Stop the Hogs!

Statement on C-38 to House of Commons Finance Committee

http://canadians.org/blog/?p=15535

By Anil Naidoo, Friday, June 1st, 2012 More Sharing ServicesShare Print

Check Against Delivery – May 31, 2012, Anil Naidoo opening statement before House of Commons Finance Committee testifying on Bill C-38, the Conservative government’s Omnibus Budget Implementation Bill termed the ‘Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Bill’

Good evening, I want to thank the committee for inviting us to present.

My name is Anil Naidoo and I am here on behalf of the Council of Canadians, an organization which is over 25 years old with tens of thousands of members across every province and territory and with chapters in almost 80 communities across the country.

We take no corporate or government money and are therefore able to speak independently; in the interests of our members and in the broader public interest, as we see it.

The Council’s campaigns are focused on water, trade, public health care, energy as well as sometimes carrying forward our members concerns around issues of democracy and social programs.

Right now our Chairperson, Maude Barlow, is traveling around the Great Lakes holding town halls to protect this most precious body of water and we are simultaneously hosting a mining justice conference in Vancouver.

We have held meetings across the country on the Canada EU Free Trade Agreement, on Medicare, on bottled water, on many issues of concern to Canadians and our members.

Personally I am highly focused on the issue of water and want to note that Canada had an important breakthrough on Tuesday when this government recognized the human right to water and sanitation at the United Nations Rio+20 negotiations. This was long overdue and we are now focused on implementation.

The Council has been advocating for the human right to water for over the last 10 years, both internationally as well as pressing successive Canadian governments at home. We are pleased to have been part of the campaign to get the UN to recognize the human right to water and Canada joining the international community is clearly positive.

Recognizing the human right to water is in the public interest, but I am here to say that those parts of Bill C-38 that deal with water are clearly not.

This bill contains amendments to acts related to Environmental Assessment, Fisheries, Parks, Navigable Waters not to mention cuts to front line programs at Environment Canada and decades-long monitoring programs studying the health of our lakes, effluent-monitoring and water-use efficiency.

I know that others, including former Progressive Conservative Minister Tom Siddon, have presented many of these concerns to you already so let me suggest that as Members of Parliament, what this process is asking you to do is untenable.

To try and assess, in a matter of mere hours, the impacts of profound changes to 70 acts of parliament, which is contained in these 420 pages is daunting, but it is even more complicated than this – each paragraph impacts whole laws which are themselves massively complex.

We should not expect members of one committee to be asked to pass judgement on whether these changes are in the best interests of Canadians?

In your situation, I would appreciate more time before making such a major decision regarding these myriad acts and changes. Even a very short bill of a few paragraphs, such Bill C-36 will have a full review.

We all know that in one form or another majority government get bills passed, this is not the issue. What is at issue is whether members of parliament, including Conservative members get the time to grapple with the issues, suggest constructive changes and are confident when they vote that they are representing all of their constituents.

This ultimately goes to Canadians being able to have confidence in our system of government. Right now people are losing confidence in politics and I believe the reactions you are seeing to Bill C-38 are only going to build if there is no political solution to address our concerns about this challenge to our democratic institutions.

Our system is based on convention and tradition and I believe that this bill, while legal according to the letter of the law, does challenge the spirit of our parliamentary system.

I also want to address the framing of this bill, I believe that if we are truly focused on ‘Jobs, Growth and Long Term Prosperity’, we must be focused on the environment as the foundation of a healthy economy and society.

Canadian environmental legislation is not frivolous, it was deemed necessary by previous members of parliament and governments. The reality is that the threats to our environment are increasingly enhanced due to industrialization and technology, not diminished, and removing critical checks and monitoring at this moment is very ill-advised.

I am asking you to send this piece of legislation back and ask for more time and thought to be put into the implications. This is not only about our democracy and our environment; it is also about future generations and the kind of Canada we want to leave to our children.

Bill C-38 represents an unacceptable level of centralization of control and removal of checks and balances. The range of groups allied against it should give the government pause. CARP is speaking out, health care professionals, archivists, charitable organizations, environmental groups, arts groups, public servants, former ministers and we at the Council of Canadians add our voice strongly to that growing list.

We can do better and it can start with the members of this committee asking for the leeway to fully vette this bill. If Canadians do not have confidence in their democracy then what choices are left to ensure accountability?

- - - - -

WATCH THIS!! Weir faces McCarthyism (7 videos)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkWOfOqS4Ms

Published on May 31, 2012 by weirteam

Erin Weir is testifying in front of a Canadian Parliamentary Committee when Conservative MP Randy Hoback (Prince Albert, SK) attacks him with lines right out of the McCarthy Witch-hunts.

Category: News & Politics

Tags: ErinWeir
License: Standard YouTube License

- - - - - -


Canada Declares Support for Human Right to Water: Now is the time for action, says Council of Canadians

http://canadians.org/media/water/2012/30-May-12.html

MEDIA RELEASE For Immediate Release May 30, 2012

After years of national and international pressure, the Canadian government finally signalled that it will recognize the human right to water and sanitation. The Council of Canadians, Canada’s largest social justice advocacy organization, has campaigned for more than a decade to ensure the human right to water, and to convince past and present Conservative and Liberal governments to accept Canada’s international legal obligations.

As recently as last month, Canada was isolated in the Rio+20 negotiations as the only country to publicly claim there is no legal basis for the right and call for its deletion. This position was untenable, however, almost two years after the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution recognizing the right (GA Res. A/64/292) followed by three subsequent confirming Human Rights Council resolutions.

Maude Barlow, National Chairperson of the Council of Canadians and a former UN Senior Advisor on Water to the President of the General Assembly, says “It took unprecedented pressure to get this government to change its position, and the shift is a good thing, but words are not enough. We need actions, and the government’s actions directly contradict respect for the human right to water.”

According to Barlow, the recent omnibus Bill C-38 is evidence that this government does not respect the human right to water: “The changes to the Fisheries Act, Parks Canada, environmental assessments, and decades-long programs of environmental monitoring, as well as many more water-related cuts contained in the over 400 pages of C-38, aren’t compatible with the right to water.”

The Council of Canadians is calling on the government to reconsider those initiatives in Bill C-38 with devastating impacts on nature and communities across Canada, and put in place a plan to implement the human right to water. The Council will be presenting at the federal Finance Committee Hearings on Bill C-38 tomorrow at 5pm.

The Council has consistently asked Canadian governments to show their commitment to water by implementing a national water act including a domestic plan of action on the human right to water. The Council of Canadians looks forward to the government providing a clear plan of what it intends to do to meet its international and domestic obligations with regard to the human right to water and sanitation.

– 30 –

For media inquiries:

Dylan Penner, Media Officer, Council of Canadians, (613) 795-8685, dpenner@canadians.org
Twitter: @CouncilOfCDNs, Facebook

The War of 1812 and the Surrender of 2012

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/elizabe ... ender-2012


BY ELIZABETH MAY

JUNE 2, 2012

It always struck me as a bit odd, from when I first heard it heralded in the 2011 Speech from the Throne, that Canada was to have a major celebration for the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812. It got more intriguing when the detail was unveiled that we were to spend $28 million in such celebrations, in a year when the budget was described as working toward deficit reduction.

Many commentators have noticed Stephen Harper's tendency to wrap himself in the flag - to adopt a jingoism and patriotic voice more often associated with a southern accent.

I am very comfortable with language about valuing Canada. I love Canada. No doubt about it. I consider myself a patriot. In fact, ever since receiving the honour of being made an Officer of the Order of Canada, I have taken the words of "O Canada" very seriously indeed. "We stand on guard for thee" is personal. And I tend to see it in terms of standing on guard for wilderness and ecosystems and future generations, which means standing on guard for environmental science and laws and policy.

But not until the details of 420 pages of C-38 came to light did I realize that Stephen Harper is doing something extraordinary for the 200th Anniversary of the War of 1812. That flag he has wrapped himself in is a white flag. He is surrendering.

How else to explain that 200 years after protecting the sovereignty of the land that is now Canada and ensuring it was not subsumed by our southern neighbour, we are passing legislation to allow US law enforcement agents onto Canadian territory to enforce US laws. What would Laura Secord have made of that plot? Had she discovered it with her wandering cow, would she have turned Stephen Harper in?

Be a Hero, Stop the Budget Bill

http://heroes.leadnow.ca/events/randy-h ... albert-sk/

Each rally is coordinated by a volunteer host, and while each will be a little different, the core of each action is simple: we’ll gather at Conservative MP offices, and support locations across the country when there are no nearby Conservative MPs, and take a photo with a banner that says: “Be a Hero, Stop the Budget Bill.”

Each family friendly action will range in size from a few friends to a few hundred people, and give you a chance to stand with people who share many of your hopes and concerns for our country. If you like, we encourage you to bring signs that express your reason for standing against the Federal Budget Bill.

The default time for these actions is 5:30PM, local time, so they take place a few hours before Casseroles Night in Canada. Participants and organizers are welcome to combine the spirit of these pro-democracy demonstrations.

- - - - -

RALLY: Prince Albert, SK

Randy Hoback, MP

Tell Randy Hoback: “Be a Hero, Stop the Budget Bill.”

Gathering Time: Wednesday, June 13th, 2012 @ 05:30 PM

Member of Parliament: Randy Hoback (Conservative)

Notice: We are currently looking for assistance with organizing this event in your community.

Address:
137-15th Street East, Prince Albert SK, S6V 1G1

- - - - - -

Why “13 Heroes?”

While the opposition parties step up their efforts to slow down and split apart the Federal Budget Bill, Conservative MPs are under intense pressure to pass the bill from Harper and his cabinet. It’s our job to counter that pressure, and call on them to represent their constituents and a majority of Canadians by stopping this bill, splitting it and starting over.

1.The Opposition parties are already united against the Budget Bill, and, by working together, 13 Conservative MPs can make sure that Harper and his cabinet have to change plans or lose the support of the majority of votes in Parliament they need to pass the Budget Bill.

2.We will shine a spotlight on the choices being made by individual Conservative MPs, and focus the national conversation onto the fact that concern about this Bill reaches all the way across the political spectrum.

3.Finally, we will highlight the fact that our representatives have become increasingly powerless to represent their constituents in Ottawa, and kick-start a much needed debate about the need for democratic reforms and the opportunity for MPs to reclaim some independence.

STAND AGAINST THE FEDERAL BUDGET BILL

Canada’s environment laws are in trouble and they need our help!

WHEN: Wednesday, June 13, 5:30 to 6 PM
WHERE: 505 B Nelson Road (off Attridge Dr.) Saskatoon Sk. (Outside the office of Brad Trost, Conservative MP for Saskatoon-Humbolt)

Please come with your neighbours, your friends, some signs, and some pots and pans!

Let’s make our voices heard!

The misnamed Budget Implementation Act, Bill C-38, brings in sweeping changes to Canada’s environmental laws. Fully 30% of the 420 page bill is actually not about the budget at all.

Instead, it attacks environmental legislation, repealing the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and introducing an entirely new approach to environmental assessment. It re-writes the Fisheries Act, The Species at Risk Act, and the Navigable Waters Protection Act. It also repeals the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act, and outright cancels the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy.

This will forever change Canada’s natural environment with devastating effects on our future, and that of our children.

While our MP’s gather in Ottawa for a decisive showdown in Parliament, we’ll rally their home ridings across Canada, to call for 13 “hero” Conservative MPs to work together to stop the bill, split it, and start over.

Organized across Canada by Leadnow.ca

For more info;
Dianne at dianner@hotmail.com
Paula at paulanc@shaw.ca

Sawa speaks against C-38 at rally in Prince Albert

http://canadians.org/blog/?p=15742

by Brent Patterson, Council of Canadians

Date: 14 June, 2012 8:00:30 AM CST

paNOW.com reports, "MP Randy Hoback received another 60 person visit at his home office in Prince Albert Wednesday night. 'As we are here right now they are in Ottawa debating bits and pieces of the Omnibus Bill that we wanted them to separate into sizable pieces and have all the important ones debated in parliament,' said Rick Sawa with the Council of Canadians. 'We’re here to say we don’t agree with that, that there are so many things in that budget that are budgetary; there’s over 70 items that they’re going to sneak through without any debate. We’re here today to say we don’t want that kind of Canada.'"

"This is the second time a group has gathered to protest the Omnibus Budget Bill C-38 in less than two weeks and Sawa said Hoback has yet to make an appearance. 'This is the fourth time we’ve tried to engage Mr. Hoback. We asked him to a debate that he did not come to. We were here for the Crime Omnibus Bill and now we’ve been here twice and we feel he should be answering our questions. We’re his constituents whether we vote for him or not. His job is to represent all of us and we don’t think that he is willing to listen to us,' Sawa said."

"Hoback was in Parliament during the protest and could not be reached for comment, but in a previous response he issued he said the Council of Canadians disagrees with everything the Conservative Party puts fourth. 'The Council in fact, has become nothing more than a mouthpiece of those who advocate against all of the policies undertaken by the Conservative Government,' Hoback wrote. In response, Sawa said it’s simple name calling. 'We’re very concerned about democracy and that’s what we’re all about. He can call us names all he wants and say that we’re NDP. We’ve criticized the NDP, we’ve criticized the Liberals. We criticize anybody that does things that’s very undemocratic and so he says ‘well they just hate conservatives and that’s why they’re here. No matter what we do they’ll be here’ well that’s not true,' Sawa explained."

"In addition to their signs condemning Bill C-38, the group of protesters were also banging pots and and pans. Sawa said this was to show support the students and people in Quebec who are fighting Bill-78, which constricts their right to protest, which is another challenge of democracy, he said. 'It’s all about democracy.'"

To oppose C-38, Council of Canadians chapters have organized protests in front of Conservative MPs across the country; chairperson Maude Barlow wrote an op-ed for the Windsor Star; trade campaigner Stuart Trew wrote an action alert calling for the bill to be split up and for more debate; campaigner Anil Naidoo has presented to the House of Commons finance committee; and we’ve participated in both the ‘Black Out, Speak Out’ web-campaign and in the Leadnow ‘Blackmark Budget Bill’ protests.

For more please see
http://canadians.org/blog/?s=C-38.


To read the paNOW.com article on-line, please go to
http://www.panow.com/node/220821.

QUOTE: “The Council in fact, has become nothing more than a mouthpiece of those who advocate against all of the policies undertaken by the Conservative Government,” Hoback wrote."

The Home Stretch - Bill C-38

From: "Craig Cantin, Outreach Director" <admin@elizabethmaymp.ca>
Subject: The Home Stretch
Date sent: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 18:03:18 -0400

We are heading into the home stretch on Bill C-38, the Environment Devastation Act. 20 to 30 hours of round-the-clock voting will soon begin on 300 amendments put forward by Elizabeth May. These amendments, if passed, would make improvements to this legislation and prevent the gutting or outright removal of key pieces of environmental law.

Ms. May has worked tirelessly since the budget was tabled in March to convince the Harper Conservatives to reconsider what they are doing and rally Canadians to fight this horrendous piece of legislation. No stone has been left unturned in her pursuit of stopping this bill in its tracks, through countless print, radio and TV interviews, via her new website budgetdevastation.ca, through a series of speeches and Points of Order in the House of Commons, and several press conferences.

It's not too late to take action. Go to budgetdevastation.ca, sign the online petition, and let the Harper Conservatives know that this is not a future you want for Canada.

Also, if you have a moment or two, please send Ms. May a note of encouragement as round-the-clock voting begins. You can email her at elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca.

This isn't over, and your ongoing support is greatly appreciated.

Yours sincerely,

Craig Cantin
Outreach Director
Office of Elizabeth May, O.C., M.P.

Voting endlessly oddly appropriate way to protest abuse of Parliament

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/06/13/
andrew-coyne-voting-endlessly-oddly-appropriate-way-to-protest-abuse-of-parliament/

Andrew Coyne Jun 13, 2012 - 6:46 PM ET | Last Updated: Jun 13, 2012 7:26 PM ET

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick

The opposition has lost many of the procedural tools it once had to protest bills like the budget bill.

The House of Commons was to begin voting Wednesday night on several hundred amendments to Bill C-38, the 425-page monster known as the omnibus budget implementation bill. The voting was expected to go on all night and all day Thursday.

Viewed one way, the whole thing is quite silly. Given the government´s majority, none of the amendments is likely to pass, nor is the bill itself in any danger of defeat. Viewed another way, however, this is an important moment. For the first time since the last election, the opposition is putting up a serious fight against the abuses this government has visited upon Parliament: not only the omnibus bill, which repeals, amends or introduces more than 60 different pieces of legislation, but the repeated, almost routine curtailing of debate by means of "time allocation"; the failures of oversight, misstating of costs, and abdication of responsibility in the F-35 purchase; and the refusal to provide basic information on spending to Parliament or the Parliamentary Budget Officer - to say nothing of the stonewalling, prorogations and other indignities of the minority years.

- - - - SNIP - - -

What´s the point? Once, as in the famous "bell-ringing" episode of 1982, the point would have been to hold up parliamentary business until the government relented: not on the substance of the bill, which a duly elected government is entitled to pass, but on the principle that the bill should be split, that Parliament is entitled to vote on each of its several major parts separately, and to give each the kind of informed scrutiny and debate it warrants. Again, that is not only in the opposition´s interests, or even Parliament´s, but the nation´s: it makes for better legislation.

But the opposition has lost many of the procedural tools it once had to protest in this way. It can delay a bill´s passage, not prevent it, and then only for a day or so, after the Speaker´s ruling earlier this week consolidating several amendments into single votes. So the fight now is not to block the bill but to make a point: to bloody the government´s nose, to arouse public opinion and, it is hoped, deter the government from acting in a similarly high-handed fashion in future. That strikes me as well worth trying. Obstructing Parliament, even for a day, is not ordinarily to be encouraged, and is rarely good politics. But when a government has abused its powers as regularly and as grotesquely as this one, it forfeits the benefit of the doubt.

The question is what happens next. We are a long way from the next election, and it´s not clear anyone is paying much attention. Suppose they are: Parliament will rise for the summer before long, and whatever damage the government may have sustained in the short run will be forgotten. Certainly it would be hard to argue the Conservatives paid much of a price for their past misdeeds: given a chance to punish them at the last election, the public instead returned them with a majority. Little wonder that the Finance minister is already advertising his intent to bring forth another omnibus bill in the fall. The precedents thus set, we can look forward to a future in which Parliament would be reduced to two votes of consequence per year - one to rubber-stamp the government´s spring agenda, a second to cover the fall.

This is how it happens. This is how it has happened: the more powers government acquires at the expense of Parliament, the harder it is for Parliament to resist still further encroachments, or even to recall why it might. And if somebody doesn´t stop it, somewhere, this is how it will continue.

It cannot count on appealing to public sentiment. It has to teach the public to care. It has to teach them why it matters

So this is just a start. As gratifying as it is to find, notwithstanding an earlier column, that Parliament still has some fight in it, it can´t end here. The opposition must be prepared to bloody the government´s nose again, and again, and go on doing so, for as long as these abuses continue. It must be prepared to do so, what is more, in the face of public indifference or even hostility.

It cannot count on appealing to public sentiment. It has to teach the public to care. It has to teach them why it matters.

It´s an oddly appropriate way to protest: by voting, repeatedly, futilely, endlessly. It has become a somewhat degrading ritual - could there be a better symbol of how ruthlessly all parties, not just the Conservatives, whip nearly every vote than the sight of MPs in obedient little rows, standing up and sitting down when they are told? But it can mean something real again.

Postmedia News

Council’s idea would hurt Canadian progress

http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/viewer.aspx

by Randy Hoback, MP

2 Jun 2012 Prince Albert Daily Herald

To the editor:

Re: The story that appeared on Page A1 of Thursday edition of the Daily Herald about a protest planned for anti-democratic omnibus bill [. . . .]

I thank Mr. Sawa for outlining to your readers how his Council is no longer the impartial, pro-Canadian nationalistic organization it once was.

The Council in fact, has become nothing more than a mouthpiece of those who advocate against all of the policies undertaken by the Conservative Government — policies which support the growth and success of Western Canada’s natural resource economy.

The power of one

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/westview/
the-power-of-one-159286365.html

By: Dan Gardner

OTTAWA -- There are 308 members of Parliament. In the House of Commons, Elizabeth May occupies seat number 309.

There couldn't be a better symbol of irrelevance, which seems fitting. May is the sole MP from the Green Party, which lacks official standing in the House. In effect, she is an independent. She has few resources, fewer privileges. She has no place at the table of parliamentary committees. At a time when most MPs no longer have to travel 50 yards from Parliament Hill to become "nobodies," as Pierre Trudeau famously observed, Elizabeth May should be utterly, hopelessly, spectacularly irrelevant.

And yet, look around the House. One of the most prominent and effective MPs occupies seat number 309.

- - - -SNIP - - -

Traditionally, in the Westminster system, all MPs are equals, each having been selected by the voters of a riding to represent them in Parliament. Even the prime minister is merely "first among equals," having been elected to Parliament in the same way as the others and depending on their continued support to remain head of government.

Of course this picture is complicated by parties, which have always existed in the Westminster system, in one form or another, and have always exerted control over MPs, of varying degree. But the existence of parties doesn't change the fundamentals, which is why, traditionally, party affiliation didn't appear on ballots next to the candidates' names. That changed in the late 1960s. And that change meant Elections Canada needed to confirm a candidate actually is the party's representative. So it required party leaders to sign nomination papers.

It seemed like a minor procedural change. It wasn't. "That was the first bludgeon party leaders got to use to keep his or her party members in line," May notes. The decades since have seen a steady decline in the ability of MPs to think and speak freely, leading to the current reality where mindless obedience and witless partisanship are the norm and a member of Parliament who simply exercises her judgment, as she was elected to do, is a startling aberration.

May plans to introduce a private member's bill that would replace the party leader's signature on candidates' nomination papers with those of the local riding executive. It's wildly unlikely it will pass. The party leaders will see to that. But the fact May, who is herself a party leader, would try to curtail the power of party leaders, at least offers a flicker of hope the Westminster system may not be entirely dead.

Which is an impressive accomplishment for someone in seat number 309.

Dan Gardner is a columnist
for the Ottawa Citizen.
Postmedia News

Driven to Dismantle Community

http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2012/06/18/Di ... Community/
?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=180612

Bill C-38 barrels over belief in a healthy commons. How to wrest back the wheel.

By Murray Dobbin, Today, TheTyee.ca

Of all the appalling abuses of democracy and ruthless dismantling of the country represented by Bill C-38, one stands out of as representative of the right-wing dystopia that Stephen Harper has in store for the 99 per cent. And that is the mentality and ideology behind the draconian changes to Employment Insurance. This is particularly true of the changes affecting seasonal workers in the Atlantic region, but in general the whole underlying principle that workers should simply move, holus bolus, to where the jobs are is an assault on the very nature of community.

Of course, it is not news that neo-liberalism -- obsessed with the individual, competition and the market -- destroys community. Margaret Thatcher made it explicit by stating "There is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families." All happily selling their labour and buying stuff. And that's all there is -- no cooperation, no compassion, no equity, no sharing.

Of course Thatcher's absurdist declaration was aspirational. This was the model of the world she hoped to create, though to a depressing degree she was successful. But the strong resistance to Harper's gutting of EI demonstrates that Canadians know both that community and society do exist and that they are worth saving. Even the pro-business premiers of the Atlantic region came out swinging against the changes because they know their communities have for decades been maintained on part-time seasonal work. Indeed one of the very best features of EI was that it recognized this and was adapted to make such communities viable.

Yet in the decades since the free trade deals were first signed we have gradually stopped talking about community and have perhaps forgotten just how critical it is to human health and indeed what it is to be human. The hyper-competitiveness promoted by neo-liberalism and the politicians it has captured is completely at odds with our social natures. Community -- the commons -- is at the core of what we have lost and reclaiming it will be at the core of any successful social movement that halts and reverses the current trends.

A town to emulate

I was reminded of this when I read Malcolm Gladwell's remarkable book Outliers. The book is a compelling look at human achievements that fall outside normal experience. The first chapter is about Roseto, a U.S. town founded in the late 1800s by the inhabitants of an Italian town of the same name. In the late 1950s the ethnically homogeneous town caught the attention of doctor Stephen Wolf who was told by a colleague that there wasn't a single man under 65 in the town who suffered from heart disease -- an almost unbelievable finding given that at the time heart disease was the leading cause of death of men under 65.

Wolf's subsequent investigation of this phenomenon found a classic outlier: a community so remarkably healthy that it fell completely outside the norm for similar communities in the area. It showed not only low rates of heart disease, but a 30 to 35 per cent lower rate of death from other causes. It had no suicides, no alcoholism, no drug addiction, very little crime and no one on welfare. Wolf, with the help of a sociologist, slowly eliminated possible explanations: diet, genetics, geography.

What explained Roseto was Roseto itself. They observed "how the Rosetans visited one another, stopping to chat in Italian on the street, say, or cooking for one another in their backyards. They learned about the extended family clans that underlay the town's social structures. ...They counted 22 separate civic organizations in a town of under 2,000 people. They picked up on the particularly egalitarian ethos of the community which discouraged the wealthy from flaunting their success and helped the unsuccessful obscure their failures."

Roseto was healthy because its inhabitants "had created a powerful, protective social structure capable of insulating them from the pressures of the modern world." We could do worse than to look at Roseto of the 1950s and '60s when we start to rebuild community in Canada, because if we want to halt the march to a competitive, mean-spirited and selfish existence for our children, this is the vision we have to keep in our minds.

Reversing the Great Dismantling

Reclaiming what we have lost will not be easy. The policies already implemented by the anti-governments of the day present huge barriers to such a project. Studies of work-life balance suggest that most working people in Canada don't have anything resembling family life, let alone time for engaging in community. Over the past 20 years of culture war against the commons we have acquiesced to the notion that we are here to serve the economy. The consistent line of the Harper government in forcing through its budget implementation bill is that it must be passed as quickly as possible in the interests of the economy. Literally everything the government does -- from EI changes to OAS revisions to gutting environmental laws -- is dedicated to the economy. This is what Canada has been reduced to.

Corporations, of course, promote this ideology and take advantage of it. A small example of this revealed itself in my community, Powell River, when our hedge-fund owned paper mill, Catalyst Paper, presented the city with a cheque for half the taxes it owed, declaring that it would only pay for the specific services it actually used -- presumably roads, fire and police protection, and water. In other words all the other services which fulfilled its employees needs -- recreation, culture, health, education -- had nothing to do with them. For Catalyst, like the Harper government, one may infer that there is no such thing as community.

The example of Roseto has lessons for progressives fighting the gradual dismantling of the country. It suggests that we need to rethink the model of social change we have been using for over 40 years -- single issue organizations, sometimes referred to as issue "silos," organizations fighting for Medicare, child care, the environment, against poverty, for affordable secondary education -- it's a long list.

This model of social change organizing was formed in the early 1970s at a time when governments actually believed in democratic governance and genuinely engaged with civil society groups. Those groups not only pressured governments on policy matters, they offered expert advice on the social policy areas they focused on. It was by no means a perfect relationship, but there was a genuine dialogue. But today such groups' interventions are like one hand clapping. Governments are dismantling what previous governments built -- they don't want advice and unless you're strong enough to actually threaten their power they have no intention of responding to even majority opinion.

I am not suggesting that single issue organizations have been ineffective. Far from it, had they not been active things would be immeasurably worse and Medicare, for example, would be well down the road to privatization. But it is clear that these groups are now, for the most part, shadows of their former selves, exhausted from their efforts to have an impact on the Harper (and other) governments and are finding it more and more difficult to sign up members and motivate them to act. The major exceptions are environmental groups, with the Enbridge pipeline issue as the obvious example.

Coalitions need leaders

The main response of single issue organizations to the neo-liberal reality has been the creation of coalitions -- an effort to create a broad social movement by getting all groups to join in battles that affect all their concerns. The anti-free trade Action Canada Network of the late 1980s was the most important and most successful. But the initiators of the ACN, the churches and labour, have been virtually silent for years. With labour unwilling to lead and fund coalitions, their future is in doubt.

Reclaiming the commons through a broad-based movement will not be easy, but two momentous developments illustrate the need for reinventing social change movements: Occupy and the Quebec rebellion. Both have something extraordinary and potentially transformational in common: they see themselves as creating community and are marked not just by anger at injustice and inequality but by an outpouring of joy at discovering that newly created community.

The Occupy movement's creating of new communities (with libraries, day care, kitchens and medical clinics at their sites) is well known -- so, too, is the nurturing positive spirit of the movement. The Quebec 'Casseroles' rebellion (named after the nightly, spirited banging of pots in communities across Quebec) is imbued with that same spirit. According to journalist Ethan Cox, "It is not a movement of anger, of rage or of hate. It is a movement of love, of community, and of hope. People who would be alone in their houses watching TV take to the streets and march with neighbours they never knew they had."

What is the Quebec protest movement trying to achieve? This video was made to explain.
Generation Wise from Bis Films on Vimeo.

http://vimeo.com/43330466

If you want to know how governments like Harper's authoritarian regime will be decisively dispatched to history's dustbin you need look no further than these two movements. They reveal not only the strength of their community-based moral imperative, but the weakness of politics as usual. For decades progressive politics has mimicked the individualistic consumer society which is its greatest barrier to success. We do politics like we do our job or our recreation or family life -- separate from and too often unrelated to other aspects of our lives. Because of the peculiar infrastructure of civil society we devote time to "social change" -- going to meetings, writing checks, going to demos, writing letters -- as if it were a job. Our time spent trying to make the world a better place parallels the political silos we choose to devote time to. But it doesn't build community.

Single issue organizations will have a role to play for a long while yet and that role is still important in fighting back against the destruction of democratic governance. But it is now largely a rearguard action against powerful and ruthless forces who are committed to dismantling what we have built. We need new activist models, rooted in community and replicating Occupy's and Casseroles's energy and vitality, if we are actually to build the world we know is possible.

Murray Dobbin regularly contributes his State of the Nation column to The Tyee and Rabble.ca.

Beyond Harper: Rebuilding community

http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/06/bey ... -community

By Murray Dobbin | June 18, 2012

Of all the appalling abuses of democracy and ruthless dismantling of the country represented by Bill C-38 one stands out of as representative of the right wing dystopia that Stephen Harper has in store for the 99 per cent. And that is the mentality and ideology behind the draconian changes to EI. This is particularly true of the changes affecting seasonal workers in the Atlantic region but in general the whole underlying principle that workers should simply move, holus bolus, to where the jobs are is an assault on the very nature of community.

Of course, it is not news that neo-liberalism - obsessed with the individual, competition and the market - destroys community. Margaret Thatcher made it explicit: "...there is no such thing as society. There are individual men and women, and there are families." All happily selling their labour and buying stuff. And that's all there is - no cooperation, no compassion, no equity no sharing.

Of course Thatcher's absurdist declaration was aspirational - this was the model of the world she hoped to create though to a depressing degree she was successful. But the strong resistance to Harper's gutting of EI demonstrates that Canadians know both that community and society do exist and that they are worth saving. Even the pro-business premiers of the Atlantic region came out swinging against the changes because they know their communities have for decades been maintained on part-time seasonal work. Indeed one of the very best features of EI was that it recognized this and was adapted to make such communities viable.

Neo-liberalism vs. the commons

Yet in the decades since the free trade deals were first signed we have gradually stopped talking about community and have perhaps forgotten just how critical it is to human health and indeed what it is to be human. The hyper-competitiveness promoted by neo-liberalism and the politicians it has captured is completely at odds with our social natures. Community - the commons - is at the core of what we have lost and reclaiming it will be at the core of any successful social movement that halts and reverses the current trends.

I was reminded of this when I read Malcolm Gladwell's remarkable book Outliers. The book is a compelling look at human achievements that fall outside normal experience. The first chapter is about Roseto, a US town founded in the late 1800s by the inhabitants of an Italian town of the same name. In the late 1950s the ethnically homogeneous town caught the attention of doctor Stephen Wolf who was told by a colleague that there wasn't a single man under 65 in the town who suffered from heart disease - an almost unbelievable finding given that at the time heart disease was the leading cause of death of men under 65.

Wolf's subsequent investigation of this phenomenon found a classic outlier: a community so remarkably healthy that it fell completely outside the norm for similar communities in the area. It showed not only low rates of heart disease but a 30-35 per cent lower rate of death from other causes; it had no suicides, no alcoholism, no drug addiction, very little crime and no one on welfare. Wolf with the help of a sociologist slowly eliminated possible explanations: diet, genetics, geography.

What explained Roseto, was Roseto itself. They observed "..how the Rosetans visited one another, stopping to chat in Italian on the street, say, or cooking for one another in their back yards. They learned about the extended family clans that underlay the town's social structures. ...They counted twenty-two separate civic organizations in a town of under two thousand people. They picked up on the particularly egalitarian ethos of the community which discouraged the wealthy from flaunting their success and helped the unsuccessful obscure their failures."

Roseto was healthy because its inhabitants "...had created a powerful, protective social structure capable of insulating them from the pressures of the modern world." We could do worse than to look at Roseto of the 1950s and '60s when we start to rebuild community in Canada because if we want to halt the march to a competitive, mean-spirited and selfish existence for our children, this is the vision we have to keep in our minds.

Harper continues culture war against the commons

Reclaiming what we have lost will not be easy. The policies already implemented by the anti-governments of the day present huge barriers to such a project. Studies of work-life balance suggest that most working people in Canada don't have anything resembling family life let alone time for engaging in community. Over the past twenty years of culture war against the commons we have acquiesced to the notion that we are here to serve the economy. The consistent line of the Harper government in forcing through its budget implementation bill is that is must be passed as quickly as possible in the interests of the economy. Literally everything the government does - from EI changes, to OAS revisions to gutting environmental laws - is dedicated to the economy. This is what Canada has been reduced to.

Corporations, of course, promote this ideology and take advantage of it. A small example of this revealed itself in my community, Powell River, when our hedge-fund owned paper mill, Catalyst Paper, presented the city with a check for half the taxes it owed declaring that it would only pay for the specific services it actually used: presumably roads, fire and police protection, and water. In other words all the other services which fulfilled its employees needs - recreation, culture, health, education - had nothing to do with them. For Catalyst, like the Harper government, there is no such thing as community.

The example of Roseto has lessons for progressives fighting the gradual dismantling of the country. It suggests that we need to rethink the model of social change we have been using for over forty years - single issue organizations, sometimes referred to as issue "silos," organizations fighting for Medicare, child care, the environment, against poverty, for affordable secondary education - it's a long list.

The limitations of single issue organizing

This model of social change organizing was formed in the early 1970s at a time when governments actually believed in democratic governance and genuinely engaged with civil society groups. Those groups not only pressured governments on policy matters they offered expert advice on the social policy areas they focused on. It was by no means a perfect relationship but there was a genuine dialogue. But today such groups' interventions are like one hand clapping. Governments are dismantling what previous governments built - they don't want advice and unless you're strong enough to actually threaten their power they have no intention of responding to even majority opinion.

I am not suggesting that single issue organizations have been ineffective. Far from it, had they not been active things would be immeasurably worse and Medicare, for example, would be well down the road to privatization. But it is clear that these groups are now, for the most part shadows of their former selves, exhausted from their efforts to have an impact on the Harper (and other) governments and are finding it more and more difficult to sign up members and motivate them to act. The major exceptions are environmental groups with the Enbridge Pipeline issue as the obvious example.

The main response of single issue organizations to the neo-liberal reality has been the creation of coalitions - an effort to create a broad social movement by getting all groups to join in battles that affect all their concerns. The anti-free trade Action Canada Network of the late 1980s was the most important and most successful. But the initiators of the ACN, the churches and labour, have been virtually silent for years. With labour unwilling to lead and fund coalitions their future is in doubt.

Occupy and the Quebec student rebellion

Reclaiming the commons through a broad-based movement will not be easy but two momentous developments illustrate the need for reinventing social change movements: Occupy and the Quebec rebellion. Both have something extraordinary and potentially transformational in common: they see themselves as creating community and are marked not just by anger at injustice and inequality but by an outpouring of joy at discovering that newly created community.

The Occupy movement's creating of new communities (with libraries, day care, kitchens and medical clinics at their sites) is well known - so, too, is the nurturing positive spirit of the movement. The Quebec 'Casseroles' rebellion (named after the nightly, spirited banging of pots in communities across Quebec) is imbued with that same spirit. According to journalist and rabble contributor Ethan Cox "..it is not a movement of anger, of rage or of hate. It is a movement of love, of community, and of hope. People who would be alone in their houses watching TV take to the streets and march with neighbours they never knew they had."

If you want to know how governments like Harper's authoritarian regime will be decisively dispatched to history's dustbin you need look no further than these two movements. They reveal the not only the strength of their community-based moral imperative but the weakness of politics as usual.

For decades progressive politics has mimicked the individualistic consumer society which is its greatest barrier to success. We do politics like we do our job or our recreation or family life - separate from and too often unrelated to other aspects of our lives. Because of the peculiar infrastructure of civil society we devote time to "social change" - going to meetings, writing checks, going to demos, writing letters - as if it were a job. Our time spent trying to make the world a better place parallels the political silos we choose to devote time to. But it doesn't build community.

Single issue organizations will have a role to play for a long while yet and that role is still important in fighting back against the destruction of democratic governance. But it is now largely a rearguard action against powerful and ruthless forces who are committed to dismantling what we have built. We need new activist models, rooted in community and replicating Occupy's and Casseroles's energy and vitality, if we are actually to build the world we know is possible.

- - - -

Murray Dobbin is a guest senior contributing editor for rabble.ca, and has been a journalist, broadcaster, author and social activist for 40 years. He writes rabble's bi-weekly State of the Nation column, which is also found at The Tyee

ARNEY: C-38, You and Ms. May

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jeremy Arney <iamjema@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:45 AM
To: "Glover, Shelly" shelly.glover@parl.gc.ca
Cc: May Elizabeth <Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca>, "Albas, Dan" <Dan.Albas@parl.gc.ca>, "Cannan, Ron" <ron.cannan@parl.gc.ca>, "Duncan, John" <john.duncan@parl.gc.ca>, "Fast, Ed" <ed.fast@parl.gc.ca>, "Findlay, Kerry-Lynne" <Kerry-Lynne.Findlay@parl.gc.ca>, "Grewal, Nina" <nina.grewal@parl.gc.ca>, "Harris, Richard" <richard.harris@parl.gc.ca>, "Hiebert, Russ" <russ.hiebert@parl.gc.ca>, "Kamp, Randy" <randy.kamp@parl.gc.ca>, "Lunney, James" <james.lunney@parl.gc.ca>, "Mayes, Colin" <colin.mayes@parl.gc.ca>, "McLeod, Cathy" <cathy.mcleod@parl.gc.ca>, "Moore, James" <james.moore@parl.gc.ca>, "Saxton, Andrew" <andrew.saxton@parl.gc.ca>, "Strahl, Mark" <Mark.Strahl@parl.gc.ca>, "Warawa, Mark" <mark.warawa@parl.gc.ca>, "Weston, John" <john.weston@parl.gc.ca>, "Wilks, David" <David.Wilks@parl.gc.ca>, "Wong, Alice" <alice.wong@parl.gc.ca>, "Young, Wai" <Wai.Young@parl.gc.ca>, "Zimmer, Bob" <Bob.Zimmer@parl.gc.ca>, "Harper. Stephen" <pm@pm.gc.ca>, "Flaherty, Jim" <jim.flaherty@parl.gc.ca>, "Clement, Tony" <tony.clement@parl.gc.ca>, "Oliver, Joe" <Joe.Oliver@parl.gc.ca>, "Van Loan, Peter" <peter.vanloan@parl.gc.ca>, "Ashfield, Keith" <keith.ashfield@parl.gc.ca>, "Mulcair, Thomas" <thomas.mulcair@parl.gc.ca>, "Davies, Libby" <libby.davies@parl.gc.ca>, "Cullen, Nathan" <nathan.cullen@parl.gc.ca>, "Leslie, Megan" <megan.leslie@parl.gc.ca>, "Nash, Peggy" <Peggy.Nash@parl.gc.ca>, "Rae, Bob" <bob.rae@parl.gc.ca>, "Garneau, Marc" <marc.garneau@parl.gc.ca>, "Savoie, Denise" <denise.savoie@parl.gc.ca>, "Garrison, Randall" <Randall.Garrison@parl.gc.ca>, "Crowder, Jean" <jean.crowder@parl.gc.ca>, Times Colonist <letters@timescolonist.com>, Saanich News <editor@saanichnews.com>, Peninsula Review <editor@peninsulanewsreview.com>, Island Tides <news@islandtides.com>, Gulf Islands Driftwood <news@gulfislands.net>, The Ottawa Citizen <letters@ottawacitizen.com>, Globe & Mail <letters@globeandmail.ca>, Toronto Star <city@thestar.ca>, CPAC <comments@cpac.ca>, cbcnews@cbc.ca, letters@freepress.mb.ca

Subject: C-38, You and Ms. May


Ms. Glover,

In response to Ms. May’s speech on Bill C-38 on June 11 (beginning at 1255):

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/
Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=1&DocId=5667054#Int-7643101


this ( beginning at 1305) is what you said.:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/
Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=1&DocId=5667054#Int-7643110



Mrs. Shelly Glover (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, CPC):


Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague across the way for her passionate plea. However, I would like to say on behalf of the government that this is not something that was put together at the last moment. This is something we have been working on for many years, so I would hope the member would take much of that into consideration.

However, I do have a couple of questions for my hon. colleague. First and foremost, she spoke at length about many of the environmental assessment measures, et cetera, but I am interested in knowing, on behalf of her riding, how she feels about the integrated cross-border law enforcement operations act. It is important to her riding. Her constituents are waiting to hear from her on this measure. Therefore, I would like her to address it. So far, it has been very well received from all the stakeholders.

The last question I would have for her is this. Is she considering a run for the Liberal leadership given that its members seem to have found their sea legs under her guidance and leadership? I am just curious to know if she has considered it.

- - - - -

Firstly, for you to have openly admitted that this wholesale destruction of Canada has been in the making for years and yet not one word of it in the last election, simply shows the incredible dishonesty and duplicity of the Corporate Party of Canada (CPC) and particularly the leader. For a party which claims to be open and transparent, and for ALL its caucus members to stand and support these actions shows the total lack of conscience and lack of ability or desire to represent their constituents.

We all know that Harper hates Canada and wants desperately to destroy it, we do not know why nor do we know why the CPC caucus feels the same way. Is it a religious thing? I actually feel sorry for Harper’s children who will have this yoke to bear if the family stays in the Canada he so hates.

When you then asked about the new act being brought into force in a budget implementation act concerning cross border law enforcement, you opened the door to several things.

Why was an act concerning international law enforcement brought into being in a Budget implementation act and what does it have to do with the budget?

Having crossed the Emerson/Noyes border many times in a commercial truck, I can assure you that this was the worst place to cross on the entire border and I can see why you might be concerned.

Here in Victoria, Esquimalt Juan de Fuca and Saanich-Gulf Islands (which in case you didn't know are on the south of Vancouver Island BC), we on the other hand have an excellent rapport with the US Customs, and the US Immigration services as we have their officers living here on the Island to service various ferry routes between Washington State and Vancouver Island. We live in harmony with the USA here Ms. Glover, something not known in Winnipeg.

I might also ask you why you would want to attack Canadian businesses close to the border by encouraging cross border shopping through increased amounts allowed back into Canada in shorter times?

I am sure your fellow CPC members from Vancouver, Surrey and White Rock are delighted that so many of their businesses will be hit by this.

Oooops sorry, forgot, none of you care do you? Job creation in the US is more important.

You claim that this new act is important to those of us in Ms. May’s riding and we are waiting to hear from her on it. How do you know that? If in fact you knew anything at all about this riding you would know that particular piece of CPC sleight of hand is one of the last things on our mind.

Potentially, black oceans, dead and currently diseased or radioactive fish, seniors in poverty, first nations reserve conditions, the attacks on health, lies, deceit and contempt from our so called ‘government’ is what we are concerned about here and none of those has been dealt with in this incredibly damaging and destructive piece of legislation, Ms. Glover; so perhaps you should try looking after your own constituents before you criticize and lecture someone who is finally giving Saanich-Gulf Islands a voice in Ottawa after years of being in the reform/alliance/cpc wilderness.

Jeremy Arney
CAP member and past candidate for SGI
6254a Springlea Rd
Victoria BC V8Z5Z4
778-426-0454