What the Hell?

So, I'm sitting around reading the Vancouver Province this afternoon and I come across this article, "Sims, BCTF sue Google over comments in blog about B.C. politics." (article is subscription only)

Seems Jinny Sims and the BCTF have decided to sue Google over some statements made on the BC Poly Blog. This was a blog set up back in April that pretty much solely criticized and/or made fun of the BCTF and BC NDP. It then pretty quickly petered out after the teachers union settled with the government.

This is probably the first I've heard of this, at least in a Canadian jurisdiction. Especially over the naming of Google as the defendant.

But I think the reason I had to share this was due to this paragraph reporting on the statement of claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court(thank you so much Keith Fraser):

"And it says Sims did not kidnap beloved Sesame Street (original emphasis) character Big Bird and threaten to kill him/her in response to the Functional Skills assessment tests"

Now most of you are probably going: Uhh, wait a minute, WHAT?

Well if you're interested, here is the offending post.

Looks like Jinny and BCTF don't have a sense of humour. Anyways, if anyone would like to see the full text of the article, let me know and I will endeavor to track it down for you.

UPDATE:

Well, it appears this lawsuit has re-awakened the BC Poly Blog. And it appears the rest of the Sesame Street characters are coming to their defense.

Tags: Jinny Sims, BCTF, Keith Fraser, Google

Just a couple of tidbits

I was going to include these few notes at the end of my last post but I felt that one was getting pretty long. Anyways:

1. For those of you that use Firefox, the 2.0 update is coming out today (ht to Andrew), for those of you still using IE, why do punish yourselves? For details on what's new, check out what Andrew had to say.

2. I was a little slow to catch on to the whole podcast thing but I've found myself listening to them more and more. For those out there looking for some decent ones, try theses two:

- For fellow Canadian political junkies out there, check out the Bloggers Hotstove. Hosted by Greg Staples (of Political Staples), he gathers bloggers from across the spectrum to discuss issues that have come up during the week. The result is a reasoned and respectful debate of the ideas and policies in question.

- For my fellow Canuck fans, swing by thecrazycanucks.com and check out their weekly podcasts. Each week 4 or 5 canucks bloggers get together and discuss what's happened with our beloved team. Members include Alanah from vancouvercanucksoped.com (one of my favourite blogs, and in fact the first blog I can remember visiting) and JJ from the Canucks Hockey Blog, along with others.

3. Finally, as you may have noted in my last post, requests and/or ideas for posts are welcome. Heck, they're greatly appreciated. It lets me be kinda lazy in not having to decide what to post on.

Tags: Firefox, Podcasts, Bloggers Hotstove, Crazy Canucks

Decorum in Politics, Hah!

Well, I wasn't planning on doing a post on this subject but I recently had a reader ask me to post about my thoughts on the Belinda Stronach / Peter MacKay kerfuffle. And since I pretty much do whatever my readers ask (within reason, unless the money's right), here we go.

My initial reaction to this when I first heard this was, oh man they're up to it again. What I mean by this is that our elected representatives have regressed again to level of schoolchildren in debate. Now, this in no way excuses MacKay's comment. I think Mr. MacKay is still smarting from the public break-up the two had and needs to get past it. And by no means should he have made that statement in the House (or in any sort of public setting). But seriously, I think all of us have probably said some nasty things about ex's that we've had, but 1) not in public and 2) more than likely to someone that is not going to repeat to the other party.

When the first reports came out on MacKay's words, the Liberal Party was pretty mute on the issue. Only after a day or so did the outrage begin to grow, giving the appearance that they had figured the political gains that could be made. Debate then descended to a "did not" / '"did too" level. And then we had a statement in the House from Ms. Stronach (ht to Olaf and CTV for the transcripts):

"'“Mr. Speaker yesterday during question period the minister of foreign affairs used a very inappropriate word to describe me,'” Stronach said, adding that those kinds of comments have a "“chilling"” effect on women who contemplate entering politics. '“For that Mr. Speaker, I simply ask that the minister of foreign affairs apologize to this House,'” she said to a round of applause."

I agree with her on the first point. The second point, well I'm not so sure as I'm not a woman and can't really say what effect it might have. And she is right in asking for an apology. She then made this comment to reporters later:

"I am even more disappointed today as I reflect on the character of this government, we saw it during question period, no one is willing to take responsibility for this and I am worried for the women of Canada how this kind of attitude translates into policy development and the actions that this government is taking."

Ah ha, now to score some political points. Peter MacKay makes sexist comment, MacKay is Tory, therefore the Conservatives and their policies must be sexist. Nevermind that a Liberal (former Defense Minister Doug Young to Reform MP Deb Grey) had done much the same in the past.

Make no mistake, I think MacKay should have immediately apologized, even if he doesn't think it was that big of a deal. But the words "I'm sorry" and "I was wrong" seem to be anathema to politicians nowadays. Hence the need for this proposal from two NDP MP's Joe Comartin and Dawn Black to punish MP's that cannot act like adults in the House. Its a good idea (yes I said that, even though it is a NDP idea) but I think the fact we need it at all is a pretty sad commentary on the state of political discourse in Canada.

Tags: Peter MacKay, Belinda Stronach, Liberal Party, Conservative Party

Garth and the Greens

Well all the kerfuffle around Garth Turner's expulsion from the Conservative party and speculation about what he's going to do has led me to take a closer look at the Green Party.

I'll admit, Elizabeth May had already piqued my interest in the party but I hadn't taken a really good look at the party and their policy platform. Well, I had a couple of hours to spare this morning and decided to take a read through it (you can Word or pdf copies here). In the past, I saw the Greens a single issue party and that was the way their platform was based. But I have to admit, they have done a pretty good job of applying their principles to develop a well-thought out and coherent policy platform. Of course I don't agree with all of it, but then again I've never seen a single party platform that I completely agreed with (although the BPofC platform comes pretty close).

However, there is one part of the platform I have some rather serious concerns with. That would be their proposal to shift more of our freight shipping from trucks and over to rail. I can see and agree with the argument against trucks but I don't know if it is economically feasible to switch. Guess it's the fiscal conservativeness in me coming out but the money that would be needed to improve our rail lines to handle this increase would have to be astronomical. Guess we'll have to wait and see what Canadians are willing to pay for.

What does this all have to do with Garth? Well, as many of you know, Elizabeth May extended an offer to him to join the Green Party. If he takes her up on the offer, that would then allow May to participate in the leader's debate before the next election. This would allow the Green's to finally be able to get their message to general public and introduce some fresh ideas into the political discussion occurring amongst the electorate. To quote Martha Stewart, "and that's a good thing".

UPDATE:

National Newswatch is reporting that Garth has decided to join the Greens (ht Dante). However, it was an anonymous tip and neither Garth nor Elizabteh May has confirmed the report so far.

UPDATE:

Garth Turner has announced he won't be joining the Green Party for now, but wouldn't rule out doing so in the future (ht to Robert).

Tags: Garth Turner, Elizabeth May, Green Party, Conservative Party

Well, its here now

In my last post, I was talking about PM Harper's announcement on proposed changes to the dangerous offender legislation. Well today, the Justice Minister Vic Toews tabled the bill in the House (ht to David Akin). Halifax's Chronicle Herald and the Toronto Sun have articles on it. For those of you out there interested in reading the full text of the bill, I did some digging on the Parliament of Canada's website and found it for you here.

Not as much of blog response to the tabling yet, at least compared to when the announcement was made. Then again the Garth Hunter thing has kind of obliterated everything else out there. A few criticisms have come out though, check 'em out here and here.

Bit of a side note, work and school have slowed down my posting a bit. But if your looking for some good reads, I encourage you to check the guys (and girls) in my blogroll. Especially Andrew @ bound by gravity, Olaf @ Prairie Wranglers and Steve @ Far and Wide. Scott Feschuk does a pretty humorous news round up as well.

Tags: Dangerous Offender, Stephen Harper, Vic Toews

Third times a Charm

In Toronto today, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that the government will introduce legislation next regarding dangerous offenders (ht to Robert @ MyBlahg). The proposed bill would see someone deemed a dangerous offender after their 3rd time convicted of a violent and/or sexual crime. CBC has a report as well as the G & M.

Now, I think we still need to wait and see the legislation in full but so far, this sounds like a great idea. Anything that can be done to remove repeat violent offenders from the streets is a good thing in my opinion. So far the reaction in the blogosphere to the announcement has been mixed, mostly (and unsurprisingly) along strict partisan lines, but with some exceptions.

There seems to be two main criticisms against this plan, one that is typical of the Harper = Bush/ anti-american crowd, and then one which is actually well reasoned. The first is that this is simply a copy of the Three Strikes laws introduced in various states (most notably in California). This law differs from those in that it only applies to those that have committed 3 violent crimes, instead of any 3 crimes that many of the american laws cover. The second is that this may fail the "Oakes" test, or the "reverse onus" clause. This is where the burden is shifted to the individual to prove that they are innocent of the offence. Now, I'm no lawyer and I sure as hell won't claim to fully understand constitutional law, so I think we will need to wait and see how exactly the law is written to see if it'll pass the test rather than condemn it beforehand.

Tags: Stephen Harper, Oakes, Dangerous Offender

Well, why shouldn't she?

The Ottawa Citizen is reporting that Auditor General Sheila Fraser has had informal discussions with staff on Parliament Hill with regards to an audit of the spending done by our MP's. (h/t to Joel at ProudtobeCanadian.ca)


The article indicates that some MP's aren't too happy with this idea however. It mentions quotes by two MP's opposed, Pat Martin (NDP) and Derek Lee (Liberal). As Martin put it:

"There are internal checks and balances that are subject to the scrutiny of the Canadian people at election time. That's their chance to comment,"

Or Mr. Lee's comment:

"I don't think the auditor general should want to do anything other than that which she is asked to do by statute or by Parliament," Mr. Lee said.

"There will be resistance, I think, among some members for diverse reasons to going through an audit of their individual budgets."

Not all MPs agree though, both Garth Turner (Conservative) and Peter Stoffer(NDP) agreed that "it should be open." And communications officer Isabelle Serrurier said the Fraser has the authority under the Auditor General's Act and the Financial Administration Act to conduct the audit of Parliament.

Now, I'm of the opinion that we Canadians should have every opportunity to see how our MP's are spending OUR money. But I have no doubt there will be great resistance to this audit by members of all of the parties. One can only hope that Sheila is successful in her fight and brings more accountability and openness to the way our money is being spent.

Technorati Tags: Sheila Fraser, Auditor General, Government Spending

When will it end?

So, the Liberal party has had their "super" weekend and elected their delegates for their Leadership convention. Seems like the end is in sight. What are we at now, Month 82 of 86, in this incredibly long leadership campaign?

First thing I noticed was that somebody actually voted for Volpe. Heck, he even managed to beat out two other candidates (Scott Brison and Martha Hall-Findlay). And he's basically tied with Ken Dryden, who I thought would have had at least a couple of Hab's fans vote for him. For those interested in the unoffical results, check out the Liberal.ca page here. And for some great analysis of the results check out Greg Morrow's blog.

So far, it seems that all this weekend managed to do, was take this from a 8 man (oops, person) race down to a 4 man race. And each one of the different campaign's supporting blogs have been explaining why these results are good for their respective leaders campaign.

And we still have almost two months to go in this thing.

So far, my favourite is Michael Ignatieff and I do hope he wins. Think this comes from the fact that he doesn't come off as your typical politician. He has had some stumbles but many of those seem to stem from the MSM's obsession with 15-30 second sound bites, whereas his positions are more complex and can't be reduced to a one or two sentence answer. I have much more respect for a politician that can explain himself, even if I don't agree with his position, than with one that has so-called "media friendly" quips ready to go. Basically, I'd like to see a politician with a good head on his shoulders, not a goddamn parrot.

Think this all comes back to my pollyanna-ish idea that politics would actually come back to a true debate about ideas and policy, rather than simply attacking the other guy for votes.

Tags: Liberal Party, Michael Ignatieff, Joe Volpe