Saturday, June 20, 2009
Iran -- Al Jezeera
From Al Jezeera:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/2009620184151643728.html
Police crack down on Iran protests
Riot police in Iran have used tear gas, water cannon and batons to disperse about 3,000 people attempting to protest over the disputed presidential election of Mahmoud Ahmdinejad, the president.Witnesses said that dozens of people were hospitalised after being beaten by police and pro-government militia in the capital, Tehran, on Saturday.
"Lots of guards on motorbikes closed in on us and beat us brutally," one protester said.
"As we were running away the Basiji [militia] were waiting in side alleys with batons, but people opened their doors to us trapped in alleys."
Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, a defeated reformist candidate, had planned to stage a rally in the city's Revolutionary Square, but arrived to find their way blocked by police. A witness told Al Jazeera that police were turning people away. "The roads were pretty much blocked by the militia, they were out with retractable metal batons. It looked like they were very frantically trying to keep people from the area," he said.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/2009620184151643728.html
Police crack down on Iran protests
Riot police in Iran have used tear gas, water cannon and batons to disperse about 3,000 people attempting to protest over the disputed presidential election of Mahmoud Ahmdinejad, the president.Witnesses said that dozens of people were hospitalised after being beaten by police and pro-government militia in the capital, Tehran, on Saturday.
"Lots of guards on motorbikes closed in on us and beat us brutally," one protester said.
"As we were running away the Basiji [militia] were waiting in side alleys with batons, but people opened their doors to us trapped in alleys."
Supporters of Mir Hossein Mousavi, a defeated reformist candidate, had planned to stage a rally in the city's Revolutionary Square, but arrived to find their way blocked by police. A witness told Al Jazeera that police were turning people away. "The roads were pretty much blocked by the militia, they were out with retractable metal batons. It looked like they were very frantically trying to keep people from the area," he said.
THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL RECOGNISES MATERNAL MORTALITY AS A PRESSING HUMAN RIGHTS CONCERN
Governments commit to promoting women and girls health and rights17 June 2009, Geneva -- Today, the Human Rights Council at its eleventh regular session adopted a landmark resolution on 'Preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and human rights'. In this resolution, governments express grave concern for the unacceptably high rates of maternal mortality and morbidity, acknowledge that this is a human rights issue and commit to enhance their efforts at the national and international level to protect the lives of women and girls worldwide. Over 70 UN member states co-sponsored this resolution, led by Colombia and New Zealand."This is a groundbreaking step towards ensuring every woman's basic human right to a safe and healthy pregnancy and childbirth," said Ximena Andion, the International Advocacy Director at the New York-based Center for Reproductive Rights, which was one the organizations promoting the resolution. "Governments should heed the call of the Human Rights Council and take urgent action to prevent women from dying needlessly in pregnancy and childbirth."Globally, maternal mortality is the leading cause of death among women and girls of reproductive age. More than 1500 women and girls die every day from complications related to pregnancy and childbirth; that translates to around 550,000 annually. While it is difficult to measure pregnancy-related injuries and disabilities, estimates vary from 16 to 50 million annually, and include conditions such as haemorrhage, infection, brain seizures, hypertension, anaemia and obstetric fistulae.Yet, it has taken fifteen years since the adoption of the International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action, fourteen since the Fourth World Conference on Women Platform for Action, and nine since the Millennium Development Goals - all significant United Nations' consensus documents recognizing the need to increase efforts promoting the health and rights of women and girls - for the UN's main political human rights body to take this important step. Globally, governments have failed to meet the commitments made and targets set in these documents.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
First criminal trial without a jury for 400 years

The case concerns an armed robbery at a warehouse at Heathrow
Four men accused of being part of a gang that stole £1.75 million in a raid at Heathrow face the first criminal trial without a jury in England and Wales for 400 years after an historic Court of Appeal decision yesterday.
John Twomey, 61, Peter Blake, 56, Barry Hibberd, 41, and Glen Cameron, 49, must be tried by a judge alone after claims of jury nobbling at a previous trial, the court ruled.
The four are alleged to have taken part in a bungled armed robbery of a Menzies World Cargo warehouse in February 2004. They deny a series of charges, including conspiracy to rob and the possession of a firearm.
The robbery has already given rise to three trials at a total cost of £22 million. The third collapsed last year after what the judge called "a serious attempt at jury tampering".
The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, with Lord Justice Goldring and Mr Justice McCombe, decided yesterday that the case could be heard by a judge alone. A preliminary hearing for the fourth trial is scheduled to take place at the Old Bailey on July 10.
The ruling means that the new trial, which would normally be tried by a jury, will be the first of its kind in England and Wales under legislation that took effect in 2003 to prevent jury nobbling. The only other judge-only trials for serious cases, known as Diplock trials, have been in Northern Ireland.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
The case concerns an armed robbery at a warehouse at Heathrow
Four men accused of being part of a gang that stole £1.75 million in a raid at Heathrow face the first criminal trial without a jury in England and Wales for 400 years after an historic Court of Appeal decision yesterday.
John Twomey, 61, Peter Blake, 56, Barry Hibberd, 41, and Glen Cameron, 49, must be tried by a judge alone after claims of jury nobbling at a previous trial, the court ruled.
The four are alleged to have taken part in a bungled armed robbery of a Menzies World Cargo warehouse in February 2004. They deny a series of charges, including conspiracy to rob and the possession of a firearm.
The robbery has already given rise to three trials at a total cost of £22 million. The third collapsed last year after what the judge called "a serious attempt at jury tampering".
The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, with Lord Justice Goldring and Mr Justice McCombe, decided yesterday that the case could be heard by a judge alone. A preliminary hearing for the fourth trial is scheduled to take place at the Old Bailey on July 10.
The ruling means that the new trial, which would normally be tried by a jury, will be the first of its kind in England and Wales under legislation that took effect in 2003 to prevent jury nobbling. The only other judge-only trials for serious cases, known as Diplock trials, have been in Northern Ireland.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Failing Grades for Canadian Prisons
From today's Ottawa Citizen
Failing Grades for Canadian Prisons
By James Morton
Last week, the House passed Bill C-15. As a result, Canadian law will soon dictate mandatory prison sentences for serious drug offenders, particularly drug traffickers and anyone manipulating young Canadians to commit drug crimes.
Let’s take a closer look. At present, Canada has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the Western world. Also, our aboriginal population is grossly overrepresented in jail; in provincial institutions, aboriginals – who represent approximately four per cent of Canada’s population – make up about a quarter of all inmates. Bill C-15 will soon cause a significant increase in inmates, as flexibility in sentencing makes way to mandatory prison terms. If prisons worked, these facts might not be so troubling, but our prisons, as present constituted, do not produce the effect intended.
Using them to reduce drug crimes seems especially wrong-headed. Prisoners often become addicted to narcotics while in prison. That sounds preposterous, but it’s true. The place we send society’s most dangerous elements for rehabilitation is full of illegal drugs. Over ten per cent of Canadian prisoners tested positive in random drug tests, and that figure is probably low, because many prisoners refused to be tested, presumably knowing they’d fail. Prisons can only rehabilitate their inmates if they are free from crime and places for reflection and retraining. Unfortunately, Canada’s prisons are crime ridden, dirty, degrading and dangerous. They act more as a school for crime than a place of rehabilitation.
In fact, the most recent Federal Government study showed that incarceration was associated with a slight increase in recidivism; in the blunt words of the report: “Prisons and intermediate sanctions should not be used with the expectation of reducing criminal behaviour”. The concept of using prisons for rehabilitation is relatively modern.
Historically, prisons were intended as places to hold accused only briefly, pending trial or punishment; St. Paul’s time in prison, some 2,000 years ago, was as someone awaiting trial. The concept of redemption through a restriction on liberty was alien to the pre-modern world. The concept of rehabilitation appears with the creation of the modern penal system, of which it was a driving force.
The first Penitentiary Act, written in 1779, began by speaking of “deterring others from the commission of … crimes [and] of reforming individuals and inuring them to habits of industry.” In theory, the concept of deterrence and reformation through incarceration remains the justification for prisons to this day. Unfortunately, the practice of prisons is vastly different. In theory, criminals separated from society and bad influences will reflect on their errors and, with time and training, move on to become productive citizens.
The concept of quiet solitude combined with productive labour is well suited for spiritual and moral rebirth. In such circumstances prisoners might indeed well be rehabilitated. Prisoners might spend time reflecting on their actions and see that they should best avoid their former errors. In practice, however, prison life is a struggle to survive, allowing little room for reflection. While some prisons, especially those holding inmates for extended periods, have adequate training and counselling resources, no Canadian prisons isolate prisoners from the bad influence of other prisoners. Fraudsters, robbers, thugs and the mentally unhinged (at least 15 per cent of the prison population) mingle in circumstances of almost limitless intercourse.
Add widely available narcotics to the mix and it’s hardly surprising that few reform.
What’s more, many prisons are grossly overcrowded and under- resourced. Tiny cells designed for one inmate hold three, often for more than 12 hours a day. Violence is commonplace, made worse by overcrowding and drugs. Ill health, including widespread tuberculosis, is a daily fact of life. It defies common sense to think anyone will come out of such conditions an improved person.
Our system fails in large part because it is not rational. It is possible to make prisons that are free from drugs and where prisoners are treated for ill health and protected from assault. The failure to effect these reforms makes a mockery of Canada’s penal system.
Prison reform, treating prisoners as human, does not mean they should be mollycoddled. Punishment is a legitimate part of incarnation. But prison reform must mean that prisons be designed to allow for improvement through incarceration. If we continue to incarcerate people, and we do in large numbers, there must be at least a prospect of the incarceration doing some good. Prisons can work, but only if they are what they are supposed to be—quiet, orderly places where the inmate can reflect on the misdeeds of the past and find the resolve to change for the future.
James C. Morton is a lawyer at Steinberg Morton Hope & Israel in Toronto and Adjunct Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University.
Failing Grades for Canadian Prisons
By James Morton
Last week, the House passed Bill C-15. As a result, Canadian law will soon dictate mandatory prison sentences for serious drug offenders, particularly drug traffickers and anyone manipulating young Canadians to commit drug crimes.
Let’s take a closer look. At present, Canada has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the Western world. Also, our aboriginal population is grossly overrepresented in jail; in provincial institutions, aboriginals – who represent approximately four per cent of Canada’s population – make up about a quarter of all inmates. Bill C-15 will soon cause a significant increase in inmates, as flexibility in sentencing makes way to mandatory prison terms. If prisons worked, these facts might not be so troubling, but our prisons, as present constituted, do not produce the effect intended.
Using them to reduce drug crimes seems especially wrong-headed. Prisoners often become addicted to narcotics while in prison. That sounds preposterous, but it’s true. The place we send society’s most dangerous elements for rehabilitation is full of illegal drugs. Over ten per cent of Canadian prisoners tested positive in random drug tests, and that figure is probably low, because many prisoners refused to be tested, presumably knowing they’d fail. Prisons can only rehabilitate their inmates if they are free from crime and places for reflection and retraining. Unfortunately, Canada’s prisons are crime ridden, dirty, degrading and dangerous. They act more as a school for crime than a place of rehabilitation.
In fact, the most recent Federal Government study showed that incarceration was associated with a slight increase in recidivism; in the blunt words of the report: “Prisons and intermediate sanctions should not be used with the expectation of reducing criminal behaviour”. The concept of using prisons for rehabilitation is relatively modern.
Historically, prisons were intended as places to hold accused only briefly, pending trial or punishment; St. Paul’s time in prison, some 2,000 years ago, was as someone awaiting trial. The concept of redemption through a restriction on liberty was alien to the pre-modern world. The concept of rehabilitation appears with the creation of the modern penal system, of which it was a driving force.
The first Penitentiary Act, written in 1779, began by speaking of “deterring others from the commission of … crimes [and] of reforming individuals and inuring them to habits of industry.” In theory, the concept of deterrence and reformation through incarceration remains the justification for prisons to this day. Unfortunately, the practice of prisons is vastly different. In theory, criminals separated from society and bad influences will reflect on their errors and, with time and training, move on to become productive citizens.
The concept of quiet solitude combined with productive labour is well suited for spiritual and moral rebirth. In such circumstances prisoners might indeed well be rehabilitated. Prisoners might spend time reflecting on their actions and see that they should best avoid their former errors. In practice, however, prison life is a struggle to survive, allowing little room for reflection. While some prisons, especially those holding inmates for extended periods, have adequate training and counselling resources, no Canadian prisons isolate prisoners from the bad influence of other prisoners. Fraudsters, robbers, thugs and the mentally unhinged (at least 15 per cent of the prison population) mingle in circumstances of almost limitless intercourse.
Add widely available narcotics to the mix and it’s hardly surprising that few reform.
What’s more, many prisons are grossly overcrowded and under- resourced. Tiny cells designed for one inmate hold three, often for more than 12 hours a day. Violence is commonplace, made worse by overcrowding and drugs. Ill health, including widespread tuberculosis, is a daily fact of life. It defies common sense to think anyone will come out of such conditions an improved person.
Our system fails in large part because it is not rational. It is possible to make prisons that are free from drugs and where prisoners are treated for ill health and protected from assault. The failure to effect these reforms makes a mockery of Canada’s penal system.
Prison reform, treating prisoners as human, does not mean they should be mollycoddled. Punishment is a legitimate part of incarnation. But prison reform must mean that prisons be designed to allow for improvement through incarceration. If we continue to incarcerate people, and we do in large numbers, there must be at least a prospect of the incarceration doing some good. Prisons can work, but only if they are what they are supposed to be—quiet, orderly places where the inmate can reflect on the misdeeds of the past and find the resolve to change for the future.
James C. Morton is a lawyer at Steinberg Morton Hope & Israel in Toronto and Adjunct Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, York University.
But can he feel Canada?
Rex Murphy (today's Globe) asks if Michael Ignatieff can "understand" Canada. Perhaps only a continual living in one place is sufficient to give understanding? Murphy seems to suggest such understanding is a condition precedent to being Prime Minister.
If that were true then no one could ever be Prime Minister. The experiences of a Prairie Canadian are very different from those of a Maritimer. An MP from Vancouver may well have never lived in Quebec. Nevertheless, Westerns are perfectly capable to become Prime Minister. Canadians are diverse and that is a strength not a weakness. Bottom line we are all "from away".
Michael Ignatieff is Canadian; enough said. The question is not whether he is Canadian. The question is will he make a good Prime Minister and to that question the answer is yes.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Dangers in Iran
How difficult it is to decide? To risk death for freedom (even limited freedom)? These are not -- thank heavens -- decisions we must make here:
TEHRAN -- Backers of beaten presidential candidate Mirhossein Mr. Mousavi will decide on Saturday whether to defy a stern warning by Iran's top authority and stage mass protests over a disputed election.
Iran's top legislative body holds an extraordinary session on Saturday morning to which it has invited Mr. Mousavi and the two other candidates who lost against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the June 12 election, which Mr. Mousavi wants annulled.
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei demanded an end to the rallies on Friday, issuing a strong warning to leaders of the street protests that they will be responsible for any bloodshed.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Friday, June 19, 2009
Ooopsie, the old erroneous email
Cops planned to Taser Dziekanski: RCMP memo
Inquiry adjourned until Sept. 22
"He has asked investigators for a synopsis and should have it by noon tomorrow."
Rideout is the former commanding officer in charge of investigating Dziekanski's death.
Photograph by: Handout, Paul Pritchard
Lawyer Helen Roberts, who represents the RCMP, broke into tears as she told retired judge Thomas Braidwood, who is heading the inquiry, that her office received the e-mail in late April but never opened the CD for the document files until last week.
"I do say, it was by oversight that this occurred," she said. "Canada continues, as it has all along, to fully support the work of this commission."
Roberts said Bent was mistaken in his e-mail and that the officers did not formulate a plan to use the Taser as soon as possible.
"As a result of (our office's discovery) of this e-mail . . . the IHIT (Integrated Homicide Investigation Team) file has been searched and there is no evidence in the IHIT file that the members formulated a plan to use the Taser prior to the encounter with Mr. Dziekanski," Roberts said.
"It is our conclusion from these interviews that Chief Supt. Bent must have misunderstood information provided to him by Supt. Rideout."
The lawyers for the four RCMP officers said their clients deny they formulated a plan to Taser Dziekanski.
RCMP Commissioner William Elliott echoed Robert's statement that the e-mail was not released to the inquiry due to an "oversight."
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Inquiry adjourned until Sept. 22
"He has asked investigators for a synopsis and should have it by noon tomorrow."
Rideout is the former commanding officer in charge of investigating Dziekanski's death.
Photograph by: Handout, Paul Pritchard
Lawyer Helen Roberts, who represents the RCMP, broke into tears as she told retired judge Thomas Braidwood, who is heading the inquiry, that her office received the e-mail in late April but never opened the CD for the document files until last week.
"I do say, it was by oversight that this occurred," she said. "Canada continues, as it has all along, to fully support the work of this commission."
Roberts said Bent was mistaken in his e-mail and that the officers did not formulate a plan to use the Taser as soon as possible.
"As a result of (our office's discovery) of this e-mail . . . the IHIT (Integrated Homicide Investigation Team) file has been searched and there is no evidence in the IHIT file that the members formulated a plan to use the Taser prior to the encounter with Mr. Dziekanski," Roberts said.
"It is our conclusion from these interviews that Chief Supt. Bent must have misunderstood information provided to him by Supt. Rideout."
The lawyers for the four RCMP officers said their clients deny they formulated a plan to Taser Dziekanski.
RCMP Commissioner William Elliott echoed Robert's statement that the e-mail was not released to the inquiry due to an "oversight."
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Iran and The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam
Thinking on what is happening in Iran now I thought back to the The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (the Edward FitzGerald translation).
Omar Khayyam ( عمر خیام), ( 1048 -1123) was less a poet than a mathematician. His greatest work was not poetry but his Treatise on Demonstration of Problems of Algebra.
The Rubaiya was a great favorite in the early part of the last Century but is now pretty obscure.
Yet it still has much to say:
63
Oh threats of Hell and Hopes of Paradise!
One thing at least is certain-This life flies;
One thing is certain and the rest is Lies;
The Flower that once has blown for ever dies.
Omar Khayyam ( عمر خیام), ( 1048 -1123) was less a poet than a mathematician. His greatest work was not poetry but his Treatise on Demonstration of Problems of Algebra.
The Rubaiya was a great favorite in the early part of the last Century but is now pretty obscure.
Yet it still has much to say:
63
Oh threats of Hell and Hopes of Paradise!
One thing at least is certain-This life flies;
One thing is certain and the rest is Lies;
The Flower that once has blown for ever dies.
Pillsbury dough boy
Did you know Poppin' Fresh, the Pillsbury dough boy, has a girlfriend Poppie?
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
I, me and my
I think it's a meaningless issue but since Conservatives have been counting the use of "I, me or my" in recent speeches by Michael Ignatieff, I picked a recent speech by Stephen Harper and did a count.
I picked the speech at random -- it was the most recent one produced in full on the PMO website (I set it out below).
Anyway, I counted 18 uses of "I, me or my". That ignores the use of "we and our". It's a pretty short speech; I read it out at normal speech speed and it took four minutes.
That's an "I, me or my" every 13 1/3 seconds.
But, in fairness, the speech does not read as an homage to self -- it is a normal speech using normal language to describe normal things in a normal way.
My point is that it is not strange to use "I, me and my" a lot and any complaint based on that use is misplaced.
Or so, in my opinion (at least to me) I think. (It's all about me me me; isn't it???).
PM accepts Canadian Council of Snowmobile Organization's President's Award for Excellence in Leadership
12 June 2009
Summerside, PE
CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY
Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
Thank you Kevin for that kind introduction.
Greetings also to Prince Edward Island's hard-working representative at the Cabinet table – Minister Gail Shea.
And, of course, to Mike Duffy.
It's great to be here in Summerside today.
I want to thank your organization, the Canadian Council of Snowmobile Organizations, for inviting me.
For thirty-five years, this organization has done much to promote a pastime that combines Canadians' passion for the great outdoors with the love of adventure.
Earlier this year I had the pleasure of hitting the trails on a Ski Doo Renegade during a visit to Wilmot, Nova Scotia.
I can certainly see the attraction.
The outdoors.
The speed.
The rush.
I think I may be hooked!
But my technique is still pretty raw, so I suppose winning your Outstanding Snowmobiler Award is probably out of the question.
But I am very honoured to be receiving the Canadian Council of Snowmobile Organizations' President's Award for Excellence in Leadership and pleased to be here among Canadians who cherish our great outdoors.
One of the best things about being Prime Minister of Canada, the best job in the world's best country, is that I have had an unparalleled opportunity to travel the length and breadth of our vast and awesome territory.
From Labrador to Vancouver Island to Southern Ontario to Alert in Nunavut, I've met Canadians who work, play and live on the land.
All this travel has reinforced my view that the heart of Canada is still in the countryside.
The timeless values of rural life, a close relationship to the natural environment, community interdependence, strong family bonds, these are the foundational characteristics of our country.
And they are the qualities that sustain our peaceful and prosperous society to this day.
As one author noted, and I quote: "Nearly every Canadian feels, as a special part of his national identity, a closeness to the wilderness; and many a Canadian's personal identity is bound up with the pleasure he takes in wilderness activities."
Of course, however, with the enjoyment of outdoor pursuits comes the corresponding responsibility to preserve the Canadian wild for future generations to experience.
That's why the education, advocacy, and conservation efforts of organizations like yours are so essential.
Now, when we speak of conservation, we're not just talking about conserving wilderness and wildlife.
We're also talking about conserving the traditions, values, and love of country that form the foundation on which Canada has been built.
It's also no accident, in my opinion, that the words "conservation" and "conservative" are derived from the same root.
A conservative, ladies and gentlemen, is a conservationist.
We want to conserve our land and its riches.
We want to conserve strong families in healthy, safe, self-reliant communities
And, of course, we believe, fundamentally, that we have a duty to make Canada better by conserving and enhancing what our ancestors have built for us.
That's why our Government has made conservation such a high priority over the last three years.
We are, for example, expanding the boundaries of the spectacular Nahanni Park in the Northwest Territories.
We have created the Lake Superior National Marine Conservation Area, the largest freshwater marine protected area in the world.
We have provided substantial support for the preservation of the Great Bear Rain Forest in British Columbia.
Here on the Island we are restoring vegetation and expanding the trail network in Prince Edward Island National Park.
We have entered into partnership with the Nature Conservancy of Canada and groups like Ducks Unlimited to conserve a half million acres of ecologically significant land.
And, as Kevin mentioned, our Government announced a major investment in the country's trail infrastructure.
There is no better way to appreciate Canada's rich natural heritage and unrivalled beauty then to explore our extensive network of trails.
Over the next two years, our Government is partnering with the National Trails Coalition to create, upgrade and sustain snowmobile and ATV trails from coast to coast to coast.
And with your organization as one of the lead Trails Coalition partners, I have no doubt that this collaboration will be a tremendous success.
In the short term, this significant investment will create jobs and generate economic activity in communities across the country.
In the longer term, it will attract tourists from around the world and create a lasting legacy of pristine trails for the generations of Canadians to come.
In closing, I'd once again like to thank the Canadian Council of Snowmobile Organizations for this generous honour.
I'd also like to pay tribute to your efforts.
Few of us appreciate, or do as much, to conserve and strengthen Canada's natural heritage as sportsmen like you.
On behalf of the Government of Canada, I'd like wish you a successful AGM and a great season ahead.
Thank you.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Iran
Iran is a modern sophisticated country with a well educated and (relatively) wealthy population. A population that in living memory (in my living memory!) overthrew a tyrannical government.
For the Supreme Leader to blame foreign enemies is transparent nonsense (indeed, Obama has been very very careful not to even appear to intervene). The claim smacks of desperation (next we'll see attack ads against Mousavi?).
That said, I do not foresee a revolution here. And the changes that would come from having Mousavi elected are not that great -- he is a reformer yes, but far from a radical (although as reform in the Soviet Union showed, a little change can morph into a big change).
Those hesitations aside, something remarkable is happening in Iran and if massive repression is avoided it may might could be possibly conceivably be the start of a new free Iran.
Tehran - Reuters and Associated Press, Friday, Jun. 19, 2009
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appealed for calm on Friday and attacked "enemies" questioning the result of a presidential vote that has sparked the biggest street protests in the Islamic Republic's history.
"Today the Iranian nation needs calm," Ayatollah Khamenei said in his first address to the nation since the upheaval began.
He said Iran's enemies were targeting the legitimacy of the Islamic establishment by disputing the outcome of the election.
Ayatollah Khamenei said there was "definitive victory" and no rigging in the disputed election. He offered no concession to opposition supporters who are demanding the elections be cancelled and held again.
He blamed Britain and Iran's external enemies for the unrest, vigorously defending the ruling system.
Ayatollah Khamenei called for street protests to end, telling the defeated candidates: "I am urging them to end street protests, otherwise they will be responsible for its consequences, and consequences of any chaos."
"The result of the election comes out of the ballot boxes, not on the street," he added, saying political leaders who engaged in extremist behaviour were responsible for any post-election bloodshed.
Ayatollah Khamenei said the election showed off the country's religious democracy for the world to see. He said that if the Iranian people did not feel free they would not have gone to the polls in such huge numbers as they did during the June 12th election.
Ayatollah Khamenei has already approved the election results that gave President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad a landslide victory, but he has not been able to ignore the powerful defiance of the opposition, which has called the vote rigged, of his authority.
Ayatollah Khamenei made his address as part of Friday prayers at Tehran University. Among the throngs of people crowded into the hall to see him speak was Mr. Ahmadinejad.
It was not known whether Mr. Ahmadinejad's main challenger, Mir Hossein Mousavi attended as well. At least one other candidate who ran against Mr. Ahmadinejad, reformist Mahdi Karroubi, had said he will attend the service.
Press TV, an English-language version of Iranian state television, showed television pictures of the crowded hall where Ayatollah Khamenei was speaking as the crowd and thousands of people assembled outside cheered.
The address comes one day after hundreds of thousands of protesters in black and green flooded the streets of Tehran in a sombre, candlelit show of mourning for those killed in clashes after Iran's disputed presidential election.
The massive march - the fourth this week - sent a strong message that opposition leader Mr. Mousavi has the popular backing to sustain his challenge.
After the June 12 elections, Ayatollah Khamenei approved the balloting results as a "divine assessment" and urged the Iranian people to pursue their allegations of election fraud within the limits of the cleric-led system.
But this week's rallies, which recall the scale of protests during the 1979 Islamic Revolution that ended the Iran's U.S.-backed monarchy, openly defied those orders.
It may be hard for Ayatollah Khamenei - a man endowed with virtually limitless powers under Iran's constitution - to back down from his support of Mr. Ahmadinejad. But Mr. Mousavi and his supporters have also shown that they can't be brushed aside.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Troubling factoid regarding fast food
Today's Globe reports "one fast-food hamburger may involve meat from literally thousands of cattle".
I'm not sure mechanically how that can be, but assuming it's true it certainly makes the risk of tainted food much higher. The chances a single cow has BSE may be very low, but even a low probability becomes significant when sampling thousands of animals.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Afghanistan campaign -- Canadian Forces stretched too thin
In any campaign you have to work with what you have.
The story below suggests that Canadian Forces are stretched too thin.
Ignoring the public relations issue, especially if some hired guard, say, uses a Canadian gun to kill his cousin, it seems obvious Canadian Forces would prefer to guard themselves.
Hiring locals to guard Canadian bases raises the possibility of Taliban infiltration. Imagine, say, Union forces hiring local guards from Hilton Head Island for Union bases during the US Civil War; wouldn't have happened.
"Canada secretly armed Afghan civilians"
MURRAY BREWSTER
The Canadian Press
Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:00:00 EDT
Canada's military secretly provided weapons to Afghan civilians who were hired as security guards at a forward operating base in Afghanistan, federal documents show.
The unidentified "guard force" was also provided with uniforms so its members would not be "mistaken for Canadian soldiers or for that matter members of the Afghan National Army," says a briefing note obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.
All Canadian bases in southern Afghanistan have some form of private protection involving paramilitary forces. They often employ local Afghans under the supervision of former Western soldiers.
The handover of surplus C7 rifles - the Canadian variant of the U.S. M16 - was approved by the Strategic Joint Staff, the military's senior decision-making body.
"The distribution of weapons to civilian personnel remains problematic in terms of potential for public criticism, especially in the event of misconduct by an Afghan guard using a Canadian weapon," says the censored document from May last year.
But it was deemed an urgent operational requirement.
The force guarding the unidentified base was different from private security firms, which are plentiful in Afghanistan, because "guard force" members are hired directly off the street.
"The individuals were extensively screened," Lieutenant-Colonel Norbert Cyr, an adviser to the joint staff, said in an interview.
The guards free up Canadian soldiers to patrol or train Afghan troops.
Private security contractors provide their own weapons and training.
The Canadian weapons carried by guard staff "were at the end of their life cycle." The note indicates the weapons were to be disposed of once replacements could be found.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Thursday, June 18, 2009
We can trust the authorities with new surveillance powers
They have proven how sensitive they can be to privacy issues.
Curiously, in the UK police seem to have an aversion to having themselves watched -- who watches the watchers! See the story from EPhotozine below:
Lord Carlile says photography of the police is allowed
Photographers have a right to take photographs - Lord Carlile addresses concerns with stop and search powers in his annual report.
"It is inexcusable for police officers ever to use this provision (section 58A) to interfere with the rights of individuals to take photographs," said Lord Carlile.
In his annual report, Lord Carlile addressed Section 58A of the Terrorism Act. On page 39 of the report Lord Carlile said: "A number of professional and amateur photographers have approached me to complain that this provision is being used to threaten them with prosecution if they take photographs of police officers on duty. In one case a correspondent informed me that a police officer used the section to force him to delete from his camera a photograph of a police officer on traffic duty, in circumstances in which the member of the public had a legitimate reason for taking the photograph in connection with his own impending traffic case."
He continued: "It should be emphasised that photography of the police by the media or amateurs remains as legitimate as before, unless the photograph is likely to be of use to a terrorist. This is a high bar...The police must adjust to the undoubted fact that the scrutiny of them by members of the public is at least proportional to any increase in police powers – given the ubiquity of photograph and video enabled mobile phones. Police officers who use force or threaten force in this context run the real risk of being prosecuted themselves for one or more of several possible criminal and disciplinary offences."
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Curiously, in the UK police seem to have an aversion to having themselves watched -- who watches the watchers! See the story from EPhotozine below:
Lord Carlile says photography of the police is allowed
Photographers have a right to take photographs - Lord Carlile addresses concerns with stop and search powers in his annual report.
"It is inexcusable for police officers ever to use this provision (section 58A) to interfere with the rights of individuals to take photographs," said Lord Carlile.
In his annual report, Lord Carlile addressed Section 58A of the Terrorism Act. On page 39 of the report Lord Carlile said: "A number of professional and amateur photographers have approached me to complain that this provision is being used to threaten them with prosecution if they take photographs of police officers on duty. In one case a correspondent informed me that a police officer used the section to force him to delete from his camera a photograph of a police officer on traffic duty, in circumstances in which the member of the public had a legitimate reason for taking the photograph in connection with his own impending traffic case."
He continued: "It should be emphasised that photography of the police by the media or amateurs remains as legitimate as before, unless the photograph is likely to be of use to a terrorist. This is a high bar...The police must adjust to the undoubted fact that the scrutiny of them by members of the public is at least proportional to any increase in police powers – given the ubiquity of photograph and video enabled mobile phones. Police officers who use force or threaten force in this context run the real risk of being prosecuted themselves for one or more of several possible criminal and disciplinary offences."
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Lafleur given suspended sentence in Montreal court
I am already hearing that he got a "special deal" -- he didn't. If he did the same thing and was just an ordinary person he would have gotten the same treatment.
Lafleur given suspended sentence in Montreal court
Guy Lafleur has been handed a suspended sentence for giving contradictory evidence at a bail hearing two years ago.
The hockey great was sentenced Thursday afternoon to a year-long suspended sentence, and was ordered to pay a $100 fine and make a $10,000 charitable donation.
CTV's Genevieve Beauchemin reported that for the 12 months of his suspended sentence, Lafleur will be required to comply with any conditions requested by the court or the police.
"He will have to follow court conditions, he will have to be followed for a year by police," Beauchemin told CTV News Channel just before 3 p.m. on Thursday afternoon. "If he's asked to come to the police station, to appear in court during that year, he has to comply with that."
Lafleur given suspended sentence in Montreal court
Guy Lafleur has been handed a suspended sentence for giving contradictory evidence at a bail hearing two years ago.
The hockey great was sentenced Thursday afternoon to a year-long suspended sentence, and was ordered to pay a $100 fine and make a $10,000 charitable donation.
CTV's Genevieve Beauchemin reported that for the 12 months of his suspended sentence, Lafleur will be required to comply with any conditions requested by the court or the police.
"He will have to follow court conditions, he will have to be followed for a year by police," Beauchemin told CTV News Channel just before 3 p.m. on Thursday afternoon. "If he's asked to come to the police station, to appear in court during that year, he has to comply with that."
Twitter rules
I am impressed. Twitter seems to have allowed dissenting Iranians to organise. I never thought it would ever have answers to "what are you doing?" like "I am leading the revolution".
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Tortured Canadians
The case for compensation at some level is pretty strong. The question shouldn't be if but rather how much:
Report urges compensation for men's torture ordeal (MPs-Torture)
Source: The Canadian Press
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OTTAWA_ A parliamentary committee says the federal government should purge false information from the files of three Canadians who were jailed and tortured in Syria.
The public safety committee also urges the government to compensate and apologize to the men.
It says Canada should do ``everything necessary'' to remove false allegations about the men and their families in records held by national security agencies.
Last fall, an inquiry found that Canadian officials contributed to the overseas torture of Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin by sharing information with foreign agencies.
The men are suing the government, but the committee says that should not stand in the way of an apology.
Conservative members of the committee issued a dissenting report rejecting the recommendations for redress.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Report urges compensation for men's torture ordeal (MPs-Torture)
Source: The Canadian Press
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OTTAWA_ A parliamentary committee says the federal government should purge false information from the files of three Canadians who were jailed and tortured in Syria.
The public safety committee also urges the government to compensate and apologize to the men.
It says Canada should do ``everything necessary'' to remove false allegations about the men and their families in records held by national security agencies.
Last fall, an inquiry found that Canadian officials contributed to the overseas torture of Abdullah Almalki, Ahmad El Maati and Muayyed Nureddin by sharing information with foreign agencies.
The men are suing the government, but the committee says that should not stand in the way of an apology.
Conservative members of the committee issued a dissenting report rejecting the recommendations for redress.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Judicial review
Abdoulrab v. Ontario (Labour Relations Board), 2009 ONCA 491, released today, has useful comment on the reasonableness standard for judicial review:
[42] Regarding judicial review on a standard of reasonableness as the determination of whether a tribunal's decision deviates from the correct decision by more than a reasonable margin of error is a grave misconception. Judicial review on a standard of reasonableness recognizes there is no single outcome that must be regarded as the correct one. Rather, there is a range of outcomes that are acceptable and the function of judicial review on a standard of reasonableness is merely to determine whether the decision falls within that range. The Supreme Court of Canada has explained this repeatedly.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
[42] Regarding judicial review on a standard of reasonableness as the determination of whether a tribunal's decision deviates from the correct decision by more than a reasonable margin of error is a grave misconception. Judicial review on a standard of reasonableness recognizes there is no single outcome that must be regarded as the correct one. Rather, there is a range of outcomes that are acceptable and the function of judicial review on a standard of reasonableness is merely to determine whether the decision falls within that range. The Supreme Court of Canada has explained this repeatedly.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Today in 1815
Napoleon was defeated at the battle of Waterloo.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Email thoughts
My office email is down.
A decade ago who would care?
But now it's a great loss -- whereas I would get dozens of calls a day now I get but a handful.
Everything is email.
But I remember telegrams and telex machines -- so I assume email will pass too... .
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Another snapshot
Liberals' narrow lead over Tories holds during election standoff: EKOS poll
CBC.CA News
Thu Jun 18 2009, 6:04am ET
Section: Canada
CBC.CA News
Thu Jun 18 2009, 6:04am ET
Section: Canada
The Liberals have maintained a razor-thin lead over the Conservatives across the country, while also opening up substantial leads in Ontario and Quebec in a week that threatened to plunge Canada into a summer election, according to a new poll from EKOS released exclusively to CBC News.
Asked which party they would support if a federal election were held tomorrow, 33.7 per cent of respondents opted for Michael Ignatieff's Liberals, while 32.4 per cent chose Stephen Harper's Conservatives, EKOS said.
The Liberal numbers are a drop from the 35 per cent support reported in a similar EKOS poll conducted last week.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Trial move likely?
The extraordinary amount of media attention paid to the Tori Stafford case will bolster any motions made by defence lawyers to change trial locations, legal experts say.
Toronto lawyer James Morton said the "continual barrage of information" from news media about the little girl's abduction and the arrests for her murder would make it "very, very difficult" to find local jurors who hadn't some opinion on the case.
"Even though courts are disinclined to grant them, this would be a particularly strong case (for a change of venue motion)," said Morton, a past president of the Ontario Bar Association.
Hal Mattson, defence lawyer for Michael Rafferty, the 28-year-old man accused of Tori's kidnap and murder, suggested in late May he may seek a change of venue, saying the city's small size would make it difficult to find 12 jurors "who didn't have an opinion before they went in."
"That's probably the underlying reason" for a change of venue motion, said Syd Usprich, a University of Western Ontario law professor. "When you get a case that has had so much publicity -- like the Tori Stafford case -- (the defence lawyer) will argue there's no way (the accused) can get a fair and unbiased jury in Woodstock.
"And he may be right."
Jeanine LeRoy, lawyer for 18-year-old Terri-Lynne McClintic, simply said it was "too early" to make a decision on a change of venue.
Usprich suggested Woodstock's relatively small city population would also bolster a change of venue motion. While it may be possible to find potential jurors in larger cities who are largely unfamiliar with a high-profile crime, that is much more unlikely in smaller centres, Usprich said.
Changes of venue motions, Morton said, are intended for higher-profile cases where the attendant notoriety makes it difficult to obtain a "free and unbiased jury." After filing the motion itself in Superior Court, the lawyer must provide evidence that a change of venue is necessary to find an unprejudiced jury through media reprints or public surveys. "(Change of venue motions) are not granted very freely," Morton said. "Courts don't like to move trials. It's better for the trial to be held in the place where (the crime) happened so the community can be there."
If a change of motion venue is granted, Morton said the trial -- because of the associated costs and potential inconvenience to witnesses -- would likely be as close to Woodstock as possible while ensuring unbiased proceedings. Because of the case's media profile in London, Morton guessed that any potential motion would look to some other jurisdiction.
"If I was the lawyer, I'd be trying to move the trial to Windsor, Kitchener-Waterloo or Hamilton," he said. "They're far enough away that you can almost certainly find a jury panel that doesn't have strong preconceptions."
But Morton suggested defence lawyers might forgo change of venue motions and take their chances with local jurors if the Crown's cases are unconvincing. If the case against Rafferty is largely based on statements made by McClintic that aren't corroborated by physical evidence, Morton suggested Mattson might choose a Woodstock trial for his client. Because McClintic is also accused of Tori's kidnap and murder, Morton characterized her as an "unsavoury witness" whose testimony would be suspect without "evidence that points to her being truthful."
"Maybe a local jury is the right jury (in Rafferty's case)," Morton said. "They might be angry at this terrible crime ... (but) let them look at the evidence."
Any contemplated change of venue motion would not be filed until after the preliminary hearings, which determines if the Crown has enough evidence to go to trial. Last week, Mattson indicated that his client's preliminary hearing likely wouldn't be scheduled until early 2010. McClintic is next scheduled in court on June 23 while Rafferty is expected to appear by video on July 17.
Tori Stafford, 8, disappeared April 8. Her body has not been found.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
On reading of another Canadian killed in combat I thought of Anthem for Doomed Youth (1917)
Wilfred Owen was born in Oswestry, Shropshire and went on to work as a lay assistant to the vicar of Dunsden in 1913.
In 1915, he enlisted in the Artists' Rifles and served at the Somme that winter. Suffering from shell shock, he was sent to recover in Edinburgh where he met and was encouraged by Siegfried Sassoon. Most of his best poetry was written and polished during his convalescence there.
His shocking, realistic war poetry on the horrors of trenches and gas warfare was heavily influenced by Sassoon. Following recovery he returned to the front, having spurned the offer of a home-based training position, and was killed one week before the end of the war at the age of twenty-five. One month before he died Owen was awarded the Military Cross.
Anthem for Doomed Youth (1917)
What passing-bells for these who die as cattle?
Only the monstrous anger of the guns.
Only the stuttering rifles' rapid rattle
Can patter out their hasty orisons.
No mockeries for them from prayers or bells,
Nor any voice of mourning save the choirs,—
The shrill, demented choirs of wailing shells;
And bugles calling for them from sad shires.
What candles may be held to speed them all?
Not in the hands of boys, but in their eyes
Shall shine the holy glimmers of good-byes.
The pallor of girls' brows shall be their pall;
Their flowers the tenderness of silent maids,
And each slow dusk a drawing-down of blinds.
Language to hide meaning
Today I heard someone on the radio trying to explain why aboriginal Canadians are disproportionally sick.
She said:
"Issues that are live in the discourse of First Nations health status include financial and access to sanitary water supply."
How about "First Nation people are often poor and don't have access to clean water and so get sick a lot"?
Sad but true... .
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Bail pending retrial
R. v. Heyden, 2009 ONCA 494, released today, deals with a situation where a conviction for murder has been set aside and a new trial ordered. The Court considered the appropriate test for considering judicial interim release (bail). The decision is helpful because it outlines the fact that the earlier conviction is irrelevant for considering bail and, more generally, the consideration of the three grounds in a reverse onus circumstance.
The Court writes:
[11] We emphasize that as the appellant comes before us awaiting trial, he is entitled to the presumption of innocence. While he lost the benefit of that presumption upon his conviction in 1999, that conviction has been set entirely aside because of an error that the Crown itself conceded rendered the trial unfair. We cannot ignore the conviction because it is part of the history of the case and explains why we are now considering bail pending trial at a point when the appellant has served almost ten years in prison. However, the conviction is otherwise irrelevant to our task. The appellant is legally entitled to go back to “square one” and benefit from the crucial core value of our legal system, enshrined in s. 11(d) of the Charter, that everyone accused of a crime is entitled “to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing”. This right has been described by the Supreme Court of Canada as “essential in a society committed to fairness and social justice”: R. v. Oakes, [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, at p. 120, per Dickson C.J.
[12] It is common ground that, as the appellant is charged with first degree murder, s. 522(2) operates so as to place upon him the burden of showing cause why his detention pending trial is not justified under the three grounds specified in s. 515(10) and set out above.
Primary Ground
[13] The Crown does not dispute that the appellant has satisfied the primary ground and that his detention is not required to ensure his attendance at trial.
Secondary Ground
[14] We disagree with the application judge’s conclusion that the appellant fails to meet the secondary ground on the basis that the Crown’s case is “strong” and that there are “very substantial concerns” that the appellant would offend or interfere with the administration of justice if released on bail.
[15] With respect to the strength of the Crown’s case, we agree with McMurtry C.J.’s assessment of the case against the appellant as “not overwhelming”. As counsel for the Crown fairly conceded before us, the Crown’s case is almost inevitably weaker now given the passage of time since this crime was committed. One witness has died and the evidence of Debbie Vanderheyden as to an incriminating statement allegedly made by the appellant prior to the murder has been significantly undermined by her cross-examination at trial.
[16] The application judge based his assessment of the risk of interference with the administration of justice primarily on Lynda Smith’s unsworn complaint that she was offered $150,000 by the appellant through their son, Robert Vanderheyden. However, that evidence suffers from several defects. First, Smith’s allegation is vague and lacking in detail. In particular, she did not state that this offer was accompanied by any threat from the appellant or request by him to change her evidence about the murder. Second, the alleged offer was made before the appeal was heard, and therefore before the appellant knew that he would face a new trial. Third, Robert Vanderheyden denies that he made any such offer on behalf of his father. Fourth, Smith is involved in a civil dispute with Robert Vanderheyden over the proceeds of a real estate deal and, within days of the alleged offer from the appellant, she commenced a civil action against Robert for $165,000. Her evidence is not strong enough to warrant a conclusion that there is a substantial likelihood that the appellant would interfere with the administration of justice if released from custody.
[17] We turn now to the appellant’s record of compliance with the terms of his judicial interim release pending trial. In our view, the fact that the appellant spent five and one half years on relatively lenient terms pending his trial without incident has a strong bearing on the risk he now poses. We agree with Mr. Lockyer’s submission that given the appellant’s proven record of compliance with his conditions of bail pending trial, his case for release pending trial is now even stronger than it was when he was granted bail in 1994. As we read his reasons, the application judge gave no meaningful consideration to this factor. We would add that the appellant’s case also appears to be somewhat stronger than in 1994 in that the proposed sureties are more numerous and the amounts available are significantly higher.
[18] We recognize that the appellant was convicted in 1992 of assault causing bodily harm and uttering threats with regard to Smith. However, those convictions did not prevent the appellant from obtaining bail in 1994, and they are now dated. As we have noted, the appellant did not attempt to interfere with Smith during the five and one half years before his first trial. The fact that the appellant is now almost 65 years old and has served almost ten years in prison also reduces the risk that he will commit another offence if released.
[19] The Crown expresses concerns that the appellant will attempt to influence the future testimony of his son Robert, with whom he is now reconciled. However, Robert has assured the police that, despite their reconciliation,, he will give the same evidence at the new trial that he gave at the first trial.
[20] Viewing this evidence as a whole, we are satisfied that the appellant’s detention pending trial is not required on the secondary ground.
Tertiary Ground
[21] We also disagree with the application judge that detention pending trial is justified on the tertiary ground. As the application judge recognized, and as both the Supreme Court of Canada and this court have held, bail can be denied under the tertiary ground only in limited circumstances: R. v. Hall, [2002] 3 S.C.R. 309, at paras. 31, 85; R. v. LaFromboise (2005), 203 C.C.C. (3d) 492, at para. 23.
[22] As we have already indicated, we would describe the Crown’s case as “not overwhelming” rather than as “strong”. While this is a serious offence involving a brutal murder for which the appellant will face a lengthy sentence if convicted, we disagree that his detention “is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice” when the case is looked at as a whole.
[23] In R. v. Hall supra, at para 41, McLachlin C.J.C. stated:
At the end of the day, the judge can only deny bail if satisfied that in view of these factors and related circumstances, a reasonable member of the community would be satisfied that denial is necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice.
Similarly, this court held in R. v. Dhillon, [2002] O.J. No. 3451, at para. 28:
…the applicant must show that his detention is not necessary to maintain confidence in the administration of justice. It is the confidence of a reasonable, informed and dispassionate public that provides the measure of this ground. As such, the public would understand that the applicant has reacquired the presumption of innocence as a result of the decision of this court.
[24] The public’s interest in the continued incarceration of an individual charged with the most serious offence known to the law must be balanced against the public’s interest in seeing that no person be unjustly punished and, as in R. v. Khan (1998), 129 C.C.C. (3d) 443 (Man. C.A.) at 445, it is our view that “confidence in the administration of justice would more likely be compromised by detaining a possibly innocent man in custody for a prolonged period pending his retrial.”
[25] For five and one half years before his trial, the appellant complied with his terms of release, and for almost ten years since his conviction at a trial it would appear that he has been a model prisoner. We are informed that his trial will not start before early 2010 and is estimated to take up to one year.
[26] In our view, the public’s confidence in the administration of justice would be undermined rather than advanced by detaining the appellant pending his trial. The appellant presents a stronger case for release than he did fifteen years ago when he was released pending his trial. He is now sixty-five years old, he is presumed to be innocent, and throughout his fifteen years of involvement with the justice system on this charge, he appears to have complied with all terms and conditions. He has the strong support of several reputable friends and family members who offer to stand as sureties for him if he is released. He has already served almost ten years after being convicted at a trial that the Crown conceded and this court found to be unfair. To detain a man of his age, who is presumed to be innocent and who complied fully with the terms of his release pending his first trial, for at least two more years pending the determination of the trial would, in our view, be perceived by an informed and dispassionate public to be unfair and contrary to our society’s sense of justice.
No election yet
Harper, Ignatieff reach deal to avert summer election (Election-Showdown)
Source: The Canadian Press - Broadcast wire
Jun 17, 2009 10:41
Source: The Canadian Press - Broadcast wire
Jun 17, 2009 10:41
OTTAWA_ A summer election has been averted.
Sources say Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff have finalized the details of an agreement that will preserve the Conservatives' minority government_ for now.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Hired guns
I did not know Canada used mercenaries.
Government quiet on how Canada controls hired guns in Afghanistan
Waterloo Region Record
Wed Jun 17 2009
Page: A3
Section: Front
Byline: Murray Brewster
Source: The Canadian Press
Canada quietly signed an international agreement last fall on
regulating private security companies in war-zones, just weeks after a Canadian soldier was allegedly shot by a contractor during a confused firefight in Afghanistan.
But it's unclear what the government is doing to keep the hired guns on its payroll in check.
Canada was one of 17 countries to agree to the Montreaux Document,
which lays out responsibilities for the use of hired guns under
international law.
Others nations have since signed on and the United States is among
those in the process of enacting tough new regulations.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
The Conservatives are proposing changes to the federal corrections system
This would make sense if the prisons actually worked. The problem, of course, is that prsions, as we have them structured today, do not work; indeed, that make criminals worse. Prison reform is expensive; political “law and order” speeches aren’t.
By the way, the Federal Prisons hold First Nations men at a rate of 4 ½ times their general population – I wonder what special consideration will be given to trying to rehabilitate persons of that community (to whom the Crown owes special duties)?
CTV.ca News Staff
Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan introduced the legislative amendments in Parliament Tuesday.
"This Government is taking a new approach to corrections by putting a greater focus on public safety," Van Loan said in a press release.
"We are also putting the rights of victims first, by proposing changes to help keep them better informed."
The proposed key reforms to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act include:
The "protection of society" becoming the paramount principle of corrections and conditional release.
Enshrining in law, a victim's right to participate in parole board hearings.
Authorizing police to arrest without the need for a warrant, an offender breaking their release conditions.
Emphasizing the importance of taking into consideration the seriousness of an offence in National Parole Board decision-making.
Van Loan said the changes are being proposed so that offenders are more accountable for their actions and rehabilitation is more effective.
The changes are in response to a December 2007 report from the Correctional Service Canada Independent Review Panel.
The report found that
In Budget 2008, the government allocated nearly $500 million over five years to create change in the federal correctional system.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
Iran
It's hard to tell what's really going on. Twitter, that absurdity, seems to be a main source of information.
One seemingly secure source says security officials posing as clients entered the Tehran offices of one of Iran's leading human rights lawyers today and arrested him.
One seemingly secure source says security officials posing as clients entered the Tehran offices of one of Iran's leading human rights lawyers today and arrested him.
That lawyer, Abdolfattah Soltani, publicly said that the Iranian government should recount all the votes in last Friday's disputed presidential election, in which President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was declared the winner by a 2-1 margin
Adjournments
Today's important Court of Appeal decision in LSUC v Igbinoson 2009 ONCA 484 sets out the factors an adjudicator ought to consider in granting, or refusing, an adjournment request:
Reference may be made to Khimji v. Dhanani (2004), 69 O.R. (3d) 790 ( C.A. ); Moudry v. Moudry (2006), 216 O.A.C. 84 ( C.A. ); R. v. Wood [2007] 196 C.C.C. (3d) 155 (Ont. C.A. ) ("Wood"); R. v. Hazout (2005), 201 O.A.C. 235 ( C.A. ) ("Hazout"); R. v. Marzocchi (2006), 211 O.A.C. 2 ( C.A. ); Kalin v. Ontario College of Teachers (2005), 75 O.R. (3d) 523 ( Div. Ct.); and Ariston Realty Corp. v. Elcarim Inc. (2007), 51 C.P.C. (6th) 326 ( Ont. S.C.). A non-exhaustive list of procedural and substantive considerations in deciding whether to grant or refuse an adjournment can be derived from these cases. Factors which may support the denial of an adjournment may include a lack of compliance with prior court orders, previous adjournments that have been granted to the applicant, previous peremptory hearing dates, the desirability of having the matter decided and a finding that the applicant is seeking to manipulate the system by orchestrating delay. Factors which may favour the granting of an adjournment include the fact that the consequences of the hearing are serious, that the applicant would be prejudiced if the request were not granted, and a finding that the applicant was honestly seeking to exercise his right to counsel, and had been represented in the proceedings up until the time of the adjournment request. In weighing these factors, the timeliness of the request, the applicant's reasons for being unable to proceed on the scheduled date and the length of the requested adjournment should also be considered.
Reference may be made to Khimji v. Dhanani (2004), 69 O.R. (3d) 790 ( C.A. ); Moudry v. Moudry (2006), 216 O.A.C. 84 ( C.A. ); R. v. Wood [2007] 196 C.C.C. (3d) 155 (Ont. C.A. ) ("Wood"); R. v. Hazout (2005), 201 O.A.C. 235 ( C.A. ) ("Hazout"); R. v. Marzocchi (2006), 211 O.A.C. 2 ( C.A. ); Kalin v. Ontario College of Teachers (2005), 75 O.R. (3d) 523 ( Div. Ct.); and Ariston Realty Corp. v. Elcarim Inc. (2007), 51 C.P.C. (6th) 326 ( Ont. S.C.). A non-exhaustive list of procedural and substantive considerations in deciding whether to grant or refuse an adjournment can be derived from these cases. Factors which may support the denial of an adjournment may include a lack of compliance with prior court orders, previous adjournments that have been granted to the applicant, previous peremptory hearing dates, the desirability of having the matter decided and a finding that the applicant is seeking to manipulate the system by orchestrating delay. Factors which may favour the granting of an adjournment include the fact that the consequences of the hearing are serious, that the applicant would be prejudiced if the request were not granted, and a finding that the applicant was honestly seeking to exercise his right to counsel, and had been represented in the proceedings up until the time of the adjournment request. In weighing these factors, the timeliness of the request, the applicant's reasons for being unable to proceed on the scheduled date and the length of the requested adjournment should also be considered.
PM, Ignatieff make progress to defuse election threat
Updated: Tue Jun. 16 2009 3:47:36 PM
Updated: Tue Jun. 16 2009 3:47:36 PM
CTV.ca News Staff
It appears the threat of a summer election has been averted as sources said Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff had a "productive" meeting Tuesday.
According to CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife, the secret meetings will continue Tuesday evening before both leaders head back to their parties on Wednesday.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Nothing is easy, especially if lawyers are involved!!!
Funny how simple matters get complex.
I took a simple matter, an administrative hearing, this week. It should have gone a day or two.
No caselaw just facts.
Well, 10 cases were delivered to me this morning and a full day of legal argument on a motion is now being scheduled.
Zzzzzzz
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Michael Ignatieff's interview with Canada AM
Newsnet
Newsnet
>> Bev: The prime minister and liberal leader both say they don't want to send canadians to the polls this summer. But unless an agreement can be reached soon, it may be unavoidable. Michael ignatieff is threatening to defeat the government this friday. Unless stephen harper agrees to major employment insurance changes. Stephen harper has called the proposed plan irresponsible. The two leaders will meet today to try twork out a deal, but before he speaks to the prime minter liberal leader michael ignatieff joins us from ottawa this morning. Good morning to you.
>> Good morning.
>> Bev: It would seem that everybody is in agreement on not wanting an election. What's it going to take in the meeting today? What do you need to hear from the prime minister so that you'll vote in favour of the spending on friday?
>> Michael Ignatieff: Well, i can't vote large amounts of money -- taxpayers' dollars unless I get a few answers to a few simple questions. How high is this deficit going to go, what are you going to do to dig us out, some questions about how much you've already spent. These are simple questions, you can't ask me to vote for another sum of money unless I've got a clear account of what you've done before. And then the key issue as you raised is making employment insurance fairer and more equal for canadians across the country. 'Ve been campaigning for this, I need to see very substantial movement on that. A commitment on that. The prime minister is putting another thing in play ich is helping the self-employed, that's a complicated question. I want to hear in much more specific detail what he's got in mind. But just so people understand what's going on, the prime minister doesn't have the confidence of the house of commons. He has to work with other opposition leads like myself. We're doing the business of canadians, making the system work for canadians and I'm optimistic today that we can makeome progress. But I will have to see what happens in the meeting.
>> Bev: To make parliament work, as you've been talking about and do what canadians need wouldn't it be -- wouldn't it work better to vote in favour of it so that the spending continues?
>> Michael Ignatieff: Well, i think the prime minister is to be blunt not telling canadians the whole truth about this. There are stories out there this morning which confirm that in fact we voted in march something like $22 billion worth of expenditure, and 21 of it can go out. Even if we had an election, the money voted in march will continue to flow.
>> Bev: How does that happen? If the government falls there's no budget, so there's no authorization to continue that spending.
>> Michael Ignatieff: No, expenditure can flow during an election period. Believe me.
>> Bev: With a governors general warrant.
>> Michael Ignatieff: It can do so, yes, that. The position is we're not -- canadians have this idea that all the money stops flowing kind of fromay one of an election. Not true. Not so.
>> Bev: Oka so then if it did continue, if we were in an electric campaign and a warrant was received so the spending could continue, then you're still talking about the original stimulus plan with one would assume similar numbers.
>> Michael Ignatieff: Well, if we got into government, we would be a different government and we'd have some different priorities. Some of the stimulushat we voted in march would of course continue because we voted for it before. But we might make some significant reallocations. We don't want to push the deficit up but we might make some very different decisions. I feel that this stuff isn't structured closely enough to key priorities that make us more competitive and more productive for tomorrow. And so we might reallocate. Not increase the amount of the deficit, but reallocate it. So those are the choices. But we're not there yet. Those are the choices we would present to canadians in an election, and they'd have a clear sense of alternatives at that time.
>> Bev: But you're optimistic going into the meeting today?
>> Michael Ignatieff: I'm alwa optimistic, I want to make parliament work. I take the prime minister at his word, he doesn't want an election. I'd like to avoid an election if we can. We're trying to do this to show to canadians that their system of government can work.
>> Bev: Michael ignatieff, thank for your time.
>> Mhael Ignieff: Thanks so much.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Monday, June 15, 2009
Important decision regarding territorial jurisdiction of Justices of the Peace
Today's decision in R. v. Ellis, 2009 ONCA 483 arose in the context of a private complainant seeking to lay a charge in Toronto when neither the complainant nor the accused had anything to do with Toronto.
The Justice of the Peace, quite sensibly, said go to your home jurisdiction. For unknown reasons the complainant declined and sought mandamus and, on losing that, appealed the matter to the Court of Appeal.
(Why? There must be some story there!!! Who has time or money for that especially when the charge could have been laid without issue at the local courthouse)
The Court of Appeal ruled that Justices of the Peace have province wide jurisdiction -- an important point arises from an otherwise unedifying case:
[38] In my view, "territorial jurisdiction" in s. 504 of the Criminal Code refers to the entire province of Ontario.
[39] Pursuant to s. 17(1) of the Justices of the Peace Act, justices have jurisdiction throughout Ontario. The fact that the Courts of Justice Act divides Ontario into regions for administrative purposes does not alter the jurisdiction conferred on justices by s. 504 of the Criminal Code. As Aitken J. stated in Hackett at para. 15, "[t]he regions created under the Courts of Justice Act are created for administrative purposes related to the administration of justice in the province; they are not created for jurisdictional purposes."
[40] Contrary to the Crown's submission, interpreting "territorial jurisdiction" in s. 504 as the entire province of Ontario does not offend the principles of statutory interpretation. The Criminal Code is federal legislation, governing all of the provinces and territories. Adopting one interpretation for one province does not dictate such a result elsewhere in the country. In other parts of Canada , where legislative schemes governing the systems of court may be different, "territorial jurisdiction" may well have a different meaning. In my view, the phrase "territorial jurisdiction" in s. 504, like the definition of "territorial division" in s. 2 of the Criminal Code, provides the flexibility necessary to accommodate provincial and territorial differences: see Hackett at para. 10. Accordingly, interpreting "territorial jurisdiction" in s. 504 to mean the province of Ontario does not necessarily render that phrase redundant simply because the word "province" is used elsewhere in that section.
[41] Moreover, the reference in s. 504 to "territorial jurisdiction" in Ontario may be explained on an historical basis. Historically, in Ontario, justices were appointed to a particular county or docket. At that time, their jurisdiction may have been limited to the territory to which they had been appointed. However, the enactment of the Courts of Justice Act, 1984, S.O. 1984, c. 11 "brought about significant changes in court structure" and "altered the approach to territorial divisions within the province": see Ponnuthurai at p. 443. Separate provincial courts of each county and district were amalgamated into province-wide courts. After a detailed review of the legislative history of the Act and the subsequent amendments, Pringle J. stated at p. 445 of Ponnuthurai:
When the language of the Courts of Justice Act was amended to indicate that the division of the province into regions was for administrative as opposed to jurisdictional purposes, it is logical to infer that regions no longer had jurisdictional significance, but rather only administrative [significance]. The effect of the legislation was thus to create different administrative regions within a single jurisdictional unit. [Emphasis added.]
[42] The notion of a single jurisdictional unit is further reflected in s. 17(1) of the Justices of the Peace Act which, as has been mentioned, states that justices of the peace have jurisdiction throughout the province.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Police watching for criticism
Does anyone else find it disturbing that the police keep and collect information on someone who wrote a letter to the editor criticising the police? I guess I better not get a speeding ticket in Windsor!!!
CBC News
Ontario's privacy commissioner is probing whether privacy rights were violated when police launched secret background checks on jurors....
The information gleaned on potential jurors included their opinions of police based on, for example, their writing a letter to the editor criticizing police, any convictions they might have had as young offenders or any criminal pardons, among other things.
“Israel/Palestine: Mapping Models of Statehood and Paths to Peace.”
Today York University responded to concerns raised about a conference on campus about Israel, Palestine and the future. The response is below:
http://www.yorku.ca/mediar/archive/Release.php?Release=1696
Sadly, the response does not address the issues the conference raises for Jews. It largely uses academic freedom as an explanation for why there is a conference.
The issues to be discussed raise existential questions about the Jewish nation – whether there will be Jews in the 21st of 22nd Century.
“Israel/Palestine: Mapping Models of Statehood and Paths to Peace” aims to explore a one-state, bi-national solution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, the imposition of which would spell the end of Israel as a Jewish state. The conference will include a number of speakers who are recognizable for their roles as organizers and outspoken proponents of “Israel apartheid week” and the Israel boycott movement.
Candidly it is hard to imagine a similar conference being held to discuss the future of any other group with similar existential concerns – say First Nations – and the use of academic freedom to avoid considering the underlying problems is troubling.
http://www.yorku.ca/mediar/archive/Release.php?Release=1696
Sadly, the response does not address the issues the conference raises for Jews. It largely uses academic freedom as an explanation for why there is a conference.
The issues to be discussed raise existential questions about the Jewish nation – whether there will be Jews in the 21st of 22nd Century.
“Israel/Palestine: Mapping Models of Statehood and Paths to Peace” aims to explore a one-state, bi-national solution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, the imposition of which would spell the end of Israel as a Jewish state. The conference will include a number of speakers who are recognizable for their roles as organizers and outspoken proponents of “Israel apartheid week” and the Israel boycott movement.
Candidly it is hard to imagine a similar conference being held to discuss the future of any other group with similar existential concerns – say First Nations – and the use of academic freedom to avoid considering the underlying problems is troubling.
He said she said
In a bad relationship he says "I don't want to XYZ" and she says "I don't want to XYZ".
Usually they both XYZ.
So when we say "we don't want and election" and Harper says "we don't want an election" ... methinks we may have an election... .
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Stay tuned
Election Showdown Update
Source: The Canadian Press - Broadcast wire
Jun 15, 2009 17:01
OTTAWA_ Prime Minister Stephen Harper is rejecting overtures from Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff to prevent a summer election.
Harper says he will unveil proposed reforms to E-I by the fall.
But he says he can't meet Ignatieff's Friday deadline for providing details on the proposals.
Still, the prime minister says he is willing to meet with Ignatieff to discuss how they can come to terms.
Ignatieff today gave the Tories until Friday to produce details on proposed changes to the Employment Insurance system, otherwise his party could vote against the federal budget spending estimates -- something that would trigger an election.
But Harper says it would be unrealistic to put together detailed proposals on such dramatic changes to E-I in such a short period of time.
Harper's comments today make it unclear whether the country is headed for a summer election.
Both Harper and Ignatieff have said they don't want an election, but neither has ruled out the possibility.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Source: The Canadian Press - Broadcast wire
Jun 15, 2009 17:01
OTTAWA_ Prime Minister Stephen Harper is rejecting overtures from Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff to prevent a summer election.
Harper says he will unveil proposed reforms to E-I by the fall.
But he says he can't meet Ignatieff's Friday deadline for providing details on the proposals.
Still, the prime minister says he is willing to meet with Ignatieff to discuss how they can come to terms.
Ignatieff today gave the Tories until Friday to produce details on proposed changes to the Employment Insurance system, otherwise his party could vote against the federal budget spending estimates -- something that would trigger an election.
But Harper says it would be unrealistic to put together detailed proposals on such dramatic changes to E-I in such a short period of time.
Harper's comments today make it unclear whether the country is headed for a summer election.
Both Harper and Ignatieff have said they don't want an election, but neither has ruled out the possibility.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
An election? Maybe
Ignatieff on Newsworld - closed captioning - June 15, 2009¸
>> I'm introducing you today to michael ignatieff, the liberal leader. ignatieff will speak for about ten to twelve minutes and take questions for about 25 minutes. Mr. igtieff, over to you.
>> The Hon. Michael Ignatieff: Thanks, mr. brennan. Good morning. Bonjour.
>> (Voice of Translator): LET Me start by saying that the liberal party does not want -- it wants parliament to work. We want to replace confrontation with cooperation, but in order to do that, the prime minister must be accountable. That is what canadians expect of their government.
>> The Hon. Michael Ignatieff: -- By telling canadians that the libel party is not seeking an election. We want parliament to work. We want to replace confrontation with cooperation, but we need the prime minister to deliver the accountability that canadians expect from their government. We're here this morning to provide the liberal party's response to the government's second accountability report. And let's remember why the government has to submit accountability reports in the first place. The government's full economic statement was a serious error of judgment. It offered no help for the economy and it triggered a political crisis. The government lost the confidence of the house, the prime minister escaped defeat only by proroguing parliament. He was then forced by the opposition to come back to the house with a budget.
[00:03:40]
>> (Voice of Translator): HIS Fall economic update was a serious mistake in judgment. It made no provision for recovery and resulted in a political crisis. The government lost the confidence of the house. The prime minister avoided defeat, only because he prorogued parliament. The opposition then forced him to come forward with a new budget when the house resumed.
>> The Hon. Michael Ignatieff: My party voted for that budget because it promised to get needed stimulus into the economy, and it did so within a fiscal framework that we could live with. But after what the country lived through, particularly that political crisis, we demanded that parliament submit regular reports on its regular performance. The government submitted its second report last thursday. Now, there are two other parties that rejected both the budget and the report before giving it any kind of serious attention. So the idea that we are in coalition with these parties is simply false. There is no coalition. and the bloc, parties of permanent opposition, we've been a party of government, and we hope one day when we secure the confidence of the people to be a party of government again. So we can't afford to behave irresponsibly. We listened to the prime minister, studied the report, and consulted with canadians, and we have serious questions about this report and about the government's performance.
>>> The government came forward with its second report last thursday. Two other parties rejected both the budget and the report before having read them. Sohe idea that there is a coalition with these parties is false. There is no coalition, unlike and the bloc quebecois which are only ever in opposition, we have been in power and we hope to be in power once again. However, we cannot allow ourselves to act irresponsibly. We have listened to the prime minister, we have studied his report, and we have consulted canadians. This report on the government's actions leads to a number of questions.
[00:06:11]
>> The Hon. Michael Ignatieff: For months, we have been asking the government to do something t remedy the regional variations ineligibility, to lower eligibility requirements would make the system fairer and help to get help to the canadians who need it most. It's also the best immediate stimulus. Several provincial premiers have already agreed with us.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Ignatieff to Harper: make EI changes or face election
Source: The Canadian Press - Broadcast wire
Jun 15, 2009 10:42
Jun 15, 2009 10:42
OTTAWA - Michael Ignatieff is set to impose conditions on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to avoid a summer election.
The Liberal leader told his MPs today that Harper must make changes to the EI system before the House of Commons rises Friday.
Sources in the room said Ignatieff will also demand more information about stimulus spending and the ballooning deficit - and action on the medical isotope shortage.
They said Ignatieff stressed that he doesn't want an election, but added he must hold the government accountable.
The Liberals have an opportunity to bring a non-confidence motion against the minority Conservative government on Friday.
The NDP and Bloc Quebecois have already said they would vote against the government.
(The Canadian Press)
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Conservative intellectuals won't give us the next election
There's an interesting analysis in the Post today dealing with former conservative backers of Stephen Harper now moving away from him because he has not shown principle in government.
I am sure some have left him but before we hire a moving truck for Harper let's think a moment. How many conservative intellectuals are there? (That's not a smarmy joke -- my point is political intellectuals of any stripe are rare). And if they don't vote for Harper who are they going to vote for?
The truth is that Harper was right to be pragmatic -- both politically (the centre is where the votes really are) and factually (we needed the stimulus).
I want to win the next election; we need to win the next election (just look at justice issues). But we won't win just because some right wing thinkers are annoyed at Harper.
James Morton
1100-5255 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6P4
416 225 2777
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Standing Flocke
We will know about the summer election tomorrow -- perhaps Flocke will stand for a Riding? She'd have my vote!Mark Persaud speaks to Cooley Law Students
An excellent speaker, Mr. Persaud outlined the many ways a law degree can be used.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)