mayor Ford’s Dangerous Liaisons Bailey Reid 09 Nov 2013

Mayor Rob Ford may or may not smoke crack. That is yet to be revealed- because he doesn’t quite remember. What we do know, however, is that spending time with the man happens to be very dangerous, particularly for racialized communities in Toronto.

There have been numerous calls for the mayor’s resignation in the last few days, but mainly over the horror of his potential drug addiction and the attendant argument that he is unable to govern the city, from a moral standpoint.

Quite frankly, I find this to be the least of anyone’s worries. Our collective dismay about Mayor Ford smoking crack has overshadowed a very important subtext to this video of the mayor of Canada’s largest and arguably most diverse city (“Diversity Our Strength,” to cite the city’s motto). A deeper investigation into the mayor’s feelings towards marginalized people makes the crack video even more distressing: does the mayor see communities of colour as the proverbial “whipping boy”?

continue: http://www.policyplay.com/mayor-fords-dangerous-liaisons.html

Laughing at Rob Ford? The laugh may be on us By Paula Simons, Edmonton Journal November 7, 2013

EDMONTON – In Toronto, they’re known as the Dixon Bloods. Or the Dixon City Bloods. Or the Dixon Goonies. Many — though not all — are Somali-Canadian.

According to Toronto police, the gang has been “networking with associates” in Edmonton since 2006.

Not so coincidentally, since 2006, more than 30 young Somali-Canadian men have been killed in Alberta, most in gang-related shootings and stabbings. About half those killings took place in Edmonton.

Det. Cory Buerger is a member of Edmonton’s gang unit, on secondment to ALERT, the Alberta Law Enforcement Response Team.

For almost a decade, he’s tracked the rise of local drug gangs dominated by Somali-Canadians. All, he says, are tightly networked with Toronto groups.

“Dixon Blood members have been seen in Fort McMurray and Edmonton, but they’re not wearing their gang colours out here.”

Instead, he says, members in Alberta operate as free agents. They don’t stake out physical turf, as they have in Toronto. They’re mobile, customer-based, delivering drugs to their buyers. Buerger says the Bloods and their affiliates bring their drugs through Vancouver, but their guns from Ontario. Most are bought legally in the United States, then smuggled across the border near Windsor.

This June, after a year-long investigation, 17 Canadian police agencies, including the Edmonton Police Service and ALERT, executed a takedown of Dixon operations in Toronto, Windsor and Edmonton: Project Traveller.

Police made 44 arrests, and seized 42 guns and $3 million worth of narcotics, including cocaine, heroin, marijuana, LSD and crystal meth. Among those arrested was Edmonton’s Daud Hussein, 27.

Yet for all its scope, Project Traveller really made headlines because of its connection to Rob Ford.

continue: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Simons+Laughing+Ford+laugh/9134771/story.html

#Harper vs #Canada: a short compilation #cdnpoli via ‏@Anon_GovWatchCA (archives)

The Harper government is starving the beast of departments that don’t fit into his ideological viewpoints on industry, eliminating positions, eliminating funding, closing down departments or buildings. This has a two fold effect. One, this is money the Conservatives need to help balance the budget. Two, it is eliminating voices of dissent, or any other facts that could create cracks in his vision for Canada. Now groups directly opposed to his vision, not politically, but because that is the purpose of the groups themselves, are being labelled terrorists, accused of fraud, and political scheming, only because it challenges the rhetoric of what the government is trying to do.

Here are some links on muzzling of scientists

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/05/02/muzzling-science-canada-cuts_n_3187100.html

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/10/13/harpers_war_on_science_continues_with_a_vengeance.html

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2012/12/31/2012_a_bleak_year_for_environmental_policy.html

This paper shows rather well the muzzling that’s happening

http://democracywatch.ca/wp-content/uploads/OpenGovReportJan2113.pdf

Here is the AB government doing it

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/10/07/the_muzzling_of_albertas_oilsands_critics_steward.html

Funny how they didn’t want to appeal at all

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/11/13/alberta-wont-appeal-after-judge-says-province-muzzled-anti-oilsands-groups

Why silence environmentalists? If they’re as crazy as the governments say, why not let them say their piece and let Canadians be the judge if they’re crazy or not?

Science has shown that reclamation in the oilsands will not work

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/rebuilding-land-destroyed-by-oil-sands-may-not-restore-it-researchers-say/article552879/?service=mobile

What about letting industry and the AB government dictate their own emission rules, and delaying it as long as possible, while the rest of the country has a different set of rules?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/ottawa-bows-to-alberta-on-emission-rules/article4470544/

What about harpers own appointee saying we’re an ‘environmental rogue state’? That’s someone he hired and vetted.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/Canada+rogue+state+environment+Harper+appointee+tells/9237296/story.html

What of the environment canada report that either left out information, or had misleading data, to confirm the governments message that everything is going good?

http://sgnews.ca/2012/09/15/new-enviro-canada-report-raises-eyebrows-2/

Why the deception on emission rates?

http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2012/08/08/canadas-emissions-deception/

What about our poor record on reaching our GHG targets?

http://thechronicleherald.ca/canada/106716-report-canada-doing-poorly-at-achieving-climate-change-targets

Why was the government so sneaky to leave out the oilsands GHG emissions to the UN?

http://business.financialpost.com/2011/05/30/canada-leaves-out-rise-in-oilsands-pollution-from-un-report/

Why were they so quiet when they finally did release that information, and the fact that GHG from the oilsands will quadruple while in other areas it’s falling? Which will push us further and further away from the Copenhagen targets?

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/14/oil-sands-emissions-alberta_n_4598004.html

Why release press releases from both federal and AB governments about oilsands pollution not being a concern, if the GHG is going to quadruple?

http://o.canada.com/business/markets/canada-and-alberta-not-concerned-by-air-and-water-contamination-levels-from-oilsands/

How can science be objective when the oilsands make up our largest group of lobbyists far greater than any other industry?

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/04/oil-gas-lobbying-canada-polaris_n_2237826.html

Why are we allowing industry to rewrite our environmental laws?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/energy-industry-letter-suggested-environmental-law-changes-1.1346258

Why is the NEB and Transcanada delaying access to information, and hiding information about pipeline spills from 5 years ago?

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/02/04/transcanada-pipeline-rupture_n_4722126.html

Why are we selling off land and resources to oligarchies in the USA, why are we spending all this money on advertising, on natural resources promotion, when the Koch brothers will make $100 billion off of our land and resources when average Canadians will never see any of this type of profit?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/21/keystone-xl-koch-brothers_n_4136491.html

With environmental regulations gutted, and left to the whims of provinces, will we have more spills like this, that are still leaking after 9 months?

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/09/3268751/alberta-tar-sands-leaking/

Why does the government spend taxpayers money of all of Canada, to promote a provinces resources that the province owns? Especially if other than tax dollars from the oilsands, only Alberta benefits from it?

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/01/20/ottawa_wont_release_details_for_oilsands_advertising_blitz.html

Why is all of this money being spent, when John Kerry said that lobbying won’t alter his decision? And he says  “The public has a role in this. We’re all accountable to our publics. The democratic process demands that we do that.” If only our government felt the same way.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/17/john-baird-john-kerry-keystone_n_4617515.html

Why kill wolves to try and slow the decline of the Caribou when scientists have been reporting for a very long time that their loss of habitat is the main reason? Why disregard the reports from scientists, and instead form an industry led body to address the issue?

http://www.desmogblog.com/unethical-oil-why-canada-killing-wolves-and-muzzling-scientists-protect-tar-sands-interests

Why does the NEB keep any environmental concern out of the northern gateway hearings?

http://www.desmogblog.com/built-fail-national-energy-board-muzzles-environmental-scientists-enbridge-northern-gateway-hearing

Why is the NEB taking over protecting our oceans and fish from industry, an energy regulator, instead of scientists who’ve gone to school for their specific field in the DFO?

http://grist.org/news/canadas-energy-officials-take-over-job-of-protecting-fish-from-pipelines/

Why such a small window to voice concerns over the kinder morgan expansion, oh right those new laws from the government to ‘speed up the review process’?

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/energy/Critics+charge+energy+board+rules+muzzle+Kinder+Morgan/9391211/story.html?__lsa=c640-7cba

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/National+Energy+Board+pulling+fast/9370205/story.html

Why eliminate over 3000 environmental reviews on pipelines and other projects?

http://o.canada.com/news/politics-and-the-nation/parliament/harper-government-kills-3000-environmental-reviews-on-pipelines-and-other-projects/

Why spy on environmentalists if only because they threaten your talking points and are a lone voice of dissent? Why are tax paying dollars spent spying on Canadians who care about the environment?

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/harper-governments-extensive-spying-anti-oilsands-groups-revealed-fois

I’m sure the lucrative environment industry, the ones who don’t have as much to gain from expansion being approved, are really radicals and ‘ecoterrorists’. Easier to brand your opponents radicals and kooks, than to actually address valid concerns people have.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/radicals-working-against-oilsands-ottawa-says-1.1148310

2010 the advertising budget for natural resources canada, NRCan, was $237,000.

The Harper government has increased its advertising spending to $16.5m in 2012 from $9m in 2011. To $40m in 2013. No other departments have had an increase in spending like that in just advertising, many other departments are facing massive cuts across the board.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-ramps-up-ad-spending-for-u-s-pipeline-fight-1.1307723

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-spending-40-million-to-pitch-canadas-natural-resources/article15641360/

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/may/16/canadian-government-doubles-advertising-spend-tar-sands

We need our government to force oil companies to clean up their act, not buy their ads for them.

While they cut funding and jobs to the DFO in stations that fall along the proposed nothern gateway pipeline that would lead in monitoring, assessments, and remediation if there was a spill.

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/politics/story/1.1138481

The government is focusing on telling the world and Canadians that we’re environmentally friendly when they should be showing it by creating and enforcing sound environmental policies not gutting them.

Meanwhile our national debt has exploded since they took power by an additional $169 billion. I wonder if the same thing will happen in 2015 with the promise of a balanced budget as what happened with the promise to drive the debt-ratio down.

[Link to more links to information on our deficit and debt](http://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/1vgy9b/hey_reddit_canada_who_are_you_all_voting_for_next/cesn0yq)

The government is targeting environmental groups. Let us not forget that the public relations war is largely being won by those with the most money, and that compared to just the advertising budget of both the federal government and companies who are represented by CAPP (who receive far more foreign investments than NPOs), foreign donations these groups get pales in comparison.

>Calgary-based TransCanada has hired Phil Fontaine – former national chief of the Assembly of First Nations – to help it win the support of native communities from Alberta to New Brunswick.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/energy-companies-struggle-with-aboriginal-needs-on-pipelines/article15818477/

I would be concerned if I was an environmental group, when the head of the watch dog for our spy agency is lobbying for enbridge.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/investigations/canada%E2%80%99s-top-spy-watchdog-lobbying-enbridge-northern-gateway-pipeline

I would be concerned if I was an environmental group and was being targeted and spied on by our spy agencies and the RCMP.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/harper-governments-extensive-spying-anti-oilsands-groups-revealed-fois

I would be concerned if I was first nations and instead of listening to their appeals, or trying to find some common ground, then send out ministers to convince band leaders.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ottawa-brings-pipelines-pitch-to-b-c-first-nations-1.1864589

I would be worried if I were first nations, and the government when holding meetings essentially didn’t listen to you and talked past you, really only wanting to use you to bolster support and not have to worry about pesky legal battles.

http://www.ipolitics.ca/2013/09/22/harpers-sudden-change-of-strategyneeded-to-woo-b-c-natives-on-pipeline/

The radicals and ecoterrorists part? Not necessarily about infrastructure bombings and destruction, but just simply voicing their opposition and taking part of the regulatory hearings. The pipelines aren’t even built yet, so it can’t be a concern that they are going to destroy something that hasn’t been built. It’s the possibility that they could derail or put a wrench in their plans

>Oliver says the groups “threaten to hijack our regulatory system to achieve their radical ideological agenda,” stack the hearings with people to delay or kill “good projects,” attract “jet-setting” celebrities and use funding from “foreign special interest groups.”

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/radicals-working-against-oilsands-ottawa-says-1.1148310

These aren’t radicals and eco terrorists, these aren’t people threatening to blow up pipelines. These are people protesting, which is their right. These are people who care about the environment, and because it goes against the plans of our government, they are being focused on. Do the groups below have any criminal history? Have they ever committed any violent acts? Is protesting, or voicing opposition a terrorist act in the eyes of the government now?

>Idle No More, ForestEthics, Sierra Club, EcoSociety, LeadNow, Dogwood Initiative, Council of Canadians and the People’s Summit.

They passed legislation so that the CRA could do this…

>The prime minister’s office directed requests for comment to the Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA). Noël Carisse, a spokesman for CRA, said **that since 2012** “the CRA has conducted additional review activities focused on political activities. Audits are being conducted in addition to our regular audit activities, and will include charities from across the entire spectrum of charitable activity.”

http://o.canada.com/business/money/opposition-brands-canada-revenue-agency-spending-on-audits-of-charities-a-witch-hunt/

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawas-new-anti-terrorism-strategy-lists-eco-extremists-as-threats/article533522/

http://www.greenisthenewred.com/blog/7-ways-canada-environmental-groups-labeled-terrorists/6374/

>With his announcement this week, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has increased the concern among environmentalists that Ottawa regards them as implacable adversaries to be monitored and battled, rather than well-meaning advocates to be consulted.

And

>A document from the Department of Foreign Affairs listed allies of the government’s oil-sands development plans and “adversaries” that included environmental and aboriginal groups.

You’re either with us, or you’re with the ~~pedophiles~~ ecoterrorists.

http://thestarfish.ca/home/2013/6/am-i-an-eco-terrorist-convince-me-mr-harper

>”Unfortunately, there are environmental and other radical groups that would seek to block this opportunity to diversify our trade,” Oliver said in an open letter.

>”Their goal is to stop any major project no matter what the cost to Canadian families in lost jobs and economic growth. No forestry. No mining. No oil. No gas. No more hydro-electric dams.”

From the submission that we’re commenting on:

>The Canada Revenue Agency conducts audits for a number of reasons, including in response to outside complaints that an organization is violating federal laws for charities.

>Environmentalists believe that is why so many of them are being singled out. Shortly after the pro-tar sands group Ethical Oil launched a public campaign in 2012 to “expose the radical foreign funded environmental groups’ activities attacking Canada’s ethical oil and industry,” Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced an $8 million effort to more deeply investigate nonprofits’ political activity.

>Since then, Ethical Oil has filed formal complaints with the CRA about Environmental Defence, the David Suzuki Foundation and Tides Canada, saying the groups should be “stripped of their charitable status” for “engaging in partisan activity,” according to Ethical Oil’s website.

>Ethical Oil has deep ties to both the tar sands industry and the Harper administration. In 2011, one of the group’s co-founders, Alykhan Velshi, left his job as a spokesperson for Harper’s government to help found Ethical Oil. A few months later, he left Ethical Oil and returned to the Harper administration to become director of planning in the prime minister’s office. Today, he is the director of issues management for the prime minister.

Also interesting how Jason Kenney is paying for Ethical Oils websites…

http://deepclimate.org/2012/01/13/ethical-oil-political-connections-part-1-conservatives-go-newclear/

echnical Data that you can verify

ethicaloil.org — whois ?

Tech Email:ezra@ezralevant.com[1] Name

Server:NS1.STRATEGICIMPERATIVESONLINE.COM Name

Server:NS2.STRATEGICIMPERATIVESONLINE.COM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra_Levant%5B2%5D

So who is paying for hosting theses pages ?

See top 5 websites with these affiliate IDs below or click on specific affiliate ID above to see full list for that ID

Domain Alexa Rank IP Google IDs Affiliate/Product IDs Nameserver(s)

jasonkenney.net N/A 174.123.161.10 (56) Google Analytics (Urchin) Id: UA-20233645 (6) ns1.strategicimperativesonline.com (5)

ns2.strategicimperativesonline.com (5)

http://www.jasonkenney.net N/A 174.123.161.10 (56) Google Analytics (Urchin) Id: UA-20233645 (6)

jasonkenney.com


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#Harper’s 33 #cdnpoli Vulnerable #CPC #Tory Targets

33 Vulnerable Tory Targets

Dispersed, disorganized, and focused on mixed concerns, veterans make a weak political demographic. Due to the variety of challenges veterans face, and unlike the general public, are rarely politically apathetic.  The primary strength of veterans is a willingness to vote.  Most veterans that I have spoken to ensure they vote in federal and other elections but veterans cannot be labeled as politically powerful – unless we take advantage of the politically weak.

The current government has taken advantage of the fractured and disjointed nature of veterans.  With the exceptions of the SISIP and EQUITAS sponsored lawsuits the government has been very effective in blunting veteran concerns.  Using paid media spots and “Stakeholder” consultations to validate their choices, the government of the day has been successful at frustrating veteran efforts to bring about meaningful change. The Tory majority government has steamrolled over veteran concerns.

The shoe is now on the other foot.  The Hill Times has provided a list of 33 vulnerable Tory targets who won their riding by less than 10%.  The Tory majority is vulnerable and veterans need to take advantage of this opportunity.

Veterans do have powerful allies.  Matthew Good is concerned with suicides and PTSD.  Rick Mercer is unrelenting in his criticism of how veterans are “kicked to the curb”.  There are other high profile persons that support us.  Contact them and ask them to step forward and publicly chastise the government for their failures.

Our weakness of being geographically dispersed is a hidden strength: we can have our voices heard across the country – especially in the ridings of the vulnerable 33.  Active veterans can contribute to the political “death by a thousand cuts” of the Tory politicians. Simply put, inform the public of the variety of challenges that veterans face.  Individual veterans can (and should) make their voices heard in the both the traditional and non-traditional media throughout 2014.

Below, arranged alphabetically by last name, is a list of the 33 vulnerable.  Speak publically and make an appearance on radio or TV.  If you have a face made for radio and a voice designed for duck calls I suggest blogging, editorials, letter writing or “information pickets” outside the MPs office.

2014 is the time for individuals to put pressure on these 33 vulnerable Tories.

Targets up!

Eve Adams (Mississauga-Brampton South, ON.)
Chris Alexander (Ajax-Pickering, ON.)
Stella Ambler (Mississauga South, ON.)
Jay Aspin (Nipissing-Timiskaming, ON.)
Joyce Bateman (Winnipeg South Centre, MN.)
Kelly Block (Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, SK.)
Ray Boughen (Palliser, SK.)
Brad Butt (Mississauga-Streetsville, ON.)
Peter Braid (Kitchener-Waterloo, ON.)
John Carmichael (Don Valley West, ON.)
Corneliu Chisu (Pickering-Scarborough East, ON.)
Rob Clark (Desnethé-Missinippi-Churchill River, SK.)
Joe Daniel (Don Valley East, ON.)
John Duncan (Vancouver Island North, BC)
Royal Galipeau (Ottawa-Orléans, ON.)
Robert Goguen (Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe, NB)
Bal Gosal (Bramalea-Gore-Malton, ON.)
Jacques Gourde (Lotbinière-Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QU.)
Bryan Hayes (Sault Ste. Marie, ON.)
Roxanne James (Scarborough Centre, ON)
Gerald Keddy (South Shore-St. Margaret’s,NS)
Chungsen Leung (Willowdale, ON)
Wladyslaw Lizon (Mississauga East-Cooksville, ON)
James Lunney (Nanaimo-Alberni, BC)
Costas Menegakis (Richmond Hill, ON)
Joe Oliver (Eglinton-Lawrence, ON)
Ted Opitz (Etobicoke Centre, ON)
Lawrence Toet (Elmwood-Transcona, MN)
Susan Truppe (London North Centre, ON)
Bernard Trottier (Etobicoke Lakeshore, ON)
Bernard Valcourt (Madawaska-Restigouche, NB)
Wai Young (Vancouver South, BC)

Originally posted on Veteran Watch by David T. MacLeod at Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 12:26

“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to enquire. We know that the wages of secrecy are corruption. We know that in secrecy error, undetected, will flourish and subvert.” ~ Julius Robert Oppenheimer

continue reading source: http://veteranwatch.blogspot.ca/2013/12/33-vulnerable-tory-targets.html


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Can #WhiteObama distract #cdnpoli away from the #Harper #CPC #FordNation 3 Ring Circus?

Now that is a very interesting pondering that seems intriguingly racist and elitist at the same time but we did not make up the term, we just rolled with a hashtag to inspire conversation. So where can we even begin with the recent announcement from Doug Ford that Rob Ford is a “social liberal” that is fighting against the dark forces of the elite as White Obama, who seemingly is fighting the opposing light forces of the elite. How can one possibly square this circle in the face of the never-ending Wars on Crime, Drugs and Terror rhetoric spewing forth from the 3 ring right-wing circus. What is a “White Obama” anyway?

“Everyone keeps saying Rob’s a conservative,” Doug explains. “He’s a huge, massive social liberal. He loves Obama. The headlines of the papers when he won? ‘The White Obama.’ “ source: Reporter’s notebook: In the heart of Ford Nation with Toronto’s embattled mayor By Bill Weir, CNN updated 8:51 AM EST, Mon November 18, 2013

Maybe it’s OK sometimes to “white” wash the “black” market so that drugs, guns and terror can remain accessible to the “white” suburban folks and punishment can be left to the broke and less-white folks or less politically connected. Not only that but this is a fantastic way to “cut” taxes by way of downloading the costs to the tax-payer through the crimes against society? In other words, even though Rob Ford commits illegal acts and supports organized international criminal activity, being re-branded as a “White Obama” saves the tax-payers of certain areas of Toronto. One might wonder how much illegal activity the Toronto Police Services were really willing to allow Rob Ford to engage in. Not only that, but the bigger question, that has actually answered itself, may be if this is common practice, aka: status quo based upon quid pro quo.

Now one can fully appreciate the gravity that drugs and weapons are not exported to Windsor from Toronto and that they flow from the US through Detroit/Windsor to get to Toronto so that they may be redistributed, aka: trafficked, nationwide, via well organized criminal activity.

Police believe gang hiding suspect By The Windsor Star January 3, 2008

A fugitive murder suspect from Windsor who allegedly shot a man in the back has disappeared into an underground world of gangs and criminals who may be helping him hide from police, say investigators.

Police believe Mohamud Abukar Hagi has ties to a criminal street gang from Toronto called the Dixon True Bloods, which branched out to other cities after police cracked down on their territory.

TORONTO CRACKDOWN

That Toronto crackdown has Windsor police dealing with a growing number of gangbangers.

“They’ve branched off to Calgary and, obviously, Windsor,” Det. Const. Mike Williams, with the Toronto police guns and gangs unit, said of the Dixon Bloods. “We pushed them out.”

continue: http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=b5e2147f-7552-448a-b2a8-40df1317b5b4

Mayor Ford’s Dangerous Liaisons Bailey Reid 09 Nov 2013

Mayor Rob Ford may or may not smoke crack. That is yet to be revealed- because he doesn’t quite remember. What we do know, however, is that spending time with the man happens to be very dangerous, particularly for racialized communities in Toronto.

There have been numerous calls for the mayor’s resignation in the last few days, but mainly over the horror of his potential drug addiction and the attendant argument that he is unable to govern the city, from a moral standpoint.

Quite frankly, I find this to be the least of anyone’s worries. Our collective dismay about Mayor Ford smoking crack has overshadowed a very important subtext to this video of the mayor of Canada’s largest and arguably most diverse city (“Diversity Our Strength,” to cite the city’s motto). A deeper investigation into the mayor’s feelings towards marginalized people makes the crack video even more distressing: does the mayor see communities of colour as the proverbial “whipping boy”?

continue: http://www.policyplay.com/mayor-fords-dangerous-liaisons.html

Laughing at Rob Ford? The laugh may be on us By Paula Simons, Edmonton Journal November 7, 2013

EDMONTON – In Toronto, they’re known as the Dixon Bloods. Or the Dixon City Bloods. Or the Dixon Goonies. Many — though not all — are Somali-Canadian.

According to Toronto police, the gang has been “networking with associates” in Edmonton since 2006.

Not so coincidentally, since 2006, more than 30 young Somali-Canadian men have been killed in Alberta, most in gang-related shootings and stabbings. About half those killings took place in Edmonton.

Det. Cory Buerger is a member of Edmonton’s gang unit, on secondment to ALERT, the Alberta Law Enforcement Response Team.

For almost a decade, he’s tracked the rise of local drug gangs dominated by Somali-Canadians. All, he says, are tightly networked with Toronto groups.

“Dixon Blood members have been seen in Fort McMurray and Edmonton, but they’re not wearing their gang colours out here.”

Instead, he says, members in Alberta operate as free agents. They don’t stake out physical turf, as they have in Toronto. They’re mobile, customer-based, delivering drugs to their buyers. Buerger says the Bloods and their affiliates bring their drugs through Vancouver, but their guns from Ontario. Most are bought legally in the United States, then smuggled across the border near Windsor.

This June, after a year-long investigation, 17 Canadian police agencies, including the Edmonton Police Service and ALERT, executed a takedown of Dixon operations in Toronto, Windsor and Edmonton: Project Traveller.

Police made 44 arrests, and seized 42 guns and $3 million worth of narcotics, including cocaine, heroin, marijuana, LSD and crystal meth. Among those arrested was Edmonton’s Daud Hussein, 27.

Yet for all its scope, Project Traveller really made headlines because of its connection to Rob Ford.

continue: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Simons+Laughing+Ford+laugh/9134771/story.html


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Claims that landlocked oil costing Canada billions in revenue are ‘bogus’, economists say

Claims that landlocked oil costing Canada billions in revenue are ‘bogus’, economists say

William Marsden, Postmedia News | 13/06/03 | Last Updated: 13/06/03 8:29 AM ET

 

Is there any truth in the “double discount” on Canada's oil? Energy economists say that the situation is not nearly as cut and dry as the politicians pretend.

WASHINGTON – Politicians call it the “double discount” and it’s supposed to be costing Canada billions of dollars in lost oil revenues.

B.C. formally opposes Northern Gateway pipeline over lingering environmental concerns

In a final written submission to the federal review panel after more than a year of hearings, lawyers for the westernmost province said the proponent, Calgary-based Enbridge, has not shown that it will be able to effectively respond to oil spills. Read more.

Last December, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver told a New Brunswick audience Canada was losing “$50 million every single day —$18 to $19 billion every year.”

A month later, Doug Horner, Alberta’s finance minister, raised the figure to about $100 million a day in a speech to a Calgary audience. “Right now, Alberta’s bitumen is fetching more than $40 per barrel less than oil in Mexico or Texas,” he told a Calgary audience.  “Some of our oil is fetching about $50 less than oil from the Middle East.”

Many Canadian politicians have invoked the argument that because western oil is landlocked it’s not fetching international prices and therefore is being sold at a discount. If Canada could build more pipelines such as Keystone XL or the proposed Northern Gateway through British Columbia, it would reach tidewater ports where it would attract world prices, the so-called Brent and West Texas Intermediate prices.

The second part of the discount comes from backlogs at U.S. pipeline terminals that can result in lower prices for some Canadian heavy crude oil.

But is there any truth in the “double discount”?

Energy economists say that the situation is not nearly as cut and dry as the politicians pretend. Some call the claim “bogus.” World prices are based primarily on quality and so Canada’s bitumen, which has the lowest quality of the heavy oils, naturally fetches lower prices. Sending the oil sands bitumen to Gulf Coast refineries is not going to change that fact, they note.

“It just doesn’t make any sense,” Michal Moore, an energy economist at University of Calgary, said of the discount argument. “Anything that does not meet that quality standard is going to trade at a discount relative to Brent.  All that discount means is that any refinery owner is going to pay less for something they have to spend more time and energy to upgrade. That’s all it means.”

Warren Mabee, director of the Institute for Energy and Environmental policy at Queens University, said the discount claim “is kind of bogus” If only because it is impossible to predict future prices.

“Unless you are delivering the highest quality crude, Brent Crude or West Texas Intermediate, out into that international market place, you are not going to be getting the highest price that is out there,” he said.

He said there is some discount attached to Canadian heavy oil when there are pipeline backups, but these tend to rectify over time.

Moore noted that Canada already tests international markets when it pipes thousands of barrels of bitumen daily to the Gulf Coast through existing pipelines. There is no indication this oil is attracting higher prices because it is reaching tidal waters, he said.

B.C. Energy economist Robyn Allan, who recently wrote a report on the pricing of Canadian oil, said “the discount has been used by the federal and provincial governments to shadow out the fact that by shipping raw bitumen to U.S. refineries, Canada is also shipping jobs.”

So where did Oliver and Horner get their figures from?

Christopher McCluskey, who is Oliver’s media aide, said the minister took his $50-million figure from a CIBC report of March 2012 that coined the phrase “double discount” and mentioned the $50-million-a-day figure.

It’s not clear from the report how the $50-million figure was calculated. But an analysis of crude oil prices shows that at close of Feb. 10, 2012, the price differential between West Texas Intermediate (WTI), a U.S. international bench mark, and Synthetic Crude Oil (SCO), which is a light crude upgraded from oil sands bitumen, was $23.04 a barrel. This substantial differential works out to about $50 million a day as a discount.  (A price comparison of WTI to SCO is significant because the quality is similar.)

In his report, CIBC analyst Andrew Potter cautioned that this price differential would not last because pipeline bottlenecks and refinery problems would ease and the overall vagaries of the oil market would change the pricing dynamics.

Indeed, within a week that differential was closing. By Feb. 15, 2012, the price differential was only one dollar, which means the $50-million discount claimed six months later by Oliver, was now only about $2.5 million. By August 2012, SCO was selling above WTI prices and continued to do so through to November when WTI vaulted back into the lead. But by the end of February 2013 SCO was once again surging ahead of WTI. So the discount that Horner claimed in January had reached more than $100 million a day (in fact the WTI-SCO differential on the day of his speech was only $1.74 a barrel, producing a discount of at best $4.4 million) had not only disappeared but was now a premium. Canada was selling its synthetic crude at more than $6 a barrel above the WTI world price. As of May 30, the differential was 32 cents.

After Postmedia questioned McCluskey about the use of the CIBC report, he replied on behalf of Oliver that the government is in fact using an average annual price differential between Brent and WTI prices that implies a $45-million-a-day discount on Canadian crude.

But Moore said this is not a logical comparison because Brent is a better quality sweet crude than WTI and therefore refineries are willing to pay more for it. He added that it is “just crackers” and “not realistic” to think that Brent-WTI pricing can be applied to lower quality Canadian heavy crude.

“The most desirable mix on the block is the Brent,” he said. “So anything that does not meet that quality standard is going to trade at a discount relative to Brent.  All that discount means is that any refinery owner is going to pay less for something they have to spend more time and energy to upgrade. That’s all it means.”

Moore also said it is unlikely that oil sands bitumen would find a market in refineries outside the United States. He said no producer would pay the extra shipping costs of sending the oil to, say, Europe if he is already getting the best price in Texas.

“I mean I have heard this insane argument that we would take a barrel of Western Canadian Select (a diluted bitumen from the oil sands), send it to Port Arthur, Texas, put it on a ship and sent it somewhere else like to Europe,” Moore said. “Why would you do that? That’s just nuts.”

continue reading source:  http://business.financialpost.com/2013/06/03/canada-oil-price-discount/


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Global giants snap up Canada assets

By Stephen Ewart, Calgary Herald October 18, 2012
Stephen Ewart is the Calgary Herald’s Energy and Economics editor and columnist.

Amid the series of high-profile takeovers of Canadian oil and gas producers by Asian oil and gas producers, the news that ExxonMobil has offered to buy Celtic Exploration Ltd. in a $3.1 billion deal is a change, but hardly a surprise.

Exxon was widely rumoured to be a rival bidder when Malaysian state oil company Petronas made its offer for Progress Energy during the summer as global energy giants snap up properties in promising shale oil and gas plays in Alberta and British Columbia. Exxon’s friendly offer for Celtic is the latest in a series of foreign purchases of unconventional assets – including oilsands – in Canada that represent long-term strategic acquisitions for some of the industry’s biggest players.

In addition to Petronas’ $5.2 billion offer for Progress, the federal government is also reviewing if there is a “net benefit” to Canada in the $15.1 billion bid by Chinese state-owned oil giant CNOOC for oilsands producer Nexen. Ottawa is expected to rule on both purchases before the end of this year.

The Exxon-Celtic deal is also subject to federal review but doesn’t carry the same political baggage.

The Celtic assets would give Exxon large tracts in the liquids-rich Montney shale gas play and a stake in Alberta’s promising Duver-nay shale play, where global players such as Chevron and ConocoPhillips have renewed their interest in Canada with big property acquisitions.

“It’s not going to pay off for them right away,” said Ed Kallio, director of gas consulting at Calgary’s Ziff Energy Group. “They can keep their heads above water in both the Duver-nay and the Montney even at today’s prices, but they’re not going to make out like bandits, at least initially.

“As we see appreciation in the gas price they are really well set up. And if they can work that (opportunity) into Asia then they are really sitting pretty.”

Natural gas has been selling for less than $3 per thousand cubic feet in Western Canada. In Asia, gas sells for five times that as supplies from shale formations throughout North America have outpaced demand and pushed prices to uneconomic levels.

The B.C. coast has gained momentum as a top North American LNG export point as companies proceed with development plans that are generally supported by provincial politicians and First Nations and have largely avoided the controversies that have beset export pipelines from the oil-sands.

continue reading source: http://www.calgaryherald.com/touch/business/Global+giants+snap+Canada+assets/7408132/story.html?rel=7412114


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

P3s: Harper takes Canadians down a risky road

By Emma Lui
October 15, 2012

In today’s Globe and Mail article, The hidden price of public-private partnerships, Barrie McKenna highlights the risks of Public-private partnerships (P3s): As McKenna notes, “Disturbing new research highlights some serious flaws in how governments tally the benefits of public-private partnerships versus conventional projects. Too little is known about how these contracts work, who benefits and who pays.”

The new research was a study of 28 Ontario P3 projects worth more than $7-billion. The article that highlights that “University of Toronto assistant professor Matti Siemiatycki and researcher Naeem Farooqi found that public-private partnerships cost an average of 16 per cent more than conventional tendered contracts. That’s mainly because private borrowers typically pay higher interest rates than governments. Transaction costs for lawyers and consultants also add about 3 per cent to the final bill.”

McKenna warns P3s are just too risky: “Without putting a fair price on risk, taxpayers will never know whether P3s are any cheaper than building things the conventional way. Set the value too high, and P3s become vehicles for governments to subsidize inflated profits of powerful and well-connected contractors and financial institutions.

He concludes that “Notwithstanding these red flags, Ottawa and the provinces continue to embrace the public-private model. P3 Canada Inc., Ottawa’s $1.24-billion P3 fund, has sunk more than $300-million into various projects since the summer.”

PPP Canada became operational in February 2009 and has a total of $1.24 billion to allocate under the P3 Canada Fund. PPP Canada explicitly promotes privatization of public services by only providing funding to P3s in water and wastewater, transportation and communications. In water and wastewater services, PPP Canada has approved funding for the Lac La Biche Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) Wastewater Treatment Facility in Alberta ($3.8 milllion) and the Evan Thomas Water and Wastewater Plant in Kananaskis Country, Alberta ($9.95 million).

PPP Canada states that the P3 fund was created “to improve the delivery of public infrastructure and provide better value, timeliness and accountability by increasing the effective use of P3.” However, P3s in Canada have been found to be more costly and as the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives notes “a string of failures, delays, little transparency, and secretive deals proved these claims wrong.”

A proposed P3 plan for water services was defeated in Abbotsford because of public opposition.

This week the House of Commons operations committee will continue hearings on P3s and as McKenna puts it is “stacked with witnesses who like them.”

This week is also the week of final negotiations of the Canada-Europe Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement this week which could open municipalities in Canada up to European water corporations and put our public water services at risk to privatization.

To learn how to fight CETA, visit our Trade campaign webpage.
To learn about the Blue Communities Project and how to keep your municipal water services public, click here.

continue reading source: http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/making-waves/2012/10/p3s-harper-takes-canadians-down-risky-road

Related Tags:


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Nexen takeover bid raises difficult policy questions for government, Harper says

Nexen takeover bid raises difficult policy questions for government, Harper says

By Jason Fekete, Postmedia News October 4, 2012

A security officer keeps watch outside the headquarters of China National Offshore Oil Corp (CNOOC) in Beijing in this February 19, 2008 file photograph. China's top offshore oil producer CNOOC, is hoping to buy Calgary energy company Nexen.
A security officer keeps watch outside the headquarters of China National Offshore Oil Corp (CNOOC) in Beijing in this February 19, 2008 file photograph. China’s top offshore oil producer CNOOC, is hoping to buy Calgary energy company Nexen. Photograph by: REUTERS/Claro Cortes IV , Postmedia News

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper says CNOOC’s takeover bid for Canadian energy company Nexen “raises a range of difficult policy questions” for his government as it decides whether to approve the $15-billion transaction.

The prime minister’s comments Thursday — some of his strongest yet on the issue — added more intrigue to a day that saw the NDP announce it opposes the deal as currently structured, due to what it says is a secretive review process, government’s history of “rubber stamping” deals and CNOOC’s poor track record.

The Conservative cabinet is currently reviewing, under the Investment Canada Act, whether China National Offshore Oil Corporation’s (CNOOC) $15.1-billion takeover of Calgary-based petroleum producer Nexen is of “net benefit” to Canada.

The government’s review — and the ramifications of its decision on future foreign investment and takeovers, especially in the oilsands sector — is proving to be a somewhat divisive issue within the Tory cabinet and caucus.

Harper said his government is generally welcoming of foreign investment, but he noted it has significantly modified some previous takeover bids and rejected a couple of others.

The prime minister has previously indicated public opinion, which repeated polls have shown is quickly souring on the deal, will be a factor in the government’s decision, and he reinforced that again Thursday.

continue reading: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/National/Nexen+takeover+raises+difficult+policy+questions/7343396/story.html


Please feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media or mail us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Pipeline development was ‘top of mind’ in Stephen Harper’s budget bill, say “secret” records

Pipeline development was ‘top of mind’ in Stephen Harper’s budget bill, say “secret” records

By Mike De Souza September 28, 2012
Pipeline development was ‘top of mind’ in Stephen Harper’s budget bill, say “secret” records

Environment Minister Peter Kent declined an interview request from Postmedia News, referring questions to Natural Resources Canada. This photo taken during Question Period, May 31, 2012. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

OTTAWA – Pipeline development was a “top of mind” consideration factoring into the Harper government’s regulatory reforms adopted in a 400-page piece of legislation supporting the 2012 budget, reveals an internal briefing note prepared for Environment Minister Peter Kent.

The federal document, marked “secret” but released through access to information legislation by Environment Canada, highlighted the department’s role in assessing two different proposals for pipelines linking Alberta’s oilsands industry to the west coast of British Columbia.

It also recommended that Kent tell a pipeline industry association, before the budget was tabled, that the new legislation would revamp regulations for new industrial projects.

“Pipeline development is certainly among the major industrial sectors that are top-of-mind as we consider the modernization of our regulatory system,” said the briefing material, prepared for a Jan. 26 meeting between Kent, his former deputy minister, Paul Boothe, and the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association.

Nearly one third of the budget legislation was dedicated to changing Canada’s environmental laws, offering new tools for the government to authorize water pollution, investigate environmental groups, weaken protection of endangered species, and limit public participation in consultations and reviews of proposed industrial projects.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency confirmed in August that it cancelled nearly 3,000 environmental assessments as a result of the new legislation, including about 250 reviews of projects involving a pipeline.

Kent’s office referred questions about the briefing document to Natural Resources Canada, which said that energy and other resources contribute billions of dollars to Canadian economic growth.

“Resources are the backbone of our economy that creates jobs and growth for all Canadians,” the Natural Resources Department said in a statement emailed to Postmedia News. “The government’s plan for responsible resource development will create high-quality, skilled jobs across Canada… ensuring more predictable, timely reviews, reducing duplication, while maintaining the highest possible standards for protecting the environment, and ensuring more meaningful consultations with aboriginal people.”

After reviewing the briefing notes, NDP deputy leader Megan Leslie said the material demonstrates that the budget legislation, introduced in Parliament on April 26, 2012 and adopted in July, was mainly designed to remove environmental laws standing in the way of projects proposed by companies such as Alberta-based Enbridge, which is proposing the Northern Gateway pipeline from Edmonton to Kitimat, B.C.

She also said it indicates the government had made up its mind to overhaul environmental assessment legislation before Parliament had a chance to complete reviewing the situation.

“Now that I see this briefing document, I realize that the fix was in from the beginning,” said Leslie in an interview.

Previously released internal government records have indicated that Enbridge officials were disputing concerns raised by federal scientists about the risks of their proposed pipeline and the need for additional information, Postmedia News and the Vancouver Sun reported last spring.

The new budget legislation also allows ministers in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s cabinet to overrule decisions made by the National Energy Board on project reviews.

After facing criticism for downplaying these new powers of cabinet during an announcement in April about the environmental reforms, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver told the National Post in an interview that the government had not highlighted the changes, but suggested that it was not trying to hide them.

Brenda Kenny, president of the industry association, told Postmedia News that she didn’t agree with the suggestion that pipelines were “top of mind” in the regulatory reforms, explaining that other sectors of the economy could also be important factors in the changes adopted in July.

But she noted that the reforms have strengthened some provisions of environmental assessments, introducing some new fines for companies that don’t respect conditions of project approvals.

She also said that there was a need to remove administrative delays that were slowing down project approvals, without offering any additional environmental protection.

Follow Mike De Souza

© Copyright (c) Postmedia News

continue reading source: http://www.canada.com/Pipeline+development+mind+Stephen+Harper+budget+bill+secret+records/7303087/story.html


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Alberta-B.C. dust-up forces Harper to rethink ideology

By: Frances Russell
Winnipeg Free Press – PRINT EDITION
Posted: 07/26/2012 1:00 AM

Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Prime Minister Stephen Harper
SEAN KILPATRICK/ THE CANADIAN PRESS ARCHIVES Enlarge Image

Ideologues always get tripped up by their ideology. Just look at Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Now that B.C. and Alberta are on the warpath, are you still on the side of provincial rights and the dubious doctrine of federal-provincial watertight compartments, Mr. Prime Minister?

The man who wanted to build a firewall around Alberta and won’t meet with the premiers because he’s bought the bogus provincial rights theory of Canadian Confederation for ideological reasons now finds himself in a political bind.

Not only are B.C. and Alberta at each other’s throats, their standoff is over his chief preoccupation — oil.

continue reading: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/alberta-bc-dust-up-forces-harper-to-rethink-ideology-163822236.html


Please feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media or mail us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

MAJOR NEWS!! Canada’s Parliament votes to Repeal Hate Speech law

MAJOR NEWS!! Canada’s Parliament votes to Repeal Hate Speech law

Thursday, June 7, 2012 14:04

Did libertarian Wildrose influence the vote?

From Eric Dondero:

A few years ago, right-libertarian author and satyrist Mark Steyn was brought up on “hate speech” charges in Canada due to anti-Islamist passages in his books and writings.

Now the Conservative-led Tory government has voted to repeal such hate speech laws. And no surprise, it was a legislator from the libertarian-leaning Province of Alberta who led the charge.

From the Montreal Gazette, “MPs vote to repeal hate-speech sections of human-rights act”:

The Conservative government voted late Wednesday to repeal controversial sections of the Canadian Human Rights Act banning hate speechover the telephone or Internet.

In a vote of 153 to 136, the majority Harper government supported a private member’s bill from Alberta Conservative MP Brian Storseth that would scrap Section 13 of the human rights code, which deals with complaints regarding “the communication of hate messages by telephone or on the Internet.”

Storseth argues the current human-rights code fails to protect freedom of speech, which is guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and believes Canadians are better off if the government repeals sections 13 and 54 — the latter section dealing with associated penalties

Conservative party members voted a few years ago at their annual convention in favour of a resolution to eliminate the human rights commission’s authority to “regulate, receive, investigate or adjudicate complaints” dealing with hate speech on the Internet.

Lo and behold, Sorseth’s bill had the support of Alberta’s libertarian party, Wildrose Alliance.

From the St. Paul Journal, Feb. 14 “Wildrose leader endorses MP’s bill”:

Wildrose leader Danielle Smith commended Storseth’s work while in St. Paul on Jan. 31.“The human rights tribunal is not supposed to be used to muzzle journalists. It’s not supposed to be to stifle free speech, and if it’s being misused that way, it makes perfect sense to repeal the section,” Smith said.

The Wildrose supports repealing section 13 of the federal act. If elected, the Wildrose Party would repeal the province’s hate speech section, section 3.

Editor’s comment – Another instance of libertarians influencing conservatives be more libertarian? (Photo credit – WN.com)
Read more at Libertarian Republican

original source: href=”http://beforeitsnews.com/libertarian/2012/06/major-news-canadas-parliament-votes-to-repeal-hate-speech-law-2232500.html


Please feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media or mail us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

RCMP exposed: Police spying on opponents of Enbridge pipeline, documents show

By Martin Lukacs Tim Groves
May 10, 2012

You don't need police spies to tell you there's big opposition to Enbridge's pipeline plans. (Photo: Laríssa / Flickr)

The RCMP has been spying on a group of British Columbia First Nations whose vocal opposition to Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline has taken them to the company’s annual shareholders meeting in Toronto, according to documents obtained through an access-to-information request.

The documents show that a provincial RCMP unit has been closely tracking the potential for “acts of protest and civil disobedience” by the Yinka Dene Alliance, a coalition of northern B.C. First Nations who have been at the centre of resistance to Enbridge’s $5.5 billion pipeline proposal.

Their territory covers a quarter of the route of the pipeline, which would carry more than 500,000 barrels of oilsands crude from Alberta through pristine territory to Kitimat, B.C., for export by supertanker to Asia and other markets.

The revelations add ammunition to critics who have charged that the Harper government is waging a campaign to demonize legitimate opponents of resource developments like the Northern Gateway, by labelling them as radicals or including them in Canada’s “counter-terrorism” strategy.

continue reading: http://rabble.ca/news/2012/05/rcmp-exposed-police-spying-opponents-enbridge-pipeline-documents-show

Tim Groves is a freelance journalist and investigative researcher based in Toronto. Martin Lukacs is a writer and organizer in Montreal.

Related items

 


Please feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media or mail us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Getting inside Harper’s headspace

‘Everybody knows final decisions are made by the PM’

by Paul Wells
Friday, November 11, 2011 11:20am

The Cabinet committee on priorities and planning meets on Tuesdays, usually with Stephen Harper as chairman. He calls a lot of decisions on the spot. But not all. Sometimes decision is reserved pending the Prime Minister’s private decision.

When it came time to decide how many seats each province would get in an enlarged House of Commons, a senior source close to the government says, the Prime Minister took the briefing books and spreadsheets and sat alone for hours, juggling options, weighing the political fallout from every scenario.

Three days before Minister of State for Democratic Reform Tim Uppal announced the new numbers—15 new seats for Ontario, six each for Alberta and British Columbia, three for Quebec—Conservative MPs were called to a rare Monday caucus meeting so the plan could be run by them. Harper has his control-freak moments, but he prefers to hear complaints from his MPs quietly, before an announcement, rather than loudly after it.

All of this is to say that Stephen Harper is still in charge of the Stephen Harper government. Half a year after voters gave that government a majority, it’s still not clear what Harper’s plans are beyond, say, next spring.

continue reading source: http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/11/11/getting-inside-harpers-headspace/

Tags: , , ,

More by Paul Wells


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Stephen Harper’s most controversial quotes compiled — by Conservatives

Stephen Harper’s most controversial quotes compiled — by Conservatives

04/26/2011  | Joan Bryden, The Canadian Press

A 500-page dossier of potentially damaging remarks by Stephen Harper has hit the election campaign, but don’t blame the opposition parties — it was prepared by the Conservatives.

The thick binder of material, obtained by the Liberals, is a treasure trove of controversial Harper quotes, listed alphabetically by subject matter. It covers everything from abortion to western alienation and reaches as far back as the 1980s.

The fact that the Tories felt compelled to research their own leader suggests they believed Harper’s past penchant for blunt, uncompromising talk could pose a problem on the campaign trail.

And indeed many of his controversial stands in the past are in stark contrast to the positions he espouses today.

On the campaign trail now, Harper stresses that he has no hidden agenda to reopen the abortion file. But the Tory files include this 2002 boast from Harper, then a leadership contestant: “I’m not ashamed to say that, in caucus, I have more pro-life MPs supporting me than supporting Stockwell Day.”

Harper is insisting now that he can erase the deficit by 2014 simply by cutting $4 billion a year in wasteful and inefficient spending. But in 1995, he said it would be impossible to eliminate the deficit without slashing social programs, which he noted account for two-thirds of federal spending.

“We would have to look at everything, you can’t spare anything,” he said then.

Then there’s his 1995 assertion that “providing for the poor is a provincial, not a federal responsibility.”

Since becoming prime minister, Harper has tried hard to woo Quebec, including masterminding a parliamentary motion recognizing the Quebecois people as a nation. But the quote dossier has numerous reminders of Harper’s past refusal to countenance any type of special status for the province.

In 1992, he railed against a proposal to ensure Quebec a 25 per cent share of seats in the House of Commons, regardless of the province’s share of the population.

“In fact, what’s even more repulsive than the 25 per cent guarantee is the giving 18 new Commons seats to Quebec, which isn’t even on the basis of population.”

And in 1999, he argued that Quebec’s language law was designed “to suppress the basic freedoms of English-speaking Quebecers and to ghettoize the French-speaking majority into an ethnic state.”

Conservatives shrugged off release of the dossier, essentially maintaining that Harper’s record in government is all that should matter to voters — not his long-ago comments while in opposition or heading up a right-wing advocacy group.

“Prime Minister Stephen Harper has a proud record of delivering (for)Canadians with strong leadership for the last 5 years,” party spokesman Ryan Sparrow said in an email.

All parties go to enormous effort to dig up damaging comments by rival leaders and candidates and take great glee in exposing them at the most inopportune moments. But it’s unusual to see a party collect its own leader’s questionable quotes.

The research was begun in 2003 by Harper’s former chief of staff, Tom Flanagan, who appears to have believed the old adage that forewarned is forearmed.

“When I became chief of staff in 2003, one of the first things I did was organize a ‘Harper research’ program to collect everything he had ever written or said in public,” Flanagan wrote in his 2007 book “Harper’s Team.”

Flanagan declined to comment Monday on the binder of material obtained by the Liberals.

However, a Tory source who was familiar with the research project said the binder appears to be genuine. It includes an initial 359 pages of quotes, which were supplemented by about 100 more pages in two instalments in July 2003 and January 2004.

A cover note on the 2004 instalment says the quotes “that have the potential to be the most problematic are the quotations dealing with health care.”

Some of those comments have already been mined by opposition parties to cast doubt on Harper’s commitment to maintaining universal, publicly funded health care. Other quotes, in which Harper extols the virtues of allowing private, for-profit health delivery and a parallel private health-care system, seem to have gone largely unnoticed.

There’s his 1997 claim that “the best system means having a system where you have as many tiers as possible and you bring in as many health-care dollars into this country as possible.”

There’s his 2002 assertion that “the private provision of publicly insured services should be permitted. The monopoly of provision of services is not a value that, in and of itself, is worth preserving.”

Or his lament, also in 2002, that the Canada Health Act “rules out private, public-delivery options, It rules out co-payment, pre-payment and all kinds of options that are frankly going to have to be looked at if we’re going to deal with the challenges that the system faces.”

In 1995, Harper said “the federal government should contemplate” a proposal advanced by Quebec’s finance minister wherein the federal government would transfer tax points, instead of money, to the provinces for social programs. With no cash transfers, Ottawa would lose its only hammer to enforce the Canada Health Act.

Among the other controversial comments:

— “I, too, am one of these angry westerners … We may love Canada but Canada does not love us … Let’s make (Alberta) strong enough that the rest of the country is afraid to threaten us.” Report Newsmagazine, December 2000.

— “As a religion, bilingualism is the god that failed. It has led to no fairness, produces no unity and cost Canadian taxpayers untold millions.” Calgary Sun, May 2001.

— “You’ve got to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada: people who live in ghettoes and who are not integrated into western Canadian society.” Report Newsmagazine, January 2001.

— “If a person doesn’t want to vote, for whatever reason, that’s their decision. It’s not the business of the government.” On a proposal to make voting in federal elections mandatory. Freedom Watch, January 2001.

— “(He) is not a serious scholar … Saul is such an intellectual lightweight that a 10-km wind would blow him right off the ground.” On John Ralston Saul, husband of then-governor general Adrienne Clarkson. Report Newsmagazine, April 2000.

— “Let’s face it, the average backbench MP is little more than a bench warmer for his/her political party.” Letter to The National Post, February 1998.

— “MPs are bit players in a top-down parliamentary system and role players on their own top-down partisan team.” The Bulldog, August, 1998.

source: electronically submitted content, no additional source data available


Please feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media or mail us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

The government list: Women’s groups that ARE funded

The government list: Women’s groups that ARE funded

by Karina Roman
Posted: May 6, 2010 10:19 AM
Last Updated: May 6, 2010 11:06 AM

Minister of Status of Women (and of Public Works) Rona Ambrose said yesterday that the government was funding 78 projects undertaken by women’s groups in Canada…and that 34 of those groups were receiving funding for the first time.

Today Chris Hilton, the minister’s director of communications, sent us the list of those 78 projects/groups (which were chosen from a record 486 proposals, according to the government.) This list is by province and territory and there is no indication of how much money is attached to each project (although we will attempt to find that out). There is also no information on what the projects are specifically about (although some seem obvious), but I’m sure a little digging will bring us those nuggets as well.

This list comes after the opposition accused the government of cutting funding to groups that do not share the Conservative’s ideology. The Liberals, for example, issued their own selective list yesterday.

Here is the government’s list for readers to peruse:

(* Indicates new groups that have been approved for funding.)

Newfoundland and Labrador

* Réseau de développement économique et d’employabilitéde Terre-Neuve-et-Labrador (RDÉE TNL)
Projet d’entreprenariat pour les femmes de l’Ouest du Labrador

Newfoundland Aboriginal Women’s Network (NAWN)
Empowering Aboriginal Women; Influencing Community Wellness

Multicultural Women’s Organization of Newfoundland and Labrador
A Culturally Appropriate Gendered Approach to Improving Immigrant Women and Girls Economic Security Through Leadership Skill Development

Nova Scotia

Fédération des femmes acadiennes de la Nouvelle-Écosse
La violence, ça suffit!

The Hypatia Association
Tools for the Trade: Promoting Economic Security for Women in Cape Breton

New Brunswick

Association acadienne et francophone des aînées et aînés du Nouveau-Brunswick
Éveil à l’exercice de la citoyenneté des femmes et comment l’exercer

Centre de prévention de la violence familiale de Kent
Notre destin notre autodetermination

*Partners For Youth Inc.
Building Opportunity – Leadership Development for Young Women to Eliminate Relationship Violence

Urban Core Support Network Saint John Inc.
POWER UP! Mentoring

Prince Edward Island

PEI Coalition for Women in Government Inc.
Supporting Democratic Participation of Prince Edward Island’s Women and Girls

Women’s Network PEI Inc.
Trade Herizons

Quebec & Nunavut

Centre d’intégration au marché du l’emploi (CIME)
Les femmes dans la construction: une voie d’avenir pour un secteur en effervescence

Centre social d’aide aux immigrants
Favoriser la participation et la représentation des femmes immigrantes et réfugiées dans le quartier Ville-Émard / Côte-Saint-Paul

Femmes et politique municipale de l’Estrie
Ensemble, continuons!

*Fripe.com
En route vers le marché du travail

*Groupe d’entraide L’expression libre du Haut-Richelieu
Réseau de soutien et d’entraide pour femmes victimes d’agressions sexuelles

*Le Cran des Femmes
Onward Together!

*Regroupement des femmes d’affaires et femmes professionnnelles de la region de Thetford
Influence et pouvoir au feminin

Relais-femmes
Pour que les femmes continuent d’avancer

Réseau des femmes des Laurentides
Citoyennes, faites vos marques!

*Saturviit Inuit Women’s Association of Nunavik
Governance Training for Inuit Women in Nunavik

*Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes Inc. (TCRI)
Améliorons nos conditions de vie : en route vers le développement du leadership des femmes immigrées!

Wapikoni Mobile Corporation
Soirées de filles: de l’intime au collectif

Ontario

Action Ontarienne contre la violence faite aux femmes
Tools to increase safety

*Agincourt Community Services Association
Forced Marriage – Education and Empowerment

*Biminaawzogin Regional Aboriginal Women’s Circle
Women’s Transition Bridging Project

*Catholic Family Services Toronto
Women Helping Women

*Community Living Peterborough
Young Women’s Leadership Group

Community Opportunity and Innovation Network (COIN)
Women Leading, Women Learning, Women Working

*Cornwall and District Immigrant Services Agency
From Learning to Earning Women (FLEW) – A Program for Immigrant Women by Women

*Elizabeth Fry Society Sudbury
EMPOWER (Education Making Positive Outcomes within Everyone’s Reach)

*Eritrean Canadian Community Centre of Metropolitan Toronto
Empowering African Immigrant Women to Become Leaders in Raising Sexually Healthy Children

Focus for Ethnic Women
Immigrant Women and Voice

*Girls Incorporated of Limestone, Algonquin and Lakeshore (Girls Inc. Limestone)
Girls Inc. Mother’s Network

*Korean Canadian Women’s Association (KCWA) Family and Social Services
FEM (Free and Empower Me)

Lowertown Community Resource Centre – trustee of the City for All Women Initiative
Engaging Diverse Communities through Facilitation

*London Urban Services Organization Centre (LUSO Community Services)
D.A.M.E.S. (Daughters and Mothers Experiencing Success)

Media Action (National Watch on Images of Women in the Media)
Informed Opinions

*Mouvement Ontarien des femmes immigrantes francophones (MOFIF)
Viser haut

*MUJER- Latin American Women’s Organization
Empower Youth Latinas in Toronto

*My Friends House, Collingwood Crisis Centre
“Next Door” Transitional Support Program for Women

*Oasis centre des femmes
Developing an Economic Hub for Language

PARO Centre for Women’s Enterprise
SUPPLEMENT: Women’s Access Project

Reh’ma Community Services
Shifting Burdens and Empowering Women

*Sault Sainte Marie Indian Friendship Centre
Jingle Dress Regalia Making Project

*The Multicultural Council of Windsor and Essex County
Leadership 360

The Redwood for Women and Children Fleeing Abuse
Women on the Move, Phase 2

*Urban Alliance on Race Relations
Making Noise Media and Accountability Project

National

Federation of Canadian Municipalities
National Women in Municipal Government Program

Girls Action Foundation
Young Women: Learning and Leading for Change

Girl Guides of Canada/ Guides du Canada (GGC)
SUPPLEMENT: Girls for Safer Communities

National Initiative for Care of the Elderly (NICE)
Older Women and Financial Literacy: Bridging the Income Gap

Native Women’s Association of Canada
Evidence to Action

Manitoba

Association for Community Living – Winnipeg Inc.
Women in Harm’s Way – Addressing the Silent Abuse – Phase 2

Ka Ni Kanichihk
Aboriginal Women & Youth – Reclaiming our Power

West Central Women’s Resource Centre
Cultivating Holistic Community Leadership

*Women’s Enterprise Centre of Manitoba
WEC-Tech Project

Saskatchewan

*Daughters of Africa International
 African Women in the Community

Elizabeth Fry Society of Saskatchewan
Strong Sisters

*La Ronge Native Women’s Council
Piwapan Sexual Assault Program

Provincial Association of Transition Houses and Services of Saskatchewan
Modeling and Mentoring: Creating the Supportive and Effective Relationships that Lead to Non-Violent Communities

Saskatchewan Towards Offering Partnership Solutions (STOPS) to Violence
The Community Connections Plan Phase 2: A Consistent, Coordinated, Effective Response to Violence and Abuse

Alberta

Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters (ACWS)
Changing Lives: Empowering Women through Enhanced Shelter Practices

Canadian Mental Health Association
Community Development for Sexual Assault Response Services in Southeast Alberta

Changing Together: Centre for Immigrant Women Association
The Silkworm Project: An emergency shelter designed specifically for Immigrant women

Edmonton Mennonite Centre for Newcomers (EMCN)
Immigrant Women Claiming their Future: Building Capacity through the Sustainable Livehood Model

Immigrant Services Calgary Society
Integrated Women’s Mentorship: Phase II

United Cultures of Canada Association
Enhancing Community Response to Support Victims and End Domestic Violence

*Westlock Women’s Association
Stop the Violence – Pilot Project

British Columbia

*Cridge Centre for the Family
The Cridge Asset Building Project

*Minerva Foundation for BC Women
Women Leading the Way Project

Supporting Women’s Alternatives Network (SWAN Vancouver)
Preventing Violence by Protecting Rights

SWOVA Community Development and Research Society
Pass It On: Women and Girls Working Together for Safety, Phase II

Salvation Army, The Governing Council
Female Lone Parent Family Breakthrough

*New Hope Community Services Society
Woman to Woman: Empowering Refugee and Immigrant Women to Stand Strong in Canada Through Mentoring

WISH Drop-In Centre Society
Peer Security Project: Phase Two

*Women’s Enterprise Centre
Taking the Stage: Leadership Skills Training targeting Aboriginal,  Immigrant and  Entrepreneur Women in BC

Yukon

Les EssentiElles (fiscal agent for the Yukon Status of Women Council)
Financial Literacy for Yukon Women

Les EssentiElles
Renforcement PluriElles

Northwest Territories

YWCA of Yellowknife, NWT
Increasing Safety for Women in NWT Communities

continue reading source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2010/05/the-government-list-womens-groups-that-are-funded.html

Karina Roman caught the journalism bug in Australia where she wrote AND sold ads for a fledgling weekly newspaper. Back in Canada, journalism school and stints at a national newspaper and CBC Radio’s As It Happens followed. In 2001, she was lured to Ottawa from Toronto by promises of “real” winters, thinking it was only going to be for a year. In the nine years since, she has reported on politics, business, technology, crime and elections for radio and television. In 2008 she joined CBC radio’s parliamentary bureau, became a mom for the first time and bought a house. Which makes her realize that probably means she’s going to be “enjoying” winters here for a while.


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Six prominent citizens deliver a manifesto calling for provincial autonomy

By B4Ranch
02/ 19/ 01 4:27am

Alberta first

Six prominent citizens deliver a manifesto calling for provincial autonomy
by Kevin Michael Grace

ALBERTANS are not the wealthiest Canadians, but they are the biggest contributors to the cost of confederation. According to Alberta Treasury estimates, every man, woman and child paid a net fee of $2,905 for the privilege of being Canadian in 2000. For a family of four, that amounts to $11,620. The federal government has taken almost $200 billion out of Alberta in the last 30 years. Not that the Liberals are grateful–Prime Minister Chretien says the province needs “tough love.” Well, push has come to shove, and a group of six prominent citizens has declared that Alberta is no longer content to be the cow milked by Ottawa to feed Quebec and Atlantic Canada.

The six–Stephen Harper, president of the National Citizens’ Coalition (NCC); Tom Flanagan, University of Calgary political science professor; Ken Boessenkool, former policy adviser to former treasurer Stockwell Day; Ted Morton, University of Calgary political science professor and Alberta senator-elect; Andrew Crooks, chairman of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation; and Rainer Knopff, University of Calgary political science professor–published an open letter to Premier Ralph Klein on January 24: “Re: The Alberta Agenda.” It is nothing less than the opening salvo in a campaign to make Albertans “masters in their own house.” (The full text is available by clicking here.)

The letter begins, “During and since the recent federal election, we have been among a large number of Albertans discussing the future of our province. We were not dismayed by the outcome of the election so much as by the strategy employed by the federal government to secure its re-election. In our view, the Chretien government undertook a series of attacks not merely designed to defeat its partisan opponents, but to marginalize Alberta and Albertans within Canada’s political system.”

During the campaign, Mr. Chretien said he preferred working with easterners because westerners are “different.” Immigration Minister Elinor Caplan said that Canadian Alliance supporters–i.e., a majority of Albertans and British Columbians–are “Holocaust deniers, prominent bigots and racists.” A Liberal attack ad implied falsely that Alberta’s Bill 11 had gutted medicare and that the Alliance planned to do the same nationwide. The Gang of Six may not have been dismayed by the election result, but many in the West concluded that it proved the East would never accept a western-led political party. The result has been a swelling feeling of rage and the rebirth of western separatism. (See story, page 15.) The rage intensified after Mr. Chretien’s post-election comments that Albertans could thank Ottawa for their prosperity and that Albertans, like Quebeckers, needed an emissary from Ottawa to correct their bad attitude.

The Gang of Six does not advocate secession. In a December 8 piece in the National Post, Mr. Harper argued, “We should not mimic Quebec by lunging from rejection into the arms of an argument about separation. As that province has shown, separation will simply divide our population in a symbolic debate while, still part of the country, it isolates us from any allies.” The Alberta Agenda proposes a middle course between separation and the status quo: “the exercise of all our legitimate provincial jurisdictions under the Constitution of Canada.”

Specifically, it calls for the Alberta government to:

“Withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan to create an Alberta Pension Plan offering the same benefits at lower cost while giving Alberta control over the investment fund.”

“Collect our own revenue from personal income tax, as we already do for corporate income tax.”

“Start preparing to let the contract with the RCMP run out in 2012 and create an Alberta provincial police force.”

“Resume provincial responsibility for healthcare policy. If Ottawa objects to provincial policy, fight in the courts. If we lose, we can afford the financial penalties Ottawa might try to impose under the Canada Health Act.”

“Use Section 88 of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Quebec Secession Reference to force Senate reform back on to the national agenda.”

The first three conditions already exist in Quebec. Collecting personal income tax would not save money but would allow Alberta to create a provincial tax tailored exactly to its specifications. Creation of a provincial police force would not save money either, but it would protect Alberta from the depredations of federal laws such as Bill C-68, the gun registry. Opting out of the Canada Health Act would cost up to $700 million, quite feasible for a province that is reporting a surplus of $7 billion.

The letter urged Mr. Klein to build “firewalls” around Alberta, warning, “As economic slowdown, and perhaps even recession, threatens North America, the government in Ottawa will be tempted to take advantage of Alberta’s prosperity, to redistribute income from Alberta to residents of other provinces in order to keep itself in power.” In other words, a new National Energy Program or an even more aggressive transfers policy.

Mr. Klein responded at a January 29 news conference that the Alberta Agenda is “worthy of consideration.” He added, however, “Those are major policy changes and they just don’t happen overnight.” He admitted, “It is quite obvious that we do more than our fair share in terms of sending money to Ottawa to assist through the equalization program the so-called have-not provinces,” he said. This was quite a change from the position he took last year after then-Newfoundland premier Brian Tobin accused him of resenting equalization payments to the have-nots. Then Mr. Klein insisted that Albertans were “caring” and “sharing.” Now the premier’s office has released details of unfair treatment by Ottawa.

Eastern reaction to the Alberta Agenda was contemptuous. Typical was Toronto Star columnist Richard Gwyn, who, like Mr. Chretien, considers Alberta and Quebec morally equivalent. He characterized western alienation as a “non-starter,” and “somewhere between adolescent attention-getting and a way of getting through the long winters” and the open letter as an “intellectually bankrupt search for outside enemies.”

A non-starter? Not according to a January 29 Compas poll, which revealed that Alberta is more alienated than Quebec. Only 7% of Albertans supported separation (37% in Quebec); but 47% supported a constitutional limit on equalization; 75% said they have little say in federal spending decisions (62% in Quebec); and 43% said they are more dissatisfied with Canada than five years ago (38% in Quebec).

Robert Mansell, the man who has done more than anyone to demonstrate how much more Alberta pays into Canada than it gets back, says he does not extrapolate any political opinions from his data. But the University of Calgary economics professor is passionate in his denunciation of the attempt to equate Alberta with Quebec. “Studies have consistently shown that if Canada broke up, Alberta would gain and Quebec would lose,” he points out. (According to Statistics Canada, Quebec got $5.9 billion more than it paid out in 1998, a per capita benefit of $797. Other winners were Saskatchewan ($1,657 per capita), Manitoba ($2,288), New Brunswick ($3,607), Nova Scotia ($4,382), Prince Edward Island ($4,774) and Newfoundland ($5,982). Other losers were British Columbia (-$564) and Ontario (-$1,559).)

“Every place where there’s the possibility of rigging [the system] so you get as much out of Alberta on a net basis as you can, that’s what Ottawa does,” Prof. Mansell says. “Employment Insurance takes a massive amount out of Alberta. In discretionary federal spending Alberta (and B.C.) get screwed. When they reduced the tax for large corporations everybody got the benefit except the energy sector–Alberta is getting screwed again. How is it that Ontario has a higher per capita income and four times the population, yet Alberta ends up paying far more?”

To the argument that the current have-not eastern provinces bailed out the West during the 1930s, Prof. Mansell responds, “Yeah, right. Prior to the 1960s there were very few of these federal transfers. So what are they talking about? Some charity that may have happened, with no records, during the Depression? That’s very nice, but how does it compare with the almost $200 billion in net outflows [from Alberta] over the last 30 years?”

Mr. Harper says that according to central Canada, “The proof that Alberta contributes more is proof that Alberta has money that it shouldn’t have in the first place. Every benefit that Alberta has is attributed to the fact that Alberta has oil.” He counters, “Alberta has the wealth it has because of what it has done with its resources. Saskatchewan has an abundant resource base and has managed to take that and turn itself into not just a have-not province but one with no long-term prospects of growth whatsoever through a long-term series of government polices that drove industry after industry out and replaced them with incompetent crown corporations.”

“The reaction to our letter validates everything in it,” Mr. Harper declares. “I think to some degree the central Canadian Liberal establishment is frightened by what we’re saying. They must try and denounce the debate itself because they have no reply.” He concludes, “Confederation is not about sharing with this part of the country; Confederation is about taking. If it was necessary for the flow to go the other way, the system would break down.”

Tom Flanagan agrees. “I’ve increasingly become aware that the structure of Confederation has become a kleptocracy,” he says. “What is the federal government doing for us? Is it protecting us from the Russians? No, the Americans defend us. Does it provide a stable currency? No, we have a 66-cent dollar. It’s become intrinsic to the system that governments stay in power by transferring money from some parts of the country to other parts of the country in order to buy votes.”

This is not a new opinion. The Reform Party was founded precisely to fight this inequity. And three of the Gang of Six have been intimately involved with Reform: Mr. Harper was an MP, Prof. Flanagan was policy director and Prof. Morton is a Reform Party senator-elect. So does their decision to concentrate on provincial politics constitute an acknowledgement that Reform and its successor, the Canadian Alliance, have failed?

Prof. Flanagan responds, “Well, the [open letter] represents a realistic appraisal of the Alliance’s chances of coming to power. I don’t think it represents loss of support for the Alliance; I certainly continue to support it. But you’d have to be a moron not to see that the chances of the Alliance winning soon are not very great. But this isn’t really abandoning federal politics; it’s opening another front.”

Mr. Harper warned in his December National Post piece, “Separation will become a real issue the day the federal government decides to make it one.” Prof. Flanagan declines to comment on whether Alberta should threaten separation if Ottawa refuses to reform the equalization system or acts to frustrate the Alberta Agenda. He says it would be unrealistic to expect much from Premier Klein, as his re-election campaign was fully planned before the letter was released. However, “Mr. Klein is driven very much by public opinion. If he starts to hear Albertans say these things, he might move. But Mr. Klein won’t be around forever. Most people think this might be his last term.”

NCC president Harper reports, “At the National Citizens’ Coalition we are determined to establish an organization after the election to take direct political action in Alberta. It will have ambitious goals. I can’t elaborate; it won’t be a political party, but it will be a party to mobilize Albertans behind this agenda.”

So does Steve Harper aspire to succeed Ralph Klein? “They’re definitely up to something,” says Lethbridge Community College political science teacher Faron Ellis. “And I think the easiest option would be to take over the Conservative party in a post-Ralph era. It will take a major housecleaning, but the party will need that.”

The Reform Party had a “sunset clause” in its constitution. If Reform did not take power by 2000, the party would re-examine the reasons for its existence. Reform became the Alliance, but many Reformers took the clause to mean dissolution, and Prof. Ellis argues that the rise of Alberta particularism indicates that for many Alberta Reformers the sunset clause has kicked in. “The Alliance is not really a party anymore,” he argues. “It’s just a series of factions. Supporters are drifting off to separatism; some are drifting off to non-involvement, some, like Flanagan and Harper, have given up and are focusing on provincial politics.” Stockwell Day has recently given two major addresses on Western alienation, but they have largely been ignored. Attention has been paid instead to the continuing Alliance leadership crisis, the embarrassment of Mr. Day’s $800,000 legal bill in the Goddard case and MP Deb Grey’s decision to buy into the “gold-plated” MP pension plan she so long reviled.

Even before the 2000 election, many Reform/Alliance members were heard to say that it would be the last chance they would give Canada. Edmonton Journal columnist Lorne Gunter says, “In talking to people about the Harper project or people who went to the Alberta Independence Party convention, there is clearly an undercurrent that we watered down everything we believed in to get this Alliance, and it was rejected as much as Reform was. I had not fully understood until the fallout from the campaign just how pronounced was the anti-western sentiment in the East.” Mr. Gunter, a long-time advocate of the contents of the Alberta Agenda, describes it as “the next logical step, perhaps the last step to preserve Confederation.” He adds that he is not a separatist yet, but in light of the outright “bigotry” displayed by the Liberals and the Canadian establishment during the election, “we may be coming to the point where we have two incompatible visions of Canada: one held by the majority in Ontario, Quebec and the Atlantic provinces and another held by the West. If this happens, western separation may occur quickly.”

Back to square one
Nineteen years ago this month Gordon Kesler of the Western Canada Concept (WCC) was elected to the Alberta Legislature in a by-election in Olds-Didsbury. Suddenly, western alienation was a real threat to the establishment. It did not last long. By the end of the year, Mr. Kesler was out of office. And by 1987, western alienation had been subsumed into the nascent Reform Party.

In 1980, the newly re-elected Pierre Trudeau announced the National Energy Program (NEP). This, in the words of Victoria lawyer Doug Christie, “effectively expropriated western Canada’s oil resources.” It was a declaration of war.

The NEP “destroyed thousand and thousand of jobs,” says Edmonton lawyer Bob Matheson. “It virtually destroyed me. I had spent 30 years building up my position as a lawyer acting for the oil and gas industry. My practice was devastated. Property values plummeted, and I’ve never gotten back to where I was then.”

Ironically, Mr. Matheson had been exploring western independence since 1975, when he and others established the Independent Alberta Association. That year Mr. Christie wrote a famous letter to the Victoria Times Colonist. In 1978, he formed the Committee for Western Independence, which in 1980 became the Western Canada Concept.

Rage against the NEP was so pervasive that Mr. Christie was able to pack auditoriums across the West, including, memorably, the Jubilee Auditoriums in Edmonton and Calgary in November 1980. The WCC was registered as a political party in Alberta the next year, but Mr. Christie lost control of it after the chief electoral officer ruled that a British Columbian could not head an Alberta party.

By this time Mr. Matheson had helped form WestFed, which, unlike the WCC, did not take a hard line on separatism. It was led by the colourful Elmer Knutson, who went on to form the Confederation of Regions Party, which later achieved some success in, remarkably, New Brunswick. The NEP had provided the impetus for separation, but the movement was bedevilled by rivalry and factionalism. After Mr. Kesler was elected in February 1980 he took control of the party and led it to a “separation if necessary but not necessarily separation” position.

Premier Peter Lougheed moved quickly to crush the movement. His leading role in the 1982 constitutional talks and his unrelenting fight to defend natural resources as a provincial jurisdiction persuaded Albertans that the Conservative party was Alberta’s best defence against Ottawa. In the 1982 provincial election, his last, he won an overwhelming victory. Mr. Kesler, now running in a different riding, was defeated. According to Lethbridge Community College political science instructor Faron Ellis, “Albertans decided to put all their eggs in one basket.”

The Alberta WCC mutated into different parties. Mr. Christie soldiered on. Mr. Matheson directed his energies to the federal scene and dreamed of a western party that could hold the balance of power in the House of Commons. “Before the Western Assembly in 1987,” he says, “Preston Manning got in touch with me and said he wanted voices from all these different organizations. When I went to the Assembly, I saw how well it had been organized and the support it had from people who could finance it. I said, ‘This is going to work.'” He threw in his lot with the Reform Party, as did many other separatists.

Mr. Christie says, “The Reform Party had the momentum. It was going to save Canada. I watched as many of our members joined it. But I always thought that over time people would realize that Ontario and Quebec have the power, and they are not going to surrender it.”

The Reform Party begat the Canadian Alliance. The 2000 election proved to many that eastern Canada would never support a western-led party. The western separatist movement has come full circle.

Send them a message
A Compas poll revealed last week that only 37% of Quebeckers favour separation. In Alberta, support stood at 7%. The difference between the provinces is that until last month Albertans did not know they had a separatist movement.

The Alberta Independence Party (AIP) held its founding convention in Red Deer January 21 and 22. If the first test of a new party is to get noticed, the AIP passed with flying colours. About 250 attended, including such observers as Canadian Alliance MPs Daryl Stinson and Myron Thompson and CA senators-in-waiting Bert Brown and Ted Morton. Mr. Brown spoke to the crowd and wished the party “every success.” Then the recriminations began.

Prime Minister Chretien suggested the two CA MPs were “traitors.” Mr. Thompson dared Mr. Chretien to make that accusation to his face. “Tough Love” Minister Stéphane Dion attacked CA leader Stockwell Day for not rebuking MPs Stinson and Thompson: “It’s a mistake, a moral mistake to blackmail your fellow citizens with separatist blackmail. You should say to them, ‘You don’t have a case.'” Suddenly Alberta separatism was more lively than at any time since the halcyon year of 1982. Pretty good work for a previously unknown 29-year-old Calgarian named Cory Morgan.

Mr. Morgan, an oil field surveyor and native Albertan, is AIP’s interim leader. He is a former Reform activist. He co-created the AIP Web site (www.albertaindependence.com) in the fall of 1998. “I had come to the conclusion that the Reform Party would end up stalemated,” he explains. He says of the Alliance, “Lots of people put their last hopes into it, but after the virtual lack of change [in the federal election], people have come to the conclusion that change is not going to happen on the federal front.”

Mr. Morgan says he became a separatist because “I feel strongly that we need some major changes in Alberta’s role in Confederation.” He rejected the Alberta Conservatives because “one of Ralph Klein’s biggest weaknesses has been when it comes to negotiating with Ottawa. He doesn’t want to rock the boat. We want change, big change.”

AIP’s goals are “pursuing provincial autonomy for Albertans,” “protecting the individual rights of Albertans,” “the preservation of western culture,” “direct democracy involving referenda and citizen’s initiatives,” “resisting the further centralization of power by Ottawa,” “maintaining the social standards which the majority of Albertans want” and “the reduction of oversized government and overspending.” It has much in common with the Alberta Agenda advocated by Stephen Harper’s Gang of Six.

But is Mr. Morgan really a separatist? At the convention, AIP voted for separation if necessary. He explains, “It’s not the explicit goal of the party right now, but it is a very possible contingency, not just a threat. We are saying that if we don’t get a new deal, separation is going to be the only alternative left to us. We do see separation as more attractive than the status quo.”

Mr. Morgan reports that AIP has “hundreds” of members, mostly in the north and south, with few in Edmonton and a “surprising” number in Calgary. The Web site is getting over 1,000 hits a day. His priority now is to get the 5,400 signatures necessary to register the party in time for what is expected to be a provincial election in March. If that is done, he admits, “We’ll have to be realistic and run probably just a half-dozen or maybe a few more candidates.” It has been rumoured that former Alliance MP Cliff Breitkreuz was going to run for the new party. He responds, “I was just requesting some information, but I’ll let you know if anything develops.”

Lethbridge Community College political science professor Faron Ellis says he has talked with Mr. Morgan and other party leaders. He reports, “They’re young, energetic, enthusiastic and have all the pluses and minuses associated with that.” He argues they should consider separation a “20-year program” and commends AIP for its “prudence” in rejecting a hard line on separation.

True separatists do not need a platform, but those that stop short of the final step do. That being the case, Albertans are not likely to vote for a government consisting of political neophytes. Prof. Ellis says, “I had to give them a lesson on the constitution. They were reading it to say that since the provinces have responsibility for direct taxation, this means the federal government cannot levy direct taxation. This was an indication of their naïveté.”

Western Canada Concept (www.westcan.org) founder and leader Doug Christie of Victoria of comments, “There are many people who would like to find a trick solution to the problems of being a western Canadian. They are dreaming. These are political problems created by our own apathy and lack of will.” In his opinion, a hard line is essential: “People who start off from a position of compromise are weak and doomed to failure.”

Edmonton Journal columnist Lorne Gunter says bluntly that the main difficulty any Alberta separatist party has is that “this province is running a $7-billion surplus.” But Prof. Ellis insists that conditions are more propitious for separatism now than in the 1980s. “Canadian patriotism is not what it was. It is especially weakest among the late baby boomers, Generation-Xers and the echo boomers. And globalism has resulted in a situation where the younger you are the more likely you are to consider yourself a citizen of North America. Chretien still represents the ’60s vision. Secessionists are more likely now to be looking outward than inward. And Albertans have had 20 years to try the alternatives, Reform and the Alliance, and they’ve failed. The colonial tax, the two-dollars-out for every-dollar-in price that Albertans pay to be in Canada can no more be justified than rape.”

continue reading source: http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1920


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/