Prorogue precedents

Steven Harper wanted to shut down Parliament just because he does not agree with it. Some say this is unprecedented.

In fact, Harper is following parliamentary tradition. Consider the following precedents:

1629 King Charles I in England
1799 Napoleon in France
1913: Victoriano Huerta in Mexico
1933: Adolf Hitler in Germany
1936 Francisco Franco in Spain
1939: Benito Mussolini in Italy
1973: Augusto Pinochet in Chile
2008: Steven Harper in Canada

with thanks to Sean in Ottawa for bringing this to my attention.

Coalition: Keep Meeting

Keep meeting

This is posted from a comment by Eric Finley to a post at pogge.ca.  This action would demonstrate that opposition to Stephen Harper and to the events of the last week isn’t just some fleeting, momentary frustration. And it would demonstrate that objection to today’s decision is based on both serious concern for our democracy and for the urgency of the occasion. Please give it your consideration and feel free to leave your comments below.

Keep meeting.

To the coalition: Keep meeting.

Parliament has been prorogued. So you’re not meeting in an official capacity. But nonetheless meet as if you were not prorogued.

Find a site. Pay for it yourselves, and be explicit about that. You’re citizens meeting to speak. But in so doing, keep up the business of Parliament. Debate. Draft bills. Hold (unofficial) committee meetings. Vote… on memoranda of understanding.

Show the country, its citizens, and its investors that while you do not argue with the legality of the delay, you see no need to go on vacation in this crucial economic time. Assume (without even explicitly saying it) that in January when Parliament reconvenes, Harper will fall, the coalition will form government, and the memoranda of understanding and drafted bills will be dealt with, bang-bang-bang, because you have already hashed this out.

Invite the Conservatives to join you. If you get some momentum, you might get no few disgruntled members willing to bet that Harper’s fury will not control their lives.

Let the Conservatives take an extended vactation. Shrink the proposed vacation period instead, to mark the severity of the economic need.

Make it plain that you do not dispute Her Excellency’s right to consent to her nominal first minister’s request to prorogue, and that you respect her for making a difficult decision in uncharted waters. Open each session with a consistent, well-crafted adaptation of protocol which is sufficiently distinct that it does not trespass upon Parliament’s formal privileges… but that nonetheless shows clearly that you do this out of the uttermost respect for the Queen, the Governor General, and the Canadian people.

Repeat frequently that you’re just trying to get work done now, so that things can happen fast when the doors unlock in January. It can’t be trespass upon the privileges of government if its level of formality is that of a caucus meeting.

Be completely transparent. Defeat the smoke-filled rooms meme. Heck, hold it in a bar, if you can find one big enough.

The media will come to you. I can think of no more efficient way to stretch your advertising dollars than a bold, newsworthy stroke like this.

If you do this, I will donate to the limit of my ability. I will write letters to the editor praising your actions. I will take my four children and go door to door. In Edmonton. In December.

Pass it on.

KEEP MEETING.

Attacks on Parliamentary Democracy

The mainstream media does not like the idea of a coalition government, that much is clear.  After all, they were the bunch that promoted Steve, the Sweater Guy, into a second Minority term with all their glowing editorials about him, despite his many faults — faults they acknowledged.

So, now that Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition has teamed up with the other parties in opposition and signed a guarantee of 18 months of stable governance following Mr. Harper’s recent ideologically motivated attack through Minister Flaherty’s Economic Update, the media is doing its best to attack democracy.  Here’s a brief summary.

Whole bales of comment seek to rhetorically delegitimize a clear-cut succession with considerable Commonwealth precedent; in the Post, Don Martin growls about a “putsch” and John Ivison sneers at an incipient “banana republic”, the Globe editorial mutters about “averting this politically illegitimate coalition”. Others, more troublingly, contort constitutional logic to legally delegitimize the idea of majority rule in a hung parliament. In the Citizen, Randall Denley calls it a “virtual coup that is perfectly legal” (and thus, not a coup at all); in the Post, L. Ian MacDonald rants near-identically about “a perfectly constitutional coup, endorsed by the Westminster tradition” (ditto).

It’s as though they’ve taken the Conservative’s Talking Points and memorized them. Or maybe it’s that they wrote them, being that the MSM is supposed to be comprised writers and editors and not propagandists. Take a look at these:

Opposition lacks mandate to take power

* This fall, Canadians gave the Conservative government a clear mandate to continue taking action on the economy.

* During a global downturn, the last thing our country needs for Opposition politicians to claim entitlements for your tax dollars and ultimately, to take power without a mandate from the people.

* Under Stephen Harper’s leadership, our government was ahead of the curve in anticipating the global economic slowdown. We are injecting billions in stimulus through tax cuts, investments in roads and bridges, and we are protecting the banking system.

* Our focus is the economy, but Opposition parties have their own priorities. While all Canadians are tightening our belts, they feel entitled to make taxpayers pay for political party staff, polls and advertising. They want to replace the elected government, just to preserve $17 million worth of entitlements.

* This is clearly unacceptable for a modern democracy.

* The Speech from the Throne was passed by the House of Commons yesterday – after the details of the Economic and Fiscal Update were known.

* After approving the Speech from the Throne, the opposition now is trying to orchestrate a backroom deal to “take” power rather than “earn” it. It would be fundamentally anti-democratic for the Liberals – after their worst popular vote showing in history – to:
o Offer up a surprise leader;
o Offer up a surprise coalition; and
o Have such a coalition backstopped by a party that wants to destroy the country.

* Furthermore, neither the Liberals nor the Bloc have any mandate to form a coalition as they explicitly campaigned against it:

* During the election the Liberals told voters they could not govern in coalition with the NDP because Layton “does not understand the economy”.

* The Bloc also told voters during the campaign that they categorically rejected the possibility of forming a multi-party coalition to stop the Conservatives.

If you listen to talk radio call-in shows, read letters to the editors of newspapers or frequent comments sections or blogs online, you’ll already be familiar with those points.  But now we have some new ones.  And they are nastier:

Sputtering with rage in the Post, Michael Bliss goes so far as to demand that the Governor-General reject any no-confidence vote supported by the Bloc — and if she doesn’t, it amounts to “an abuse of vice-regal power” that raises “fundamental questions about Ms. Jean’s loyalty to the Constitution and to Canada”.

I had expected the attack on the Governor General to come, just not so soon.  I thought they’d denigrate her after she’d decided on the course she must take.  Perhaps this is simply an encouragement to take that line of attack.  Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m no Monarchist, but until we change our system, well, I can live with it.  What this attack does, however, is show how desperate the Stephen Harper supporters are to cling to power.

They will do whatever it takes.  And we can be sure that’s not good for Canada.

crossposted at rabble.ca

The Maple Syrup Revolution!

Whoever said Canadian politics was boring wasn’t paying attention! I certainly did not imagine that Minister Flaherty’s Economic and Fiscal Update – a tradition of modern Parliamentary democracies – would be the tipping point for a majority of Canada’s politicians. I’d been encouraged to participate in the grassroots’ push for a coalition government, urged to send emails and write letters, but I dismissed the idea as too pie-in-the-sky.

Well I’m taking a huge bite of some mighty fine humble pie right now!  The past few days have been a truly remarkable demonstration of how a Parliamentary system of governance can work. I’m not suggesting that it’s the best system around, just that what has been built into it, in terms of checks and balances, seems to work.  This is how would-be tyrants and dictators are prevented from taking power.

A coalition of Liberal, NDP and Bloc MPs is the best outcome we can hope for at this time in our history. The coming together of a coalition as diverse as this is truly remarkable and will, I believe, force Parliament to work in the best interests of all who live in this vast and diverse place.  As I said elsewhere, it is the only logical response to an ideologue whose drive for power exceeds common sense and common decency in the House of Commons.

And now we see the Conservatives embarking on a massive PR campaign, a last-ditch effort to hang onto power. “It’s a PR war now,” according to a senior Conservative.

That about says it all, doesn’t it?  Public. Relations.  For the right wing alliance that became the Conservative Party of Canada, governance appears to be meaningless.  It’s about business, not government.  It’s about dog-eat-dog, not co-operation.  It’s about survival of the fittest, not love thy neighbour.  It’s really sad, actually.

And then, looking at the text of the Accord that all three parties in Opposition signed, in the Policy section, the coaltion lists its concerns, concerns over and above partisan politics:

Economic Stimulus Package
The top priority of the new Government is an economic stimulus package
designed to boost the domestic economy beginning with (but not limited to):
• Accelerating existing infrastructure funding and substantial new
investments, including municipal and inter-provincial projects (such as
• transit, clean energy, water, corridors and gateways). This would certainly
include addressing the urgent infrastructure needs of First Nations, Métis
and Inuit;
• Housing construction and retrofitting; and
• Investing in key sector strategies (like manufacturing, forestry and
automotive) designed to create and save jobs, with any aid contingent on
a plan to transform these industries and return them to profitability and
sustainability.
Rapid Support for those affected by the Economic Crisis
The new Government is committed to ensuring that the federal government has
the appropriate programs in place to assist those most affected by the economic
crisis so that all citizens will be in a position to fully participate in the economic
recovery to follow, including the following measures:
• Facilitate skills training to help ensure Canadian workers are properly
equipped to keep pace with the rapidly changing economy, while
respecting provincial jurisdiction and existing agreements;
• Amend the current law establishing a new crown corporation for
employment insurance in order to guarantee that all revenue from EI
premiums provides benefits and training for workers. Eliminate the current
two week waiting period;
• Lower the minimum required RRIF withdrawal for 2008 by 50 per cent;
• Reform bankruptcy and insolvency laws to better protect pensions; and
• Implement an income support program for older workers who have lost
their jobs in order to help them make the transition from work to receiving
retirement benefits.
Other Priorities to Stimulate the Economy
• Support for culture, including the cancellation of budget cuts announced
by the Conservative government.
• Support for Canadian Wheat Board and Supply Management
• Immigration Reform
• Reinstate regional development agency funding to non-profit economic
development organizations.
Families
As finances permit, we are committed to moving forward with improved child
benefits and an early learning and childcare program in partnership with each
province, and respectful of their role and jurisdiction, including the possibility to
opt out with full compensation.

It’s unfortunate that children fall to the bottom of the heap, but then again, this is a Liberal-led coalition and it took them 12 years of governance to actually put foward a plan, so I guess we know where we have to place some effort, eh?  My kids are 17 and 15 now so maybe by the time they have kids in a decade or so, we’ll have a real plan for childcare in this country!

But I digress.  It’s clear that the coalition partners have the interests of the people of Canada at heart and not their own partisan interests.  Layton made huge concessions in allowing the corporate tax cuts to proceed.  Dion has had to eat some humble pie, too, having said he’d never work with a socialist like Layton.  And Duceppe, by providing support to this coalition, could be seen by hard-liners as jeopardizing Quebec sovereignty.

Pretty sweet times in Canada, eh?  It’s definitely a Maple Syrup Revolution!

with thanks to skdadl @ pogge.ca for the blog post title.

The 2008 Canadian Blog Awards: Another Mistake?

It’s awards season again.  Apparently, the 2008 version of the Canadian Blog Awards is underway.  Thanks to Beijing York, a regular reader, this blog has been nominated in the Best Feminist Blog category.  I appreciate the recognition.  And I am grateful that the Best Feminist Blog category has been added to this year’s list.  It took a lot of people making demands for such last year to make sure the organizers got it right this year.

However, it seems they didn’t quite.  Get it right, that is.  In the nominees’ list for Best Feminist Blog are at least two blogs which consistently and continuously produce rabid anti-feminist, anti-women posts.  Furthermore, they bring their gang of freepers along wherever they go.  I’m sure it’s great that they have friends because the vitriol they post does not find favour among feminists (nor among some Saskatchewanian politicians, apparently).

As a result, I have requested that the regina mom be removed from the list. I do not accept the nomination. If I must share a nomination with those who actively work to undermine the great work of dedicated feminists commited to making the world a better place for women and their families, then, with all due  respect to the organizers, I want no part of it.

Canadian Conference of the Arts Regional Forums

From the Inbox, information about opportunities to deepen connections within the arts community at regional meetings throughout the country.
Dear Friends,
Everyone is welcome to attend the upcoming Canadian Conference of the Arts Regional Forums (see below). The CCA has posted papers as background to the discussion on their website at www.ccarts.ca and a blog has been set up to begin the conversation: French: http://forumscca.blogspot.com/; English: http://ccaforums.blogspot.com/


cca logo

The National Director of the CCA Regional Forums

Regina: Globe Theatre, 1801 Scarth St.

November 6th

1:30 – 4:30 p.m.

Saskatoon: Mendel Art Gallery, 950 Spadina Cres. E.

November 27th

1:30 – 4:30 p.m.

With the arrival of a new federal government in power, this is an opportune time for the arts and cultural stakeholders to gather and consult on the short term and long term strategies, so that the interests of the arts and cultural communities figure within the public discourse and on the political agenda.

During this fall, the CCA will be on tour to meet with artists and cultural workers across Canada. We invite you to meet the CCA Director General, and to express your perspective on the three following questions:

Within the arts and culture milieu: how can we improve collaboration in the pursuit of common objectives?

What should our 3 to 5 priorities be for the next coming two years?

What are the best strategies to promote these priorities?

We look forward to hearing your opinions!

The regional forums are free and open to all; however we are requesting that you confirm your attendance at least one week before the forum with Annie Caporicci annie.caporicci@ccarts.ca 613-238-3561 extension 10.

www.ccarts.ca/

North American Union, Listeriosis, TILMA & the Stephen Harper Party

A trip through some blog posts has my neural pathways click-click-clicking! Be forewarned, this is a click-heavy post!

It all started with Alison@Creekside, talking about Stock Day and the hook-up with the Conference Board of Canada, Bell Canada, Microsoft and the RCMP for discussions on the server in the sky, that whacked-out plan for a surveillance society.  It’s a plan which flows from the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), that nasty piece of work cobbled together by the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE – those poor, poor millionaires) and the Mexican Consejo Mexicano de Asuntos Internacionales (Comex, a group sponsored by Exxon Mobil, and boasting affiliation with none other than Milton Friedman’s Chicago School of Economics).

After civil society defeated the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI), a piece on the path to North American Union, the CCCE worked with the CFR and Comex on another way of making change.  They proposed, in 2003, the North American Security and Prosperity Initiative (NASPI) which identifed five key areas of work:

Wholehearted action on these began when the SPP agreement was signed by former Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin, US President George W. Bush and former Mexican President, Vincente Fox, in 2005.  It has been lovingly tended by PM Harper, President Bush and Mexico’s President Calderon.

On my blogging journey, when I got to Larry Hubich‘s post discussing the Stephen Harper defence strategy that’s absent from the Conservative platform, I thought SPP.  He sent me over to Owls and Roosters, for more on the $490,000,000,000 defence plan.

In the sidebar at OnR, I noted a piece about TILMA, the Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement that puts investment ahead of people.  Get this!  A re-elected Stephen Harper government would force TILMA on the provinces.  From page 16 of Stephen Harper’s de-sweatered platform:

A re-elected Conservative Government led by Stephen Harper will work to eliminate barriers that restrict or impair trade, investment or labour mobility between provinces and territories by 2010… We hope to see further progress, but are prepared to intervene by exercising federal authority if barriers to trade, investment and mobility remain by 2010.

And guess where talk of labour mobility barriers first appeared.

Yup!  The CCCE! It’s in the section on regulatory efficiencies:

  • As part of this effort, three issues of significant sensitivity must be addressed: the use of trade remedies within a de facto integrated market; regulatory restrictions on access and ownership in major industries; and impediments to the mobility of skilled labour.

Given what’s happening on Wall Street right now, it would make more sense for Canada to race away from markets more integrated with the USA!  But Steve, like Noah of the Old Testament, is staying the course.  In fact, Canada should have run away from the North American integration a long while ago.  That might have prevented 20 recent deaths.  From the same regulatory/economic efficiencies section:

  • With respect to standards, inspection and certification procedures, our two countries should be able to apply a principle of “tested once” for purposes of the Canada-United States market. Examples of such areas are the consumer and industrial goods sector, food safety and pharmaceuticals.

Food safety, huh?

But wait! There’s more.

I had to travel back to Alison@Creekside, in 2006, where she quoted a Maclean’s article (note the changed URL),

This is how the future of North America now promises to be written: not in a sweeping trade agreement on which elections will turn, but by the accretion of hundreds of incremental changes implemented by executive agencies, bureaucracies and regulators.

Incremental changes, huh?

One more bit from that Maclean’s article.  Ron Covais, president of the Americas for the arms manufacturer, Lockheed Martin, and a former adviser to US Vice President, Dick Cheney, said of the 2006 SPP meeting, “We’ve decided not to recommend any things that would require legislative changes because we won’t get anywhere.

Democratic process is such a pain, isn’t it?

Government by stealth; the Stephen Harper Party’s strength.

Can you stand more, dear reader?

Go ahead, watch this without me; I’ve had enough for one day!

Crossposted at rabble.ca/election

Incremental attack on women’s rights

On March 5, Parliament passed the Second Reading of Bill C-484, An Act to amend the Criminal Code (injuring or causing the death of an unborn child while committing an offence) aka the Unborn Victims of Crime Act. Bill C-484 is a very dangerous piece of legislation for women. Should it become law, personhood will be granted to a fetus and that would provide solid groundwork for the re-criminalization of abortion in Canada. And, according to Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada / Coaltion pour le droit a l’avortement au Canada, “it could also criminalize pregnant women for behaviours perceived to harm their fetuses.”

When Harper and his nationalist Stand Up for Canada campaign landed the Conservatives with only a minority government in the 2006 election many, including me, breathed a sigh of relief. At least they didn’t get a majority, we all said. But Harper had done his homework. He knew he would have to work differently from any minority government in Canada’s history. And he did. His study of Stalin helped him to maintain extreme control over his caucus, to exert some control over the already right-wing bias in the media and to govern by stealth. The attempt to censor film arts confirmed for me that his ideology is what I would call a soft fascism. As a writer, I go to the dictionary to help me decide language use. The American Heritage Dictionary‘s definition of fascism is the one I mean when I say it is a soft fascism that Harper has brought into Canada.

But it is the Dictionary.com Unabridged definition that more clearly spells out the components of fascism. With the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the North American FTA already in place and the Security and Prosperity Partnership underway, corporatist control of economics is proceeding. Control of the media and the caucus as well as socioeconomic control have been key components in Harper’s soft brand of fascism. The incrementalist nature of his governing has been most evident in his measured and consistent attacks on women’s human rights. Within a few short months in office, Harper radically altered Status of Women Canada (SWC). Prior to the Harper attack, the SWC had played a key role within government and within Canadian society in securing such things as parental benefits and women’s reproductive freedom. But Harper’s removal of the word equality from the SWC mandate and the change to funding guidelines ended that kind of work. His attack meant that even the most broad-based, community-oriented and democratic women’s organization would be ineligible for funding if it engaged in any form of lobbying, whatsoever. Feminist blogger, April Reign, cited Tom Flanagan on the cuts to SWC:

Flanagan calls funding cuts to Status of Women Canada and the elimination of the Court Challenges Program a “nice step,” asserting without equivocation that Conservatives will “defund” all equality-seeking groups – with feminists at the top of the list. He goes further, clarifying that Conservatives also plan to choke-off these groups’ supposedly privileged access to government by, for example, denying “meetings with ministers.” But for strategic reasons, Flanagan notes, this will all happen incrementally. To avoid the perception of mean-spirited retribution, he says, “incrementalism is the way to go.”

Women’s groups such as the National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL) have closed their doors. Others have scaled back their operations to a bare minimum. Harper’s attack has effectively silenced the voices of feminism. With the media and society under control, the Opposition parties out of control, and Harper definitely in control, Bill C-484 found a most welcome environment. It is now much more unlikely that women’s organizations would be able to defeat C-484 if it becomes law.

Few saw it coming. But those who did acted as best they could to sound the trumpets. Before C-484 made it to Second Reading activity increased but it was not enough to stop the legislation from moving forward. Four brave Conservative MPs voted against their government while 27 Liberal MPs and 1 New Democratic MP voted with the government. 10 Liberals, including Stephane Dion and former Prime Minister Paul Martin, were not present for the vote. Nancy Karetak-Lindell was apparently caught in an Arctic storm. Martin was simply MIA. But Dion was at Stornoway for his wife’s International Women’s Day party! Apparently, his support for women’s rights only goes so far. As one wise blogger said, The Liberals failed to stand up against the Conservative agenda they warned us against.

There is still hope that Canadians can defeat this regressive bill. It now moves to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, where there is an even split of Committee members who voted for and voted against it. Once the Committee is done with it — if they don’t throw it out — it would go back to the House for Third Reading where, by then I would hope, enough Liberals have been brought into the House of Commons and onside to defeat it. Or, in the event that an election is called, C-484 will die on the Order Table.

Many fear that with the Liberals in shambles the Harperites would easily win a majority government. I disagree. I believe that Harper’s brand of fascism will not be tolerated by Canadians.

This post would not have been possible without the good work of the women and men at Bread and Roses, Birth Pangs, and the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, and dedicated activists too numerous to mention.

The SPP lacks democratic approval

Last summer, Linda McQuaig (Part I and Part II) spoke of the “sophistication” of the business elite in their soft-peddling of continental integration through the Security and Prosperity Agreement (SPP).  The deal has been kept quite quiet and the work of moving it forward is ongoing via various business leaders, politicians and bureaucrats.

McQuaig’s focus is North American Energy Security which, in essence, is an agreement that Canada guarantee an energy supply to the USA.  The catch is that we must do that before we take what we need!  Why would Canada agree to ensuring the US supply before ensuring our own?  As McQuaig says, there are about 10 years of regular oil supplies left in Canada.  Are we too nice, offering it to the US first?  Or, too stupid?  Yes, there’s the Alberta tar sands, but that über project has garnered a huge outcry from ecological organizations, northern peoples, environmentalists, and even a few politicians, such as former Alberta premier, Peter Lougheed and the Mayor of the Alberta boomtown, Fort McMurray.

Are we, as Canadians, really prepared to give over our own energy security, the ecological integrity of our beautiful north and the well-being of our northern and First Peoples so that the business elite can continue to line their own pockets?  Do we really want to continue fueling the USA’s wars?  Furthermore, are we willing to let this carry on without the due process of our democratic institutions?

In August 2007, Prime Minister Harper refused to accept letters on this matter from 10,000 concerned Canadians.  In the April 2006 Throne Speech, Mr. Harper promised to present “significant international treaties” to a vote in Parliament.  In the last session, he did not do so.  Did he lie to Canadians?  And why, as we learned from US President Bush’s State of the Union Address earlier this week, is our Prime Minister is continuing to forge ahead with the SPP?  He has plans to meet with Presidents Bush and Calderon this April in New Orleans.  But he will do so without the consent of the Canadian people, despite promises — not to mention the obligation — to do so!

Should you so wish, you can tell the Prime Minister how you feel about this lack of democratic process.  The Council of Canadians have been following the developments on the SPP very closely.  It was the organization that forced some media attention onto the issue last summer.

If we truly treasure democracy then we are obliged, as responsible citizens, to speak out when it is being circumvented or abused.  This, I think, is one of those times.  If you do nothing else, at least inform yourself on this important issue.  It will change your life, one way or the other.