In keeping with my plan for this blog to be unbiased I am ignoring the current election. In the present campaign any comment would be taken by someone as being partisan.
REALLY? 2,564 miles per gallon?
For the third year in a row students from Université Laval in Quebec, Canada, took home first prize in Shell’s Eco-marathon Americas fuel-efficiency competition, with a vehicle that was able to get 2,564.8 miles per gallon.
FOX NEWS NORTH?
A new 24-hour TV news station in Canada has been quietly launched by the Quebecor-owned Sun News Network. This is their second attempt. Their first run was held up when the CRTC blocked the use of “fake news”.
The specialty channel was the brainchild of Kory Teneycke, former spokesman for Canada’s Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
INCOME TAX DATE RANT
Doing my income tax reminded me of one of my pet peeves – the lack of common sense in dates. Can you tell me what date 12/11/10 is? 12h of Nov 2010? or Dec 11th 2010? or maybe even Nov 10th 2012 ? And have you noticed that receipts, banks and income tax forms are nowhere consistent in their use even within their own forms?
How hard can it be for Canada and the USA to decide on a format? I have noticed that the bank cheque printers have begun this silent revolution by printing “yymmdd” under the blanks for the date. Maybe FaceBook could move this revolution along.
And while we are at it why not promote a slashed 0 to distinguish it from a capital O like early computers did. and maybe some way to distinguish more clearly the numeral 1 from the letter l. Airlines like to use a mix of capital letters and digits for your unique reservation code.
There are a few other examples too, but I have to finish sorting my medical bills by date for my income tax.
BTW , today is April 20th which`could be written as 20/4. A lot of younger people prefer to think of it as 4/20. You know – “420”? If you still don’t get it ask anyone between the ages of 17 and 30. Or just hang out in a public park or place where kids gather at 4:20 this afternoon. And there are people who don't think it matters how you write dates !
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Only 27 days until Canada’s Federal Election (May 2nd)
Our American friends are fascinated by Canada’s ability to find a reason (a vote holding the government in contempt of our Parliament), pass a motion of non-confidence to defeat the government, hold a federal election and count the votes all in less than 5 weeks. That’s less time than it took to count the ballot’s for one of Bush’s elections. But to be fair, the USA has a lot more voters than we do.
The Canadian elections need to be fast because there is sometimes a short time between them. For example, shortest terms for being Prime Minister are:
- Sir Charles Tupper shortest at 69 days
- John Turner for 79 days
- Kim Campbell (first and only female) for 140 days
- Joe Clark for 273 days
We thought that problem was solved in 2006 with the passing a law requiring fixed election dates - one every 4 years (except by a vote of non-confidence). Since this law was passed this will be the 3rd election and the only one resulting from a vote of non-confidence (the other two by unprovoked prorogation). Go figure.
I found it interesting in 1996 when the Official Opposition in the Parliament was the Parti Québécois which was dedicated to the separation of Quebec from the rest of Canada (known currently as the “ROC”). As I recall those days they made an effective opposition party (although a philosophically bizarre political situation).
In the current election campaign the Bloc Québécois (dedicated to promoting Quebec over the ROC) are being demonized as being unfit to be a part of the government because of their policies (or for only existing in Quebec) and hence should not be part of the upcoming political debate. The Green Party is not allowed to be part of the National debate (presumably because they do not have a sitting MP).
If people or organizations with power can decide who should or should not be heard (based on non existent criteria by ab arbitrary consortium) , that would be a major blow to democracy in Canada. Surely Canadians should be able to hear all 5 official parties in a televised discussion, even if it isn’t really a debate.
OK, I agree 5 party leaders in a debate is unwieldy and confusing to watch – let alone to hear. But where is it written that only one debate is allowed? Maybe if our “system” were less strictly controlled by arbitrary rules then more people might get involved in the electoral process. Sport events manage to handle a large number of teams in one-on-one competitions. It could easily be done with the 5 official federal parties. Why not?
FYI, Canada has 19 registered political parties:
The Canadian elections need to be fast because there is sometimes a short time between them. For example, shortest terms for being Prime Minister are:
- Sir Charles Tupper shortest at 69 days
- John Turner for 79 days
- Kim Campbell (first and only female) for 140 days
- Joe Clark for 273 days
We thought that problem was solved in 2006 with the passing a law requiring fixed election dates - one every 4 years (except by a vote of non-confidence). Since this law was passed this will be the 3rd election and the only one resulting from a vote of non-confidence (the other two by unprovoked prorogation). Go figure.
I found it interesting in 1996 when the Official Opposition in the Parliament was the Parti Québécois which was dedicated to the separation of Quebec from the rest of Canada (known currently as the “ROC”). As I recall those days they made an effective opposition party (although a philosophically bizarre political situation).
In the current election campaign the Bloc Québécois (dedicated to promoting Quebec over the ROC) are being demonized as being unfit to be a part of the government because of their policies (or for only existing in Quebec) and hence should not be part of the upcoming political debate. The Green Party is not allowed to be part of the National debate (presumably because they do not have a sitting MP).
If people or organizations with power can decide who should or should not be heard (based on non existent criteria by ab arbitrary consortium) , that would be a major blow to democracy in Canada. Surely Canadians should be able to hear all 5 official parties in a televised discussion, even if it isn’t really a debate.
OK, I agree 5 party leaders in a debate is unwieldy and confusing to watch – let alone to hear. But where is it written that only one debate is allowed? Maybe if our “system” were less strictly controlled by arbitrary rules then more people might get involved in the electoral process. Sport events manage to handle a large number of teams in one-on-one competitions. It could easily be done with the 5 official federal parties. Why not?
FYI, Canada has 19 registered political parties:
Animal Alliance Environment Voters Party of Canada
Bloc Québécois
Canadian Action Party
Christian Heritage Party of Canada
Communist Party of Canada
Conservative Party of Canada
First Peoples National Party of Canada
Green Party of Canada
Liberal Party of Canada
Libertarian Party of Canada
Marijuana Party
Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada
New Democratic Party
People's Political Power Party of Canada
Pirate Party of Canada
Progressive Canadian Party
Rhinoceros Party
United Party of Canada
Western Block Party
Friday, March 25, 2011
A Canadian Federal Election??? Where Did That Come From ?
"Everyone" is saying Canadians do not want an election now. MP's state in the house they have not heard a single Canadian say they want an election. Well, I am one Canadian who says we DO need an election if it will provide an opportunity to get more than the approximately 58% of our population that usually votes in a federal election out to vote in the upcoming election. If you have watched Question Period in the House you will understand why I say it varies from being a "mad house" to being a "circus" to being a "sideshow".
You may not notice much difference when we are officially in election mode. We have already had a 2 or 3 month barrage of radio and TV political attack ads. There was even an attack ad from the Green Party attacking attack ads.
I read an editorial attacking the Green Party for attacking attack ads. I resisted the impulse to write a letter attacking the editorial for attacking the Green Party for attacking attack ads.
Somewhat facetiously (and I am trying not to be partisan), I suggest that the major parties all are hoping for something from this election:
- the Conservatives hope for a majority
- the Liberals hope for a minority
- the Bloc Québécois hope for some 2.2 million dollars and a hockey rink
- the NDP hope for many more seats
- the Green party wishes for a greener, gentler world but I have no idea for what they specifically hope
What do YOU wish FOR? Not what are you against, but what do you want YOUR Canada to be like?
Personally, I hope for a Parliament made up of MP's who can be less partisan, more thoughtful and capable of some semblance of DEBATE on issues. That's all we really need for an effective functioning government. Everything else is empty rhetoric, posturing, and over active egos on steroids.
For this election, I hope that Canadians will open their minds to facts and thoughtful opinions. Surely, there are at least 75% of us who care enough for their future and the future of their country to VOTE. If you don't like any of the parties or their leader then chose the PERSON who is running in your constituency that you trust to make good decisions for the country. But please, do VOTE. Otherwise we can not ever have a functioning democratic Parliament.
Talk to all the young people you know and help them to separate political rhetoric from facts and then to VOTE as they wish. Their vote (or lack of it) will shape the Canada in which they will be living. The MP for whom they cast their vote makes up the government and passes the laws.
You may not notice much difference when we are officially in election mode. We have already had a 2 or 3 month barrage of radio and TV political attack ads. There was even an attack ad from the Green Party attacking attack ads.
I read an editorial attacking the Green Party for attacking attack ads. I resisted the impulse to write a letter attacking the editorial for attacking the Green Party for attacking attack ads.
Somewhat facetiously (and I am trying not to be partisan), I suggest that the major parties all are hoping for something from this election:
- the Conservatives hope for a majority
- the Liberals hope for a minority
- the Bloc Québécois hope for some 2.2 million dollars and a hockey rink
- the NDP hope for many more seats
- the Green party wishes for a greener, gentler world but I have no idea for what they specifically hope
What do YOU wish FOR? Not what are you against, but what do you want YOUR Canada to be like?
Personally, I hope for a Parliament made up of MP's who can be less partisan, more thoughtful and capable of some semblance of DEBATE on issues. That's all we really need for an effective functioning government. Everything else is empty rhetoric, posturing, and over active egos on steroids.
For this election, I hope that Canadians will open their minds to facts and thoughtful opinions. Surely, there are at least 75% of us who care enough for their future and the future of their country to VOTE. If you don't like any of the parties or their leader then chose the PERSON who is running in your constituency that you trust to make good decisions for the country. But please, do VOTE. Otherwise we can not ever have a functioning democratic Parliament.
Talk to all the young people you know and help them to separate political rhetoric from facts and then to VOTE as they wish. Their vote (or lack of it) will shape the Canada in which they will be living. The MP for whom they cast their vote makes up the government and passes the laws.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Do We Really Want Fake News In Canada ???
The initial stimulus for this blog was a discussion I had a couple of years ago with a fellow at a party in the USA about politicians telling lies. I, (being naively Canadian), felt that honesty was high on my priorities for a politician. His position, (being worldly American), was that he would never vote for a politician who DIDN’T lie. At that point we became ships that passed in the night – never to meet again. However, it has given me much cause for thought. Should we really expect our politicians to be liars? Maybe there are cases where the end justifies the means? I’m not as sure as I used to be.
But when it comes to our public news media being allowed to spew forth information they know to be false I would have said, “NOT IN MY CANADA. NOT NOW. NOT EVER.”
I had always thought that there was a ban (legal, or at least moral) on allowing the Canadian TV and radio news media to spew forth false information. And I find I was right. The CRTC has had a ban on broadcasting false information on radio and TV, and the CRTC was content with that current ban on fake news.
Then, late in 2010 the commission was “coerced” to approve a proposal to make "fake news" acceptable on Canadian TV and radio. One can only guess from where this political pressure came, but it is most likely related to the earlier move to establish a “Fox News North”.
" We never wanted to touch this thing. We put it forward because we were ordered to do it," von Finckenstein told reporters.
The CRTC is dropping this proposal to allow fictitious news items thanks to on the support from a Parliamentary committee. "All I can say is, 'Thank you committee.' I will withdraw this proposal tomorrow. This is the end of the issue,’”Finckenstein said.
I sincerely hope this is “the end of the issue.” MY CANADA didn’t (and never will) approve of giving right to broadcast information that is know to be false or deliberately misleading.
But it scares me that this sort of thing was going on without the knowledge of the Canadian public.
But when it comes to our public news media being allowed to spew forth information they know to be false I would have said, “NOT IN MY CANADA. NOT NOW. NOT EVER.”
I had always thought that there was a ban (legal, or at least moral) on allowing the Canadian TV and radio news media to spew forth false information. And I find I was right. The CRTC has had a ban on broadcasting false information on radio and TV, and the CRTC was content with that current ban on fake news.
Then, late in 2010 the commission was “coerced” to approve a proposal to make "fake news" acceptable on Canadian TV and radio. One can only guess from where this political pressure came, but it is most likely related to the earlier move to establish a “Fox News North”.
" We never wanted to touch this thing. We put it forward because we were ordered to do it," von Finckenstein told reporters.
The CRTC is dropping this proposal to allow fictitious news items thanks to on the support from a Parliamentary committee. "All I can say is, 'Thank you committee.' I will withdraw this proposal tomorrow. This is the end of the issue,’”Finckenstein said.
I sincerely hope this is “the end of the issue.” MY CANADA didn’t (and never will) approve of giving right to broadcast information that is know to be false or deliberately misleading.
But it scares me that this sort of thing was going on without the knowledge of the Canadian public.
Sunday, March 6, 2011
Our Government: Fomerly Know As "Canadian"
It has been made public by CBC news that a directive has been given by the PMO to public servants to use the works "Harper Government" on all communications in place of the words, "Canadian Government".
When a Bloc MP tried to query this in the Friday Parliamentary Question Period, she was blocked by the Speaker of the House because MP`s cannot be named and must be referred to by the riding they represent. She tried to rectify her error by referring to `Harper` as the `H - word`.
So, we now have added one more to our list of unspeakable words: `the f - word`, the `n - word` and now the `H - word`.
I don`t much like the sound of the `H - word Government`. I would much prefer to follow the example of TAFKAP (The Artist Formerly Known As Prince).
The `Government formerly known as Canadian` has a much nicer ring to it.
When a Bloc MP tried to query this in the Friday Parliamentary Question Period, she was blocked by the Speaker of the House because MP`s cannot be named and must be referred to by the riding they represent. She tried to rectify her error by referring to `Harper` as the `H - word`.
So, we now have added one more to our list of unspeakable words: `the f - word`, the `n - word` and now the `H - word`.
I don`t much like the sound of the `H - word Government`. I would much prefer to follow the example of TAFKAP (The Artist Formerly Known As Prince).
The `Government formerly known as Canadian` has a much nicer ring to it.
Friday, March 4, 2011
NOW I Know Where “My Canada" Went
The “Canadian Government” has been officially replaced by the “Harper Government” in all federal communications by an order given late last year to public servants.
I now know where “My Canada” has gone. I really want it back because I don’t like where it went. And I am afraid of where it is heading.
Wikipedia states:
Because the prime minister is, in practice, the most politically powerful member of the Canadian government, he or she is sometimes erroneously referred to as Canada's head of state,[n 2] when, in fact, that post is held by the Canadian monarch, represented by the governor general.[12] The prime minister is, instead, the head of government . . . “
Harper is the head of the government, but it is not HIS government. We still have a Parliamentary government, not a personal one.
No matter what Harper may choose to say.
I now know where “My Canada” has gone. I really want it back because I don’t like where it went. And I am afraid of where it is heading.
Wikipedia states:
Because the prime minister is, in practice, the most politically powerful member of the Canadian government, he or she is sometimes erroneously referred to as Canada's head of state,[n 2] when, in fact, that post is held by the Canadian monarch, represented by the governor general.[12] The prime minister is, instead, the head of government . . . “
Harper is the head of the government, but it is not HIS government. We still have a Parliamentary government, not a personal one.
No matter what Harper may choose to say.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
A Perspective From The USA
A few decades ago when traveling overseas, I discovered that Canadians were held in high regard most everywhere. A Canadian flag lapel pin assured one of a pleasant smile and a friendly everywhere because Canadians had a reputation of being quiet, friendly cooperative and accepting of the differences between cultures. Americans, by comparison, seemed to be loud, pushy and wanting things the way they were at home.
On my vacation last week to California, I discovered that Americans seem to have mellowed with age (or maybe it is I who has mellowed).. Americans seem to have become more Canadian in deportment and manner.(or is it just that I have found that out current government embodies much of what used to be annoying about Americans). And, by the way, our Federal Government is OUR government and not Harper’s Government to use as his personal chess game. The Canadian parliament is made up of the elected representatives of the people and IT (not Harper) should be making the rules as the governing body of Canada. But I digress.
For example, I was in a hardware store in Redwood City and a sales person asked if I needed help.(apparently I have a perpetual look of confusion). I explained that I was looking for some kind of wax product to lightly wax a table. He suggested I could rub the table with a large brown paper bag instead of buying a commercial product. It was a marvelously helpful idea (and it actually works, although it will never replace Pledge). I never get that kind of useful assistance (without a sales pitch) in Canadian stores.
It seems “My Canada” has gone south in more ways than one. I found everyone in California (and in Denver where I had a stopover) to be pleasant and friendly – well, maybe not as much when they are driving, but still much more polite, considerate and respectful than in Winnipeg. They even take a turn signal light as a suggestion for them to make room for the signaling car. In Winnipeg it is usually taken as a challenge to close the gap.
Maybe I don’t really want my Canada back. Maybe I should just let it run merrily along on its present self-destructive course and move south. But I would miss our winters . . . less than you might imagine.
On my vacation last week to California, I discovered that Americans seem to have mellowed with age (or maybe it is I who has mellowed).. Americans seem to have become more Canadian in deportment and manner.(or is it just that I have found that out current government embodies much of what used to be annoying about Americans). And, by the way, our Federal Government is OUR government and not Harper’s Government to use as his personal chess game. The Canadian parliament is made up of the elected representatives of the people and IT (not Harper) should be making the rules as the governing body of Canada. But I digress.
For example, I was in a hardware store in Redwood City and a sales person asked if I needed help.(apparently I have a perpetual look of confusion). I explained that I was looking for some kind of wax product to lightly wax a table. He suggested I could rub the table with a large brown paper bag instead of buying a commercial product. It was a marvelously helpful idea (and it actually works, although it will never replace Pledge). I never get that kind of useful assistance (without a sales pitch) in Canadian stores.
It seems “My Canada” has gone south in more ways than one. I found everyone in California (and in Denver where I had a stopover) to be pleasant and friendly – well, maybe not as much when they are driving, but still much more polite, considerate and respectful than in Winnipeg. They even take a turn signal light as a suggestion for them to make room for the signaling car. In Winnipeg it is usually taken as a challenge to close the gap.
Maybe I don’t really want my Canada back. Maybe I should just let it run merrily along on its present self-destructive course and move south. But I would miss our winters . . . less than you might imagine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)