So What Does Larry Miller Think of Jason Kenney's Hitler-Like Move?

'Walking past the hundreds of stately Somali refugees lined up outside the gates of the UN High Commission for Refugees here in Nairobi -- men in tidy shirts and slacks, women in baby blue, fuchsia or copper chadors -- the pasty face of Jason Kenney floats into my mind.

Later, watching the images of the nearly 400,000 starving Somali women, children and men crammed into the Dadaab refugee camp on Kenya's border with Somalia, there he is again, forcing his way into my imagination: Jason Kenney, Canada's minister of immigration and xenophobic rhetoric ....'  (1)

In Kenney's world only the tidy shirts and slacks need apply.  Unless of course you're a tidy shirt and slacks wearing Muslim.  His department has made it clear "No Muslims!" (Harperland)

Astonishingly, Kenney has been able to redefine the term "refugee" as "queue jumper," "illegal alien," or his favourite xenophobic term: "terrorist."
 
Fortunately for Peter Van Loan, someone like Jason Kenney was not immigration minister when his family fled Estonia after it fell to the Soviets.  They were able to avoid arrest and execution, when given asylum in Canada.  Or as Bruce Cheadle reminds us of Vic Toews.

There's a global recession and Canada's economy is not immune. Shiploads of strange, foreign refugees — economic migrants and oppressed minorities — have been landing on our shores, fleeing civil war, economic upheaval and famine. No one is certain how they can be assimilated and there are concerns about criminals, subversives and agitators in their midst.  "If (their) ... government is threatening to deport them ... it is probably because they refuse to obey the laws of the country, and we should have full information regarding the facts," one mainstream advocacy group objects.

The year was 1929 when migrant Mennonites were fleeing deportation to certain starvation in Siberia under Stalin. Fortunately for Toew's Ukrainian refugee parents and grandparents, they were able to find safe haven in Canada.  Those queue jumping, illegal alien terrorists.

However, today Toews refers to those like his parents and grandparents as "customers".  From his June 2011 press conference he explained the reasoning behind his mistrust of potential "smugglers".  "What we're trying to do is to put a big question mark in the minds of the potential customers.  About the prospect of quick family reunification and we're trying to say to them that you, even if you get asylum status in Canada, it won't necessarily be permanent. We believe that those doubts seeded in the minds of potential customers  will significantly depress demand and the price point ..."

"No one is certain how they can be assimilated and there are concerns about criminals, subversives and agitators in their midst."  The "customers" of the Toews family perhaps?  Just as fortunate for them, Vic was not yet in the picture and indeed there would not have been a Vic at all if Kenney was running the show in 1929.  At least not in this country.

In an unprecedented move, Jason Kenney has presented legislation that will create "safe" lists.  Bill C-31 would also block claimants from so called “safe” countries from appealing a negative decision to the new Refugee Appeal Division and it would eliminate a provision that called for a committee of experts to decide which countries would be placed on the safe list.  It also ultimately gives the Kenney full discretion over the yet-to-be-established safe list.

His list.

Where's our Nazi spotter Larry Miller?  It's a dangerous thing when one man can make and control a list that determines the fate of entire groups of people.

One country on Kenney's list is Czechoslovakia, and concerns the Roma of that country.  Those queue jumping terrorists need to stay home.  After all, as he points out, Czechoslovakia is a democratic country and champion of human rights.

Or are they?

According to Canwest European Correspondent Peter O'Neil:

A ghastly arson attack that has left a two-year-old girl fighting for her life contradicts Canadian and Czech government assertions that an exodus of Roma refugee claimants to Canada is driven by economics, rather than fear of persecution, say members of the Roma community here.  ... They say they face a constant threat of neo-Nazi attacks and hateful demonstrations, where marchers head into Roma communities and call them "parasites," organized by increasingly sophisticated organizations such as the far-right Workers' Party.

"We are afraid for our lives," said Martin Duna, 31 ... "We are worried that Hitler is coming back." ... Duna's reference to Hitler, who sent Roma, as well as Jews and homosexuals, to extermination camps during the Second World War, isn't as extreme as it may sound ... Czech municipal politicians have won nationwide public praise for evicting Roma from apartments to live in metal containers in city outskirts; and human-rights groups have reported involuntary sterilizations of Roma women from the late 1960s to as recently as late last year.  Growing neo-Nazi violence, as well as discrimination and even segregation in areas such as health, housing, education, criminal justice and employment, have been reported in numerous publications issued by the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the U.S. State Department and Amnesty International.

Does this sound like a country committed to human rights?

And how does someone like Jason Kenney qualify as the supreme keeper of lists and authority of what constitutes oppression?

He has a high school education, dropping out of prep school at a time when that prep school, St. Ignatius was accused of running a cult.  He made headlines in San Francisco for his attacks on the gay community.  He challenged the Pope Paul because he opposed the Iraq War. He established the Christian Coalition in Canada, a group determined to take North America back to the time of the Reformation.

Or according to one of Kenney's teachers the '50s.  Not the 1950s but the 1550s.

He has had no job outside of politics, running a pyramid scheme called the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, inspired by Grover Norquist's Americans for Tax Reform.  Much of his time was spent traversing the country forcing politicians to sign a pledge not to raise taxes.  Mike Harris signed Kenney's pledge.  Enough said.

This new legislation is nothing more that a power trip by a narcissistic nincompoop.

I can't wait to hear what Larry Miller thinks of all this.  Maybe I'll give him a call.

1. In Africa, It's Sickening to See Tories Play Refugee Politics: Here at the bleeding edge of the Somali crisis, I can't shake the face of Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, by Cam Sylvester, The Tyee, July 20, 2011

Why Does the Right Hold the Left to a Higher Moral Standard?

Despite the allegations of sexual misconduct, Herman Cain continues to poll high with Republicans.

And yet they wasted millions of tax dollars in an attempt to impeach President Bill Clinton, because of a sex scandal.  Clinton's was consensual.  Cain's appear to have been uninvited assaults.

When it was discovered that "family values" czar, Vic Toews, had fathered a child with a young staffer, destroying his marriage, there was barely a murmur from the Right.  In fact with mounting scandals, they continue to defend the Harper government, blaming the media and liberals.

David Kuo, a former member of the Bush (G.W.) administration wrote a book, Tempting Faith: An Inside Story of Political Seduction.  He also speaks of this phenomenon.  Despite the horrendous things that George Bush did, the Christian Right stuck with him.  He said it was because Bush was considered to be a "brother in Christ".  A "born again" Christian who might slip up once in a while, and it was their duty to be there when he did.

He did a lot of slipping.  They must have been exhausted.

Kuo broke through the holier than thou image, and while still a devout Christian, is no longer a member of the political movement.  He saw too many things that tested his faith, not the least of which was the fact that the Bush team referred to Kuo and his colleagues, as "the F---ing faith based group".

They were an annoying distraction.

As further proof of their hypocrisy, Newt Gingrich is beginning to "surge".  A womanizer, who cheated on two of his wives, one while she was dying of cancer.

I hope they come out with a sinner's guide book soon, because I'm confused.

I may just be a saint.

Harper's War on Women Was Launched in the USA

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"The woman who is truly Spirit-filled will want to be totally submissive to her husband . . . This is a truly liberated woman. Submission is God's design for women."BEVERLY LAHAYE, The Spirit-Controlled Woman

One evening in 1978 Beverly LaHaye was watching television with her husband. On the tube Barbara Walters was interviewing the feminist leader Betty Friedan, who suggested that she represented many women in America.

According to the story that LaHaye has repeated countless times, she immediately sprang to her feet and declared, "Betty Friedan doesn't speak for me and I bet she doesn't speak for the majority of women in this country."

From that day on, or so the story goes, she vowed to rally other "submissive" women who believed, like her, that "the women's liberation movement is destroying the family and threatening the survival of our nation." (1)

Betty LaHaye's husband is Religious Right leader, Tim LaHaye, co-author of the successful Apocalyptic Left Behind book series. He is also a founder of the Council for National Policy, where Harper gave his 1997 speech, where he vilified Canadians and our socialist ways.

Betty LaHaye's "submissive awakening" was in direct contrast to what she had been preaching several years before. Then as a pastor's wife, raising four children, she felt unfulfilled and hated the drudgery of her day to day existence.

One very well-meaning lady said to me in the early days of our ministry, "Mrs. LaHaye, our last pastor's wife was an author; what do you do?" That was a heavy question for a fearful twenty-seven-year-old woman to cope with. And I began to wonder, "What did I do?" Oh yes, I was a good mother to my four children, I could keep house reasonably well, my husband adored me, but what could I do that would be eternally effective in the lives of other women? The answer seemed to come back to me. "Very little!" There was something missing in my life.

In my case it was not the major problems that succeeded in wearing me down; it was the smoldering resentment caused from the endless little tasks that had to be repeated over and over again and seemed so futile. Day after day I would perform the same routine procedures: picking up dirty socks, hanging up wet towels, closing closet doors, turning off lights that had been left on, creating a path through the clutter of toys. (1)

So despite the fact that her children were still young, she returned to work full-time, as a teletype operator for Merrill Lynch. This job she claimed helped her to "gain confidence" and fulfilment.

By 1978 her children were grown and forgetting her life before Merrill Lynch, she decided that she would be the voice of submissive women everywhere.

Lahaye helped to form the group 'Concerned Women for America', drafting women's policy for the Neoconservative/Religious Right movement. CWA also sparked similar organisations in other countries, including our own version 'Real Women of Canada', who have worked in Harper's various parties from the beginning of Reform.

A branch group of Real Women, Alberta Federation of Women United for Families, helped to get Conservative MP Rob Anders elected.

Members of Concerned Women, regularly speak at Real Women conventions, and Canadian members return the favour.

In fact several Conservative MPs have also made the trek to Betty LaHaye's anti-feminist kingdom, including Vic Toews and Stockwell Day.

Given this kind of support for anti-feminism, should we really be surprised that the Republicans are attacking any funding to vulnerable women? That Harper's tax policies ignore single mothers, and pander only to high income households with one wage earner? Or that the Neoconservative government of David Cameron in the UK, is also targeting women in their "austerity" budgets?

This all began when stocking footed Betty LaHaye stood up and vowed to offer an alternative voice for women, who could find happiness if they would just totally submit to their menfolk.

So kick off those shoes ladies and get back in the kitchen where you belong.

As for me, I'm experiencing a case of the vapours. Could just be that my corset's too tight.

Sources:

1. Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women, By Susan Faludi, Crown publishing, 1991, ISBN: 0-385-42507-4, Pg. 247-249

If Vic Toews Had Lived Then ...

I spent several years researching my family history, not only to create a genealogy, but to find the stories that brought my ancestors to Canada.

The first arrived in 1632 as an army surgeon. His future wife would join the colony at Port Royal, a few years later, but it's what brought her here that is interesting.

Her father was escaping the law. Apparently he was among a group, that included a Catholic priest, who were caught stealing firewood from a nobleman's estate. Had they not they would have froze to death, but that didn't matter. All the wealth was in the hands of a few, and you didn't try to get any of it for yourself.

Had that been today he would no doubt have been detained and shipped back, but he found refuge in Canada. His daughter would marry my ancestral grandfather, raise a large Acadian family, and contribute to Canadian history.

One of their descendants would later meet the son of an Irish immigrant, better known as my grandparents.

What brought his family to Canada is also an interesting story.

My dad had always told me that his grandfather was a "freedom fighter". An Irish Catholic who had joined a group of rebels opposing British rule.

I mentioned this to an aunt several years ago, when I was visiting her in New Brunswick, and she brought out an old Irish newspaper that she had from 1833. In it there was a small story about three men who had blown up an "outhouse" and were still at large.

I laughed thinking it was just a prank. A desire to watch the crap fly. But she informed me that the "outhouse" was actually a munitions shed, and had they not escaped to Canada, would have probably been executed.

They were just teenagers then, and by today's standards, "terrorists". But given the suffering of the Irish at the time, especially Irish Catholics, who were refused basic human rights, it's easy to put it into context.

Those rebels found wives in Canada, raised large families, and produced many mayors, judges, and even a provincial fisheries minister.

Bruce Cheadle has a great story on the ancestors of our current Public Safety minister, Vic Toews. He reminds us that had someone like Toews been in his job in 1929, the future Vic Toews would not exist.

There's a global recession and Canada's economy is not immune. Shiploads of strange, foreign refugees — economic migrants and oppressed minorities — have been landing on our shores, fleeing civil war, economic upheaval and famine. No one is certain how they can be assimilated and there are concerns about criminals, subversives and agitators in their midst.

"If (their) ... government is threatening to deport them ... it is probably because they refuse to obey the laws of the country, and we should have full information regarding the facts," one mainstream advocacy group objects.

No, it is not 2010. The year is 1929. The migrants are Mennonites fleeing Joseph Stalin's Soviet Russia and deportation to certain starvation in Siberia. Canada's doors are slamming shut to refugees. Among the massive Mennonite influx who had helped fuel that public and political backlash were the Ukrainian refugee grandparents and parents of current Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.

I had written a similar story when Peter Van Loan was Public Safety minister, and I learned that he was engaged in horrific workplace raids.

With the stage being set for war, the small Republic of Estonia declared neutrality, not wishing to take sides in any conflict.

However, a month before the Invasion of Poland that precipitated World War II; Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, which was a treaty of nonaggression between Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

This sealed the fate for the Estonian people, as they soon fell under the Soviet sphere of influence. Mass political arrests, deportations, and executions followed, as Stalin's scorched earth philosophy was inflicted on the country.

Peter Van Loan's mother and grandparents fled during this horrible time, and were among three thousand Estonian immigrants, given asylum in Canada.

Toews refuses to discuss his family history, I suppose believing it to be irrelevant. But it is very relevant.

We could argue that the world is a dangerous place, but the world has always been a dangerous place, and Canada throughout our history, a refuge, where many sought safety from oppressive regimes, starvation, and in the case of my Irish ancestor, political asylum.

Do we really want to be a country that closes the door, and turns back those suffering? For example, Jason Kenney once claimed that the Roma from Czechoslovakia, were not legitimate refugees, only opportunists.

But Peter O'Neil, European Correspondent for Canwest News Service, wrote in May of 2009:

A ghastly arson attack that has left a two-year-old girl fighting for her life contradicts Canadian and Czech government assertions that an exodus of Roma refugee claimants to Canada is driven by economics, rather than fear of persecution, say members of the Roma community here.... They say they face a constant threat of neo-Nazi attacks and hateful demonstrations, where marchers head into Roma communities and call them "parasites," organized by increasingly sophisticated organizations such as the far-right Workers' Party."We are afraid for our lives," said Martin Duna, 31 ... "We are worried that Hitler is coming back." ...

Duna's reference to Hitler, who sent Roma, as well as Jews and homosexuals, to extermination camps during the Second World War, isn't as extreme as it may sound ... Czech municipal politicians have won nationwide public praise for evicting Roma from apartments to live in metal containers in city outskirts; and human-rights groups have reported involuntary sterilizations of Roma women from the late 1960s to as recently as late last year.

Growing neo-Nazi violence, as well as discrimination and even segregation in areas such as health, housing, education, criminal justice and employment, have been reported in numerous publications issued by the United Nations, the Council of Europe, the U.S. State Department and Amnesty International.

We are becoming a country without a heart, and one that ignores its rich history.

I'm just glad that Vic Toews, Peter Van Loan or Jason Kenney, were not around in 1632 or 1833. If they had, I would not be in 2011.

The High Cost of Being Poor in Canada

My daughter is disabled and on the Ontario Disability Support Program. She works 16 hours a week for minimum wage, part of which is deducted from her monthly allowance, so suffice it to say that she is deemed low income.

She is dependable, and has been at her job for three years. During that time she has never been late, with the exception of the odd snowstorm that delayed her bus, and rarely takes a day off.

But this summer I was abruptly introduced to the hidden economy of the working poor, when a young street "punk" moved in on her, and in just two weeks, destroyed years of my daughter's financial prudence.

And she was able to do this so easily because of something called "payday loans". I had heard the term before but never really understood the system. I certainly understand it now.

During that time, this young girl (16-years-old) took my daughter to four of these places, where for 21% on the dollar, she could get a cash advance (the longest term 11 days). All she needed was a chequing account and proof that she had a job.

Using one transaction as an example, she was advanced $118.50 in exchange for a post-dated cheque of $ 150.00 (6 days hence). Since roughly 60% of her income goes to rent, she doesn't have $ 150.00 extra in income, so the cheque bounced.

The bank charged her an NSF fee of $40 and the establishment an NSF fee of $50.00. So the cost to borrow less than $120 dollars for a week was now $240.

I know that the right-wing would automatically denounce the young girl who took advantage of a disabled person, with "soft on crime", "young offenders", because after all, she was the one who walked away with the $118.50. But what of the offenders who "legally" netted $121.50? They are no better than the "little criminal".

In total, this young girl received about $800, and my daughter was left with a debt of almost $2000, because not only did she have exorbitant bank charges, because of returned "payday loans", but her regular monthly bills, like cable and telephone, also bounced, and these companies charged her on their end as well.

I only became aware of what was happening when my daughter called crying that her employer had messed up her paycheque and she had no money for food. Turns out that she received her pay, but all of it went to cover an overdraft.

How Did This Happen?

In October of 2006, Vic Toews, announced with much fanfare that he would be putting measures in place to regulate the Payday Lending Industry.

The Honourable Vic Toews, Q.C., Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, together with the Honourable Maxime Bernier, Minister of Industry, today introduced proposed amendments to the Criminal Code regarding payday lending, to provide provinces and territories with the flexibility to regulate the industry.

"As more Canadians make use of payday lending, Canada's New Government is taking steps to ensure that the industry can be properly regulated," said Minister Toews. "We're getting things done for families and taxpayers, by giving provinces and territories the tools they need to protect consumers and deal with questionable business practices."

But hidden behind those words, was the fact that what this "new" government was actually doing, was amending the criminal code (347) that set limits on interest rates. They hailed it as allowing the provinces to regulate the industry themselves, but those provinces could no longer use the criminal code as a guideline.

Given what we know of neoconservatism, that it is a government run by and for the corporate sector, we then ask what motivated this gesture.

The answer: Lobbyists.

Because those pushing for this change to the criminal code was the industry itself. At the time there was a class action lawsuit being brought against them in British Columbia (OK Payday Loans) that threatened to put a stop to this form of legal loan sharking.

The payday loan industry is booming, but the interest they charge is against the law. Now they want the law changed - or they'll be out of business. (October, 2006 report)

Getting this legislation passed is a top priority for Michael Thompson, president of the Canadian Payday Loan Association (CPLA). He says the association wants to "make sure that the legislation gets introduced quickly and passed through Parliament quickly" ... Mr. Thompson gave several reasons for this urgency: the need for "regulatory certainty", payday lending's poor image in the media, and putting a halt to "certain issues in the industry that are potentially hazardous to consumers". However, a recent British Columbian Supreme Court decision against a payday lender has sent shockwaves through the industry and provided a powerful motivation for new laws: without them, payday lenders may not survive.

According to the preamble of Toew's legislation:

The expanding presence of payday loan companies suggests that some Canadians are willing (forced?) to pay rates of interest in excess of those permitted under the Criminal Code for their payday loans. Bill C-26 is designed to exempt payday loans from criminal sanctions in order to facilitate provincial regulation of the industry.

It was sold as helping consumers, not the industry that is cashing in on the scheme.

By June of 2010, the Globe and Mail was reporting that one of the largest providers of payday loans, had not only been able to remove the bad rap his industry was receiving before Toews came to the rescue, but was now lending legitimacy to this legal loan sharking.

No one knows more about a business than the CEO – except the CEO who owns a lot of the stock. Gordon Reykdal is one. Mr. Reykdal founded and runs Cash Store Financial, a gem of a business. He also owns about a quarter of the stock, and it shows. Talk to him for a few minutes and it soon becomes obvious that he knows every wrinkle about his company, which offers payday loans to a growing base of consumers that big banks want nothing to do with.

And the fact that this industry is growing at such an alarming rate, is further testimony to the struggles of Canada's working poor, many of whom might be called 'middle class'. Canada has the highest debt to income ratio in the world, which means that many of these people have probably maxed out their credit cards and traditional borrowing power, so are forced to turn to high rate "payday loans", often to meet the obligations of their credit burden.

And as they get caught in the quagmire of allowing this industry to operate from their payday to their next payday, they see no way out. In fact, "payday loans" are protected from bankruptcy legislation, so that even if forced to take that route, you will still be indebted to the cash stores.

We have been hearing a bit more rumbling lately, but who is going to seriously take any steps to drive these guys out of business? It will end up just more smoke and mirrors.

I read one justification for this, as being a better alternative to having to go to a loan shark. But how many ordinary families know a loan shark? It's not like you can find them in the yellow pages. Whereas, these "cash stores" are on every street corner.

It's like a pimp saying that he gets his girls off the street and gives them a roof over their head, while making it impossible for them to leave.

My daughter's financial mess was temporary. Because of ODSP guidelines, family members cannot give her large amounts of money or she would have to claim it, so though it meant giving up her apartment, moving back home for awhile, and living like a pauper for several months, she was able to clear her debt by herself.

A tough lesson in life.

When she moved into her new apartment in January, she was debt free. Most are not so lucky.

More on the G-20 From Hell

The scathing report on the human rights abuses at the G-20 in Toronto, presented by the Attorney General Andre Marin, appears to lay the blame squarely on the shoulders of the Toronto Police Chief and the Premier of Ontario.

But something this massive requires a lot of hands and a lot of fingerprints.

And the man with the most fingerprints on the civil disaster was none other than Stephen Harper.

He decided to hold the G-20 in Toronto. He authorized the enormous expenditures. He gave the untendered contract for security.

But rather than taking leadership on this issue, something a prime minister is supposed to do, he is simply trying to wipe off his prints and go into hiding.

What assurances do Canadians have that this won't happen again? None.

This is part of a pattern. As a group of law professors calling for an inquiry, said recently: 'the mass arrests effected during the G20 appear to be part of a trend towards the criminalization of dissent in Canada.'

Vic Toews simply released a statement saying that the security forces acted with “professionalism” and thanked them for their “exceptional work”, while Ontario Neocon leader, Tim Hudak, heard on the above video demanding answers, wrote a column praising the police for their conduct. Hypocrite.

Nothing short of a full public inquiry can be acceptable, with people from all levels of government being held to account.

Will Canada Need a Liu Xiaobo to Draw Attention to Our Own Police State?

The Noble Peace Prize winner this year was not able to collect his award.

And that's because he is in jail, imprisoned for standing up for human rights in China.

The Chinese government did everything it could to prevent Liu Xiaobo from receiving the honour, but in the end, this champion of democracy won the day.

Watch the video at the end of this post, as they discuss his attempts to overturn a police state, at a time when Canada is drifting into one.

We also have the appearance of a modern open society, but that appearance is in direct contrast to what we saw during the G-20 weekend in Toronto. And it's in direct contrast to the treatment of protesters when they tried to peacefully oppose the closing of the prison farms in Kingston.

And it's in direct contrast to the number of people who have been vilified by our government for speaking out. The number of public servants fired and destroyed because they opposed arbitrary decisions.

And it's in direct contrast to civil servants being gagged.

The Chinese people are demanding the basic rights of freedom of expression, freedom of publication and freedom of association.

All things that our current government is trying to take away.

Jim Coyle in the Star suggests that it is no longer simply about public dissent, but public disgust.

It started with an attempt to steal our democracy:

In Ottawa, two years ago, Prime Minister Stephen Harper locked and shuttered Parliament in order to avoid having his minority government face a non-confidence vote — the shameless means justifying the desperate end of saving his own political skin.

This was after already silencing the media and everyone else within the new Canadian gated community, that has a sign at the gatepost, "Welcome to Haperland. Enter at your own risk".

Is there a Noble Peace Prize in the future of some brave Canadian who is just going to say they've had enough?

Vic Toews in the Thick of the Brutality at the G-20 in Toronto

It was Stephen Harper's decision to hold the G-20 in Toronto. It was his decision to spend an enormous sum of money on security and it was he who bragged about this decision on the videotron at the G-20.

To suggest that the feds can now just wash their hands of the whole ordeal is ludicrous.

We need to be damn mad at anyone and everyone involved in what has been called the "most massive compromise of civil liberties in Canadian history."

If Toews is crying ignorance, he's only confirming something we already knew. But unfortunately for the Harper government, stupidity is not a legal defense.

Look at this guy. His actions are indefensible.

A Dishonourable Man Should Not Receive an Honorary Degree

Students at the University of Winnipeg are protesting the decision to give Vic Toews an honorary degree. This upstanding Christian who got a young woman pregnant and then left his wife for her, represents everything a progressive university should oppose.

And I don't mean the affair.

The students say Toews has opposed gay rights, is behind a needless law-and-order crackdown that will result in millions spent on prisons and he called Tamil refugees terrorists. The students, who are lined up against the
building, say those views are at odds with the U of W's inclusive reputation.

"(Toews’) policies are in direct opposition to the notions of compassion, justice, acceptance, inclusiveness, human rights and equality," said Brittany Thiessen. "As a university which values these notions, I along with many others, believe that honouring this man is unacceptable." Also this afternoon, student valedictorian Erin Larson is expected to use her address to graduates to condemn the university for honouring Toews.

I love how the Sun (Fox News North) plays this. They are not "concerned students" but "left-leaning students." For that reason alone this man should not receive any accolades. It encourages the crazies.

A large group of the institution’s left-leaning students and former students plans to gather outside the U of W’s Duckworth Centre, where the fall convocation is held, to protest the decision to honour Toews with the doctor of laws degree.

If There was Really Justice, There Would be no Harper Government

Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin has called justice a "human right". A no-brainer.

And Canada has always been a leader in human rights issues.

Canadians may not realize it, but along with all the other things we export to the world, we also export our rights talk ... when the chief justice of our Supreme Court, Beverly McLachlin, visited a judicial training college [in] China, she found Chinese judges discussing Canadian Supreme Court cases." When I visited the Constitutional Court of South Africa, I discovered that the judges there make frequent reference to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The originality of Canadian rights culture may be obvious to South Africans, but it is not obvious to Canadians. (1)

Our laws have been created on the traditions of France, Britain and the U.S., but the Canadian justice system was forged from our "rights" culture.

And it worked. Some may have wondered if "justice" was always served, but no one can argue with the results. Our crime rate is the lowest it's ever been, and before the Harper government scrapped the Court challenges program, the justice system was becoming available to a broader range of citizens.

So with the government proceeding so aggressively with it's new "law and order" agenda, which includes the building of more prisons, there is a reason for Canadians to be concerned.

I just had to listen to some perky news personality singing the praises of the Conservative plan to "crack down on crime." What crime? As mentioned, our crime rate is the lowest it's ever been.

Minister of Public Safety Vic Toews said Wednesday the federal government has plans to construct additional prison units. The Conservatives say the expansions will improve the protection, safety and security of Canadians. "Our government is proud to be on the right side of this issue — the side of law-abiding citizens, the side of victims who want justice, and the side that understands the cost of a safe and secure society is an investment worth making," Toews said. (2)

If we really want to create a safe and secure society we need to create a justice system that is fair and balanced, with an emphasis on rehabilitation, not incarceration. This Old Testament eye for an eye, will only as Ghandi once said, "make the world blind".

And to make matters worse, they are expecting the provinces to help foot the bill, for something they neither want nor need.

The public safety minister says it's up to the provinces to find their share of the money to handle an expected surge in the prison population. Vic Toews says the federal government will spend $2 billion over five years to handle more prisoners due to stiffer sentencing laws — a figure the parliamentary budget officer argues will be higher. But Toews says he doesn't know how much it will cost the provinces, but they'll have to shoulder their share of the financial burden. (3)

Shoulder our share. We don't want this. Why should taxpayers foot the bill for something we don't want? This money could go to so much better use.

This all leaves me with the most horrible feeling of dread. They are simply not listening. It's like we don't exist.

Sources:

1. The Rights Revolution: CBC Massey Lectures, By Michael Ignatieff, Anansi Books, 2000, ISBN: 0-88784-656-4, Pg. 13

2. Tories announce $155.5M prison expansion, CBC News, October 6, 2010

3. Feds say provinces on hook for their share of extra prison costs, By: The Canadian Press, October 6, 2010

The Creation of Mad Stevie: Sorry Robert Service

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

The Creation of Mad Stevie

There were strange things done for political fun
By a man whose blood runs cold;
His campaign trails have their secret tales
Of pure cunning as they unfold;

And while election nights, have seen queer sights
The queerest we ever did see
Was when we let down our guard, and without reward
We elected Mad Stevie

Now Mad Stevie is from Calgary

Though Toronto born and bred

Why he left that place to get in our face

T'was a decision we now all dread

He was always cold, and the tales he told

Were of a Canada he could sell;

Though he'd often say, in his evil way

"he'd sooner put us through hell."

But in our Canadian way, we gave him his day

At the end of that campaign trail.

Then the air turned cold! Because we were not told

That the devil would now prevail.

So our eyes we closed, as Mad Stevie imposed

a blackout to history;

The media were shunned, now our country was run

In unheard of secrecy.

And every night, we are treated to the sight

of Mad Stevie on the go,

Photos on planes, photos with Danes

Even photos with Marilyn Munroe.

And if you wonder, or sometimes ponder,

What he does with all those pics;

He lines the halls, and plasters the walls;

The narcissist's daily fix

Yes it seems quite low, but you have to know;

That Mad Stevie's not quite right in the head:

It's his cursèd cold, that has taken hold,

He doesn't govern but dictates instead.

So what have we done, for political fun?

And what's happened while we were asleep?

Well hold on tight and I'll tell you tonight,

Because he's got us in trouble deep."

The first thing to tank, was our once sound banks,

As he sold out to AIG;

And when things went south, he opened his mouth;

And bought them for you and me.

Bought what you ask, what was this task?

That has us in trouble deep;

Bought all sub-prime, 125 billion and a dime

All that's left is for us to weep.

But that's not all, he had the gall

to pat himself on the back,

And though we're in a mess, he won't confess,

That our finances are out of whack;

Tighten your belts, he's always felt:

While adding more holes to his own

"I need more cash", he cries unabashed

His house of cards starts to moan.

"And I want a lake, we'll make it fake

And gazebos will dot the land.

And in days to come, I'll beat you numb,

You'll never see my slight of hand.

"In my month long flight, I'll stay out of sight,

Others will take the fall,

For census woes and heartless blows

I'm mute and on the ball.

"But I'm no fool, a circus school

I've built for my next career;

Because I know, that Canadians so

want to kick me out on my rear."

"But it's not just me", he cried with glee

"Stockwell Day is raving mad;

He sees criminal acts, and without any facts

Is building more prisons; the cad

"And what about Gail Shea, who was in a play

With Tilly Oneil-Gordon

It was closed first night, with not a patron in sight

Their careers now clearly done

"Or Jim Prentice, who got off the fence

And started making stuff up

We have no plan, and yet this man

Packed his release with a wallop

"And Peter MacKay, who sees to this day

the Ruskies on the attack;

'The sky is falling', how appalling

so why not get on his back?

"Or that Vic Toews, who everyone knows,

is a sorry excuse for a man

Or Dean Del Mastro, who everyone knows,

Could always use a good kick in the can

"I've prorogued before, I can prorogue some more

Just you wait and see

I'll lock up this place, and if you show your face

I'll make you a detainee

"And I'll not have to pay, 'cause I'll call it a day

And go on a photo-op

There's an empty wall, in the bathroom stall

Just begging for a pic of my yop

"And I've got me a Guy, who you'll rarely see

He's my Joseph Goebbels from Hell

He'll keep you away and make innocents pay

He does his job very well

"And Dimitri Soudas and John Baird the bad ass

Are ready to growl, snap and bite;

So if you want to rumble, It's you who will tumble

'Cause I'm your dictator for life."

But then came a sound, that has rarely been found

In a country not known for aggression

One day all awoke, and a new leader spoke

"I will make his downfall, my obsession"

So I'll finish my tale, and in this I won't fail

Because the ending is one of pure joy

We had our election, and made our selection

And finally got rid of our boy

There were strange things done for political fun

Good sense was clearly lacking

But we're finally awake, when Democracy was at stake,

And we've sent Mad Stevie packing

Vic Toews Archaic Views on Rape Reflect Government's Narrow Minded Agenda

The Canadian Press has learned that Vic Toews tried to abolish the broad definition of sexual assault, calling it the "biggest mistake in criminal law ever made."

By replacing it with "rape" would take us back decades.

Catherine Kane, who's in charge of the criminal law policy section at Justice, jumped to the defence of the current law, internal documents show. “We have several offences that cover the conduct previously captured by the very narrow and impossible to convict of charge of rape,” she wrote in a late-night email on May 11, the same day Toews made controversial public comments on the issue. “And we have several offences to cover the equally harmful sexual offences that fell short of the offence of rape.”

I do like this comment from Rob Nicholson though:

“The government currently has an ambitious justice agenda and we are committed to pursuing it. However, in regards to your question (about rape), there is nothing currently in the works.”

"Ambitious justice agenda" ... yes. "Committed to pursuing it" ... yes. The need for it ... not on your life.

In what has turned into a rite of summer in recent years, Statistics Canada has released data that again suggests the crime rate in the country continues to fall. The annual police-reported crime statistics issued yesterday indicated drops in overall crimes, motor vehicle thefts and even violent offences. The crime rate in the country in 2009 was 17% lower than a decade earlier. A relatively new indicator, the Crime Severity Index, which is a weighted average of criminal offences, is down 22% from the level in 1999.

Going through with massive corporate tax cuts when this country has so much poverty, our health care is in crisis and our veterans are being treated like dogs ... That's the real crime that needs to be addressed.

Oh, Oh! Vic Toews Caught Cheating - Again!

And this time I'm not referring to his affair with a younger woman, though that one still represents hypocrisy at it's best.

... the 55-year-old Toews' public face of self-righteous morality is now clashing with his troubled private life. An MP dubbed the "minister of family values" by Liberals is embroiled in a messy divorce after fathering a child last fall with a much younger woman.

So much for family values.

This time Toews is being investigated for a conflict-of-interest:

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has not disclosed $18,000 in annual pension payments as required by law in a conflict-of-interest declaration for the public registry he personally signed. The Conflict of Interest Code for Members' of the House of Commons requires all MPs to disclose assets,liabilities and sources of income over $1,000 outside their MP salary. If they earn income over $10,000, that fact is to be made public in a disclosure summary posted on the ethics commissioner's website. There is no pension income listed in Toews' most recent summary that he signed on March 5, 2009.

In an affidavit filed in Manitoba court April 10, Toews acknowledges earning $18,267.84 a year from the Manitoba Civil Service Superannuation Board. Those pension payments began when he turned 55 in September 2007. Also included in court documents is an e-mail Toews wrote to his lawyer in May 2007. In that e-mail, Toews' indicates he had not disclosed to the ethics commissioner the pension he was about to start receiving or a condo his wife owned in Gatineau, Que.

More of those so-called "conservative values" we keep hearing about. And Vic is a card carrying member of the Religious Right. Wonder if he'll get kicked out of the club now?

The Rule of Law or the Supremacy of God?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Last month a Quebec judge made a ruling on the rights of a Jesuit school to have the ability to refuse to teach anything that goes against their own religious beliefs.

According to a decision handed down on June 18 by the Quebec Superior Court, Jesuit Loyola High School of Montreal will be dispensed from teaching “the Ethics and Religious Culture course” imposed by the Quebec Ministry of Education in the fall of 2008.

The Jesuit school administration asserts that the course’s contents conflict with the institution’s Catholic values. According to statements reported on the Radio Canada website (http://www.radio-canada.ca/), headmaster Paul Donovan stated that Catholic values must be present in every discipline, not only in religion classes, but in the other subjects such as English or Physical Education. (1)

Now this should have made a case for freedom of religion, except that the judge took it one step further, by invoking the preamble to the Canadian Constitution which states: “Canada is founded upon the principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.”

This is setting a very dangerous precedence. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada has already stated that they see it as a good sign, and many Religious Right sites are singing Hallelujah.

Atheists are suggesting that since they don't believe in God they should not have to support this, while others like the National Post are seeing it as part of our country's history.

What does the “supremacy of God” mean? At a minimum, it reflects a historical fact. From the early French explorers and Jesuit missionaries to the British institutions of Crown-in-Parliament, the architecture of Canada is incomprehensible without the institutions of religion. It is impossible to tell the story of Canadian finance without the Catholic driven caisse populaire movement in rural Quebec. Medicare is the product of the Protestant prairie pastors who led the Commonwealth Co-operative Federation. Today, our newest Canadians often turn to services offered by religious congregations of all kinds — indeed, our refugee programs more or less assume that this will be the case. Religion is not an alien force, but, to use an apt word, constitutive of who we are.

The Constitution describes not only who we are–matters of history — but also who we ought to be–matters of aspiration. This is likely what those who object to the “supremacy of God” find difficult. They think that such language excludes from the Canadian project those who do not believe in God. Yet even those Canadians should welcome God in the preamble. Something, after all, has to be supreme. And if it is not God, even understood in the broadest possible sense, then what is it? Fearsome it would be to live in the land where the works of man alone are supreme.

Of course they are right. Symbolically Christianity is part of our culture. But so too is a divisiveness, based not on the supremacy of God, but perceived supremacies of various religious beliefs, even within the Christian faith.

If courts start tapping into the 'Supremacy of God' as a legal argument, we have to ask "Whose God?" Whose interpretation of the Bible? Old Testament or New Testament?

Will judges have to memorize the Bible before they can make a decision? Will we need a representative from the Mormons, the Jews, the Jehovah Wittiness, Evangelicals, Lutherans, etc. etc., who have all interpreted the ancient texts differently.

And what about Buddhists or Muslims?

Because you see Canada was not founded on one religious faith. The French explorers and Jesuit missionaries were Catholic, and even when protestants arrived it was not a shared Judeau-Christian dogma. That only came about when Cyrus Scofield was asked to create that heritage.

Even during the time of Samuel De Champlain, Jews were outcasts. At Port Royal the French adventurers created The Order of Good Cheer, believed to be the first Euro-Canadian social club in North America.

We could also probably take it one step further and say the first integrated social club of Europeans and Canadians, since Membertou [native host] was an official member and any other visiting sagamores [chiefs] always held a place of honor at the main table, while their people were seated with the men on the floor of the dining hall. But then we could also say that it was the first social club in North America that banned membership based on racial or religious grounds. [Marc] Lescarbot says that everyone joined, except "the artisans, who were from a different class", or more precisely from the Jewish Ghetto at Saintes.

So anti-semitism is also part of our early history.

The Post article also states:

The Charter does not say that, but we ought to be grateful that it intuitively points in that direction. The Judeo-Christian tradition is not the only foundation for tolerance between different peoples, or for harmony in a pluralistic society, but surveying the global scene today it is the most secure foundation currently on offer.

Again that is not true. An arrogance of faith has often turned the western world into bullies. We are always invading countries. It has also created two world wars which pit Christians against Christians. The Religious Right claim that they are being bred out because of abortion, but those wars destroyed generations. Admittedly they were not about religion but territory. However, a good religious faith would have preferred diplomacy to so much death.

Another editorial by John Moore in the National Post is right on the money.

Christians in the U.S. and in Canada have engaged in elaborate intellectual exercises and historical revisionism to shoe horn God into government. God appears nowhere in the U.S. constitution, so his fans have concocted a school of foundational thinking that requires the more mystical Declaration of Independence to be considered a pre-amble. The phrase “One nation under God” was only inserted into the pledge of allegiance in 1954.

Canada’s union in 1867 was a far less exuberant affair than the creation of the United States. Our founding document reads more like something written by notaries, though I would argue that “peace, order and good government” — while less inspirational than “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” — is a far more concrete and achievable goal. The British North America Act has nothing to say about religion save a formula for the funding of confessional schools. In spite of stubborn efforts in some quarters to float the fiction that the word “Dominion” was intended to reference God it merely establishes our status as hapless subjects of the British Crown.

Moore concludes that it was Trudeau's fault because of his devout Catholic faith. However, I think it may have been due to the influence of Catholic leader Cardinal Emmett Carter, who worked with Trudeau when he was drafting the constitution. Carter wanted abortion left out but Trudeau wanted it in (I have a lot of information on this that I will be sharing soon). This may have been an appeasement.

I do agree with John Moore on this, however:

Those who insist upon pushing God further and further into the public square become angry when secularists push back and then scurrilously accuse non-believers of having started the fight. Non-believers want one thing: to be left alone. What atheists and agnostics fight for is the preservation of the shared secular oxygen that permits the faithful and non believers to co-exist. But some religious people are like prohibition era teetotalers: it’s not good enough to be sober so long as someone else is enjoying a good drink.

If, as my colleagues insist something must be supreme in Canada, let it be the law and the ultimate sovereign: the citizen.

Touche!

Conservative Bigotry Now Defining Canadian Values

To say that the Reformers are bigots, is like saying Sarah Palin is ignorant. Tell us something we don't know.

A story by Paul Koring (an excellent journalist always) in the Globe and Mail, only reveals that nothing has changed. They are still the same party they were more than 20 years ago, where only Anglo, Judea-Christian males need apply.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has been ordered to reconsider the Harper government's refusal to allow a Canadian citizen to return home to serve out his prison sentence.

In an unprecedented federal court ruling, the minister was given 45 days to explain and justify or reconsider the decision. It seems “inconsistent and arbitrary, and therefore it lacks transparency,” ruled Mr. Justice Robert Barnes of the Federal Court.

Yavar Hameed, the lawyer representing Dwayne Grant, the Canadian black man denied permission to return home, said he believed bias played a role in the Harper's government's decision ... Mr. Van Loan rejected the unanimous advice of senior government officials who recommended last March that Mr. Grant be allowed to return to Canada to serve out his sentence. “He's a black man; maybe that's why the treatment is different,” Mr. Grant's fiancée, Felecia Douglas, said in an interview prior to the judge's ruling last Thursday. In that ruling, Judge Barnes raised the same issues of double standards ...

There is a pattern of this kind of selective citizenship, that is not confined to Peter Van Loan. It just represents the Reformer's view of Canada.

I did have to correct one remark by Koring though:

In some high-profile cases, the Harper government has acted quite differently. Amid a public outcry, Prime Minister Stephen Harper sent a cabinet member to Mexico in May of 2008 to sort out the release of Brenda Martin, a white woman.

The government then chartered an executive jet for $82,000 and flew Ms. Martin, who had been convicted of fraud in connection with a pyramid scheme that bilked more than 15,000 people $60-million and sentenced to five years in prison, back to Canada. She was released from prison eight days later.

So I left this comment:

I have to correct the Brenda Martin situation. Harper did send Helena Guergis to Mexico to look into it, and all Guergis did was party. Martin said she NEVER even came to talk to her and prison officials confirmed they heard not a word from the minister.

It was only after W-Five exposed the story, that the Harper government took action. It had nothing to do with justice or protecting Canadian citizens.And as to 'Liberal' judges. They are Canadian judges appointed by the elected (by us) government of the day.And given that 2/3 of Canadians still live on the left side of the political spectrum, they best represent 'our values'.

IS THIS REALLY YOUR CANADA?

I agree with Pat Martin. No Taxpayer-funded Proselytization

“The problem is not with people or churches that are politically active. It is with a party that has gone so far in adopting a sectarian agenda that it has become the political extension of a religious movement.” John C. Danforth, U.N. Ambassador

As our neoconservative government is ramping up their social conservative agenda, Canadians have got to start speaking out.

They are setting an extremely dangerous precedent by funding Christian fundamentalist organizations, especially ones seeking to indoctrinate children. That has always been a recipe for disaster.

This year, our science minister, who doesn't believe in science; was tangled up in an adoption mess, involving several over zealous fundamentalists. Though Goodyear's interest in the project was monetary, I read some of the accounts of workers talking about teaching African children Bible stories, which on the surface might sound OK, but were the children's families aware of this? Were they even aware they were there?

According to one report; 'Nine adoptions from Ghana were suspended after officials there found some children at an orphanage run by an Ontario charity had been taken from their parents.'

There's a very fine line here.

So when we learn this week that the federal government is funding a Youth for Christ centre in Winnipeg, the red flags go up. Our federal government, or any government, should not be funding private religious schools or centres, and yet they are.

Canada is not a theocracy, and in fact this country embraces a lot of different faiths. It would appear that this groups 'mission', pardon the pun; may be about more than just providing a centre for youth.

Social conservative Vic Toews and NDP MP Pat Martin, got into a bit of a battle of words over this and I agree with Mr. Martin, when he called the proposal "taxpayer-funded proselytization."

"I have no objection to faith-based organizations providing services. Sally Ann (the Salvation Army) and others have been doing a great job for years.

But these people are evangelical fundamentalists," Martin said of Youth For Christ. "Offering much-needed sports opportunities is just their way of luring in young prospects." He went on to quip: "Would the federal government be so willing to give them $3 million if they were called Youth for Allah?"

Gordon Sinclair Jr. also discusses this situation in the Winnipeg Free Press; More ominous issue underlies Youth for Christ flap

Youth for Christ, an evangelical organization with a missionary-centred mission statement, was proposing to create a $12-million youth-centred recreation project [primarily aboriginal kids] ...

A Youth for Christ news release summarized it this way: "A Centre For Youth Excellence envisions services that promote sport and recreation, character development, community health services for all youth (especially for low-income
and high-risk youth) and spiritual formation opportunities from a Christian
world view."

It's that carefully cloaked phrase "spiritual formation opportunities" that suggests Youth for Christ's underlying raison d'être. They are out to convert aboriginal youth to Christianity.

And as Sinclair reminds us:

Systematic conversion -- and resulting subjugation of First Nations culture and religion -- by Ottawa-backed Christian organizations has a painful history in this country.

One of the neoconservative principles is that the government should not be involved in social programs at all, but that should be left to the churches to administer. This is wrong, on so many levels. If the churches hold the purse strings, what will be expected of people who need help?

Will they have to sell their souls for their daily bread?

What are Vic Toews and Jason Kenney Up To Now?

After defunding KAIROS because Charles McVety called them left wing ideologues, the Reformers appear to be playing games once again with another humanitarian aid organization.

They claim to be redirecting funding to put it more in line with 'Canadian Values'?

And did you wonder what those 'Canadian Values' are?

Apparently building courts and prisons in Palestine. What the hell?

How is it our job to be judge, jury and executioner ... in Palestine?

These guys scare the hell out of me. We've got to get the nuts off the hill and the Reformers out of government, because clearly they have no idea what Canadians value. We prefer it be humanitarian aid.

Canada redirects funding for UN relief agency
By Antonia Zerbisias
January 15, 2010

Is Canada pulling the plug on the UN's Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides education, health and other social services in 59 Palestinian refugee camps in the Middle East?

Will UNRWA's Canadian funding be diverted instead to training Palestinian police forces and building courthouses and prisons? That's certainly what was suggested on Wednesday by Treasury Minister Vic Toews in both the Jerusalem Post and a news release from B'nai Brith Canada ....

Three Years and Poilievre is Still Wimping Out on Accountability

It's been more than three years since the Conservatives rode into power on the promise of an accountability act, and yet they still have not delivered.

Apparently critics were right when they said it was no more that a public relations gimmick, and the fact that Pierre Poilievre actually sought the advice of the U.S. Republican Party before it was drafted, says it all.

Now NDP Pat Martin is suggesting that the entire idea be scrapped, because we are paying to staff an office that only exists on paper.

Of course, the Conservatives are still falling back on the tired 'it was all the opposition's fault', when they rejected a Tory fundraiser to head up the appointments commission. They've got to let it go. They tried to pull a fast one, but it didn't work.

Federal Public Appointments Commission should be scrapped: NDP
The PM abruptly cancelled the patronage watchdog office in 2006, but it has spent more than $1-million since.
The Hill Times,
June 15, 2009
By Cynthia Münster

The government should scrap the Federal Public Appointments Commission because it still doesn't have a promised patronage watchdog and has spent $1-million since 2006, says NDP MP Pat Martin.

The commission and the secretariat itself fall under the portfolio of the Prime Minister and the PMO and his Parliamentary Secretary Pierre Poilievre (Nepean-Carleton, Ont.) declined to respond to questions on the subject. When asked in Question Period in May, Mr. Poilievre said the officials within the secretariat are "in the process of establishing this important enhancement in the way appointments are done. Our government came forward with a very qualified nominee to head a review board for public appointments. The opposite decided to play partisan games with that nomination.

As such, our government was unable to fill that position," stated Mr. Poilievre. "We continue to make appointments based on merit and the government is currently laying the ground-work for the eventual establishment of a public appointments commissioner."

Treasury Board President Vic Toews (Provencher, Man.) told Civil Circles he wasn't aware of the state of the appointment or commission. "The only thing I know is the commissioner was rejected by the House," said Mr. Toews.

Calls to the secretariat were responded by Privy Council Office spokesperson Myriam Massabki, who would only say the office is setting the stage for the commissioner's office to be established, while acknowledging they've been doing it for two years.

"I don't have details of what they are doing exactly but their mandate and this is what they are doing, they are currently laying the grounds for the eventual establishment of the commission, I don't have any other detail on that but we have, as you know, the government has appointed a number of qualified individuals to key positions, that was done in the past and continues to be done," said Ms. Massabki.

Once the commission is set up, the secretariat's job will be to assist the commission, "providing policy and operational support to the chair and members." After the House rejected Mr. Morgan's appointment—MPs rejected him on comments he had made on immigrants, questioning the wisdom of multiculturalism—Mr. Harper said it was an "irresponsible decision" by the opposition and his government would need a majority to do that in the future, suggesting he would take it to the polls.

Lorne Sossin, director of the Centre For Professionalism, Ethics and Public Service at the University of Toronto Law School, said the "foreboding" comments worried people in the administrative justice community. "I think many people took that to mean that the Conservatives were going to be scaling back or not moving forward on the pledge to bring greater merit-based transparency to their appointments and that they would go back to business as usual, which has always included factors other than merit," said Prof. Sossin.

He said although a minority government is an "ideal time" to move forward with this kind of initiative because of an overarching need to have government act in some non-partisan ways and acceptable to other parties, he added that "he is afraid" it may take another crisis, "another Gomery-style set of events" to get these changes to happen.

It may also be that the government doesn't want another set of eyes watching its every movement. "You have to live by these institutions once you create them and Harper's disputes with Elections Canada, disputes with the Military Complaints Commissioner, the Nuclear Safety Commission when Linda Keen was there, there's a track record of being fairly abrasive with a number of these outside independent bodies and the appointments process is part of that governmental responsibility to show respect for the independence of these bodies by making sure they get really qualified people who merit the appointments, I see all of these issues as connected around the government's commitment to accountability," said Prof. Sossin.

Liberal MP Alan Tonks (York South-Weston, Ont.), who was part of the committee that looked at the Federal Accountability Act in the last Parliament, said it's an opportunity lost, but not forever.

"It's one that they could address and make that appointment, bring all parties together behind that and follow through on a promise that they made and put an infrastructure in place that transcends politics and whoever is the next government, inherits something that is very strong foundation as a mechanism in the public appointments process," said Mr. Tonks. "Patronage—and I use the term patronage because it was what was originally what the call for a Public Appointments Commission was all about—and patronage has no boundary or monopoly with respect to political party," said Mr. Tonks.

"There will always be charges that individuals are appointed because of their connections, the important thing is not their connections, it's their qualifications and capacity, experience and ability to do the job and the only way that will inevitably satisfy that first requirement, that people are qualified, it's to have an instrument that transcends partisanship like the Public Appointments Commission so it would be wise for the government to follow through on their promise because it's in the higher public interest and it would be wise for us to press it in Question Period with a well-prepared question and a preamble that sort of indicates that this is a very important part of the democratic and Parliamentary infrastructure," said Mr. Tonks.

The Conservatives have shown once again that they are all bluster and no substance, and who better than Pierre Poilievre to prove my point.