Month: April 2010

Conservatives say no money for abortion in G8 maternal health initiative

A few minutes ago in the House of Commons, the following exchange took place between BQ MP Joanne Deschamps and Conservative MP Jim Abbott. Abbott is the parliamentary secretary for Bev Oda, the minister for international development, who is in Halifax meeting with her G8 counterparts. [This is a rush transcript from the press gallery in the House of Commons and will be updated when the Blues are released:)

Deschamps: (voice of translator): mr. speaker, this week, g8 development ministers are meeting in halifax in order to harmonize their policies on maternal and child health. we know that this government is ideologically opposed to abortion and would love to export its conservative values around the world. will the government put aside its ideological prejudices and recognize that family planning measures, including abortion, improve women and children's health?

Jim Abbott (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Development): We'll be leading the discussion at the upcoming g8 summit on child and maternal health. we're focused on how to make a positive difference to save the lives of mothers and children in the developing world. Canada's contribution to maternal and child health may include family planning. However, canada's contribution will not include funding abortion.

johanne deschamps (bq): (voice of translator): …the conservative government has asked for assistance from norway in order to come up with a strategy on maternal and child health in developing countries. norway's special advisor is emphasizing the need for family planning measures, including abortion, in the strategy. will the conservative government listen to this wise advice and provide all the resources to get women full choice?

Abbott: … always trying to score cheap political points on the issue of abortion. we're giving the opportunity to all our g8 partners to assist us in promoting maternal and child health. the standard practice is each country makes its own domestic decision, which areas it will peck us on. our government has no intention to reopen the abortion debate in canada. we will work with our partners on this important issue.

UPDATE: And here is that exchange as recorded in the “Blues”, the transcription provided by the House of Commons staff:

Mme Johanne Deschamps (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ): Monsieur le Président, cette semaine, les ministres du Développement du G8 se réunissent à Halifax afin d'harmoniser leurs politiques à l'égard de la santé maternelle et infantile. On sait que ce gouvernement s'oppose idéologiquement à l'avortement et qu'il voudrait bien exporter ses valeurs conservatrices à l'international. Est-ce que le gouvernement va mettre de côté son idéologie et reconnaître que les mesures de planification familiale, incluant l'avortement, contribuent à améliorer la santé des femmes et des enfants?

Hon. Jim Abbott (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation, CPC): Mr. Speaker, my minister is hosting the G8 development ministers in Halifax today where this issue will be discussed. We will be leading the discussion at the upcoming G8 summit on child and maternal health. We are focused on how to make a positive difference to save the lives of mothers and children in the developing world. Canada's contribution to maternal and child health may include family planning, however, Canada's contribution will not include funding abortion.

Mme Johanne Deschamps (Laurentides—Labelle, BQ): Monsieur le Président, le gouvernement conservateur a demandé l'aide de la Norvège afin d'établir sa stratégie à l'égard de la santé maternelle et infantile dans les pays en voie de développement. Le conseiller spécial de la Norvège insiste pour dire que les mesures de planification familiale, incluant l'avortement, sont essentielles à une telle stratégie. Est-ce que le gouvernement conservateur va écouter ce judicieux conseil et prévoir des ressources afin de donner la liberté de choix aux femmes?

Hon. Jim Abbott (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation, CPC): Mr. Speaker, it is getting a little tiresome to have the opposition always trying to score cheap political points on the issue of abortion. We are giving the opportunity to all our G8 partners to assist us in promoting maternal and child health. The standard practice is each country makes its own domestic decision which areas it will focus on. Our government has no intention to reopen the abortion debate in Canada. We will work with our partners on this important issue.

Mugabe's nuclear deal; Khadr's day in court and dope-smoking green Riders?: Monday's A1 headlines and Parliament daybook

Mugabe's nuclear deal; Khadr's day in court; and dope-smoking green Riders?: Listen to my four-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.
Listen!
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. Lookin the top right corner of the “Boos” box.

Josph Stiglitz on Keynes, rational markets, and information

Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz reviews Robert Skidelsky's new book about Keynes …

We should be clear about this: economic theory never provided much support for these free-market views. Theories of imperfect and asymmetric information in markets had undermined every one of the ‘efficient market’ doctrines, even before they became fashionable in the Reagan-Thatcher era. Bruce Greenwald and I had explained that Adam Smith’s hand was not in fact invisible: it wasn’t there. Sanford Grossman and I had explained that if markets were as efficient in transmitting information as the free marketeers claimed, no one would have any incentive to gather and process it. Free marketeers, and the special interests that benefited from their doctrines, paid little attention to these inconvenient truths.

…   As financial market regulations were stripped away, crises became more common: we have had more than 100 in the last 30 years. The present crisis should lay to rest any belief in ‘rational’ markets. The irrationalities evident in mortgage markets, in securitisation, in derivatives and in banking are mind-boggling; our supposed financial wizards have exhibited behaviour which, to use the vernacular, seemed ‘stupid’ even at the time.

If unemployment is caused by real wages being too high, the obvious remedy is to lower wages. Hence the standard call of conservative economists for more ‘labour market flexibility’, ensuring that the wages of workers – which have stagnated in the US for a quarter of a century – will drop even further. But traditional Keynesian economics argues that what matters is aggregate demand, and that lower wages reduce aggregate demand. The current crisis demonstrates what can happen: countries with stronger systems of social protection and less labour market flexibility have, in many ways, fared better.

…The financial markets that caused the crisis – which in turn caused the deficits – went silent as money was being spent on the bail-out; but now they are telling governments they have to cut public spending. Wages are to be cut, even if bank bonuses are to be kept. The Hooverites – the advocates of the pre-Keynesian policies according to which downturns were met with austerity – are having their revenge. In many quarters, the Keynesians, having enjoyed their moment of glory just a year ago, seem to be in retreat.

We can’t pass laws that ensure that people won’t suffer from irrational optimism or pessimism. We can’t even be sure that banks will make good lending decisions. What we can do, however, is ensure that those who make mistakes bear more of the consequences of their decisions – and that others bear less. We can ensure that those entrusted with the care of other people’s money do not use that money for gambling. This is true whether those decisions are based on flawed models of risk or irrational perceptions of uncertainty. Taxpayers, workers, retirees and homeowners all over the world suffered because of the mistakes of America’s financial markets. That is unacceptable, and it is avoidable.

A sealers' lament; waste at NHL charities; and a killer seeks redemption: Saturday's A1 headlines and Parliamentary daybook

A Sealers' lament; waste at NHL charities; and a killer seeks redemption: Listen to my four -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.

Listen!

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. Lookin the top right corner of the “Boos” box.

Liberals fight back: Launch their own fund-raising drive on Tory gun-registry attacks

Earlier this week, the Conservative Party of Canada launched a fundraising drive on the hot button issue –for Tories — of the long-gun registry. The Conservatives also launched a series of radio ads targeting 8 Liberal MPs who have voted in the past to kill the registry.

Now the Liberals are fighting back. The following letter went out this afternoon from Liberal National HQ:

[NAME REMOVED] —

Barely 48 hours after Michael Ignatieff proposed sensible changes to make the long gun registry fairer and more effective, Stephen Harper has opened the Conservative war chest – and teamed up with the gun lobby – launching personal attacks against MPs and police who support gun control. As the Liberal Party’s chief fundraiser, I need your help right now to fight back.

The attacks began as Conservative spokesman and Saskatchewan MP Gerry Breitkreuz compared Canada’s police chiefs to “members of a cult” who “should be ashamed of themselves” for defending the gun registry – a tool police officers use over 11,000 times each day in their work protecting public safety.

Close behind was a deluge of radio ads targeting Liberal MPs in rural ridings, spreading misinformation and questioning the integrity of our MPs for doing exactly what you and I elect our representatives to do – listen to their constituents and work to adapt the laws of the land in ways that find common ground.

Police across the country tell us that they rely on the gun registry. I believe them. Law abiding gun owners tell us the gun registry has problems in its current form and I believe them too. So we need a balanced solution and the Liberal proposal provides it. Now, our MPs who helped to create that solution are under fire and need our support.

That’s why it’s critical that we respond with a targeted ad campaign of our own. Canadians need accurate information about the changes we’ve proposed, and the MPs under attack need to know that Liberals from coast to coast to coast are standing behind them.

Please be a part of making these ads happen. Your donation of $100, $250, or whatever you can afford will contribute directly to this important campaign. And if we receive your donation online before midnight Monday, we’ll send you a special link to be among the very first to see the ads in the coming days.

The Conservatives continue with tactics that attempt to divide rural and urban Canada. You and I can’t let that happen.

Thank you.

Adam Smith

National Director, National Liberal Fund

PS. In addition to helping build this ad campaign, your donation will earn you a generous tax credit of up to 75 per cent. That means that you’ll get as much as $75 of your $100 contribution back at tax time, and a $250 contribution costs only $62.50!

Wright Tech says "never discussed lobby efforts" with Jaffer, Glemaud

From today's headlines first and then a response from one of the key players:

The federal government introduced new documents Thursday that show former MP Rahim Jaffer's company sought as much as $135 million in federal government grants or loans for three different business projects, revelations that amount to potentially damning new evidence against Jaffer and his wife, MP Helena Guergis.

Jaffer's company was promoting one project involving a division of Wright Tech Systems, the documents show. Guergis, on her MP letterhead, sent a letter last September to a municipal council in her riding asking the council to consider doing business with Wright Tech for a waste-management project.

Jaffer wanted his former Conservative colleagues to sign off on a $100-million government grant to the Wright Tech business unit known as Green Rite Solutions, the documents indicate.

… in the spring of 2009, Glemaud met with [Infrastructure Minister John Baird's Parliamentary Secretary Brian] Jean and, at that meeting, gave him the executive summaries of business plans for two projects. One project for Green Rite Solutions, was seeking $100 million in financing … Jean took no action on the third proposal, which described how Green Rite Solutions was hopeful of securing $100 million in federal financing.

…on Sept. 10, Guergis sent a letter on the letterhead of her MP constituency office to her cousin, Tony Guergis, who was then the warden of Simcoe Country. In that letter, Guergis recommended that Simcoe County consider Wright Tech for some municipal waste-management services. Wright Tech is the parent company behind Green Rite Solutions, the proponent of the project that Glemaud and Jaffer's company had told Jean needed $100 million in federal financing.

Here's the response for Wright Tech/Green Rite:

Wright Tech Systems, Gillani and Jaffer; Setting the record Straight

“We never had any financial dealings with Gillani or Jaffer” – Jim Wright, Chairman Wright Tech Systems.

  “At no time has Wright Tech Systems or Green Rite Solutions had any financial dealings with Nazim Gillani or Rahim Jaffer” states Jim Wright, owner of Wright Tech Systems Inc. and partner in Green Rite Solutions Inc. Mr. Wright states further that “At no time has either Gillani or Jaffir had any financial interest in these companies; at no time have any payments of any kind been made between any of these parties. We certainly never discussed lobby efforts.”

Wright Tech Inc. and its marketing division, Green Rite Solutions Inc., met these individuals in the course of promoting their advanced waste conversion technology in Canada and abroad. Capital funding meetings and institutional marketing efforts have brought them into contact with diverse financial interests over the years.

Meetings were arranged with Gillani in the firm's Richmond Hill boardroom specifically to assess potential financial opportunities. These were preliminary, exploratory and fact-finding initiatives only, says Wright. Nazim Gillani’s involvement ended after several meetings. Mr. Jaffer was introduced to Wright Tech and Green Rite Solutions at a meeting chaired by Gillani and held at La Castile Steak House, the only time Gillani and Jaffer were together with respect to these companies. During subsequent meetings with Mr. Jaffer Wright observes that Rahim Jaffer “appeared to always act in good faith but did not bring any substance to the discussions”. Further involvement with Mr. Jaffir was terminated shortly thereafter when it became apparent that in order to receive any funding all of the effort was to be provided by Green Rite Solutions and Wright Tech.   

The summary sheet that was sent by GPG and evidenced in the parliamentary hearing was an internal communication from Green Power Generation. Wright says it was planned for their use to ascertain investor interest in the Wright Tech system. Further, neither Wright Tech Systems nor Green Rite Solutions was involved in the creation of said documents beyond providing data about their system’s Canadian market potential.

“It is my belief that allegations against MP Helena Guergis Simcoe-Grey as to impropriety or conflict of interest are misguided as regards this matter.” Mr. Wright recalls having spoken with Ms. Guergis once briefly on the telephone– and as a private constituent – about the merits of his technology for use in Simcoe County. He also had a similar discussion in person with Simcoe North MPP Garfield Dunlop as to the merits of the technology for waste management in Simcoe County. Neither discussion, to his knowledge, had any result.

What the RCMP is telling us about Guergis and investigations

In Ottawa, we all want to know if Helena Guergis is actually being investigated by the RCMP. If I read between the lines of what her lawyer's been saying, I get the sense she wants to know, too.

We know the RCMP has a letter from Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office in which the PMO asks the RCMP to check out allegations that disturbed him enough to fire her as the Minister of State for Status of Women.

The reason we want to know if the RCMP has fired up an investigation is more than just a semantic exercise; it would be a kind of vindication from an independent, third party of Harper's claim, which he has made often enough, that he acted on “credible and reliable” allegations in tossing Guergis within hours of learning of those allegations. Those allegations came to the PMO via a private investigator, Derrick Snowdy. Snowdy was investigating Toronto businessman Nazim Gillani when Gillani hinted to Snowdy that Gillani had photographs of Guergis and her husband Rahim Jaffer using cocaine and hanging out with hookers. There is also suggestions that Guergis and Jaffer may have been meeting with Gillani to set up offshore tax havens for some unknown nefarious purpose.

Guergis says all the allegations are nonsense.

Snowdy has said he has never actually seen any such photographs and has no direct knowledge of any offshore bank accounts set up for Jaffer. Gillani right now is facing fraud charges on a separate matter. If those are the allegations Harper acted on — second-hand gossip from an accused fraudster – it would seem, on the face of it, to be pretty thin. And you would think that the word of a privy councillor – that's what Guergis is — who has been working side-by-side with Harper since 2004 would earn her at least a chance to explain herself or, simply resign as minister of state but remain in caucus until any funny business was cleared up. But, no, Harper lowered the boom just like that and, if the RCMP begins an investigation, the cops would essentially be confirming Harper's judgement and perhaps validating his swift and rather merciless action. In the absence of any investigation, Harper's political opponents can say he called in the police as an excuse to get rid of an increasingly unpopular member of his cabinet who was becoming a political liability.

So what do we know about the status of the investigation?

Well, the investigator, Snowdy, told my friend Jennifer Ditchburn at The Canadian Press that the RCMP, when they interviewed him this week, as much told him that a full-fledged investigation was underway. “It was my second meeting with them and everything has now been turned over to them and I think we can say safely say they are satisfied and moving forward,” Snowdy told CP. “They said, 'We're in the middle of an investigation.'”

Sounds pretty definitive to me.

But when we asked Snowdy about that, he told my colleague Carolyn Jarvis of Global National that “CP has it wrong.”

In any event: Neither the PMO nor the Guergis' lawyer had been told, as of late last night, that there was any change in the status of the RCMP's interest in Guergis.

So what about the RCMP? They're trying to say as little as possible. When told about Snowdy's claim that an investigation was under way and asked to confirm those comments, here's what Insp. Marc Richer provided to me:

The RCMP acknowledges that it has received a referral of this matter from the Prime Minister's office.

   * Based on an evaluation of the information provided, the RCMP may or may not initiate an investigation.

   * If it is determined that an investigation is not warranted, the RCMP would advise the complainant privately of this result.

   * If it is determined that an investigation is warranted, one would be initiated. In order to protect the integrity of the investigation, the evidence obtained, and the privacy of those involved, the RCMP would not offer any comment during the course of the investigation.

   * Every investigation is unique in the challenges it may present, and the time required to complete them is based on many factors, including: the nature and complexity of the allegations, the number of individuals involved (suspects and witnesses), the number of witnesses that need to be interviewed as well as their availability and location, the characteristics of the evidence trail

Only in the event that an investigation results in the laying of criminal charges, would the RCMP confirm its investigation, the nature of any charges laid and the identity of the individual (s) involved.

Should the investigation not generate sufficient evidence to support the laying of criminal charges, the RCMP would conclude its file and advise the complainant privately of this result.

In the course of responding to complaints, RCMP investigators routinely speak with persons to help determine substance of allegations.

Doesn't really shed much light on the status of Guergis' case, does it?

But that statement from Richer does, it seems to me, represent quite a change in approach from 2005 when the RCMP told a complainant named Judy Wasylycia-Leis that, yes, indeed, Mounties had sufficient grounds to open an investigation into a certain Mr. Ralph Goodale for breach of trust over the income trust scandal. As Wasylycia-Leis learned of this in the middle of an election campaign and, as she happened to be a New Democrat and poor old Goodale was the Liberal finance minister, she told everyone that the cops were investigating the Liberals. Turned out no charges were ever laid and the investigation into Goodale and his political circle came to nothing but we wouldn't find out about that until well after Stephen Harper and the Conservatives had won the 2006 general election.

The Liberals say that decision by the RCMP, more than any other single factor, was the reason they lost that election.

Now that a Conservative MP is facing allegations, the national force is clamming up.

Sex ed flip flop; border bad guys; and a home invasion gone wrong – Friday's A1 headlines and Parliamentary daybook

Sex ed flip flop; border bad guys; and a home invasion gone wrong; Listen to my four -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.

Listen!

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. Lookin the top right corner of the “Boos” box.

Conservatives aim to bank on gun-registry opposition to raise political cash

The Conservative Party of Canada this week launched a series of radio ads in the the ridings of eight Liberal MPs. Each of those MPs voted with the Conservatives last fall to kill the long–gun registry. Now, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff says that his party, should it form the government, would keep the long-gun registry but make it easier for gun owners to register and be a little more forgiving for those caught failing to register on a first offence. He also says that, with those changes, any future vote on the gun registry will be whipped, that is to say, those eight Liberal MPs are not going to have a choice.

Newfoundland Liberals Scott Andrews and Todd Russell — who voted to kill the registry last fall — now say the compromise is good enough for them and they'll vote now to maintain the registry, on the understanding their party will modify the registry's requirements.

The Conservative radio ads, now airing in the ridings of the eight Liberal MPs not only identify each MP by name but they encourage listeners to phone up the MPs office and tell them to do vote to kill the registry.

Also, this week, the Conservatives rolled out their latest fundraising letter and the gun registry is the hot button Tory fundraisers believe will bring in the cash. Here's that letter. (You'll have to find the links referred to in the letter on your own).

Wednesday, April 21, 2010

Dear ———,

Earlier this week, Michael Ignatieff turned his back on rural Canadians by renewing his vow to protect and preserve the failed long-gun registry. And this time around, he's promised to whip his rural MPs into protecting and preserving this costly Liberal legacy.

If Michael Ignatieff succeeds, the failed long-gun registry will continue to threaten law-abiding farmers, hunters and sport-shooting competitors – while doing nothing to reduce gun crime in our major cities.

We need your support now to prevent that from happening. Please make a contribution of $1000 or $500 by following this link right now.

During the last session of Parliament, eight Liberal MPs stood with their constituents and voted with the Conservative Government to scrap the long-gun registry.

Liberal MP Todd Russell was clear:

“I've been clear about my position and I will be consistent with that particular position, and I will vote subsequently to scrap the long-gun registry,” (The Labradorian, Dec. 29, 2009).

So was Liberal MP Anthony Rota. He went so far as to call the long-gun registry “disgusting” (North Bay Nugget, June 18, 2004).

Russell and Rota were joined by six other Liberal MPs in voting against the long-gun registry: Scott Andrews, Larry Bagnell, Jean-Claude D'Amours, Wayne Easter, Keith Martin and Scott Simms.

These MPs have now been told that they MUST support Michael Ignatieff. They must vote to protect and preserve the failed long-gun registry. They must choose their leader over their constituents. They must do what they have been told.

We need your help today to hold these Liberal MPs to their previous commitment. They need to understand the political consequences of going back on their word. Of voting against their constituents. Of choosing Michael Ignatieff over their friends and neighbours back home.

The Conservative Party is launching a campaign to do just that. Please make a contribution of $1000 or $500 right now by following this link in support of this campaign. We will ensure that every long-gun owner, every citizen and every voter in these eight Liberal ridings will be fully aware of the choice they must make.

Their choice will be clear: SCRAP the failed long-gun registry or KEEP it. It's as simple as that. No shifting, no sliding.

We need your help today to keep these Liberal MPs to their word. Make a contribution of $1000 or $500 right now by following this link.

Working together we can scrap the failed Liberal long-gun registry. Support our campaign today.

Sincerely,

Irving R. Gerstein, C.M., O.Ont.

Chair, Conservative Fund Canada

PS – Remember that you'll receive a tax receipt for any contribution you make. This can make the actual cost of your contribution as low as 25% of your overall giving this year. Please, follow this link right now and make a contribution of $1000 or $500.