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

Monday, February 15, 2010

Missing Aboriginal Women and Missing Federal Funding

I'm simply passing this information along from the Facebook group, Proud to be a Member of That "Left-Wing Fringe Group" Called Women,* with the fervent hope that you will take action and write to your MPs, Minister Guergis and Mr. Harper. Our country has a very poor record when it comes to the treatment of aboriginal populations and aboriginal women have borne the brunt of this mistreatment.

Please help this group continue its work by making the Conservatives aware that we do care - about every person's rights and dignity.

Thank you.

{snip}

From Elizabeth Pickett, February 15 at 5:56pm

Minister of State for the Status of Women Helena Guergis has made several announcements over the last ten days with respect to small funding grants to various groups across Canada, particularly those encouraging and coordinating educational projects for women entrepreneurs fitting with SWC's theme Strong Women, Strong Canada. There has been no announcement about funding for the Sisters in Spirit initiative of the Native Women's Association of Canada. From the Winnipeg Free Press :

"We haven't heard anything," said Sisters in Spirit director Kate Rexe. "The government is silent on the issue."

With a grant of $5 million, Sisters in Spirit spent the last five years compiling a database of more than 520 women who have disappeared or been killed over the last 40 years. The group prepared tool kits for families and police to use when a woman goes missing and developed policies and programs to help stop the cycle of violence.

Rexe said the Sisters group is prepared to begin implementing policies and community programs aimed at three specific areas -- the justice system, child welfare and poverty. But that's been on hold for months because Ottawa won't say if it plans to keep funding the work.

"It's unbelievably frustrating," Rexe said. "We have all the knowledge, the momentum. We can actually start to implement change, but we don't even know if we can keep planning."

A year ago, Status of Women Minister Helena Guergis said she was working on extending the project. "I want you to know, I've already engaged in the process of what Sisters in Spirit Two would look like," Guergis said at the Status of Women committee meeting Feb. 12, 2009.

But a spokeswoman for Guergis would not say Friday whether funding for Sisters in Spirit is forthcoming, and said in an email Ottawa has asked NWAC to share its database with police.

Please support Canadian First Nations sisters in spirit and write, phone or fax Helena Guergis, the PM, opposition critics, opposition leaders and your MP demanding full funding for this critical initiative. First Nations women must be the leaders in resolving the national shame of missing and murdered Aboriginal women - they are our experts. The RCMP and provincial and local police have miserable track records with respect to these tragedies and must work in partnership with women to create effective strategies for their resolution.

PM Harper
Harper.S@parl.gc.ca

House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0A6
Telephone: 613-992-4211
Fax: 613-941-6900

Helena Guergis
Minister for Status of Women
guergh@parl.gc.ca

733 Confederation Building
House of Commons
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0A6
Phone: 613-992-4224
Fax: 613 992-2164

Suzanne L. Clément
Deputy Head
suzanne.clement@nlrb.gov

Michael Ignatieff
IgnatM@parl.gc.ca

Anita Neville (Lib MP, Winnipeg South Central & party critic on SWC)
email@anitaneville.ca

Jack Layton
LaytoJ@parl.gc.ca

Irene Mathyssen (NDP MP, London-Fanshawe & party critic on SWC)
mathyi@parl.gc.ca

Libby Davies (NDP MP Vancouver East)
daviel@parl.gc.ca

Olivia Chow (NDP MP Trinity-Spadina)
chowo1c@parl.gc.ca

Nicole Demers (Bloc Québécois MP Laval & party critic on SWC)
DemerN@parl.gc.ca

Find Your Member of Parliament
{snip}

* The name of this group refers to a comment Mr. Harper made in a supposedly closed-door meeting in Thunder Bay where he commented on the cancellation of the Court Challenges program and proclaimed that they had shut down the influence of left-wing fringe groups. It's at 3:40 of the video though you might enjoy his bragging about the cancellation of universal daycare at about 3:30. Sadly, one of, if not the major beneficiary of the Court Challenges program had been the equity and rights of women through many cases. It was a major loss to equity in this country and it slipped right by, almost un-noticed and un-challenged. We might as well change it to the Minister of State Against the Status of Women

Sunday, February 14, 2010

If democracy doesn't function, it isn't the fault of politicians

[Letter number 2 in what will most likely be a series of Letters to the Editor of the Era-Banner that I am not allowed to send because I am a declared candidate for an election that will happen sometime in the future. I wish I had realized that when I declared for the Green Party I would lose my voice at the Era-Banner but such is life. Now I get to make my letters longer. Ha!]

Dear Editor,

Re: Voter turnout low because politicians lie, letter from Mr. L. Rothwell, Feb 11 / Re: If you care about democracy, vote, editorial, Jan 28

With all due respect to Mr. Rothwell I must challenge his hypothesis that when "80 per cent of voters... stay at home. Then, maybe, politicians will get the message."

While there are a few directions my disagreement could take - including my belief that when 80% of voters stay home we will live in a true oligarchy where only the select few have any say in government and tyranny will reign and Canada will weep. Though, this scenario is fairly close to the mark with respect to municipal elections. Anyways.

That was not the point.

What I really wanted to dispute was Mr. Rothwell's obvious anger towards 'politicians' and his categorization of them as "people who lack integrity and ethics."

Of course, as a recently declared political candidate I take it a little personally that because of my political choice I suddenly have no integrity nor ethics. I actually consider myself to be a person possessing both integrity and a high ethical standard.

But that is still not the point, though closer to it. The point is - there are no politicians. There are merely people, just like Mr. Rothwell and myself, that have chosen to join in the political process.

Politicians are not usually born. They are made. They are people who have decided to pursue a public life - hopefully in the service of their country and the best interests of the electorate.

Do these people sometimes lose focus and become swayed by the pretty, shiny danglings of lobby groups? Yes.

Do they sometimes pursue power to the exclusion of everything else. Yes.

Do these people sometimes let us down? Yes. Often.

Do we have a democratic crisis in Canada? Yes. I believe we do.

But my point is that sitting at home and whinging about it is not the best use of one's time.

Stand up. Get engaged. Make your voice count.

And if you can't find a single political candidate that you can trust - then take the leap and become a candidate. For municipal, provincial, or federal politics quality candidates are desperately needed.

Of course, it would be super-spiffy if you would support me and my bid to be the first Green MP for Newmarket-Aurora, but if you can't, then get your butt out there and run against me.

I also have an issue with your contention that "the population is a lot more educated these days." Hardly. When the anti-proroguing rally was being organized most people did not even know that our democracy had been suspended. They didn't understand what it meant. And they didn't know why they should care. Some were happy to get the 'liars' out of Ottawa for a while. People know far more about what Britney Spears is up to than what our PM is doing showboating in Vancouver.

But that isn't the politicians fault. If there are issues with our democracy it is because we expect 'someone else' to take care of it for us.

We are the change we wish to see. We are the smallest unit of a democratic society. And it is up to us to keep it safe and keep it strong. If we don't have anyone to vote for then it is up to us to find them - or to become them. That is what I did. And it is what I encourage everyone else to do.

That is why I am so proud of local organizers like Liz, Neale, Nick, Carter and everyone else who helped make the January 23rd rally such a success - and who are now organizing a public meeting in Aurora on February 25.

Holding the Line on Democracy will take a frank look at what is happening in our society and, hopefully, send people away feeling more educated, more empowered, and more motivated to take action to keep our democracy strong.

Mr. Rothwell, I am personally inviting you to join us. It's kind of fun to be around other people who care as passionately as you obviously do.

Tuesday, February 9, 2010

Suddenly, Harper cares about women?!

... oh! Wait. It's just our uterus' that he cares about. Okay, no change there.

A funny thing happened a couple of weeks ago. In his inaugural speech as 2010 President of the G8, Mr. Harper proclaimed that he was very, very concerned about maternal and infant health and that, during his term, he was going to champion these two causes (Millennium Development Goals #4 and #5) and bring much needed attention and funding to them - on a global basis. No. Really. He said it.

Immediately, other commentators began to question his good intentions. Mr. Ignatieff, for one, thought it a bit odd and discussed how "Harper has made cuts to the status of women and equality programs, while salary gaps between men and women are increasing in Canada" and that, perhaps, Mr. Harper could "start showing at home in Canada the same commitment to women."

And this is all well and good. I expect certain people to have problems with everything that Mr. Harper announces.

But when Stephen Lewis has problems with the same announcements, then my ears prick up. Why? Because I have seen no evidence that he is anything other than a profoundly humane and compassionate man in a very challenging and frustrating position, exposed to the most heart-breaking conditions on Earth and managing to carry on year after year. To him I listen.

His critique is that it seems odd that Mr. Harper would trumpet Canada's burgeoning awareness of the issues of maternal and infant health when the G8 has been working on securing funding for the past year. Note that the MDGs were first developed leading up to 2000 with a due date of 2015 - sometimes it just takes a while to get the ball rolling, y'know.

In addition, Mr. Lewis noted that none of the other MDGs were mentioned and that it didn't "include sexual violence, child marriage, sexual trafficking, female genital mutilation, economic autonomy, political representation, land rights or inheritance rights. It include[d] none of the panoply of women's issues which consign women to subordinate positions around the world."

Anyway, I'm sure that members of the G8 hope that Canada will stop actively opposing humanitarian causes and denying human rights and freedoms to as many groups as they possibly can. I wish I could believe Mr. Harper but I have seen no evidence that he cares about anyone except for white, straight males, and preferably corporate oil executives at that.

Especially since he considers women to be a 'left-wing fringe group'.

The audacity of Mr. Harper is threatening to make my brain explode - is this his attempt at a kinder, gentler Harper to try and make us forget that he is a cynical, arrogant, autocratic leader who has shown only contempt for Canadian citizens and our democracy. Is this a reaction to the pro-democracy, anti-prorogue rallies that occurred all across Canada last month?

Probably. He honestly seems to believe that we will be easily lulled back to sleep with the belief that he is going to take care of the world's poorest and most vulnerable citizens. When he doesn't care about those same people right here.

How about raising the quality of life, or, heck, even the standard of living for our own aboriginal populations? How about taking care of the poorest and most vulnerable right here?

How about that Mr. Harper?

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Kevin Page - economic hero?

I was trying to find out more about the structural deficit predicted by the Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO) when I wandered across this groovy article in Macleans on the man himself, Kevin Page.

I tell ya, it's a rosy picture they paint of Mr. Page. I have a bit of a crush now. And he's a Queen's grad. And he said this:

"These days Page sees signs of Ottawa sliding back into a pattern of spilling red ink year after year. The Tories have cut taxes without curbing spending, and an aging population looms. 'This problem is going to get bigger and bigger and bigger,' he says."

But that wasn't the information I wanted so I went to the PBO site. Much better. No frills, just a statement of their mandate and a list of recent reports.

I must say I'm looking forward to a report on whether the economic stimulus is working - the issue that sent me looking in the first place.

I think the best part about the PBO is that he was part of the accountability and transparency measures put in place by Mr. Harper when newly elected, measures that I am sure he now regrets but that keep the rest of us informed.

I'll keep you up-to-date.

Friday, February 5, 2010

Now *that* was some impressive negotiating

The media is all abuzz today about the wonderful deal finally reached between American and Canadian officials to exempt Canadian businesses from the 'Buy American' clause of the $787 billion infrastructure aid program set up in the US last year. After months of tough negotiations Ministers van Loan and Cannon proudly made the announcement this morning.

Fabulous! That is great news for Canadian businesses...

Right?

Maybe.

Except that there is only about $75 billion of the money left - less than 10%.

Oh yes, and the deadline for proposals is February 17th. So our businesses have, hmm, let's see, less than two weeks to actually get proposals together and compete for that money.

Oh! And this agreement only applies to this particular program - other legislation that has 'Buy American' clauses is not included - though there is apparently a negotiated fast track. We'll be fighting this battle over and over again - meaning we will be always slightly behind American companies in the Request for Proposal (RFP) process.

Oh! And it only applies to the 37 states that are WTO signatories. However ALL Canadian provinces are included.

What did we have to offer up in return? We just had to agree to one teensy little WTO clause. One small little clause that opens every municipal, provincial and federal RFP process, in perpetuity, to American and European Union companies.

Well. Seems like they made a great deal. Well done Steve!

So what is really happening here?

Seems to me like Harper is using this issue as an excuse to further his plans to fully integrate the economy of Canada under the U.S. After being thwarted at the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) he has found another way to circumvent citizen pressure and preference. This article mentions how "the new deal also furthers Harper's goal of breaking down interprovincial trade barriers and gives momentum to his push to have a single securities regulator."

All on the pretext of saving Canadian exports.

We'll see. But I don't think so.

(P.S. I confess I am writing this without having seen the full agreement - as soon as I can check it out I'll let you know if I'm wrong about any of the points.)

Friday, November 16, 2007

Schreiber

Okay, I just had to put my two cents in on this one.

Please, please, please extradite him to Germany. Please, for our country's sake. The man has played our legal system like a pro and made us look like a bunch of chumps.

Just send him away.

I don't care whether there were unscrupulous business dealings. I really don't. I mean, $300,000? Our government wastes that much on letterhead, much more on fancy golf balls. Who cares what Mulroney did almost 20 years ago?

There was far more money wasted canceling the Airbus deal and the damage it did to our international reputation... how is this going to help?

And now, Schreiber says he won't co-operate if he gets extradited. He is issuing threats and attempting to hold my government and my justice system hostage to his rantings.

Send him home.

He has been fighting extradition for 8 years. Eight! It is so embarrassing.

Don't waste millions more on a public inquiry that is likely going to find - oh, what a shock! the guy was pulling out any desperate accusations he could to remain out of the reach of the German legal system...

where maybe there's a hope in hell he'll actually get convicted of something.

sigh.

Thursday, September 27, 2007

Where to begin?

I don't even know how to express the awful feeling in the pit of my stomach when I hear the daily report from CBC about the worsening situation in Burma. Dozens of monks and nuns have been beaten/arrested/shot. Mass arrests were last nights attempt to keep the people from marching - but it didn't work. They were out there again today and the latest reports have 11 wounded and 9 dead, including, possibly, a foreign journalist.

The military junta is trying to restrict bandwidth to prevent pictures and reports from 'leaking' out of the country.

The military junta is going to crack down. There is going to be a massacre. And we are watching. It hurts me.

I always thought that if I was about to witness innocent people being slaughtered that I would surely throw myself in front of the guns.

But now I sit and watch. Does it matter that they are far away around the world? Not to me - but how do I help when I can't get there.

Please visit www.avaaz.org and sign the petition. Write Stephen an email. The Security Council is having emergency meetings, let's hope that it gets better.

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

My email to Stephen...

Dear Sir,

I am sorry to hear that your speech at the UN was not so well received but perhaps you can earn some points for Canada by bringing up this issue during your stay in New York.

There are hundreds of thousands of monks and pro-democracy believers, marching through the streets of Myanmar/Burma, demanding freedom from the oppressive military junta. Last time they tried this, thousands were killed. Please don't let it happen again.

Please say something to support them, please say to the UN that these people deserve our attention. They are desperate for democracy and they have suffered long enough.

Don't let your stated commitment to protecting and developing democracy in other countries ring hollow. Prove that you truly support the freedom of the soul and the body.

Please.

Something important is happening in Burma

If you dig through the National Post you can find it on Page A18. There are protests happening in 'Myanmar' or Burma as it was called before the military junta took over decades ago.

The revolt in 1988 was viciously put down by the military and thousands were killed.

Since the middle of August, there have been more and more protests.

Today there are 40-60,000 monks - that's right, monks - leading protests of civil leaders, students and others demanding democracy. Marching through the streets of Rangoon and other towns. Hundreds of thousands of people rising up and demanding democracy. Literally risking their lives for freedom. Literally, of course, because the government has promised to crack down on the marches. And when they say crack down they mean with bullets, not with flowers.

Visit avaaz.org for more information and to lend you name to a petition to the UN Security Council. While Ahmadinejad is mistreated in New York as the U.S. marches to war against Iran, this issue is ignored. While the U.S. and Canada pick and choose their targets (based on uncooperative governments, I suppose) the very real dictatorship in Burma has been unopposed for decades. DECADES!

To learn more about this issue and one of my favourite people on Earth, here's the link to Wikipedia for Aung San Suu Kyi.

If you have a bit more time, please send an email to Stephen Harper, he just happens to be in New York this week making an ass of Canada before the UN. Maybe he'll enjoy an email or two.

Pay attention - the monks are leading the way. It probably won't hurt to send them your prayers.

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Yeah for Indigenous Rights, Boo for Canada

Have I mentioned that Harper makes me feel kindof sick to my stomach. Here then we have a hooray! for human rights trumping the invested corporate interests of big business in Canada, which Harper so devotedly represents.

THE DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES WAS OVERWHELMINGLY PASSED TODAY BY THE U.N. GENERAL ASSEMBLY.

Yeah! Here is a report by the CBC. Notice that there were 4 countries who voted against the declaration: Canada (I am so embarrassed), Australia, the United States and New Zealand. Hmmm... I wonder what could have happened to make them vote 'No!'

You may or may not know (but now you will) that I am taking a Seminar on Indigenous Peoples in IR this semester. Here is my favourite quote so far from the textbook: "Our object is to continue until there is not a single Indian in Canada that has not been absorbed into the body politic and there is no Indian question, and no Indian department." This was said by Deputy Superintendent-General Duncan Campbell Scott in 1920 (Leslie and Haguire 1978:115 in Niezen "The Origins of Indigenism" 2003:31).

No, I guess we don't have anything to apologize for. Nothing at all.

Excuse me while I go curl up in a ball and weep.

Clearing up that whole treason thing... a little

Not that I regret my morning post or anything, but I thought it might be a good idea to actually look up what it means to be treasonous in Canada. From our legal description (included below), the only treasonous way to overthrow the government is through force - nothing is written about undermining Canada's sovereignty until the country crumbles. So, our PMs are off the hook.

There is also a lovely prohibition about attempting to kill the Queen. Fabulous. We are *so* 21st century. Of course, that means that there is nothing treasonous about attempting to kill the PM. Which I would never advocate - I'm just trying to make blatantly obvious that this law is stupidly out-of-date.

or is it...

Here's the problem: I love Canada. I love Canada a lot. I love being Canadian and I am proud to be Canadian.

or at least I used to be. Now I'm wondering what it means to be Canadian. Is there a Canada at all? Are we still just a silly little dominion in the crumbled British Empire, asserting loyalty to a royal family an ocean away while neglecting our own citizenry and sovereignty?

or was there a brief period mid-twentieth century where maybe we did have an independent identity, where Canada built its reputation and stood for something.

and then we became part of the American Empire. Maybe we should change the law to make it treasonous to plan to assassinate the President of the US.

BTW, I don't like using the word assassinate, its done enough damage already hasn't it?

Shouldn't it be treason to attempt to kill our own head of state, our own PM? If we were a real, independent country, free and proud, wouldn't that be treason?

--V

From the Canadian Criminal Code:
PART II
OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER

Title: Treason and other Offences against the Queen’s Authority and Person

High 46. treason

46. (1) Every one commits high 46. (1) treason who, in Canada,

(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;

(b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or

(c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

46. (2) Treason

(2) Every one commits 46. (2) treason who, in Canada,

(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

(b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;

(c) conspires with any person to commit high 46. (2) (c) treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);

(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high 46. (2) (d) treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or

(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.

Okay, one more Harper rant

I'm not sure exactly what constitutes treasonous behaviour but I'm taking a course called "Diplomacy" and while I was doing the first readings last night I started thinking about supreme interests. You see, the supreme interest of a nation is its survival as a sovereign state. To be sovereign means that a state is able to act in its own interests both internationally and domestically.

So, I began to wonder if various prime ministers we have had over the last 20 or 30 years have compromised the integrity of Canada to the point that our continued existence as a *sovereign* state is jeopardized. Did Brian Mulroney compromise this ability with the signing of NAFTA and the inclusion of the proportionality clause that dooms us to be forever beholden to American needs instead of our own? I'm sure that Chretien and Martin furthered the process while in power, but not particular instance pops to mind. Certainly signing on to the Kyoto protocol and then doing nothing for several years was against our national interest and severely damaged our international reputation - the consequences of which are still to be seen.

But my mind drifted most to Harper and his affection for big business and especially big oil. I know that he loves Alberta - but does he love Canada? I'm sure his answer would be yes but how is that demonstrated? Does encouraging deep integration with the US and the actions of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives show a love of Canada? To me it is betraying our supreme interests, it threatens our very survival as a sovereign state. I think that that is treason.

Am I in so much trouble?

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

ahhhhh... Imperialism lives on

Harper - the man actually makes me nauseous. I hate that he represents the way a 'typical' Canadian thinks - I always pray that it isn't true but I am yet to be convinced.

You may wonder what I'm blabbing about today. Today, I love the hypocrisy of Canada. All over the world we trumpet the human rights of indigenous peoples - but when it comes time to stand up for them at the United Nations our country runs and hides. Harper/Howard are having a wonderful time in Australia, dreaming up ways to say that they want to help stop climate change but do nothing and that they respect human rights but are planning to actively oppose a tremendous opportunity to support those most in need of protection.

Why do we hide? My first thought would be that obviously we want to ensure that our own indigenous peoples to not receive any internationally recognized rights which would help to lift them out of the abhorrent situation in which they find themselves here at home. I guess the other is... wait, I can't think of any other reason to not support the General Assembly resolution that will come up for a vote at the United Nations on September 13, 2007. That's only two days away!

Oh, maybe it's this phrase from the preamble: "Recognizing the urgent need to respect and promote the rights and characteristics of indigenous peoples, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources, which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies,"

If the resolution passed, our own aboriginal populations might then have a better defense against large corporations walking in to their lands and developing them for royalties that amount to a pittance. Or maybe they would ask for Toronto back. It weighs on my conscience to know that our wealth was built on a genocide. Weighs heavily.

Here is a nice site to learn more. You may want to read the Amnesty International open letter to Howard and Harper. Maybe I'll write a letter to my MP (I haven't heard from Belinda for awhile), or maybe to the Foreign Affairs Minister (who's the new one again? oh right, the Industry guy.).

Don't even get me started on Harper participating and 'leading' at an APEC conference on climate change. ack.