fortress of knowledge

Democracy wins

2010-04-27T18:56:00.006-04:00

Today's ruling, in regards to the role of Parliament and the executive, by House Speaker Peter Miliken is a win-win for everyone: members of parliament get a bit more clout again and excessive partisanship is forced to tone down. Our parliamentary system has its flaws, but until it can be changed or reformed, it is the way it works. This is not a Conservative or a Liberal issue. How many of us complaining that Canada, when it was government by the Chrétien Liberals, was a 'friendly dictatorship' would have loved such a ruling in the house ? Therefore what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Is it about hydro, Québec or both ?

2010-01-22T19:21:00.005-05:00

It seems to me that concerning this whole hydro-Québec and New-Brunswick deal and the virulent reactions it caused, is more about fear of Quebec using its muscles and influence rather than actual economics. Would people outside of New-Brunswick have reacted as strongly if this deal had been done with another province, oh say Newfoundland for example ? On a related note, the argument federalists in Quebec have used for years was that Canada was a wonderful place to expand Quebec's influence and that Canada was a welcoming federation. But when Quebec actually DOES get involved, it gets accused of being selfish or 'un-canadian', and if it DOESN'T get involved, then it gets accused of indifference and of being a spoiled child of the federation. My my, what should an undecided nationalist Quebecer think about this ? Can you say qui gagne, perd?

PS: I find it is somewhat amusing that anything written about Quebec, whether on the main news websites or blogs, attracts many opinions even if most of them are unrelated to the story at hand.

si j'étais néo-démocrate...

2009-09-21T19:04:00.002-04:00

Je donnerais un coup de fil à Martin Cauchon qui détient le profil idéal du social-démocrate moderne. Si le NPD souhaite devenir une réelle alternative au pouvoir, why not?

Are you an AC/DC Tory ?

2009-09-12T13:01:00.006-04:00

By which I mean the Angry Canadian/Dominating (the)Conservatives ? Reading some blogs out there and the comment sections of various media (print and electronic) regarding Canadian politics, one gets the impression that Canada is dominated by the angry crowd (borderline trolling) : the angry Liberal and the angry Tory. But it seems to me that the political ads by the Conservatives are always aimed at making people angry (or scandalized or worried about some sort of 'doom') at something. I realize it is probably 'efficient' at mobilizing people, especially for funding close to an election, but nonetheless for me at least, making anyone who isn't a Tory seem like a enemy makes me feel uncomfortable. I believe in the best of people, I'm an optimist by nature, so negative ads or aggressive ones don't appeal to me. Perhaps that isn't the point you'll say, since I'm ALREADY a Tory and will remain one for as long as I live. But wouldn't it be better to argue positive reasons to be a Conservative ( ie: believing in the independence of people to create and innovate without having to justify themselves to the State all the time, respect different sovereignties (provinces for example), rather than go on about ' separatists, socialists' or ' bleeding hearts' (or anything else) ? Are there any other Conservatives out there who DON'T view their opponents as enemies and who prefer to have a positive debate about what we stand for ? Are we becoming the Liberals of old (and possibly new) by pretending to have an hegemony on what 'Canadian values are' ? It certainly makes me wonder these days. Anger is a powerful emotion, but it isn't the best characteristic to have, and by appealing to that raw power, politics becomes warfare at the expense of the social fabric.

The picture says it all

2009-09-03T22:17:00.003-04:00

A big thanks to a buddy of mine, Darcy Hartwick for creating this awesome picture of PM Stephen Harper. It's too good not to share with other blogging Tories. Thanks man I owe you a beer or two or....

Paddling for Liberals...that's a paddling

2009-07-21T20:35:00.006-04:00

So, apparently Liberal Party National Director, Rocco Rossi is paddling the Rideau Canal from Ottawa to Kingston for a good cause and is asking for donations. How cute. What is the cause? Cancer ? Fighting childhood obesity ? No no. Instead it is to, get this, help make Dear Michael, the next Prime-Minister. I didn't know the Liberal party was a charity did you? Oh well, whatever gimmick makes them happy I suppose. It sure beats developing and defending policies to the people of Canada. Still, was this particular director inspired by a Simpsons character named Jasper? "Talking out of turn...that's a paddling. Looking out the window...that's a paddling. Staring at my sandals...that'spaddling. Paddling the school canoe...ooh, you better believe that's a paddling." What next ? How about a hot-dog eating competition to help the Alberta wing of the Liberal party get out of permanent rehab. It's a good cause boys and girls: let's help protect an endangered species.

Gordon Brown....really?

2009-07-07T19:19:00.003-04:00

You know a leader's status is greatly diminished when the first reaction to criticism from another leader is laughter. Whatever legitimate criticism we can have about Stephen Harper and the government, this declaration from the UK's PM would have more clout if his situation at home wasn't so sad. Heck he makes Paul Martin look pretty good in comparison. What is it they say, that it is better to be hated than mocked or pitied..... in which case, Stephen Harper shouldn't feel too bad about this.

Canada Day: a community of communities

2009-07-01T11:07:00.005-04:00

Happy Canada Day everyone. As far as I'm concerned, the genius that is Canada is in its regional and national (first nations and Quebec) diversity. These differences are like 'accents' or unique narratives that enrich Canada. From Newfoundland to BC, the Territories or micro-regions of Ontario, everything seems out-of-sync. And yet somehow it works. Canada-on-Turtle-Island may not be a 'logical' country (in terms of acting like a nation-state with a centralized form of governance), but it is a decent and fundamentally fair one. Regionalism in Canada is a sign of strenght, not weakness. Moving to Vancouver in 2008 from Ottawa, and travelling in BC, you realize that the province is very different from Ontario, and yet that is EXACTLY what makes its particular identity narrative so interesting. Since Canada is so geographically diverse anyway, these 'accents' give the country a better understanding of itself, in all its subtelties. Unity in Diversity is our non-official moto,and I couldn't be any happier about it. Happy Canada Day to all and have a cold (Canadian) micro-brewed beer to enjoy this day.

Liberals like to burn each other don't they ?

2009-04-27T13:30:00.008-04:00

Will the federal Liberals "no policy" policy convention in Vancouver next weekend be out-of-focus, blurred and forgotten? Oh dear. If I were Stéphane Dion, I would refuse that tribute instead of risking being humiliated...again.

La dernière entrevue de René Lévesque

2009-04-24T19:03:00.006-04:00

Avis aux amateurs d'histoire et des acteurs qui façonnent celle-ci: En navigant sur la toile, je suis tombé sur la dernière entrevue d'un grand homme, René Lévesque, accordé en 1987, peu avant sa mort et disponible ici.

off topic: hilarious Boston Bruins ad

2009-04-23T13:44:00.003-04:00

I hate to rub in in the wounds of the Habs now that the *ahum* "series" is over but.... (oh who am I kidding, seeing Hab fans cry and try to run Carey Price out of town is funny to me). Brilliant marketing ads on the part of the Bruins LOL

How nasty will it get ?

2009-04-14T12:26:00.007-04:00

Well the BC election is official today. On May 12th, I'm pretty sure I'll vote for *gasp* the BC Liberals (I can hardly believe it myself but that's the way it is), mostly because it is the only more-or-less center-right party in the province. I will however need time to read more about the party proposals as well as the referendum question on the single transferable vote (STV) issue. I've only been in this province a few months, but already the "third party adds" are pretty nasty. On the pro-BC Liberal side,mostly from business, are adds about the NDP and Carole James being the ,"Wrong Party, Wrong Leader, Wrong Time", versus the third party adds supporting the NDP, mostly unions, and accusing the premier, Gordon Campbell of "hating your grandma" and helping gangs.

Ouch, who knew that BC politics could be so polarizing and nasty? You'd think a province that consumes so much of the green stuff (literally and metaphorically) would somehow be a more gentle place to discuss politics. If a citizen who is undecided is to vote based on these adds, it isn't promising. You have to either a) vote smart (BC Liberal) or b) move forward (NDP). These either/or choices and how they frame the public discourse are both hilarious and sad at the same time.

Dear GC, please fund me, or else.....

2009-03-26T14:46:00.005-04:00

So the Canadian Arab Federation is taking Jason Kenney to court because of his decision to take away the funding for the group. Even if the minister's decision may have been influenced by being called a "professional whore" (aren't whores professional anyway?), I hope this group loses. It is ridiculous that a group would go to court for losing funding. And this has NOTHING to do with a Arab or Muslim thing. I think the Canadian government should pull ALL funding for any cultural groups regardless of nationality, religion or political orientation. This way, the government can't be accused of 'censorship' or favouring one group or another. It's time to kick the addiction to government funding. Jason Kenney was wrong to ban George Galloway from entering Canada (yes it wasn't "his decision" but the principle remains), but he is right on the issue of public funding for cultural groups. If everyone's favourite scapegoat, the Canadian Jewish Congress calls for funding ( or already receives some), the government should also pull out the funding. (I didn't think I needed to write this, but this is simply in case someone might see this post as a anti-muslim thing, IT ISN'T)

THIS is why I hate Fox News

2009-03-20T19:42:00.005-04:00

I can't tell if this show is supposed to be funny and deliberately cocky or not, but quite frankly I don't care (not that the producers of that show would care, they probably wouldn't consider me conservative anyway).How can they expect their country to get respect (unless they don't care?) from their OWN FRIENDS and ALLIES when they pull stunts like this? They give the Republicans (assuming that most Democrats don't care much for that "news" station) who may like that channel a very bad name. Or maybe I should just relax and find this funny ?

Red Tories ARE alive and well people...

2009-03-19T19:38:00.003-04:00

....they just prefer to stay out of politics. Still, way to go Amy, and a U of O poli sci student to boot, nice! Just make sure those young U of O Liberals don't get too cocky again. Sorry about the incident though.

Qu'est-ce qu'un "souverainiste repenti" ?

2009-03-16T13:32:00.004-04:00

Curieux titre employé par le quotidien La Presse ce matin. C'est drôle parce que je pensais que se repentir était du domaine religieux pour nous pauvres pécheurs. Le repentir s'applique normalement quand on manifeste publiquement une faute que l'on a commis et dont on demande LE PARDON. Il y a dans ce titre une désagréable dialectique de supériorité morale qui se manifeste (fédéralisme=le bien,le juste, souveraineté du québec=le péché,l'injuste) mais qui finalement risque de nuire au 'message' du texte. Quel souverainiste en effet se considère comme "pécheur" ou pense qu'il a commis une 'faute' exigeant le Pardon (avec le 'p' majuscule), simplement pour avoir une opinion POLITIQUE différente? De toute façon Denis Coderre ne parle que de "souverainistes fatigués" ou "déçus" alors pourquoi parler de "souverainistes repentis" dans le titre de l'article si ce n'est que pour donner un "coup de pied moral" dans les c..... du mouvement souverainiste ? Vraiment pas très subtil en effet.

Do we REALLY want honest politicians ?

2009-03-07T13:10:00.004-05:00

What kind of question is that you might ask.We all want honesty in our politicians right? Well in light of John Tory's defeat and the subsequent comments regarding the role of honesty and "being a good guy" not being useful virtues in politics, I'm not so sure that it is true. Honesty in politics is defined here as simply exposing a candidate's ideas to the general population, such as John Tory's financing of religious schools or Stéphane Dion's green shift. Critics have argued that in both cases the ideas were either terrible or poorly articulated. Cynical political wisdom teaches us that a candidate running for office should keep strong ideas AFTER the elections, rather than run on them. For some this is considered good politics. But it is also dishonest and puts a dent on the political legitimacy of a public policy, regardless of merit or lack of.

We ask our politicians to tell us "the truth", and yet, it seems that when some of them actually articulate strong and controversial ideas because they genuinely believe in them, pundits, columnists and other political marketing 'experts' shun them for acting too foolishly.Thus one of the main reasons why our politicians don't say much, or prefer being vague in promises. After all, why take a chance on big policy ideas and be defeated for it (like Tory or Dion or Joe Clark) when you can simply tell people what they WANT to hear? That is the point. We want honesty in our politics, but at the same time we judge as 'political losers' those who do take chances. We use buzz words and expressions to sound analytically clever such as:

1- lack of political judgment
2- wrong timing (is there a 'good time' to discuss something?)
3- politics is a contact sport, not a debating club (how ironic really, since democracy is all about debate.....right ?)

To be clear, it isn't because a politician is honest or presents a big policy idea in public that one has to agree with it (like Tory or Dion's ideas).But to judge their attempts as politically foolish only feeds contempt in the general population for our political institutions and representatives, as well as increasing cynicism and decreasing voter turnouts at elections. Was Lionel Hutz from the Simpsons right? Is there the TRUTH(frown) and the truth(smile)? What do you think?

The Simpsons: Realty Bites (Looking at pictures of houses)
Marge: That house is awfully small.
Lionel Hutz: I'd say it's awfully cozy.
Marge: That's dilapidated.
Lionel Hutz: Rustic!
Marge: That house is on fire!
Lionel Hutz: Motivated seller!

J'appuie le silence de Daniel Leblanc

2009-02-23T12:42:00.005-05:00

Daniel Leblanc est ce journaliste, courageux, oeuvrant pour le Globe and Mail qui a été le premier à sortir certains faits concernant les politiques publicitaires du gouvernement fédéral, qui jouera un rôle fondamental dans le triste scandal des commandites. Il est honteux qu'un groupe se faisant poursuivre -Polygone- par le gouvernement fédéral tente d'intimider un journaliste, intimidation qui ressemble plutôt à une vendetta. Cette vendetta apparente pourrait avoir comme conséquence d'intimider ceux et celles qui observent des comportements éthiquement douteux , pour ne pas dire illégaux,de leurs supérieurs, puisque ceux-ci pourraient perdre leur anonymat plus tard. HONTEUX.

Voici ce qu'en pensent deux chroniqueurs intéressants: Josée Legault et Patrick Lagacé. Appuyez le journaliste Daniel Leblanc si vous ne souhaitez pas vivre dans une société ou l'intimidation domine et protège les crapules.

Asymmetrical caucus discipline

2009-02-03T12:55:00.010-05:00

Newfoundland & Labrador 1, Liberal party 0. After asymmetrical federalism, we now have asymmetrical caucus discipline. Even if Michael Ignatieff says this is a "one time" event, it will be interesting to watch the consequences of this decision, especially with his Quebec caucus and supporters who will surely ask for similar 'rights' when the time comes. Michael Ignatieff, rightly, recognized Quebec as a nation in his leadership campaign, so the question is whether he will allow Quebec MPs to do the same as Newfoundland & Labrador when the Quebec National Assembly denounces anything. If he doesn't, what explanation (if any) will be given to distinguish the actions of some MPs on the BUDGET, particularly in a minority Parliament, and other votes in the house.

As for N&L, it would seem that Danny Williams is copying former Quebec premier Robert Bourassa's strategy of encouraging political dissent in Parliament to achieve maximum influence. In the early 1990s, Robert Bourassa had encouraged Lucien Bouchard and other Progressive Conservatives to create the Bloc québécois, in response to Meech Lake, because this would give his provincial Liberal government more leverage with the Federal government and ironically against his sovereignist foes in the National Assembly. By playing Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff one against the other, Danny Williams doesn't lose anything.

On the other hand, these N&L MPs are only doing their jobs, because our political system and institutions are theoretically built for this kind of asymmetry. Canada has much more severe party discipline than any other Commonwealth country, including the UK. Perhaps we have gotten so used to the idea that MPs 'rubber-stamp' executive ideas, that when MPs do stand out we see it as political folly rather than applaud their independence. For this reason, the political scientist in me is curious to see if this will encourage other MPs in all parties to do the same.

Does recession = killer of governments ?

2009-01-30T14:19:00.005-05:00

Last night I had an interesting debate with an old friend who couldn't understand why Michael Ignatieff didn't defeat the government and try his hand at governing -assuming that the GG would have given the now defunct coalition a chance- instead of staying in opposition. I tried to counter-argue that the Liberals and Ignatieff are probably counting on the recession and the possibility of more bad news on the job front defeating the government. If you look at previous governments, provincial and federal, in the 1980s and early 1990s, many of them didn't survive the recession. Now there might be other factors than the economy, such as longevity in power, arrogance, the constitution etc... but the Ontario NDP, the Quebec Liberals and the federal PCs didn't survive. That is why I wonder if this Harper government can survive in the long term. Politics is the art of governments taking credit in good times (right or wrong) but also blame (again right or wrong) in bad times. All Ignatieff has to do is let the government get tangled in the web of economic pressures and insatisfaction, and use the old Liberal discourse that "they are the party of fiscal management". People tend to have short term memories and this line may very well work for them. Of course if the recovery is relatively quick, then this 'rule' may not necessarily apply. Recessions are like kryptonite to governments it would seem, no matter what ideological orientation they may have.

Éric Caire, prochain chef de l'ADQ ?

2008-12-10T12:42:00.004-05:00

Maintenant que Mario Dumont quitte la direction de l'ADQ, quel avenir pour la droite au Québec, est-ce même possible considérant la relative force du PLQ, du moins en théorie? Le populisme dumontien avait ses fautes, trop souvent accroché aux manchettes sans aller plus loins dans une analyse profonde et réfléchie. Cependant, la démocratie québécoise serait appauvrie sans la contribution d'une dimension plus conservatrice au sein de l'Assemblée nationale et dans la population en général. Un des députés de l'ADQ qui a attiré mon attention lors de la dernière session est Eric Caire député de La Peltrie.Intelligent et articulé,s'il pouvait éviter les excès populistes de Mario Dumont, qui sait si ce député ne pourrait pas faire de l'ADQ une force de droite permanente sur la scène québécoise. Sinon, que fait Lucien Bouchard ces jours-ci? Il pourrait être une figure importante et crédible pour la droite nationaliste, sans la présence de radicaux fédéralistes du PLQ et nationalistes du PQ. Pourquoi pas, même si c'est improbable.

With apologies to the Rolling Stones....

2008-12-03T18:03:00.003-05:00

Please allow me to introduce myself
I'm a party for Quebec's independence
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a Canadian's vote and faith

And I was round when Jean Chrétien
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that Bouchard
Washed his hands and sealed Canada's fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of the Bloc's game

I stuck around Ottawa for shits and pensions
When I saw it was a time for a coup
Killed the czar Harper and his ministers
Western Canada screamed in vain
I rode a coalition of the willing
Held a Marxist general's rank
When the talking raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh ouais
Ah, whats puzzling you
Is the nature of the Bloc's game, oh ouais

I watched with glee
While the Liberals and Tories
Fought for a decade
For the political gods they made
I shouted out,
Who killed national unity
When after all
It was Pierre Elliott, Stéphane and me

Let me please introduce myself
I'm a party for Quebec's independence
And I laid traps for federalists
Who get apathetic every day
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh ouais
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh ouais, get down, Canada
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh ouais
But whats confusing you
Is just the nature of the Bloc's game

Just as every Liberal is a criminal
And all the sovereignists saints
As heads is tails
Just call me Gilles Duceppe
cause I'm in need of some restraint
So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some money for Quebec
I'll use all your well-earned tax dollars
So I'll lay Canada's finances to waste, um ouais
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, um ouais
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of the Bloc's game

Time to apologize monsieur Harper

2008-12-03T13:10:00.003-05:00

Tonight, I hope that PM Stephen Harper will admit his own role in the deteriorating atmosphere within the House and in Canada -the increasing risks of polarization not seen since the days of Meech Lake- and apologize, as Deborah Grey suggested, in his address to the nation.Even if he can't convince the opposition to support his government, he will look like he's trying to make amends with them and therefore look more statesmanlike. This shouting match between some Tories and the opposition is simply shameful, regardless of how frustrated one may be about the current situation. I certainly am, but yelling and using inflammatory rhetoric won't help anyone.

Conservatives for Prentice....huh?

2008-11-30T18:01:00.003-05:00

Check this website. While it claims to be a grassroots movement, I find the timing of its creation curious: Friday November 28th 2008 hmmmm....I really like Jim Prentice myself, he's a capable minister, but his grassroots 'supporters' should be careful here. There were rumours during the cabinet swearing in that PM Stephen Harper had named Jim Prentice at Environment instead of the higher profile Industry portfolio, to keep a potential leadership rival at bay. Perhaps there was something to this rumour after all?

NDP demands Finance and the Environment

2008-11-28T14:48:00.002-05:00

...in addition to one third of cabinet positions according to "La Presse". Wow.

Let's play 'what if...'

2008-11-28T13:22:00.005-05:00

Let's assume (yeah yeah I know....) that the BLN (Bloc, Liberal, NDP) opposition does vote against the government and it is forced to ask the GG to form a LN coalition, supported from time to time by the Bloc. And let's assume that it will be Dion heading the 'new' government with key dippers in Cabinet posts. What about the Bloc then, it will be primed to make big demands in return for supporting the LN government. The Bloc québécois could ask the Dion/Layton government to transfer all cultural institutional powers and funding to Quebec, as demanded by Pauline Marois of the PQ and to some extent by Mario Dumont of the ADQ. This could happen regardless of who wins in Quebec's election -likely Jean Charest's Liberals- or better yet (or worst depending on how you view the place of Quebec in Canada), what if this puts in motion a Slovakia-Czech Republic type breakup?.

I know it is very farfetched considering all the variables in play here, but the Bloc would have the power to at least propose a sovereignty-association type deal between the Parliament and the National Assembly. If it didn't try, sovereignists might question why the Bloc is there at all if it can't put pressure on the Canadian parliament to advance Quebec's sovereignty. Of course, in this scenario, the LN government could refuse Bloc demands and thus forcing another election at some point. None of this matters...for now, if the Tories remain in power. However in these uncertain times, politically and economically, political fiction is sometimes more interesting than reality. And now, back to our regular broadcast programming.

Prime-Minister Dion or Layton?

2008-11-27T17:09:00.004-05:00

Could either leader become PM should the Liberals and the NDP work out an arrangement to share power? It seems both parties, no word yet about the Bloc, will vote against the government's economic plan. If the government does fall, I doubt we will go into an election, as the GG may ask the opposition to work out an arrangement. Much has been said that the Tory's plan to scrap subsidies to political parties is in play here. Personally, I would prefer if the parties received no subsidies, but if that's the big issue between being in power and returning to opposition, the government shouldn't be dogmatic about this, otherwise it might look like they want to lose.

Liberal leadership and Homer Simpson

2008-11-24T12:20:00.004-05:00

Is there anything Homer Simpson can't do? Just having some fun this morning. Curiously, Homer has this Ignatieff-thinking-about-his-answer look doesn't he?

Happy birthday BC

2008-11-19T12:22:00.006-05:00

Happy 150th birthday BC. Although I'm new to this province-region of Canada, I can definitely appreciate the nuances of its geography, its politics and unique identities.For example, Victoria is the historic heart, the link to the British past, Vancouver is the international cosmopolitan city, the 'interior'(Kamloops, Kelowna) has a strong relationship with the the Prairie provinces, while the North is home to numerous First Nations peoples. BC is a strange multiplicity of ideas and identities, but hey, it worked for 150 years and it will keep working for years to come while the influence of this beautiful province on the Canadian scene will continue to grow. Happy birthday BC.

No deficit spending please

2008-11-18T13:34:00.004-05:00

I'm not an economist and math has never been my friend, but I hope the Harper government won't give in to temptation and engage in deficit spending to pay for its responsibilities. Now I understand that conventional wisdom (is it still "conventional" if the word deficit is a dirty political word?) would suggest that in tough economic times, deficit spending may be necessary to start up the economic growth and support key social programs and pay back the deficit in good economic times. I will admit that the government musn't be dogmatic about preserving jobs and helping people in difficult times, so thinking about deficit spending isn't a thought-crime.

But considering how much the Harper government has spent in its previous mandate and the relative health of the Canadian economy as a whole, it seems to me that deficit spending may be unnecessary. Budget cutbacks aren't popular, but deficit spending will be a terrible blow to the Tories for two reasons: It will give the Liberals a terrific political narrative for the next election in which they will be able to present themselves as the surplus-producing party.Should this economic downturn continue, the contrast with the current government will not be kind to Stephen Harper's government.Secondly, considering how difficult it was to get out of the deficit habit in the 1990s, how will the government be able to get back to paying it off? Since the negative consequences for the government are political, the only way it can give itself some political protection is by way of legislating a temporary deficit act should it choose this road. Deficit spending, like credit spending is unwise when you don't have the money to pay for what you want right away. The government should therefore steer clear from deficit spending.Besides, if the government wants people to tighten their belt, why should it act any differently?

Autonomie et péréquation

2008-11-13T13:26:00.004-05:00

Il y a une question que j'aimerais voir les principaux chefs de parti au Québec répondre, et elle concerne l'importance de la péréquation dans le budget total du gouvernement du Québec. En 2008, il semble incroyable que la péréquation représente près de 12 % des revenus annuels du gouvernement du Québec. C'est énorme pour une province qui détient une population importante et éduquée. Ainsi, le Québec touchera 8,355 milliards de dollars grâce à la péréquation en 2009-10, comparativement à 8,028 milliards cette année. Une hausse de 327 millions de dollars. Ma question pour messieurs Charest, Dumont et Madame Marois: Comment le Québec peut-il vouloir être plus politiquement autonome mais se contenter de recevoir de la péréquation, l'équivalent du bien-être social, en même temps? Le Québec n'est pas l'Alberta soi. Mais la Colombie-Britannique non plus. Il serait intéressant de connaître les stratégies des partis pour créer la richesse, et sortir le Québec du…hum… “Club” de la péréquation, à moins que personne n'y songe sérieusement ?

Jean Charest going for gold

2008-10-27T12:16:00.006-04:00

Québec is going to the polls on December 8th 2008 according to CBC newsworld. Jean Charest is adopting the Harper strategy of trying to maximize his gains, take advantage of the weakness of the opposition ADQ and the relative popularity of his government ( approval ratings close to 50%). He was likely to have been convinced that he should go for a majority now while the economic downturn isn't too severe. EDIT: This news is confirmed by CTV now. Currently the National Assembly had the following members:

Québec Liberal Party 48
Action démocratique du Québec 39
Parti québécois 36
Vacant seats 2

Sarah Palin the, uh, intellectual ? Good God

2008-10-22T18:05:00.005-04:00

Yes that's right, miss I-can-see-Russia-from-my-house Palin thinks of herself as an intellectual. How sad and offensive really. To be fair, you don't need a PhD to be an intellectual, but you sure-as-hell need more than wearing glasses, reading briefing notes or Bazooka Joe comics. At its most basic, an intellectual is someone who is deeply involved in abstract erudite ideas and theories and engages in analytical thinking. In any case, isn't intellectualism a dirty word for Republicans who seem to prefer phony populism, or perhaps this is a sign that anti-intellectualism in american politics is coming to an end ?

Mieux vaut en rire qu'en pleurer ?

2008-10-22T12:33:00.004-04:00

On a souvent entendu dire que les Québécois sont de bons vivants qui aiment bien rire. Mais selon l'icône de la comédie québécoise, Yvon Deschamps, l'omniprésence de l'humour dans toutes les sphères de la société au Québec, serait en fait l'expression du "vide collectif"d'une société qui ne croit plus en rien. C'est certainement une hypothèse intéressante qui s'apparente à ce que le philosophe Jocelyn Maclure appelait le nationalisme mélancolique. L'humour serait-il l'ambassadeur du nihilisme sociétal, et pas seulement au Québec ?

BC is the key to victory

2008-10-06T12:46:00.005-04:00

Sorry fellow Tories, but Quebec will NOT be the key to an electoral breakthrough for a Conservative majority this time. But another province may pick up the slack, and that is beautiful British Columbia. Over here, the race is essentially between the NDP and the Tories now. But the potential for gains for both parties is surprisingly high, which makes this province very competitive indeed. As an example, my ridding is Vancouver Quadra.In 2006, Stephen Owen won it with more than 48% of the vote. When he left, the Liberals went into a by-election March 17th 2008 with relative confidence. But then they were shocked to have won a pyrrhic victory with Liberal Joyce Murray winning the seat with only 151 votes more than the Conservative candidate Deborah Meredith. Some have suggested that the Green vote was to blame, it went up almost 8%. But this riding has voted for the Conservatives before and the influential Point-Grey area is more right of centre. A good friend of mine who is more of a right-wing Liberal, was taught Business by Deborah Meredith at UBC , and he told me that he expects his party to lose the riding for two reasons: the quality of the Conservative candidate and the 'voter fatigue' with Liberals.

To win a majority the Tories will need more Vancouver-Quadras in BC to make up for the lack of progress in other parts of the country. Certainly here, people have a sense of optimism that BC's political weight is increasing and that it can have a real and powerful influence over the electoral results. Indeed, people will no longer need to shut down their televisions as soon as the Quebec/Ontario results are in. BC's polarized politics between left and right on the provincial scene may give the rest of the country a glimpse of its future with NDP and Tories being the beneficiaries of the melting of the Liberal iceberg.

English debate impressions

2008-10-02T22:18:00.009-04:00

** 7:20 PT**

So far, Elizabeth May is the winner of these debates by far. She answered all questions straight up and she offers serious insight into the various topics discussed thus far. She certainly gives me food for thought. Jack Layton is doing allright, trying to sound like a Leader of the Official Opposition, but I swear that he sounds like a broken record each time he brings the words CORPORATE and TAX CUTS. If both words were eliminated tomorrow, what would Jack do then ? I loved when he talked about balanced budgets and NDP governments that "of course Bob Rae is in your party now" to Stéphane Dion. Priceless. Stéphane Dion is doing an honest job. Certainly Liberals can breath easier. He hasn't damaged his party or himself, so in a sense he is a winner by surpassing the low expectations, but he didn't really 'strike me' with any big idea or issue. His best moment thus far was when he almost got angry in front of the cameras when Stephen Harper talked about his Carbon Tax. Gilles Duceppe is what Gilles Duceppe is expected to be in english debates: an interesting 'tourist' participating in another nation's debate. As for the Prime Minister, it is always tough to face 4 opponents who gang up on you (as is expected of any PM mind you), but he is keeping his cool as he must to achieve his goal of appearing statesman-like. I thought he handled the issue of cultural funding quite well. His best moment of the evening so far.

**7:35 PT**

I think it was a mistake by Stephen Harper to wear a Canadian flag pin on his jacket, it looks too 'republi-american'. Nothing wrong with patriotism, but I'm surprised that none of the leaders so far have said anything about it, considering the collective fixation with George Bush.

**7:40 PT**

Stéphane Dion just ended his intervention by promissing the 'best cabinet Canada ever had'. By Liberal standards, it is a very tall order since Lester Pearson's cabinet had Turner, Chrétien, Trudeau just to name a few. Good luck Stéphane. Curiously, does Jack Layton even know that Canada is a federation, that ne cannot simply invent solutions which would clash with provinces and their constitutional responsibilities?

**8:00 PT: final thoughts**

As is expected with these debates with so many participants and so little time for each leader, no 'knock out' punch was given nor expected. Stephen Harper defended himself well, which is pretty much the only thing he could do. Oh well, at least all the leaders admitted that conservatives are not barbarians!!! Dion didn't damage himself which may be considered a 'victory' for him. Jack Layton's strategy of looking like the Official Leader of the Opposition looks mediocre at best with his constant bombardment of CORPORATE TAX CUTS and juvenile George Bush references. Elizabeth May, regardless of what one thinks of her ideas was actually spunky, straightforward and articulate in her answers and provided insight into the various topics discussed. Considering the 'drone-ness' of our politics, that is refreshing. She is the clear winner for that reason and I wouldn't be surprised if the Green vote went up as a result, to the detriment of the NDP and Liberals. As for the PM, he played well on the defensive, but he did well defending during the 'cultural' and arts section, looking down-to-earth and pragmatic.

The arts and the free market (beauty & the beast)

2008-09-24T12:21:00.010-04:00

I find it curious that some actors and other caviar-eating,champagne drinking cultural elitists are decrying the cuts in some arts programs (did you know that Canadian Heritage groups like Museums, sports, VANOC 2010 and Heritage sites such as Parks, received increased funding?) So "Canadian" actress Wendy Crewson(who?) is fed up and orders the government to reverse the cuts.... or else what Wendy? These are the same people who decried Bill C-10 as a form of government interference and censorship. And yet they see nothing wrong with being almost subsidized at the same level while pretending they are doing independent work. As such, free market-based principles are much more appropriate to the arts: no censorship, artists can do what they wish and the taxpayer doesn't need to pay what he doesn't want to. If he likes an artist's work, he can support it himself. Granted the market in Canada needs some regulation and protection from being drowned in made-in-USA programs, but the budget cutbacks won't bring about the apocalypse. The free market can be rough at times, but it is also fair to the artist and the people who enjoy their work. Isn't that what being an artist is all about - taking risks and defying the comfortably-numb Canadian Government subsidizing attitudes?

Death by survey

2008-09-22T11:14:00.004-04:00

Another day, another survey. These surveys will be the death of Canadian politics. Why do we have so many surveys, every day? The media probably figured that since this campaign doesn't have a charismatic leader, that surveys are a useful way of perpetuating a false crisis and anguish. It all sounds so dramatic doesn't it, when you listen to the CBC do their polling and what the "numbers" tell them? Ok the campaigns seem to have flatlined for a while now, we get it. Is it absolutely necessary to say the same thing, rephrased differently each day ? Surveys are becoming the issue of this campaign which is unfortunate. The consequence is that the electoral discourse of all parties will focus on strategy and where parties stand and why they are doing well or poorly in the polls rather than what the issues are. This obsession with script-politics and strategizing rather than policy-making is fuelled by this constant bombardment of surveys. To be fair, surveys can be useful once in a while, at least for political junkies such as myself, but not every single day. Surveys can influence the decision of some voters of who to vote for -pick the winner or who is ahead, rather than risk being on the 'losing side' on E-day- and that is really unfortunate.

Phoney war 08 ?

2008-09-12T13:09:00.006-04:00

Is it just me or is this 2008 campaign looking more like a Phoney War with each passing moment ? Puffins, Sparrow(s), Mohawk-bashing, May Day, and poll after poll. Here is a riddle for you: how many polls does a campaign need to get annoying ? You decide.

****

On another note, did you know that Calvin & Hobbes are the real authors of the Liberal green shift plan? It's true, just look at this:

Bitching your way to a debate

2008-09-10T19:15:00.005-04:00

Congrats to Elizabeth May who managed to bitch her way to an elections debate. Or so it seems. Unlike the Reform Party (Deborah Grey in Beaver River by-election) and the Bloc Québécois (Gilles Duceppe in Laurier Sainte-Marie by-election) in 1993 however, the Greens never got anyone elected (Blair Wilson doesn't count, he fraudulently picked the only party that wanted him). Had they elected one MP in an election or a by-election, then their case would be legit. I suppose that means that if one MP jumps ship to the Marxist-Leninist party, they will be invited to the debate as well, I mean they are just as legitimate as the Greens aren't they ? Oh well, at least her presence may hurt either Dion or Layton if she performs well. To paraphrase Homer Simpson: Kids you tried your best and you succeeded, the lesson is... always bitch.

We are all progressives

2008-09-03T13:24:00.005-04:00

As a federal election will soon be upon us, journalists such as Lawrence Martin have already declared this election -and the one in the United States- as one between so-called "progressives" and "conservatives". While it is easy and indeed tempting to categorize politics as such, it is also false. Because if one is progressive, then he must be the anti-thesis to the conservative, and vice-verça. Unfortunately, this sort of thing doesn't work because, well, everyone is a progressive.

Change in life, much like in politics, is inevitable and cannot be stopped, never mind returning to "the way things were". The anti-revolutionnaries of the 19th century fighting Napoleon Bonaparte and the French Revolution thought they could, but they failed miserably as the ideals of 1789 became powerful forces accross Europe. The question is not whether change can be stopped, but rather how it can be adapted to particular circumstances. Progress is inevitable, due to scientific innovations, sociological transformations, technology etc... Therefore the only difference between what we call " conservatives", "liberals" and "socialists" in regards to overall progressivism, is the degree and speed in which change is tolerated. The classic Burke-conservative is more incremental in his approach to change, whereas the classic liberal and socialists will prefer a more profound and rapid one.

In Canada for example, our parties differ on what progress means. Take health care for example. The NDP and some Liberals believe that progress means no role for the private sector in health care. They are defending what was, and are indeed more "conservative" about this. Others like many Conservatives and Liberals believe that some change within the Canada Health Act is necessary in order to IMPROVE or make our system better. Incremental progress in this case. Structuring change in order to safekeep what we really want. Others will view social issues as the defining clash between what is progressive and what isn't. But even the most conservative Canadian is unlikely to want a return to days where woman couldn't work or earn the same wages as a man, or forbidding inter-ethnic relationships. It is one thing to debate the merits of certain social policies and values, but it HAS to be debated or talked openly, accepting legitimate differences instead of guilt-tripping people into believe they are "not progressives". Who is going to admit that he or she doesn"t BELIEVE in progress but would rather go back to the way things were back in the 1900s ? Some might, but the majority of Canadians accept that change is inevitable and play that give-and-take game.

So before we hear anymore nonsense about this election being a "battle" between progress,light and puppys vs conservatism, darkness and Darth Vader, we should all remember that progress is a question of degree, not whether we believe in it or not. Some want radical or rapid change tabula rasa, while others prefer a more methodical, incremental approach to change. Let's keep that in mind if we wish to keep political discourse in this country, and elsewhere, civil.

Obama and the politics of hope

2008-07-24T13:42:00.003-04:00

While watching Barack Obama's speech in Berlin on CBC, I noticed that his oratorical skills and style strangely resemble Martin Luther King's I Have a Dream speech in style and in fundamental substance (hope and breaking walls between groups on an international leve). Critics will say it is "only" a speech with lofty words. But they miss the point: a great speech is more than that,it can change attitudes,motivate and inspire people around the world to believe in the United States again, much like Martin Luther King, JFK and Robert Kennedy in their time.

Le fédéral kossa donne ?

2008-07-18T11:05:00.004-04:00

La récente décision du Conseil de la fédération d'assurer d'ici le 1er avril 2009 la pleine mobilité de la main d'oeuvre au Canada est une excellente nouvelle, non seulement pour les travailleurs et les provinces, mais -plus subtilement peut-être- également pour le fonctionnement de la fédération.Le Conseil de la fédération est un organisme qui en apparences a simplement formalisé les rencontres ad hoc des premier-ministres provinciaux.Mais dans les faits, cette initiative de Jean Charest a une importance symbolique significative à moyen et à long terme.

En adoptant la décision de favoriser le libre-échange interne, les provinces travaillent ensemble sans devoir dépendre du gouvernement fédéral. Et c'est tant mieux. Certains centre-gauchistes et apôtres de la religion trudeauiste ont souvent accusé les provinces d'êtres régionalistes, mesquines et égoïstes(!!!) par rapport au soi-disant «intérêt national».Avec cette entente, le Conseil de la fédération vient de défaire de tels «arguments» en déplaçant le centre de gravité politique vers les provinces, sans nécessairement faire sombrer le pays dans une balkanisation politique. En somme, cette entente pave la voie à un fédéralisme pluraliste (transcendant le rapport conflictuel «fédéralisme uniforme et fédéralisme communautaire») où «l'intérêt national» n'est plus le seul monopole du gouvernement fédéral.

Adoption, autochtonie et assimilation

2008-07-09T09:10:00.006-04:00

L'adoption est une question délicate. Elle l'est encore plus lorsque cela implique une adoption multiculturelle, par exemple les couples qui vont en Chine, en Afrique et ailleurs pour former une famille. La question est-elle si différente dans le cas des autochtones ? Un récent projet de loi à Québec, le projet de loi 125, retirerait un enfant autochtone de moins de deux ans, placé depuis un an en dehors de sa famille, de sa communauté de manière permanente. Cette mesure semble inquiéter plusieurs dans la communauté autochtone du Québec qui craignent une forme d'assimilation de la culture autochtone, semblable aux tristes pensionnats "indiens".

Que faire alors? S'il y a un manque de ressources financières pouvant appuyer les parents et les communautés autochtones dans l'adoption, il est clair que les gouvernements doivent soutenir ces communautés. Il faut favoriser les bons foyers, autochtones ou non, pour les enfants. Par contre, est-ce qu'un autochtone adopté par un couple non-autochtone serait automatiquement assimilé? Sans vouloir être insensible aux arguments de Ghislain Picard, le Chef de l'Assemblée des Premières Nations du Québec et du Labrador, plusieurs parents qui adoptent internationalement ne cachent pas les origines biologiques et culturelles des enfants qu'ils adoptent, bien au contraire. Certes la socialisation est différente de leur culture d'origine, mais sont-ils pour autant assimilés ou perdent-ils une "mémoire profonde" ? Pourquoi alors serait-ce différent dans le cas des autochtones ? L'adoption domestique ne décourage pas certains critères qui peuvent favoriser certains "traits" recherchés, et la préférence pour un placement dans une culture similaire n'est pas impossible. Mais si cela s'avère impossible pour des conditions qui nous échappent ici, est-ce dans l'intérêt de l'enfant de demeurer dans une situation précaire, passant de foyer d'accueil en foyer d'accueil, d'instabilité affective à rage identitaire ? Un enfant ne doit jamais devenir l’objet d’un combat politique identitaire.

Si certains parents non-autochtones font preuve de bonne volonté -au sens de respect intégral et non pas d'un caprice condescendant- envers leurs enfants autochtones en essayant du mieux de leurs capacités à apprendre à ceux-ci les origines, traditions et manières d'êtres autochtones, en quoi est-ce recréer un "deuxième tome" du pensionnat indien d'antan? La socialisation n'est pas la même, mais ca ne signifie pas un retour à une politique de destruction culturelle. On ne nie pas la valeur culturelle autochtone, mais plutôt on recherche à maximiser le potentiel de celle-ci en favorisant les conditions physiques et sociales ou elle peut s'épanouir (sans être condescendant). Moi-même adopté, je suis simplement heureux d'avoir des parents qui m'aiment, même si ma "mémoire profonde" d'origine est différente. Je suis fort heureux et fier de pouvoir vivre et apprécier ma culture d'adoption, le français, sans que cela ne nie mes origines distinctes.

The conservative case for a carbon tax

2008-07-07T15:36:00.007-04:00

I wish I could say that I had written this article, instead of Jonathan Kay in today's Post. When conservative economists such as Mark Jaccard, an award-winning environmental economist from Simon Fraser University agree with a form of carbon tax it certainly is worth exploring. I like the general concept behind Stéphane Dion's Green Shift, but I reserve some judgement for two reasons: First, hard numbers need to given before endorsement. Secondly, because of very legitimate Western sensibilities and the very REAL risk to national unity caused by a serious EAST-WEST political rift (sometimes called Western Alienation) that a carbon tax represents must be addressed first.

In my MA thesis, I argued that Western alienation is not so much a question of public policies such as the NEP of the 1980's, the CF-18 contracts under Mulroney or even the Green Shift of Stéphane Dion, but rather a more profound clash of political cultures in which Western provinces and Ontario specifically are fighting for influence within the federation. In other words, there is this suspicion that the term " National Interest" is really a code word for "Central Canadian interests".These public policies are only symbolic and represent a deeper malaise within our political and cultural institutions. In addition,the western provinces are growing - both demographically and politically-want to be more than peripheral actors vis-à-vis what the "national interest" is defined as. That is why it is absolutely crucial that ALL parliamentarians work together on this file because, while a carbon tax may be good for the environment and even business, if not handled properly it can seriously threaten national unity, much more so than the two Quebec referendums.

Is Canada ruining the NHL salary cap ?

2008-07-02T11:22:00.005-04:00

Well it didn't take long for the free agency frenzyto take hold did it? My God, why did we have a lock-out in the first place and when will the salary cap go down? Could it be that a strong Canadian dollar and higher shared revenues created in good part by incredible fan support in Canada be driving the salary cap to levels that allow the Toronto Maple Laughs to sign so-so former Avs defensemen Jeff Finger (who) to a four year deal worth 14 million dollars or the Vancouver Canucks to offer Ikea Sundin a rumoured 2 year 20 million dollar deal? At this rate, Hamilton,Winnipeg and Quebec won't be able to afford an NHL team again.

Bonne fête nationale

2008-06-24T11:19:00.005-04:00

En ce 24 juin, je souhaite une excellente fête nationale aux citoyens de la nation québécoise, coeur du fait français partout au Canada. Et rien ne dit "Bonne fête Québec" comme une Fin Du Monde rafraîchissante.

Le Québec est, aujourd'hui et pour toujours, une société distincte, libre et capable d'assumer son destin et son développement-Robert Bourassa (22 juin 1990)

Philippe Couillard à Ottawa ?

2008-06-20T09:55:00.005-04:00

Histoire à suivre... Monsieur Harper doit TOUT faire pour attirer cette étoile du cabinet de Jean Charest et lui donner un ministère de prestige aux Affaires étrangères. Il serait certainement un ministre de grande importance à Ottawa: bilingue, charismatique et très apprécié au Québec.

Liberal green plan worth discussing

2008-06-19T11:04:00.006-04:00

Just going throught a rapid reading of the Liberal Green Shift right now.So far I'm liking it. I wish our political system was less partisan so questions as important as the environment could be discussed seriously. I REALLY hope the government takes the high road like it did with the residential school apology or the Afghan mission and wants to debate this rather than instrumentalize the politics of fear. If the plans has flaws(ie: could this create a 'national unity crisis' or seriously affect rural regions and Canadians with modest income), it must be brought up, but in a frank and honest way, not just for partisan gains. After all,isn't it better to tax pollution(waste)than taxing work(productivity)? If the next election becomes a 1988-style election on the environment, the government is on shaky ground if it refuses to engage all parties on this matter.

Democracy only works if you win your referendum

2008-06-16T09:32:00.007-04:00

In Québec as in Europe,it seems that if you vote "NO" you are undemocratic. It is curious and sad to see the flak that the Irish took last week over their refusal to endorse the Lisbon treaty. Does it even matter that the Irish, the French and the Dutch have voted AGAINST the bureaucratic-building entreprise of the European Union? Apparently not: Jean-Pierre Jouyet, secretary of state for European affairs told the Le Figaro daily that: "...the process of ratification will continue. We have to ensure that the Irish take the time to reflect.France will pursue the goals it has set for its presidency despite the vote". And the Irish rejected this kind of democracy? Eurocrats should remember that you can take a horse to a river, but you can't make it drink the water....

Cheerleaders, Hired Goons and Negative Ads

2008-06-10T14:06:00.010-04:00

More and more I am starting to think that some members of the PMO must not have much esteem for Canadians, especially in the light of the most recent negative advertising aimed at Liberal leader Stéphane Dion.The ads in question are childish, stupid and populist by reducing every public policy to a question of taxes regardless of the context and merit of the proposition. It's almost as if the brain trusts behind these ads are saying "keep repeating TAXES TAXES TAXES and people will start to scream". Doesn'it sound condescending?

You don't have to be a Liberal or a supporter of Stéphane Dion to be concerned about how this government engages in a debate. Isn't it possible to engage in a productive debate about the best way of combating climate change, which could include the virtues and flaws of a carbon tax, without resorting to high drama, insults and innuendos? Perhaps the question of taxation is important, but is it the only criteria upon which to evaluate public policies?

Those defending the negative ads may remark that it is "define or be defined" and that the Liberals under Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin used the same tactics. Fair enough, it is understandable that a certain spirit of revenge may linger in the tiny brains of certain Conservatives. But this type of politics will only produce more anger, accusations, mud-throwing tactics that will discourage good and decent people from all walks of life from entering politics. Furthermore, this type of behaviour is something you would expect from a party used to being in opposition -insecurity, paranoia and a besieged mentality- being the main symptoms. Are we Conservatives not better than this? We have some great intelligent MPs, but we rarely get to engage the opposition because the government has decided to polarize our politics even more.
Oh yes,before opponents of the Conservative government start wetting themselves about this, I'd have the same reaction if this was done by another party in power, just so you know. If negative ads were unjustified under the Liberals, they are equally unjustified under the Conservatives.

Negative ads, and those who justify them no matter what, are like hockey fans who relish in the goonish tactics of their team -fights,cross-checks,hits from behind- instead of enjoying an actual game of talents and skills. Goons, thuggery and revenge are comprehensible from a certain point of view, but they are not justifiable if a party wishes to build long-term demographic and geographic bridges within Canada. As for mindless cheerleading of anything and everything Tory (or Liberal,New-Democrat,Bloquiste)there is a fine line between a sensible and intellectually honest defence of one's party and downright political prostitution.

I have the right not to be offended too

2008-06-09T11:27:00.010-04:00

This really annoys me -and many others I'm sure-. I don't understand what Khurrum Awan is trying to argue here when he says that "We have to tell them, you know what, if you're not going to allow us to do that, there will be consequences. You will be taken to the human rights commission, you will be taken to the press council, and you know what? If you manage to get rid of the human rights code provisions [on hate speech], we will then take you to the civil courts system.

My question is whether or not Canadians of the muslim faith are being prevented in participating in

a) national and regional media
b) the blogosphere
c) community newspapers

Never mind, apparently Canada and its media are islamophobic, if you are to believe M.Awan. Maclean's was within its right to decide what comments or letters they print,all media do this,they don't have to publish everything.Heck, maybe I should take the National Post or the MontrealGazette to court for publishing "hurtful" or "wilful promotion of hatred" material against Quebec sovereignists while ignoring my letters-to-the-editor over the years.

Farewell to a classy MP

2008-06-02T09:37:00.005-04:00

Good-luck Ms.McDonough, you will be missed. You don't need to be partisan to appreciate the class and distinction that MPs such as her or Bill Blaikie brought to the House of Commons.The House of Commons'loss is also Canada's.

BREAKING NEWS U of Ottawa is doomed

2008-05-29T13:44:00.004-04:00

If this doesn't confirm that the University of Ottawa is Liberal red, nothing will.Anne McLellan should clear her schedule as she will be called upon to fix whatever mess Allan Rock will leave behind,tradition oblige. It is bad enough we have the "Pavillon Paul G.Desmarais" ( the awesomeness of having a Starbucks there notwithstanding) for a political studies building. Sigh. It's LUCKY for my Liberal friends that Allan Rock also happened to attend the University in his younger days, so they can use the "hey he is an alumni too you know" line. LOL

PS: I'll never forget the expression of one political science Martinite who tried to recruit me when I was doing my undergrad there, only to be shell-shocked to find I was working for Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe. Ahh memories.

"Hey, we won. A couple of junkies knocked off the PM"

2008-05-28T11:24:00.006-04:00

It's the end of the world as we know it and [we ?] feel fine...

I just don't understand this decision by Justice Ian Pitfield who argued that people who drink alcohol or smoke tobacco to excess aren't denied treatment: "I do not see any rational or logical reason why the approach should be different when dealing with the addiction to narcotics ... Simply stated, I cannot agree with ... Canada's submission that an addict must feed his addiction in an unsafe environment when a safe environment that may lead to rehabilitation is the alternative".

I'm not a lawyer, so maybe someone could help me understand this, but it seems to me that unlike tobacco and alcohol, drugs are illegal and therefore cannot be considered as a "health care right". Why would there be an exception in regards to Canada's trafficking and possession laws being unconstitutional when they are applied to addicts using a supervised-injection site? I have no objections debating various policies to reduce the consumption of narcotics, but calling it unconstitutional could be a potentially dangerous precedent paving the way for a serious challenge of Canada's drug laws.

Quand The Gazette prend le Québec pour des cons

2008-05-21T09:17:00.006-04:00

Mais quelle mouche impériale a donc piqué «La Montreal Gazette ce matin? J'imagine qu'ils ne font pas une différence entre le multiculturalisme et l'interculturalisme. En orchestrant une fuite dans son édition du samedi le quotidien The Gazette fait preuve d'une déconcertante relecture du rapport Bouchard-Taylor pour des fins ressemblant dangereusement à de la propagande condescendante envers les francophones. Nul besoin d'être IDÉOLOGIQUEMENT multiculturel au niveau étatique comme le Canada pour être néanmoins interculturellement ouvert à « l'autre » comme c'est le cas au Québec.

400e de Québec: Mémoire mensongère

2008-05-06T12:59:00.003-04:00

La mémoire dit-on est une faculté qui oublie. Comment expliquer alors l'abus flagrant de la mémoire, retrouvé sur le site fédéral du 400e anniversaire de Québec? Voici ce qu'on y raconte plus précisément:

La fondation de Québec marque aussi la fondation de l'État canadien

Ou encore lorsque ce même site internet affirme que «Le Canada déroule le tapis rouge à Québec».Cette manière d'écrire indique que la ville de Québec "subit" la rencontre plutôt que de l'initier.

Aux dernières nouvelles, le Canada comme entitée étatique et donc politique, n'a été fondé qu'en 1867 et non pas en 1608. Prétendre le contraire est un bien mauvais raccourci historique qui réflète une lecture déterministe de l'histoire. La ville de Québec est certes une ville canadienne et il est parfaitement légitime et raisonnable pour le gouvernement fédéral de s'impliquer dans les célébrations. Mais il ne doit pas abuser de la mémoire historique de la fondation de Québec basé sur une interprétation idéologique, faute de quoi il risque de sombrer dans la propagande la plus audieuse.

Newfoundland to start subsidizing Ontario ?

2008-04-29T13:12:00.006-04:00

How interesting would that be? If the state of the Ontario economy wasn't so serious, I would say this is finally the occasion to re-evaluate the purpose of equalization in this country.Underneath the rhetoric of solidarity and generosity lies a deeply flawed policy that causes more harm than good while agrieving regional tensions. No government in this country would choose to receive equalization payments and for good reasons too: much like welfare, equalization is only a temporary solution to much more complex problems like productivity, aging populations and infrastructures,or the competitivity of cities.

Has Sinclair Stevens lost it ?

2008-04-25T10:17:00.005-04:00

His hysterical open letter in today's edition of The Toronto Star is quite sad actually: One Canada or Ten Canadas? In a nutshell he argues that Stephen Harper's plan to give Canadian provinces more autonomy is bringing Canada back to colonial times and is ludicrous. Take this particular gem: "Given a choice, without double-talk, Canadians will support a One Canada vision rather than Harper's suggestion that we make Canada the Belgium of North America, with up to 10 autonomous nations". Nowhere does Harper suggest to make all provinces their own nations, and his Belgium reference was ONLY regarding the french institutions in 2004.

Furthermore he adds that..."Does Harper not realize that prior to Confederation, the colonies of British North America were autonomous and that Lord Durham in his famous report reaffirmed their colonial status while Britain retained control over foreign affairs and the military? It is strange that Harper's mission today is to make all our provinces autonomous with Ottawa mainly looking after foreign affairs and defence as Britain did in colonial days. Does Sinclair Stevens not realize that it is BECAUSE provinces were given autonomy that we have a Canada at all ? Federalism was a sine qua non of 1867 ? Without it, Quebec and the Maritime provinces -at least Nova Scotia- would not have joined the other colonies.

Secondly, there is some irony in his arguments since he worked with Joe Clark who argued in the 1980s in favour of a Canada as a community (singular) united by communities (pluralism) and then with Brian Mulroney who worked hard to re-integrate Quebec in the constitution. Stevens Sinclair should remember that autonomy need not exclude unity.Observing the provinces today, none except the PQ governments in Quebec are seeking to break out of the bond of federation. Unity in diversity is a Canadian model to be proud of not shun upon.

Finally, what is ludicrous here is trying to impose a one-size-fits-all model on Canadian regions.There are many examples in our history of attempts to nation-building, constructed from one point of view that was disguised as a "national interest" that actually alienated many regions instead. The best way to create disunity in Canada is by denying those regions a voice to express their interests and concerns. Regional differences are what make Canada unique. They all represent a certain idea of what is Canada. Would anyone seriously consider multiculturalism -as a fact rather than ideology- as somehow weakening Canada? There are many ways to deal with diversity in our societies.Multiculturalism like regionalism are pluralist elements of our common bond. By embracing them rather than denying or fighting them, we contribute in building a stronger, more united Canada by showing respect -and bridging-the past and the future.

Lets get ready to humble

2008-04-24T09:11:00.003-04:00

Now that the second round of the 2008 Stanley Cup playoffs is upon us, let me bombard you with a few predictions:

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Montreal-Philadelphia. As much as I want them to lose, I can't see the Habs losing this series.The Bruins series taught the young team how to work hard as well as using their talents. Montreal has a better defense, more mobile while the Flyers have a good offense led by Brière and Prospal. Mike Richards (a young Doug Gilmour) could create some damage and give the Flyers some hope of an upset. Habs in 6

Pittsburgh-NY Rangers This one is much tougher to call. The Rangers actually play some very good hockey defensively and have great clutch players in Shanahan,Jagr,Gomez and of course my favourite ex-Av Chris Drury. Avery will make Crosby's life miserable, so for Pittsburgh to win, Hossa,Roberts and Malkin must step up. Lundqvist is the best goaltender between him and Fleury. Key difference will be how Pittsburgh starts this series after a long layoff. Rangers in 7

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Detroit-Colorado.YESS,this will be THE best series of the playoffs. Avs are underdogs, they lost all four games this year against the Wings ( all of them without Sakic, Smyth,Stastny,Foote, Forsberg,Salei). Wings have a slightly better defense led by the incredible Niklas Lidstrom (they should rename the Norris trophy the Lidstrom trophy)while Colorado has more offense and depth. Colorado is a team to be taken seriously. Any team with Sakic as a first line, Foppa on the second and Smyth on the third must be taken seriously. The defense is much better now with Salei, Leopold and Foote while Theodore has been oustanding and is the early 'MVP' of these playoffs. Avs in 6

San Jose-Dallas.When the Sharks decide to play hard, they are invincible.But they have been uneaven against Calgary and the Stars have a good balanced team with Modano as the third line center (!!!) They have defeated the SC champs Anaheim Ducks, so that will give Brad Richards and Co. some confidence. Dallas pulls the upset in 7 games.

Go to jail or pay a fine if

2008-04-23T11:51:00.009-04:00

...the Portrait Gallery is anywhere but in Ottawa. Sigh. I'm from Ottawa and I love my city, but for crying out loud, must everything cultural or political be either in Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa? Canada is a country of regions and they have the right to be represented AND to represent Canada in their own way. I mean it is not like Ottawa doesn't have its share of museums and cultural institutions. I really hate this attitude that if anything of political, cultural or economic importance is anywhere outside of Ottawa, Montreal or Toronto, it somehow "diminishes" Canada's stature as a country.

Le syndrome Jacques Parizeau

2008-04-22T09:01:00.007-04:00

Ainsi donc, le gouvernement Harper aurait acheté l'élection de 2006 aux dires de l'opposition. Bien que la méthode dite du «in and out» concernant les dépenses électorales est éthiquement douteuse et mérite des réponses de la part du gouvernement, l'idée que cette méthode aurait influencé le résultat électoral de 2006 est absurde à deux égards: méthodologiquement et philosophiquement. En premier lieu il est impossible de démontrer de manière cartésienne le lien de cause-à-effet entre une dépense partisanne et le vote d'un citoyen. Deuxièmement il est troublant de penser que les gens peuvent se laisser «duper» par une telle machination. Tout le principe derrière le scandale des commandites est là. Les parlementaires fédéraux prendraient-ils les citoyens pour des imbéciles une deuxième fois?

Celà n'excuse pas les allégations à l'endroit du Parti conservateur, mais la situation présente illustre parfaitement bien l'idée qu'en politique canadienne, il est plus rentable de sortir «une petite vite» contre le gouvernement pour faire la manchette -quitte à sombrer dans la démagogie- ( cette critique s'applique aux conservateurs, libéraux, bloquistes et néo-démocrates ) plutôt que de réfléchir aux conséquences d'une critique insultante et absurde envers les citoyens du Canada et du Québec. Libéraux et Conservateurs ont tort de miser sur l'importance de l'argent pour espérer un gain politique, et l'opposition a tort d'y croire également pour d'autres raisons.

Online plagiarism: rewarding stupidity and laziness

2008-04-14T11:16:00.005-04:00

Un-freakin-believable. This morning,just out of curiosity, I googled the key words buying essays and more than 534,000 results came up, including this Canadian site. You would think that paying all those fees to have the PRIVILEGE of attending university, never mind having a sense of honour and honesty, would guide students into doing serious research for themselves. Some of us worked real hard to obtain a BA, MA or PhD. Do these "students" ( frauds is the better word ) have any pride of handing their own work, even if the grade they receive may disappoint ?

There is no excuse whatsoever ( job, partying, financial pressures etc...) to justify this. Fortunately, despite the increasing number of frauds cheating , many of them are also quite stupid in thinking that TAs and teachers don't have tools to detect them. I remember one paper that I corrected as a TA for a second year political science class. The format AND colour from paragraph to paragraph was different ( a copy-paste job ) and the writing went from drunk fratboy style to Shakespeare!!! Sadly, these frauds will probably end up being heads of government departments or in the private sector. Everyone wants something for nothing these days, even if that means corrupting a noble academic environment. For shame!

PS: for you cheating numb-nuts reading this ( or copy-pasting this), here is a easy-to-understand guide of what plagiarism is

What the hell does "pro-torch" mean ?

2008-04-09T12:46:00.006-04:00

How sad and absurd that the whole 2008 olympics protest movement has been reduced, in the eyes of the media as a clash between those who "support the torch" and those who don't. Ummm ok. Last time I checked, a torch was a THING, not an issue, a philosophy or a person. Is it supposed to mean that supporting the torch = supporting its "right" to exist ? Gotta love post-materialist nonsensical slogans. Oh, one last thing: I also happen to be anti-torch. The Olympic torch can be a dangerous object...it could start a fire somewhere, somehow.

Habs suck, Leafs suck, Krypton sucks

2008-04-09T08:10:00.008-04:00

Now that I have your attention with this provocative title, here are my picks for the first round of the 2008 Stanley Cup playoffs.

EASTERN CONFERENCE

Montreal-Boston: This is no contest. The Bruins play hard and they deserve credit for making the playoffs with all the injuries they had this year. Will compete but Montreal has too much depth and speed. Tim Thomas is a wild card in net. Montreal has the most underrated defense in these playoffs, if not the best one outside of Anaheim. Montreal in six

Pittsburgh-Ottawa: No one it seems gives the sad-sack Senators any chances against the high-flying Penguins. Ottawa ended the year poorly, but they did start the year 15-2 so they must be doing something right, they just need to rediscover what that is. Pittsburgh has superior goaltending and the offense is slightly to Pittsburgh's advantage. Hossa is a playoff no-show however. Ottawa can win this IF guys like Redden,Vermette,Stillman and Lapointe step up. Ottawa in 6 games IF Gerber is solid and the offense takes advantage of Pittsburgh high give-aways defense.

Washington-Philadelphia: Seeing Ovechkin in the playoffs will make me want to see the Capitals play. He is very exciting and the team has good players in Backstrom, Mike Green and Cristobal Huet will keep the Caps in this series. However, the Flyers have a "built-for-the-playoffs" type of team. They will miss Simon Gagné, but they have the toughness and depth to outhit and grind down the young Capitals. Philadelphia in 6

New-Jersey-New-York: Brodeur vs Lundqvist. Gomez vs Parise. This will be a snoozer since both teams play defensively. The addition of Drury, THE clutch guy will tip the scale of this series in the favour of the blueshirts. Devils play tough and Brodeur can steal a series, but they lack the offense necessary. Rangers in 5

WESTERN CONFERENCE

Detroit-Nashville: Kuddos to the ( Hamilton someday ) Predators for making the playoffs after their summer firesale. Red Wings will win because of superior goaltending, defense and offense. Nashville will take the Wings to overtime several games, but they lack that "game-breaker" to surprise the Wings. Detroit in 5

San-Jose-Calgary: Now THIS will be a all-out war between teams that play very physically. Whoever wins will definitely have key injuries for the next round. Sharks are the hottest team going 15-2 in the last grind of the regular season. Thornton seems to finally have that maturity for the playoffs. If Thornton and Marleau get hot, they will beat Calgary. But the Flames can pull the upset because they have Kiprusoff, Phaneuf and Iginla. They key for the Flames is to neutralize the smooth-skating Brian Campbell to prevent the Sharks transition game. Calgary in 7 hard fought games.

Minnesota-Colorado: Jacques Lemaire is THE coach when it comes to making good teams out of nothing. The Wild have more offense than they get credit for: Gaborik,Demitra,Rolston and Koivu.All the games will be tight however, and to win, Colorado must score the first goals. Key for the Avs will be Theodore who has to keep playing as well as he has this year. The Wild will have their hands full with Forsberg-Stastny-Hejduk and the Sakic-Brunette-Wolski line. Keys to watch are how Ryan Smyth and Tyler Arnason on the third line will play. Colorado "upsetting" Minnesota in 6

Anaheim-Dallas: Any team with a top three of Pronger, Niedermayer and Schneider will always be a SC favourite. Dallas is a tough team, but they seem to be lacking chemistry since acquiring Brad Richards. If he can get going however, they will make it interesting. The Stars won the regular season series with Anaheim, so they know what it takes to beat this physical team. The Stars will miss Sergei Zubov which affects their powerplay. For Anaheim, losing Andy McDonald to St-Louis, traded for Doug Weight, and Dustin Penner will have a bigger impact now that Cory Perry is injured. Anaheim will win based on superior defense and "intangibles" such as Niedermayer, Selanne and yes Todd Bertuzzi. Anaheim in 7

NovLangue nationaliste québécoise

2008-04-03T09:55:00.004-04:00

George Orwell serait fier du Québec moderne rien qu'à écouter le discours nationaliste québécois -souverainiste et fédéraliste- et sa manière très NovLangue de communiquer. Par exemple les célèbres Condition Gagnantes de Lucien Bouchard et du PQ veut vraiment dire: Il n'y aura pas de référendums. Chez les fédéralistes, le concept du Fruit-n'est-pas-Mûr se traduit ainsi: impossible de ré-ouvrir la constitution au Canada, passez à autre chose. On attend la souveraineté...non non, on fait une conversation. On ne renouvel pas la constitution, on veux cueillir des fruits!!! Heureusement que le défaitisme, la pensée magique et la «doublepensée» ne sont pas contagieux. La souveraineté ou le renouvellement de la constitution ne vont tout de même pas se produire par eux-mêmes, à moins que tout le monde ait abandonné ?

If it isn't symbolic....is it a threat ?

2008-04-01T11:20:00.003-04:00

Rae said his affectionate greeting to Ignatieff was just that, and there was no deeper message intended. Nice try Bob, even Judas kissed Jesus . Incidently, they also happened to be old friends. * cue the Godfather theme song *

LEGAL DISCLAIMER This blog neither endorses or claims that Michael Ignatieff is the son of God or a messiah. Then again I'm not a Liberal.

The brilliance of the GST cut

2008-03-31T11:54:00.005-04:00

Almost every single economists and members of the opposition described at the time the Harper government's cut of the GST as bad for the economy. I would argue that these critiques missed the more significant point of this cut. Other than fiscal populism, it wasn't based on economics but rather on the need to radically -yet subtly- transform the nature of federal-provincial relations. The effects of this may not seem obvious at first, but by reducing its surpluses, the federal government has less room to spend and is forced to be disciplined and focused on its own responsibilities rather than venture into provincial and municipal concerns.

All governments, Liberals and Tories, have pledged to respect other governments in fiscal matters before, but Stephen Harper has taken further steps to ensure this. Other governments, particularly those more prone to the tax-and-spend mentality, unless willing to re-up the GST or risk going into a deficit, will be forced to focus on core federal responsibilities and let social policies, including the fiscal room to innovate, to the provinces. Governments, like people are less likely to go on undisciplined spending sprees when they have less revenue at their disposal. Good.

Jim Flaherty's childish strategy

2008-03-26T11:21:00.006-04:00

In the current feud that opposes Jim Flaherty --and by extension Stephen Harper -- to the McGuinty government, pundits and various media are left perplexed at the "strategy" behind this war of words and philosophy. There are three possible answers to what the federal government is trying to achieve here:

1. Minimizing political fallout from a downturn in the Ontario economy by shifting focus on the policies of the McGuinty government.
2. Trying to weaken the overall Liberal brand ( provincial and federal )in Ontario which remains quite strong --in the Toronto area anyway-- by deliberately engaging Ontarians in a clash of political philosophies and demonstrating the consequences of the Ontario Liberal government's choices.
3. Less likely but nonetheless plausible is the potential of Jim Flaherty considering moving to Queen's Park as a leader of the opposition. This is less likely simply because he has failed twice before in a leadership bid and because he wouldn't have a seat in the legislature ( never mind the fact that John Tory is still leader ).

Regardless of what one thinks of the McGuinty government, it is poor federalism on the part the Harper government to want to second guess provincial decision-making. Some of the Harris-era cabinet ministers may not like Dalton McGuinty, but this is no reason to deliberately provoque Ontario and engage in intrusive behaviour. This kind of action would never have been acceptable had it been done to provinces like Québec, Alberta, British-Columbia.

It is normal in a federation that governments will disagree, but this confrontation is pointless, childish and a betrayal of the core conservative principle of respect for provincial responsibilities. If Jim Flaherty wants to act like a leader of the opposition instead of a federal finance minister,he should act accordingly. As for Stephen Harper, he must stop giving tacit approval to this strategy that can only cause more harm than good, both as a federalist principle and an economic one.

Finally, had this been a federal Liberal government acting the same way towards a provincial government, would those defending Flaherty's actions been applauding such a gesture?

Time to boycott the 2008 olympics

2008-03-17T09:57:00.005-04:00

Olympic games should not be "political" as the old saying goes, but we all know that isn't the case: domestic nationalisms intertwine with geopolitical considerations in international relations: whether that is the treatment of African-Americans ( the infamous fist salute ), the boycott of the Moscow olympics over the invasion by the Red Army of Afghanistan and the tit-for-tat reaction in 1984 by the Eastern block in Los-Angeles. Countries use sports to promote its international image and China is no different: These games were suppose to be about China's big "coming out" party as a political, cultural and economic world power. Now, with China being embarrassed by the uprising by Tibetan monks and ordinary civilians, I believe it is time for Canada and other countires to reconsider their participation in the 2008 Olympics.

It would be most damaging for athletes to miss out on an international competition of this nature, and it isn't clear how such a boycott would improve the lot of the Tibetans and other minorities in China, not to mention ordinary Chinese citizens who cannot express dissent. It may make things worst by hardening the regime. Indeed there is a strong thesis in international relations that the best way to change a regime's ways is to engage it by having a dialogue and building political and economical relations. But on the other hand, if we do nothing and participate in these games, it may confirm the Chinese position that as long as they can do business with other countries and have some of their citizens acquire un-communist-like wealth, that it can treat its citizens as it wishes, never mind minorities and get away with it. This leads to a fundamental question about sports and diplomacy: can all countries be allowed to hold the Olympics or should it be only the ones that have high standards ( some would say "western democracies" ) in regards to human rights ?

Pinocchio federalism

2008-02-29T10:22:00.003-05:00

We all love the notion of political accountability when it comes to our politicians and our institutions. But in a country as regionally diverse and large as ours, is fiscal accountability between governments that important ? One of the crucial distinction between political parties is how they view government intervention and how taxes are spent or cut. It is well known that the current government has transfered millions of dollars to provinces to solve what has been called the "fiscal imbalance" between federal and provincial governments. Some social groups and members of the political left want the federal government to keep tabs on the provinces to see where and how those transfers are spent, most notably in health care. At first glance it seems reasonable to want accountability of how money is spent. Unfortunately, it is a counter-productive argument that only leads to what can be called a federative deficit.

First, because Canada is a federation in which both levels of government have access to revenue, and sovereign in their jurisdictions, one level of government cannot claim to have a monopoly of ownership of taxes and money. The fact that the federal government is responsible for banking and currency is irrelevent here. Second,it is the money and tax dollars of hard working Canadians that constitutes the economic backbone of this country, and no government can claim it as theirs. Therefore the question is not whether one government can dictate terms or impose conditions or strings on financing another government's ( including provincial politics towards municipalities )responsibilities.

Third, because we have different governments, accountability must lay in areas where the constitution prescribes responsibilities between federal, provincial and municipal institutions. But by claiming that the federal government should be the guardian of distribution of taxes and money in provincial jurisdictions, it betrays the federal ideal of this country by portraying our federal institutions as master puppeteers of provincial pinocchio governments. By doing so, instead of increasing accountability, you blur it and limit public policy freedom to innovate while increasing regional tensions.

It is not up to the federal government to decide where other national governments ( a provincial institution is a part of the national fabric ) spend federal transfers. If those governments misspend or cause difficulties, then the citizens of those provinces can decide what to do about it, not politicians on Parliament Hill. Any claim on their part to wanting to increase the accountability for taxpayers is just an excuse to increase the powertrip of politicians who would rather play pinocchio federalism than treat federal partners --and taxpayers-- with respect.

L'université a-t-elle tué «l'intellectuel public»?

2008-02-25T09:46:00.010-05:00

Voici un Un article fort intéressant pour quiconque s'intéresse au débat intellectuel et au rôle des penseurs dans nos sociétés. Ayant moi-même appliqué pour le doctorat a l'Université de Colombie Britannique ( UBC ) en science politique, je me demande en effet si nos universités ne sont pas en train de se transformer en simple «usines» de la pensée morale et comformiste. Par exemple, en recevant mon diplôme de maîtrise en science politique de l'Université d'Ottawa en octobre 2007, la cérémonie ressemblait davantage à une salle d'attente --voici votre diplôme, bonne journée, au suivant-- que d'une réelle reconnaissance du bienfait du travail intellectuel universitaire que nous venions de compléter.

Par ailleurs, bien que la recherche me passionne, c'est l'enseignement c'est-à dire la transmission de la connaissance, qui me tient le plus à coeur. Mais à force de mettre l'accent sur l'aspect quantitatif de la recherche et non sur la qualité ( évidemment il est possible de faire les deux, bien que ce soit de plus en plus difficile ) nos universités au Québec, au Canada et aux États-Unis perdent de leur cachet mystique. Celles-ci finissent par reproduire le même système fordiste au niveau de la connaissance que plusieurs dénoncent.

Maître Dion et le budget fédéral

2008-02-19T10:00:00.011-05:00

Tout le monde semble avoir la fièvre électorale ces temps ci, même si le chef de l'Opposition officielle Stéphane Dion semble vouloir changer d'idée. Les habitués de ce blogue savent que j'aime faire preuve d'humour en instrumentalisant des poèmes/chansons/fables connus pour présenter un éditorial d'une situation donnée.

Maître Dion, sur un parti penché,
Tenait en son bec la survie du gouvernement.
Maître Harper, par l’odeur alléché,
Lui tint à peu près ce langage :
« Hé!bonjour, Monsieur Dion.
Que vous êtes juste ! que vous me semblez omnipuissant!
Sans mentir, si votre flair politique
Se rapporte à votre charisme,
Vous êtes le Phénix des boites de Cornflakes du Parlement»
À ces mots le Dion ne se sent pas de joie ;
Et pour montrer sa belle voix,
Il ouvre un large bec, laisse tomber son intégrité.
Le Renard Harper s’en saisit, et dit : « Mon bon Monsieur,
Apprenez que tout gouvernement minoritaire
Vit aux dépens de celui qui l’écoute sans rien faire :
Cette leçon vaut bien un autre budget, sans doute.»
Le Corbeau Dion , honteux et confus
Jura, mais un peu tard, qu’on ne l’y prendrait plus.

** To my anglophone friends, please find this hilarious translation of this text by google: Dion got pwnd **

Welcome to indoctrinate University ?

2008-02-13T09:32:00.007-05:00

An interesting article ( a rare one ) by Barbara Kay in today's National Post. As a former political science undergrad and grad student of Ottawa U, I can't say I fully agree with the author or the documentary that she is referring to. While the examples of " left wing " exaggerations or of closed mindedness are deplorable, they are not to be confused with a general decay of intellectual discipline. Professors and faculties have too much to lose --credibility, research funding-- to play indoctrinal games . While it is true that students and student politics on campus is usually more left of centre ( one of my professors once told us that if you aren't a communist when you are 20 you have no heart, but if you are still a communist when you are 40, you have no head ) there are usually a decent amount of fair play on campus, such as various political clubs and opportunities to express oneself about any political issues.

When I attended Ottawa U between 2000 and 2006, the university had a reputation as a refuge for Liberals, while Carleton was more NDP-oriented. But does this mean that everyone on campus was indoctrinated or agreed with a pre-determined ideological and social position ? Not likely. My thesis is simply that they ( left of centre Liberals and new democrats, greens ) were more voiciferous and present in campus activities then their more right of centre counterparts ( right of centre Liberals, Conservatives, libertarians ) whose views tended to express themselves more clearly in course papers, essays and discussion groups.Finally I would caution in using american examples and transporting them to Canada since our politics is less polarized and the so-called " culture wars " in the United States is much less of an issue here in Canada. Finally, no one talks about how students can mature and work on their own ideas and perspectives. There is a big difference between a first year university student, a fourth year undergrad and a graduate student, both in terms of quality of work and in articulating thoughts ( I should know, re-reading some of my old essays and opinions makes me wonder: what the hell was I thinking ? )

"But Marc, what about the people who told you NOT to attend the university of Calgary for your PhD because it is so right wing, isn't that proof that there is a bias against a plurality of ideas on university campuses?". This is a good counter-point as I have indeed heard this one when I applied for a PhD at UBC. But again, it cannot be empirically proven that there is a generalized closing of intellectual minds or that it is rigged by crass political considerations. Everyone has their own bias, there is no such thing as neutrality when it comes to essay-writing and teaching. The point here is to be aware of our own bias and to be as fair as possible to other points of view, something that is actually possible.

For the record, I couldn't care less if a school is right or left leaning, as long as they offered a good program. Calgary seemed interesting, but the political department there didn't really have what I was looking for ( federal studies, political thought and canadian regionalism ). I could be wrong and have my head in the sand on this one, so it would be nice to hear about others who may have had issues regarding their own political views vis-a-vis campus life ?

Tories need Harris

2008-02-08T09:53:00.000-05:00

Jim Harris that is. The former leader of the Green party would be an interesting candidate for the federal conservatives. Back in my undergrad days a good friend of mine had given me the link to the Green party platform for the 2004 federal election. So,just for kicks, I read the whole thing, and honestly I was impressed. I had expected some pro-marxist, everyone-is-wrong-except-me type of reading. But they had some moderate centre-right ideas on the economy, on taxes and things like that. Naturally they had more material on the environment, but I thought that Jim Harris did a good job of building a serious political party that I could possibly get on board with.

I don't know what he is up to these days, but it would certainly be interesting if the Tories tried to consider him as a candidate for the next election. He might be interested, and who knows, may want to settle a score with Elizabeth May. That pompous and arrogant leader has completely demolished any chances I had of voting Green by denouncing free trade and adopting indigestible positions on Afghanistan, foreign affairs and the economy. If the federal Conservative party wants to increase the size of their coalition, reaching out to a former leader of the Green party would be a very good start.

Starving people to beat obesity

2008-02-05T10:52:00.001-05:00

So much for the idea of free will. If people can't or won't help themselves through personal responsibility, the State will do it for you. America can be a very strange place at times: land of the free ( to do almost anything ) and land of the we-will-tell-you-how-to-live society. I'd be curious to see what the legal definition of "obese" is though.Maybe someone at Fox will start a new reality-show Queer eye for the fat guy that will give us some clues as to how to be thin enough to order food at a restaurant. Or maybe they'll all weight us on a scale when we walk into a restaurant ? I'm sorry sir you are two pounds overweight, I'll have to ask you to leave now before you get a heart attack here and get us all arrested for murder

Jack Layton betrays Canadian ideals

2008-02-01T09:05:00.000-05:00

Good thing Jack Layton wasn't in Parliament during the Dieppe raid of World War II. No doubt he would have said after that disaster that defeating Nazi Germany was too tough, too long and that Canada should leave . So what is the message here: When the going gets tough, we should just leave ? It is one thing to have reserves over the Afghan mission, but to frame it like Jack Layton did is a betrayal of what Canada stands for. Is he saying that Canada should be defending "peacekeeping" as long as no gun shots are fired, that soldiers aren't harmed and that battles be kept "virtual" ?

This is EXACTLY why the NDP will never replace the Liberals as a centre-left alternative, because they take completely irresponsible positions ( such as this one ) that would tarnish Canada's reputation as a dependable ally. What would happen for example if we went into Darfur or Kenya to protect vulnerable populations ( as Jack Layton has asked numerous times ) and our "peacekeepers" got shot or violence rised ? If we are to take Jack Layton's thinking to its logical conclusion, that would mean we would also have to leave those missions as soon as things got tough and more complex.

Instrumentalizing cultural groups

2008-01-30T10:17:00.000-05:00

Riddle me this: What is a Canadian citizen, but is treated as a separate entity and considered as an essentialist group by Liberals and now the Conservatives ? It would be easy to read the efforts of the Tory government to increase its presence in multicultural neighbourhoods and trying to build bridges as a positive step. On the surface, it does indeed seem like a good idea to increase electoral competition for votes in urban and multicultural ridings. No group should "belong" to a particular party. But on the other hand,the Tories are repeating the same message that the Liberals used --with considerable success-- by considering "cultural groups" as a singular massive bloc of votes. By tailoring certain issues to attract support from specific groups,the Liberals and the Conservatives are placing Canadian citizens of various cultural backgrounds in well-defined pigeonholes by associating an issue and an identity with a voting pattern. A Canadian of Jewish, Korean or African background for example, deserves more respect than having his identity instrumentalized and patronized for cheap political gains by political parties too eager to believe in their own hype.

Snow White is horrified

2008-01-28T11:06:00.003-05:00

In the 'WTF' news category, take a look at this particular gem...

Dwarves' Trojan horse bus raids

CUNNING gangs are robbing unsuspecting bus passengers blind by smuggling dwarves into suitcases and getting them to raid luggage holds.

The thieves then take the booty back to their hiding place and wait to be collected by mates when the bus reaches its destination

Thousands of dollars in cash, jewellery and other valuables have been pilfered in recent months, Britain's The Sun newspaper reports.

The raids began on Sweden's Swebus, with a spokesman confirming: "We have had reports about several thefts by dwarves on the stretch between Vasteras and Stockholm.

"We're thinking of installing video cameras."

A Stockholm Police spokesman admitted: "We are looking at our records to identify criminals of limited stature."

Health Canada's shame

2008-01-25T12:59:00.000-05:00

This is what I don't understand about Health Canada's decision to ban ( calling it an "excluded organs" is the same thing as an outright ban ) organ donations from gay men. I understand completely the need to have regulations and rules to avoid complications like the ones with the blood transfusion scandal of the 1980s by targetting dangerous behaviours: drugs, HIV, criminal activities etc... But why are gay men in general targetted here? What makes them more vulnerable than say, a heterosexual relationship? If the issue is only about behaviour, then why not specify that it is unprotected sex that is at issue rather than the vague wording of " men who had sex with men ". If gay men had protected sex and have not been involved in drugs or other dangerous activities, then what is the problem? Could it be that our so-called liberal society may still be influenced by fear and ignorance when it comes to homosexuality? Shame on Health Canada.

La souveraineté fédéraliste de mme Marois

2008-01-22T09:55:00.000-05:00

Il est assez paradoxal que les gestes de souverainetéproposés par madame Marois, risquent d'avoir le même effet que l’adoption de la Loi 101 sur le projet de la souveraineté du Québec : il agira comme un « substitut » ou une sortie de secours ( pour reprendre le titre de l’ouvrage de Jean-François Lisée ) au projet de faire du Québec un pays. Une constitution et une citoyenneté québécoise sont certes des idées qui s’inscrivent dans la mouvance du nationalisme québécois. Mais ces gestes de souveraineté, dans une certaine mesure, rejoignent l'esprit du fédéralisme classique. En théorie et en pratique le fédéralisme classique, n'empêche pas les entités fédérées de se doter d'une constitution ( la Bavière en Allemagne par exemple ) ou d'une autonomie politique intéressante. En somme, le projet de madame Marois risque fort d’agir comme réconfort psychologique pour la majorité « associationiste » du nationalisme québécois.

Ready or not...no one cares

2008-01-18T10:06:00.001-05:00

American and Canadian media types, pundits and general know-it-alls keep asking and repeating the question of whether or not America is ready for a (fill in the blanks) President. Is this question really necessary? What purpose does it serve, other than making one look good, or --more cynically-- to hide one's pessimistic view of America( that if they lose, it will be BECAUSE of Barack Obama's skin colour or Hillary Clinton's gender rather than ideas ). For instance, if Obama or Clinton wins, then the media pundits will make it seem like it was inevitable that they would win, thus saying that America was indeed ready. But if they both lose, those who asked this question will be convinced that American opinion, in majority, has a pre-determined notion of what is acceptable and what isn't when it comes to power and influence. If one accepts the idea that the concepts of race and gender don't matter when it comes to judging a candidate, then the question of "readiness" is completely irrelevant. Ready or not America...no one cares.

Le silence des agneaux

2008-01-16T15:42:00.000-05:00

Mémo à l'ADQ: quand on est l'opposition officielle, ne pas se manifester parce qu'on craint d'avoir l'air niaiseux ne contribue ni au bon fonctionnement de la démocratie en gardant le gouvernement sur le qui-vive, ni aux intérêts --pour ne pas dire l'amour-propre-- de la formation adéquiste.

Maple Leaf fans are being scammed

2008-01-15T14:24:00.000-05:00

Who needs day time tv drama when we have the Toronto Maple Leafs ? Never have I seen such a classless and incompetent group of owners. They don't know how to run a team, hiring a rookie GM, then saying in public that it was a mistake to hire him, on top of trying to replace the current GM behind his back. John Ferguson jr deserves better than to be played and hamstrung like that by a bunch of power-hungry executives who keep suckering Leaf fans into buying tickets to the ACC to see their beloved blue and white. I know it sucks to have to tank a season to rebuild ( I am an Avs fan who watched the Québec Nordiques suffer for years ) but in the end they were much better for it...and so can Toronto if they have a long-term plan in place. Leaf ownership always sold the idea that they could win without drafting properly or investing in young talent and now they have untradeable assets ( Blake, McCabe,Tucker have no-trade clauses), long term and expensive contracts ( Kubina, Blake,Raycroft ) and very few prospects. When owners like Richard Peddie of MLSE try to micromanage a team, it never works simply because there is no accountability. I'm definitely not a fan of the Toronto Maple Leafs, but I am a huge hockey fan and I find this display of ego quite pathetic and sad. Leaf Nation deserves better than being suckered like this.

Healthy in paranoid times

2008-01-11T14:30:00.000-05:00

Imagine for a second the outrage that the opposition would have created had a Liberal government treated Linda Keen of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission the same way that Gary Lunn and Stephen Harper have treated her. It is one thing to debate whether it was a good decision by PARLIAMENT to overrule the independant commission's judgment ( and Parliament did the right thing in re-opening the nuclear installation in Chalk River ), but it is entirely different....and disappointing to see this -almost personal- vendetta and unjustified paranoïa against anything related to the Liberals: whether that is the Public Service or the Courts. Can anyone honestly say that this kind of political pressure would have been tolerated under Jean Chrétien or Paul Martin instead of Stephen Harper ? Honestly ? Some Tories no doubt would have decried the pseudo-imperial nature of our Canadian government and probably would have taken Linda Keen's side and seen this as "proof" that the Liberals felt entitled about everything.

In any case, is it that far-fetch to think that it doesn't matter what party she may support because she has a job to do ? And even IF she is a Liberal, who cares ? Are some of us Tories so paranoïd about Liberals that we can't trust people to do their own jobs, or that everything is a massive conspiracy ? Some Public Servants may not like the Tories, but people are much smarter than trying to wage a bureaucratic guerilla warfare against the government. I find it ironic --and sad-- that Conservatives who are ideologically more inclined to place greater trust in individuals, cannot in return trust the judgement of Public Servants such as Linda Keen. If the Conservatives are going to be taken seriously, not just as a government, but as a party that can be trusted in the long run as a credible alternative to power when in opposition, the party must adopt a more positive view of governing institutions instead of focussing on the past and conspiracy theories. I think we all have better things to worry about.

Merry Christmas Charlie Brown

2007-12-24T14:14:00.000-05:00

I would like to take this opportunity to wish to each and one of you, whoever you are, a very merry Christmas. I have a special thought for all my family and friends, but also to all the single mothers out there who work hard to make Christmas extra special for their children. I can only imagine how emotionally and financially difficult it must be, at this time of the year especially. No one should be sad on December the 25th, and I thank God for all the kind hearts out there who volunteered, donated toys, clothing, books, or food to families in need. To all of you, regardless of your beliefs, I hope you have fun with family and friends during the holidays, and wish you nothing but health and happiness. Joyeux Noël à tous et à toutes.

Marc-André Mongeon

Justin Trudeau chez le psychologue

2007-12-22T14:22:00.001-05:00

Une caricature hilarante dans l'édition du vendredi 21 décembre 2007 dans le journal Le Soleil. Justin Trudeau ( tout comme n'importe quel individu) a le droit à son opinion concernant la reconnaissance ( ou non) du Québec comme nation, mais il n'aide certainement pas la cause de son parti au Québec (en Ontario c'est une tout autre histoire par contre) en perpétuant l'idéologie fédéraliste-universaliste de son père....

Yet another reason to privatize the CBC

2007-12-16T13:05:00.000-05:00

Thanks to Stephen Taylor for bringing attention to what appears to be a serious problem regarding the Communist Broadcasting Corporation. Granted Jean Lapierre isn't the most reliable of sources, but it is very worrisome that a supposedly "neutral" organisation like this would deliberately take sides. It is one thing for newspapers to have partisan editorials ( the National Post, the Globe or the Star) but it is entirely different when an organisation such as the CBC pretends not to be. ALL Canadians pay for the CBC, regardless of their political opinion. Therefore, if the allegations are indeed true, the corporation should issue an apology to Canadians for this blatant attempt at soft propaganda using taxpayers'dollars. Besides, other than Hockey Night in Canada, who would miss the CBC if it ceased to exist tomorrow morning?

Lex Luthor charged with bribery

2007-12-10T18:55:00.000-05:00

Not a good time to be Mayor Larry O'Brien or a supporter of his right now. While it is true that a person is innocent until proven otherwise, this story doesn't smell good, there usually is no smoke without a fire they say. This is too bad, since I really admired his pro-business approach to the City of Ottawa, a city --at times-- too comfortable with itself and too eager to think small when it comes to building a real national capital. If he does indeed have to step down, I hope the INTERIM Mayor that will follow will not hike city taxes, but will rather keep working to approve a modern Light Rail project for the city.

Le retour de Bernard Lord

2007-12-02T19:00:00.001-05:00

Le gouvernement Conservateur va nommer l'ancien premier-ministre Bernard Lord à la tête d'une commission sur le bilinguisme au Canada. Cette commission tentera de mieux comprendre les dilemmes des minorités linguistiques afin de mieux cibler des solutions pratiques à ces mêmes communautés. C'est une excellente nouvelle. Bernard Lord possède à la fois l'expérience commen leader d'une province bilingue, et comme chef de parti ayant parvenu à réconcilier francophones et anglophones au sein du parti Conservateur du Nouveau-Brunswick après le schisme au début des années 1990 entre francophones et les membres du parti COR ( Confederation of Regions ). Qui sait si cette commission n'est pas le tremplin qu'attendait Bernard Lord pour faire le saut en politique fédérale ? Peu importe, le retour de Bernard Lord sur la scène fédérale ne peut qu'être une bonne nouvelle, à la fois pour les communautés linguistiques minoritaires et pour le pays dans son ensemble.

Can Harper survive another minority government?

2007-11-24T10:08:00.000-05:00

Hypothetical questions, like hockey trade rumours are fun to talk about, but there isn't always a point to them. So it is with this particular question. There is much to like about the Harper government and Stephen Harper himself: decisive, made overtures to Québec ( where it was once deemed impossible) and a keen strategic sense. But there is also a darker side: controlling (can we really talk about a Harper team), at-times struggling to keep his " angry opposition leader" side in check particularly during Question Period. All this to say, Harper has come a long way, saving the Canadian Alliance, then uniting the Right, reducing the once mighty Paul Martin to a minority government in 2004 before prevailing in 2006. Clearly, Harper deserves ( as much as anyone can or should deserve anything in this world) a chance to govern the country and lead the party as he wishes. But like a hockey coach who is demanding and very very disciplined, this tactic can only work as long as the " team " is winning. Once the team hits tough stretches or struggles, suddenly, the previous qualities become liabilities and can stir dissent.

Keeping cabinet in check and controlled made sense when the Tory government started, in order to avoid rookie mistakes and undo all the hard work to unite the Right and then win power. But how long can such a state of affairs remain before it starts to wear thin with Tory MPs and cabinet ministers? I personally respect Stephen Harper for all that he has done, and strongly believe that he is often unfairly stereotyped as some sort of " evil-doer " by some in the media and in the urban café-latté drinking Toronto-star reading communities. But will fellow Tory sympathisers and MPs be as patient with him ? Assuming, for the sake of discussion, that the Tories win another minority mandate -- and at this point, it is not that realistic to believe a majority is possible with the Bloc Québécois still strong in Québec and the Liberals strong in Ontario-- will people start to wonder if it is Harper himself that prevents the Tory brand from growing ? Rightly or wrongly ( usually wrongly) , like an NHL hockey coach, players and fans ( MPs and card-carrying members) will start to wonder whether a change of direction is required to give the " team" some momentum again. If the Liberals start selling their " team" better ( they still have a relatively strong " brand" appeal , it will neutralize all the preconceived " Dion-is-not-a-leader" plans for an election campaign and increase pressure on Harper to de-concentrate power and responsibilities.

Vous savez que l'apocalypse arrive quand...

2007-11-16T17:55:00.000-05:00

Des centaines d'étudiants au Québec se "plaignent" tels de vulgaires bébés gâtés que le gouvernement québécois ose augmenter de ** attention,retenez votre souffle tout le monde!!!** CINQUANTE dollars par session universitaire les frais pour étudier dans une université au Québec, qui demeure la province ou les coûts sont les moins chers. Quand bien même ce serait gratuit d'étudier à l'université, il y en aurait probablement qui se plaidraient du fait que les livres sont trop chers et que l'État devrait subventionner les livres également. Une idée comme ça... pourquoi certains étudiants n'écriraient-ils pas à Hugo Chavez, Président-dictateur du Vénézuela, en lui demandant de subventionner leurs études à coup de pétro-dollars?

Gotta love the fightin Irish in Brian Mulroney

2007-11-13T21:52:00.000-05:00

After a few days of increasing nervousness, I am relieved that you have decided to ask for a full public inquiry in regards to the whole "airbus" thing. I am a big fan, I regard you as a hero and a great Prime-Minister, and I would hate it if the allegations had substance to it and thus destroy a great political career. Indeed, nothing says " I have nothing to hide" like asking the government to accept the call for a full public inquiry. I hope this doesn't end up as a tribune for Karlheinz Schreiber to spew his venom on everyone as a way of staying in Canada. You and your record in office deserve better than let others decide whether or not you were guilty of anything. Go out on your terms Brian, go out fighting and I hope your adversaries will realize the danger of trying to unleash the fightin Irish in you. Good luck Monsieur Mulroney.

Retour vers le futur

2007-10-20T09:18:00.000-04:00

Difficile d'entammer une discussion sur le pouvoir fédéral de dépenser sans risquer d'endormir son auditoire tant le sujet est complexe. Néanmoins, que ce soit la chronique de Jeffrey Simpson dans le Globe and Mail ou l'éditorial d'André Pratte dans La Presse, la question du pouvoir fédéral de dépenser abordé par le gouvernement fédéral dans son Discours du Trône, intéresse plusieurs personnalités politiques, tant au Québec qu'au Canada. Depuis bon nombre d'années maintenant, les rôles fédératifs, particulièrement celles des provinces concernant les politiques sociales ( santé, éducation post-secondaire) faisaient l'object d'une convoitise croissante de la part d'acteurs sociaux --particulièrement hors-Québec-- qui souhaitaient voir le gouvernement fédéral faire preuve de leadership, en santé, en éducation et même envers les municipalités. Leadership légitime pour les uns, ingérance et fédéralisme impérial pour les autres, il est grand temps de clarifier le débat.

À cet égard, le gouvernement Harper doit être félicité pour son intention de vouloir encadrer le pouvoir fédéral de dépenser. Évidemment, il reste à savoir en quoi exactement consistera le projet de loi. Rappelons que le gouvernement Libéral de Jean Chrétien en 1999 en était arrivé à une Entente Cadre sur l'Union Sociale avec toutes les provinces, à l'exception du gouvernement du Québec. Au-delà des technicalités et de son accent porté sur la santé, cet accord devait permettre de mieux clarifier les responsabilités constitutionnelles et fiscales des gouvernements. Il prévoyait notamment la stabilité et la prévisibilité des payments de transferts aux provinces. Quant aux nouvelles initiatives fédérales dans le champ de compétence des provinces, le gouvernement fédéral s'engageait à ne pas "...créer de telles initiatives pancanadiennes sans le consentement de la majorité des provinces ".

En ce sens, le gouvernement Libéral de l'époque avait en quelque sorte entammé le débat sur la meilleure manière de " ré-équilibrer" les responsabilités et le partage fiscal entre les gouvernements, ce qui revient à dire qu'il proposait d'encadrer le pouvoir fédéral de dépenser selon ses propres intérêts. La différence entre cette entente et le projet Conservateur semble être de mettre l'accent sur le respect intégral des compétences et ne pas s'immiscer dans les politiques publiques des provinces --directement ou indirectement-- plutôt que de simplement "clarifier" la question du financement. En d'autres mots, le gouvernement Harper met l'accent sur l' encadrement constitutionnel du pouvoir de dépenser. Néanmoins, malgré cette différence de degré entre les deux approches, la stratégie du gouvernement Harper semble être de reprendre le " cadre théorique" de l'entente de 1999 mais en transformant le vocabulaire et en mettant l'accent sur la discipline constitutionnelle et fiscale afin de transformer sa portée symbolique, particulièrement au Québec.

Scripted politics is killing democracy

2007-10-13T12:55:00.000-04:00

Was anyone seriously surprised that only 52.6% of Ontarians voted ? Our politics, federal and provincial is so scripted that we may as well be living in a " Truman-show-esk" universe. Provincial Liberals and federal Tories will congratulate themselves for the way their tightly controlled campaigns went and how it allowed them to prevent " unforseen" events, particularly in public. Strategically, it may be good for politicians and leaders. But for democracy, it is nothing short of a cynical farce. Leaders are so scripted that there is no real debate anymore, other than what " image" looks best and who has done the best job of being " leadership" material.

That is why I applaud Howard Hampton for being angry at the poor job the media has done at reporting issues during the Ontario campaign. We don't elect political strategists or image consultants, and yet it seems they are the ones with the real power. I believe we are so accustomed to a language of efficiency or procedural automatisms when it comes to democratic debate that any criticism of this view is seen as either naïve or as undermining electoral competition ( making parties less likely to win ). I for one would welcome seeing leaders as they are with their strenghts and weaknesses, rather than what they are scripted to appear as, even if that means hurting one's electoral chances because of the temper tantrums of the press gallery pundits. It is a vicious circle that has to be broken, otherwise democracy will become an elite sport at the exclusion of everyone else...by default.

Democracy is loud, it is messy and it is not meant to be "efficient". Efficiency is a technocratic term that doesn't take into consideration debate, dialogue,give-and-take negociations. Power is centralized with the PMO and the Premiers offices in Canada at the expense of legislatures ( even with minority governments). I am always going to vote anytime I can, but the last Ontario campaign in particular has really made me understand why so many people decide not to exercice their fundamental democractic right to express their political opinion. This kind of centrally-controlled, scripted and superficial politics is powerful enough to contribute to an increasing disenchantment of our citizenry towards institutions and elected officials.

It will be a great day for democracy when all leaders in Canada, municipal, provincial, federal, exercising power or not, will be WILLFULLY delegating some of their considerable authority to the legislatures. Right now, Stephen Harper can govern without parliament ( never mind his own MPs), just like Dalton Mcguinty ( Ontario), Dany Williams ( Newfoundland) or Ed Stelmach ( Alberta), while Stéphane Dion, Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe run their Opposition offices much in the same style of central command and control. Democracies don't necessarily " die", but they run the risk of falling into a procedural coma.

McGuinty's victory is good news for Harper

2007-10-11T08:40:00.001-04:00

Ontarians like to put their eggs in separate baskets. Pierre Trudeau had Bill Davis, Mulroney had Peterson and Bob Rae, Chrétien had Harris, and McGuinty has Harper. Had it been a Tory victory, perhaps some unpopular provincial decisions would have had an effect on federal attitudes towards the Conservatives, much like the McGuinty " health premium" angered Ontarians and affected the Martin government federally.

Now that the Liberals are drunk on their own vanity and sense of false accomplishments, thinking they are the greatest thing since sliced bread, it is less likely that this will affect federal politics. That's the genius of federalism that you can have one type of government in a province and feel safe enough to vote for another party at the federal level. Stephen Harper shouldn't worry too much about yesterday's results. A better campaign by Tory, and had he not promised to fund religious schools, McGuinty would not have had the success he had yesterday. He probably would have won, but definitely not by this margin.

On another note, I hope John Tory stays, he deserves another chance. McGuinty himself was given up for dead in 1999 after being crushed by the Big Blue Machine, only to learn his lessons and come back stronger in 2003. Those who wish to replace him will only make the Official Opposition even less effective giving the Liberals a free pass at governance. Besides, saying that Red Tories are dead tories is condemning the party to marginality. Tories need EVERYONE in the coalition to win, not just so-called blue tories or vice-verca.

L'intolérente tolérance

2007-10-10T08:31:00.000-04:00

Suis-je le seul qui est profondément agacé par l'emploi de l'expression " tolérance" dans le débat sur les " accomodements raisonnables" ? Combien de fois entendons-nous dans les médias, dans les conversations quotidiennes la phrase suivante: Il faut faire preuve de tolérance à l'égard de... ? Cette question me semble tout à fait pertinente dans le cas des rapports interculturels au Canada et au Québec. Je crois que cette expression est mal utilisée et ne permet pas véritablement d'établir un rapport de confiance entre les communautés majoritaires et minoritaires. Ainsi, certains définissent la tolérance comme étant "... une notion qui définit le degré d'acceptation face à un élément contraire à une règle morale, civile ou physique particulière. Plus généralement, elle définit la capacité d'un individu à accepter une chose avec laquelle il n'est pas en accord. Et par extension moderne, l'attitude d'un individu face à ce qui est différent de ses valeurs".

D'autre part, la tolérance fait également référence à la notion absolue de "bien" et de "mal". La tolérance s'exerce lorsqu'on reconnait qu'une chose est un mal, mais que combattre ce mal engendrerait un mal encore plus grand. La tolérance est donc une abstention volontaire dans le combat contre un mal identifié comme tel. Cette abstention n'est pas du tout motivée par une relativisation des notions de bien et de mal, mais au contraire par la pleine conscience d'un mal qui ne peut malheureusement pas être combattu sans produire un autre mal plus grave encore.

Les gens qui font preuve d'une ouverture sincère envers l'autre peu importe ses origines, utilisent souvent cette expression pour définir le rapport qu'ils entretiennent avec d'autres valeurs provenant de groupes culturels ( nationaux ou religieux par exemple). Cependant, je crois qu'il serait plus approprié d'évaluer -- sur une échelle conceptuelle-- le degré de respect. On peut très bien " tolérer" sans vraiment respecter et considérer un groupe minoritaire comme étant RÉELLEMENT membre de la communauté élargie. Voilà pourquoi le concept de tolérance semble imprécis et caduc lorsqu'on parle de rapport harmonieux entre différents groupes culturels au sein d'une communauté donnée.

Has anyone seen my hidden agenda ?

2007-09-26T15:47:00.000-04:00

Can someone explain to me how anyone can stop an agenda that is hidden? If an agenda is hidden, how do you know it exists then? The Liberals are in serious trouble if they feel they need to bring up that old fossil again.... the political equivalent of a Hail Mary pass in football. Said Stéphane Dion: I am pleased when people underestimate me, I need to fight and win against a caricature of myself. And I will win. The Canadian version of Don Quixote chasing windmills ?

The folly of attacking Iran

2007-09-25T08:33:00.000-04:00

Is President Ahmadinejad a man that can be trusted about anything? The answer is no. Is he the type of leader that should be ignored by western powers, the answer again is no. And yet, despite his very offensive and aggressive stance against Israel and the United States, these countries and their allies would be wrong to launch a first-strike attack against Iran, even should they be on the cusp of building nuclear weapons. Two main reasons why Iran should not be attacked: one is tactical and the other is philosophical. Let's examine the philosophical reasoning first.

Are you MAD? A philosophical counter-point

Assuming that Iran does indeed intend to build nuclear weapons --and the Iranian President's "assurances" on american networks that he doesn't want it is a blatant lie--, what makes Iran more dangerous than the Soviet Union or China of the Cold War? Is it the religious undertones of his regime, or his inflammatory rhetoric against Israel and the West? No doubt these types of speeches are meant to deliberately provoque. But they are just speeches, a religious discourse to make other countries take it seriously as a political actor.

The Soviet Union and China didn't have many nice things to say about the West either, they wanted the destruction of capitalism and the political freedoms of democracies. And yet, it was the USSR and its discourse that collapsed, China being somewhat of an exception. Despite the Soviet Union's fear and hatred of capitalism and the western democracies, it knew full well what an attack, conventional or nuclear would mean for itself. It may have hated many things, but that hate wasn't as powerful as the need to self-preserve. The famous MAD theory ( Mutually Assured Destruction) certainly proved it wasn't pointless. There is therefore nothing to suggest that Iran's government is not aware of this fact as well. It may hate Israel and the United States, and by extension its allies, but no one in that regime can be that stupid. Do they not wish to self-preserve not only their own government but their lives, never mind those of their citizens as well? We don't need to like what President Ahmadinejad and his Ayatollah masters think or say in inflammatory discourses. The only difference between their discourse and the one of the Cold War nemesis ( USSR, China etc...) is that in Iran's case, religion takes centerstage, in combination with a heartland-hinterland marxist theory.

Fear is a powerful motivator to attack Iran. Indeed what if it doesn't care about its own survival and wish to become " martyrs"? There are never any guarantees, but a state-like actor like Iran has much more to lose in attacking Israel or the United-States. At best, they will wage a " war by proxy" in places like Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. Like any threats however, this doesn't mean that Israel, the US and western democracies should not pressure, monitor and make preparations against Iran. It wouldn't be responsible and it would allow the Iranian regime to continue believing it can " win by blackmail". Nonetheless, a first-strike attack against Iran would be counter-productive for strategic reasons.

Will you still be my friend after I bomb your house?

There is no doubt that Iran's military would be destroyed by a combined US/Israeli invasion. But it is what comes " after" the conventional battles that becomes problematic as the US involvement in Iraq is showing. The Iranian regime plays up confrontations with the West because it serves its purpose of hidding its own internal fractions and weaknesses. A regime such as this one that relies on " show and tell" logic of showing off military parades, grand speeches and the like, are actually at their weakestpoint in time. They resort to this sort of " show of strenght" as a way to compensate for a lack of legitimacy and internal influence. For these regimes, it is not about what you do, it is about what you can make people believe you'll do.

Remember, Iran has the youngest population in the world with over 40% of the population below the age of 15. There have been rumblings within the country for a good number of years now, mostly from student activists to reform the country. Indeed, attitudes towards the US are surprisingly good with the younger population, compared to other countries in the region. The regime therefore is very unstable despite the rhetoric of war and destroying Israel. It needs to create a crisis with the external forces to keep itself a minimum of legitimacy. Nothing brings a population together like an armed attack ( ie: the immediate 9/11 impact on the United States citizenry). By attacking Iran, the United States would neutralize the good will from the post-revolution generation that wants to liberalize the country by its own means. It would be ironic that the reason that would be invoqued to attack Iran: to make it less of a threat to the "world" would actually result in more instability in that country and a radicalisation of a part of the population there. In other words, potential allies turned adversaries because of hubris and fear.

I should specify that a " first strike" attack in this case means a full-scale war. That would be folly. However, Israel for instance would be right and legitimized to attack military targets that support the Hezbollah or other groups targetting Israel's citizens. Only the Air Force would be needed as using ground troops would amount to a full-scale invasion in logistics, if not logic. Iran's regime is many things, but attacking Iran would completely destroy the whole point of an invasion: to bring peace and stability as well as understanding between Iran and the West. If we want Iran to change, it will have to change itself from within.

The NDP monorail

2007-09-21T12:29:00.001-04:00

Lyle Lanley: Well, sir, there's nothing on earth
Like a genuine, Bona fide,
Stone-faced,
Six priority
New-Democrat
What'd I say?
Ned Flanders: NDP
Lyle Lanley: What's it called?
Patty+Selma: not-that-New democrats
Lyle Lanley: That's right! Communists
[crowd chants `NDP' softly and rhythmically]
Miss Hoover: I hear young dippers are awfully loud...
Lyle Lanley: Their ideas glide as softly as a cloud.
Apu: Is there a chance that Hampton could win?
Lyle Lanley: Not on your life, my union friend.
Barney: What about us brain-dead slobs?
Lyle Lanley: You'll be leading our campaign
Abe: Was Hampton sent here by the devil?
Lyle Lanley: No, good sir, he's unilingual
Wiggum: My platform came off my pudding can.
Lyle Lanley: Take a toke my good man.

I swear it's Ontario's only choice...
Throw up your vote and waste your time
All: NDP
Lyle Lanley: What's it called?
All: NDP!
Lyle Lanley: Once again...
All: NDP!
Marge: But Ontario's streets are still all cracked and broken...
Bart: Sorry, Mom, the liberal mob has spoken!
All: NDP
NDP!
NDP!

[big finish]
NDP
Homer: ND... D'oh!