The brother of a Mississauga teenager who was killed last December has been charged with first-degree murder. There was considerable media comment at the time of the killing about how the murder was motivated by the teen's refusal to wear traditional Muslim dress.
Waqas Parvez, 27, was originally charged with obstructing police in the death of his sister, but he has now been additionally charged with the murder count, Peel Regional Police said on Thursday.
The man's sister, 16-year-old Aqsa Parvez, died after being attacked inside their family home. She died in hospital on Dec. 10 after police said a man had called 911 and said he had killed his daughter.
An autopsy showed Aqsa died from "neck compression."
The girl's father, 57-year-old Muhammad Parvez, had his charge of second-degree murder upgraded to first-degree murder last week.
Police are not commenting on the reason for the new charges, saying only that they have resulted from their ongoing investigation.
Aqsa had been staying with friends due to a falling out with her family but returned home before school on the day she was killed.
Her friends said she had been involved in a family dispute over her choice not to wear a hijab, the traditional Muslim head scarf.
Police have not commented on a motive or how the teenager was attacked.
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Zimbabwean leader Mugabe has history of violence against those who disagree
"Hate oppression but fear the oppressed"
June 28, 2008
Michelle Faul, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa - In the mind of Robert Mugabe, reality is summed up by a massive banner hanging in the entrance to the presidential offices in Harare: Mugabe is Right.
The longtime Zimbabwean leader defied the world Friday to hold a one-man presidential run-off on the heels of a campaign of intimidation and violence in which dozens of opposition supporters have been killed and thousands injured and driven from their homes.
Mugabe fought to liberate a country of oppressed Africans from racist white rule and then built it into a much-hailed economic and social success. What would drive him to preside over its decline and ruin?
Under Mugabe, Zimbabwe fed itself and became a major exporter of food as well as of tobacco and minerals. Literacy and longevity rates shot up. Today, a third of the population is starving and the country has the lowest life expectancy in the world - just 34 years for women.
Twenty-eight years after he freed the country from white rule, he still depicts himself as a liberator fighting to keep Zimbabwe from white imperialists. He calls whites vermin and mongrels.
Heidi Holland, in her recently published book "Dinner with Mugabe," describes Zimbabwe's leader is an "emotionally weak man" who has never come to terms with some of life's earlier disappointments.
He has never forgiven the father who abandoned him when he was 10 to the women in the family - a heathen grandmother and an over-pious mother converted to Catholicism who proudly gave her son into the care of Jesuit priests at nearby Kutama mission. There, Mugabe found a surrogate father in Anglo-Irish headmaster Rev. Jerome O'Hea.
To this day, Mugabe models himself on a British gentleman - dark lounge suits, silk ties and handkerchiefs, a fondness for tea and cricket.
Holland said Mugabe was likely humiliated in the past week when the Queen stripped him of the honorary knighthood bestowed in 1994 when he was an anti-apartheid hero.
Yet it is Britain that Mugabe has chosen to demonize, accusing London of wanting to reclaim his southern African country as a virtual colony.
"When you hear Mugabe vilifying Britain, expressing hatred of Britain, underlying that is a love of Britain," said Holland, a Zimbabwean journalist living in South Africa who won a rare interview with Mugabe in November, meeting with him for 2 1/2 hours.
She did not think he was crazy, but "lives in the world in a mad kind of way."
"But I think it's deliberate," Holland said. "I think he's in denial. I think he can't face what he's done in Zimbabwe because that isn't what he intended to do. He did genuinely, I think, want be the saviour of his people, the liberator of an oppressed nation. What has happened is a source of deep pain to him, I think."
Holland believes Mugabe still is bitter that the apartheid Rhodesian regime refused to allow him out of jail, where he was a political prisoner for 11 years, to attend the funeral of his only son with his first wife, Ghanaian fellow teacher Sally Hayfron.
Even as a child, Mugabe could not bear to be criticized, she said. He was a loner with his head constantly stuck in a book and a scholar who earned six degrees while he was imprison.
Mugabe would have been fine if he'd remained a teacher, perhaps advanced to headmaster, Holland said. But "the problem is he has an army and police force to act out his anger."
And at 84, Mugabe has the strength, stamina and health of a 60-year-old, with no sign that age is slowing him down or softening his sharp brain.
Chenjerai Hove, a Zimbabwean poet, novelist and essayist who fled Mugabe's regime, says whenever Mugabe is challenged "he becomes a wounded lion and goes on the attack."
Those who have failed to see that pattern chose "to look the other way while the man was busy showing his dictatorial tendencies," says Hove, a writer in resident at Brown University.
Back in 1976, when Mugabe fled Rhodesia to take control of the war for black rule from Mozambique, "a lot of people were arrested and tortured for him to be accepted as a leader, so his cruel past started at that time, and he has always worked like that," Hove said.
When Mugabe's leadership was challenged after independence in 1980 by disgruntled military leaders of rival liberation leader Joshua Nkomo's movement, Mugabe sent his North Korean-trained elite Fifth Brigade on a rampage against Nkomo's minority Ndebele tribe. Some 20,000 people, most innocent civilians, were killed. Thousands starved to death as Mugabe withheld international drought relief from Ndebele civilians.
The international community looked the other way, still pleased that Mugabe had urged reconciliation with the whites who had oppressed his people, allowing former Rhodesian ruler Ian Smith to draw a government parliamentary pension and whites to continue living privileged lifestyles with domestic workers in mansions replete with pools and tennis courts.
When the white farmers started voting against him, it infuriated Mugabe.
Few could argue with the logic of redistribution when some 5,000 white commercial farmers owned two-thirds of the best arable land in a country of millions of blacks.
But when voters rejected a 1999 referendum that would have strengthened his presidential powers and allowed his government to seize white-owned farms without compensation for redistribution to black farmers, he again turned brutal.
Mugabe sent self-styled "war veterans" to violently take over farms, which were then given to his cabinet ministers, military leaders and other elite. Hundreds of thousands of black farm labourers lost their jobs, fertile lands turned fallow and nearly a third of the population fled the economic collapse and political oppression.
In 2005, Mugabe sent bulldozers to shantytowns and street markets where residents had voted overwhelmingly for the opposition.
This year, Mugabe unleashed his military and ruling party hooligans on his people after Zimbabweans rejected him in the first round of presidential elections in March, giving the most votes to opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai. Dozens of opposition supporters have been killed and thousands injured.
As the violence intensified, fearing more blood on his hands, Tsvangirai withdraw from the run-off election held Friday.
Mugabe has shrugged off the growing chorus of criticism, which this week belatedly was joined by African leaders condemning him for pursuing his violent re-election.
Holland fears the violence won't end now.
"This is a man who does not forgive ... I think it's about revenge ... He now knows that his own people don't want him."
Green Shift -- Sound Foreign Policy
Listening to the Conservative ads attacking the Green Shift I am struck by the failure to address the main issue -- the use of oil.
While it is helpful for parts of Canada in the short run, the massive industrial use of oil on a worldwide scale is highly problematic. Ignore for the moment the environmental issue (not that the environment is to be ignored -- we do have a duty to be good stewards). Look at who benefits -- often some of the most dangerous and repressive nations on earth. Look at the fate of Christians (and indeed some Muslims) in Saudi Arabia. Funding these regimes is just bad.
Some uses for oil cannot be eliminated. Electric jets just aren't going to happen. Canada's oil patch won't lose its business if we reduce oil dependence.
A revenue neutral tax structure that encourages a move away from oil where possible is a free market way to implement a necessary policy. The Dion Green Shift can work. Perhaps there are other approaches that could work but so far we haven't heard about them, at least from the Conservatives.
While it is helpful for parts of Canada in the short run, the massive industrial use of oil on a worldwide scale is highly problematic. Ignore for the moment the environmental issue (not that the environment is to be ignored -- we do have a duty to be good stewards). Look at who benefits -- often some of the most dangerous and repressive nations on earth. Look at the fate of Christians (and indeed some Muslims) in Saudi Arabia. Funding these regimes is just bad.
Some uses for oil cannot be eliminated. Electric jets just aren't going to happen. Canada's oil patch won't lose its business if we reduce oil dependence.
A revenue neutral tax structure that encourages a move away from oil where possible is a free market way to implement a necessary policy. The Dion Green Shift can work. Perhaps there are other approaches that could work but so far we haven't heard about them, at least from the Conservatives.
Privacy concerns quashes 'chronic offender' program
"Well, it's pretty obvious the police were making a political point -- that said, so what? The point, that there are some seriously dangerous folks on the street who are not being taken care of by the system, is valid (the police answer is a problem but that's another point). Moreover the individuals in question are unlikely to care. Still, the law does seem pretty clear against the police. jcm"
Brian Hutchinson, National Post Published: Friday, June 27, 2008
Brian Hutchinson, National Post Published: Friday, June 27, 2008VANCOUVER -- An aggressive police campaign designed to expose career criminals in Vancouver has been suspended after B.C.'s Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner said it may violate provincial law.
"We don't want people to play fast and loose with the rules," the office's executive director, Mary Carlson, said in an interview Friday, suggesting the Vancouver Police Department may have violated provincial privacy laws when it launched its "Chronic Offender" publicity program last week.
Among other things, the VPD released photographs and brief criminal histories of three career criminals, each of whom has more than 125 convictions for theft, break an enter, assault and other crimes.
The publicity blitz was to continue this week with the release of more criminal profiles, part of its new "Chronic Offender of the Week" program. That campaign has also been shelved, says VPD Inspector Rob Rothwell, who runs the department's chronic offenders program.
Ms. Carlson said B.C.'s Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act requires police to notify her office first before making such information public.
Police must provide her office with material they intend to publicize, including photographs and written descriptions of criminals and criminal suspects.
Ms. Carlson said this protocol was not followed last week. "We were not informed prior" to the release of the three criminal profiles, she said. Her office immediately contacted the VPD and expressed its concern. She then participated in a conference call with Vancouver police representatives.
Ms. Carlson acknowledges that efforts by her office to stop or delay the police program, the first of its kind in Canada, "may not be popular" with British Columbians.
But, she said, the criteria that determine which criminal is to be identified and exposed by police are "not clear to us."
Under the Privacy Act, police are to create awareness of a criminal's status in the event there is "significant risk" to the public. "This is to be done right away," Ms. Carlson said. "How does releasing the photograph [of an offender] once a week meet that test? I'm not entirely sure what the police are trying to do with that."
Insp. Rothwell says the VPD does not believe it breached the Privacy Act. Certain sections, he adds, "are open to interpretation. If you look at the Act, the wording is fairly vague and general."
He denied that Ms. Carlson and her colleagues were not provided advance notice of its media campaign last week. "We did alert them," he said. "Granted, it may have been more of a last-minute advisory."
He hopes his department's decision to suspend the Chronic Offender publicity campaign is only temporary. The VPD is preparing a response to the privacy office and discussions are expected to continue with officials next week.
NDP Leadership Race -- Lots Of Choice?
Jun 28, 2008
Leading the Ontario NDP has been called the most thankless job in provincial politics.
And that's what New Democrats say about it privately.
"Who the hell wants it?" scoffs one senior party insider, who, like many others interviewed by the Star, requested anonymity so he could speak freely about internal matters.
With a fractious caucus of 10 MPPs, the party is mired in third place in the Legislature, still haunted by the tumultuous 1990-95 tenure of former premier Bob Rae, now a Liberal MP.
The Green Party is threatening to lure away tree-hugging NDPers while Premier Dalton McGuinty's governing Liberals are attracting traditional New Democrats in policy areas as disparate as poverty and manufacturing.
Yet the race to succeed NDP Leader Howard Hampton, 56, who has guided the left-leaning party since succeeding Rae in 1996, is shaping up to boast a surprisingly crowded field.
"There's any number of good, capable, exciting people who are going to be announcing their leadership ambitions over the course of the next few months from both within the caucus as well as outside the caucus, I'm sure," says NDP House Leader Peter Kormos.
"I'm looking forward to an exciting campaign ... I think the people of Ontario are going to be excited by the sort of people who come forward," says Kormos, who is unlikely to run even though he was a kingmaking runner-up to Hampton 12 years ago.
While the official campaign does not begin until July 15, candidates are already out there selling memberships in readiness for the convention in Hamilton next March.
The consensus front-runner is MPP Peter Tabuns (Toronto-Danforth), a former city councillor and Greenpeace executive who shares a riding with federal NDP Leader Jack Layton.
Sources say Tabuns, 56, has the support of popular MPP Cheri DiNovo (Parkdale-High Park), herself an oft-rumoured leadership hopeful, and he has been criss-crossing the province building support.
"He has an excellent organization, but some animosity has developed toward Tabuns and you might see an `anybody-but-Peter' movement emerge," says another party insider, referring to the resentment over Tabuns' overt campaigning before Hampton even made his departure official two weeks ago.
MPP Gilles Bisson, (Timmins-James Bay) is planning a bid and sources say he could have the most money to work with because he is well regarded by mining firms in the North. There's a $500,000 spending limit for the contest and Bisson, 51, who uses his own plane to traverse his massive riding, may well enjoy a cash advantage.
Also likely to run are MPPs Michael Prue, 59, (Beaches-East York) and Andrea Horwath, 45, (Hamilton Centre), with ex-cabinet minister Rosario Marchese, 56, (Trinity-Spadina) another possibility.
From the labour movement, both Canadian Union of Public Employees Ontario president Sid Ryan, who has repeatedly failed to win seats for the NDP provincially and federally, and former Ontario Public Service Employees Union president Leah Casselman are mentioned as possible contenders.
Because unions affiliated with the NDP receive 25 per cent of the leadership ballots, labour will have a big say in choosing the ultimate winner. The remaining 75 per cent belong to rank-and-file party members, so selling memberships at $25 apiece, or $5 for students and the less fortunate, is crucial in a one-member, one-vote election. The deadline for sales is January.
Provincial party insiders play down speculation that a federal New Democrat – MPs Peggy Nash (Parkdale-High Park), Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay), and Brian Masse (Windsor West) are often mentioned – might enter the race.
In part, that's because there is so much uncertainty about the timing of the next federal election.
Still, a popular parlour game in New Democratic circles is guessing which, if any, outsiders would want to take the plunge.
"I'm going to throw a name out at you: André Marin," says a party official, referring to the headlining-grabbing Ontario ombudsman.
"He's young, speaks both official languages ... and you could argue he's the most effective opponent in the province of this (Liberal) government," says the insider. "Would he even consider it? I don't know."
Even against this backdrop, party members are optimistic that the next nine months could give birth to a new NDP, unencumbered by its recent past. "People are ready to see the Rae years put to rest," says one weary insider. "Finally."
Human Rights Commissions, Free Speech and Defamation In the Supreme Court
Yesterday's Supreme Court of Canada decision in WIC Radio Ltd. v. Simpson, 2008 SCC 40 is of considerable importance for defamation law. But its greater importance may be the foreshadowing it gives of the Court's view about how the litigation process can be abused to stifle otherwise valuable free speech. This last point is especially relevant in light of the ongoing issues of free speech and human rights commissions.
In this regard a passage from the case is most relevant:
[15] The function of the tort of defamation is to vindicate reputation, but many courts have concluded that the traditional elements of that tort may require modification to provide broader accommodation to the value of freedom of expression. There is concern that matters of public interest go unreported because publishers fear the ballooning cost and disruption of defending a defamation action. Investigative reports get "spiked", the Media Coalition contends, because, while true, they are based on facts that are difficult to establish according to rules of evidence. When controversies erupt, statements of claim often follow as night follows day, not only in serious claims (as here) but in actions launched simply for the purpose of intimidation. Of course "chilling" false and defamatory speech is not a bad thing in itself, but chilling debate on matters of legitimate public interest raises issues of inappropriate censorship and self-censorship. Public controversy can be a rough trade, and the law needs to accommodate its requirements.
Turning now to the legal impact decision itself the Court held that the traditional elements of the tort of defamation require modification to provide broader accommodation to the value of freedom of expression.
Accordingly the Court modified the "honest belief" element of the fair comment defence so that the test, as modified, consists of the following elements: (a) the comment must be on a matter of public interest; (b) the comment must be based on fact; (c) the comment, though it can include inferences of fact, must be recognizable as comment; (d) the comment must satisfy the following objective test: could any person honestly express that opinion on the proved facts? Even though the comment satisfies the objective test of honest belief, the defence can be defeated if the plaintiff proves that the defendant was subjectively actuated by express malice. The defendant must prove the four elements of the defence before the onus switches back to the plaintiff to establish malice.
The Court held:
[28] For ease of reference, I repeat and endorse the formulation of the test for the fair comment defence set out by Justice Dickson, dissenting, in Cherneskey [Cherneskey v. Armadale Publishers Ltd., [1979] 1 S.C.R. 1067] as follows:
(a) the comment must be on a matter of public interest;
(b) the comment must be based on fact;
(c) the comment, though it can include inferences of fact, must be recognisable as comment;
(d) the comment must satisfy the following objective test: could any [person] honestly express that opinion on the proved facts?
(e) even though the comment satisfies the objective test the defence can be defeated if the plaintiff proves that the defendant was [subjectively] actuated by express malice.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Liberals and Conservatives
What's the difference? Well, there's the obvious colour distinction but that's hardly dispositive.
The real issue is one of faith -- do you believe that together people are stronger or individuals alone are the way to go?
There is no moral point here. A solitary individual can be honest, decent and G-d fearing. And a community minded person can be a cad and a crook.
But there is a question of being open to the goodness of humanity or seeing merely its fallen nature. Is humanity perfectible, or open to striving to perfection, or is it inherently to be distrusted?
A life of hope or a life of fear?
Political labels alone are insufficient but suggestive. Conservatives fear, Liberals hope. We seek the same things -- and only a blinded partisan would suggest otherwise -- but I choose hope.
To paraphrase Paul, casting aside that which has been I strive toward that which is to come. My hope for a perfected future means I am a Liberal.
The real issue is one of faith -- do you believe that together people are stronger or individuals alone are the way to go?
There is no moral point here. A solitary individual can be honest, decent and G-d fearing. And a community minded person can be a cad and a crook.
But there is a question of being open to the goodness of humanity or seeing merely its fallen nature. Is humanity perfectible, or open to striving to perfection, or is it inherently to be distrusted?
A life of hope or a life of fear?
Political labels alone are insufficient but suggestive. Conservatives fear, Liberals hope. We seek the same things -- and only a blinded partisan would suggest otherwise -- but I choose hope.
To paraphrase Paul, casting aside that which has been I strive toward that which is to come. My hope for a perfected future means I am a Liberal.
Honda v Keays
The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Honda Canada Inc. v. Keays 2008 SCC 39 this morning. The summary appears below.
K had worked 11 years for the same employer, first on an assembly line and later in data entry, when, in 1997, he was diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome. He ceased work and received disability benefits until 1998, when his employer's insurer discontinued his benefits. K returned to work and was placed in a disability program that allows employees to take absences from work if they provide doctor's notes confirming that their absences are related to their disability. K's employer became concerned about the frequency of his absences. Moreover, the notes K offered to explain his absences changed in tone, leaving the employer to believe that the doctor did not independently evaluate whether he missed work due to disability. As such, the employer asked K to meet Dr. B, an occupational medical specialist, in order to determine how K's disability could be accommodated. On the advice of his counsel, K refused to meet B without explanation of the purpose, methodology and parameters of the consultation. In March 28, 2000, the employer gave K a letter stating that it supported K's full return to work but that K's employment would be terminated if he refused to meet B. When K remained unwilling to meet B, the employer terminated K's employment. K sued for wrongful dismissal. The trial judge found that K was entitled to a notice period of 15 months. He held that the employer had committed acts of discrimination, harassment and misconduct against K. He increased the notice period to 24 months to award additional damages dependent on the manner of dismissal. He also awarded punitive damages against the employer in the amount of $500,000, a costs premium, and costs on a substantial indemnity scale. The Court of Appeal reduced the costs premium and, in a majority decision, reduced the punitive damages award to $100,000. The Court of Appeal otherwise upheld the trial judge's decision. Held (LeBel and Fish JJ. dissenting in part on the appeal): The appeal should be allowed in part and the cross-appeal should be dismissed.
The award of aggravated damages for manner of dismissal and the award of punitive damages should be set aside. The cost premium should be set aside and costs should be adjusted to reflect an award on the regular scale in the lower courts. Costs are awarded to the employer at the Supreme Court level. Per McLachlin C.J. and Bastarache, Binnie, Deschamps, Abella, Charron and Rothstein JJ.: K was wrongfully dismissed and the award of damages reflecting the need for 15 months' notice should be maintained. In determining what constitutes reasonable notice of termination, courts should consider the character of the lost employment, the employee's length of service, the age of the employee, and the availability of similar employment having regard to the experience, training and qualifications of the employee. These factors can only be applied on a case-by-case basis and no one factor should be given disproportionate weight. No presumptions about the role that an employee's managerial level plays should be adopted in determining reasonable notice. The trial judge erred in alluding to the employer's flat management structure rather than examining K's actual functions; however, on the facts of this case there is no basis to interfere with the assessment of 15 months' notice.
An action for wrongful dismissal is based on an implied obligation in the employment contract to give reasonable notice of an intention to terminate the relationship in the absence of just cause. Generally, damages are not available for the actual loss of a job or for pain and distress suffered as a consequence of being terminated. However, in cases where parties have contemplated at the time of the contract that a breach in certain circumstances would cause the plaintiff mental distress, the plaintiff is entitled to recover. This is consistent with the view expressed in Findler that all compensatory damages for breach of contract are assessed under one rule, i.e., what was in the reasonable contemplation of the parties (Hadley v. Baxendale). In the employment law context, damages resulting from the manner of dismissal will be available if they result from the circumstances described in Wallace, namely where the employer engages in conduct during the course of dismissal that is "unfair or is in bad faith by being, for example, untruthful, misleading or unduly insensitive". These damages should be awarded through an award that reflects actual damages rather than by extending the notice period.
Aggravated damages should not have been awarded in this case. The employer's conduct in dismissing K was in no way an egregious display of bad faith justifying an award of damages for conduct in dismissal. On this issue, the trial judge made overriding and palpable errors of fact. The employer's March 28 letter to K did not misrepresent the positions of its doctors and it should not have been faulted for relying on the advice of its medical experts. There is no evidence that B took a "hard-ball" attitude towards workplace absences or that K was being set up when asked to meet B. The employer's request for a meeting between K and B was normal in the circumstances. The employer's decision to stop accepting doctor's notes was not reprisal for K's decision to retain legal counsel. Rather, the employer was simply seeking to confirm K's disability. Lastly, there is no evidence that K's disability subsequent to termination was caused by the manner of termination.
Similarly, punitive damages should not have been awarded. Punitive damages are restricted to advertent wrongful acts that are so malicious and outrageous that they are deserving of punishment on their own. The facts of this case demonstrate no such conduct. Courts should only resort to punitive damages in exceptional cases and the employer's conduct here was not sufficiently egregious or outrageous to warrant such damages. Even if the facts had justified an award of punitive damages, both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal should have been alert to the fact that the compensatory damages already awarded carried, under the old test, an element of deterrence and they should have questioned whether punitive damages were necessary. This failure resulted in considerable and unnecessary duplication in the award of damages.
Both the trial judge and the Court of Appeal also erred in concluding that the employer's "discriminatory conduct" amounted to an independent actionable wrong for the purposes of allocating punitive damages. The Ontario Human Rights Code provides a comprehensive scheme for the treatment of claims of discrimination. A breach of the Code cannot constitute an actionable wrong; therefore the legal requirement for the common law remedy of punitive damages is not met. Since there is no evidence of discrimination to support a claim of discrimination under the Code and no breach of human rights legislation serves as an actionable wrong, there is no need to deal with K's request for recognition of a distinct tort of discrimination.
Le "Tournant vert" va véritablement permettre de rendre le Canada plus riche, plus juste et plus vert
Dion, Stéphane
Samedi dernier, La Presse a publié trois textes d'opinion sur le "Tournant vert" que propose le Parti libéral du Canada. Le "Tournant vert" consiste à imposer une taxe sur les émissions de gaz à effet de serre et à se servir des revenus de cette taxe pour réduire les impôts sur le revenu des particuliers et des entreprises. Autrement dit, les libéraux proposent de taxer moins ce que nous voulons voir augmenter: nos revenus, nos épargnes, nos investissements, et de taxer plus ce que nous voulons voir diminuer: la pollution, les gaz à effet de serre, le gaspillage.
Jeffrey Simpson a bien résumé les trois raisons pour lesquelles ce plan a été bien reçu par un nombre impressionnant d'économistes et d'environnementalistes. Premièrement, ce plan sera bon pour la croissance économique, car il permettra de baisser les impôts des particuliers et des entreprises, et de déplacer cet effort fiscal vers la réduction de la pollution. Deuxièmement, en assignant un prix aux émissions de dioxyde de carbone (CO2), le plan libéral va avoir un effet positif sur l'environnement et sur la lutte aux changements climatiques. Troisièmement, le plan libéral évite d'alourdir le fardeau fiscal des Canadiens en étant fiscalement neutre: chaque dollar prélevé auprès des pollueurs va être remis dans les poches des contribuables canadiens.
André Pratte et Claude Picher ont des interrogations tout à fait légitimes qui contrastent heureusement avec le ton hargneux et carrément grossier du premier ministre Harper.
André Pratte demande quelle est la méthode la plus efficace: une taxe sur le carbone ou un système d'échange de permis d'émissions. En fait, les deux méthodes peuvent se compléter et c'est bien ce que nous comptons faire. L'avantage de commencer avec une taxe est qu'il est plus facile de la mettre en oeuvre rapidement. Par ailleurs, ce dont le Canada n'a vraiment pas besoin, c'est du système d'échange de permis d'émissions proposé par les conservateurs. Ce système est mal conçu, plein d'échappatoires et sans cibles absolues. Tous les experts qui l'ont étudié ont conclu qu'il ne pourra pas atteindre les trop faibles cibles qu'il s'est données.
André Pratte se demande aussi si la taxe sur le carbone proposée par mon parti sera suffisamment élevée pour réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Selon le Groupe d'experts international sur l'évolution du climat, ce groupe de scientifiques parrainé par l'ONU qui a gagné le Prix Nobel cette année pour ses recherches sur les changements climatiques, la zone d'efficacité se situe à un prix variant entre 20$ et 80$ la tonne de CO2.
Le "Tournant vert" se situe dans cette fourchette: en taxant le CO2 à 10$ la tonne la première année, puis en augmentant graduellement cette taxe jusqu'à 40$ la quatrième année, il donnera des résultats réels tout en accordant à chacun le temps de s'adapter.
Totalité des émissions
Claude Picher calcule que si la totalité des émissions de gaz à effet de serre canadiennes était taxée à 40$ la tonne, le revenu ainsi obtenu serait de 23 milliards de dollars. Il se demande pourquoi nous prévoyons obtenir un revenu moindre (15,4 milliards). Il y a deux raisons à cela. Premièrement, nous tenons compte du fait que certains combustibles fossiles sont déjà assujettis à une taxe d'accise. La taxe sur le carbone que nous proposons va remplacer ces taxes, elle ne va pas s'y ajouter. L'objectif est que tous les combustibles fossiles soient taxés de la même façon la quatrième année: 40$ la tonne de CO2. Voilà pourquoi nous n'envisageons pas d'augmenter la taxe sur l'essence à la pompe, car elle est déjà assujettie à une taxe d'accise de dix cents le litre, ce qui équivaut à environ 40$ la tonne de CO2.
Deuxièmement, la taxe va seulement s'appliquer au CO2 émis par la combustion des carburants fossiles, et non aux autres gaz à effet de serre, tel le méthane. Nous allons proposer d'autres mesures pour réduire ces gaz, car il serait difficile de le faire par une taxe. Comme nous l'avons déjà dit, le " Tournant vert" ne constitue pas l'ensemble de notre plan de lutte contre les changements climatiques, mais il en est la base essentielle.
Enfin, M. Picher prévoit que les entreprises vont refiler aux consommateurs une partie des coûts de la taxe sur le carbone, car elles ne pourront pas réduire leurs émissions du jour au lendemain.
Mais il faut bien voir que tout plan de lutte contre les changements climatiques va avoir un tel effet. Même les conservateurs admettent que leur plan va accroître le coût de l'électricité et de l'énergie pour les consommateurs. ()
On le voit, le "Tournant vert" va être bon pour l'économie, bon pour l'écologie. Jeffrey Simpson, et tant d'autres experts et commentateurs ont raison: le "Tournant vert" va véritablement permettre de rendre le Canada plus riche, plus juste et plus vert.
L'auteur est le chef de l'opposition officielle, à Ottawa, et chef du Parti libéral du Canada.
Samedi dernier, La Presse a publié trois textes d'opinion sur le "Tournant vert" que propose le Parti libéral du Canada. Le "Tournant vert" consiste à imposer une taxe sur les émissions de gaz à effet de serre et à se servir des revenus de cette taxe pour réduire les impôts sur le revenu des particuliers et des entreprises. Autrement dit, les libéraux proposent de taxer moins ce que nous voulons voir augmenter: nos revenus, nos épargnes, nos investissements, et de taxer plus ce que nous voulons voir diminuer: la pollution, les gaz à effet de serre, le gaspillage.
Jeffrey Simpson a bien résumé les trois raisons pour lesquelles ce plan a été bien reçu par un nombre impressionnant d'économistes et d'environnementalistes. Premièrement, ce plan sera bon pour la croissance économique, car il permettra de baisser les impôts des particuliers et des entreprises, et de déplacer cet effort fiscal vers la réduction de la pollution. Deuxièmement, en assignant un prix aux émissions de dioxyde de carbone (CO2), le plan libéral va avoir un effet positif sur l'environnement et sur la lutte aux changements climatiques. Troisièmement, le plan libéral évite d'alourdir le fardeau fiscal des Canadiens en étant fiscalement neutre: chaque dollar prélevé auprès des pollueurs va être remis dans les poches des contribuables canadiens.
André Pratte et Claude Picher ont des interrogations tout à fait légitimes qui contrastent heureusement avec le ton hargneux et carrément grossier du premier ministre Harper.
André Pratte demande quelle est la méthode la plus efficace: une taxe sur le carbone ou un système d'échange de permis d'émissions. En fait, les deux méthodes peuvent se compléter et c'est bien ce que nous comptons faire. L'avantage de commencer avec une taxe est qu'il est plus facile de la mettre en oeuvre rapidement. Par ailleurs, ce dont le Canada n'a vraiment pas besoin, c'est du système d'échange de permis d'émissions proposé par les conservateurs. Ce système est mal conçu, plein d'échappatoires et sans cibles absolues. Tous les experts qui l'ont étudié ont conclu qu'il ne pourra pas atteindre les trop faibles cibles qu'il s'est données.
André Pratte se demande aussi si la taxe sur le carbone proposée par mon parti sera suffisamment élevée pour réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Selon le Groupe d'experts international sur l'évolution du climat, ce groupe de scientifiques parrainé par l'ONU qui a gagné le Prix Nobel cette année pour ses recherches sur les changements climatiques, la zone d'efficacité se situe à un prix variant entre 20$ et 80$ la tonne de CO2.
Le "Tournant vert" se situe dans cette fourchette: en taxant le CO2 à 10$ la tonne la première année, puis en augmentant graduellement cette taxe jusqu'à 40$ la quatrième année, il donnera des résultats réels tout en accordant à chacun le temps de s'adapter.
Totalité des émissions
Claude Picher calcule que si la totalité des émissions de gaz à effet de serre canadiennes était taxée à 40$ la tonne, le revenu ainsi obtenu serait de 23 milliards de dollars. Il se demande pourquoi nous prévoyons obtenir un revenu moindre (15,4 milliards). Il y a deux raisons à cela. Premièrement, nous tenons compte du fait que certains combustibles fossiles sont déjà assujettis à une taxe d'accise. La taxe sur le carbone que nous proposons va remplacer ces taxes, elle ne va pas s'y ajouter. L'objectif est que tous les combustibles fossiles soient taxés de la même façon la quatrième année: 40$ la tonne de CO2. Voilà pourquoi nous n'envisageons pas d'augmenter la taxe sur l'essence à la pompe, car elle est déjà assujettie à une taxe d'accise de dix cents le litre, ce qui équivaut à environ 40$ la tonne de CO2.
Deuxièmement, la taxe va seulement s'appliquer au CO2 émis par la combustion des carburants fossiles, et non aux autres gaz à effet de serre, tel le méthane. Nous allons proposer d'autres mesures pour réduire ces gaz, car il serait difficile de le faire par une taxe. Comme nous l'avons déjà dit, le " Tournant vert" ne constitue pas l'ensemble de notre plan de lutte contre les changements climatiques, mais il en est la base essentielle.
Enfin, M. Picher prévoit que les entreprises vont refiler aux consommateurs une partie des coûts de la taxe sur le carbone, car elles ne pourront pas réduire leurs émissions du jour au lendemain.
Mais il faut bien voir que tout plan de lutte contre les changements climatiques va avoir un tel effet. Même les conservateurs admettent que leur plan va accroître le coût de l'électricité et de l'énergie pour les consommateurs. ()
On le voit, le "Tournant vert" va être bon pour l'économie, bon pour l'écologie. Jeffrey Simpson, et tant d'autres experts et commentateurs ont raison: le "Tournant vert" va véritablement permettre de rendre le Canada plus riche, plus juste et plus vert.
L'auteur est le chef de l'opposition officielle, à Ottawa, et chef du Parti libéral du Canada.
Anthony Hanemaayer -- An impossible choice
Anthony Hanemaayer's dilemma was real: risk a lengthy sentence in a federal prison for a crime he didn't commit, or admit to that crime for the certainty of a shorter sentence in a reformatory. His choice was not unreasonable, but having to make the decision was wrong. Punishment should not be directed to whether the accused decided to exercise his or her right to have a trial.
From Toronto Star - Dion gung-ho on carbon tax
Liberal leader, hinting at a possible fall election, defends his complex, environmentally friendly plan
A bullish Stéphane Dion says he's confident he can win over Canadians with his party's climate change plan, even though it will mean higher energy costs.
"It's a debate and we intend to win it because we have a good policy, good values," Dion said.
"It's the first time in history I guess that you have this debate about climate change that may be at the core of an election," Dion said, hinting that his party, after several missed opportunities, may finally be ready to topple the minority Tories.
The Liberal leader, fresh from unveiling the policy last week, is in the early days of a nationwide, summer sales pitch to sell Canadians on the strategy for tackling greenhouse gas emissions.
"I'm pleased by where we are in the debate. I hope it will continue through the summer," he said during a meeting with the Toronto Star editorial board yesterday.
But it's no secret he faces a challenge in persuading Canadians to sign on to a plan that will boost the cost of diesel, home heating oil and natural gas – but could also serve up income tax cuts, too.
Liberals say fuel for cars, trucks and buses would not be affected because gasoline is already subject to a 10-cent-a-litre federal excise tax.
Dion defended the twin goals of his party's ambitious "Green Shift" to curb greenhouse gas emissions while at the same time reforming the country's tax system to put more money in the wallets of the poor.
"I have received some criticism, `why is it about helping the poor? That has nothing to do with climate change and the environment'," Dion said.
"To the contrary. Who will be the most affected by climate change if it is not the most vulnerable people ...," he said.
"This plan is a plan that brings together economic growth, environmental sustainability but also social justice," Dion said.
"It's a change of our tax regime to make it more progressive," he said. "I'm committed to fight poverty."
Under the Liberal proposal, a carbon tax would be slapped on fossil fuels, meaning higher costs for individuals, homeowners and businesses.
But Dion has promised the Liberal plan will be revenue neutral and that the federal tax windfall, estimated to be about $15 billion, will be returned to individuals and corporations in the form of tax breaks.
However, lower-income families stand to come out ahead. For example, a two-income couple earning $20,000 with two children would get back almost $2,400, compared to $1,300 for a couple earning $100,000.
"We are asking the polluters to pay. The polluters are all of us but some of us are more polluting than others and they will have to pay more," Dion said.
"The people with little means will receive more money," he said.
He also touted the Liberals' investments to help businesses cope with the changes, and said
"The booming part of the global economy today is green technology because humanity is facing two problems ... cheap oil is over and climate change," Dion said.
"If we don't act and we continue to try to build the big polluting cars ... we have no future," Dion said.
"It's what I want to indicate, not only to the auto industry but to world,
But he was vague on his party's strategy for a carbon tariff on imports, meant to ensure that domestic manufacturers, who could see costs go up because of the carbon tax, aren't disadvantaged by cheaper imports.
"To design a carbon tariff is something I want to do well. I need to consult a lot of experts to be sure. But the commitment is there. We will build carbon pricing into our strategy for international trade," Dion said.
"Where it's possible, we will ensure that goods from countries that are not pricing carbon will face a tariff reflective of carbon content," he said.
Dion, who has staked his political future on the green plan, hinted that current debate is just the prelude for an election battle that could come this fall.
After ducking repeated opportunities to topple the minority Conservatives in the last parliamentary session, Dion was fired up yesterday as he talked about the urgency to enact his party's climate change strategy.
"The science is telling us you need to act right away. ... we need to start now," Dion said.
And he said the next election would be a turning point for the country as climate change takes centre stage.
"It will not only be for the next four years but the next 40 years," Dion said.
"It will decide whether we want to tackle the challenges of the century or ignore them."
Chronic Repeat Offenders -- Vancouver Police Blame Judges For Overly Soft Sentencing
Blaming the criminal system for
Punishment for crime in
The problem with specific deterrence is that it presumes a rational actor. And that is exactly what we do not have when dealing with the drug addicted and, perhaps, mentally ill, criminals of
The criminal system is not designed to treat addicts and while there is some treatment available in prison it is time limited and usually under resourced. Voluntary drug treatment is seldom successful because, bluntly, it is unpleasant and requires willpower and funding, both of which are seldom found in criminal street addicts.
But this does not mean the problem is without solution – it merely means that “more of the same” will not work.
The Australian program targets 100 repeat male offenders with long term illicit drug dependency and an associated life of crime and constant imprisonment. The program combines a term of incarceration with mandatory treatment and a slow reintegration into society. Jail is followed by custody in the community with ongoing supervision – initial results from the program seem positive.
The chronic repeat offenders of
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Security Certificates and Preservation of Evidence
Today’s Supreme Court of
The respondent ministers signed a security certificate against C under s. 77(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. C was then arrested and detained. Before the scheduled date of the fourth review of C’s detention, counsel for the ministers informed the judge at an in camera hearing that they had recently taken cognizance of a document that should have been disclosed to C at the outset of the proceedings but had not been disclosed because of an oversight. The document consisted of a summary of two interviews C had had with CSIS officers. The judge ordered that the summary be disclosed to C’s counsel forthwith. At this same hearing, counsel for the ministers filed fresh allegations about C that were based on information that was not in his file when the ministers signed the security certificate. The next day, the judge disclosed a summary of this new information to C. The detention review hearing was adjourned and C was granted a postponement. C then filed a motion to exclude the new evidence. He also requested that the complete notes of the two interviews conducted by CSIS be disclosed to him together with the recordings of the interviews. But the ministers informed the judge that there were no recordings in the file and that notes of interviews are, in accordance with an internal policy of CSIS, systematically destroyed once the officers have completed their reports. Alleging that his right to procedural fairness had been violated, C filed a motion for a stay of proceedings, in which he asked that the certificate be quashed and that he be released. In the alternative, he asked that the new evidence be excluded. The Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the applications.
Held: The appeal should be allowed in part and the application for a stay of proceedings should be dismissed.
The destruction of operational notes is a breach of CSIS's duty to retain and disclose information, which derives from s. 12 of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act and a contextual analysis of the case law on the disclosure and retention of evidence. Section 12 provides that CSIS must acquire information to the extent that it is strictly necessary in order to carry out its mandate, and must then analyse and retain relevant information and intelligence. The CSIS policy on the management of operational notes rests on an erroneous interpretation of that provision. Section 12 does not require that collected information be destroyed, but instead demands that CSIS retain its operational notes when conducting an investigation that targets an individual or group. The retention of notes, which include drafts, diagrams, recordings and photographs, must serve a practical purpose. As a result, the meaning of the word "intelligence" in s. 12 should not be limited to the summaries prepared by officers. The original operational notes are a better source of information and of evidence.
Whether or not the constitutional guarantees of s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply does not turn on a formal distinction between the different areas of law, but depends instead on the severity of the consequences of the state's actions for the individual's fundamental interests of liberty and security and, in some cases, the right to life. By its very nature, the security certificate procedure can place these rights in serious jeopardy. To protect them, it therefore becomes necessary to recognize a duty to disclose evidence based on s. 7 that goes beyond mere summaries. Investigations by CSIS play a central role in the decision on the issuance of a security certificate and the consequent removal order. The consequences of security certificates are often more severe than those of many criminal charges. As things stand, the destruction by CSIS officers of their operational notes compromises the very function of judicial review. To uphold the right to procedural fairness of people in C’s position, CSIS should be required to retain all the information in its possession and to disclose it to the ministers and the designated judge. The ministers and the designated judge will in turn be responsible for verifying the information they are given. If the ministers have access to all the original evidence, they will be better positioned to make appropriate decisions on issuing a certificate. The designated judge, who will have access to all the evidence, will then exclude any evidence that might pose a threat to national security and summarize the remaining evidence — which he or she will have been able to check for accuracy and reliability — for the named person. The duty of CSIS to retain and disclose the information submitted to the ministers and the designated judge also applies with respect to the person named in the certificate. However, confidentiality requirements related to public safety and state interests will place limits on how this duty is discharged. The judge must therefore filter the evidence he or she has verified and determine the limits of the access to which the named person will be entitled at each step of the process, both during the review of the validity of the certificate and at the detention review stage.
In this case, the designated judge granted the appropriate remedy for the late disclosure of the interview summary and the summary of the new allegations. By adjourning the hearing and granting a postponement of C’s detention review to enable C to prepare his testimony and defence, the judge averted any prejudice that might have resulted from the delay in disclosing the new evidence. Moreover, since it was C himself who had been questioned in the interviews, he had knowledge of the subject and doubtless knew what he had said on that occasion. As a result, he had sufficient time to prepare his testimony.
As for the new allegations filed by the ministers, any new evidence should be admitted, regardless of whether it is submitted to the designated judge by the ministers or by the named person. The judicial review process relates, on an ongoing basis, to both the certificate and the detention. It is not limited to a review of the bases for the ministers' initial decision. Furthermore, receiving new evidence in the course of this ongoing verification process is fairer, since such evidence can be as beneficial to the named person as to the ministers.
A stay of proceedings is not an appropriate remedy in this case. The only appropriate remedy is to confirm the duty to disclose C’s entire file to the designated judge and, after the judge has filtered it, to C and his counsel. This appeal is from an interlocutory judgment by the designated judge, not from his final decision on the reasonableness of the certificate. It would therefore be premature at this stage of the proceedings for the Court to determine how the destruction of the notes affects the reliability of the evidence. The designated judge will be in a position to make that determination, as he will have all the evidence before him and will be able to summon and question as witnesses those who took the interview notes. If he concludes that there is a reasonable basis for the security certificate but that the destruction of the notes had a prejudicial effect, he will then consider whether C should be granted a remedy.
Chretien wins Federal Court battle to set aside Gomery findings
STATEMENT FROM THE LIBERAL PARTY OF CANADA ON THE FEDERAL COURT DECISION TO SET ASIDE GOMERY FINDINGS
The
Though Judge Gomery’s report itself stated that there was no evidence Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Pelletier were involved, today’s decision by Judge Max Teitelbaum of the Federal Court removes any lingering hint of impropriety, and is a reminder that no elected officials were ever charged with wrongdoing in the federal sponsorship program.
We wish to thank Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Pelletier for their lifelong commitment to our great country and to the
June 26, 2008
Joan Bryden, THE CANADIAN PRESS
OTTAWA - Former prime minister Jean Chretien is "obviously very gratified and very happy" about a Federal Court decision today that struck down parts of Justice John Gomery's report into the sponsorship scandal.
Eddie Goldenberg, Chretien's former chief of staff, said the former prime minister sees the ruling as a "total vindication." Goldenberg said he spoke earlier today to Chretien, who is attending a meeting with his wife Aline in Stockholm.
The Federal Court struck down Gomery's 2005 finding that Chretien and his top aide bore some responsibility for the federal sponsorship scandal that rocked the Liberal government.
Justice Max Teitelbaum ruled that Gomery's inappropriate comments to the media throughout the hearings into the scandal betrayed bias against Chretien and his chief of staff, Jean Pelletier.
Gomery said today he had not yet read the judgment, but that he had not made up his mind during the hearings and was impartial throughout.
"I made a lot of declarations," the retired judge said in an interview. "I had not decided anything at the time. I considered myself impartial."
Goldenberg said the Gomery report unnecessarily damaged Canadian unity, undermined trust in institutions and hurt the reputation of the Liberal party.
He added that Pelletier, who suffered ill health because of Gomery, should receive an apology from former prime minister Paul Martin, who established the inquiry.
Teitelbaum's ruling said "the comments made by the commissioner, viewed cumulatively, not only indicate that he prejudged issues but also that the commissioner was not impartial toward the applicant (Chretien)."
Moreover, Teitelbaum said Gomery's zeal to remain in the media spotlight trivialized the proceedings and tainted the perception of fairness.
"I agree with the applicant (Chretien) that the commissioner became preoccupied with ensuring that the spotlight of the media remained on the commission's inquiry and he went to great lengths to ensure that the public's interest in the commission did not wane," Teitelbaum wrote in a 51-page ruling.
"This preoccupation with the media outside the hearing room had a detrimental impact on the fairness of the proceedings."
Teitelbaum set aside the portion of Gomery's Nov. 1, 2005, report that said Chretien and Pelletier were to blame for "omissions" in their direction of the sponsorship program that led to wrongdoing.
Gomery, however, also ruled there was no evidence Chretien and Pelletier were "in any way" involved in a kickback scheme that a senior Liberal in the province supervised and which resulted in $1.1 million of government sponsorship money being diverted to the Quebec wing of the Liberal party.
Right to Face Accusers Is Affirmed in Unusual Case
"This just can't be right! jcm"
Witness Was Murder Victim
The Supreme Court yesterday threw out the conviction of a man accused of murdering his ex-girlfriend because the defendant could not challenge an incriminating account she gave the police weeks before her death.
The 6 to 3 ruling drew howls from domestic violence opponents who said the decision could lead to perverse situations in which criminals would reap a legal "windfall" after killing their victims.
The case revolved around the Sixth Amendment, which affords people the bedrock right to confront and cross-examine witnesses who give testimony against them. At issue is whether defendants forfeit their confrontation rights by doing harm to people whose statements are introduced in judicial proceedings.
Typically, courts have carved out few Sixth Amendment exceptions, giving leeway only to deathbed statements and to accounts by witnesses who are kept away from the courthouse by defendants seeking to thwart the judicial process.
The facts before the court were stark. Dwayne Giles shot his ex-girlfriend Brenda Avie six times in September 2002, killing her and then fleeing the scene. At trial, Giles argued that he fired the weapon out of fear, in self-defense and with his eyes closed. Avie's wounds indicated that she was turned to her side and lying on the ground during at least part of the attack, according to the court record.
Three weeks before her death, Avie tearfully told a police officer responding to a domestic violence call that Giles had choked her and threatened to slash her with a knife. The trial court allowed the statements to be introduced at Giles's murder trial under a
The California Supreme Court later upheld Giles's conviction, reasoning that he had forfeited his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses by killing his ex-girlfriend and rendering her unable to appear in court.
But a majority of justices at the Supreme Court yesterday wiped away the conviction and sent the case back to lower courts.
"Domestic violence is an intolerable offense that legislatures may choose to combat through many means," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority. "But for that serious crime, as for others, abridging the constitutional rights of criminal defendants is not in the State's arsenal."
Reasons May Be Brief
Today’s Court of Appeal decision in R. v. Haller, 2008 ONCA 517 has a small obiter dicta worth noting. The Court, in passing, points out that decisions given in very busy trial courts, generally criminal cases in the Ontario Court of Justice but presumably also in some Family Courts and perhaps Small Claims Court, may be abbreviated so long as the crucial function of reasons – to let the parties know why what was decided was decided and to allow for appellant review – is met.
The Court says:
We make the obvious observation that a trial judge is not required to refer to every piece of evidence led at trial. That is especially so where, as here, the trial judge in our busy provincial courts gives oral reasons after a short and simple trial.
Media Daze ...
Doing media commentary is great but glamorous it ain't. Studios that look fabulous on screen can be, errrh, shop worn shall we say, in real life.
See, for example, this green room (station unnamed). Practical yes, romantic not so much... .
Liberals Up Three Percent But Conservatives Maintain Lead Though Support Slightly Down
"Go to the full polling results at this website:
http://www.angus-reid.com/uppdf/2008.06.25_ARPW.pdf
jcm"
http://www.angus-reid.com/uppdf/2008.06.25_ARPW.pdf
jcm"
Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research
Grits Gain, Conservatives Lead in Canada
June 26, 2008
(Angus Reid Global Monitor) - The governing Conservative party remains ahead in Canada’s political scene, according to a poll by Angus Reid Strategies released by the Toronto Star. 33 per cent of respondents would vote for the Tories in the next federal election, while 30 per cent would support the opposition Liberal party.
The New Democratic Party (NDP) is third with 19 per cent, followed by the Bloc Québécois with nine per cent, and the Green party with seven per cent. Support for the Grits increased by three points since May, while backing for the Tories fell by one point.
Canadians renewed the House of Commons in January 2006. The Conservative party—led by Stephen Harper—received 36.3 per cent of the vote, and secured 124 seats in the 308-member lower house. Harper leads a minority administration after more than 12 years of government by the Liberal party. In December 2006, former environment minister Stéphane Dion became the new leader of the Liberals.
Yesterday, Harper announced a cabinet shuffle. David Emerson was reaffirmed as foreign minister, Christian Paradis took over as public works minister, and Michael Fortier became the new international trade minister. Emerson had replaced Maxime Bernier on an interim basis. Bernier had announced his resignation in May after admitting to have left classified government documents at a private residence.
Harper declared: "With these small but important changes to the ministry, we will continue to build on our record of achievement over the past two and a half years. We will also continue to deliver the strong leadership Canadians expect and deserve."
Polling Data
If a federal election were held tomorrow, which one of the following parties would you be most likely to support in your constituency?
| Jun. 2008 | May 2008 | Apr. 2008 | Mar. 28 | |
| Conservative | 33% | 34% | 33% | 36% |
| Liberal | 30% | 27% | 30% | 26% |
| New Democratic Party | 19% | 18% | 20% | 18% |
| Bloc Québécois | 9% | 11% | 8% | 9% |
| Green | 7% | 8% | 8% | 9% |
| Other | 1% | 2% | 1% | 1% |
Source: Angus Reid Strategies
Methodology: Online interviews with 1,007 Canadian adults, conducted on Jun. 23 and Jun. 24, 2008. Margin of error is 3.1 per cent.
Approval Ratings: Harper 32%, Dion 12%
Preferred Prime Minister: Harper 37%, Dion 10%, Neither 39%
Momentum Score: Harper -19, Dion -26
52% do not want the opposition to force an early election
Harper defeats Dion on eight qualities and characteristics
Naked at the airport: Kelowna airport to test 'virtual strip search'
By David Wylie, Canwest News Service
Security officials at Kelowna airport will soon be undressing passengers with their electronic eye.Starting next week, passengers travelling though the Kelowna International Airport will be asked if they're willing to be scanned by technology that allows an officer the "see" through their clothing in search of weapons or explosives.
It's a breakthrough that airport and security officials say will make air travel safer and security lines shorter. However, one civil rights group is calling the technology "an abomination" and a "virtual strip search."
A computer monitor viewed by a Transportation Security Administration officer reveals details of the body of a fully-clothed employee of L3 Communications Security and Detection Systems as she is scanned inside a ProVision whole body imaging machine at Los Angeles International Airport
A computer monitor reveals details of the body of a fully-clothed woman as she is scanned inside a ProVision whole body imaging machine at Los Angeles International Airport in April. A similar device will soon be installed in Kelowna, B.C.
The seven-day pilot project was announced Thursday by the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, a federal government corporation that provides air security services.
Jenelle Turpin, spokeswoman for the Kelowna airport, said it's the first airport in Canada to use the technology, and the first airport in North America to pair the full-body screening with a metal detector check.
Turpin said she's read the criticisms over the technology's intrusiveness, but found the images were less revealing than she'd expected.
"It gives an outline of underwear. It goes through clothes," she said. "When I actually saw it and how it's set up, it's really not that bad."
The security official who views the screen will be in a separate room, and won't see the passenger that's being screened. If the official spots something suspicious, he will radio another official who's with the passenger and relay the information.
"They've really taken care of making sure the passenger's privacy (is maintained) and the experience is more of a positive one," said Turpin.
The images are deleted as soon as the review is complete, and images are not stored, printed or transmitted, the agency says.
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada has said the pilot project meets all the conditions of the office.
Still, Micheal Vonn, policy director for the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, said the images are so detailed they will reveal whether passengers have had vasectomies, penile implants, mastectomies or have a catheter inserted.
"Everything that is in and about your body will be screened, quote and unquote, for your safety," she said.
"This is an abomination," said Vonn. "They are wielding the mighty sword of vagueness about what kind of explicit images they'll see. It's a virtual strip-search. I think if people actually got to see what security people are seeing, they'd be breathless."
Vonn urged passengers travelling through Kelowna airport, in the B.C. Interior, to express their enthusiasm for their right to decline being screened because such a pilot project hints that the screening will soon be mandatory.
"The concept of consent is so slippery," especially in the current "climate of bizarre anxiety and fear," she said.
Kelowna was chosen as the test site because the airport has recently undergone major renovations to its departures area, and an ideal space where the previous security area was located could be easily converted for the pilot project.
Millimetre wave technology is used to do the full-body scan. It projects low-level radio frequency energy over and around the passenger's body producing a three-dimensional image of the passenger.
Similar pilot projects are taking place at a number of U.S. airports, including Los Angeles International, New York's JFK airport and Phoenix Sky Harbor airports.
Moscow, Osaka and Amsterdam airports are also using the technology.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Hugely unpopular leader survives another day
Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister of Israel reached a deal with his Labour Party rivals to extend his term.
JERUSALEM -- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert demonstrated again Wednesday that he has not yet exhausted his many political lives.
The hugely unpopular leader of the Kadima-led centre-left coalition brokered a last-minute deal with his senior coalition partners from the Labour party in the early hours Wednesday. The move meant his government avoided defeat and the dissolution of the Knesset later in the day and that Mr. Olmert probably will be able to continue as prime minister until at least the fall.
"This is another rabbit that Olmert has pulled from his hat," said Asher Arian, a political scientist from Haifa University and a close follower of Israel's tortuous governing process.
"I am not surprised that Olmert has managed this. It is not so much because he is a talented politician, which he is, but that he has found compatriots who like him, wish to delay an election."
The binding arrangement that Mr. Olmert struck with Labour Leader Ehud Barak forces the prime minister to face a Kadima leadership primary by September 24. If Mr. Olmert had not agreed to the ultimatum, Mr. Barak said he was going to force a Knesset vote on Wednesday that would have led to the dissolution of the government and fresh elections.
"Olmert has proven again that he is the ultimate survivor," said pollster Rafi Smith of the Smith Research Institute. "It shows that in Israeli politics anything is possible."
The overnight election reprieve served both of the Ehud's interests. Mr. Olmert has bought a little more time as prime minister while Mr. Barak can claim that he forced the prime minister to put his leadership of Kadima and therefore his prime ministership on the line. More tellingly, perhaps, both Messrs. Olmert and Barak have conspired to avoid an early vote which polls have indicated would probably be won by Benjamin Netanyahu's right wing Likud Party.
"Voters are very fed up with Olmert but they will give him another three months because they have no choice," Mr. Asher said. "The question is whether voters will punish those who have cooperated with him. History shows us that the answer to that question is no."
Despite the deal, Mr. Olmert continues to face huge political problems. There have been mounting calls for his resignation because of an intensive police investigation into allegations that he illegally accepted campaign contributions from wealthy Jewish American donors. Even before this latest financial scandal, he had very little public support because he has been widely blamed for the inconclusive result of Israel's war with Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006.
It is still not clear that Mr. Olmert will stand for re-election when Kadima holds its primary in September, Rafi Smith said.
"Polls show that Kadima will lose more than half of its seats if Mr. Olmert is the leader, so he may not continue," the pollster said. "The data suggests that with [foreign minister] Tzipi Livni as leader, Kadima could once again have the largest party bloc after the election.
"But things can change rapidly in Israeli politics. With this deal, Mr. Olmert has bought himself some time and he thinks he will be able to use it to heal and to do something to survive. For example, if he can sign some sort of treaty with the Palestinians -- and that is what he is trying to do -- he might still have a chance."
The next chapter in Olmert's sordid legal saga is expected on July 17 when American campaign donor Morris Talansky is scheduled to testify for the second time, about money that he gave to the embattled prime minister when he was mayor of Jerusalem and a minister in former prime minister Ariel Sharon's government. If he is indicted, Mr. Olmert has promised to resign.
Until then, the Israeli leader continues to mastermind a blitz of direct peace talks with the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority and indirect peace talks with Syria, as well as continuing a ceasefire with Hamas and discussing possible prisoner exchanges with Hezbollah and Hamas, which has ruled Gaza since a bloody coup chased Fatah out of the Palestinian enclave 12 months ago.
The Gaza truce, which began last Thursday, was shattered by several rockets fired into Israel on Tuesday from the territory. Israel responded by closing border crossings and reimposing an economic blockade. If there are no more attacks the crossings may reopen on Thursday.
Court told of terror-case e-mails
COLIN FREEZE
Globe and Mail Update
June 25, 2008
OTTAWA -- The nub of the case against the first man charged under Canada's antiterrorism act is contained in two significant - and uncontested - e-mails he wrote six months before he and a group of British suspects were arrested.
Defence lawyer Lawrence Greenspon admitted his client, Mohammad Momin Khawaja, 29, wrote messages that include clear references to building detonators, bringing recruits to a guesthouse in Pakistan and sending money and night-vision goggles to insurgents in Afghanistan.
The e-mails also discussed sending a friend on "a one-way-mission to the most high in Yahoodi land," which a Crown witness testified was in reference to an intended suicide bombing in Israel.
One e-mail sent by Mr. Khawaja said: "Bro, I will start on the remote devices thing right away and will let u know once we have it ready for testing. And I'll find some of the things for testing, Urea, nitro, phosphate, anything else we need?
The e-mails were entered into evidence on the third day of Mr. Khawaja's heavily guarded trial, as testimony from informant Mohammed Junaid Babar, 33, continued.
Mr. Babar, an American who was living in Pakistan at the time of the alleged conspiracies, didn't receive the e-mail in question but testified he was privy to much of what was being discussed. He said he had heard about other schemes, too, as Mr. Khawaja visited Pakistan.
These included "a project that Momin was working on with his brother" that called for outfitting remote-control model airplanes with explosives, Mr. Babar said.
Police raided the Khawaja family home in March, 2004, and court has heard the Crown say the RCMP seized a remote-controlled detonation device, guns, bullets, jihadi literature and $10,000 in cash.
None of Mr. Khawaja's family members were charged.
The seizures appear to have been foreshadowed by messages Mr. Khawaja wrote about six months earlier, while communicating with a British terrorist ringleader, Omar Khyam, now serving a life sentence in the United Kingdom.
They communicated on a shared Yahoo account, saving messages in "Draft" form so they would be less vulnerable to interception.
The e-mail was sent shortly after Mr. Khawaja's second trip to Pakistan, when, according to Mr. Babar, he brought over money, invisible ink and a medical kit for extremist associates.
The court also heard that Mr. Khawaja tried to revisit a training camp where he had fired off a rocket propelled grenade launcher a few months earlier, but was disappointed to learn there was no longer any ammunition for the RPG.
Mr. Khawaja is then alleged to have returned to Canada and redoubled his efforts to aid what he regarded as an international jihad against the West.
"We still don't have my house [in Pakistan] being used," he wrote in the Oct. 19 e-mail. "It's still empty so do you know any bros from the UK that wanna go to PK any time soon so we can put them up there."
A week later Mr. Khawaja sent a follow up message regarding remote controlled detonators.
"Ok nigga we can get the devices the cost to make em is about 4 pounds each, remote detonation, I think the range is about 2 kilometres ..."
He also suggested that a mutual friend, "Immy," known to the group as a mentally challenged loose cannon, had the makings of an excellent martyr.
"Also bro, when I was in PK me and Kash talked about Immy, what's he gonna do there? We have a suggestion to use the bro for a one way operation to the most high, maybe, in Yahoodi land."
This Sunday Oct. 19, 2003 draft message was saved to the account nicole_chic_shara@yahoo.co.uk , an account shared as a security measure so that Canadian terrorism suspect Mohammad Momin Khawaja and British terrorist ringleader Omar Khyam could communicate.
Both men were arrested for involvement in an alleged bomb conspiracy six months later. Mr. Khawaja visited Pakistan shortly before the e-mail was sent, and his defence lawyer admits his client wrote it.
"Nigga your message always give me a laugh! Yeah the porn vid's ain't ready yet. I just got back home. I met with Kman and he said that the faces of people that they did not want to show in public right now. I think maybe if we edit the video and block out some of the stuff then maybe Kman and all the other bros will agree to send the videos over. You can talk to Kman and tell him I can fix up the video's [sic] if you want. I also talked to him about the computer stuff , communicating safely, so I will try to set up something for the bros so we can have a better way of staying in contact.
"Kash is doing good. I gave him the money also and two phone cards with the numbers and explained the costs of using them in the mobile. We went to the village but none of the niggaz are there right now. Immy went for medical treatment to Pindi I think with the Doctor.
"The place looked good. Kash cleared up the trouble with the niggz and things are good now with all the people. But we still don't have my house being used. It's still empty so do you know any bros from the UK that wanna go to PK any time soon so we can put them up there. I need a solution for this bro, so try and ask around the bros, if anyone wants to head to PK they can live there.
"Also bro I will start on the remote devices thing right away and will let u know once we have it ready for testing. And I'll find some of the things for testing, Urea, nitro, phosphate anything else we need?
"But I think Kman said they needed night vision goggles and that stuff here is cheaper so if u want we can try to gets some for the bros from here at the cost of maybe 300 UK? I can look into it. Anything else bro that we need to do, or any help needed separately?"
A Message Mr. Khawaja wrote using the same account on Oct. 27, just over a week later:
"Ok nigga we can get the devices the cost to make em is about 4 pounds each, remote detonation, I think the range is about 2 kilometres, it is small in size. We can try a few out here and let u know how things go. Also I'm looking for the other things. Also bro, tell Kash to parcel the video from the summer. I can put something together here.
"Also bro, when I was in PK me and Kash talked about Immy, what's he gonna do there? We have a suggestion to use the bro for a one way operation to the most high, maybe, in Yahoodi land. What do you think."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)