Creating a Culture of Fear in the Public Service

If you had to choose one word to describe how Stephen Harper runs his government, it would be a toss up between control and fear, though both go hand in hand.

His tight fisted control creates a culture of fear, and he uses his PMO to keep everyone in his government afraid.

Dean Del Mastro says that he even has to select his ties with care because if he wears one that goes against the image that the PMO were hoping to create that day, he'll end up on the hot seat. (Harperland, Lawrence Martin, 2010)

Those on the Hill say that even with a majority, Harper has not loosened the shackles.

We learned recently that Tony Clement is joining the fear to keep people in line team, as he looks to cut government spending.  Just don't touch the PMO, with the largest communications staff in the history of the country.

Their next press release could have his name on it, next to the word 'demoted'.

The government has hired an accounting firm to determine where they can cut funding, costing us $90,000 a day.  This reminds me of John Baird when he was in the Ontario Mike Harris government.  He hired Enron's accounting firm to do the same thing.

They were successful, finding savings of $89.5 million.  The only problem was that Ontario taxpayers were handed a bill for $193 million for their "cost cutting" services.  Most of the $90 million was at the expense of welfare recipients who saw their benefits slashed, while others were simply cut from the rolls. (Anderson Consulting and Accenture, Polaris Institute, June 2003)

From social welfare to corporate welfare.

Anderson Consulting changed its name to Accenture when the Enron scandal hit, but not the way they did business.  To make sure they didn't lose the contract, they contributed $30,000 to the Harris team.  ( Tory Welfare Donations Under Fire,  Hamilton Spectator, October 25, 2001; "Consulting Firm Boosts PC Coffers, Richard Brennan, Toronto Star, October 25th, 2001)

They became the gift that kept on taking.

So when Tony Clement claims to be hiring private firms to "save" us money, I'm not buying it.  Clement was also in the Harris government.

However, even worse than possible palm greasing, there is also a cash bonus being offered to managers who can find ways to save money.  The bigger the cut, the larger the bonus.

What a horrible workplace atmosphere that this creates.  Your boss could be making money off your demise.

The union is standing up for the workers, and we must support them.  We've seen how several U.S. states have suspended, or attempted to suspend bargaining rights, and there is a potential for similar legislation here, that could affect everyone.

Even those who don't belong to a union, could find themselves out of work, because lower wages across the board, means less disposable income, and less disposable income, creates a trigger effect.

This could be a disaster in the making.

Despite Evictions and Arrests, Occupy Wall Street Message is Getting Through

The actions of those in the Civil Rights Movement were not always supported by the majority of Americans, especially the violence.  But the messages presented at the sit-ins and marches did begin to resonate.

However, what probably helped the movement the most, was the response of segregationists like George Wallace.   "In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny, and I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever". 

His confrontations with students played out like a Klan lynching, and Americans noticed, overwhelmingly supporting an end to segregation, and discrimination that defined where blacks could live, work and be educated.

As "Occupiers" in the anti-Wall Street movement are being evicted, many citizens are applauding the police crack down.  But the message of inequality is sinking in, being helped by the parallel universe of the Republican debates.  We know that there are many people hurting, victims of not only the "economic crisis", when the rich got even richer, but of a concerted effort to remove the public from public policy.

The message presented by the GOP hopefuls, is that poor people should be allowed to starve, sick people without medical insurance, allowed to die, and if you're unemployed, you're just lazy.  The same message they've been spouting for fifty years.

The right wing noise machine has monopolized the political conversation for too long, and people are beginning to tune out.

In Mississippi, voters rejected a measure that would have defined a fertilized egg as a person, even though pro-life groups poured a lot of money into getting it passed.  They were hoping that this would set a precedent, and help a larger bill, the Sanctity of Life Act, sponsored by Georgia Republican Rep. Paul ‘When Will Someone Shoot Obama’ Broun. If they can't get it passed in Mississippi, there's hope.

In Ohio, an anti-union bill that was signed into law earlier this year, was repealed by voters with a 23 point margin. 

Regardless of the margin, last night was historic as no Governor of Ohio has ever seen voters repeal any portion of their agenda within the first year in office. First, the ability of anyone to pull off a referendum so early in a new Governor’s term is itself incredibly rare. Second, this is the only time it worked. 

A grassroots group called We Are Ohio, need to be commended. They were discredited at every turn, called communists and traitors, but they never quit.

Canadian unions are challenging Tony Clement's budget cuts, and we need to back them up.  In Ohio, Democrats and Republicans worked together.  This is not a partisan issue but a We are Canada one.

Maine reinstated same day voter registration after the Republicans tried to make it more difficult to vote.  Russel Pearce, the architect of Arizona’s racist profiling law, just got voted out of office, in an historic recall and the state of Delaware is suing Wall Street for questionable mortgage practices.

You don't have to live in a park and pee in a porta-potty, to know that what is happening is wrong.  The Occupy Wall Street group has struck a nerve and the ridiculous Republican presidential hopefuls, a shot of common sense and common decency, sorely lacking in the GOP.  They represent everything that is wrong with the Conservative movement.  It is pure evil.

We SHALL Overcome.

Tony Clement and the Crime of the New Century

As Tony Clement sits in stony silence, like a petulant child, refusing to admit he was the one who stole the cookie, despite the crumbs on his face; others are having to defend the indefensible.

The 50 million dollars that was misappropriated and spent lavishly in his riding with little or no oversight.

Many of the projects were questionable, though John Baird claims to have approved everyone of them, and that everyone of them is backed up with the proper paperwork.

Nonetheless, a receipted lighthouse on a stump, is still just a lighthouse on a stump.

Not to diminish the veritable theft of taxpayers money, there is a more serious crime here that should not go unpunished.  This is the crime committed against the people of Parry Sound - Muskoka.  The ones that Tony Clement is supposed to be representing, and whose interests should be his concern.

The area's picturesque shorelines, captivating scenery and tranquil settings, provide a backdrop for one of the poorest regions in the country.

The District of Parry Sound Poverty Reduction Network, addresses issues that are in direct contrast to the extravagant lifestyles of the often  famous summer residents.

And as is often the case, in an economic downturn, those already suffering are further victimized by cuts to essential services.  Even those working full time often "cannot meet basic costs of safe shelter and healthy food".   And while housing costs in the area are comparable to many larger urban centres, the salaries are not.  Most work is seasonal, in the hospitality sector, serving the needs of the summer well to dos.

Yet the money spent by Clement went to the benefit of the temporary residents, not to those struggling to survive year round. 

How easy will it be for them to acquire additional funding, when they've already blown the bank on things that only favor an elite few?

What good is an expensive new sign to a parent out of work and out of options?  A gazebo to a family unable to secure adequate housing?  Or a paved road to nowhere, that could have at least been built to provide a more comfortable trip to the nearest food bank.

I spoke with Tami Boudreau of the DPSPRN, and she described the many hardships facing the people in her area.  But she also spoke of their enormous generosity and strength of character.  The anguish in her voice was palpable as she related the frustrations of trying to help so many with so little.

Boudreau is a "transplant" to Parry Sound-Muskoka, but you'd never know it.  Her soul is there.

The DPSPRN, has a website, where you can download a copy of  The District of Parry Sound Speaks Out on Poverty: A Call to Action.

The site is currently down for renovation, but I'm told will be up and running again soon.  Boudreau sent me a copy of their report and it's absolutely heartbreaking, making Clement's actions all the more appalling.

Watching him and Baird together, promising to do better and taking the report of the Auditor General under advisement, is deja vu for Ontario residents.  A similar scene played out when they were in the government of Mike Harris, and again the money was stolen from those who had so little of it.

When John Baird tried to privatize social services, money flowed to Anderson Consulting, the firm that destroyed Enron.  After they were exposed, Anderson quickly changed their name to Accenture, but their questionable actions in the name of profit continued.

In Ontario the money fell out of the holes in the pockets of those who needed it, and landed right in the pockets of the Valentino suits, of those who didn't.

For the third time since 1998, Ontario's provincial auditor has sharply criticized the government's dealings with Accenture. Auditor Erik Peters called the firm's social assistance system "seriously flawed" and "a bad deal for taxpayers." The contract has cost more than $400 million - and counting. The original cost was supposed to be capped at $180 million. Peters called payments to Accenture "questionable" because savings on which the payments were based "were exaggerated."  (1)

Yet those on social assistance were deemed to be the criminals.  Government posters sought help in tracking down "welfare fraud", and neighbours were encouraged to turn in neighbours.  Even the staff at social services were suspect, creating even bigger profits for Anderson/Accenture.

In early March 2000, the Ontario government fitted social services workers with tracking devices in a 16- week trial to track their activities virtually every minute of every day. These "Big Brotherish" boxes, the brainchild of Accenture, would beep several times every hour, and workers would have to punch in a code to indicate what they were doing at that moment. (1)

How could they possibly find the time to help those seeking help?

Under the Ontario Government's Business Transformation Project (privatizing of services), Auditor Erik Peters revealed that:

... the cost ratio of having Accenture do the work rather than public servants was 6 to 1 and that in 2000 the Province realized savings of $89.5 million [much of this from the continued gutting of access to welfare payments], but the government had paid Accenture $193 million. This statement of the Auditor General was part of a larger condemnation of the Tory government's overuse of private consultants throughout its Departments. (2)

(Some things never change).

The Harris government created no less than 800 new rules for welfare recipients, cutting thousands from its ranks.  Yet not only did Accenture keep the $89.5 million that should have gone to the disadvantaged, but charged us an additional $103.5 million to do it.

Peters noted that many of the expenditures were not only "questionable and unnecessary" but were "unreceipted".  He also complained of how slow it was for the Harris government to address the alarming situation, including the issue of the expensive computer that Accenture sold to us, that never worked. (3)

Of course, addressing these issues might have stopped the flow of money from Accenture to the Conservative re-election campaign. ("Tory Welfare Donations Under Fire", Hamilton Spectator,  October 25, 2001 and "Consulting Firm Boosts PC Coffers",  Richard Brennan, Toronto Star, October 25th, 2001)  Couldn't have that.

So just as Baird ignored the Auditor's report then, he will ignore the Auditor General's report now.

I'm glad that Charlie Angus is on top this, (though it was the NDP who blocked the release of the report before the election).  He knows how these guys operate.

He helped to expose a similar scandal involving a land deal with Adams Mine/Cortellucci Group.  Tony Clement was involved with that one as well, netting $40,000 from Cortellucci for his provincial leadership bid.  Jim Flaherty was paid $47,000.

Tim Hudak sat in the Ontario Legislature at the time, so is well aware of what "cronyism" really looks like.  He is promising to once again get tough on "welfare fraud", from the bottom, not the top, where it is actually perpetrated.

There is no honour in being poor, and most would prefer not to wear the label.  However, the real shame is in being someone in a position to help, but instead choose to simply add to the misery.

No, this scandal will not destroy the people of Parry Sound - Muskoka, but they have been victimized just the same, with the added burden of being labelled "greedy".

They didn't ask for the extravagance, but are paying for it in the worst possible way.

Sources:

1. ACCENTURE: A snapshot of cost overruns job loss and dissatisfaction, CUPE, June 24, 2003

2. Anderson Consulting and Accenture, Polaris Institute, June 2003

3. Tories ignored computer warnings, By Trish Hennessey and Peter H. Sawchuk, University of Toronto Press, July 13, 2004

The Canadian Manifesto 11: God, Guns and Gays

Throughout the 1990s, especially the early years, the Canadian Reform Party and the American Republican Party were forging ties, that have proven to be lasting.

They share policies, initiatives, staff, and even financing.

One name that comes up often is Morton Blackwell, founder of the Washington based Leadership Institute, where young conservatives are trained in the art of political guerrilla warfare.  Karl Rove, Grover Norquist and Ralph Reed are all graduates of his program.

Blackwell was co-founder of the Moral Majority, and was Ronald Reagan's liaison with the Religious Right.  He once claimed that the Evangelical community was "the greatest tract of virgin timber on the political landscape."

It was Blackwell who invited Stephen Harper to speak at the Montreal conference of the Council for National Policy, an organization where foreign affairs and religion are mixed, and made to fit the Old Testament.  In other words, they promote perpetual war.

Blackwell was also called upon by Preston Manning to help him establish a Canadian branch of the Leadership Institute, giving birth to the Manning Centre For Building Democracy.  A dubious title for a training centre that teaches the art of undermining democracy.

His U.S. counterpart was more than happy to help out, saying that he offers his services for free, to any groups "trying to be conservative in the U.S. sense of the word". (1)

About God's Love of Guns

One of the advisers at the Leadership Institute is James Inhofe, the Republican senator from Oklahoma.  In 1994, the Republicans were determined to sweep the mid-term election, so pulled out all the stops.  Frank Luntz left the Reform Party and helped to draft the Contract With America, while Republican leader Newt Gingrich, studied Preston Manning's anti-government campaigning

The Evangelical army that had put Ronald Reagan on the throne, were once again mobilized for action and every right-wing group in the country was on speed dial.

But perhaps the most important factor in the success of the Republicans then, was when they put a gun in God's hands and changed the profile of a religious activist, from one wanting to do what was right, to one so filled with hatred that it now consumes them.

Because 1994 was the year when the National Rifle Association found a loophole in the election financing laws, and began to interfere in the democratic process.  They spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to target Democrats who supported gun control, in particular, the Brady Act.

One campaign that was fought with NRA ammo was that of Inhofe, who was running against the incumbent Dave McCurdy.  With graduates from the Leadership Institute, including our own Rob Anders, McCurdy was shell shocked.

The NRA’s PAC spent more than $150,000 in independent expenditures to run television and newspaper advertisements and put up billboards denouncing McCurdy in addition to the $9,900 it gave directly to Inhofe, just under the maximum $10,000 allowable under FEC regulations. The NRA also spent thousands of dollars more urging its Oklahoma members to turn out for Inhofe. It was an all-out attack that turned the tide against McCurdy. (2)

Inhofe ran on a campaign of 'God, Guns and Gays', a slogan later borrowed by the Republican National Committee.  However, most NRA sponsored ads did not mention guns at all.  In one TV spot, they showed McCurdy at a distance and then zoomed in to reveal that he was wearing an Aids ribbon.

The same kind of gunfight took place across the country, as the NRA took up the cause for Republican hopefuls.  Christine Todd Whitman, the woman who loaned out her Common Sense Revolution to Mike Harris in Ontario,  garnered $ 200,000 in free ads.

Recognizing a good thing when they saw it, Harris's team then sent a letter to the Canadian branch of the NRA, the National Firearms Association, promising to do what he could to kill Bill C-68, and the Gun Registry.  The NFA published the letter as an encouragement for their members to get out and vote.

This was not the organization's only foray into conservative politics.  They had been active supporters of the Reform Party, and made a huge impact in 1997, when Reform became the official opposition.  According to the book Rebuilding Canadian Party Politics:

During the campaign, the NFA's political clout was put at the disposal of the Reform Party. In a memo to supporters, NFA president David Tomlinson noted that the only party offering a "trustworthy promise of an immediate turn toward dumping the Liberal game plan, revoking Bill C-68 and bringing in a completely tweeked firearms control system that will ... favor our firearms community is the Reform Party." Using images of war and battle, Tomlinson exhorted any member who was not a political activist to "get off your butt and become one".

During the 1997 election, signs bearing the somewhat ambiguous message "Remember Bill C-68 When You Vote" were a common sight in rural areas where gun ownership is concentrated. Part of the National Firearms Association's (NFA) extensive and ambitious campaign to defeat the Liberal government and the gun-control legislation it had supported. These signs signalled widespread discontent over firearms legislation in parts of the country.

He [Tomlinson]called on NFA supporters to work for, donate money, goods and services to, and promote the Reform Party". Tomlinson himself was president of a Reform Party constituency association in Edmonton. NFA activists apparently heeded Tomlinsons call. Messages posted on the organization's website throughout the election reflected considerable involvement in Reform campaigns,. Activists compared notes about the travails of keeping Reform signs in place, boasted about their campaign activity and contributions, and called for volunteers to help at local Reform offices.(3)

The New Right movement has many "signals" and according to David Kuo, the term "believers' is assigned to anyone believing in three things: the end of abortion, the end of gay rights, and the right to carry a gun. In an oped piece Harper wrote in 1995, he claimed that Reform was about "Gays, Guns and Government Grants".

He was a "believer".

Gun Control is Not a Liberal Issue

In their effort to make everything liberal evil, the New Right has called gun control, besides a feminist plot to destroy their masculinity (honest), a 'liberal folly'.  However, the idea of gun control, was actually a conservative priority.

Richard Nixon once said that "guns are an abomination," and went on to confess that  "Free from fear of gun owners' retaliation at the polls, he favored making handguns illegal and requiring licenses for hunting rifles."

George Bush, Sr. banned the import of "assault weapons" in 1989, and promoted the view that Americans should only be allowed to own weapons suitable for "sporting purposes."

When Ronald Reagan was Governor of California, he signed the Mulford Act in 1967, "prohibiting the carrying of firearms on one's person or in a vehicle, in any public place or on any public street." 

Twenty-four years later, Reagan was still pushing gun control. "I support the Brady Bill," he said in a March 28, 1991 speech, "and I urge the Congress to enact it without further delay." 

After all, the act was put in place because he was shot, and named after the man who died protecting him.

Republican Rudolph Giuliani, former mayor of New York City, actually sued 26 gun manufacturers in June 2000, and his police commissioner, Howard Safir, proposed a nationwide plan for gun licensing, complete with yearly "safety" inspections.

Another Republican, New York State Governor George Pataki, on August 10, 2000, signed into law what The New York Times called "the nation’s strictest gun controls," a radical program mandating trigger locks, background checks at gun shows and "ballistic fingerprinting" of guns sold in the state. It also raised the legal age to buy a handgun to 21 and banned "assault weapons," the sale or possession of which would now be punishable by seven years in prison. (4)

In Canada, the first aggressive gun control, was at the request of then Ontario Conservative Premier William Davis.   After a student opened fire at the school his daughters attended, killing one teacher and injuring 13 students, he sent his attorney general, John Clement, to Ottawa to meet with the Liberal government.

Armed with a petition bearing thousands of names of Brampton residents, demanding better gun control, Clement met with federal Justice Minister Otto Lang and Solicitor General Warren Allmand to review possible amendments to the Criminal code. (5)

Though Clement failed to get re-elected, he is credited with the passing of  Bill C-51 in 1977, that came into affect on January 1, 1978:

The two biggest changes included requirements for Firearms Acquisition Certificates (FACs) and requirements for Firearms and Ammunition Business Permits. Other changes included provisions dealing with new offences, search and seizure powers, increased penalties, and new definitions for prohibited and restricted weapons. Fully automatic weapons became classified as prohibited firearms unless they had been registered as restricted weapons before January 1, 1978. Individuals could no longer carry a restricted weapon to protect property. Mandatory minimum sentences were re-introduced. This time, they were in the form of a 1-14 year consecutive sentence for the actual use (not mere possession) of a firearm to commit an indictable offence. (Wikipedia)

And for the record, John Clement is Tony Clement's stepfather.

Gun control is not a partisan issue.  It is a Canadian issue.

This past election, gun lobbyists were again out in full force.  Mark Holland, former Liberal MP for Ajax-Pickering, was targeted by several groups, including Gun Nutz.  The Conservatives wanted him gone because he had been a vocal supporter of both the Prison Farms and the Gun Registry.

What does it say for the future of our democracy, when those wanting to create a Canadian "Gun Culture", can affect the outcome of an election?  And what does it say for Christianity, when the devout are behind them?

Using Romans 13 that establishes the "boundaries of governments", they are now advocating that we all should be armed.  And they wonder why people are leaving churches in droves.  How is this inspiring to anyone?

The truth of the matter is, that the New Right saw an opportunity for support from gun lobbyists, who are financed by gun manufacturers.  The potential outcome of the end of gun control, is not important.  Only the money and the power.

Conservative insider, Tom Flanagan, said that Stephen Harper wrote the Reform Party gun policy, only stopping short at calling it a right to bear arms.  This has nothing to do with long guns, or farmers, but is to appease those who want bigger and more lethal handguns, and want the right to carry them anywhere.

They claim that the streets will be safer.

If that were the case than the United States would be the safest country in the world.

It's not.

Sources:

1. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8 3, p. 104-105

2. Political Snipers, By Robert Dreyfuss, American Prospect, September 21, 1995

3. Rebuilding Canadian Party Politics, By R. Kenneth Carty, William Paul Cross, Lisa Young, UBC Press, 2000, ISBN: 978 0774 807784, p. 99-100

4. Don't Blame the Liberals for Gun Control, by Richard Poe, Studies in Reformed Theology, Volume 11, 2001

5.  Another School Shooting, Thoughts From up Here, March 22, 2005

First We Take New Jersey ... Then On-tar-i-o! Tim Hudak's New Theme Song?

Martin Regg Cohn had an excellent column in the Star on Monday: Hudak’s taking Ontarians for a ride.

In it he questions the logistics of the Ontario Conservative's Changebook Platform. I perused that and it reminded me of another questionable platform. That of Mike Harris's Common Sense Revolution.

For Ontarians with short memories or those not biting their nails to the quick and developing a nervous tremor at the mention of Mike Harris, maybe it's time for a little history lesson.

I don't need to tell you the damage that Harris did to this province, so will instead lay the foundation for the 1995 manifesto, that made no more sense, than the 2011 redux.

So grab a coffee and pull up a chair.

The 'Long' and the Short of it

One of the engineers of Ontario's so-called Common Sense Revolution, was Tom Long, former president of the Ontario Conservative party.  Long had worked on the campaign of Ronald Reagan and returned to his home and native land, to practice his recently acquired neoconservative skills.

His first big campaign was that of Kim Campbell.  If you're asking yourself Kim who (?), she took over the party leadership of the federal PCs, after Brian Mulroney stepped down, and led them to their disastrous showing in 1993, when they were reduced to two seats and lost official party status. (Soon to be gobbled up by the Reform-Alliance)

With the help of several Tory staffers, including John Baird, who was then working for the Campbell government, Long created several personal attacks on Jean Chrétien, including one making fun of his face (the result of Bell's Palsy), that turned the nation off.

Undaunted, Long then turned his attention to Ontario, while Baird went to work as a lobbyist.

Meanwhile Back in New Jersey

Then governor of New Jersey, Jim Florio, was reeling from a report, revealing that his state contained  five of the ten poorest cities in the United States, while also the home to some of the country's wealthiest citizens.

Access to education was considered to be one of the stumbling blocks for the poor, prompting a Supreme Court judgement, demanding that Florio raise billions in revenue to turn this around.

So he raised the income tax rate on the wealthiest and all hell broke loose.

His future Republican opponent, Christine Todd Whitman, helped to create Republicans for Responsible Government, organizing mass protests against this "Tax and Spend" Democrat.  One of their slogans.  How original.

Whitman, a former classmate of neocon guru, Steve Forbes (he handpicked her to run as Governor), then challenged Florio, running on a platform of "Common Sense".

Meanwhile Back in Ontario

Whitman's platform was drafted by Republican strategist, Mike Murphy, a friend of Tom Long's.  With wounds licked clean from the Campbell trouncing, he visited Murphy to discuss a new strategy for the next provincial election.

Soon after, the National Citizens Coalition, created Ontarians for Responsible Government, a carbon copy of Whitman's 'advocacy for the rich' group.  While Campbell's defeat was devastating for Long, the NCC were actually rejoicing.  They had spent $50,000 on the successful campaign of a newly minted Reform Party MP, who they knew would work for corporate interests.

His name:  Stephen Joseph Harper.

So while OFRG poured $560,000 into attack ads on NDP Premier Bob Rae, the "Whiz Kids" (including Tony Clement and Guy Giorno), also known as the "cut and paste" crew, copied Whitman's platform, which was highlighted by a promised 30% reduction in income tax rates.

In the 1996 Fall edition of Canadian Dimension, there was a piece by Jason Ziedenberg, entitled First, we'll take New Jersey: The real roots of common sense.  In it he says: 

In November, 1993, Tom Long, the former president of the Ontario Tories and manager of the last federal PC's campaign, went down to New Jersey to find out if the first shots in America's Republican revolution could echo up here  ... After organizing Kim Campbell's disastrous campaign, Long needed a good idea to redeem his name as political king-maker. What Long found in New Jersey wasn't a good idea; but he did find the raison d'etre for Canadian neoconservatism in the 1990s.

That November, against the conventional wisdom of American pundits and pollsters, Republican gubernatorial candidate Christine Todd Whitman narrowly defeated Democratic Governor Jim Florio

Few knew that Long and Murphy's friendship would produce Ontario's "made in New Jersey" nightmare. (1)

Monkey See, Monkey Do

Los Angeles Times staff writer, Craig Turner, also wrote of the Ontario/Republican connection, instead comparing Harris to Newt Gingrich.

There is more at work here than the tendency of some Canadians to seek a dark cloud behind every silver lining.  The debate reflects the ongoing controversy over Ontario Premier Mike Harris' political and economic agenda, which reminds many of the approach of the U.S. Republicans, especially House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Harris was elected last June on promises to eliminate the province's burgeoning budget deficit and cut income tax rates by 30%. His enthusiastic budget-slashing--particularly when targeted on the poor, as in a 21.6% reduction in welfare grants--quickly earned him the nickname "Newt of the North," a sobriquet seized on by both admirers and detractors.

Harris' knife has cut a wide swath, leading to $5.88 billion in spending reductions over the next three years. As a result, tuition has risen 15% to 20% at most universities. Dozens of public hospitals are expected to close or consolidate. The cost of prescription medicine in the government-funded health care system is increasing for the elderly. Fares on the Toronto transit system are among the highest on the continent. More than 10,000 of the province's 81,000 government jobs are marked for elimination. (2)

What Turner may not have realized, was that Reform Party leader, Preston Manning, had played a role in Gingrich's 1994 victory.  The same Preston Manning who worked on Harris's campaign, even using their Ontario riding associations to give the budding Neocons a boost.

However, this "Newt of the North" was more of a "Whitman of the North", as he not only copied her platform, but also her actions.   Let's compare.

Back to Ziedenberg:

Whitman has spent the last three years cutting and fudging the state budget of $16 billion (US) to find the $1.2 billion needed to deliver her tax cut. She saved $26 million by robbing 30,000 senior citizens of their subsidized drug benefit plan. Twelve hundred of the state's 60,000 public sector workers were given their pink slips: Of the first 744 people to lose their jobs, 75 per cent of them were women, and 44 per cent were minorities. State aid to most school boards has been frozen. Trenton's Education Law Centre, a New Jersey public interest legal research group, is pressing the state courts to force Whitman to increase aid to poor schools by $400 million to fulfil commitments made by Gov. Florio. But under her tight-fisted, tax-cut induced budget priorities, no one knows where this money could come from. As well, tuition at New Jersey's public universities will rise by between 10 to 30 per cent.  (1)

Whitman introduced "Workfare", calling it "tough love", and holy cow if Harris didn't lap at her heels with his own tough love.

On May 31, 1995; Mike Harris told the Toronto Star "If I don't live up to anything that I have promised to do and committed to do, I will resign."  After promising not to reduce money for healthcare or reduce welfare benefits (page 7 of the Common Sense Revolution), he failed to keep his promise to step down.

Tim Hudak is now telling the Star pretty much the same thing, but how can we believe him?  He's learned from the master.

Canada's Neoconservatives like to think they're so clever, with their "new" ideas.  But there is nothing clever, nothing revolutionary, and nothing "new".  Every word and action comes from their American counterparts, who with the help of the corporate funded Tea Party and demonic Religious Right, have destroyed politics in the United States.

Ah you loved me as a loser, but now you're worried that I just might win

You know the way to stop me, but you don't have the discipline

How many nights I prayed for this, to let my work begin (Leonard Cohen: First we Take Manhattan, Then We'll Take Berlin)

First I took New Jersey.  But not On-tar-i-o (Tim Hudak's Swan Song)

To fellow Leonard Cohen fans, enjoy the video.  It will help take your mind off the rash you're developing, symptom of the Fear of Harris Lapdog Syndrome.  You won't get the song out of your head, but at least the itching will subside.





Sources:

1. First, we'll take New Jersey: The real roots of common sense, By Jason Ziedenberg, The Canadian Dimension, Sept/Oct 1996

2. CANADA : Ontario Gets a Tax Break, By Craig Turner, The Los Angeles Times, May 11, 1996

RCMP Looking Into Misappropiation of Funds Re: G-8 Spending

Several people, including myself, have contacted the RCMP about the $50 million dollars spent in Tony Clement's riding, that was supposed to be for border security and the easing of congestion at crossings.

Stephen Harper's only defense was that they had done it before. He no longer even pretends to be honest.

But Liberal Marlene Jennings has taken the bull by the horn, and we learn today that the RCMP will be investigating the matter.

Just because you steal the money from taxpayers, doesn't make stealing legal, despite what Harper says.

Let's hope the RCMP don't bury this one along with countless other Conservative crimes. We deserve better.

I Stand Corrected on Tony Clement

I'm still unable to leave comments on my blog, or even respond to them, but several of my readers provided some vital insight into Clement's spending orgy.

One dealt with bicycle racks, which are indeed part of infrastructure spending. However, they should have been receipted as such, not funded from a border security/congestion, G-8 summit account. And of course, they should have been "receipted".

Another legitimate dispute was my comment that Clement's riding is one of the richest in the country. I was basing that on the resorts and the cottages of the rich and famous. But Sara said: "Parry Sound-Muskoka is actually one of the poorest ridings in the country. When you look at the people who live here year round (like me) 40% of the families here earn less than $30,000 per year."

Just imagine how $50 million could have helped those people. But now Clement has "used up" all federal funding, putting them at the back of the line ... again!

A third comment that needs is addressing, is my suggestion that if this happened in the in the private sector, Clement could be facing jail time for embezzlement.

But Leslie reminded me of something I should have known, because I've written on it before.

A friend suggested that I read the book Swindlers: Cons and Cheats and How to Protect Your Investments From Them, By Al Rosen and Mark Rosen.

So I did, and what an eye opener.

Something that is getting little (as in NO) media coverage is the fact that Jim Flaherty and Stephen Harper have signed onto a new set of accounting rules, known as the International Financial Reporting Standards, which according to Al Rosen, a forensic accountant who, for 15 years acted as a technical advisor to three Auditor's General of Canada, allows corporations to legally misrepresent their financial picture, to lure unsuspecting investors.

A recent survey revealed that just 42% of Canadian portfolio managers know that Canada is preparing to switch to International Financial Reporting Standards starting in 2011. It’s a good bet that even fewer retail investors are aware of the change, despite the significant impact it will have on investment values. The transition to IFRS represents the biggest upheaval in financial reporting the country has ever seen ....

And for those who feel that this will only affect those with money to invest in stocks, guess again.

This could mean your pension funds being invested in corporations who can now legally lie about the state of their finances and potential growth.

So Leslie is right. Clement would not be facing jail time, because his cohorts have made lying and cheating legal. Just don't lie while holding a single marijuana plant. That will put you behind bars.

I'm doing a separate posting on France's hosting of the summit, another important point.

Thanks guys. My readers are so smart.

We Don't Want an Apology From Tony Clement. We Want an Investigation.

Embezzlement - To take (money, for example) for one's own use in violation of a trust.

Fraud - deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

I watched the news coverage last night on the G-8 spending in Tony Clement's riding. John Wiersema, the acting auditor general, who has worked in the department for 33 years, claimed that he had never seen anything like this.

The Conservatives misappropriated funds and used those funds on cosmetic surgery.

Bike racks, carvings and lighthouses on stumps. All going into one of the wealthiest ridings in the country, without receipts or oversight.

I then watched as NDP Charlie Angus, asked Tony Clement to apologize.

Are you kidding me? Apologize for the theft of almost $50 million dollars? If this had been in the private sector, Clement would not only lose his job, but could also be facing jail time.

What happens if the government steals $100 million? Will they have to write lines?

I will not get caught, I will not get caught, I will not get caught ...

This is fraud boys and girls and demands an investigation. Who got what and how did they spend it? I looked at the crap sprinkled around his riding, and there's no way they can account for $50 million. No way on earth.

This is not just about pork barrelling. This is about missing funds. Our funds. We demand more than a damned apology.

It was nice that in the debate, Thomas Mulcair brought up the Sponsorship scandal. I see the NDP are picking up where they left off, allowing the Conservatives explain away every misdeed, because apparently the Liberals did it first.

Grow up.

I've been doing a lot of research into the sponsorship scandal, that involved no elected officials, unlike this one. I think I'm going to have to publish some of it, because that scandal started with Conservative Brian Mulroney.

However, Mulcair is only further turning people off politics. What must the young people in his caucus think? This is a lot of money and it must be taken seriously.

And yet what do we get from the Conservatives?

John Baird accusing the opposition of engaging in uncivil behaviour, and Stephen Harper arrogantly claiming that they used more misappropriated funds, if Bob Rae had only done his homework.

Openly admitting to being crooked, knowing that they were going to get away with it.

Unbelievable.

Where is the right-wing noise machine? In 1995 the Canadian Taxpayers Federation were all over the sprucing up of Nova Scotia for the impending G-7 summit.

The federal government was wrong to put next month's G-7 summit in Halifax because the city needs too many government-funded fixups, says a national taxpayers' lobby group. The heads of the leading industrialized nations meet in the Nova Scotia capital June 15-17 and the federal, provincial and local governments are spending $8.1 million to spruce it up.

The federal government "should have chosen a location which wouldn't cost that kind of money ... There are conference facilities available, I'm sure, in that part of the world as well as across Canada that could have hosted an event like this without spending several million dollars to upgrade them." (Halifax wrong choice for G-7, By Steve Lambert, Canadian Press Newswire, April 30 1995)

And who was this tax dollar watchdog, quoted in the article?

...said Jason Kenney, spokesman for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, a watchdog group promoting cuts in taxes and government spending.

Never Seen Anything Like It? I Have. Mike Harris all Over Again

Why can't taxpayers press charges against politicians who steal our money?

Tony Clement deliberately misled Parliament, suggesting that he needed money for border security and instead used it for his re-election campaign. And listening to John Baird trying to defend it, is deja vu. These two criminals learned their craft when they stole from the Ontario taxpayers.

Same old, same old.

The big question is, why did the NDP not want this report to be released before the election? Puzzling.

I'll Miss Mario Silva But a Punk Band's Kinda' Cool

One of Canada's newest MPs is NDP Andrew Cash, a former punk band member, whose group included veteran NDP Charlie Angus.

I've been a fan of Angus since the days when he helped to expose the Adams Mine scandal in Ontario, that involved both Tony Clement and Jim Flaherty.

It's unfortunate that Cash's win was at the expense of another progressive, the well educated Mario Silva, but if he's half the MP as Angus, he will do his party and constituents proud.

Stephen Harper Did Not Bring Alberta and Ontario Together. Do Your Homework.

On March 27, 2000, the Canadian Alliance Party was formed. Many mistakenly believe that it was just a reinvention of the Reform Party, but they couldn't be more wrong.

The concept was to bring together all of the neoconservatives in the country, to oust the Liberals, and turn Canada sharply to the right.

This concerted effort helped to unite Mike Harris's government in Ontario, Ralph Klein's in Alberta and of course the Reform Party, primarily from the Western provinces.

Candidates for leader of the new Alliance Party would be selected from the three groups. It was thought that Tony Clement would be a front runner, but he declined, so it eventually came down to three men: Tom Long from Ontario, Stockwell Day from Alberta and Preston Manning from the Reform Party.

Stockwell Day of course won, but failed to lead, so was forced to resign. It was only then that Stephen Harper joined the fray.

So the suggestion after this election victory, that he united Ontario and Alberta is giving credit where none is due. This began more than a decade ago, and the work done by others in the movement.

In 2003, Harper bought out the assets of the Progressive Conservative Party, that folded in December of that year, putting an end to a 150-year-old tradition.

This election was a continuation of work began by others, and part of the broader neoconservative movement. Has anyone else noticed how many new Ontario MPs and candidates were friends of Jim Flaherty's? Even his first cousin.

So if we plan to build a Progressive movement, we need to understand fully, just what we're up against. The Conservative Party of Canada is not merely a political party, but the head of a broader movement that includes not only Canada's neocons, but more alarmingly the U.S. Republicans, the Tea Party, and the Religious Right.



We are really on the cusp here.

Danielle Smith's Wildrose party, created by old Reform Party activists, like Link Byfield, Barry Cooper and Tom Flanagan, has a good chance of ousting Ed Stelmach's progressive Conservatives in Alberta.

Tim Hudak, former caucus member of Mike Harris, and husband of one of his chief operatives, Deb Hutton, is expected to win Ontario. Neocon Rob Ford is already running Toronto.

With a majority Harper will push through his bill to add 30 new ridings that he feels he can win, so unless we start now building a progressive movement, we could be looking at a Neoconservative dynasty.

And the first step is to demand that the media stops calling Harper's party 'Tories'. He himself, claims to hate the term. Canadian conservatism became a battle between [Red] Tories and Republicans. Republicans won, let's move on.

I'm currently working at putting all of my research on the Neoconservative Alliance, into a book and will make it available in PDF format. (I just have to figure out how) I'm at about 100 pages now, and that's just on the 'Alliance'.

Before we can wage a progressive war, we have to know our enemy. Not the contrived notion of a centre right party, but a hard right revolution.

When I'm done I'll post a link on this blog. We must all become Davids to the Neocon Goliath. What's that they say? The bigger they are the harder they fall.

Our task is enormous, but not impossible. Are you in?

Did Harper Take $15 Million From Alberta and Give it to Tony Clement?

This should thrill Albertans. Apparently the Harper government took $15 million earmarked for Alberta and instead funnelled it into Tony Clement's re-election campaign.

“Why did it disappear? It doesn’t just evaporate,” said Boucher, a former RCMP superintendent. “The investigation will prove it. We know the $15 million disappeared. We know that there’s millions that were taken from border security infrastructure and moved to Tony Clement’s (riding). I think we’re going to see two plus two here.”

The draft auditor general report said the Harper government did not act “clearly” and “transparently” when it sought permission from Parliament to spend $50 million on the G8 Legacy Infrastructure Fund that delivered 32 projects for the Parry Sound-Muskoka riding in southern Ontario represented by Clement.

They really take Alberta for granted don't they?

Bill to Taxpayers for Tony Clement's Re-Election Campaign: 100 Million!

With the news that Tony Clement had poured $50 million into his riding for things like lighthouses on stumps and gazebos, we now discover that the bill to taxpayers was actually a cool $100 mill.

For Tony Clement.

$5.00 is $4.99 too much.

In the wilderness cottage country north of Parry Sound, where a two-lane road peters out in the middle of nowhere, motorists can keep going through the bush on a winding roller-coaster of paved track called the Bunny Trail. Thanks to the Harper government, this little-travelled side road is now slated for improvement—at a cost to Canadian taxpayers of nearly half a million dollars.

“Reconstruction of Bunny Trail”—as the project near the town of Dunchurch is described in federal government records—will cost $463,061. But that’s just a drop in the bucket compared with the nearly $100 million the Conservatives have poured into the riding of Parry Sound-Muskoka in the past couple of years since former Tory MPP Tony Clement took over as federal industry minister.

Under Clement, who originally won the former Liberal-held riding by only 28 votes in 2006, Ottawa has tapped every funding program available to shower the 90,000 residents with cash

Mad yet?

More Scandal Surrounds Tony Clement

In Tony Clement's bid to sizzle as much pork in his riding as humanly possible, he has opened the door to a major scandal.

A Toronto builder siphoned almost $1.8 million of taxpayers’ money from a municipal project in cottage country by taking advantage of weak controls in the Conservative government’s economic stimulus program, a Star investigation has found.

Dalton Engineering and Construction Ltd. used a sophisticated kickback scheme to extract the money from cement, steel and other suppliers working on an expansion of the Gravenhurst Centennial Centre. The project is in Industry Minister Tony Clement’s riding.

When are we going to cry "Uncle!". Haven't we had enough from this government?

Criminal Investigation Could be Underway Over G8 Spending

When the news first broke of the Fake lake, Conservatives claimed it showcased Canada. As fake?

The Liberals are now calling for a probe into the G8 spending that took money from the border security fund to finance Tony Clement's re-election campaign.

We know if it was the other way around, the Conservatives would be all over it.

I had someone from Clement's riding say that it wasn't their fault. They were hardly going to turn down the largess. I told him that he was right. But if they re-elect Clement, it means they support it.

Tony Clement is Proud to be an Oinkee From Muskogee. Sorry Tim Harper.

Tim Harper has an excellent column in the Star, suggesting that Harper shot himself in the foot on this one. So I decided to put it to music.

Tony Clement singing 'Proud to be an Oinkee from Muskogee'. If you're not sure of the tune in this old Merle Haggard song, the video is below.

We don't want no leftovers in Muskogee;
We'll take all you've got if it's for free
We don't need those hydrants down on Main Street;
Just cover 'em up and we'll clap our hands with glee.

Tony Clement never came from our Muskogee,
But rode into town with cash pinned to his lapel
Said my own hometown didn't want me in the House there,
So vote for me and together we'll give them hell.

I know I'm weird and a little short on lovin';
But my campaign will be all about pitchin' woo;
Roads to nowhere and airports just for viewin'
We'll do it like those folks in Beverley Hills do.

He's now proud to be an Oinkee from Muskogee,
A place where even squares can be dug up.
He just waves around those untold millions,
Refusing to say "Ok, now that's enough".

Shops in T.O., still waiting for reparations
broken windows, mishapen doors and signs torn off.
But Tony's busy schmoosing with the big shots,
To care much what they need, while Baird says 'Flick off.

Yes he's proud to be an oinkee in the House now
But not for long, Tony's now on his way out.

Why Did the NDP Block the Release of the Auditor Generals Report Before the Election?

The above image is of a lighthouse on a stump in Tony Clement's riding, that cost taxpayers $186,000.

A real beauty isn't it?

Robert Silver reveals in the Globe and Mail that just before the Harper government fell on Contempt of Parliament charges, Liberal MP Jean-Claude D'Amours, put forward a motion to table the Auditor Generals report on spending for the G8 and G20 summits.

The Conservatives were naturally outraged, but surprisingly it was an NDP MP who put the brakes on the report being made public. Why? Is this 2005 all over again when Jack Layton worked with Stephen Harper to bring down the government on the day that Kyoto would have been ratified, because he didn't want the Liberals to look good?

Who knows?

We would have learned earlier of the bombshell G8 spending, that included the lovely little lighthouse on a stump.

This one is a puzzle.

Bloombergs is Reporting Corruption in the Canadian Government

We didn't really need Bloombergs to tell us that our government was corrupt, but I suppose they felt they were doing us a service, seeing as how our own media rarely does.

And when they do, their voices are drowned out by the right-wing echo chamber.

But yes, as difficult as it may be to believe, the Harper government is corrupt. According to Bloombergs: Canadian Ethics Roiled as Barrick Exploits Loophole in Lobby Law With Visa

Barrick Gold Corp. and Visa Canada Corp. are exploiting an exemption in ethics legislation to hire former Harper administration aides as lobbyists, triggering calls for increased regulation as Canadian lawmakers prepare to
review the rules.

Barrick, the world’s largest gold producer, and Visa Canada, the subsidiary of the world’s largest bank-card network, have hired former advisers to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty and Industry Minister Tony Clement as directors of government affairs. They have done so even though a 2006 law sought to ban politicians and ministerial staffers from lobbying for five years after leaving office.

The companies are taking advantage of a provision that exempts former policy makers who take jobs with corporations and spend less than 20 percent of their time lobbying. The exemption undermines the effectiveness of rules Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said were aimed at eliminating lobbying by insiders, and should be removed, said Pat Martin, a lawmaker for the opposition New Democratic Party.

“It violates the spirit if not the letter of the law to be lobbying on policy or legislation when you’ve just recently left the ranks of government, and I don’t care if it’s for 20 percent or 1 percent of your time,” Martin said in a telephone interview. “There are inherent loopholes in the lobbyist registration regime that you could drive a Mack truck through and make a mockery of the intent.”

‘Revolving Door’

Ah yes, Harper's revolving door. The one he was going to put a stick in and instead set the dial at 'moving as fast as you can'.

Will Canadians Have to Adopt the Rapporteur Model to Combat the Corporate Welfare State?

When Mike Harris became premier of Ontario in 1995, everything changed. It was one of the first attempts at neoconservatism in the country and a province was blind-sided. Because instead of addressing social issues they scorned them, and instead of fighting poverty, they fought the impoverished. Poor bashing became a spectator sport.

There was no longer a social welfare state but a corporate welfare state, and it became clear that unless you were already very rich, this government had nothing for you but contempt.

Riot police were a normal scene around Queens Park, and were used vigorously to stifle dissent. But friends of Mike Harris needn't worry, because they had Julian Fantino in their corner, and he could fix anything. Allegedly, with his own version of the game show The Price is Right.

Given the new change in direction, and with the Common Sense Revolution drafted by Republican strategist Mike Murphy, it came as no surprise that Harris chose a corporate lobbyist to 'clean up' our social services.

And that corporate lobbyist would prove to be the most hyperpartisan politician the province had ever seen. His name: John Baird. And he was ruthless. He cut thousands off assistance and reduced benefits by 42%. All without notice.

But a multinational corporation got very rich off John. In his attempt to privatize social services, he paid them four to one what it would have cost to keep the civil servants he laid off. And while another Harris henchman, Tony Clement, earned the nickname "two-tier Tony" for trying to privatize our healthcare, John Baird became known as 'Enron John'.

When it was reported that many Ontario seniors had been eating catfood, the Harris government produced a meal plan of tuna and beans. And when Mike Harris was asked about the unprecedented need for foodbanks, he callously replied that the foodbanks were good and that he and his wife had just dropped off a bag of groceries.

Can you imagine the premier of a province suggesting that he had done his part to reduce poverty by dropping off a bag of groceries?

When it was brought to their attention that homelessness was also increasing at an alarming rate, another Harris boy, Jim Flaherty, came up with a solution. He would just throw them all in jail, as if being poor was a crime.

But there was something else happening In Ontario during those years, which is unthinkable in a developed country. There was a large segment of the population living in fear. Fear of speaking out against a government who had the ability to cut off their livelihood, or have them beaten for their efforts.

And human rights abuses became so bad that an interfaith group assisting the poor, was forced to adopt the United Nations Human Rapporteur" model, to conduct their investigations, and get help to those who needed it the most. This was a special mandate under the UN Commission on Human Rights, that allowed for "secret" interviews, for those suffering the effects of inhumane actions.

There is a new book, Persistent Poverty: Voices From the Margins, that speaks of those days in Ontario.

Back in 1998 the atmosphere in Ontario had been so poisoned by poor-bashing and punitive attitudes that many people were afraid to speak up at public hearings. In 2003 ISARC [Interfaith Social Assistance Reform Coalition] decided that all future audits would use the "United Nations Human Rapporteur" model.' This is a model used in oppressive countries, with hearings generally held only in places in which people are accustomed to gather. The news media are not invited; governments are not notified. UN rapporteurs listen to participants' words and submit written reports. The process ensures safety, confidentiality, and truthfulness. (1)

"A model used in oppressive countries" was having to be used in the largest province in Canada, so that human rights abuses could be heard.

With those same key players now planted in the federal government, and an even more callous and vindictive leader, we are all starting to feel the effects of oppression. The G-20 in Toronto was a perfect example of what happens to people who oppose the decisions made by the Harper regime.

And when a senate committee produced a report on how to address poverty, Stephen Harper barely gave it a glance before throwing it in the trash. But when one of the 'victims' of his corporate welfare state needs help, he's there with our cheque book.

And just as with Harris, people are terrified of speaking out. We saw this with KAIROS, another interfaith social justice group, who had their funding removed for speaking out against government policy. Public servants work in an atmosphere of distrust, and as one of them said, 'welcome to Harper's world'. But only on the promise of anonymity.

Do we need to create a "Human Rapporteur" model to address concerns of the victims of the corporate welfare state's economic meltdown? Those who would challenge the 'rosy' jobless figures? Who would describe their lives after losing good paying union jobs and now having to work two at minimum wage, and still not able to survive?

There is an atmosphere in this country now. The fear is palpable, but familiar to those living in Ontario under Mike Harris. And if you look at the roster of Conservative candidates for the next federal election, many have been handpicked by Jim Flaherty, Tony Clement and John Baird.

Heaven help us.

Sources:

1. Persistent Poverty: Voices From the Margins, by Jamie Swift, Brice Balmer and Mira Dineen, Between the Lines Toronto, 2010, ISBN: 978-1-897071-73-1

Glass Shatterer? LMAO. Jenni Byrne is Stephen Harper's Jabba the Hutt

In 2003, at the national conference of the Civitas Society, Guy Giorno gave a presentation entitled "Transplanting Provincial Successes to Ottawa".

The Civitas is the policy arm of the Harper government and many members move back and forth. Ian Brodie, a director at Civitas, was formerly Harper's chief of staff, and many others, founding members of the Reform Party.

But Guy Giorno is a stickler for details, so when he spoke of "transplanting" the success of Ontario's Mike Harris, he meant transplanting every single thing.

So you might call it a "remake", where a script written in 1995, would be followed line by line. Only a few of the actors would be replaced.

If you google 'Guy Giorno and Ontario Legislature', you'll find that many of the complaints raised by the opposition then, are eerily similar to those being raised in federal Parliament today.

ORAL QUESTIONS: GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING, Ontario Hansard - October 28, 1998

Question: What you are doing is unprecedented. Your current $4-million spending spree is just the latest. It comes on top of millions spent on education propaganda. It comes on top of millions spent on wasted welfare propaganda. It comes on top of millions wasted on business propaganda. In total so far, and it's early going yet, early days yet, you have wasted over $42 million worth of taxpayers' money in a desperate attempt to save your own skins.

Minister, why should taxpayers be involved in this plot to fund your re-election campaign? Minister, you're wasting $42 million of taxpayer dollars on PC Party propaganda. It doesn't matter how you slice it and how you dice it, that's what it's all about. Let's understand what this would have meant in terms of health care dollars for patients: $42 million would have allowed you to hire almost 1,000 new nurses; $42 million would have allowed you to wipe out the entire deficit of the Ottawa Hospital, which right now stands at $41 million; $42 million would have allowed you to pay for your share of 40 MRIs desperately needed by communities right across this province; $42 million would have allowed you to pay for your full-year funding commitment to attract doctors to under serviced areas in communities right across the province. How can you justify wasting taxpayer dollars that ought to be devoted to health care and putting them into your campaign to re-elect Mike Harris?

Answer: There's nothing that I think is more important than communicating to the public about major changes that are taking place.

Feds spent $42M promoting stimulus spending, documents show, By Glen McGregor, Ottawa Citizen: April 27, 2010

Federal departments have spent nearly $42 million promoting the Harper government's economic stimulus programs. Documents introduced in Parliament
detail the massive wave of print, radio, TV and online advertising intended to highlight the Economic Action Plan launched in January 2009.The advertising blitz includes everything from $110,000 in newspaper ads for the Agriculture Department's slaughterhouse improvement program to the $44,000 spent to wrap two Go Transit commuter trains in the Toronto area with the distinctive green and blue EAP logo.

Critics charge that the promotion of the unprecedented government spending is a form of political advertising but the government defends the ads as critical to communicating with Canadians as the country navigates its way out of the economic downturn.

See. They are following a script, and a plot line. It now just involves a lot more money, with the Harper government spending 45 million on signs and over 100 million on self promotion ads. And it's not about to end anytime soon.

The Liberals have made a weekly event out of highlighting what they perceive to be wasteful spending measures on the part of the Conservative government. On Friday, the target of their ire was the half-million dollars the government spent on “partisan-style” backdrops from press conferences and meetings and $6.5-million promoting tax measures that were introduced in 2006.

“Following Haiti’s earthquake last year, rather than delivering aid as quickly as possible, the Conservative government wasted $27,000 on single-use backdrops, conveniently coloured Tory blue, when they were coordinating a response to the earthquake,” Liberal MP John McCallum told a news conference. “To put that in context, it’s about 55 times the income of the average Haitian.” Mr. McCallum also said the government spent $10,000 on backdrops to unveil the G8 logo. In total, he said, in just over a year, the government has spent more than $500,000 on backdrops alone. Documents explaining how he reached those figures are available here. And he pointed to a Globe and Mail Story published Thursday that said the government is spending $6.5-million of public funds to promote its tax-cutting record in an advertising campaign centred on what is shaping up as a key election issue.

In the private sector these actions would be called embezzlement. But in the neocon world it's business as usual.

One Actor Eliminated

The only thing different between the original movie How Guy Giorno Stole Millions From Taxpayers for Mike Harris and the remake How Guy Giorno Stole Millions From Taxpayers for Stephen Harper, is that they have eliminated one character. Deb Hutton and Leslie Noble from the original, are now embodied in the character of Jenni Byrne.

Like Guy Giorno, Leslie Noble was a top lobbyist who had her own gold plated cheque book. But she used to berate, ridicule and taunt elected MPPs, because she knew that she had more power than them. And she also kept them all election ready.

Noble has no official job with government but regularly briefs Harris, his cabinet ministers and Tory MPPs on what needs to be done politically to stay in power ... One pipeline [Leslie] Noble has to influence government decision-makers is the unelected cadre of political aides in the offices of the Premier and his top ministers. These aides, many of whom report to Noble during the election campaign, wield tremendous power in government, a reality acknowledged by some Tory MPPs. Tory backbencher Bill Murdoch says they openly flaunt their power. ``They say, `Hey Murdoch, we didn't even have to go through an election and we're running the place.' '' Queen's Park Speaker Chris Stockwell, a Tory MPP, calls them a "cabal'' and says they make decisions without input from elected politicians.

Jenni Byrne:

It has not gone unnoticed by some staffers that a hakapik, the weapon used to club to death baby seals, sits on her desk. “She has cultivated a reputation where most people are terrified of being on the wrong side of her,” says a senior Conservative official who knows her well. No wonder then that many of her colleagues who were interviewed for this article asked not to be identified. Ms. Byrne refused to be interviewed.

The other female character that has been absorbed by Byrne is Deb Hutton, now married to Tim Hudak, the man we have to make sure doesn't become our next premier in Ontario. Hutton was called Jabba the Hutt, because if you wanted to talk to Mike Harris you had to go through her, and few got through.

Meanwhile, Deborah Hutton, who remained as the premier's legislative assistant, was given the nickname "Jabba the Hutt" by ministerial aides terrified of her legendary tantrums. One of these aides, like those working for the Conservatives, was willing to be more specific, only on the condition of anonymity. According to the disgruntled staffer, Hutton was and remains "a one-person Blitzkrieg against party morale. (Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-Conservatism in Canada, Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 170)

Jenni Byrne

Described by colleagues as possessing a volcanic temper with a penchant for yelling at cabinet ministers, staffers and senior bureaucrats alike, Ms. Byrne is fiercely loyal to the Prime Minister...

So to Gloria Galloway, do your homework. If you think Jenni Byrne is a ground breaker ... or glass breaker ... she's about 15 years too late. I've seen this movie before and I know how it ends. The leader resigns because of corruption, and when they are voted out of office, they leave not only a bare cupboard, but a province (and now a nation), with a record deficit and swimming in debt.

The Defrauding of Taxpayers II.