BLOG THIS | blog.thismagazine.ca: October 2008 Archives

York University may find itself embroiled in a strike next week. The strike may be the last resort for teaching assistants, graduate assistants, research assistants, and contract faculty, if negotiations regarding wage increases and job security, among other things, do not prove fruitful. Sadly, the media, with its poor research and resultant inaccuracies, has not been helping the situation.

The Globe and Mail published an article today covering this development but omitted some key facts and, frankly, got others completely wrong. The article says that the Canadian Union of Public Employees, the representative and organizing body for the teaching assistants, graduate assistants, research assistants, and contract faculty, "is seeking a 30-per-cent wage increase".

Yet from a third-party, I obtained an email from the union's Chief Steward, Tyler Shipley, and he wrote this about their wage demands: "we have been clear with the employer that our wage demand - currently 15.6% - is flexible and subject to change". That was 15.6% - not 30. How did the Globe get this wrong? Couldn't they have spoken with any one of the union's representatives for some accurate numbers? The article ends with the line "Union officials did not respond to calls"; perhaps this serves as an answer?

Well, unfortunately, that is simply untrue. Tyler Shipley, in the same email, writes this: "I got a message at 10:00 this morning from the Globe and Mail asking for a comment on negotiations. When I called back at 12:00, no one answered the phone. At 12:15, I noticed this article". Continuing, he says "the union did respond, I phoned the individual reporter myself, but...the Globe and Mail chose not to answer the phone."

More entries on:

October 30, 2008

In conversation with Norman Lofts

Posted by Sarah Gopaul at 08:30 PM ET | Comments (1)

The ninth edition of the Planet in Focus International Environmental Film & Video Festival wrapped this Sunday, having screened over 100 of the world's best films on a wide range of environmental themes and subjects by Canadian and international filmmakers. Awards were handed out prior to the final screening and Norman Lofts was presented with the Canadian Long Form Award for his documentary Michael Schmidt: Organic Hero or Bioterrorist. The film features the Ontario farmer and raw milk activist who is currently making headlines with his legal battle for the right to sell raw milk and the consumer's right to choose. I had a chance to speak with Lofts a few days later.

First point of business was to congratulate him. "Thank you, thank you," Lofts replied humbly. "It was totally unexpected. I was just sitting there. I didn't realize it was going to happen."

One question that had to be asked was did Lofts have a personal interest in Schmidt's story prior to shooting; i.e. is he a raw milk consumer? "No, I'm not a raw milk consumer. I'm not even a milk consumer. I think I'm the best person to make the film because I don't drink milk." Lofts was actually made aware of the issue the way most other Canadians were - he saw the newspaper article detailing the raid on Schmidt's farm by 25-armed police officers. His shock convinced him to follow the story's developments. "I thought I'm just going to start to follow this story with my camera and see how it unfolds, see if there's a real story here. I started to do that... and I could see that [Michael] was a really interesting, charismatic character and that's what you need to make a story work. So I finally approached him and had that first interview about three weeks after the raid."

That was two years ago. "It's going to be an ongoing story for many years before I think Michael can get anywhere near the goal he is trying to reach. And we'll see what happens to him before that: will he end up in jail; will they shutdown his farm? But I really wanted to get out an initial film and documentary about Michael.

"There is a broader story here. In 45 minutes, you can't get into everything. But it is important that people start to think about the source of their food."

An equally important question addressed an element obviously missing from the documentary. Why did Lofts interview several people from the scientific and medical community who were firmly against the consumption of unpasteurized milk but no one from the same community is shown speaking in favour of it? "Well, that's because it's very difficult to find somebody from the medical and government health unit who will talk about raw milk." Lofts explained that even Schmidt's lawyers failed to find anyone, from the U.S. or Canada, willing to testify at his trial in January. The problem is compounded by the lack of financial support for research into the benefits of raw milk.

Lofts is seeking funding to release a sequel to Organic Hero or Bioterrorist, which would encompass Schmidt's trial as well as expand the focus to other issues, such as the summer passing of a law in Quebec that rescinds the 60-day aging period for raw milk cheeses from artisanal producers. "It won't be just another story about the continuing saga of Michael Schmidt."

Lofts is also looking at building on his interest in food documentaries with a more general look at the problems with "sustainable organic nutritious healthy food" or as Michael Pollan says, "real food." With all the recalls and label deception, Lofts poses the question: "Why haven't Canadian consumers turned their backs on industrial food more and embraced real food?"

If you missed Michael Schmidt: Organic Hero or Bioterrorist at Planet in Focus or on CBC Newsworld Tuesday night, "The Lens" will be re-airing it in January, closer to Schmidt's trial date.

More entries on: Film

Obama and NAFTA

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:16 PM ET | Comments (0)

The American Presidential election is coming to a close next tuesday, November 4. Canadians might be watching this election as if it were a tv show - amused, entertained, titillated, yet ultimately detached. But let's not forget just how much our future is wrapped up in the dealings of those south of the border.

Case in point, our economies are very much intertwined at the moment. With the signing of the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993, Canada, the United States, and Mexico, forged a special trade relationship comprising lowered tariffs and, since 1998, the elemination of all tariffs on qualifying goods traded between Canada and the United States. Some of the effects of the agreement include relaxed restrictions on the mobility of workers from the three states; the strengthened role of foreign corporations in domestic affairs; and weakened environmental regulations; and weakened workers unions.

So in light of our growing integration with the United States, and the current election, Paul Cellucci, American ambassador to Canada, thought he would tell us what a Barack Obama administration would mean. He said that if Obama wins, there will be pressure on him "to . . . open up NAFTA and make significant changes. I don't think that's in U.S. interest; I don't think that's in Canadian interest." This would be a "danger" to Canada in Cellucci's view.

What Cellucci fails to understand, or conveniently forgets to mention, is that Canada is deeply apprehensive about NAFTA-as-it-currently-stands. The agreement is still seen as doing more for the United States than for Canada, and a good majority of Canadians feel the agreement should be renegotiated. The kind of renegotiation Cellucci warns of should not be seen as a "danger" to Canada. It's quite obviously an oppurtunity.

More entries on: American Presidential Election

Obama infomercial was puke-tacular TV

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 01:30 PM ET | Comments (5)

On Wednesday night the Obama-Biden ticket broadcast their already infamous "Barack Obama: American Stories" infomercial, above, across seven TV networks simultaneously. Initial ratings indicate 30 million people tuned in. I hope it brings him some votes, because he's obviously the better candidate of the two.

But seriously, folks: what a nakedly manipulative, shamelessly sentimental trough of Hallmark bull-pucky it was. The Amber Waves of Grain swaying in the breeze, the plucky everyfamily filling up at the gas pump, the stoic elders working at Wal-Mart to pay for prescription arthritis drugs. Real people, sure, with real problems that are worthy of the candidate's attention. But the soft-focus, TV-movie-of-the-week production values made the whole thing seem like a promotional video for a nursing home. Ick.

More entries on: American Presidential Election

Random acts of kindness 2.0 with Montreal's Akoha.com

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 12:50 PM ET | Comments (0)

akoha.com logo Today I stumbled across Akoha, a new website/game/social experiment that has recently started in Montreal and is slowly working its way across the land.

Akoha works by turning good deeds into a points-based game. Which sounds horrifying, in a way, but still strikes me as a better grade of electronic past-time than, say, Grand Theft Auto. It works this way: you sign up and receive a deck of instruction cards in the mail. You do the good deeds on the cards and pass them on. The next person repeats the process and so the cards hop around from person to person, spreading tidbits of joy wherever they go. And everyone can follow the cards on their journey through the website. Here's a little comic book that Akhoa has made to explain.

Akoha card

The endearing dorkiness of the whole enterprise really appeals to me. But I can't actually imagine handing these cards out to strangers, myself, although I might give them to a select group of friends. First, like most people, I would find it simply embarrassing to slip one of these to someone I didn't already know. Second, I would worry that the points system would retroactively undermine the altruism of what seems like a spontaneous act by turning the whole thing into a crass transaction.

But on balance, it's an intriguing idea and a nice, socially-aware variant on a chain-letter or Bookcrossing.com. And if it takes a deck of cards and some web-2.0 zeitgeisty social networking to advance what you might hope was just basic human kindness, well, I'll still take it.

More entries on: Interweb

October 29, 2008

Obama and socialism

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 04:13 PM ET | Comments (2)

McCain, Palin, and their Republican acolytes have recently taken to calling Barack Obama a socialist. In making that "charge" (apparently socialism is a very bad thing in the States) they point to Obama's progressive, or punitive, depending on how you look at it, income-tax plan. In his plan, people making more than $250,000 will face increased tax rates. The rest will experience tax cuts. The McCain campaign calls this redistributionist and, therefore, socialist.

There are a few things to keep in mind at this point: graduated taxation is not necessarily socialism. It is, at best, only one of the conditions for socialism. The United States is now and has been for quite a while a country with a graduated income-tax rate. Obama merely wants to increase the top marginal income-tax rate from 35 to 39.6, amounting to an incremental progression from an existing income-tax plan - not a major shift into a totally different economic system.

Finally, McCain and Palin should not be throwing stones. Palin, as Alaska's governor, did nothing but redistribute wealth. Here is the New Yorker's Hendrik Hertzberg on Palin's hypocrisy:

"She is, at the very least, a fellow-traveller of what might be called socialism with an Alaskan face. The state that she governs has no income or sales tax. Instead, it imposes huge levies on the oil companies that lease its oil fields. The proceeds finance the government's activities and enable it to issue a four-figure annual check to every man, woman, and child in the state. One of the reasons Palin has been a popular governor is that she added an extra twelve hundred dollars to this year's check, bringing the per-person total to $3,269."

And when asked in 2000 why people are being penalized for making more money and if this was socialism, McCain responded: "Here's what I really believe: That when you reach a certain level of comfort, there's nothing wrong with paying somewhat more."

That indeed might be what he really feels. Now why can't he bring himself to let the truth out? He knows Obama is not a socialist and, ultimately, he sort of agrees with Obama's plan, if not the specifics. Where's the "Straight Talk Express" now?

More entries on: American Presidential Election

The presidential election is only six days away!

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 11:18 AM ET | Comments (0)

Six days from now, on November 4th, America will decide its president. They will either choose the Democratic nominee, Barack Obama, or the Republican, John McCain. But what would choosing either amount to? Many of us know what the candidates have said they will do as president, but, of course, what one says and what one does are often two different things.

Michael Walzer, the political philosopher and co-editor of Dissent, composed a very helpful list of what, at least, a Barack Obama presidency would mean to international affairs. No more unilateralism; a more pronounced approach to global warming; the probable shut-down of Guantanamo Bay; and European cooperation on common security issues, among other things.

More entries on: American Presidential Election

October 28, 2008

ThisAbility #2: Human Frogger

Posted by Aaron Broverman at 11:08 AM ET | Comments (0)

You are all afraid. I see the fear wherever I go, it's in how you move out of the way of my path, six feet ahead of me, before I'm even remotely close to your personal space. It's in how you carefully shuttle your partner out of harm's way, as I'm coming down the sidewalk. It's also in the relief on your face, as I somehow miss your toes while I navigate through a store.

Scooter I drive an electric, three-wheel, scooter and now I'm nominated for the "Most Likely to Commit Vehicular Bodily Injury Award" in the minds of most biped pedestrians. Even physical contact I actually want to make is perceived as accidental when I'm driving my scooter. When I go for the slightest touch, it's not unusual to hear an "Oh, Sorry," spouted on reflex. (More on "The Sorry Syndrome" next week) People are genuinely surprised that I am actually good at driving, that I made that turn, that I saw them behind me, and that I didn't just plow right into them full bore.

But maybe those people have a point; maybe it makes more sense for me to be a maniac bent on vehicular homicide. There are certainly disabled people of all types who don't deserve to be on the road, people like the 83-year-old woman who ran over this boy.

His mother is calling for regulations. While her suggestion that the scooter's power be cut as soon as we get too close to something, suggests we're all just a giant pile of uncontrollable impulses with zero discretion and judgment, I'm fully behind her call for competency licensing and moderate speed on sidewalks. But people, let's not forget that common sense goes a long way on both the disabled and able-bodied side of the safe scooters equation.

I have a confession to make. Sometimes, when I'm out on the street, I don't see people, I see pylons, and during every "driving test," I'm bound to hit a few. Not literally, but I wouldn't have this feeling, and I wouldn't have to keep it in check for your safety, if I didn't have to deal with so much pedestrian apathy and people were actually aware of their surroundings. I shouldn't have to compensate for reckless stupidity, but I do all the time. Then again, the scooter is electric, so you can't hear me when I'm coming. Plus, the horn doesn't sound like a horn, it sounds like I'm flatlining on an operating table. Like I said, two sides; but maybe if both the able-bodied and disabled populations worked a little harder for each other, we could both share the sidewalk without fear or frustration.

Aaron is a freelance journalist living in Toronto. His work has appeared in Financial Post Business, Investment Executive Newspaper, and TV Week Magazine, along with Askmen.com. He is a regular contributor to Abilities Magazine and is currently plotting a weekly web comic called GIMP, with artist Jon Duguay, about a handicap school bus driver who wakes up after a crash to find he's the last able-bodied person on earth — and he's being hunted.

More entries on: ThisAbility

October 27, 2008

Soldiers and terrorists atwitter

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 03:33 PM ET | Comments (1)

The global War on Terror has a new front: Twitter! The American military has now taken up the idea of tracking the Twitter accounts of terrorists in the hopes they can intercept their moves and whereabouts. Of course, this tactic could just as easily backfire, proving to be counter-productive and a great waste of time. For one, Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists hepfully points out that if the American military has the time and resources to track Twitter accounts, they probably aren't facing too much danger. Check out the three potential consequences of this move, with special attention to the last one (Scenario 3):

"Scenario 1: Terrorist operative "A" uses Twitter with... a cell phone camera/video function to send back messages, and to receive messages, from the rest of his [group]... Other members of his [group] receive near real time updates (similar to the movement updates that were sent by activists at the RNC) on how, where, and the number of troops that are moving in order to conduct an ambush.

Scenario 2: Terrorist operative "A" has a mobile phone for Tweet messaging and for taking images. Operative "A" also has a separate mobile phone that is actually an explosive device and/or a suicide vest for remote detonation. Terrorist operative "B" has the detonator and a mobile to view "A's" Tweets and images. This may allow "B" to select the precise moment of remote detonation based on near real time movement and imagery that is being sent by "A."

Scenario 3: Cyber Terrorist operative "A" finds U.S. [soldier] Smith's Twitter account. Operative "A" joins Smith's Tweets and begins to elicit information from Smith. This information is then used for... identity theft, hacking, and/or physical [attacks]. This scenario... has already been discussed for other social networking sites, such as My Space and/or Face Book."

More entries on: Terrorism (not the state-sponsored kind)

A birthday message for the National Post

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 09:54 AM ET | Comments (1)

Canada's second mostly-coast-to-coast newspaper, the National Post, turns 10 years young today. It published its first issue on October 27, 1998, and has been keeping the country entertained with its amiably loony notions ever since. Despite corporate owner CanWest's current cash-strapped status, we hope you'll be around for many years more, scrapping and quarreling with us all the way. Here's the cake we baked for you with our best wishes on making it to the double digits:

(Click here for a larger version)

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

October 26, 2008

Review: Blue Gold: World Water Wars

Posted by Sarah Gopaul at 03:03 PM ET | Comments (1)

Sam Bozzo's documentary is based on the book "Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World's Water" by Maude Barlow and Tony Clarke. Both address the very prevalent and serious issue of global water privatization and deterioration.

The film confronts a lot of concerns that most people may not even be aware of; or, conversely, you may be aware of one problem but unaware it is connected to the world water crisis. For example, developing countries are in debt; to make money to repay their debts, these countries focus their resources on cash crops, draining the water supply that should be feeding the citizens; they then sell their goods well below market value, which does little to improve their situations.

Bozzo introduces several complex ideas and issues throughout the film, while narrator Malcolm McDowell ties the segments together and gives the big picture explanation. Although this is a very informative approach, failing to fully explain certain terms or provide sufficient back-story can sometimes make it difficult to fully grasp the concepts being discussed. It's also curious that Australia is the only largely populated continent not mentioned in the debate.

Nonetheless, it is impossible to miss the gist of what is being said: governments around the world are selling out their populaces by allowing the privatization of their water supplies; corporations, globalization and urbanization continue to be the key offenders; most efforts to move water for current use is shortsighted and does not account for what will happen when this good that no one is renewing runs out; Canada is a water-rich country but the United States is already tapping our supply uncontested.

The concluding message is the simplest. The water wars have begun and lives have been lost. But it's not too late; we can still do something about it.

The Planet in Focus International Environmental Film & Video Festival runs October 22 through October 26 in Toronto. Over 100 outstanding and compelling films and videos - documentaries and dramatic, animated, and experimental works of all lengths - created by Canadian and international filmmakers on key environmental themes will be screened at the Royal Cinema, Gardiner Museum, The Bata Shoe Museum, Innis College and the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM). Panels, workshops, youth, student and children's programs are also offered. Visit www.planetinfocus.org for full details.

More entries on: Film

October 25, 2008

Review: Addicted to Plastic

Posted by Sarah Gopaul at 02:29 PM ET | Comments (1)

Plastic is everywhere. It sounds like hyperbole but take a look around you right now and you'll quickly realize how true that statement is. Then think of the items you've bought in the last month and all the plastic packaging you discarded. Now think about this: there is no way to organically breakdown plastic.

production still from

It's a scary thought but seeing it is horrifying. It is this imagery that haunts you after viewing the film: the ocean is a plastic soup; tons of garbage washes ashore hiding otherwise beautiful beaches daily; and every piece of plastic ever thrown away has survived in some form somewhere (except for the small percentage that has been incinerated).

Ian Connacher's documentary is thought provoking and eye opening. He explores the history of plastic and how it came to dominate our lives. He exposes our society as one with a throwaway culture. He gives witness to warnings that have been whispered in our ears for years. He speaks to men and women who are investigating the effects of plastic on the environment and our health. And each segment is more revealing and provocative than the one before it.

But Connacher also gives viewers solutions and hope that we will not drown in a sea of plastic. While traveling the world, he showcases entrepreneurs who are re-purposing plastic to sell in the marketplace. They make railway ties, purses, fabric, clothes and other products that sell internationally. Others are manufacturing bio-plastic from corn and other naturally occurring elements as a biodegradable alternative. And more simply, there are groups dedicated to physically cleaning up the beaches and the oceans.

Connacher tackles a lot of scientific and complex concepts but to his credit, he always ensures comprehension by repeating it in layman's terms. Ultimately, he strikes an ideal balance between threat and hope.

More entries on: Film

October 24, 2008

Suzuki is still green

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 04:40 PM ET | Comments (1)

A National Post columnist characterized David Suzuki as saying the Green Party should no longer exist - basing this on some of Suzuki's remarks. On Tuesday, Suzuki spoke to students of Lakehead University and said, it's true, there should be no Green party. But, if we simply read the statement in context, the paradox that Suzuki would oppose the Green party should be resolved. Suzuki later explained:

"The article is a grotesque version of what I said," said Dr. Suzuki. "I said I look forward to the day when there is no Green Party because as long as there is one, the environment is a political football when it should be the basis of every party's platform. But until that time, I said I was glad there was a Green Party and that Elizabeth May got into the leaders' debates. I did not 'rebuke' Greens. I wish these reporters would listen and report, not hear what they want to hear."

Now, I know the National Post can be fairly conservative, but since when did that mean insulting their readers' intelligence?

More entries on:

Review: Michael Schmidt: Organic Hero or Bioterrorist

Posted by Sarah Gopaul at 02:48 PM ET | Comments (1)

[Editor's Note: Sarah Gopaul will be reviewing a selection of films from the Planet in Focus film festival over the next few days. She is a regular contributor to popjournalism.ca]

This documentary addresses a very sensitive subject in Canada — should unpasteurized raw milk be regulated and made available to consumers?

Both arguments are very strong. Those in favor of raw milk claim the government is making a personal choice for them by making it illegal to obtain. They also insist it has health benefits. Those against maintain the health risks, especially to children and the elderly, are too great to allow people to be given the choice at all. However, Canada is the only G8 country that enforces an overall ban on the product. Most countries have a doctrine of random inspection and testing. In California, it is even available on supermarket shelves.

Still from Michael Schmidt: Organic Hero or Bioterrorist?

Although the focus of the film is Schmidt, documenter Norman Lofts makes some attempt to ensure balance through several opposition interviews with politicians, scientists and victims of illness. On the other side of the fence, Loft interviewed Schmidt's cow share members who claim improvements to their health and farmers in the United States and England who are permitted to legally provide raw milk. He also makes the argument that it may be a matter of "small business versus big business." But in the end, a key segment missing is someone from the scientific or medical community supporting their cause.

In documenting Schmidt's fight for his livelihood, filmmakers capture the many facets of his personality as well. He is not only a farmer but also a leader, a politician and, surprisingly, a conductor for an orchestra.

It is difficult to disagree with either argument but the recent Maple Leaf Foods recall is proof listeria is a risk even with regulation but no one is about to ban lunchmeat.

More entries on: Film

CBC, Media Democracy Day, and waking up with David Frum

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 11:06 AM ET | Comments (1)

I went last night to the relaunch of the new Rabble.ca, a pretty swank bash held at the Steam Whistle Brewery in Toronto. The main attraction last night was a panel discussion with Maude Barlow, Murray Dobbin, Jessica Yee, and Anne Lagacé Dowson, and moderated by Duncan Cameron. It was a pretty good discussion.

I asked a question during the Q&A (I think I may have barged in front of someone else, in fact — sorry!) about the CBC. The Corp. is under tremendous pressure right now, feeling skittish about the Conservative government that writes the cheques that keep it going. During the panel discussion, the panelists had said that the best way to keep the mainstream media honest was to complain when you saw or heard something you think is inappropriate; Duncan Cameron said off-hand that you could probably find something to complain about Peter Mansbridge every night, and that statement stuck with me.

CBC Logo I wanted to know whether progressives can still count on the CBC. In other words, for progressive citizens and social movements, is the CBC in its current siege mentality good, bad, or indifferent? Murray Dobbin made this insight, which I think is worth paraphrasing: No matter how many conservative commentators it brings in, and no matter how many softball questions CBC reporters lob at conservative interview subjects, he said, it's not going to save them from a Conservative agenda that fundamentally opposes the existence of a public broadcaster. They don't hate the CBC because it's an alleged den of socialists (although that doesn't endear them) — they oppose it because they don't believe there should be a publicly funded broadcaster in Canada. Period. So the CBC does itself no favours by trying to be friends with people who want it dismantled either way.

This came flooding back to me this morning when I turned on the radio and found that the CBC national morning news show, The Current, was being guest-hosted by arch-conservative David Frum, of all people. Former George W. Bush speechwriter, American Enterprise Institute fellow, beltway dweeb, inventor of the "axis of evil" David Frum. I listened for a while, and at first it made me angry. But on reflection, it just makes me sad. To watch the CBC futilely attempt to cozy up to people who actively campaign for its dissolution is just, well, pathetic.

More entries on: Media navel-gazing

October 23, 2008

The torture of three Muslim-Canadians

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 04:59 PM ET | Comments (0)

The news has come out that Canadian officials indirectly contributed to the arrests and torture of three Muslim-Canadians. This revalation followed an inquiry by retired Supreme Court Judge, Frank Iacobucci into the separate, but thematically linked, cases of Ahmad El Maati, Muayyed Nureddin and Abdullah Almalki. The RCMP, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, and the department of Foreign Affairs, all did things that had the unintended consequence of having the three men imprisoned and tortured in Syria. The CSIS and the RCMP shared information, leading to Nureddin's torture. The RCMP, Iacobucci's inquiry reveals, received, from outside foreign agencies, information and accusations the men were "Islamic extremists". They then shared this information with Syria before checking the validity of the claims for themselves. It should be noted that they were never officially charged with any crimes.

In today's Globe and Mail, Wesley Wark, a security specialist, would not let us forget the importance of intelligence sharing. Although we must be careful to protect the civil rights of citizens, intelligence sharing is a critical step on the road to global security, he argues. The last line of his piece:

"Judicially inspired degrees of caution about the sharing of intelligence might save some Canadians from harm; it might also expose many Canadians to harm."

This sounds very callous. It amounts to justifying the mistreatment of the three men because such acts are essential aspects of a system (intelligence sharing) that will prevent potential harm. But can't we have both: intelligence sharing with rigorous fact-checking and oversight, thus maintaining our status as a part of the global network without indirectly throwing your own citizens under the bus?

More entries on: Terrorism (not the state-sponsored kind)

Happy Media Democracy Day!

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 11:46 AM ET | Comments (0)

Media Democracy Day logo Today is Media Democracy Day in Canada, a day that is close to our hearts at This Magazine. As a small publisher of an independent magazine of current affairs, opinion, arts, and culture, we value our independence and the freedom it gives us to tell the truth as we see it. Lots of editors out there don't enjoy the same degree of freedom that I do at This; their magazines rely on large corporate advertisers whose messages sometimes conflict with their own goal of sharing important information. Often, the more important the story, the less flattering it is to entrenched interests in industry or government, and that can put a chilling effect on newspapers, magazines, TV, and radio. As more and more media outlets come under the ownership of fewer — and larger — private companies, the ecosystem of public information seizes up, preventing the publication and dissemination of necessary public knowledge.

But people are fighting back against this entrenchment, and Media Democracy Day is an important part of the fight. There are lots of things going on today in Montreal, in Ottawa, in Kingston, inToronto, and in Vancouver.

Rabble Logo To mark Media Democracy Day in style, our good friends at Rabble.ca have launched their redesigned site and are looking for your feedback. Supporting independent media, like Rabble and This Magazine (you can subscribe, or donate, or both!) is one good way of helping. But there are plenty of others. This 12-Step program for rejuvenating the media landscape was originally published in The Nation in 2002, but sadly, it's not out of date. Yet.

More entries on: Events

October 21, 2008

ThisAbility #1: "So, what happened? Did you get in an accident, or something?"

Posted by Aaron Broverman at 12:59 PM ET | Comments (2)

[Editor's Note: Today we're launching the first in what will likely become a stable of BLOG.THIS columns. Aaron Broverman will be writing "ThisAbility," a column about issues of disability. ThisAbility will appear each Tuesday. Look for more soon.]

"So, what happened? Did you get in an accident, or something?"

No, but this is still ranks in the top three questions I, and I know a whole lot of other people with disabilities, get asked by the able-bodied population on a constant basis. It is right up there with "Are you okay?" and "How fast does that thing go?" So, as an introduction to me (your host on this journey through disability issues) and by extension this blog, I will tell you "what happened," just this once...

I have Cerebral Palsy, a congenital, non-progressive disability that usually affects the cerebellum part of the brain. CP comes with symptoms affecting balance, coordination, spasticity, posture and speech, along a varying spectrum of severity that comes to every individual differently. I like to use the maxi-pad analogy to describe it: I have Cerebral Palsy light. I walk with a cane outside the house and use a scooter for long distances. There is no speech effect and ladies — the plumbing works.

Enough about me, THIS and I have a blog to launch. We want this disability issues blog to be more about the attitudinal issues people with disabilities routinely come up against. Sure, we will cover those big systemic accessibility issues as they arise, and give you information on cool things in the community, but we don't want this club to be so exclusive that we're making people feel unable to broach particular beefs, questions or comments. Nothing is off limits here, and we hope to get a good, juicy dialogue going between writer and reader. Look for it right here, every Tuesday.

More entries on: ThisAbility

Few surprises at GG Literary awards shortlist announcement

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 11:22 AM ET | Comments (0)

This morning the Canada Council for the Arts threw a little party to announce the finalists for this year's Governor General's Literary Awards finalists. The literati and assorted hangers-on crowded into Ben McNally Books on Bay Street in Toronto to hear the announcement, and I stopped by to see the festivities (I think I qualify as a hanger-on at best).

Seventy finalists announced in all, and you can see the full list of English and French finalists on the Canada Council website. The big categories, that everyone was clearly there to see, were the English-language Fiction and Non-fiction finalists. They are:

Fiction:

Rivka Galchen for "Atmospheric Disturbances"
Rawi Hage for "Cockroach"
Nino Ricci for "The Origin of Species"
David Adams Richards for "The Lost Highway"
Fred Stenson for "The Great Karoo"

Non-fiction

Christie Blatchford for "Fifteen Days: Stories of Bravery, Friendship, Life and Death from Inside the New Canadian Army"
Douglas Hunter for "God's Mercies: Rivalry, Betrayal and the Dream of Discovery"
Sid Marty for "The Black Grizzly of Whiskey Creek"
James Orbinski for "An Imperfect Offering: Humanitarian Action in the Twenty-first Century"
Chris Turner for "The Geography of Hope: A Tour of the World We Need"

So as you can see, plenty of familiar names. Judging from the buzz in the room, it didn't seem like there were too many surprises on the list, although an approving murmur went around the room at the mention of James Orbinski's name.

So that's that: 70 new books to add to your reading list (don't worry, about half of them are children's books so they'll be quick reads). The winners will be announced on November 18.

More entries on: Lit

October 18, 2008

election comedy

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 02:55 PM ET | Comments (0)

Jon Stewart of the Daily Show had a funny bit on the Canadian election, noting why Stephane Dion might have not won this year. Check it out:

More entries on: Election 2008

October 17, 2008

Alternate reality

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 11:54 AM ET | Comments (0)

It's been three days since the de ja vu election and I, like many Canadians, have been walking around in a bit of a daze wondering what happened on Tuesday. Are we really in the same place we were before? Did we really just spent $300 million to shuffle around a dozen or so seats? In the age where so many Canadians attend post-secondary school and access to information and education is essentially instantaneous via the internet, did we really in 2008 see the lowest voter turnout on record?

I'm having a hard time believing all of it, so here's a little alternate reality for you: What would happen if, instead of forcing curmudgeonly old-timers and bored boomers to the polls each time, we let teenagers decide our fate? It may sound a little crazy, but think about it for a second.

In the days and weeks preceding the gigantic waste of time and money that was October 14, 2008, more than 4,000 schools across Canada were preparing for a round of mock elections organized by the non-partisan Student Vote. Youngins from Nova Scotia to B.C. cast their ballots and here were the results:

Conservative Party of Canada
100 seats - 26.8% of popular vote

New Democratic Party of Canada
66 seats - 23.7% of popular vote

Liberal Party of Canada
54 seats - 19.3%

Green Party of Canada
44 seats - 25% of popular vote

Bloc Quebecois
24 seats - 1.1% of popular vote

The eerie thing is that the results don't differ too drastically. There's still a Conservative minority and there's still a disproportionate number of seats for certain parties, further illustrating the problems with a "first-past-the-post" electoral system. But in the alternate reality results, the NDP and the Green Party have, collectively, the same number of seats as the Tories, giving them the opportunity to exert some serious pull when it comes to the environmental and social issues that Harper has been ignoring.

We might have gotten our arts funding back.

On the other hand, there's also the fact that, as a friend of mine pointed out, many students aren't as properly educated about party platforms as they should be in order to vote. I'd go on to say, however, that many (most?) adults wouldn't know where to find platforms even if they wanted to read them. Who knows what would have happened if every vote came from an individual (child or adult) that was fully educated on each issue. A Green Party majority? Probably not, but given the embarrassing voter (59 percent!) turnout this election, we'll probably never know.

But, there is at least one shining hope for any future Canadian elections. Four times more schools participated in Student Vote this year than during the 2006 election, totalling about 400,000 students. Educated or not, this means the potential for four times more students graduating with a yearning to vote than in years past.

As a relative youngin myself, I'm still waiting for the day when the youth of Canada shed their bad rap and actually give a crap about who's running their country. Maybe next time.

In the meantime, if you're unhappy with the turn your riding took this election, why not check out who might have been elected had you handed the power off to a bunch of kids. If you're living in Central Nova, you'd have said goodbye to Peter McKay, as Elizabeth May took the seat in a landslide. If you're living in my home riding of Toronto Centre, you'd be be cozying up with Johan Boyden of the Communist Party of Canada.

More entries on: Election 2008

Canada in the world

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 12:21 AM ET | Comments (0)

Embassy, a foreign policy newsweekly and division of The Hill Times, published a report on Canada's current place in foreign development yesterday. This report consisted of articles written by journalists and professors on what Canada has done, might do in light of the Tory win this Tuesday, and probably should do.

Stephen Brown (page 17), professor of political science at the University of Ottawa, insisted Canada provide more aid to developing countries. We have not, he points out, lived up to our promise to devote 0.7 per cent of the gross national product (GNP) to foreign aid - not by a long-shot if we only look at Stephen Harper's 0.28 per cent allotment last year. He urges us not to use the financial crisis as an excuse to cut funding because developing countries will be hurt by it as well, and this, of all times, is not when we should be frugal. He also criticizes the Harper government for endorsing the concept of "aid effectiveness". This is the practice of only spending money on countries, and on specific sectors of society, that will benefit the most. Now, this sounds like a perfectly fine thing: all things being equal, efficiency should be sought. But, in practice, "the policy implies focusing on middle-income countries that already have the capacity to transform outside financing into economic growth. However, the poorest countries often require assistance to create a growth-friendly environment." It is the poorest countries, the ones that lack the kind of infrastructure and social institutions to benefit most effectively from aid, that happen to need it the most.

Nipa Banerjee (page 18), professor of international development at the University of Ottawa, wrote about the primacy of aid effectiveness, contra Stephen Brown.

Jeff Davis (page 19) discusses the effect the financial crisis will have on the developing world, noting that foreign direct investment will drop; developing world exporters will have fewer buyers; and developing countries that subsist on the money from luxury goods exports will suffer.

Hugh Segal (page 20), a conservative senator, wrote about making the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) less mired in bureaucracy and, by dispersing it from its central location, Hull, make it more responsive to the realities of/in the developing countries it's supposed to assist. As such, he supports Bill C-293 because it "calls for a new consultative relationship between CIDA and our NGOs, many of whom are better situated in aid recipient countries than CIDA itself."

Lee Berthiaume (also page 20) discusses the role and future of democracy-promotion, ie. helping developing countries become more democratic. He writes of the Tory proposal to create a separate agency for democracy-promotion, and the complexities involved in this task.

Read the full report to fill my summaries out. It might be helpful considering that foreign policy was an issue almost nobody discussed this past election.

More entries on:

October 15, 2008

Obama Illusions

Posted by derek at 07:24 PM ET | Comments (0)

Now that the Canadian election has ended with a whimper, all eyes are back on the US, where the latest polls are showing that the next President will likely be Barack Obama. Some progressives have whipped themselves into a giddy frenzy at the possibility. I am not one of them.

Obama, to sum up, is for the PATRIOT Act, for FISA wiretapping, for escalating the war in Afghanistan and for the right to launch preemptive wars of aggression wherever the US sees fit. Even on the Iraq war, Obama's leftist credentials are suspect. Obama does not call for anything remotely like US military withdrawal from the Middle East, but rather for a change in the way the war is being carried out, and would still allow for things like US airstrikes and "anti-terrorist" actions inside Iraq. What exactly is progressive in all this?

Obama's position should come as no suprise when one considers the strategic importance of the Middle East to US power. It is simply too important an issue for the ruling class to leave up to ordinary Americans. It's here we see a key role of elections in our societies, namely the construction of "acceptable debate" and the distinguishing between "legitimate" and "illegitimate" politics. Elections, let's be frank, are simply not how such important decisions get made. We should recall that it was the Democrat Lyndon Johnson who escalated the Vietnam War after defeating the warmonger Goldwater, and that the Republican Nixon was forced to draw down and end the war mainly because of the military defeat that was being handed to them by the Vietnamese. In France, it was the Socialist Guy Mollet who greatly escalated the Algerian war after running on a promise to end it. In these cases, it was questions of national interest and power that decided matters, not anything so quaint as the democratic will of the people.

Given the tragic history of attempts to make progressive change through electoral means, it would be tempting to dismiss Obama supporters as naive. But I think their fervour and optimism point to something more troubling, namely, the near-complete absence of any kind of truly emancipatory politics in public life, and the lowered sights that accompanies this absence. Perhaps it's a failure of the imagination, or the ideological triumph of a deep-rooted cynicism, but whatever the cause the result is the bizarre sight of America's progressives lining up to support such an obviously pro-system candidate on the flimsiest of grounds -- their energy and enthusiasm sucked up and transformed so that it ends up strengthening the very system they first set out to oppose.

In times like this I think it would be worthwhile to take a look at the work of Slavoj Zizek, who argues in his latest book that "what prevents the radical questioning of capitalism itself is precisely the belief in the democratic form of the struggle against capitalism." If we are to get genuine "change we can believe in", it is precisely this illusion that may need to be shattered. My worry is that many more people around the world will have to die, this time at Obama's hands, for this to happen.

More entries on: American Politricks

The election that wasn't

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 03:01 PM ET | Comments (0)

The Canadian federal election of 2008 slouched to its ignominious end last night. Having blogged about it here over the last five weeks, we can say several things:

It didn't produce a strikingly different parliament and we could have all saved ourselves the time and money;
None of the parties experienced much of a victory or a defeat;
It was kind of dull.

Which isn't much to show for five weeks of campaigning. Especially considering that it had the potential to be one of the most ideologically heated elections in decades. Between worldwide economic collapse, an unprecedented electoral preoccupation with hot-potato arts funding, the entry of the Green Party into the debates and the Liberal party's choice to campaign on its dud "green shift" platform, and the ballooning cost of the Afghan war, there was plenty of material over which the parties could engage meaningfully.

Instead we got jokes about sweater vests and animated shitting puffins. We all responded with a resounding yawn: the number of eligible voters who actually bothered to go to the ballot box plunged to a new low of just 58 percent.

The electorate's apathy in this election could be chalked up to any number of things: uninspiring leaders, boredom with the same old platforms and policies, exhaustion after several years of minority governments and frequent elections, dissatisfaction with the First-Past-The-Post system, and so on. That last point is the one that, for me and many others, emerged as the theme of this election.

Our parliamentary representation is divorced from reality. That became very clear as the numbers rolled in yesterday. The Bloc Québecois received less than 10 percent of the popular vote and gets 50 seats; the Green party receives almost seven percent of the popular vote and receives none. The NDP receives almost twice as many votes as the Bloc but ends up with a third as many seats.

If this was a method of choosing contestants on Canadian Idol, it would be denounced as corrupt and quickly scrapped, but apparently it's just fine for choosing the government of our fine dominion.

The frustration that hundreds of thousands of Canadians feel about this is obvious: the vote-swapping groups on Facebook and the strategic voting sites like voteforenvironment.ca and anyonebutharper.ca are symptoms of a deeper dissatisfaction with how this country is governed. Millions of votes are ignored under this system, and it disenfranchises people who actually take the time to vote — a dwindling population, and no wonder.

Proportional representation works in dozens of modern democracies around the world. It's time for Canada's election system to grow up and adopt a PR electoral system. This issue cuts to the heart of Canadian democracy, and we should be demanding that it be at the top of every party's to-do list when the next election rolls around — which, at this rate, could be any minute now.

More entries on: Election 2008

Harper's Economics 101

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 02:56 PM ET | Comments (0)

In the wake of Stephen Harper's and the Conservative Party's win last night, the leader has drawn a six-point economic plan. He spoke today of holding a conference with first ministers; issuing a fiscal update by the end of November; and forging an expanded relationship with the European Union. This last one involves freer trade based on a prospective bilateral agreement between Canada and the EU.

Interestingly, this happens the same day the Globe and Mail publishes a commentary by Roy MacLaren, co-chairman of the Canada-Europe Roundtable for Business. He endorses the idea of eliminating tariffs and increasing bilateral trade.

This leaves us wondering if liberalization and deregulation are, in fact, part of the solution to this economic problem; and why Harper failed to discuss this plan earlier. Why did he wait until the day after he'd won the election to unveil this plan? Transparency is an essential aspect of both elected and potential governments alike, and Harper seems to have stumbled his way through the gate.

More entries on: Economics

October 14, 2008

A final hearing

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:07 PM ET | Comments (1)

The Toronto Star today published short pieces written by four of the national leaders: Stephen Harper, Stephane Dion, Jack Layton, and Elizabeth May. There essays included specific proposals, broadsides against other leaders, and some evocative language.

Both Harper and Dion used the word "strong" in one form or another, and often. Harper used it three times, saying "Canada now has the strongest economy in the G7"; insisting on your vote because of his "strong support for families"; and concluding that he will ensure Canada remains "strong, united, independent and free." In his first sentence, Dion asks if Canada has "grown stronger under the Harper Conservatives?". He also litters one sentence with the word, saying: "Only the Liberal Party offers the combination of a strong record as economic managers, a strong team of experienced men and women ready to take action on Day 1, and a strong plan for Canada's future."

Layton surprised me when he used the word not once. But he did use another one of his catch-phrases: evoking the mythical "kitchen-table" and asserting that Harper does not care about the concerns of people who make their decisions there.

May was increadibly vague and lofty in her essay. She wrote of representative democracy's history in North America and the moral obligation to political engagement, only mentioning her actual proposals in the penultimate paragraph. She doesn't exactly have Barack Obama's gift for expression, so I suggest she sticks to more concrete discussions in the future.

Harper wrote of his party's economic prudence. He wants to convince us he can do a good job of handling the current economic situation. For that end, he criticized Dion's carbon tax for being expensive and, therefore, very untimely. Dion, in turn, did not forget to include Harper's comment that the economic downdraft was the right time to buy stocks, effectively painting Harper as insensitive and unprepared to handle the problem. Naturally, Layton criticized Harper, but he also had some words for Dion. He called the carbon tax unfair and pointed out the fact that Dion voted along with the Conservatives 43 times as Opposition leader. Layton wants us to believe that he, unlike Dion, can truly fulfill the obligations of the official Opposition party's leader. If not the government's leader.

And that's what we all want to know. Who will best fulfill the role of Prime Minister today? We will not have a conclusive answer to that question anytime soon, but we will know who the nation elected to be Prime Minister by the end of this evening.

More entries on: Election 2008

THIS Magazine liveblogs the Canadian Federal election results

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 12:20 PM ET | Comments (5)

Today's the big day! People seemed to like the liveblogs we did of the two federal election debates, and so we'll go for the hat-trick by blogging the election results this evening.

In case you didn't see the invitation we posted on the blog below, or the Facebook invitation, we're having an election-watch party tonight, and we'll be blogging from there with friends, food, and drink. Come on by if you're able.

On to the main event, and remember, you can comment in real-time by logging in to ScribbleLive here.

More entries on: Election 2008

Come to This Magazine's Election Watch Gala

Posted by Lisa at 10:53 AM ET | Comments (0)

If you're in the Toronto area, please join us tonight, upstairs at the Rivoli (334 Queen Street West) for This Magazine's Election Watch Gala. The gala is also a welcome party for our new editor Graham F. Scott. So come and watch election coverage, eat some snacks and raise a glass to Graham.
The party starts at 7:00, but we'll be there all night (gotta wait for those B.C. polls to close).
Hope to see you tonight!

More entries on:

October 11, 2008

Yet another weekly recap, folks

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 04:22 PM ET | Comments (0)

Other than the Tories finally releasing their platform, it's been a slow week for bloggers and newsies alike, so if you're like me and suffering from a serious case of election fatigue, here's a lightning-fast recap on the week's (arguably pretty slow) happenings:

Monday: Orphan voters are left out in the cold while a group of renegade Canadian musicians advocate strategic voting to keep Harper out of office.

Tuesday: Conservative platform day! Huzzah!

Wednesday: The potential of a coalition government to wreak havoc if Harper wins a minority and a pop quiz to see how well you know your candidates.

Thursday: More musing on strategic voting and the answers to Wednesday's quiz.

Friday: A formerly glossed-over issue, HIV/AIDS, picks up a little steam in the election.

And finally, a bit of entertainment to hold you over until Monday. The Hour's George Stroumboulopoulos has launched a campaign to lure Stephen Harper into coming on the show before the election that is full of bribery, threats and hilarity.

See the rest of Strombo's efforts here.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 10, 2008

Lend a hand this election day

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 02:46 PM ET | Comments (3)

With four days to go, the rhetoric is heating up. Here in Quebec two Green Party candidates have told their constituents to vote Liberal because they (the Greens) have no chance of winning in their riding anyway. Of course, they neglected to check with their party leader first. I'd love to have heard the conversation between the two candidates and Elizabeth May when she got wind of their plan.

But one thing I really didn't want to hear were Stephane Dion's false starts to a muddled question on ATV (an affiliate of CTV). Dion was assured the flubs wouldn't be broadcast. Imagine his surprise when he saw them aired. Journalists are now officially considered pond scum -- and who knows, this whole thing may even get Dion a whole lot of sympathy votes.

So, to counter the nastiness -- and in the spirit of all that is good -- I have a suggestion: help someone vote on Tuesday. Lend a hand (in a non-partisan fashion... or not) to help someone who will have trouble getting to the polling station on Tuesday.

It's the perfect way to end this nasty, drawn out election on a positive note.

More entries on: Election 2008

Parties speak out about a forgotten issue

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:38 AM ET | Comments (1)

According to 2005 estimates from the Public Health Agency of Canada, some 58,000 Canadians are living with HIV, and about a quarter of those are unaware of their condition.

I was surprised to learn the numbers were that high, and apparently, so were the five party leaders. Four of the five federal party platforms (the Green Party being the exception) have produced no plans to put money towards AIDS research, prevention, education or treatment in Canada. (Though, both the NDP and the Liberal platforms have vague mentions of plans to help solve the AIDS crisis in developing countries.)

According to an article in the Toronto Star today, over the last two years Harper's Conservatives have scuppered nearly $21 million in federal AIDS funding. The 2004 federal government moved to double funding from $42.2 million to $84.4 million by 2008/2009, but much like the national day care program, once Harper got his hands on the plan, things turned out quite differently.

The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network asked seven questions of the five parties as to what they would do for the HIV/AIDS community if elected next Tuesday. All but one party responded (I'll give you one guess...).

The whole report can be downloaded in PDF form here, but here's a quick recap of how four leaders responded to the first question: Will your party increase funding for Canadian and international research on HIV prevention technologies, including microbicides and vaccines?

The Bloc Québécois
The Bloc proposes that Ottawa "substantially increase its budget allocations for basic reseach," and comments on the fact that the Quebec provincial government already provides resources for the fight against AIDS, and suggests that any extra funding provided by Ottawa should be paid directly to the provinces to allow them to strengthen their own health care systems.

The Greens
The Green Party supports increased funding for research on prevention technologies and believes that the costs will pay for themselves in the long run by "reducing reducing long-term treatment costs and improving the productivity of future generations."

The Liberals
Camp Dion proposes a comprehensive approach that focuses on prevention, care, treatment and provide funding for the research on prevention technologies.

The New Democrats
The NDP insists that "prevention must be the cornerstone of any effective HIV/AIDS strategy" and says that a New Democratic government will ensure that federal support for prevention research is "pegged at the highest priority."

Really, they're all saying pretty much the same thing, which is fine. What I am more concerned about is the party that isn't saying anything at all.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 09, 2008

Voting angst

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 12:32 PM ET | Comments (1)

During an election a few years ago I suggested that my mother vote for the NDP. "Why would I vote for them?" she asked me. "They're not going to win!"

Wanting to vote for the winning candidate instead of the one you believe in, is just one of the ways the results of our flawed electoral system can be skewed. And even though I've always "voted with my heart," this is the first election I've seriously considered strategic voting.

I wanted to see if strategic voting could be the tipping factor for me of one party over another since I still haven't decided who I'm voting for. On voteforenvironment.ca I punched in my postal code and was told I could "vote with my heart" since in my riding, the race is between the Liberal's and the Bloc -- both environmentally-friendly (read: not Conservative). In other words, my vote doesn't really count anyway, so I can vote for whomever I want.

It's dangerous territory when people start to feel their votes don't count -- and a signal of the need for change.

More entries on: Election 2008

Answers to Yesterday's Quiz

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 07:48 AM ET | Comments (0)

Yesterday I posted a short quiz to test your knowledge on what the five major parties' have been telling us over the past five weeks. Below are the answers to that quiz. How did you do?

1. Which party has promised to roll back taxes income trusts?
The Liberals.

2. Which party wants to bring in proportional representation?
The NDP.

3. Which party is aiming to have a federal debt to GDP ratio of 25 percent by 2011-2012?
The Greens.

4. Which party has previously spent $300 million to help protect women from cervical cancer?
The Conservatives.

5. Which party plans to take on spammers who collect personal info under false pretences or for illegal purposes?
The Conservatives (page 8).

6. Which party would invest $1 billion to make Canada's manufacturing sector greener and more competitive?
The Liberals.

7. Which party wants to limit income tax for those earning less than $20,000?
The Greens (page 7).

8. Which party plans on eliminating the GST on books?
The Bloc Quebecois (page 13).

9. Which party wants to spend $50 million to boost our country's slaughterhouse capacity?
The Conservatives (page 23).

10. Which party has mentioned allowing people without status who are currently in Canada the chance to apply for legal status?
The NDP.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 08, 2008

Can the Conservatives be defeated by a coaltion of parties? Doubt it.

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 05:10 PM ET | Comments (2)

Judy Rebick's piece in today's Globe and Mail raises the troubling possibility that this election will not be democratic. For it to be democratic, the thoughts and feelings of Canadians would have to be represented by their government. "More than two-thirds of Canadians", Rebick says, support "strong action on climate change; government intervention to create jobs and defend ordinary Canadians against the impact of the global economic crisis; an end to the war in Afghanistan; public support for the arts; implementation of at least the Kelowna Accord to raise the standard of living for aboriginal people; and a national child-care program that includes the creation of thousands of new child-care spaces." And still, the Conservatives may just eke out a win, even a majority. How representative would that be?

Her suggestion is that the Liberal Party, the NDP, the Green Party, and the Bloc Quebecois establish an alliance in the event of a Conservative minority government. As a majority-of-minorities they can overwhelm the Conservatives with their concerted effort to push progressive policies.

I like the sentiment behind this proposed tactic: it would be nice to see our representatives cast differences aside for the greater good. But things might not work out as smoothly as Rebick hopes. She describes the events unfolding like this: "With such agreement, they can defeat the government and go to the Governor-General with an offer to form a new government. They don't have to agree on everything, and they don't need to form a full coalition government. They just have to agree on some key points, and whoever has the most seats can form the government with a written promise to bring in the policies agreed on."

Well and good. But I can't help but think this is a little idealistic. This sounds a lot like the power-sharing of proportional representation and we've seen how that's worked in other countries. In Italy, for example, the Prime Minister's office has been occupied 37 times, sometimes by the same man, like the the current PM, Silvio Berlusconi, who is serving his third and inconsecutive term. It's the constant coaltion-building and power-sharing that causes all this instability. Alliances of parties that are still, let's not forget, in competition with one another are inherently unstable. The various parties in Italy simply realized they have as good a reason to dissent from even the most noble coaltion as they do to cooperate.

Canadian political parties are not above all that, in my opinion.

More entries on: Election 2008

Dancing in the Streets to the Parties' Economic Platforms

Posted by Robert Near at 05:00 PM ET | Comments (0)

Harper's enemies are dancing in the proverbial street today because the polls continue to show that he's going down on October 14th. Yay! Whooo! Oh wait, his downfall is due to a similar slide in the stock market and housing prices. Hrm. That's not that good. Is it time to celebrate?

Yes it is, says Margaret Atwood in The Globe and Mail, because a Conservative majority would wreak untold terror in this country. The Tyee claims a similar point: our potential housing bubble is Flaherty and Harper's deregulating fault and should they stay in power the downturn will only get worse. On the other side of the debate is Andrew Coyne, who argues that, hey, we're in a bit of a temporary economic jam here, not a depression and Canadians should realize that markets rise and fall. No one seems to to agree on the current state of the economy.

But supposing we are in for a recession, what will the new governing party do about it? Time for some policy perusing - here are all the major parties economic policy plans:

Liberal's A Richer Canada

Conservative's A True Strong North and Free

NDP's Making Life More Affordable for Families – Creating Jobs

The Green Party's The Green Economy

More entries on: Election 2008

Quiz Time

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 08:57 AM ET | Comments (1)

It's time to test your knowledge on the 2008 federal election. Below are 10 questions with the answer to each question being the name of one of the five major parties. See how many you can figure out and then check back tomorrow for the answers.

1. Which party has promised to roll back taxes income trusts?

2. Which party wants to bring in proportional representation?

3. Which party is aiming to have a federal debt to GDP ratio of 25 percent by 2011-2012?

4. Which party plans on spending $300 million to help protect women from cervical cancer?

5. Which party has discussed taking on spammers who collect personal info under false pretences or for illegal purposes?

6. Which party would invest $1 billion to make Canada's manufacturing sector greener and more competitive?

7. Which party has promised to limit income tax for those earning less than $20,000?

8. Which party plans on eliminating the GST on books?

9. Which party wants to spend $50 million to boost our country's slaughterhouse capacity?

10. Which party has mentioned allowing people without status who are currently in Canada the chance to apply for legal status?

More entries on: Election 2008

October 06, 2008

You Have A Choice: Stop Being an Orphan Voter

Posted by Robert Near at 01:00 PM ET | Comments (0)

A few days ago, Avaaz.ca released a song, "You Have A Choice", a catchy ditty about how you can stop a Harper majority through strategic voting. To save the world from escalating temperatures due to the mass release of greenhouse gases (GHG), one should vote for the candidate most likely to defeat the Conservatives.

Um, ok. In my riding, Trinity-Spadina in downtown Toronto, that would be any party except the Marxist-Leninist Party of Canada and the Canadian Action Party.

Too much choice, perhaps, but then again, not enough - what if I wanted to vote for the Conservatives? What if I thought a reduction of GHG gases by 20% from 2006 to 2020 was a great idea? I would have little choice.

Just as another of our columnists felt lost in the Conservative wilderness of Alberta, so too do many people whose riding is a long-held party bastion. Wanting to vote one way, but resigned to the fact that if they did, it would simply be an academic exercise.

Fair Vote Canada calls these people Orphan Voters. It's set up a website detailing why there are so many orphan voters and how to best stop them from recurring. It's mildly provocative, but concise, clear and timely.

More entries on: Election 2008

What have you got up your sleeve, Steve?

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 09:39 AM ET | Comments (2)

After being mercilessly ridiculed at last week's leadership debates for not having released a party platform, Stephen Harper is apparently planning to unveil his master plan tomorrow.

Based on the past four-odd weeks of campaigning, here are my predictions for what the Tory 2008 Platform will promise:

For families
- Parents will continue to receive $100 monthly cheques for their little ones, which will come in handy when they have to quit their jobs to take care of their children due to a lack of available day care space.
- Parents will receive a tax credit for putting their children in artistic activities, which will be awesome until those children grow up and can't get any federal funding for the arts.
- Stricter regulations for marketing tobacco items to kids. (This, I fully support, though I admit I'll miss my Popeye cigarettes if Harper does away with them.)
- Self-employed men and women will be able to opt in to EI premiums, and therefore take advantage of maternal and paternal leave after having a child.

For the economy
- Harper will continue to insist that nothing is wrong, and nothing will go wrong. I expect his platform to reveal plans to erect a giant bubble over Canada to emphasize that we are not the United States.
- Help for first-time home buyers in the form of a $5,000 tax credit to go towards closing costs
- $24 million for the development of cruise destinations along the St. Lawrence. (Seriously?)

What do you predict will come out of the grand unveiling of the Conservative party platform?

More entries on: Election 2008

October 03, 2008

This blog has seven days

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 08:15 PM ET | Comments (0)

Here's a quick recap of the topics blogged about this week, in what has been a very busy five days:

On Monday The NDP finally released their platform, and The Political Compass helped us situate the five parties (turns out the Green party are right wing authoritarians -- Just kidding. Sort of.)
On Tuesday We got the low-down on a debate in Kensington market where the Conservative candidate was conspicuously absent.
On Wednesday Harper's pledge to stop exporting bitumen was analyzed and exposed as an empty promise, advance polls were promoted, we were pointed to an article helpful in cutting through the rhetoric of environmental policy, the French leader's debate was liveblogged, and Canada's foreign policy (or lack thereof) was questioned.
On Thursday We were asked if we care whether or not our candidates live in our ridings, told that some Tory candidates are refusing to show up for debates or speak to reporters, and treated to the liveblogging of the English leader's debate where important questions such as 'what is Stephen Harper hiding under his hair?' were raised.
On Friday Everybody was urged to vote, especially those of us born before 1984.

More entries on: Election 2008

Get off your ass and vote on October 14

Posted by Melissa Wilson at 10:20 AM ET | Comments (1)

I'm still recovering from keeping up with the antics of last night's leadership debate ("Where are you hiding your platform?" Layton prodded Harper. "Under the sweater?" Just one of the many, many highlights from last night's festivities, which can be viewed at CBC online.) so for today I'm going to take a break from policy and propaganda and focus on something else.

It's no secret that less than two-thirds of Canadians of voting age will be hitting the polls on October 14th, and as shameful as that is, the Toronto Star reported today that less than a quarter of youth under 25 vote. When it comes to those who just reached the age of majority, the numbers drop even lower.

That is over two million people that could be voting that are not. That could make or break the election. That could push Dion or Layton into the PMO or push Harper into a majority government. Whether you're lazy, uninformed or just planning on falling into a turkey coma, get out there and vote.

If you don't want to pull on your turkey pants and venture out the day after Thanksgiving (which also happens to be a Jewish holiday), then don't. Vote today. Or tomorrow. Or Monday.

The Young Greens of Canada are calling today, the first day of advance polls (October 4 and 6, also), Youth Voter Day 2008. Check out the website for solid instructions on how to vote quickly and easily. If you're a student living away from home, you don't have to worry about trekking it back, you can simply vote where you're living now (residence, student ghetto, whatever.)

But before you do that, go and educate yourself on what each party is promising (or, in Harper's case, not promising) and then just do it.

Then again, I'm just one little person hiding behind an online handle. Don't want to listen to me? I wouldn't want to listen to me either, so here are some celebrities advocating the vote, after the jump.

Granted, these are all regarding the American election, but they still serve a pretty good purpose.

Check out Michael Moore's new movie, Slacker Uprising, which follows the filmmaker as he tries to inspire university and college students to vote in the 2004 election. You can download it for free, too.

Here's Leonardo DiCaprio urging you to vote by using some reverse psychology. Ohhh...tricky.

For those of you that don't care about washed up actors, here's Florida punk band Against Me! telling you to vote:

And finally, Christina Aguilera's spot for Rock the Vote. She's pretty hot, right? Do what she says.

More entries on: Election 2008

October 02, 2008

This Magazine liveblogs the October 2 English-language leaders' debate

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 04:55 PM ET | Comments (1)

And here we go again: Dominique Jarry Shore's great liveblog of the French-language federal leadership debate last night was such a success, we're doing it again!

Tonight, This Magazine editor Graham F. Scott and This Election Blog Squad^TM member Melissa Wilson will be doing the full rundown of the debate.

You can follow the liveblog and leave real-time comments on ScribbleLive or you can see it as it happens in the window below (it will automatically update with the latest entries). There might also be the occasional dispatch from the U.S. Vice-Presidential debate, which is sure to be a totally hilarious gong show.

More entries on: Election 2008

Why so quiet Tory candidates?

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 04:36 PM ET | Comments (1)

This article in today's Toronto Star caught my eye. It's about how more than a few Conservative candidates have been missing local debates and dodging local reporters. The reason why it grabbed my attention is because I've being hearing how my riding's Tory candidate has often been M.I.A. when it comes to public events (though she did show up to an all-candidates debate on Monday night).

When I first heard that my Tory candidate was skipping out on some events, I just thought it had to do with the fact that she's running in a riding (Toronto's Parkdale-High Park) that she doesn't stand a chance in hell in winning. I can understand that given how the odds are against her, she might not be giving this race her everything. After all, events such as debates and interviews are time-consuming and stressful.

But after reading that Star article and this Liberal press release, I no longer believe that this is just the case of one Tory candidate deciding that she has better things to do with her time than trying to fight an unwinnable battle. I mean, Tony Clement, the current health minister, is abstaining from some public debates as is Rob Anders, the current MP for Calgary West. As incumbents who are likely going to hold onto their seats, their decisions to not attend various local events is just plain arrogant.

And overall, I find this whole situation a bit disturbing. Voting isn't just about voting for a particular party, it's also about voting for the two individuals who represent that party - the party leader and the potential MP. By going "silent", these Conservative candidates are in way reducing themselves to technicalities in the voting process, leaving the public to decide who to vote for based on the party itself and its leader.

But I guess maybe that's it, that for whatever reason, these individuals have decided that it's better for the party and Harper if they stay quiet and out of sight. While this might turn out to be a very effective strategy, it certainly isn't a very democratic one. How is the public supposed to know if a Tory candidate is truly worthy of their votes if that candidate won't stand up and publically discuss what s/he believe in? I'm not a Conservative but if I was, I'd be pretty pissed that my candidate wasn't showing up at local debates.

Speaking of debates, I hope that everyone is looking forward to tonight’s leaders' debate. Remember, the first person in the room to suggest switching to the US V.P. debate has to chug a whole bottle of American beer.

More entries on: Election 2008

But where do they live?

Posted by Dominique Jarry-Shore at 01:59 PM ET | Comments (1)

I think it's pretty important for a candidate to live in the riding they're running in.

But often they don't. Is this a big deal? Should it matter?

To me, living in the riding shows a commitment to the people of the area and that the person isn't just some fly-by-the-night stand-in. By living in the riding, you get a feel for the struggles, the issues, the history...

My riding of Jeanne le Ber -- incidentally one of the battleground ridings in Quebec -- is currently held by the youthful Bloc MP Thierry St Cyr.

Here's a quick run-down of the candidates as well as who lives in our traditionally working-class and ever gentrifying 'hood -- and who doesn't.

Bloc Quebecois: Thierry St Cyr -- Yes, lives in the riding
Liberal: Christian Feuillette -- does not live in the riding "But will move here as soon as he wins" according to someone who works on his campaing.
Conservative: Daniel Beaudin -- Yes, lives in the riding.
NDP: Daniel Breton -- Does not live in the riding, but lives in another working class riding (they're all the same, right?) UPDATE: and used to live and work in the riding for 14 years.
Green Party: Veronik Sansoucy -- Yes, has lived in the riding for four years.
Independent: Darryl Grey -- Does not live in the riding but is the pastor of a church here and very active in the community.

So, where do your candidates live and do you care?

More entries on: Election 2008

October 01, 2008

What war in Afghanistan?

Posted by Melita K. at 06:24 PM ET | Comments (0)

Last week Senator Barack Obama voiced his concern about the unfavourable manner in which little foreign kids with dreams perceive America. Do any of our candidates care about how they perceive Canada?

The CBC asks, have foreign policy issues dropped off the radar? To rephrase a coworker who recently quipped, "What war in Afghanistan?" my answer is: "We have foreign policy issues?"

No one is arguing that economy isn't important, but where do the party leaders stand on the growing aggression between Russia and its near abroad? Do they think NATO should strike al Qaeda targets in Pakistan? When will we find out?

Given that they've largely ignored Afghanistan for the past three weeks, the candidates should perhaps also focus some time on reassuring the remaining 41 per cent of Canadians who still support the war of its virtues, or, for the 56 per cent who oppose, of its sins. Quebec has the lowest support for this war, so it will be interesting to see whether anyone brings it up tonight.

More entries on: Election 2008

This Magazine liveblogs the October 1 French-language leaders debate

Posted by Graham F. Scott at 04:56 PM ET | Comments (4)

This Magazine election blogger Dominique Jarry-Shore will be liveblogging the French-language leaders' debate tonight. And tune in tomorrow when we'll be doing the same with the English-language debate.

The debate starts at 9 pm EST. Dominique's commentary will appear in the window below. You can also read it at ScribbleLive and even leave comments in realtime.

More entries on: Election 2008

enviro-friendly debate

Posted by Daniel Tseghay at 03:51 PM ET | Comments (0)

For all you environmentally conscious types who believe the problems facing our rapidly weakening ecosystem can be tackled by government regulation and coordination, check out this piece from the CBC. It streamlines the deluge of information we have been getting from our federal parties into a simple assessment of what their environmental proposals are, how they plan to achieve them (the most important part, in my opinion), and suggested questions to ask these parties.

Let's hope enough time is spent discussing this during tonight's debate so people can make informed (read: correct) decisions.

More entries on: Election 2008

Plagiarism scandal's source more intriguing than its substance

Posted by Graeme McElheran at 02:48 PM ET | Comments (0)

There are two questions no one seems to be asking about the Liberals latest hatchet job on Stephen Harper. When did they discover this undeniable similarity between his 2003 Iraq speech and John Howards', and how did they discover it?

Harper gave the speech five years ago, and while that doesn't let him off the plagiarism hook (or his speechwriter, as the case may be), it does beg several questions, not all of which are directed to the Harper Conservatives.

Why didn't any of Harper's opponents, Liberal or otherwise, cry foul in 2003, at the time of this alleged plagiarism or in the five years hence? Undoubtedly it's because no one noticed. What fodder if they had! Surely none of them would sit on such an internationally provocative political firebomb for five years, through two federal elections. By the end of the 2006 campaign the Liberals had emptied their cannons. They must not have known about this back then.

So when did they find out about this transgression? That answer is wrapped in the even juicier question of how they found out.

It's not hard to imagine a team of Liberal operatives poring through Harper's every recorded utterance since before his political career began, searching for ammunition to use against him. That's what politicos do. But it is too much of a stretch to suppose those same operatives cross-referenced everything Harper has said over the last 20 years or so with everything other political leaders around the world have said during the same time period, and just happened to find the Howard speech now, in the nick of time, with two weeks to go in Harper's re-election campaign.

The odds of a Canadian political junkie - the only breed paying enough attention to a Canadian Opposition Leader's speech on Iraq to remember it five years later - stumbling across Howard's speech on YouTube and then recalling Harper saying something remarkably similar must be terribly long. Even longer, if you eliminate the percentage of such aficionados who swing Conservative, and would want to protect Harper in this case.

You can't rule out the fluke possibility that some apolitical devourer of Canadian media made this discovery and passed it on to a friend who passed it on to a friend closer to the Liberals, who passed it on, and so forth. But it's at least equally possible that someone from within Harper's camp, or at least his party, knew about the Howard speech and tipped the Liberals very recently.

Now that's intriguing. Harper is notorious for controlling the message of his government and his party, and his Conservative troops are, for the most part, incredibly loyal - or at least intimidated enough to keep their mouths shut. Yet someone very familiar with Harper's speech record - moreso than his political opponents who get paid to search for such things and missed this one - decided now, when he's on the brink of a majority government, to tip the Liberals off on some incendiary character ammunition.

Bob Rae, at least, knows where the tip came from, as presumably do a handful of others. However, as spicy as the prospect of dissension within Harper's ranks might be, the outcome of this conflict is largely irrelevant.

Anyone who wasn't going to vote for Stephen Harper because they think him dishonest made that decision long before news of the Howard speech broke. They probably didn't vote for him in 2006 either, and probably never would. Ergo this accusation of plagiarism is preaching to the converted, similar to the weak outcry over the ignored fixed election date. The people who care about such issues were never going to vote Conservative in this election anyway. The undecideds have other things to care about.

Certain media see this latest Liberal tactic for what it is - a desperate salvo from a beleaguered opponent that finds itself outflanked at every turn. But at least the Liberals have bought themselves some room to maneuver.

As for the Conservatives - they'll weather this squall to victory, then clean out the rats.

More entries on:

This PSA: You Can Vote October 3, 4 and 6

Posted by Robert Near at 11:20 AM ET | Comments (0)

We're in the dog days of the election. The televised debates won't start until tonight (French Language: 8 p.m. to 10 p.m. EDT on CBC Newsworld, Radio-Canada, CTV Newsnet and TVA and the English language goes tomorrow, 9 p.m. to 11 p.m.EDT) and most parties already released their policy platforms earlier in the week. So there's only time for base partisan politics, spearheaded by a five year old speech and an attractive female with impeccable timing. Surely there are those who are tired of the whole dam election.

So get it over with - advanced voting happens this weekend on October 3, 4, and 6. If you've long ago made up your mind who you're voting for (or Thanksgiving weekend is just too busy), this weekend is your weekend. Let's get those participation numbers up.

More entries on: Election 2008

Mr. Harper Goes Green

Posted by Lindsay Kneteman at 08:51 AM ET | Comments (0)

Back on Friday, Harper announced that if we elected him back into power, he would have Canada stop exporting bitumen to countries that have lower greenhouse-gas emission standards than we do.

At first listen, this sounds like a great policy from an environmental perspective-we'll stop selling our oil to nasty countries that pollute a lot and thus help to save our world from global warming and cannibalistic polar bears and all of that unhappiness. And while I doubt anyone's going to read about this promise and decide that Harper's the new David Suzuki, it does give Conservative supporters something to point to when they claim that their party does care about the environment.

But if Harper and company really cared about the planet, they'd come up with something a lot better than this promise that might be a little too easy to keep.

Bitumen is the tar-like form of petroleum that is pulled from the Alberta oilsands. Currently, Alberta produces around 1.3 million barrels of bitumen on average each day and according to the Conservatives, around 500,000 of those barrels are shipped across the border. But for the most part, this sticky substance isn't being shipped over to China or India or some other heavily-polluting third world country; no, almost all of our bitumen is sent to the United States.

But isn't the US one of the biggest polluters in the world? And wouldn't this promise mean that we'd no longer be able to export our bitumen to them? Well, yeah, the US is the world's second largest producer of greenhouse gases but they are but they are planning on cleaning up their act (at least a bit). Both Obama and McCain have promised to cut America's greenhouse gas output, something that should bring the US in line with(or even exceed) Canada's own un-ambitious greenhouse gas emission standards that include the goal of reducing emissions to three percent below 1990 levels by 2020.

But even if the next president decides to do nothing about greenhouse gas output, the Conservatives could still follow through on this promise and not cause massive economic turmoil because this new rule wouldn't apply to existing contracts. And as for how this concept could affect future bitumen exports to Asia, Enbridge's proposed multi-billion dollar pipeline to coastal BC is still years off from being operational and who knows who will be in power then.

You can call Harper a lot of names but you can't call him dumb. He knows that Canadian voters care about the environment, a topic that's clearly one of the Conservative party's weak spots. He's also seen how poorly the Liberal's complicated (though intelligent) Green Shift plan has gone down with the general public. So he's gone out and come up with a promise that, at first glance, is green, easy to grasp and very keepable.

True, keeping it will likely piss off some Albertans, but what are they going to do about it? Go and form their own federal party or something?

More entries on: Election 2008

Previous month: September 2008
Next month: November 2008

THIS MAGAZINE. BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS POLITICAL

Please note that all writers hold the copyright for their pieces and it is illegal for any portion of them to be copied or distributed without their expressed permission. So please don't steal.

THIS MAGAZINE: BECAUSE EVERTHING IS POLITICAL

October 31, 2008

Strike at York University?

October 30, 2008

In conversation with Norman Lofts

Obama and NAFTA

Obama infomercial was puke-tacular TV

Random acts of kindness 2.0 with Montreal's Akoha.com

October 29, 2008

Obama and socialism

The presidential election is only six days away!

October 28, 2008

ThisAbility #2: Human Frogger

October 27, 2008

Soldiers and terrorists atwitter

A birthday message for the National Post

October 26, 2008

Review: Blue Gold: World Water Wars

October 25, 2008

Review: Addicted to Plastic

October 24, 2008

Suzuki is still green

Review: Michael Schmidt: Organic Hero or Bioterrorist

CBC, Media Democracy Day, and waking up with David Frum

October 23, 2008

The torture of three Muslim-Canadians

Happy Media Democracy Day!

October 21, 2008

ThisAbility #1: "So, what happened? Did you get in an accident, or something?"

Few surprises at GG Literary awards shortlist announcement

October 18, 2008

election comedy

October 17, 2008

Alternate reality

Canada in the world

October 15, 2008

Obama Illusions

The election that wasn't

Harper's Economics 101

October 14, 2008

A final hearing

THIS Magazine liveblogs the Canadian Federal election results

Come to This Magazine's Election Watch Gala

October 11, 2008

Yet another weekly recap, folks

October 10, 2008

Lend a hand this election day

Parties speak out about a forgotten issue

October 09, 2008

Voting angst

Answers to Yesterday's Quiz

October 08, 2008

Can the Conservatives be defeated by a coaltion of parties? Doubt it.

Dancing in the Streets to the Parties' Economic Platforms

Quiz Time

October 06, 2008

You Have A Choice: Stop Being an Orphan Voter

What have you got up your sleeve, Steve?

October 03, 2008

This blog has seven days

Get off your ass and vote on October 14

October 02, 2008

This Magazine liveblogs the October 2 English-language leaders' debate

Why so quiet Tory candidates?

But where do they live?

October 01, 2008

What war in Afghanistan?

This Magazine liveblogs the October 1 French-language leaders debate

enviro-friendly debate

Plagiarism scandal's source more intriguing than its substance

This PSA: You Can Vote October 3, 4 and 6

Mr. Harper Goes Green