Gold, Haiti, and a cooking school is busted: Monday's A1 headlines and Parliamentary daybook

A gold medal performance; a Haiti trip; and a cooking school is busted. Listen to my three-minute audio roundup of what's on the front pages of the country's newspapers plus highlights from Saturday's Parliamentary daybook by clicking on the link below.

You can also get these audio summaries automatically every day via podcast from iTunes or via an RSS feed by subscribing to my AudioBoo stream. Both the iTunes link and the RSS link are at my profile at AudioBoo.fm. Look under my picture on the left hand side of the page.

Listen!

Tags: , , , ,

Judt's call to arms to save a welfare state that may be the victim of its own success

More from that Tony Judt essay, "What is Living and What is Dead in Social Democracy?" [An earlier post with some other excerpts is here]. If you're at all intrigued, I encourage you to read the whole essay where he fleshes out and expands on the implications of some these observations.

Keynes acknowledged [that]  the disintegration of late Victorian Europe was the defining experience of his lifetime. Indeed, the essence of his contributions to economic theory was his insistence upon uncertainty: in contrast to the confident nostrums of classical and neoclassical economics, Keynes would insist upon the essential unpredictability of human affairs. If there was a lesson to be drawn from depression, fascism, and war, it was this: uncertainty—elevated to the level of insecurity and collective fear—was the corrosive force that had threatened and might again threaten the liberal world.

Thus Keynes sought an increased role for the social security state, including but not confined to countercyclical economic intervention. [Friedrich] Hayek proposed the opposite. In his 1944 classic, The Road to Serfdom, he wrote:

No description in general terms can give an adequate idea of the similarity of much of current English political literature to the works which destroyed the belief in Western civilization in Germany, and created the state of mind in which naziism could become successful.

In other words, Hayek explicitly projected a fascist outcome should Labour win power in England. And indeed, Labour did win. But it went on to implement policies many of which were directly identified with Keynes. For the next three decades, Great Britain (like much of the Western world) was governed in the light of Keynes's concerns.

It was social democracy that bound the middle classes to liberal institutions in the wake of World War II. They received in many cases the same welfare assistance and services as the poor: free education, cheap or free medical treatment, public pensions, and the like. In consequence, the European middle class found itself by the 1960s with far greater disposable incomes than ever before, with so many of life's necessities prepaid in tax. And thus the very class that had been so exposed to fear and insecurity in the interwar years was now tightly woven into the postwar democratic consensus.

 By the late 1970s, however, such considerations were increasingly neglected. Starting with the tax and employment reforms of the Thatcher-Reagan years, and followed in short order by deregulation of the financial sector, inequality has once again become an issue in Western society. After notably diminishing from the 1910s through the 1960s, the inequality index has steadily grown over the course of the past three decades.

For the foreseeable future we shall be as economically insecure as we are culturally uncertain. We are assuredly less confident of our collective purposes, our environmental well-being, or our personal safety than at any time since World War II. We have no idea what sort of world our children will inherit, but we can no longer delude ourselves into supposing that it must resemble our own in reassuring ways.

We must revisit the ways in which our grandparents' generation responded to comparable challenges and threats. Social democracy in Europe, the New Deal, and the Great Society here in the US were explicit responses to the insecurities and inequities of the age. Few in the West are old enough to know just what it means to watch our world collapse. We find it hard to conceive of a complete breakdown of liberal institutions, an utter disintegration of the democratic consensus. But it was just such a breakdown that elicited the Keynes–Hayek debate and from which the Keynesian consensus and the social democratic compromise were born: the consensus and the compromise in which we grew up and whose appeal has been obscured by its very success.

The Olympics and a special Valentine's Day in Corner Brook: Saturday's top headlines and Parliamentary Daybook

The Olympics dominate the front pages everywhere today — except in Western Newfoundland. Listen to my three-minute audio roundup of what's on the front pages of the country's newspapers plus highlights from Saturday's Parliamentary daybook by clicking on the link below.

You can also get these audio summaries automatically every day via podcast from iTunes or via an RSS feed by subscribing to my AudioBoo stream. Both the iTunes link and the RSS link are at my profile at AudioBoo.fm. Look under my picture on the left hand side of the page.

Listen!

Tags: , , , ,

Iran's dangerous bragging; B.C.'s golden moment, and troubled gay youth: Friday's A1 headlines and Parliamentary daybook

Iran engages in dangerous bragging; B.C. prepares for its "golden moment", and Montreal researchers say gay and lesbian youth are more troubled than their heterosexual peers. Listen to my three-minute audio roundup of what's on the front pages of the country's newspapers plus highlights from Friday's Parliamentary daybook by clicking on the link below.

You can also get these audio summarie automatically every day via podcast from iTunes or via an RSS feed by subscribing to my AudioBoo stream. Both the iTunes link and the RSS link are at my profile at AudioBoo.fm. Look under my picture on the left hand side of the page.

Listen!

Social Democracy: Living and dying in North America

Tony Judt wonders why socialism or a social democratic movement has had such trouble finding root in America. He has this interesting observation:

… it is not by chance that social democracy and welfare states have worked best in small, homogeneous countries, where issues of mistrust and mutual suspicion do not arise so acutely. A willingness to pay for other people's services and benefits rests upon the understanding that they in turn will do likewise for you and your children: because they are like you and see the world as you do.

Conversely, where immigration and visible minorities have altered the demography of a country, we typically find increased suspicion of others and a loss of enthusiasm for the institutions of the welfare state. Finally, it is incontrovertible that social democracy and the welfare states face serious practical challenges today. Their survival is not in question, but they are no longer as self-confident as they once appeared.

I wonder how this observation works in Canadian context. Some things to think about:

  • Canada's “welfare state” originated in an era — end of the Second World War to the mid-1970s? — when Canada was a more homogenous society than it is now. Does Canada's increasing cultural diversity work against a social democratic vision that the country might have had in an earlier era?
  • The most homogenous society in Canada is Quebec. Quebec's politics have the strongest 'social democratic' politics. Are the two related
  • What about Alberta? Alberta, and Calgary in particular, now has some some of the largest per capita visible minority populations in the country and much of its non-visible minority population are immigrants from other parts of the country. Alberta, one might argue, is the opposite from Quebec when it comes to “social democratic” values.
  • The federal Liberal Party is the party, for better or worse, most often identified with the Canadian 'welfare state.' Is the Liberal Party's current existential crisis a function of the increasing diversity of Canada's demography and, as a result, its movement away from social democratic ideals?

Harper's speech in Victoria: Waxing poetic about B.C., Canada, and the Olympics

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today became the first prime minister to ever address a session of the legislative assembly of British Columbia. Here is the text of the speech as he prepared it. His delivery may have been slightly different.

Mr. Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, The Honourable Bill Barisoff.

Premier of the Province of British Columbia, The Honourable Gordon Campbell.

Leader of the Opposition, The Honourable Carole James.

Distinguished Members of the Legislative Assembly. Mesdames et Messieurs, Ladies and gentlemen.

C’est un immense plaisir d’etre ici avec vous aujourd'hui, dans le cadre de cette celebration de votre province et de notre pays.

It is an enormous pleasure to be here with you today, at this moment of great celebration for your province, and our country.

I’ve often said that the best thing about being Prime Minister is the unparalleled opportunity I have to travel the length and breadth of this land and to meet the wonderful people who call it home. Today, in these travels I am undertaking a first. In all the years since 1871 when British Columbia made that momentous decision to join the new Dominion and truly make it a country from sea to sea no prime minister has ever formally addressed this great assembly. And I want to thank the speaker of the house for providing me with this special opportunity. All of you do me, and your country, a great honour.

So here we are in the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia.

British Columbia.

Canadians from coast to coast to coast have known you for decades by the slogan on your licence plates “Beautiful British Columbia.” It is no exaggeration. The natural beauty is almost always the first thing people notice about British Columbia when they arrive. The famous Canadian historian and essayist, Stephen Leacock, put it rather well a long time ago. Describing his maiden trip to B.C. in his book, My Discovery of the West, he recounted a question that had been posed to him at a Canadian Club function in Vancouver: “I was asked why I had never visited the province before. I [said] that, like so many other people, I had never come to it because I didn’t realize how wonderful it was. If I had known what it was like I wouldn’t have been content with a mere visit. I would have been born here.”

B.C.’s unmatched beauty and its promise of a better life has never lost its power to enchant and to enthral. And to draw ever more newcomers to its sparkling Pacific shore. It began with the myriad nations of our First Peoples whose spirit has animated this land for thousands of years.

It continued with the great explorers: John Finley, Simon Fraser, Alexander Mackenzie, David Thompson — those who sought to connect it to the wider economic forces of the continent. It captured the imagination of the generation of adventurers who travelled enormous distances, when gold was discovered on the Fraser River. And it was in Craigellachie where the last spike of the Canadian Pacific Railway ‘ the single most important ‘ nation-building project ‘ in the history of our country was driven.

And, ladies and gentlemen, British Columbia is still calling out – now to all the peoples of the world. From a sparsely populated outpost of our country, B.C. has become the third-largest province ‘ boasting one of the ‘ most cosmopolitan and liveable cities ‘ on Earth, ‘ still growing fast ‘ and leading Canada’s way ‘ into a new century ‘ that will be defined ‘ by the opportunities in the Asia-Pacific ‘ for which British Columbia ‘ is Canada’s Gateway.

How the generation of 1871 – John Foster McCreight, Amor de Cosmos and all the rest — must marvel at the British Columbia of 2010, the British Columbia with the talent And the energy and the capability to host huge, world-class events like the Olympic Games that will be opened tomorrow.

You know, events like these have a significance beyond themselves. They serve as historic markers of where a community is going, of how its people see themselves. For instance, to visit British Columbia and Vancouver even now is to be reminded of Expo ‘86. Most of you will recall that World’s Fair, and what it meant. At a time when Asia was beginning to demonstrate Its capacity to become a future economic powerhouse that event put your province and our country on the map of the Pacific. That World’s Fair showcased this part of our country ‘ and we all remember ‘ the surge in investment and population ‘ that followed.

But it also changed British Columbia. British Columbia became bolder, stronger, possessed of the shining confidence that is the consequence of success, and so necessary to scale even higher summits. Now, you are calling the world back once again and in even more spectacular fashion. During the Olympic and Paralympic Games, sixty-eight hundred athletes and team officials, ten thousand reporters and a quarter million spectators will gather in Vancouver and Whistler. By any measure, these are remarkable gatherings.

Yet, a mere recitation of the numbers hardly does them justice. The 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games have been an unparalleled organizational and logistical undertaking. They will be simply the most ambitious sporting event ever held on Canadian soil. The work of the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee, ‘ in conjunction with its ‘ partners at all levels of government, ‘ is itself a feat worthy ‘ of the ancient Olympiads ‘ that these Games honour.

Like the earlier Expo, this is a tremendous accomplishment. And also like it, we cannot yet know, how these Games will change us all, or what their legacy will be. But we do know this, ladies and gentlemen: That British Columbia has made enormous strides in the early years of the 21st century. It has grown exponentially, gathered economic strength, and become more important in Confederation than at any time in our history.

And it is not hard to predict that, in some distant year, when British Columbians reflect upon these Games you will see them as an affirmation of what you have achieved and as your point of departure ‘ into a new and exciting era. On behalf of the Government of Canada ‘ and indeed all Canadians ‘ I’d like to thank everyone involved in the organization of the 2010 Olympic Games and those who have supported them, including you right here in this Chamber for a job well done – for a job very well done!

Je veux aussi vous dire que tous les Canadiens et toutes les Canadiennes sont fiers d’etre partenaires de ces Jeux. Que ce soit sous la forme de l’infrastructure des lieux, de fonds patrimoniaux, d’evenements culturels, ou d’ententes de securit essentielles, tous les Canadiens – par l’intermediaire du gouvernement du Canada – ont fait les investissements requis pour assurer que l’evenement soit de classe mondiale, car ces Jeux sont les Jeux du Canada.

I also want to tell you that all Canadians are proud to be partners In these Games. Be it in the form of venue infrastructure, legacy funds, cultural events, or the essential security arrangements, all Canadians – through the Government of Canada – have made the investments needed to ensure a world-class event. Because while Vancouver and Whistler may be the staging grounds of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, let there be no doubt ‘ as Premier Campbell said himself ‘ in December ‘ when we welcomed ‘ the Olympic flame to Parliament Hill ‘ ‘these Games are Canada’s Games.’

For, ladies and gentlemen, while British Columbia will have on display during these Games everything of which you are so proud, the thing most visible, once our national teams and athletes appear on the stage will be B.C.’s greatest attribute and its great asset – that is, – that British Columbia it is part of Canada. It is all of Canada that will be cheering our athletes on. It is all Canadians ‘ from Cape Race ‘ to Nootka Sound ‘ to the men and women ‘ standing on guard at Alert in Nunavut ‘ who will be glued to their television sets, not just cheering for our athletes but feeling with them, every step of the way.

In this great striving among the nations that is no less serious or determined for being undertaken in a spirit of goodwill, Canadian athletes will create now the yesterdays that we shall all savour in our tomorrows, the stories of which we shall remind each other, the feats of courage, commitment and fair play that we shall offer to our children and our children’s children as examples when they ask: ‘What does it mean to be Canadian’?

And then we shall feel that warm glow of pride. As we should, as Canadians. Patriotism, ladies and gentlemen, patriotism as Canadians, should not make us feel the least bit shy or embarrassed. I know that thoughts of grandeur and boisterous displays of nationalism we tend to associate with others. And, over the centuries, things have been done around the world in the name of of national pride or love of country that would have been better left undone.

Yet, we should never cast aside our pride in a country so wonderful in a land we are so fortunate to call home merely because the notion has sometimes been abused. There is nothing wrong, and there is much that is right, in celebrating together when our fellow citizens – perceiving some splendid star high above us – willingly pay the cost – and take the chance – to stretch forth their hands – to try – to touch it – for that one shining moment.

For, no good thing is without risk, no ideal can be reached without sacrifice. Ask any Olympian who wears the Maple Leaf. But that Maple Leaf, we must remember, symbolizes more than just the athletes who wear it. It symbolizes the country we love. It symbolizes the Canada, our Canada, that has shown during this global recession and will show during these Games, that it can compete and win against the very best.

The Canada, our Canada, where those other citizens who wear the Maple Leaf, our armed forces, serve, and have served, never for conquest and advantage, but simply to spread our gifts of freedom, democracy and justice, to make the world a little safer, a little better, as they are doing in Afghanistan; to give some hope to others, to rescue our fellow citizens as they have done so spectacularly in Haiti.

That Canada, our Canada, that has given so generously to Haiti, not because we think we will gain some power or some return but because our country is at its heart, Compassionate and generous, not only with our fellow citizens but with our fellow human beings as well. And we recognize this not to claim that our Canada Is perfect. But when we have done wrong, and we truly have on occasion, – the Chinese head tax, the Indian residential schools – we have tried to learn from those wrongs and to make amends.

And, that, my fellow Canadians, learning from our history, we have discovered is the better way to build our country. It has made us history’s benefactors, instead of its prisoners.

Le Canada, notre magnifique pays, ou nous accueillons le monde, non seulement pour les Jeux olympiques, mais dans le cadre de notre identit’ propre. Car tous les pays, quand ils viendront, retrouveront leurs fr’res et s’urs parmi nous, des Canadiens et des Canadiennes, qui sont venus de tous les coins de la planete et qui continuent ‘ venir, mettant de c’est’ les vieilles querelles et embrassant un avenir commun, ensemble.

Canada, our magnificent land, to which we are welcoming the world, Not just for the Olympic Games, but as part of our very identity. Because all nations, when they come here, will already find their brothers and sisters among us, Canadians, who have arrived from every corner of the planet and continue to come to put aside old quarrels and to embrace a common future together.

And so, when we, in our national anthem, ask God to keep our land glorious and free, We mean all of us, all men and women who choose to be Canadians of equal worth, not just in his eyes but in each other’s. Canada, our Canada is truly worthy of our pride And our patriotism.

So let us hold our flag high, at our embassies and our aid bases, our outposts and our vessels, our stadiums and our venues, even our homes, during these Canadian Olympic and Paralympic Games. But not just for these Games, also for the G8, the G20, the North American Leader’s Summit, the visit of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

And any other great occasion, – not only as a symbol of how appreciative – we are for all we have, – but also as a sign of welcome to the world. Let it be a cheerful red and white reminder of a quiet and humble patriotism, that, while making no claims on its neighbours, is ever ready to stand on guard for itself. We will ask the world to forgive us this uncharacteristic outburst of patriotism, of our pride, to be part of a country that is strong, confident, and tall among the nations.

And we will let our flag wave here in British Columbia – Beautiful British Columbia – over the podium of the 2010 Winter Games. This truly is British Columbia’s Golden Moment. And it is also Canada’s time to shine.

Merci beaucoup. Thank you, And God bless Canada.

Feds name Canada's most fuel-efficient cars and light trucks

The federal government today announced its winners of the ecoEnergy Awards for Vehicles, an annual event in which Ottawa takes a look at the all the cars and light trucks sold in the Canadian market and tells consumers which ones get the best mileage (kilometrage?). This year's group looks a lot like last year's group:

  • Two-Seater: smart fortwo
  • Subcompact: Toyota Yaris
  • Compact: Honda Civic Hybrid
  • Mid-Size: Toyota Prius
  • Full-Size: Hyundai Sonata
  • Station Wagon: Audi A3 TDI and Volkswagen Golf Wagon TDI Clean Diesel (co-winners)
  • Pickup Truck: Ford Ranger and Mazda B2300 (co-winners)
  • Special Purpose: Ford Escape Hybrid
  • Minivan: Mazda5
  • Large Van: Chevrolet Express Cargo / GMC Savana Cargo

A tribute to the data crunchers among us: Finding the cockroaches in a mountain of numbers

Ran across a fascinating how-to provided by some New York Times reporters and graphics artists about a recent info-graphic project the paper did. The Times took data about movie rentals from  Netflix and figured out the most popular titles by zip code for New York. In taking a look at the different movie preferences in each New York neighbourhood, New Yorkers are able to learn a bit more about themselves and their own cultural preferences, the Times avers.

The data was presented in the hard-copy version of the Times and was also packaged up as an online interactive feature.

For those in my line of work, this is pretty cool stuff and a great example of CAR at work. CAR stands for Computer-Assisted Reporting. If you're a journalist that's into CAR, you use spreadsheets and relational database software to crunch through data to find new stories and find new angles on stories. I was an early adopter of spreadsheet use in my reporting — anyone remember VisiCalc? — and have volunteered to lead CAR seminars and workshops at various journalism conferences.

But I'm really just a piker compared to some of the CAR superstars in Canada like the Ottawa Citizen's Glen McGregor. Glen is not only a geek's geek but he's a helluva reporter, with a good sense of being able to see the story rise out of the datasets he collects in the way some kids collect hockey cards.

Seeing the NYT piece reminded me about Glen's good work and that more in the country ought to know about it. One of my favourite projects that he did was in early 2008 when he looked at the reports prepared by federal inspectors of the country's gas station pumps. His analysis found that one in 20 failed the government inspection and consumers were either not getting the gas they paid for or, less likely, getting more gas than they paid for. Glen's piece forced then Industry Minister Jim Prentice to respond and improve consumer protection at the pumps. Over the last few days, Glen's been writing some stomach-turning pieces about restaurants in the nation's capital, all of which started with the analysis of a monster data set:

The Toronto Star did something similar a few years in a project led by another CAR star, Rob Cribb, and the revelations in that project changed a lot of things and won the Star a pile of awards. I hope Glen has some similar success.

Anti-government protestors tape doors shut at Vancouver cultural event?

I'm not in Vancouver today but I'm looking forward to hearing more about this sequence of events:

Yesterday:

Federal government appeals ruling on safe-injection site to nation's top court

Today:

Notice:

Public events for Prime Minister Stephen Harper for Wednesday, February 10th are:

Vancouver

1:45 p.m. – Prime Minister Stephen Harper will attend the dress rehearsal of the Vancouver Chinatown Spring Festival Celebration Parade. He will be joined by James Moore, Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, and Alice Wong, Member of Parliament (Richmond).

Chinese Cultural Centre of Greater Vancouver
50 East Pender Street
Vancouver, British Columbia

*Photo opportunity only (cameras and photographers only)

NDP MP Libby Davies on Twitter at about 1330 Pacific time:

With “welcoming committe” as Harper arrives in DES. He should be in parl. Insite saves lives – crazy to appeal court decisions #fb

Three notes sent from Dimitri Soudas, press secretary to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, to the Parliamentary Press Gallery beginning at at about 1415 Pacific time:

Note 1

“Veterans, seniors and young children are currently being prevented from exiting or entering the Chinese Cultural Centre of Greater Vancouver because of the libby davies “welcoming committee” has taped all exits shut. This is a lack of respect for seniors, veterans canadians of chinese origin and the young kids inside the building. The situation has created a security risk for all the people currently in the building. Some doors have been chained or taped shut while people were preparing for a Chinese New Year rehearsal.”

Note 2

Door taped shut by the Libby Davies “welcoming committee”

[Soudas attached the following photograph to the message.]

201002101827.jpg

Note 3 from Soudas

– Inside the chinese cultural centre are 250 chinese canadians who have gathered for a dress rehearsal of their chinese new year parade.

– At approx 125pm, about 200 protestors descended on the cultural centre and swarmed the building, will bullhorns, plackards and masking tape.

– They proceeded to block access to and from the chinese cultural centre, then began taping all the doors shut

– Another 50-75 protestors arrived and began chanting and cursing. Protestors totalling close to 300.

– Of the 250 chinese canadians, 50 are uniformed veterans, 50 are young children who have come to showcase their culture to the pm and media

in the horrible event of fire of emergency, all those goodwilled people would be prevented from exit

Is libby davie proud of this?

NDP MP Libby Davies on Twitter at about 1430 Pacific time

Very impressive gathering in support of Insite – building covered in police caution tape – Harper, you coming out to hear people? #fb

Davies again on Twitter at about 1530 Pacific time:

It was a peaceful protest in support of Insite (I didn't organize). Didn't see chains on doors. Police moved in and out freely @kady#fb

Conservative blogger Stephen Taylor has more photos he says were taken at protest, including one which shows chains on the doors.

UPDATE: On Feb. 12, 2010, Davies demanded an apology from Soudas:

VANCOUVER – Vancouver East MP Libby Davies is calling on the Prime Minister to apologize to her and retract the inflammatory and false statements made on Wednesday by his chief spokesperson Dimitri Soudas.  “Soudas’ comments misrepresented the actions of an elected Member of Parliament. This type of behaviour should be beneath the Prime Minister and his staff,” said Davies. “Soudas’ hot-headed statements undermined the integrity and dignity of the office he serves.” Davies attended a protest in Vancouver on Wednesday to show her support for InSite, Vancouver’s safe injection site, which the Harper Conservatives have been attempting to shut down despite scientific evidence that shows it is saving lives. Soudas told the press that Davies organized the protest and that she encouraged “locking and chaining doors of buildings while seniors, veterans, and young children are gathered inside.”   All his charges are completely unfounded and untrue.   This isn’t the first time the Prime Minister’s communications staff have jumped to conclusions based on little or no facts.   In December, Soudas publicly berated environmentalist Stephen Guilbeault at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, accusing him of creating an anti-Harper press release that another group later claimed responsibility for.   In October, the Government accused New Democrat Leader Jack Layton of being responsible for a protest in the public gallery in the House of Commons. Again, the charge was a fabrication. And last July, the Prime Minister had to apologize after he attacked the Liberal leader based on false information provided to him by Soudas. “At best the Prime Minister’s spokesperson is incompetent, and at worst malicious,” said Davies.  “However, we're giving the Prime Minister a chance to the do the right thing, apologize, and correct the misinformation that his chief spokesperson has distributed to the public.”

Liberal Senate leader to Justice Minister Nicholson: You're full of it

James Cowan, the leader of the Liberal Party in the Senate, says it with a little more gentility than I do in the subject line to this post but the takeaway is pretty clear: Justice Minister Rob Nicholson's claims that the Liberals in the Senate have been blocking the Conservative justice bills is a bunch of hooey – and Nicholson ought to admit it.

February 4, 2010

The Hon. Rob Nicholson, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Justice

Dear Minister Nicholson,

I am writing concerning several statements made by you on Friday, January 29 when defending Prime Minister Harper’s appointment of an additional five Conservative Senators. In the past 12 months, Prime Minister Harper has made an unprecedented 32 appointments to the Senate – the most Senate appointments made by any Canadian Prime Minister in a 12-month period since Confederation.

I was puzzled to read press reports in which you defended the latest Senate appointments as necessary to allow your Government “to move forward on [y]our tackling-crime agenda.” You accused the Liberal opposition of having “obstructed that agenda in the Senate.” According to a transcript of your press conference, you said:

“The Ignatieff Liberals have abused their majority in the Senate by obstructing law and order bills that are urgently needed and strongly supported by Canadians.”

I can only assume that you have been misinformed as to the progress of anti-crime legislation. In fact, as I am sure your Cabinet colleague, Senator Marjory LeBreton, would tell you, the overwhelming majority of your Government’s anti-crime bills had not even reached the Senate when Prime Minister Stephen Harper chose to prorogue Parliament. Indeed, an honest examination of the record compels one to acknowledge that the greatest delays to implementation of your justice agenda have resulted from your own Government’s actions – sitting on bills and not bringing them forward for debate, delaying bringing legislation into force, and ultimately, of course, proroguing Parliament. That action alone caused some 18 of your justice-related bills to die on the Order Paper.

As a Canadian Press report described, “Indeed, [Prime Minister] Harper himself has done far more to delay his own crime legislation, by proroguing Parliament and other stalling tactics, than Liberal senators have ever done.”

Your Government introduced 19 justice-related bills in the House of Commons. Of these, 14 were still in the House of Commons at prorogation. Of the five justice bills that passed the House of Commons and came to the Senate:

two passed the Senate without amendment;

one (the so-called Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime bill) was tabled by your Government in November in the Senate but not brought forward for further action after that;

one was passed with four amendments and returned to the House of Commons which did not deal with it before Parliament was prorogued; and

one was being studied in committee when Parliament was prorogued and all committee work shut down.

There were a further two justice bills that your Government chose to initiate in the Senate. One was passed by the Senate after 14 days, sent to the House of Commons, passed and given Royal Assent. The other was tabled in the Senate on April 1, but has not been brought forward by your Government for any further action since then.

In terms of the status of the 14 law-and-order bills in the House of Commons, that had not yet reached the Senate when Parliament was prorogued:

Four of these bills have been sitting in the House of Commons at first reading, three in that state since October, and one since November – your Government chose not to bring any of these bills forward for second reading debate.   

Another bill, Bill C-19, was tabled in the House of Commons by your Government in March, 2009, brought forward for two days of second reading debate in June, and not brought forward for any further action since then.

Similarly, Bill C-35 was tabled in June, brought forward for one day of second reading debate in October, and no further action taken since then.

Seven justice-related bills were being studied in Committee in the House of Commons as of prorogation. That work, of course, was required to stop immediately upon prorogation.

One bill – Bill C-34, the Protecting Victims from Sex Offenders bill – got as far as to be reported back from the House of Commons Committee on December 7, before dying on the Order Paper with the Government’s prorogation of Parliament.

I fail to understand how this factual record could lead you to say, as you did in your press conference that, “the record also shows that the Liberals are soft on crime” or that the Liberals in the Senate “obstructed” law and order bills. In fact, as I am sure you will now recognize, it is your Government that has failed to move forward a number of your own anti-crime bills. And, of course, by choosing to prorogue Parliament, Prime Minister Harper chose to let 18 of his Government’s 21 “tough-on-crime” bills die on the Order Paper. Comparing the numbers, Canadians would have to conclude that it is the Harper Conservatives who have chosen to obstruct law and order bills – while shamelessly trying to smear the Liberals and the Senate with the blame.

It is difficult to take a law-and-order agenda seriously when it is argued with so little respect for facts. Justice above all depends upon truth. As our country’s Minister of Justice and the Attorney General of Canada, your first allegiance must always be to the truth, far beyond any political or partisan gamesmanship. Our system of justice depends upon it. How can Canadians have any confidence in their justice system, if the person responsible for that system – the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada – is prepared to play fast and loose with the truth?

In your press conference, you pointed to three bills as evidence of Liberal Senators’ supposed “obstruction” of your Government’s agenda: Bills C-15, C-25 and C-26.

Bill C-15 was passed by the Senate with four amendments. These amendments represented our advice to the House of Commons, reflecting what we heard and concluded after listening to testimony from Canadians about the bill. That is our job as members of the second legislative House of Canada’s Parliament. We fully expected to hear back from the House of Commons with that House’s considered response to our advice. Unfortunately, that was not to be: instead, Prime Minister Harper chose to prorogue Parliament. The Senate’s work – done in the best tradition of Canadian parliamentary democracy – was lost.

While we may disagree as to whether the Senate’s amendments improved the bill (as I would say) or weakened it (as you would say) what cannot be truthfully said is that the Senate either delayed or obstructed the passage of the bill.

What “killed” the bill in the end, was not the Senate but the Prime Minister in shutting down Parliament before the House of Commons had a chance to consider the amendments proposed by the Senate.

I was particularly surprised that you referred to Bill C-25 during your press conference. That bill, which dealt with limiting credit for time spent in pre-sentencing custody, passed the Senate without any amendments on October 21, 2009, yet as of this writing, according to the Library of Parliament and the Privy Council Office, the bill has still not been brought into force by your Government – more than three months later. One is left to wonder whether you simply forgot to bring it into force? Or was the bill more about the appearance of being “tough on crime” than actually taking action? Certainly we now know that bill was not as urgent a priority for the Harper Government as was initially represented.

Finally, Bill C-26 was being studied by the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee when Parliament prorogued. As of prorogation, that bill had been in the Senate for 38 days. By comparison, the bill spent 42 days in the House of Commons. Committee study of proposed legislation is what many observers say is among the best work of the Senate. I am sure you want Canada’s criminal legislation to be the best and most effective it can be, and would agree that the proposed changes to the Criminal Code regarding auto theft require careful study consistent with our parliamentary system. Unfortunately, that work had to cease because of prorogation.

As Minister of Justice, and as a personal proponent of a strong law-and-order agenda, you have a duty, which I am sure you recognize, to uphold the truth and not mislead Canadians. Accordingly, I am confident that you will wish to quickly correct the record, and agree that the Liberal opposition in the Senate has not in fact “obstructed” your Government’s anti-crime agenda. To the contrary, the greatest delays to the implementation of your agenda have been due to your own Government’s actions in failing to bring bills forward for debate, dragging your feet in bringing legislation into force, and most significantly, proroguing Parliament.

I look forward to your clarification of these issues for Canadians.

Yours very truly,

James S. Cowan

Cc: The Right Honourable Stephen Harper, Prime Minister of Canada
Cc: The Honourable Marjory LeBreton, Leader of the Government in the Senate

We await Minister Nicholson's response.