Showing posts with label Stephen Harper. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stephen Harper. Show all posts

Wednesday, 22 May 2013

The Harper Government's War On Science - an excellent chronology

From Science Blogs - The Canadian War On Science: A Long Unexaggerated, Devastating Chronological Indictment by John Dupuis.

Excerpt:
This is a brief chronology of the current Conservative Canadian government’s long campaign to undermine evidence-based scientific, environmental and technical decision-making. It is a government that is beholden to big business, particularly big oil, and that makes every attempt to shape public policy to that end. It is a government that fundamentally doesn’t believe in science. It is a government that is more interested in keeping its corporate masters happy than in protecting the environment.

Click the link for the details.

Sunday, 17 June 2012

NDP Rise To 37%, Conservatives Drop To 30%

Since Tom Mulcair was chosen to lead the party back in March, the NDP has maintained a strong support across Canada, which has continued to grow. The opposite is true for the Conservatives. Their support has been steadily dropping. Canadians are becoming more aware of the scandals plaguing them. And the exposure of the omnibus budget bill has not helped the Conservatives either. The Liberals are maintaining their support in the low 20s.

Of Significant Note:
Some things of significant note about the latest poll numbers from Forum Research are that the NDP are now ahead of the Conservatives in the Prairies (43% to 33%), and are tied in Ontario at 34% each.

Previously, the Conservatives led in Alberta, Ontario and the Prairies, while the NDP led in Quebec, BC and in the Atlantic provinces. Now the Conservatives only lead in Alberta, are tied in Ontario, and the NDP leads everywhere else.

Also, Bob Rae's decision to bow out of the Liberal leadership race boosted his approval rating to 40% nationally.

Poll Standings
CANADA
NDP 37%
Con 30%
Lib 22%
Green 5%
Bloc 6%

ONTARIO
NDP 34%
Con 34%
Lib 28%
Green 3%

QUEBEC
NDP 41%
Con 15%
Lib 18%
Green 4%
Bloc 22%

BC
NDP 45%
Con 30%
Lib 17%
Green 7%

ALBERTA
NDP 13%
Con 60%
Lib 18%
Green 7%

PRAIRIES
NDP 43%
Con 33%
Lib 19%
Green 5%

ATLANTIC
NDP 44%
Con 28%
Lib 22%
Green 4%

This poll had a sample size of 1529, which has a margin of error of 2.51%, 19 times out of 20.

Other poll findings:
Favourable support of party leaders:
Tom Mulcair 39%
Stephen Harper 31%
Bob Rae 40%

Net Approval (approve minus disapprove)
Tom Mulcair +8%
Stephen Harper -30%
Bob Rae +8%

Forum Research:
In a sign that Canadians appreciate a clean exit, Bob Rae's approval rating has
increased from one third last month (33%) to 4-in-10 now (40%), and he has a
net approval (approve minus disapprove) of +8. This compares very favourably
with Tom Mulcair's approval of 4-in-10 (39%), and net approval of +8. Both these
scores easily outdistance those for Stephen Harper (31% approval, net approval
-30).


Majority expects government to be defeated in next election
In a measure of perception rather than voting intention, more than one half of
Canadians expect the current government to be defeated in the next election
(53%), while one third expect it to be re-elected (34%). While this is very similar
to levels of Conservative support, it should be noted that just 8-in-10
Conservative voters expect their party to be re-elected (79%), while one tenth do
not expect this to happen (11%). In an exact reversal of opinion, 8-in-10 NDP
supporters do not think the government will be re-elected (79%), and one tenth
think it will be (11%).
 

Trudeau as leader improves Liberal fortunes
If Justin Trudeau were leader of the Liberal party and the election were held
today, while the reduced plurality (32%) would still support the NDP, the Liberals
and the Conservatives would draw even in second place, with just more than a
quarter of the electorate each (28% each). The Bloc would claim the support of
5% and the Green Party of 4%. It is clear that Trudeau draws support (about 5%)
from the NDP.


Justin Trudeau leads all other contenders
When asked to select from a list of contenders for the Liberal leadership, one
quarter of Canadians in general (23%) and one third of Liberal supporters (33%)
pick Justin Trudeau, and no one else comes close. Close to one half of Canadians
(44%) and one quarter of Liberal supporters (26%) don't know who to select.
John Manley (7%) was more popular among Conservative supporters (13%) and
residents of Manitoba / Saskatchewan and Alberta (14% each). Like Trudeau,
Dominic Leblanc (4%) had highest support from residents of the Atlantic (11%)
and Quebec (6%). Gerard Kennedy (5%) was more likely to be selected by
Ontarians and British Columbians (8% each) than those of other provinces. Martha Hall-Findlay was more popular among Albertans (6%). In addition, Marc
Garneau had the support of close to a tenth of Quebeckers (8%).
 

Majority of Liberals approve of Trudeau as leader
When asked directly if they approved or disapproved of Justin Trudeau as leader
of the Liberals, the majority of party supporters (58%) approve, while just one
fifth disapprove (21%). Among the general populace, there is a split in opinion,
and just less than 4-in-10 approve (39%) and just more than a third disapprove
(34%).
Quebeckers had the highest approval for Trudeau as the leader of the Liberal
Party (49%; compared to 40% Atlantic, 39% Ontario, 36% Manitoba /
Saskatchewan, 31% British Columbia, 25% Alberta).


More Analysis:

Dave Akin's On The Hill: Has It Ever Been So Good To Be A New Democrat?
One thing that people are debating in the comments to Dave's post is that Ed Broadbent had 40% support in between polls back in 1986, but that dropped significantly when it came to election time and the NDP remained in 3rd place. The major differences here are that there was a huge rise in support for the NDP before the most recent election, at which time the NDP became the official opposition with a large number of seats, and that support for the party has pretty much maintained since that time.

Thursday, 14 June 2012

What a lot of people think of Stephen Harper right now

This picture from the This Is Not My Government Facebook Page, is currently going viral on Facebook (at least).



Considering the history of his Conservative government, and the current destruction of Canada he is pushing through parliament with his omni-mess budget bill, it is no wonder that this picture is popular.


Sunday, 10 June 2012

Conservatives Opening A Door To The Spreading of Hatred In Canada

Bill C-304: Hate Speech Clause's Repeal Gives White Supremacists Rare Moment Of Glee

White Supremacists might be happy about this, but the purpose of removing this clause was to allow the Christian Right to further spread hatred against the the gay community, same sex marriage and a woman's right to choose to have an abortion. The Christian Right has been pushing for changes like this (removing this clause of the Human Rights Act) for years in order to spread their hatred.

From Marci McDonald's The Armageddon Factor: (2010, p. 276 hardcover edition): Indeed, as Christian nationalists ... vent their views in the unregulated ether of the Internet, their chief worry is  a complaint filed against them with one of the country's assorted human rights commissions, which have become the religious right's new bete noirs - the latest gatekeepers of balance and secular humanism forcing Bible believers to measure their words.

The Christian Right has been part of the Harper Conservative government for years now and are a core supporter of this government. To maintain this support, Harper has to continue to open doors for them. In an effort to make it look to the rest of the public like his government is not pushing for draconian measures, he is getting his MPs to introduce controversial legislation as private members bills. He and his ministers may also claim that they are not interested in supporting them. But make no mistake, his government is 100% behind these private members bills.

From the CBC article Should The Human Rights Act Forbid Online Hate Speech?:
The Canadian Bar Association says that promotion of hatred is a "social evil" that has increased with the proliferation of the internet, and that the standard for wilful promotion of hatred in the Criminal Code is very difficult to prove. The CBA supported "retaining section 13 as a useful tool," but had reservations about the punitive fines. (PDF file)

Friday, 27 April 2012

Tom Mulcair And NDP In The Lead, Confidence In Harper Plummets

Two polls were released today: Forum (April 25 - sample of 1744), and Nanos (April 18 - sample of 1200). The Forum poll, having a much larger sample, is the more accurate of the two. It is also more recent, so it will give us a better picture regarding recent events in Parliament.

Forum poll findings
The findings here are that the NDP is now in the lead, and Tom Mulcair's popularity has shot up.
Comparison between March 30 and April 25 Forum Polls:

Party - March 30 - April 25 - change

NDP - 34% - 36% - +2%
Con - 36% - 33% - -3%
Lib  - 19% - 22% - +3%
Green - 5% - 2% - -3%
Bloc - 5% - 6% - +1%


Leader Popularity - March 30 - April 25 - change
Mulcair - 32% - 41% - +9%
Harper - 34% - 34% - no change
Rae     - 36% - 35% - -1%

The significant finding here in the Forum results is that Mulcair's popularity has surged ahead of the other leaders. Also, this is the first poll showing the NDP to take the lead with more than a 2 point spread. (From March 18 to April 18, 7 polls (Environics, Forum, Harris-Decima, Leger, Ipsos-Reid, and Nanos) all had the NDP and Conservatives either tied or within 2 points of each other (except the Nanos poll, which has the Conservatives ahead by 3)).

This Forum poll also shows the NDP moving into a minority government position:
Seat projections from this poll compared to seats won at election time:

Party - Election - April 25, 2012
NDP - 103 - 133 (forming a minority government)
Con - 166 - 118
Lib  - 34 - 54
Bloc - 4 - 2
Green - 1 - 1


Nanos poll findings
The previous Nanos poll was at the end of Feb - a time when the NDP had their interim leader Nycole Turmel. During this period the Liberals were more popular than the NDP. The findings here show that the NDP are on the rise, the Liberals have dropped back closer to their election-level popularity and that the Conservatives support remains about the same (although down from their election level of 40%). The significant findings in the Nanos poll are the drops in ratings for Stephen Harper in trustworthiness, competency and vision for Canada.

Party - Feb. 29 - April 18 - change
NDP - 25% - 32% - +7%
Con  - 36% - 35% - -1%
Lib   - 30% - 23% - -7%
Green - 3% - 4% - +1%
Bloc   - 5% - 4% - -1%

Leader - Feb 29 - April 18 - change

Leader Trustworthiness
Turmel - 7% - Mulcair - 20% - +13%
Harper - 32% - 20% - -12%
Rae - 20% - 14% - -6%

Leader Competence
Turmel - 6% - Mulcair - 17% - +11%
Harper - 38% - 24% - -14%
Rae - 19% - 12% - -7%

Leader Vision for Canada
Turmel - 8% - Mulcair - 17% - +9%
Harper - 33% - 22% - -11%
Rae - 16% - 11% - -5%

In these specific Nanos leadership ratings we can see that Canadians' confidence in Harper has plummeted, dropped significantly for Rae, and people have much more confidence in Mulcair than Turmel as leader of the NDP.

Forum Research latest poll results
Nanos latest poll results
News articles on these results from The Toronto Star, CBC, The National Post, The Globe & Mail.

Friday, 13 April 2012

Smack Stephen Harper

Frustrated with Harper and his government of looters in suits lying to us and taking our money to spend on jets that don't work and jails we don't need, and cheating to get elected? Take your frustrations out at Smack Stephen Harper!

After smacking him a few times, leave a comment.

Saturday, 10 March 2012

Crooks & Liars: Harper and his Conservatives and their Election Fraud

We've always known, via an ever-growing mountain of facts, that Harper and his Conservatives are crooks and liars. Will this election fraud situation be the addition to the mountain that will raise it high enough to fall over the wall of denial built by those gullible and ignorant Canadians who continue to vote Conservative against their own best interests?

At the moment, polls show that the Conservative core support still stands behind them. But a smoking gun has not yet been produced. Still waiting on the investigation by Elections Canada.

Tuesday, 6 March 2012

NDP vs The RoboCall Scandal

The corporate mainstream media has been doing a pretty lousy job of giving fair coverage to the official opposition party, the NDP. Someone who didn't know better might think the Liberals were still the official opposition party in Canada when reading the big daily papers (on-line or the paper copies).

To fill in the gaps on what the NDP has been up to in parliament with their concerns about the Election Fraud/Robocall scandal, here are some links:

Feb. 23, 2012
Use of dirty tricks to disrupt voters shameful - Harper must answer for use of voter suppression tactics by Conservative-linked firm

Reality Check: Prime Minister's local riding campaign linked to RackNine

RCMP, elections comish must find and charge those responsible - New Democrats write to Elections Commissioner pledging support for investigation

Dear Conservatives: please explain those misleading phone calls, again

Feb. 24, 2012
Reality Check: RackNine's "political superweapon"

Feb. 25, 2012
Reality Check: RackNine's government cheque

Feb. 26, 2012
NDP write to elections commish with new info on vote suppression - list of ridings where voters faced alleged suppression tactics grows

Feb. 28, 2012
Reality Check: Dean Del Mastro debunked - polling stations not changed

March 2, 2012
Statement by New Democratic leader Nycole Turmel on the investigation by Elections Canada

NDP Reality Check: Dean Del Mastro vs the truth

Friday, 13 January 2012

Same Sex Marriages For Foreigners Living In Canada Nullified?

You have probably all read, by now, the news stories from Jan 12th about how the Harper government has come out saying that marriages no longer count between gay couples who have come from countries where gay marriage is illegal.
This is not actually true.

What's true is that there is a current court case where a gay couple who do not live in Canada, came to Canada, got married and then left Canada, then came back to get a divorce. Now, since they did not reside in Canada after getting the marriage, the marriage is not recognized to be valid by Canadian law. This is no change in how the law has been for a very long time in Canada.
See:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/kevin-kindred/why-nobody-gets-it-and-everyone-is-an-idiot-a-series-of-indeterminate-length/10150462308551080

However, what is getting people upset, and justifiably so, is that, 
A) we know full well that the Harper government would love nothing better than for this law to be misinterpreted in the courts to mean that foreign gay couples who have continued to reside in Canada after being married here are no longer legally married.
and
B) Harper did absolutely nothing to reassure Canadians that gay couples living in Canada, who came to get married here and have stayed living in Canada, are still legally married and that what is happening in the court case right now will not affect them. He just said he was not aware of the court case.

A supporter of equal rights and gay marriage would have reassured Canadians regarding this issue in the courts. We know that Harper, his government, and his core supporters are vehemently against gay marriage and would do anything they could to set equality back in Canada.

Olivia Chow on gay marriage

Thursday, 12 January 2012

Sorry World

Sorry World
A site apologizing to the world for having let Stephen Harper become Prime Minister


Monday, 2 January 2012

CBC - The Armageddon Factor

News clip by the CBC regarding the growing influence of the religious Right with the Conservative Harper government, and interview with Marci McDonald, author of The Armageddon Factor.

See also:
CBC: MPs under the influence of evangelicals?

Tuesday, 20 December 2011

Harper Government Cuts to transfer payments to provinces should surprise no one

Canada News: Ottawa to scale back health transfer payments - thestar.com
This has been Harper's plan all along - cut federal money spent on healthcare and social services. The premiers should not be surprised that the federal government is going to reduce the transfer payments.
Of course Harper's looters in suits will continue to waste Canadians' money on more corporate tax cuts and buying non-functioning fighter jets and building un-needed superjails.

Friday, 7 October 2011

Top 10 under-reported facts about a decade of war in Afghanistan

Top 10 under-reported facts about a decade of war in Afghanistan | rabble.ca
Excerpt regarding "Women's Rights"
The "women's rights" rationale has been exposed as a cynical sham. I'm not sure who really takes this fraud seriously anymore, but it's important to remember that this was presented early on through wall-to-wall media coverage as a key reason for occupying Afghanistan. Afghan women's rights boosted the careers of many western NGO spokespeople, but from the beginning the post-Taliban government installed by NATO was full of anti-women fundamentalists. Rapists continue to enjoy widespread impunity in Afghanistan; female suicide by self-immolation is higher than ever. Many outspoken women's activists have been murdered, either by the Taliban or by fundamentalists linked with the Afghan government. Others, like Malalai Joya, have been banished from elected positions.

Thursday, 25 August 2011

Saturday, 13 August 2011

Apocalyptic crisis budgeting

Apocalyptic crisis budgeting - thestar.com
This is a good article by Edmund Pries in the Star regarding the recent budgeting of conservative governments.

Here it is below. I've highlighted a few parts:
The headlines have been apocalyptic and relentless. Unless the U.S. cuts trillions in social spending, it will go bankrupt. Unless Canada cuts billions in federal spending, our economy will go bust. Unless Toronto cuts more than $700 million in program spending, the city will
collapse. We live in an age of apocalyptic crisis budgeting. Unless the most drastic social spending cuts are implemented, the world as we know it will sink into the quicksand of debt, never to reappear again. How could this happen?

During the Reagan era, a friend and former colleague, a professor of American history, was invited to the deliberations of a Washington think-tank that provided policy direction for the Republican Party. As they discussed growing the debt and increasing the deficit, he was
flabbergasted: “Are you not the party of balanced budgets and debt elimination?” The reply was unequivocal, “Our goal is to grow the deficit as much as possible in order to create political space to eliminate government-funded programming. Until then, we want high deficits while lobbying for a balanced budget — and promoting social program cuts as the only solution.”

To create this useful deficit, tax cuts to wealthy individuals and corporate sectors would be dramatically increased, especially to the banking, energy and military segments. In short, one would implement a transfer of the state’s revenue supply obligations from the wealthiest to the poor and middle classes in order to permit an even greater transfer of wealth from the middle classes to the rich thereafter.


The only trick was to convince the poor and middle classes to “buy in” via a mixture of patriotism and structural necessity so that they would vote in favour of cutting the very programs that benefited them.

Canadians have had front row seats to observe this structural engineering over the past two decades. After years of sky-high deficits, Bill Clinton’s Democrats balanced the budget and produced a surplus. Then George W. Bush granted tax relief for the wealthiest and went to war in Afghanistan and Iraq to create the largest deficit in American history. As Bush exited from office and Obama entered, trillions of dollars were transferred by the government (funded mostly by middle-class Americans) to the banks. As a thank you, the banks foreclosed on the homes of more people than at any other time in history. The recent debt ceiling settlement follows the pattern as additional social spending cuts are implemented without cancelling Bush’s tax cuts to the very rich.

Like Clinton in the U.S., the federal Liberals left office with a budgetary surplus. The Conservatives created the largest deficit in Canadian history and, unbelievably, ran an election campaign on financial management savvy! Of course, they created the deficit in part by implementing tax cuts and engaging in discretionary spending designed to produce the deficit which, we are told, now needs to be eliminated by cutting programs.

The same approach has now come to Toronto and is being mimicked by Rob Ford. He, too, was left a surplus by his predecessor. Nevertheless, the agenda marches on. First, create the crisis by reducing the revenue base through tax cuts and then take the budget knife to Toronto’s city-wide programs. Instead of articulating a vision for building a great city, it is simply a slash and burn approach to a manufactured crisis.

Some have pretended that the budgetary crisis is real and not manufactured. Let us be clear: our relative wealth is greater than atany time in our history. Our collective ability to build a strong,caring and inclusive society in which everyone can participate has never
been greater. This also holds true for the community of nations: wehave the capacity to build a just global society.

Our preparedness to do so, however, seems utterly lacking, for an extreme individualism has taken over the mindset of many. We believe, falsely, that we are best served by hoarding as many resources as possible and letting others fend for themselves. The opposite is true. We are best served when we build a society together where all, including
each reader of this article, can benefit through the building of community-wide programs.

In many 16th century European cities, each citizen was required to swear an annual citizenship oath to the city (or community) in which they resided. In it citizens affirmed, among other things, their commitment to “support the well-being of their neighbour” and “promote the common good.” Toronto’s early history as a community, like Canada’s as a country, speaks of similar goals and aspirations.

Have we really lost our sense of the common good? Or is each person now on his or her own? There is no apocalyptic budgetary crisis other than of our own making. The crisis is in our orientation. 


Edmund Pries teaches in the department of global studies at Wilfrid Laurier University


Wednesday, 10 August 2011

Stephen Harper has a tantrum in Brazil and locks himself in the bathroom until he gets his way

Less amusing translation of Brazilian article on Harper bathroom tiff | Centre Block

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper put Brazilian diplomats in a
difficult (embarrassing) position this Monday, demanding a change in the
Brazilian diplomatic protocol and only accepted to come out for lunch
after his request had been accepted.


The official speeches and toasts can take place before or after
lunch. Dilma (Rouseff, Brazil’s president) prefers to have these after
lunch, so this is what is being done during her presidency. But Harper
was adamant that it should take place before lunch. He did not explain
why.


Harper had already irked Dilma’s advisors and diplomats when he
announced that he wished to speak to journalists at the Palacio do
Planalto (the Presidential Palace) when the protocol is generally that
foreign dignitaries talk to the press at the Itamaraty (the Foreign
Affairs palace).


Since Brazilian diplomats denied his request to speak to the press at
the Presidential palace, Harper was already in a bad mood when he
arrived for lunch. He demanded the shift in protocol at the lunch event,
and locked himself in the private bathroom of ministro Antonio Patriota
(Brazil’s Foreign Affairs Minister) while he waited for a reply.


Brazilian diplomats were taken aback and did not know what to do – if
they should listen to Dilma’s request or to Harper. Harper arrived at
the room (in the Foreign Affairs ministry) where the lunch was taking
place only when Brazilian diplomats confirmed that the speeches and
toasts would take place before lunch, as he had demanded.


The Canadian Embassy in Brasilia does not confirm this version of
events, but the Folha has confirmed with diplomats present at the event.

Other links for this story:

Original story from Folha.com

CBC: PMO denies Brazilian bathroom brinkmaship

The Mark: Did PM Stage Potty Protest in Brazil?

Buckdog: Looks Like Stephen Harper Locked Himself In Bathroom In Dispute With President of Brazil .....

Montreal Simon: Stephen Harper's Toilet Bowl Diplomacy

Sister Sage: We always knew Stephen Harper was anally retentive




Thursday, 4 August 2011

The transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and how this affects Toronto

Toronto at a crossroads: Will Ford's austerity agenda be derailed? | rabble.ca
Excerpts:

Lost in the rhetoric is the fact that there actually is a "revenue"
problem, a problem that is deeply connected to the larger austerity
agenda.


The city's budget is inextricably tied to other levels of government.
There are very few city services that do not receive a significant
percentage of their funding from the federal and provincial governments.
What we are seeing at the city level are merely the local impacts of
austerity measures taken at higher levels of government.


Childcare is an excellent example. Roughly 80% of funding for Toronto
Children's Services comes from the province. Some of the provincial
funding is actually, indirectly, from federal funding via transfer
payments. For many years, the budget for Children's Services has been
significantly under-funded. There are currently almost 20,000 children
waiting for subsidized childcare spaces, in a daycare network that can
only accommodate 30% of Toronto's children aged 0-9 years old. The
strain on the system will only become worse in light of significant cuts
to the provincial Best Start funding and the federal Early Learning and
Child Care funding. With the loss of these funds, the city has created
contingency plans for cutting between 2,000 and 5,000 subsidized child
care spaces in the next year.


Such cuts will directly affect the ability of low-income parents,
primarily mothers, to get paid work to support their children. For these
parents, affordable daycare is a core service that must be maintained.
For KPMG, the private-sector consultants hired by Ford to find the
"gravy," at least 2,000 childcare spaces should be labelled as
"non-core" services that are ripe for the cutting.


These cuts, if they are made, will be made by Ford and his cronies,
but it was the Harper and McGuinty governments who set the stage.


The global recession of 2008-2009 has served as a convenient excuse
for the implementation of an austerity agenda by all levels of
government from coast to coast. While banks and corporations benefit
from extremely generous corporate welfare and the Toronto Police Service
is enjoying pay raises of over 10%, the brunt of the profitability
crisis is being borne by everyone else through cuts to services and
public sector jobs.


So there is money for fighter jets, at the same time as the federal
government cuts transfers for childcare funding. There is money to
expand Canadian military bases in seven countries, while the federal
government has cut $53 million from settlement services. As both the
federal government and the City of Toronto move to reduce corporate
taxes and increase the amount that individuals pay for services, the
austerity agenda results in the massive transfer of wealth from the poor
to the rich.


If politicians were serious about getting rid of the "gravy," they
would be looking to the banks and corporations that are profiting
immensely on the basis of public monies, to the detriment of everyone
else. More profits through the fire sale and privatization of government
services are the next station for the corporate gravy train.


The City of Toronto budget cuts are just the local impact of the
larger austerity agenda. They are not simply about surrendering to the
neoliberal dogma that budgets must be balanced. For right-wingers like
Ford and co., cutting government spending is a political goal in itself.
For example, reduced funding for public health nurses reinforces the
idea that generous City services are a thing of the past. It also
reinforces the message to public sector workers that their jobs are on
the chopping block and won't be saved by money from other sources.

...

Signs of trouble for the corporate gravy train


The City of Toronto is at a crossroads. While Ford has not yet
revealed his plans for gutting services, slashing City jobs and
privatization, the potential areas identified for so-called
"efficiencies" are frightening. On the chopping block are thousands of
unionized jobs and services including public libraries, childcare
spaces, night buses and recreation centres and programs. Recent comments
by the mayor suggest that he will be pushing for the cancellation of
the entire community grant program, a fund upon which many community
agencies rely in order to deliver needed services to marginalized
communities.


But there are reasons to be hopeful. For one thing, activist
organizations, unions, community agencies and community groups have not
been silent. A massive organizing effort is underway against the Ford
cuts. While the effectiveness of the efforts by these very disconnected
groups is certainly up for debate, there is real resistance. One major
barrier has been that the City unions, still rebuilding public support
following a disastrous 2009 strike and immersed in their own contract
negotiations, have been unable to provide significant leadership for a
broad fight back to defend jobs and services.


Second, Ford's own plan for shoring up legitimacy for his massive
cuts is backfiring spectacularly. A series of community meetings and an
online survey were meant to provide the veneer of public consultations.
There is no doubt that the surveys were designed in order to get results
supportive of Ford's agenda. The surveys asked respondents to identify
"where" cuts should be made, not "if" they should be made. If, despite
this leading question, a respondent felt that a particular service
should be maintained, they were asked to identify whether services
should be maintained by way of increases to property taxes or user fees
or both. No other options were provided. The expectation was that
self-interest would win the day and the survey results would support the
cuts. Instead, the almost 13,000 Torontonians who participated in the
survey voted overwhelmingly in favour of preserving city services. A
large majority were even in favour of increasing property taxes if
necessary.


These results are all the more hopeful in a context in which Ford
publicly called upon his "Ford Nation" to turn out in droves to
participate in the public consultations. It should not be forgotten that
while Ford rode a tide of popularity into the mayor's office, he did so
on a campaign that he would not cut services. The survey results
suggest that Torontonians expect him to keep that promise.


Similarly, the KPMG Core Service Review has found that the City is
legally obligated to provide the vast majority of its services, which
thus cannot be cut. As headlines in the local papers have trumpeted,
there seems to be little in the way of "gravy" to be found. While KPMG
has certainly identified areas for cuts, many of the suggestions in the
KPMG reports are deeply unpalatable to City Councillors, who will not
want to account to their constituents for having voted in favour of
cutting services like snow plowing and child care. The Toronto Star and
to a lesser extent the Sun, as well as the Globe and Mail, have been
critical of the proposed cuts as well.


Third, Ford has managed to anger some heavyweight interests. For
example, the mayor's brother and closest ally, Doug Ford, has been
attempting to unravel plans for the Toronto waterfront that have been in
place for years, raising uncertainty about $1.5 billion in private
sector investments. Not surprisingly, developers are hopping mad.


Ford's suggestions that he is prepared to slash the Toronto Police
Service budget will likely also result in serious push back. After all,
as the federal government's massive budget increases for prisons and the
military demonstrate, the austerity agenda has generally meant a
significant commitment to building up the security apparatus to maintain
public order. Ford seems to have gone off-script in this respect (which
is not to say that cuts to the police budget would not be at least one
welcome result of the austerity agenda).


Thus, Ford's corporate gravy train may be on some rickety tracks. The
Executive Committee will be making public Ford's plans for the 2012
Toronto City budget in September. This will be the next major step to
implement an austerity agenda which could cause immense suffering,
poverty and marginalization. Activists are targeting Councillors that
they think will vote against Ford's agenda, and communities are
mobilizing for this key September meeting and beyond. No matter what
happens, the results of this battle will be decisive for years to come
and will have repercussions well beyond Toronto.


Jackie Esmonde is a member of Toronto New Socialists, No One is Illegal (Toronto) and the Stop the Cuts Network.


This article first appeared in The New Socialist.


Read the whole article:

Toronto at a crossroads: Will Ford's austerity agenda be derailed? | rabble.ca








Thursday, 14 July 2011

RCMP to investigate the Looters In Suits $50 million expenditure 100km from Huntsville (un-approved G8 spending)

RCMP finally investigates Muskoka’s G8 ‘Legacy Infrastructure’ « the reeves report
Excerpt from The Reeves Report:
Because of an election-time early leak of the Auditor General’s G8 report which I wrote about here, many opposition MP’s were suspicious of the way in which funds were spent during the G8/G20 debacle. According to the Montreal Gazette,
“the audit also found millions of dollars worth of projects — including
construction of public washrooms and gazebos — were authorized without
approval from department officials, and ended up having little to do
with their original purpose, presented to Parliament as funding for
‘border infrastructure.’”



$50K for a gazeebo 100km from Huntsville. Border Infrastructure. Huh.


What it comes down to, G8/G20 rioting or no, is that
Canadian taxpayers from coast-to-coast should not be paying for
“beautification projects” from a “legacy fund” in the Conservative
riding of Perry Sound-Muskoka just because the riding is held by a loyal
Conservative whose constituents didn’t embarrass the Prime Minister
when Obama was looking.
These kind of rewards simply
reinforce the notion that patronage payments will be made to
Conservative ridings, and if you’re stupid enough to live outside the
Tory world, well nuts to you.



And while I am not suggesting that Toronto should have received funds because of the rioting, I am suggesting that as a good will gesture to the citizens of Toronto from their
Prime Minister, whether they voted for him or not, Stephen Harper
should not have been so callous as to tell Toronto to go to hell and
sleep in the bed they made. Which is pretty well what happened.



While there is no way for the RCMP to investigate the motive
behind the decision to award Perry Sound-Muskoka for not causing a
fuss, that would be amazing. Sadly, an investigation into the sketchy
truth of the matter will have to suffice. I won’t hold my breath for
restitution on behalf of the City of Toronto, but if something
unscrupulous led to our being left to lick our wounds alone, I am in
favour of finding out what happened.


Wednesday, 13 July 2011

NDP warns against Conservatives' snooping law

NDP warns against Conservatives’ snooping law
This is what fascism looks like. Decreasing rights and privacy of the people and increasing the powers of the state and the police.

Conservative voters and people who didn't vote - this is what you support.

Thursday, 7 July 2011

You're not defending our freedoms

An Open Letter to the Troops: You’re Not Defending Our Freedoms: Information Clearing House: ICH
Stephen Harper, Conservatives and Liberals : you should take heed of this letter too. The situation in Afghanistan with Canadian troops is also pointless, is not defending our freedoms, and jeopardizes the safety of Canadians all over the world.