I should have been quicker on the ball with this because I had been anticipating this news for months now. It seems that Christmas came early this year (for me).
Yesterday, a remorseless Conrad Black (or Lord Black of Crossharbour), was sentenced to 78 months in prison for three counts of mail fraud and one for obstruction of justice. He must also return $6.1 million in restitution to the shareholders of Hollinger International and pay $125,000 in fines.
I wonder how prison orange will work with this rosy-undertoned complexion? Kidding. If he's placed in a minimum security prison, he probably won't have to don the jumpsuit.
Ah, well.
White collar crime is being punished. One can't help but be pleased.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
*smack*
And with that, the gauntlet has been thrown.
Last night, Governor General Michaëlle Jean delivered the much-ballyhooed Conservative Throne Speech from the... well, throne. There were enough election-minded rumblings in the days leading up to it, including Prime Minister's Stephen Harper's expectation that, should the speech pass, there would be full support of all the main elements mentioned therein, and oh, p.s. everything's a confidence motion, now.
The New Democratic Party and the Bloc Quebecois have firmly stated that they will not support the Throne Speech - which leaves the Liberals with the make-or-break votes. This morning's Toronto Star blared the headline "D-Day for Stephane Dion" (on the website, though, they've toned it down to "Election Hangs on Dion's Call") - the change itself indicates to me that even press understands that this was, perhaps, not the smackdown they expected.
The Globe and Mail managed to see through Harper's transparent posturing and called this a "Blueprint for an election" (seriously, since January 2006, when HASN'T Harper been itching to pull the election trigger?).
And this is precisely what irks me. It's clear that Harper wants an election like nothing else - that he's engineering everything so it will fall - but the blame will be placed on one of the Opposition parties. Everywhere, I keep hearing, "Whomever pulls the plug will suffer." But the Conservatives are the ones with their hands on the cord! Liberal leader Stephane Dion has already publicly stated that the Grits want to make this government work, so we'll have to see how the electorate responds to this.
For the Liberals, though, I think most commentators have already gone through this, but the speech is very dodgeable bullet; this is not a binding resolution, it's not a bill. Front bench can vote against this, back bench will mysteriously all have the flu, and we've staved off another election - at least for a little while. Better to save the drama for a worthier cause.
Anyway, the main points included:
- Afghanistan - extension of the mission until 2011,
- Kyoto - killing it dead,
- Tax cuts (GST and income tax being the focal points),
Afghanistan - we need to know in what capacity Harper intends for Canada will serve there until 2011. We cannot continue in a combat context (there's waning popular support for it anyway), and at the very least, this issue will require heavy debate in the House of Commons. But as a vaguery in the Throne Speech, I can't really say how this will go. There could be support for it if we take on a peacekeeping and aid role exclusively and reduce troop levels there, but it remains to be seen.
Kyoto - Stephane Dion is the champion of Kyoto. The Liberals cannot and will not let it die. There's no two ways about that. But we will have to re-tool some things, straighten out some numbers and present a reasonable new timetable that will bring us back on track with our previous commitments.
Taxes - Okay. Cuts are all very well and good (and they scream "ELECTION! VOTE FOR ME!", but that's another story). But at the same time, in terms of the GST - the cities have been lobbying for one percent of it in order to help support urban infrastructure. Help on transit is nice, but that's just one element out of many. And cosmopolitan cities such as Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal cannot be allowed to crumble because of a lack of tax revenues supporting its coffers. Especially since we're supposed to be flush with a $14 billion federal surplus. Admittedly, better economic planning is required (I'm looking at you, David Miller), but urban centres should not be expected to respond well in votes to a party that consistently ignores their needs. Just sayin'.
Opposition party leaders are expected to respond later this afternoon.
** Update **
It appears that cooler heads have prevailed. This afternoon, Dion announced that the Liberals will not topple the government on the Throne Speech. Amendments will be proposed for the speech, however, the party will abstain from voting should they be rejected.
Long story short: no election. Thank goodness.
Last night, Governor General Michaëlle Jean delivered the much-ballyhooed Conservative Throne Speech from the... well, throne. There were enough election-minded rumblings in the days leading up to it, including Prime Minister's Stephen Harper's expectation that, should the speech pass, there would be full support of all the main elements mentioned therein, and oh, p.s. everything's a confidence motion, now.
The New Democratic Party and the Bloc Quebecois have firmly stated that they will not support the Throne Speech - which leaves the Liberals with the make-or-break votes. This morning's Toronto Star blared the headline "D-Day for Stephane Dion" (on the website, though, they've toned it down to "Election Hangs on Dion's Call") - the change itself indicates to me that even press understands that this was, perhaps, not the smackdown they expected.
The Globe and Mail managed to see through Harper's transparent posturing and called this a "Blueprint for an election" (seriously, since January 2006, when HASN'T Harper been itching to pull the election trigger?).
And this is precisely what irks me. It's clear that Harper wants an election like nothing else - that he's engineering everything so it will fall - but the blame will be placed on one of the Opposition parties. Everywhere, I keep hearing, "Whomever pulls the plug will suffer." But the Conservatives are the ones with their hands on the cord! Liberal leader Stephane Dion has already publicly stated that the Grits want to make this government work, so we'll have to see how the electorate responds to this.
For the Liberals, though, I think most commentators have already gone through this, but the speech is very dodgeable bullet; this is not a binding resolution, it's not a bill. Front bench can vote against this, back bench will mysteriously all have the flu, and we've staved off another election - at least for a little while. Better to save the drama for a worthier cause.
Anyway, the main points included:
- Afghanistan - extension of the mission until 2011,
- Kyoto - killing it dead,
- Tax cuts (GST and income tax being the focal points),
Afghanistan - we need to know in what capacity Harper intends for Canada will serve there until 2011. We cannot continue in a combat context (there's waning popular support for it anyway), and at the very least, this issue will require heavy debate in the House of Commons. But as a vaguery in the Throne Speech, I can't really say how this will go. There could be support for it if we take on a peacekeeping and aid role exclusively and reduce troop levels there, but it remains to be seen.
Kyoto - Stephane Dion is the champion of Kyoto. The Liberals cannot and will not let it die. There's no two ways about that. But we will have to re-tool some things, straighten out some numbers and present a reasonable new timetable that will bring us back on track with our previous commitments.
Taxes - Okay. Cuts are all very well and good (and they scream "ELECTION! VOTE FOR ME!", but that's another story). But at the same time, in terms of the GST - the cities have been lobbying for one percent of it in order to help support urban infrastructure. Help on transit is nice, but that's just one element out of many. And cosmopolitan cities such as Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal cannot be allowed to crumble because of a lack of tax revenues supporting its coffers. Especially since we're supposed to be flush with a $14 billion federal surplus. Admittedly, better economic planning is required (I'm looking at you, David Miller), but urban centres should not be expected to respond well in votes to a party that consistently ignores their needs. Just sayin'.
Opposition party leaders are expected to respond later this afternoon.
** Update **
It appears that cooler heads have prevailed. This afternoon, Dion announced that the Liberals will not topple the government on the Throne Speech. Amendments will be proposed for the speech, however, the party will abstain from voting should they be rejected.
Long story short: no election. Thank goodness.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Ontario is red again
The Ontario general election was held today; polls closed at 9 p.m.
The votes are in for the most part and it's abundantly clear at this point that Ontario is looking at Liberal majority government.
While there were many potential election issues to choose from (seniors' care, for example, or autism funding, etc.), Conservative leader John Tory managed to trip up his own campaign before it could even get out of the gate with the publicly funded faith-based schools debacle.
Despite this promise being made early on, the topic refused to fade into the background for the duration of the election and was his political undoing. Tory's attempt to diffuse the issue nine days ago by stating that he would allow Members of Provincial Parliament to vote on faith-based schools in the Legislature, made his leadership look weak. Political pundits speculated that a free vote would kill the bill and Tory could walk away saying he kept his promise. It seemed like he would stand by his principles - unless opinion polls told him otherwise. Appearing to be indecisive, wavering or as though you were trying worm your way out doesn't look so great if your slogan is "Leadership matters".
And with that, Premier Dalton McGuinty returns with a second majority. Congratulations. Plus, I'm a fan of the idea of dental care for low-income families, among other things.
Speaking of the status quo, the referendum on whether to remain with the First Past the Post electoral system or change to Mixed Member Proportional has resulted in... well, the status quo. The difficulty here was that not enough was done to educate the public on what the options were. A pamphlet with my voter card is hardly enough, and although there is plenty of information on the Internet, one had to actively research the topic to understand what was happening. Both pro and con-MMP groups accused each other of misinformation, which only adds to the confusion.
And referendums are not usually the greatest instruments for initiating change, as the electorate will usually choose the status quo.
In short: this provincial election held no surprises.
And a little message to the federal branch of the Canadian government: for Pete's sake, please try to get along for the next six months. With Newfoundland and Labrador and Ontario just coming out of provincial elections this month, and Quebec, Prince Edward Island, the Northwest Territories and Manitoba earlier this year, we've got volunteer and voter fatigue. It would be nice if, for the next half a year, we weren't bombarded with more campaign material and had time to recuperate.
The votes are in for the most part and it's abundantly clear at this point that Ontario is looking at Liberal majority government.
While there were many potential election issues to choose from (seniors' care, for example, or autism funding, etc.), Conservative leader John Tory managed to trip up his own campaign before it could even get out of the gate with the publicly funded faith-based schools debacle.
Despite this promise being made early on, the topic refused to fade into the background for the duration of the election and was his political undoing. Tory's attempt to diffuse the issue nine days ago by stating that he would allow Members of Provincial Parliament to vote on faith-based schools in the Legislature, made his leadership look weak. Political pundits speculated that a free vote would kill the bill and Tory could walk away saying he kept his promise. It seemed like he would stand by his principles - unless opinion polls told him otherwise. Appearing to be indecisive, wavering or as though you were trying worm your way out doesn't look so great if your slogan is "Leadership matters".
And with that, Premier Dalton McGuinty returns with a second majority. Congratulations. Plus, I'm a fan of the idea of dental care for low-income families, among other things.
Speaking of the status quo, the referendum on whether to remain with the First Past the Post electoral system or change to Mixed Member Proportional has resulted in... well, the status quo. The difficulty here was that not enough was done to educate the public on what the options were. A pamphlet with my voter card is hardly enough, and although there is plenty of information on the Internet, one had to actively research the topic to understand what was happening. Both pro and con-MMP groups accused each other of misinformation, which only adds to the confusion.
And referendums are not usually the greatest instruments for initiating change, as the electorate will usually choose the status quo.
In short: this provincial election held no surprises.
And a little message to the federal branch of the Canadian government: for Pete's sake, please try to get along for the next six months. With Newfoundland and Labrador and Ontario just coming out of provincial elections this month, and Quebec, Prince Edward Island, the Northwest Territories and Manitoba earlier this year, we've got volunteer and voter fatigue. It would be nice if, for the next half a year, we weren't bombarded with more campaign material and had time to recuperate.
Wednesday, September 5, 2007
You gotta have faith... (Part 2)
Oh, John Tory. Are you trying to sink your own campaign?
According to The Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star (and various other outlets), the Progressive Conservative leader told reporters today:
Media headlines are now reading "Creationism raised as an Ont. election issue" and "Tory ignites debate over creationism in schools", etc. And as much as Tory is attempting to clarify that remark now, stating that he meant that the theory should be taught in religion classes, the soundbite has likely caused considerable damage to his own campaign. This incident, along with support for publicly funded faith-based schools, has changed his image from reasoned politician to backward bible-thumper.
The link to teaching creationism in science classes rather than religious ones came up when he mentioned "evolution" in the same breath - which could lead one to believe that his "clarification" is actually backtracking.
In terms of public reaction, however, there haven't been any polls yet on how the candidates are doing, only some angry rantings in the "Comments" section of news publications. I'll reserve my judgement on how well the Liberals are doing until after the numbers are released, but so far, I think Tory's done enough to divide his own base.
According to The Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star (and various other outlets), the Progressive Conservative leader told reporters today:
"They teach evolution in the Ontario curriculum but they also could teach
the facts to the children that there are other
theories that people have out
there that are part of some Christian beliefs,"
Media headlines are now reading "Creationism raised as an Ont. election issue" and "Tory ignites debate over creationism in schools", etc. And as much as Tory is attempting to clarify that remark now, stating that he meant that the theory should be taught in religion classes, the soundbite has likely caused considerable damage to his own campaign. This incident, along with support for publicly funded faith-based schools, has changed his image from reasoned politician to backward bible-thumper.
The link to teaching creationism in science classes rather than religious ones came up when he mentioned "evolution" in the same breath - which could lead one to believe that his "clarification" is actually backtracking.
In terms of public reaction, however, there haven't been any polls yet on how the candidates are doing, only some angry rantings in the "Comments" section of news publications. I'll reserve my judgement on how well the Liberals are doing until after the numbers are released, but so far, I think Tory's done enough to divide his own base.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
You gotta have faith...
As many of you may be aware, the Ontario general election will be held on October 10, 2007, and the topic du jour is the question of public funding for faith-based schools.
Progressive Conservative leader, John Tory, announced that if elected, he would extend public funding for education to include religious schools; the expected price tag - $400 million.
The plan has polarized the province, to be sure. But, I, for one, support this move. As a practicing Pastafarian, I'm thrilled to know that my future children may be able to attend a provincially-recognized and taxpayer funded school that is guided under the principles of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Okay, seriously now. Most of the religious groups that are clamouring over these provisions are pointing to the public funding of Roman Catholic separate schools. I would have to refer, however, to Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the purpose of which guarantees special rights specifically for Catholic schools in Ontario and Alberta, and Protestant schools in Quebec. And no more.
Further to that, a constitutional challenge was issued to Sections 2 (freedom of religion) and 15 (equality) in the form of Adler v. Ontario, 1996, which was heard by Supreme Court of Canada. It's an interesting read, by the way... at least to a junkie like me, but I would encourage people to review the conclusions to understand the final decision. The findings justified the lack of taxpayer funding for faith-based schools due to fact that public schools are fundamentally neutral and therefore do not discrimate on the basis of faith, that no child was coerced to go, and that there are a number of alternatives available (including home-schooling) that would not create a financial burden for parents who wanted to give their child a religious education. The case was dismissed.
With a Charter section and a legal precedent against him, John Tory really doesn't have much justification left for pursuing this particular platform.
What confuses me a little is why I hadn't heard about all of this until I did the research on my own.
Progressive Conservative leader, John Tory, announced that if elected, he would extend public funding for education to include religious schools; the expected price tag - $400 million.
The plan has polarized the province, to be sure. But, I, for one, support this move. As a practicing Pastafarian, I'm thrilled to know that my future children may be able to attend a provincially-recognized and taxpayer funded school that is guided under the principles of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
Okay, seriously now. Most of the religious groups that are clamouring over these provisions are pointing to the public funding of Roman Catholic separate schools. I would have to refer, however, to Section 29 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the purpose of which guarantees special rights specifically for Catholic schools in Ontario and Alberta, and Protestant schools in Quebec. And no more.
Further to that, a constitutional challenge was issued to Sections 2 (freedom of religion) and 15 (equality) in the form of Adler v. Ontario, 1996, which was heard by Supreme Court of Canada. It's an interesting read, by the way... at least to a junkie like me, but I would encourage people to review the conclusions to understand the final decision. The findings justified the lack of taxpayer funding for faith-based schools due to fact that public schools are fundamentally neutral and therefore do not discrimate on the basis of faith, that no child was coerced to go, and that there are a number of alternatives available (including home-schooling) that would not create a financial burden for parents who wanted to give their child a religious education. The case was dismissed.
With a Charter section and a legal precedent against him, John Tory really doesn't have much justification left for pursuing this particular platform.
What confuses me a little is why I hadn't heard about all of this until I did the research on my own.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Introduction
Welcome, welcome to The Great Red Spot.
As you can probably tell, the title of the blog and the URL themselves are literal references to the huge and permanent storm on the planet Jupiter. This is not, however, due to an intense interest in the planet nor astronomy, but merely because I... felt like using these names at the time. Such is my mercurial nature.
No, in fact, this blog will a place where I will broadcast my views (respectfully, I assure you) on Canadian and international politics and various other goings-on. The "Great Red Spot" is intended as a metaphor for my fondness for the Liberal Party of Canada and I will make no attempt to hide my left-of-centre leanings.
So, stay tuned and look out for future postings.
As you can probably tell, the title of the blog and the URL themselves are literal references to the huge and permanent storm on the planet Jupiter. This is not, however, due to an intense interest in the planet nor astronomy, but merely because I... felt like using these names at the time. Such is my mercurial nature.
No, in fact, this blog will a place where I will broadcast my views (respectfully, I assure you) on Canadian and international politics and various other goings-on. The "Great Red Spot" is intended as a metaphor for my fondness for the Liberal Party of Canada and I will make no attempt to hide my left-of-centre leanings.
So, stay tuned and look out for future postings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
