Month: June 2006

MPs have a week left on the Hill before heading back to their ridings for the rest of the summer. Whenever I had a week of school left, it was time to gear down and coast to the end. Not so for our MPs. Today is one of the  busiest I’ve seen this session on the Parliamentary calendar. I’m not complaining, or anything, but these are just the main event happenings on my beat today:

• The Senate Committee on National Security and Defence will hear testimony today from Jim Judd, the top guy at CSIS — the spy agency that investigated the 17 people arrested on terrorism charges in Toronto. So far as I know, it will be Judd’s first public appearance since those arrests and Senators will want to talk to him about it. William Elliott also appears before this committee. He is associate deputy minister in Stockwell Day’s deparment: The Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness. The buzz in Ottawa, though, is that Elliott is more influential than his title suggests. He has been in his current job only for a few months but had been the National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister (both Martin and Harper) since early 2005 but earned his stripes in Ottawa during the Mulroney era, serving as a top advisor to then Deputy Prime Minister Don Mazankowski. The Committee also interviews top officials at the Canada Border Services Agency and Transport Canada about border security.
• Justice Minister Vic Toews is in front of the Commons committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics where he’s going to talk about the governnment’s approach to Access to Information — a topic near and dear to the heart of every journalist and not near and dear enough to the heart of most Canadians. His views may be challenged by Information Commissioner John Reid, who is also before the committee.
• Finance Minister Jim Flaherty starts the day in Halifax where he will be talking about the creation of a new national securities regulator then he flies to Ottawa where he tells the Commons finance committee about his plans to create a Parliamentay Budget Office.
• All of the provincial trade ministers are in Ottawa today where they are meeting with International Trade Minister David Emerson. Their mission: Figure out ways to knock down interprovincial trade barriers.
• The Commons Committee that examines our international trade issues is yakking about softwood lumber.
• And, if the rain holds off, Speaker Peter Milliken hosts the annual Speakers Barbeque for Parliamentarians, to which I am invited, at official residence of the Speaker, The Farm at Kingsmere.

Today I took the unusual step of deleting a comment that was posted here in reaction to a post I’d put up that concerned the Parliamentary Press Gallery’s spat with Prime Minister over “the List.”

I took down this comment because I thought the commenter unfairly took some shots at various individuals.

Now I should point out that comments to items on this blog go up unmediated and unfiltered. I can take them down or delete them after the fact but I don’t ‘approve’ comments or otherwise take any action when it comes to the comments section here. I don’t necessarily agree or disagree with the opinions expressed in those comments.

That said: Because those comments appear at a blog with my name on it, comments ought to abide by the same general rules of civil discourse that I abide by — namely — you ought to be fair and accurate; avoid personal attacks; and generally stay on topic.

The post I deleted was neither fair nor accurate; personally attacked several individuals; and strayed a bit off-topic.

For now, posts will continue to go up unmediate and unfiltered (trackbacks have been verboten for a couple of months now because of problems with trackback spam) and I hope to keep it that way.

As always, if you’ve got a comment about this idea, feel free to let me know.

 

Last week, blogger Stephen Taylor and I found ourselves chasing down the same story: A secret report by a Senate subcommittee that was going to raise serious questions about the conduct of Liberal Senator Raymond Lavigne (left). Taylor was first to break a few of the details and I had a few more on that evening’s newscast.

Today, the report that details allegations of Senator Lavigne’s alleged misconduct has been tabled and the matter has been referred to the RCMP for investigation.

Opposition Leader Bill Graham issued this press release late today:

“The Senate today has adopted a report from their Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration on the subject of Senator Raymond Lavigne.

As a result of this, it is inappropriate for Senator Lavigne to sit with the Liberal caucus until any investigations have been completed.”

Some background on Senator Lavigne:

Lavigne was appointed to the Senate in 2002 by Prime Minister Chretien. He went into the Senate with George Baker. At the time of his appointment, Chretien appeared to trying to have some fun with Stephen Harper who had just been elected leader of the Canadian Alliance but did not yet have a seat in the Commons. In appointing Lavigne, who was an MP for nearly a decade representing a Montreal-area riding, and Baker, a Newfoundland MP, Chretien was seeming to bait Harper a bit by wondering why this newly elected leader wouldn’t want a seat in the Commons by running in a bye-election. Of course, Harper was never going to run as an Alliance candidate in Quebec or Newfoundland.

Press reports at the time of Lavigne’s appointment note that he appeared to be completely unremarkable. Some French language reporters, for example, said they were not able to recognize him by sight if they saw him — and, again, he had been in the House for nearly a decade.

Tim Naumetz, reporting for Southam News at the time wrote, on March 27, 2002: “An aide in his Montreal office said while Lavigne had earlier discussed the Senate appointment, the sudden announcement yesterday came as a surprise.”

The Official Blogware Blog-O-Meter counted 37,581 visitors to this blog in the month of May, who viewed a combined 135,757 pages. I'd like to extend a particular thank you to all you software robots — particularly those looking to drop off a little trackback spam — it's been so much fun having you drop in.
Still, I trust there were plenty of humans among that crowd of visitors, as well — and here's what those visitors in May found most interesting at this blog. The post title is displayed, followed by the date it was originally posted.
Porsche fans –thank you! You have eclipsed Celine Dion fans as the major generator of traffic to this site.

1. A Porsche moment (10 Jan 2005)
2. Hard at work (05 Mar 2005)
3. PM to snub gallery dinner? (18 May 2006)
4. Statement from the family of Cpl Randy Payne (25 Apr 200)
5. Air Canada and a new Celine Dion video — right here! (01 Nov 2004)
6. Michalak and (heavily armoured) friends (01 May 2006)
7. Speculators driving commodity market: TD Bank (19 Apr 2006)
8. Who pays for this blog? Some disclaimers (13 Aug 2004)
9. Statement from the family of Lt. William Turner (25 Apr 2006)
10. The New Air Canada uniforms (01 Nov 2004)
11. Canadian killed in Kandahar firefight (17 May 2006)
12. MPs to debate about Darfur (30 Apr 2006)
13. Michalak in Gombad ( 01 May 2006)
14. “Oiler” MPs rooting for Calgary tonight (03 May 2006)
15. Parliamentary Secretaries: The Revised List (06 May 2006)

Last Monday May 30, Jack Hooper (right), the deputy director of CSIS, was a witness in front of the Senate Committee on Defence and National Security [Read his opening remarks]. No one, of course, could have known that what Hooper would talk about would be front page news around the world a week later.

Here is one interesting exchange between Hooper and Senator Wilfred Moore (Liberal-Nova Scotia). Moore is trying to get a sense of what CSIS is facing in terms of terrorism threats and whether it has the resources to adequately pursure those threats. At first, Moore wants to get a sense of the number of terrorism threats CSIS has identified:

Hooper: We are talking about basically 350 high level targets and around 50 to 60 organizational targets.

Moore: In terms of the homegrown terrorists, I take it the basis of that is the fact that you know who and where they are.

Hooper: We know who and where some of them are.

Moore: Okay. If we know where and who some of them are, do we remove them from Canada? Is it better to have them here so we can keep an eye on what they are doing? Does the law stop us from having them removed? Are they more dangerous if they are back in Afghanistan, for example?

Hooper: The homegrown terrorists present fewer remedies than international terrorists who have arrived in Canada. We used to have what we called a three tiered approach to targeting. We tried to keep known terrorists out of the country; if that failed, we would interdict them at ports of entry; and if that failed, only then would we embark on aggressive investigations against them. When we talk about the homegrown terrorist phenomenon, in most instances, these are people who are Canadian citizens. You cannot remove them anywhere.

Moore: Most of them are Canadian citizens?

Hooper: Yes. Most of them are very young. A lot of them were born here. A lot of them who were not born here immigrated to Canada with their parents at a very early age. We have two options. We can work in collaboration with law enforcement to prosecute them or we can work to disrupt their activities

The Toronto Star and its terrorism reporter Michelle Shephard are deservedly singled out by the New York Times for its tremendous coverage of the raids over the weekend.

The competition between Toronto's four major daily newspapers is often intense, particularly over crime news. But its results are rarely as one-sided as the coverage that followed the arrests of 17 Ontario residents in what the police call a terrorist bomb plot …

When asked how The Star managed to so outflank its competition, Stephen Meurice, the managing editor for news, replied, “I can't possibly tell you.”

The answer, said Giles Gherson, The Star's editor in chief, was mainly hard work by a single reporter.

About two years ago, before Mr. Gherson joined the paper, The Star's editors assigned Michelle Shephard, a police reporter, to cover national security issues…

[Read the full story]

The Toronto Star, Hamilton Spectator and Kitchener-Waterloo Record (I can't bring myself to call it “The Record of Waterloo Region”) publish a special section today that details the results of an investigation in air transportation safety. The investigation was done by some very talented friends and former colleagues at each of those papers.

“More than 80,000 passengers have been put at risk over the last five years when airplanes they were travelling in came dangerously close together in Canadian skies, according to never-before-released federal aviation data.
Between 2001 and mid-2005, there were more than 800 incidents in which planes got too close to each other, according to Transport Canada data — about one incident every two days. Sometimes, they come within seconds of crashing.
This is one of the major findings in a joint investigation of the Canadian commercial airline industry by the Toronto Star, the Hamilton Spectator and The Record of Waterloo Region.
The investigation found a safety system straining at the seams. Experts — pilots, mechanics, airline workers and people who study aviation data — warn significant changes must be made to prevent a major catastrophe . . .[Read the full story]

Last night, I received an e-mail from “YouthForVolpe@hotmail.com” signed by “Mike Hunt from Belleville”. This is the e-mail address and name associated with the WHOIS lookup for the now infamous YouthForVolpe.ca domain. I've reproduced it below but have no way of verifying if the sender is, in fact, YouthforVolpe or if the content of the e-mail is authentic and true. That said, it has the ring of authenticity. Remember, as is the case with most of our e-mail correspondence when we're replying or forwarding, the most recent correspondence is on top, so if you're trying to determine the sequence of events here, you want to start from the bottom. Essentially, it looks like “Mike Hunt” got a note from his domain name registrar — the registrar is the person you or I would pay an annual fee to in order to hold on to the rights of our domain — which laid out all the policies he was to follow as a domain name holder. These are pretty standard policies which might vary from registrar to registrar although it looks like “Mike Hunt”'s registrar went with the CIRA template. “Mike Hunt” then replied asking his registrar what, if any, of those policies he was not complying with. His registrar replied with the answer. I have only lightly formatted this e-mail to make it a little easier to read:

From: Youthfor Volpe
To: dakin @ ctv.ca
Sent: Fri Jun 02 23:28:52 2006
Subject: Youth for Volpe
Re, your blog entry
As for why the youthforvolpe.ca disappeared from the net, I think the following email exchange from my former Registrar explains it. Jane Taber's article from today's Globe and Mail appears to give the context.
Mike Hunt from Belleville

From : CADNS.CA <registrar@cadns.ca>
Sent : June 1, 2006 8:41:26 PM
To : “Youthfor Volpe” <youthforvolpe@hotmail.com>
CC : archive@cadns.ca
Subject : RE: Domain registration for youthforvolpe.ca
Go to previous message | Go to next message | Delete |
Inbox
Article 3.1
Paragraph (h) (i) and (ii)
(h) not engage in any direct or indirect activity which in
CIRA’s opinion is designed to bring, or may bring, the Registry into
disrepute, is designed to interfere, or may interfere, with CIRA’s
operations or designed to expose, or may expose, CIRA to prosecution or to
legal action by the Registrant or a third party including, but not limited
to, any of the following kinds of activities:
(i) directly or indirectly, defaming or contributing to the defamation of
any other Person,
(ii) unlawfully discriminating or contributing to the unlawful
discrimination of any other Person; or
(iii) committing any other actionable wrong against any other Person
including, without limitation, any other infringement of the Person’s
rights;

At 04:32 PM 01/06/2006, you wrote:
And what part of the agreement am I not in compliance with?
That's right. No part. You are just censoring people who disagree with
your chosen candidate.

From: “CADNS.CA” <registrar@cadns.ca>
To: “Youthfor Volpe” <youthforvolpe@hotmail.com>
CC: archive@cadns.ca
Subject: RE: Domain registration for youthforvolpe.ca
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2006 16:33:42 -0400
Please feel free to review the Registrant agreement at
http://www.cira.ca/en/cat_Registrar.html You will find in that agreement the following:
2.6 Registrar As Agent. The Registrant
acknowledges and agrees that the Registrant’s Registrar is deemed to be
authorized to act as the Registrant’s agent in connection with Domain Name
Registrations, but not the Registrant’s CIRA membership. Further, the
Registrant acknowledges and agrees that the Registrant’s Registrar may, in
accordance with the applicable Registry PRP:
(a) make changes to the Administrative Contact details at any
time without having to comply with the change of critical information
approval process (as set out in the applicable Registry PRP), provided the
Registrant has granted the Registrant’s Registrar the authority to do so AND
HAS NOT REVOKED SAID AUTHORITY. If the Registrant has two or more
Registrars, only one of the Registrant’s Registrars may be granted said
authority. The Registrant may at any time revoke said authority or provide
said authority to another of the Registrant’s Registrars;
(b) cancel the Registrant’s Domain Name Registration within
seven (7) Days of Activation for whatever reason and without the
Registrant’s consent; and
(c) cancel, on behalf of the Registrant, a renewal term for the Domain Name
Registration, provided the renewal term has not yet commenced.
3.1 Certain Registrant Obligations. Throughout
the Term of this Agreement, the Registrant shall:
(a) comply with and abide by all applicable Registry PRP (all of the
applicable Registry PRP can be found at
<http://www.cira.ca/en/doc_Registrar.html>http://www.cira.ca/en/doc_Registra
r.html);
(b) in accordance with the applicable Registry PRP, submit to CIRA through
the Registrant’s Registrar or to CIRA directly, if CIRA, at its complete
discretion and sole option, deems it appropriate, all Registration
Information which CIRA may require;
(c) promptly give notice to CIRA, through the Registrant’s Registrar, of any
change to any Registration Information;
(d) comply with and observe all international, federal, provincial and local
laws and regulations and other laws of applicable governmental authorities
relating to the Registrant’s Domain Name Registration(s) (“Applicable
Laws”);
(e) prior to providing any Registration Information to CIRA through the
Registrant’s Registrar, obtain the written consents of individuals whose
personal information will be held in the Registry where required by
Applicable Laws;
(f) at all times ensure that the Registration Information is complete,
accurate, and in compliance with the applicable Registry PRP and this
Agreement, communicate to the Registrant’s Registrar (for communication to
CIRA) any changes to the Registration Information and promptly confirm to
CIRA when CIRA so requests in accordance with the applicable Registry PRP
that the Registration Information is complete and accurate;
(g) immediately give notice to CIRA of any pending or threatened claim,
demand, action, cause of action, proceeding, lawsuit, investigation or
application (“Claim”) in relation to any Domain Name Registration (or any
judicial requests or orders to produce documents or information obtained
from or supplied to the Registry) that became known to the Registrant;
(h) not engage in any direct or indirect activity which in
CIRA’s opinion is designed to bring, or may bring, the Registry into
disrepute, is designed to interfere, or may interfere, with CIRA’s
operations or designed to expose, or may expose, CIRA to prosecution or to
legal action by the Registrant or a third party including, but not limited
to, any of the following kinds of activities:
(i) directly or indirectly, defaming or contributing to the defamation of
any other Person,
(ii) unlawfully discriminating or contributing to the unlawful
discrimination of any other Person; or
(iii) committing any other actionable wrong against any other Person
including, without limitation, any other infringement of the Person’s
rights;
Good Day,

The Canadian Internet Registration Authority is getting a rough ride today. A representative of the Joe Volpe leadership campaign suggested that the campaign contacted CIRA and had the spoof site youthforvolpe.ca pulled down.

CIRA has no such power and, as CIRA’s executives said today, it never talked to anyone associated with Volpe’s campaign.

CIRA is not a federal government organization although the federal government has authorized it to manage the .ca domain. But CIRA itself is run by a board of directors elected by, me and anyone else who owns a .ca domain.

CIRA sets out the rules over which we can argue over the rights to a particular domain name but CIRA cannot order anyone to take down or transfer a particular domain.
I have no knowledge of how youthforvolpe.ca disappeared from the Net — only Volpe's campaign and the domain name owners know for sure.
Who was the mastermind behind youthforvolpe.ca? I'll bet that Mike Hunt from Belleville knows:

WHOIS lookup for youthforvolpe.ca

Domain youthforvolpe.ca is SUSPENDED.

Registrant Name Mike Hunt Registrar Canadian Domain Name Services Inc. Renewal Date 2007/05/31 Date approved 2006/05/31 Last changed 2006/06/01 Description Registrar Number 140 Registrant Number 1545934 Domain Number 1545934

Administrative Contact Name Mr Mike Hunt Job Title Postal Address 868 Main Street Belleville ON K8N2Y8 Canada Phone 905-338-4949 Fax Email youthforvolpe@hotmail.com

Technical Contact Name Mr Mike Hunt Job Title Postal Address 868 Main Street Belleville ON K8N2Y8 Canada Phone 905-338-4949 Fax Email youthforvolpe@hotmail.com

In my former life as a technology reporter, I wrote about Mississauga, Ont.-based Kasten Chase Applied Research Ltd. from time to time. It was a small tech company with an interesting product portfolio: It made communications and data storage gear — the software and hardware — that was so impenetrable to hackers and other threats that it was used by the Office of the President of the United States and other U.S. agencies that needed to absolutely know that no one would be eavesdropping on any fax transmissions, Internet traffic, or other electronic data exchange.
To be able to sell its gear to the highest-security clients in the U.S., Kasten Chase was subject to a rigorous audit and security check by the National Security Agency. That audit included NSA spies actually trying to break in to Kasten Chase's headquarters just south of Pearson Airport to try to steal some of its intellectual property.
It passed that test.
Sadly, for all that neat stuff, the company has been unable to make a go of it financially. For the quarter ending March 31, it reported just $100,000 of revenue and a net loss 10 times that amount — or $1.1-million.
Yesterday, it announced that it would seek bankruptcy protection after failing to find a buyer for its business or otherwise turn things around.