Trans-Pacific Partnership text shows some sectors in Canada to be badly hurt

Former Prime Minister Stephen Harper made sure the text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal was not revealed before the federal election. If it had been released, he might have faced an even more resounding defeat.

+ Add Image

The Liberal government of Justin Trudeau will now be faced with deciding whether it should seek changes in the deal. Given that there were 12 different countries involved in the negotiations it may be difficult if not impossible to negotiate changes. Mark Nantais, president of the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturer's Association, said the Liberals will need to take a close look at the agreement and see if they can make changes. The 12 nations all have to ratify the document. Perhaps some will decide to reject the terms,.

The full text of the agreement was just made available yesterday. It is available here. The document is 6,000 pages in all. Mr. Nantais pointed out that Canada consented to eliminate a tariff on imported Japanese vehicles in five years while the United States will eliminate its tariff over a period as long as 30 years.

The deal will offer Canadian companies access to the Japanese consumer market but at the same time would eliminate Canadian tariffs and also make it easier for companies to use offshore parts creating a good market in Canada for low-cost Asian parts producers, making it difficult for higher-cost Canadian auto manufacturers to compete.

The text shows that local-content protections for vehicle components are much less stringent than the Harper government had claimed. Harper claimed that the requirements would be from 40 to 45 percent. Actually engine parts, frames and metal roof panels will only require TPP content of 35 percent. Companies will be able to use low cost parts from any country such as China even though it is not a member of the TPP. This helps out the big global auto companies if they are manufacturing within the TPP.

Flavio Volpe, president of the Canadian Automotive Parts Manufacturer's Association, which employs 81,000, said that Canada got worse terms on key parts than they had been told by the Harper government. There are 26 Canadian companies that make stamped metal components and another 18 that make engine parts, according to Volpe.

The Trudeau government has not yet promised anything with respect to changing the pact. International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland urged Canadians to review the pact and send feedback to her. The Liberals claim they will consult with Canadians before approving the deal. Such consultation is unlikely to result in any changes. As trade lawyer Lawrence Herman pointed out, any attempt to renegotiate parts of the deal would prompt other signatories to do the same, causing the whole deal to fall apart like a house of cards. This is unlikely to happen since all the countries signatory to the agreement are beholden to the corporate interests who want the deal. There will be moves asking for government compensation by companies hurt by the deal. In the United States, President Obama has signified he intends to sign the TPP.

There has already been a significant negative reaction to the TPP in Ontario. Mayors of 20 Ontario cities who have significant numbers of auto sector jobs called on Trudeau to protect their industry.

UNIFOR, the trade union of which Canadian Auto Workers are part, also released a critical account of the TPP deal. UNIFOR National President, Jerry Dias, said:"The former Conservative government was in a rush to reach a deal before the national election. We now have a chance to see what concessions they made so that could happen. The new government needs to commit to fixing whatever mistakes lurk in the TPP text because the former Conservative government was in such a rush."Dias said the big question was what Harper had to give up to get the deal and claimed that even with present knowledge of the deal there were concerns not only with the auto provisions but patent laws related to publishing, and prescription drugs, as well as the impact on dairy farmers. Jim Stanford a UNIFOR economist calculates that the weaker regional content rules alone will threaten 20,000 well-paying jobs in Canada.

.

Ontario and Federal Canadian government help Toyota finance new Lexus plant

Both the federal and provincial Ontario governments will contribute to the financing of a new manufacturing plant that will produce Toyota's luxury Lexus model hybrid.

A total of as much as $34 million will be advanced to help Toyota finance the production of the first hybrid car to be built in Canada. The financing will be shared by the Conservative federal government of Stephen Harper and the Liberal provincial government of Ontario.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said at the Toyota plant in Cambridge, Ontario, that federal funds would come from the Automotive Innovation Fund. The financing is described as as a repayable contribution. Toyota will be expected to repay all or part of the amount, or the government will receive some financial return. Harper said:

"The rebound of Canada's auto sector is one of this country's biggest economic success stories of the past five years.We are here because our government is committed to creating high-quality, well-paying jobs for hard-working Canadians."

The outgoing Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, said Ontario's portion of the financing will come from the Strategic Jobs and Investment Fund.

Toyota will also invest $125 million in a new assembly line designed to increase production of Lexus luxury cars. New models include a sport utility vehicle with a hybrid gasoline-electric engine. This is expected to be in production next year. Harper said:

"Besides being the first hybrid vehicle assembled in Canada, the RX 450 hybrid has been, up until now, only, and I want to emphasize that, only, built in Japan. But that's changing. In a short time, that fuel-efficient vehicle will be assembled right here."

Toyota is increasing its auto production in Canada and employing more auto workers as a result. Toyota plans to increase production by 30,000 Lexus RX units next year to a total of 104,000 vehicles. This would include 15,000 RX450h sport-utility models. Toyota's productive capacity in Canada will be increased to about half a million vehicles per year. Toyota will hire about 400 new workers.

Harper also announced that the government is committing $250 million more to the Automotive Innovation Fund over the next five years. The fund was established in 2008 to help the Canadian automotive industry during the recession. The fund had already provided funding to four other projects. Ford received $80 million as part of its investment of up to $730 million in an engine assembly and power-train research center in Windsor Ontario. Toyota received $70.8 million to develop more fuel-efficient vehicles. Two parts companies also received financing.

Note everyone, even in the business community, supports the Automotive Innovation Fund. An article in Canadian Business points out that financing has been to huge global corporations such as Toyota and Ford. Harper's own guidelines call for helping small innovative companies to become larger. The article also notes that increasing efficiency often does not create jobs but results in job loss. The program will not result in much job creation and even those created may be expensive:

"More than 170,000 automotive jobs have disappeared in the past five years. New positions do exist in some of the plants funded by the Innovation Fund—Toyota expects to add 400 new jobs this year—but these jobs come an inflated cost. For each position either saved or created, the Institute for Research on Public Policy found, government spent as much as $212,946."

Canadian military to spend a billion on armed drones

The Canadian military intends to spend about one billion dollars on armed drones. The military claims that the drones will enable Canadian Forces to fill critical deficiencies and are needed in the Arctic.

Even during Canadian participation in the war in Libya senior Canadian defence officials were itching to use the occasion to spend up to 600 million on armed drones to use in the conflict according to documents obtained by the Ottawa Citizen newspaper. The war ended but not the desire to obtain armed drones. Now the military-industrial complex is at it again.
Even though the Conservative Harper government is all for reducing our budget deficit as quickly as possible that can be done by cutting social programs. What is crucial is to have armed drones that can be used to defend the Canadian Arctic. No doubt they can also help out in U.S. or NATO adventures around the globe. The Chief of Staff of the Canadian Forces General Walter Natyncyk is closely linked to the U.S. military and was a high official in the Iraq war even though Canada was supposedly not involved. Canada even awarded him a medal for service in a war in which we refused to take part. According to Wikipedia:

""Natynczyk attended the U.S. Army War College, and was subsequently appointed Deputy Commanding General, III Corps and Fort Hood.  In January 2004, he deployed with III Corps to Baghdad, Iraq, serving first as the Deputy Director of Strategy, Policy and Plans, and subsequently as the Deputy Commanding General of the Multi-National Corps (Iraq) during Operation Iraqi Freedom. Natynczyk led the Corps' 35,000 soldiers, consisting of 10 separate brigades, stationed throughout the Iraq Theatre of Operations... He was later awarded the Meritorious Service Cross specifically for his combat efforts in Operation Iraqi Freedom January 2004 to January 2005.""

The Harper Conservative government already approved last month that a request be sent out to various aerospace firms to ascertain what is available. Companies must provide relevant information by Sept. 28.
The Canadian Forces had already been using unarmed surveillance drones in Afghanistan but have long been wanting to move on to the purchase of armed drones. Back in 2007 the Ottawa Citizen had reported that the Defence Department requested approval to buy Predator drones for the Afghan mission. The purchase was never made however as there were concerns that there would be no competitive bidding. No doubt there might have been some concern for the political fallout as well.
   Instead the Canadians leased Israeli-built unarmed Heron drones from MacDonald Dettwiler and Associates of B.C. U.S. firms are already aware that the Canadian military is anxious to purchase drones, no doubt with government support. Northrop Grumman made a pitch to the Conservative government at a trade show in May this year to sell the military a fleet of Global Hawk drones. These drones could patrol the Arctic. However the Hawks are not armed and are useful only for surveillance. The military wants drones that can pack a punch or as they put it should be able to carry precision-guided munitions: The military claims::"This capability will allow the CF (Canadian Forces) to fill critical deficiencies”.Apparently lack of armed drones are critical deficiencies in our defense budget and no doubt this is a much higher funding priority than critical deficiencies in our health care system such as long waiting times
.

Canada: Only the best for our Bev

Canadian Conservative International Development Minister Bev Oda declined to stay in a five star hotel on a conference visit to London England. Instead she booked at another more luxurious hotel at more than twice the cost.

The original hotel Grange St..Pauls was the actual conference site. Oda had staff rebook her into the Savoy Hotel owned by a Saudi Arabian Prince. Six years ago Oda rejected a minivan as transportation and demanded a limousine instead.

Since Oba was now a distance from the conference site she also hired a luxury car and driver to shuttle her from her new hotel to the conference site. This cost another 1,000 a day approximately. The bill at the Savoy was $1995 for three nights plus another $287 for the cancellation at the original hotel..

While paying for Oda the Canadian International Development Agency had cutbacks this year to the tune of 380 million dollars. Documents detailing the expenses were obtained by the press under the Access to Information Act.

A spokesperson said:"These expenses followed the appropriate guidelines; all travel is done in compliance with Treasury Board guidelines. When Minister Oda travels we consider the most appropriate, cost-effective accommodations. On the trip in question, our office followed this procedure." So cancelling out of a five star hotel and booking one at twice the price is cost-effective. No wonder there is a government deficit.

This morning it was announced that Oda reimbursed the government for at least part of the additional expenses. She paid after the news reports not before. So why did she pay when it was cost-effective and appropriate and followed guidelines? For more see this article.

Budget cuts will mean loss of many public sector jobs

The PSAC (Public Service Alliance of Canada) a union that serves many public sector workers lists some of the areas and services that will face significant cuts as the Conservative government takes steps to reduce the deficit. The group claims that there will be tens of thousands of job losses.

Exactly where the cuts will be remains to be set out in many cases. There are to be very large cuts in the Dept. of National Defence but all on the civilian side. As a result services that are supportive of troops may very well be cut. Over a billion dollars is to be cut. There are to be cuts in Veterans Affairs as well 66 million added to a previous cut of 266 million. The government is always touting how marvelous our troops are but when they become veterans benefits are cut.

Agriculture Canada and Agri-food receive a ten per cent budget cut. Worst of all there will be 56.1 million cut from the food inspection agency an agency that is already woefully understaffed. With weakened inspections Canadians could face increased health risks.

Finally 183.2 million is cut from Human Resources and Skill Development a sector that already has backlogs because of staff shortages. Among the clients are seniors, and the unemployed. For more see the entire article here.

Former Wheat Board directors lose bid to suspend new Wheat Board law

Eight former directors of the Canadian Wheat board lost their bid to suspend the new Conservative law that would end single desk selling by the board. Eight former members dismissed by the Conservative government had asked for an injunction suspending implementation of the law until Canadian courts had ruled on its validity.

The eight former directors argued that a referendum among western grain producers had to be held before the monopoly rule could be changed. They also argue that the changes will hurt Canadian farmers. The U.S. and big grain companies have been fighting to end the monopoly for years.

Otttawa abolished single desk sell in a law passed late last year and wants to have an open market in place for wheat and barley by this crop year. The former directors were elected by farmers but were terminated with the passage of the legislation by the Harper government.

The Wheat Board monopoly has been in place for Prairie Farmers since the 1940s. The Conservatives campaign promises included ending the monopoly even though a majority of farmers in a poll supported the board monopoly. The Conservatives also promised a referendum which was never held. The Conservatives claim their election was the referendum! Ironically the Conservatives have strong support on the prairies. For more see this article.

Scientists and journalists mount campaign against muzzling of Canadian federal scientists

In Vancouver at a meeting of the American Association of the Advancement of Science a campaign is being mounted by some Canadian scientists against attempts by the government to muzzle scientists working for the government.

Both journalists and scientists have joined the campaign. The group argues that citizens have a right to be informed about research that they as taxpayer's fund. It is essential they claim for citizens to make informed decisions about government policy.

The meeting featured a panel called: "Unmuzzling government scientists: How to re-open the discourse" The panel is part of a campaign by several groups including:Association des communicateurs scientifiques du Québec, the Association science et bien commun, Canadian Journalists for Free Expression, the Canadian Science Writers' Association, the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canadaand the World Federation of Science Journalists.

For its part the Canadian federal government claims that its scientists have access to the media. However, Gary Goodyear who is the minister of state for science and technology refused to attend the meeting as did all other government representatives invited to attend.

A veteran science journalist Margaret Munro said that for much of her career it had been easy to get access to federal scientists but of late the situation has changed dramatically. Government control she said has been taken to incredible extremes.

Federal scientists face layers upon layers of approval sometimes even up to the Privy Council Office. In the U.S. this would be equivalent to having to get permission from the WHite House. Approved interviews need to be taped and often approval is not given before deadlines or at all. A new policy demands that a department should speak with a single voice on issues. Obviously minority or critical opinions are simply vetted out of the system.

In the U.S. the situation has improved somewhat compared with that under the George W. Bush administration. For more detail see this article.

.

Canadian Premiers meet to discuss health care

 At a meeting in Victoria B.C. Canada's premiers and territorial leaders are trying to hammer out a common policy on health care. The Conservative federal government has announced that it will guarantee health-care funding increases right up to the 2016,2017 year. Up until then the yearly increases were set at 6 per cent.
   After that, increases will be related to the growth of GDP but increases will continue at the rate of at least three per cent per annum. These increases were announced unilaterally and without consultation with the provinces as is usual before the federal government announces policy.
   Premier Jean Charest of Quebec was angry that there was no consultation with provinces on the question of funding but this unilateral declaration by the Harper federal government. Charest noted:"We have always in Canada, because of our federal system of government, had a dialogue on this, an exchange of information, a dialogue and decisions were made" Charest wants to hold talks with prime minister Harper on future funding. The present accord does not expire until 2014.
   Future funding will be per capita after 2014. Some provinces object to this in particular British Columbia where there are many seniors. Seniors cost the system much more. The situation does not look positive for health care in Canada. The federal government is reactionary. Although the Conservatives pledge their undying support for universal health care both they and many of the provinces will be looking to privatize more of the system to support their business friends. The system is likely to change so that the the level of services will not be the same in all provinces. No doubt there will be an offloading of costs so far as possible from the provinces to the individual. Rich provinces will no doubt have better health care systems and poorer provinces will struggle to provide basic care. Manitoba Premier Greg Sellinger said:  "The underlying principle is to offer comparable levels of service even if they are different, in such a way that it respects the overall framework of the Canada Health Act," Sellinger is an New Democratic Party premier supposedly on the left. Per capita funding will never achieve the goal he outlines.
    The premier of Nova Scotia Darell Dexter also NDP put the matter much more realistically: "Equal funding is not necessarily equitable funding," "This is the problem. We have 16 per cent of our population currently over the age of 65 in our province. We're going to move from 16 per cent over the age of 65 to almost 30 per cent over the next 20 years," Poorer provinces such as Nova Scotia will simply not have the funds to provide adequate care for an aging population if funding is based solely on so much per person. For much more see this CBC article.

Canada: Some Canadians wait up to eight weeks for unemployment checks

  As the Canadian Conservative government cuts back on government jobs there is a noticeable effect on some services including payments to jobless Canadians who collect Employment Insurance. Of course it is really unemployment insurance but the new positive spin Orwellian language  calls it Employment Insurance-as if one could not admit such an abomination as unemployment.
     At the peak of the recession Service Canada whose task is to ensure that Canadians receive their entitlement payments there were 3,000 term workers hired. However when the terms expired they were not rehired. Only about 450 workers remain and their hours have been cut from full to part time.
   Some people are waiting more than eight weeks for their first check to arrive. Service Canada promises to process claims within 28 days. However, there are now more than 80,000 claims that have gone beyond this promised deadline. Is anyone punished. Of course not.
  What the government is doing is closing about 100 processing centers and will end up with just 20 larger centralized centers. Of course at the same time this will cut another 600 jobs. Of course the Harper government is not cutting services to corporations. He is extending corporate tax breaks. He is also making sure that the reserve army of the unemployed is eager to take a job, any job, for it is becoming more and more difficult to get the unemployment payments to which unemployed Canadians are supposed to be entitled. For more see this article.

Harper Government not campaigning for seat on UN Security Council

    Foreign Affairs minister John Baird says that the Harper government will not be campaigning again for a seat on the UN Security Council. Last year Canada lost out to Portugal in a campaign for the two year term in the Council.
    Baird said: "you never want to stand for something and not be elected,""Listen, I mean, we don't go along to get along. That's just not a phrase," Certainly Baird gets along with Israel and also with those attempting to sabotage the Kyoto Accords and some other environmental issues.
      Baird said that if Canada had not been so vocal about human rights in Iran, Iran might have voted for us. I am not sure whether this is meant to be humor or not! The loss in the campaign last year was the first for Canada since the formation of the UN. Canada usually support U.S. policies at the UN but on Israel the Harper government manages to be if anything even more supportive of Israel on most policy issues. For more see this article.

Canada: Conservative government will go ahead and break the law to end Wheat Board monopoly

    Agriculture minister Gerry Ritz will go ahead with a bill that a federal judge has just ruled breaks the law. Ritz noted that the government of Canada has the sole right to act amend or repeal any piece of  legislation. While that is true it is irrelevant. The situation here is that the government has been found to have broken an existing law. Rather than break that law the government should first repeal it. But this Conservative government has a number of times showed its contempt for parliament, it is now just showing contempt for the law.
    The court ruling found that Ritx broke the law by violating a section of the Wheat Board Act. As interpreted by the judge this requires that the government  consult the Board and hold a plebiscite among farmers to see if they support the changes. The government is appealing the decision but is going ahead with passage of the bill even during the appeal process.
   The Conservative government has been a long time critic of the Wheat Board and is supported by some farmers. However a plebiscite held by the Wheat Board showed a majority actually support keeping the monopoly. Nevertheless the Conservative election platform pledged to remove the monopoly.
   The monopoly was formed in the depression by prairie farmers who felt they were exploited by the big grain companies. It has been the subject of over a dozen complaints by the U.S. that the monopoly is an unfair marketing practice but all were lost. Now the Harper Conservative government has come to the rescue of the big grain companies. Of course this is all in the name of free choice. For more see this article.

Canada will not make further commitment to Kyoto protocol

 As expected the environment minister for the Canadian Conservative government Peter Kent announced that Canad would not make any renewed commitment to the Kyoto Protocol. Kent' speech at the UN Durban climate conference was interrupted by a protest message.
   Six protesters members of the Canadian Youth Delegation stood as Kent began to speak. They turned their backs revealing the message "Turn Your Back on Canada" emblazoned on their T shirts. They were quickly removed and had their accreditation cancelled. The crowd however applauded the demonstration.
   The U.S. also has refused to sign on to Kyoto. Indeed Canada is often accused of pushing a U.S. type position at the conference. The Canadian position is that major emitters such as China and India must be involved in any new agreement. Developed countries such as the U.S.and Canada after themselves being responsible for global emissions over decades now want developing countries to bear the burden as well as they finally begin to develop their own economies. '
    Countries seem to put their own short term economic interests first and foist responsibility for tackling environmental problems on others rather than taking the lead themselves. The Conservative Harper government has always been opposed to Kyoto and made no attempt to meet targets. Observers expected Kent's announcement. Canada earned the fossil of the day award the other day. For more see this article.
 

Final day for agreement on Afghan detainee document disclosure

I expect that the Conservative government knows full well that the Liberals in particular will not risk an election at this time. The Conservatives will continue to insist on having a veto over what is released in order that nothing damaging to their credibility should emerge. One would think that Conservative credibility is already damaged but nevertheless the polls show no dip in support. Ignatieff's leadership would no doubt account for this! This is from The Star.

Speaker Peter Milliken extends deadline for Afghan document disclosur

Richard J. Brennan



CHRIS WATTIE/REUTERS
OTTAWA – House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken has agreed to extend until Friday the deadline for the Conservative government to hand over uncensored Afghan detainee documents to Parliament, or at least arrive at an all-party agreement on how to do it.

The sticking point on the release of controversial Afghan documents is the fact the Conservative government still wants to have the final say over what is made public, opposition MPs said Tuesday.

“The key issue is what happens in the events the government doesn’t agree with information that should be disclosed or how it should be handled,” NDP house leader MP Libby Davies told reporters.

Fellow New Democrat MP Jack Harris suggested more bluntly the government still wants a type of veto over what should be released to Parliament and what should be kept secret for national security reasons, despite the speaker’s ruling to the contrary.
“The real issue here is who makes the ultimate decision and our point of view is that it has to be Parliamentarians who make that ultimate decision … that’s the process we proposed. No veto,” Harris s
aid, referring to the MPs who will make up the review committee.

In his ruling, Milliken made it clear he wants Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government to hand over uncensoredd documents. Otherwise, the government risks being found in contempt of Parliament, which could precipitate an election.





NDP MP Joe Comartin suggested if a deal is not reached by Friday, then one might not be reached at all. “Our sense is we’ve had enough time, exchanged enough concepts and ideas and proposals and that it’s decision-making time,” he told the Toronto Star.

Harper axes funding for 11 women's groups.

It seems that the Conservatives are protesting a bit much when they accuse the Liberals of bringing up the abortion issue. After all the issue was brought up by the Conservatives in their refusal to fund programs that involve abortion rights and now it seems they are attacking liberal women's groups who might campaign for those rights as well. This will keep some in the Conservative base happy anyway. The piper will not pay you unless you pipe the piper's tune. This is from CTV.

Harper government axes funding for 11 women's groups



CTV.ca News Staff

A women's rights group is charging that the Harper government has cut funding for 11 women's groups in the last two weeks, just prior to June's G8 summit at which maternal health to a key part of the agenda.

Kim Bulger, executive director of Match International, said her group was one of the groups to lose funding.

International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda said the group's funding was cut due to performance issues.

The funding cuts were revealed a day after Conservative Sen. Nancy Ruth advised a gathering of women's groups that they risk a backlash from the government unless they "shut the f--k up" on the abortion issue. She said she fears there will be more of an anti-abortion response from her party if women's groups continue to speak out.

"If you push it, there will be more backlash," Ruth said. "This is now a political football. This is not about women's health in this country."

Bulger blamed the funding cuts on the "ideologically driven" Conservative agenda against feminist groups who support funding abortion as part of maternal health initiatives in developing countries.

The government announced last week that it will only fund family planning, but not abortion, in its new policy.

During question period Tuesday, Liberal MP Bob Rae said Ruth's comments are part of the "culture of intimidation and bullying" used by the Tory government to quiet their critics.

"If you have a disagreement with the government, just shut the F up," is how Rae characterized his political opponents' style.

Transport Minister John Baird said the government disapproved of Ruth's comments.

"The language is unacceptable and in no way, shape or form represents the views of the government," he said

But Baird replied that the Liberals were trying to start a "culture war" by opening the divisive abortion issue.

"Canadians don't want to drag the abortion debate in the maternal health discussion," he said. "This government is focused on how to make a positive difference in the lives of mothers and newborn children in the developing world."

Canadian Democracy Promotion equals Promotion of US foreign policy and political warfare.

THere will not be much about this in the mainstream media and what news there will be will be filled with great applause at our mission to promote democracy globally. Of course many US NGO's and in particular the National Endowment for Democracy have acted to destabilise regimes not liked by the US and promote pro-US political groups everywhere. This is fom this site.

Foundation for “Political Warfare”
Takes Cue from U.S. Strategy
Anthony Fenton
Indicating further integration with its closest neighbour and ally's foreign policy priorities, the Canadian government is in the advanced stages of establishing a foundation to promote liberal democracy, akin to the controversial U.S. National Endowment for Democracy.

Last December, the minority Conservative government of Stephen Harper quietly tabled in parliament a bipartisan blue panel report titled, “Advisory Panel Report on the Creation of a Canadian Democracy Promotion Agency.” The panel is recommending that the government create the Canadian Centre for Advancing Democracy, with a proposed budget of between 28 million and 65 million U.S. dollars per year.

Since it assumed power in 2006, Harper's government has touted its commitment to placing democracy promotion as “one of the four core principles of its foreign policy.” Speaking recently in Davos, Switzerland, as global elites gathered for the World Economic Forum, Harper included democracy promotion among the issues which “require the close cooperation of friends and like-minded allies.”

Steven Fletcher, Harper's minister of state for democratic reform, said he was given the responsibility to “construct and implement” the new democracy foundation. To do so, his office gathered “experts in the area of democracy promotion.” Now that their report has been tabled, Fletcher told IPS that the government “will be plotting the appropriate course,” but would offer no timeline on when it may be legislated.

Canada already has an array of existing organisations that promote democracy abroad. In 2005, the then-Liberal government established the Democracy Council, which is an informal forum of Canadian organisations actively involved in democracy promotion who meet biannually. Once in power, the Conservatives kept the Democracy Council in place, and accelerated Canadian collaborations with the U.S., including funding several National Endowment for Democracy (NED) related projects.

Stealth Policies
Dennis Pilon, a professor of politics at the University of Victoria, says the Harper government is “taking a lot of their cues from the Americans, particularly the Republicans,” and adds that they conduct a lot of their policies “by stealth.”

“And I think this [democracy foundation] is an example of the stealth; they think that a democracy institute will allow them to more effectively integrate their efforts with the United States, which will then allow them to gain all sorts of kudos and points with the Americans,” Pilon said.

Fletcher said the new foundation “will be a made in Canada agency that will complement what other countries are doing but it will be run by Canadians to explain the importance of democracy...in emerging and post-conflict countries.”

Recent developments also follow an extensive study on democracy promotion that was conducted by the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade in 2007. The Committee's final report declared, “The creation of a new foundation to carry out our nation's democratic development efforts is the most significant recommendation resulting from our deliberations.”

Two federal parties, the Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party, issued “dissenting opinions” against the report. The Bloc cautioned that “the types of measures recommended in this report may lead to political interference in the domestic affairs of another country,” while the NDP warned, “'Democracy' promotion can be, and has frequently undermined indigenous democratic processes around the world, when abused for the partisan foreign policy purposes of an external state.”

Fletcher told IPS that the dissenting opinions are “just not valid. This will be an arms-length agency to help countries develop democracy, and we know that democracy is the best way to empower people.”

In a statement e-mailed to IPS, the NDP's foreign affairs critic, Paul Dewar, said “It's rather ironic for the government to be pitching the creation of a democratic development organization at a time that our parliament has been shut down by the prime minister.”

Instead of returning to session as scheduled on Jan. 25, Harper suspended parliament until Mar. 3, following the conclusion of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games. Critics say he did so to suppress debate over allegations that Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan handed detainees over to Afghan security forces who, in turn, tortured them.

Mark Neufeld, a professor in the Department of Political Studies at Trent University, said Canada's role as an “occupier” in Afghanistan precludes it from promoting democracy there.

“You can argue the occupying and intervention legacy of Canada in Afghanistan means that it can never be a democracy promoter there. People will never trust us to be some kind of neutral purveyor of good governance along a democratic model. We've been there mainly propping up a government that's not democratic.”

Several U.S. experts have indicated that a Canadian democracy foundation would be welcomed. In the Standing Committee's report, former USAID consultant and advisor to the NED, Gerald Hyman, was described as stressing to committee members “that there is a role for Canada...where the U.S. carries a lot of counter-productive baggage...[Hyman] acknowledged that Canada can do things that the U.S. cannot.”

Robert Pee, who is completing a PhD on the NED and the use of democracy promotion as a tool of “political warfare” at the University of Birmingham, attributes such sentiments to the “tactical flexibility” that such a Canadian foundation might provide as a complement to U.S. efforts.

In an e-mail to IPS, Pee explained,

“Such a foundation would be able to operate more under the radar than the NED itself; thus, it seems likely that its creation would result in a division of labour between it and the NED, with the Canadian foundation working in areas that are too 'hot' for the NED to touch.”

Political warfare, says Pee, citing since-declassified definitions produced by Cold War U.S. policy planners “is the employment of all the means at a nation's command, short of war, to achieve its national objectives.”

Created in the waning days of the Cold War by President Ronald Reagan, since then the NED “continues its core mission of protecting U.S. national security interests.” The Barack Obama administration has continued to provide the NED with unprecedented levels of funding.

One danger for the Canadian foundation lies in the possibility that it will emulate the NED's mission. A document dating to 2006, obtained by IPS from Canada's Department of Foreign Affairs through the Access to Information Act describes the little-known Democracy Council as an “incarnation of earlier models such as NDI (National Democratic Institute) and NED in the United States.”

As Pee told IPS,

“The issue is that the NED does not decide which groups it will support on the basis of determining which group would be best for the ordinary people of the country concerned, but on the basis of which group would best serve the strategic or economic interests of the United States.”

Pee offered a warning for Canadians, where “citizens will find that their taxes are being used, not only or primarily to implement their own government's 'political warfare' programmes – which would be bad enough – but largely those 'political warfare' programmes which the U.S. would like to see carried out as part of its foreign policy. Thus, Canadians will be paying to implement the foreign policy of the U.S.” •

Anthony Fenton is an independent researcher and journalist in British Columbia, Canada, who covers Canadian and U.S. foreign policy. This article first published by IPS.

Ottawa appeals injection site ruling.

One would think that the Conservatives would be in favor of provincial rights. Also, health care insurance plans are under provincial jurisdiction rather than federal. The real reason that the government is appealing is because they want to do everything possible to stop the sites because the Harper government simply opposes them on principle. Even so, it will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court has to say. The last provincial ruling even imposed the costs on the government that is the taxpayer!


Ottawa to appeal injection site ruling
CBC News
The federal government is asking the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal a lower court ruling that sanctioned Vancouver's supervised drug injection site.

The case has raised important questions about the division of powers among federal and provincial governments that need answers, said Justice Minister Rob Nicholson on Parliament Hill Tuesday.

"The case we’ll be presenting before the court is to ask for clarification," he said. "I think it is important to do that."

Nicholson pointed out that there was a dissenting opinion in the lower court ruling. "I think it is appropriate for me to seek leave to appeal," he said.

The minister agreed that drug addicts need assistance, pointing out that the federal government's anti-drug strategy is aimed at prevention, and treatment for addicts.

The B.C. Appeal Court ruled Jan. 15 that provinces, not the federal government, have jurisdiction for health care, which includes services such as supervised injection sites for addicts of illegal street drugs.

The January decision upheld a lower court ruling, but the federal government is appealing on the basis that there was one dissenting opinion in the B.C. Court of Appeal ruling.

The Conservative government's decision to launch an appeal is certain to disappoint proponents of the facility who had hoped that more injection sites could open in other cities.

Mark Townsend, executive director of Portland Health Society, which runs Vancouver's Insite facility said, "The courts have now ruled twice in favour of Insite. Last time, they thought the feds were so out of line they made them pay all the costs.

"We wish [Prime Minister] Stephen Harper would stop wasting court time and the taxpayers' money and start helping to solve the drug problem in our community," he said in statement released Tuesday morning.

Federal Civil Service Unions worry about Conservative attack on pensions.

No doubt public service union workers are well advised to be ready for the Conservative onslaught on workers and especially unionised workers. As Milton Friedman once observed deficits are in some ways useful in that they provide a justification for cutting out social programs and entitlements such as are involved in these public sector union pensions. Recessions also are useful to capital in that they lower wages and make it difficult for unions to improve the lot of workers. This in turn will increase profits once there is any sort of turnaround. Notice that since last March stock markets have been going up even though unemployment especially in the US is at record low levels.


Federal civil servant unions gird for battle over generous pensions


By Kathryn May, Canwest News Service



OTTAWA — Canada's 18 federal unions are meeting in Ottawa for two days starting Tuesday to develop a united front against what they believe is the Harper government's gathering assault on the public service.


Facing one of the largest deficits in Canadian history, union leaders are braced for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty to turn to the public service to balance his books.


One big concern is persistent rumblings about cutting to the public service's generous pensions and benefits.


John Gordon, president of the Public Service Alliance of Canada, says the Conservatives have long grumbled about public service pensions. The government has said it won't cut transfers to the provinces or raise taxes, but will rely on economic growth and government spending cuts to eliminate the deficit.


Flaherty has said the "handsome arrangements" of all public servants came up at a recent federal-provincial meeting in Whitehorse on pension reform.


But union leaders say the government should be prepared for an all-out fight if it tampers with their defined benefit pension plan or tries to convert it a defined contribution plan as has happened in the United Kingdom.


Ron Cochrane, co-chair of the National Joint Council, which represents public service management and unions, said "nothing would galvanize even the most apathetic public servant like touching their pension.''


And the unions will be the first to pounce on MPs, judges and deputy ministers whose pensions are even richer than those of the rest of the public service.


The most talked about way for the government to reduce the pension costs of its employees is to make public servants, who now make about 32 per cent of the contributions to the plan, to pick up half the share of the cost.


Federal employees paid $1.2 billion in contributions into the plan in 2007-2008 while the government kicked in $2.6 billion.

© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service

Guy Giorno: 'Wicked smart'' man going to Toronto

This is from the Globe and Mail.
It seems that the Common Sense revolution is now being revitalized as the Harper revolution. Harper is surrounding himself with a gang of conservative ideologues with lots of experience in managing and massaging the people. They are much more than a 'gang of four'.

'Wicked smart' man going to Ottawa
JANE TABER
From Friday's Globe and Mail
May 23, 2008 at 5:12 AM EDT
An introverted, hard-core Conservative with a strategic mind and a deep religious faith is set to take over as Stephen Harper's top adviser.
Guy Giorno, 43, a Toronto lawyer and former chief of staff to Mike Harris, then the Progressive Conservative premier of Ontario - he once wrote that Mr. Harris "changed Canadians politics, permanently, and for the better" - begins his new job as Mr. Harper's chief of staff on July 1, according to Conservative sources.
Mr. Giorno was handpicked for the position by Ian Brodie, the man he is succeeding, a senior Conservative said. The two worked together on campaign strategy over the past few years. Mr. Brodie, who has been the Prime Minister's chief of staff since the Tories took power in January of 2006, informed his staff of his departure Wednesday morning, the source said.
Mr. Giorno, who grew up in Toronto, went to university in Toronto and still lives there with his wife and their three-year-old son, would not be interviewed. A number of his friends and acquaintances, however, agreed to speak about him, some on the condition of anonymity.
His friends say that Mr. Giorno is intelligent and cerebral but his aggressive style can sometimes rub people the wrong way.
Greg Lyle, the managing director of Innovative Research Group, who knows Mr. Giorno well, characterizes him as "wicked smart." Mr. Lyle said he's a good fit with the Harper Tories: "He's on the same wavelength as Harper and that team. He's got great relationships with a number of the senior ministers. He does get Ontario and certainly Ontario is basically one of two roads to get them to majority. And he has real experience running government."
The downsides, Mr. Lyle said, are that Mr. Giorno doesn't speak French and doesn't have experience in Ottawa.
Although he is not close to the Prime Minister, Mr. Giorno is close to senior Harper ministers, including Environment Minister John Baird and Health Minister Tony Clement. And though he has been characterized as the "author" of the Harris Common Sense Revolution, Mr. Giorno plays down his role in the controversial strategy.
Yesterday, however, the Liberals were quick to emphasize his political relationships.
"If he, in fact, becomes chief of staff, they're running this government and they are the same five-man wrecking crew whose lingering effects we're still feeling in the province of Ontario," Liberal MP David McGuinty said.
Mr. McGuinty, along with his brother, Dalton, the Liberal Premier of Ontario, share a strong animosity for the Harris Conservatives who are now in the Harper cabinet.
Mr. Giorno is also a friend of Secretary of State for Multiculturalism Jason Kenney and senior Harper advisers Patrick Muttart and Mark Cameron.
"He's a very focused guy," a veteran Tory said. "He's a little bit introverted but so, too, is Ian Brodie ... If you think about it, a lot of successful chiefs of staff are ... it's not a job where you want necessarily a hugely gregarious extrovert out there trying to get as much attention as their boss."
In the 2005-2006 federal election campaign, Mr. Giorno worked in the Tory war room as part of the "scripting unit," which provided messaging, lines and drafts for the Prime Minister's remarks.
And like some of Mr. Harper's other top advisers, Mr. Giorno is a practising Catholic with deep convictions. Although his faith was the source of some conflict during his years at Queen's Park - there were articles questioning whether as a Catholic he should bring a "wider sense of social justice" to his job - his friend says that he is professional in his work and private in his faith.
With a report from Bill Curry

Mulroney's Causes have done well under Harper government

How interesting that Harper makes sure to keep his distance from his former buddy Mulroney. The cream of the corporate crop on the other hand invite him to be on their boards and he also gets to sit on the Council on Foreign Relations. The Harper govt. seems not to be wary of advancing the interest of these firms in spite of their contamination by Mulroney! The Quebecor printing segment though is in need of more than an injection of Mulroney blarney. I believe it is in bad shape.

Mulroney's causes have done well under Harper government

Former prime minister's directorships tie in closely with with major policies of Harper government.

by the Canadian Association of Income Trust Investors, which has granted permission to republish this article.

What are the odds on this? Brian Mulroney sits on the board of directors of the following 5 corporations. Stephen Harper's policies are designed to benefit these same corporations, many at the expense of Canadians.

Let's take a closer look at Brian Mulroney's main Directorships and see how they tie-in with the Harper government's policies:

1) Archer Daniels Midland Company and the Canada Wheat Board

One of the world's largest processors of agricultural products, ADM purchases soybeans, wheat and cocoa to convert to ethanol and biodiesel, soymeal and oil, corn sweeteners, flour, cocoa and chocolate, as well as a wide portfolio of other value-added food ingredients, animal nutrition and industrial products.

ADM has a history of price fixing and was levied with one of the largest fines in the industry of $100 million.

Stephen Harper has been trying to eliminate the Canada Wheat Board with various underhanded tricks and schemes, despite the protests of farmers. The Canada Wheat Board is an international success story -- for Canadian farmers.

Destroying it would be of great benefit to ADM, as it would weaken the collective bargaining power of Canadian farmers, (the main purpose of the Wheat Board) and create a fractured market of wheat and barley sellers, which will only benefit major buyers like ADM. See: Harper comes out swinging at Wheat Board

2) Barrick Gold Corporation

Stephen Harper's jaunt to Tanzania this month was supposed to be a feel-good news item about Canadian aid to one of the poorest nations on earth, but the real agenda, that of Barrick Gold, dominated: Yet it was a 45-minute meeting with officials from a dozen Canadian investors, led by mining giant Barrick Gold Corp., that dominated Mr. Harper's news conference with President Jakaya Kikwete. Barrick has been accused of irresponsible mining practices in the country, and failure to pay adequate royalties. See: Human rights rhetoric contradicted by rush for Colombia trade pact

3) The Blackstone Group L.P.

As one of the world's largest private equity players, the Blackstone Group will reap massive benefits from Stephen Harper's elimination of the 15% withholding tax on interest paid by private equity firms on leveraged buyout debt.

Plus, his punitive tax and growth restrictions on income trusts in the hands of Canadian Investors but NOT in the hands foreign private equity like Blackstone has resulted in the perfect situation for them to pick off these sitting ducks. To date there has been $65 billion worth of takleover activity caused by this policy -- over half of it by private equity via leveraged buyout loans.

4) Quebecor Inc.

The second largest printing company in the world has been moving into communications, including Sun Media, cable and internet, and telecommunications.

A federal agency plans to review lobbying by Brian Mulroney on behalf of Quebecor Inc that could benefit from Harper's decision to open up the wireless industry to more competition according to CBC News and this report from the Globe and Mail.

5) Council on Foreign Relations

David Rockefeller's CFR is the main proponent of the Security and Prosperity Partnership, whose main goal is to bring about the North American Union under the self described process of "evolution by stealth". This is Stephen Harper's overall plan for Canada. He has gone to great lengths to hide these activities from Parliament and from Canadians as he knows full well that this abrogation of our sovereignty will never be supported by the people of this country.

Harper has been tasked with securing Canada's energy resources (oil, gas, wheat, water, electricity) for the US and what better guide than Mr Mulroney, who knows all about selling out Canada's interests.

The following are Brian Mulroney's Directorships as per Ogilvy Renault:
Barrick Gold Corporation
Archer Daniels Midland Company
Wyndham Worldwide Corporation
The Blackstone Group L.P.
Independent News and Media PLC
Quebecor Inc.

He is also a member of the International Advisory Councils of the China International Trust and Investment Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Lion Capital LLP.

Mr. Mulroney is also a director of the Montreal Heart Institute Foundation, the International Advisory Council of HEC Montréal, the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation and the Council on Foreign Relations.

Harper even has meta-polls.

That is all we need a poll on polls. Even if the Conservatives do keep their promise to spend 10 million less a year on polls they will still spend several million more than the Liberal average.


Harper government polls Canadians about polls
Published: Friday, March 14, 2008 | 7:05 PM ET
Canadian Press: THE CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA - The federal government has conducted an opinion survey to find out what Canadians think of, uh, opinion surveys.

Release of the polling data comes amid pressure on Ottawa to rein in spending on public opinion research.

The poll, Canadians' Preferences in Answering Surveys, was completed Jan. 31 by Ekos Research Associates for Public Works and Government Services.

The survey of more than 2,250 Canadians last fall found 45 per cent of respondents preferred telephone surveys over Internet or in-person questionnaires.

A Public Works spokeswoman could not immediately say how much the survey cost or why it was undertaken.

A summary of the results suggest the questions were asked as part of a long-running series of polls on information technology.



The Tories are promising to spend $10 million less on government polling in the next budget year.

In December, an independent investigator reported the Conservatives spent $31.2 million on public-opinion research in the 12 months leading up to a government-commissioned probe.

That's almost twice the $18 million a year the Liberals averaged on polling between 1993 and 2006.