David Akin’s On The Hill

“Plamen Kozarov,” writes Federal Court Judge The Honourable Sean Harrington, “is a Canadian citizen; not a very good one, but a citizen nevertheless. He is a convicted drug dealer. He is currently serving a sentence in the United States for having distributed not less than 100 kilos of cocaine, 100 kilos of marijuana and 97,000 units of Ecstasy.”

Kozarov, 52, was born in Bulgaria but came to Canada as a refugee in 1977 and became a Canadian citizen in 1982.

He now finds himself behind bars in Florida serving a sentence of 5 years and 10 months on the drug trafficking charges. Kozarov, though, would prefer to serve his sentence back in Canada and asked to do so.

Canada and the U.S. have agreements for this sort of thing. First, the Canadian prisoner must ask the U.S.  authorities for permission to serve out his sentence in Canada. In this case, the U.S. said yes. Then the Canadian prisoner must ask Canadian authorities for permission. Corrections Canada officials reviewed the case and recommended that Stockwell Day, the Minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada, grant Kozarov’s request.

But Day said no. And he said no, not once, but twice.

Kozarov asked for a judicial review of Day’s decision — alleging that Day had some sort of agenda against him. Judge Harrington, in his decision, comes down on the side of the Minister.

If you have a few minutes, the Judge’s decision makes for some interesting reading on an interesting case.

 

This press release pretty much speaks for itself — and do read the story!!

CTV News Reveals Brian Mulroney's Comments About Pierre Trudeau
<

Just moments ago, CTV National News with Lloyd Robertson revealed some of the comments that former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney made about his predecessor, the late Pierre Elliott Trudeau. The comments were made during an interview with CTV's Chief Anchor Lloyd Robertson for the exclusive CTV special, Triumph & Treachery: The Brian Mulroney Story. During the interview, Mr. Mulroney commented on the former Liberal Prime Minster's moral leadership, his refusal to serve in the Second World War and his opposition to the Allied effort against the Nazi regime – see transcript below.
Mulroney's remarks will air as part of CTV's landmark political special Triumph & Treachery: The Brian Mulroney Story airing on Sunday, September 9 at 7 p.m. CTV has also confirmed that the special has now been extended and will run for two-hours between 7 and 9 p.m. (check CTV.ca for local broadcast times)
Mulroney's comments about Trudeau come in a portion of the documentary that reviews the failure of the Meech Lake Accord. As Lloyd Robertson reports in Triumph & Treachery: The Brian Mulroney Story, Mulroney sees Trudeau as the hidden architect behind the defeat of the agreement that would have brought Quebec into the Constitution.
Transcript excerpts from CTV's Triumph & Treachery: The Brian Mulroney Story:

Mulroney:
“…(Trudeau) is far from a perfect man, this is a man who questioned the Allies when the Jews were being sacrificed and when the great extermination program was on he was marching around Outremont (Montreal) on the other side of the issue.
Robertson:
But how much of that past Mr. Mulroney, would be part of youthful exuberance? He was a rebellious youth, and a lot of people in Quebec were against conscription, he wasn't alone there.
Mulroney:
Of course he wasn't. But they aren't they aren't around 50 years later to say I'm Captain Canada. Look, out of 11 million citizens of this country, there were a million people – young men from British Columbia to Newfoundland – who rose to fight the Nazis. The most evil machine ever known to man, trying to exterminate the Jews, everybody knew that, and all these young Canadians rose and went overseas to fight them. Pierre Trudeau was not among them. That's a decision he made. He's entitled to make that kind of decision. But it doesn't qualify him for any position of moral leadership in our society.

Parliament has just been prorogued and here’s some reaction.

From the Leader of the Official Opposition, Stéphane Dion:

Dion Wants a Throne Speech that Reflects the Interests of Canadians

OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper's decision to prorogue the House and deliver a Throne Speech on October 16 is yet another example of his government's lack of accountability, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion said today.

“It's unfortunate that Prime Minister Harper decided to prorogue the Parliament after failing to address issues such as climate change, Canada's mission in Afghanistan, or his record of broken promises on matters such as income trusts or Equalization” said Mr. Dion.

“There are a number of important pieces of legislation that will be lost because of the Prime Minister's decision, including the Clean Air and Climate Change Act, which has taken months of work in committee to amend to make it a valuable tool to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and put Canada's industrial emitters on a carbon budget.”

Mr. Dion said that if Mr. Harper is genuinely committed to letting the Parliament work for all Canadians, he will use the upcoming Throne Speech to:

– Announce, without equivocation, that Canada will notify its allies in NATO that it is putting an end to the combat mission in Kandahar Afghanistan, in February 2009.  If there is to be a vote, the government must make clear the wording of the motion, and confirm how it will vote;
– Commit to reintroducing Bill C-30, which is the best tool Canadians have to effectively protect the environment and fight the effects of climate change, in the new session;
– Address the challenges facing Canada's economy, particularly on issues such as manufacturing;
– Set out a plan to combat poverty in Canada; and
– Show that he is worthy of Canadians' trust.

“Mr. Harper must work to regain Canadians' trust by honouring the ruling on the Canadian Wheat Board; explaining his broken promises on Equalization; and now – in light of the very troubling revelations about the alleged in-and-out scheme being investigated by Elections Canada – opening his party's books to public scrutiny and making it clear the Conservatives will not use the scheme in the Quebec by-elections or the next national campaign,” said Mr. Dion.

“We have serious doubts about Mr. Harper's ability to act on these matters but the ball is now in his court,” concluded Mr. Dion.

From NDP Leader Jack Layton:

STEPHEN HARPER IS WRONG TO LOCK OUT MPS

TIMMINS – Prime Minister Stephen Harper is wrong to postpone MPs’ return to work by proroguing the House of Commons until mid October, declared NDP Leader Jack Layton today.

“By his actions, Stephen Harper is effectively locking out MPs. We have work to do. Everyday families are counting on us, but Stephen Harper is preventing us from getting down to work,” said Layton.

Harper is wasting time on important files such as climate change and urgent infrastructure needs. The last sitting of the House was in June, and parliamentarians are supposed to be back on September 17.

“Students have gone back to class. Working families are back from vacation. Why is Stephen Harper locking MPs out? Why is he stopping us from getting back to work for students and families? Why is he stopping MPs from debating what to do with the budget surplus? The prime minister should be ashamed for shutting the doors of Parliament,” added Layton.

“By locking MPs out, Stephen Harper is showing utter disregard for the work that has already been done, especially on the climate change and clean air bill. Stephen Harper is wasting another month while we could be fighting climate change in order to write an unnecessary Throne Speech,” concluded Layton. 

From the Prime Minister’s Office:

Jean Chretien prorogued Parliament four times during his time as Prime Minister: February 5, 1996; September 18, 1999; September 16, 2002; and November 12, 2003.

*           On each occasion, the Liberals killed their own legislation.  Several bills ended up dying over and over again due to Liberals proroguing Parliament or calling early elections.

*           September 16, 2002 – After a summer of Liberal in-fighting and Jean Chretien being forced to announce his planned retirement date in August, Chretien prorogued Parliament, killing legislation so that he could unveil his legacy agenda. 

*           According [to] Eddie Goldenberg, Chretien decided to have a Throne Speech just to test the will of the Martinite forces who were trying to push him out early: Chretien was happy.  “I like that.  It is exactly what we just discussed.  Prepare me a statement.  But just one more thing,” said the old fox.  “I want a Throne Speech in the fall.  The government will stand or fall on it.  If they want to vote against me on it, then it is the one case in which I will run again.” (Eddie Goldenberg, The Way it Works, p. 380)

*           November 12, 2003 – Jean Chretien announced that Parliament was prorogued on the eve of the Liberal leadership convention (so Chretien and Martin didn’t have to sit together in the House of Commons and face a dispute over who was Prime Minister).   Martin did not become Prime Minister until December 12, 2003 and Parliament did not resume until February 2, 2004 – almost four months later

*           The current session has lasted as long as many comparable sessions under the Liberals, and longer than several of the sessions under Jean Chretien and Paul Martin.

The Prime Minister’s Office just confirmed what we first reported earlier today on CTV Newsnet: Prime Minister Stephen Harper will recommend to the Governor General that she prorogue Parliament until October.

That means that all the government legislation on the order paper — Bill C-30 (the revamped Clean Air Act) plus the pile of government-sponsored justice bills — dies and it’s back to square one for each bill. Notably, private member’s bills survive the prorogation which means Bill C-288 — the bill introduced by Liberal MP Pablo Rodriguez requiring the government to deal with Kyoto somehow — is still on the books. I'm a blockhead for typing too fast. As as has been pointed out to me elsewhere, C-288 is already the law of the land.

Also, prorogation means that all Standing Committees of the House are dissolved and cannot meet or transact any business until the House is recalled in October.

Harper also said there will be a Throne Speech when the house sits again. A vote on a Throne Speech is, by definition, a confidence vote.

The Prime Minister was in Meech Lake all day meeting with his cabinet’s Priorities and Planning Committee and will get on a plane late this evening for the APEC meetings in Australia. The PM is making no comment on the prorogation other than what is in the following release:

PRIME MINISTER STEPHEN HARPER ANNOUNCES INTENTION TO PROROGUE PARLIAMENT
September 4, 2007
Ottawa, Ontario

Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced today that he will be recommending to Governor General Michaëlle Jean that Parliament be prorogued, thus ending the First Session of the 39th Parliament. Parliament will be recalled on October 16 to commence the Second Session with a Speech from the Throne.

“The First Session of the 39th Parliament was exceptionally productive, especially for a Government in a minority situation,” Prime Minister Harper said. “We delivered on all the major commitments we made to Canadians during the 2006 election. After our first 19 months in office,” added the Prime Minister, “I’m pleased to report that Canada is united, our government is clean and our economy is strong.”

“Now it’s time to launch the next phase of our mandate,” the Prime Minister continued. “Strong leadership, focussed on results, will continue to guide our Government as we work to make our country even stronger, and even better for all of Canada’s families.”

“Canadians gave us a mandate for change,” Prime Minister Harper said. “But we’re just getting started. We will seize the opportunities that lie before us, and rise to the challenges that confront us. I invite the other parties to join with us to make the Second Session even more successful than the First. There is much more we can and will do to make Canada stronger, safer and better for all of us.”

 

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty (right) was in Calgary Thursday where he gave a speech to the Canada West Foundation. He spent the first part of this speech re-telling the “Conservative story” — all the things his government has done since it took office. He also noted, as many economists have also done, how well Canada’s economy is doing.

But then, for the last section of this speech, he delivered a strong pitch for a single national securities regulator, like the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.  One of the biggest opponents of such an idea is Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach.

I was not at the speech but I asked the Minister’s office for a copy of it. Here’s an excerpt of the text they provided me:

…there is more to do if we are to keep our economy on an upward trajectory.

Through this Trade, Investment and Labour Mobility Agreement Alberta and British Columbia are blazing a trail to a stronger and better Canada. I believe these provinces can provide similar economic leadership by supporting a Common Securities Regulator.

Canada has a strong Financial Services Sector that spans the country providing good high paying jobs. We have a great story to tell, one of economic success, visionary entrepreneurs, growing competitiveness and unbounded potential. And the world sees that potential.

Yet we have a capital markets regulatory system that is holding us back. A system of 13 regulators that is clearly out of step with our global competitors.

We are the only industrialized country without a Common Securities Regulator. For many, our system is seen as cumbersome, fragmented, slow and repetitive, and lacking the proper tools of enforcement.

To maximize our potential, we must work collaboratively to develop a competitive advantage in global capital markets and reform Canada’s securities system.  This is the thrust of the Capital Markets Plan our government issued with Budget 2007.

Three years ago, all provinces and territories, with the exception of Ontario, agreed to a process to create a “passport-style” system to regulate securities.

Through their actions, the provinces and territories have demonstrated a clear commitment to improving our securities regulatory system. I applaud them for that. Their recent initiatives to narrow regulatory differences and harmonize and streamline securities laws are important to achieving a more efficient and effective securities regulatory system.

But unfortunately, they do not go far enough or fast enough.

As I told the provincial and territorial Finance and Securities Regulation Ministers the passport system is simply inadequate for where Canada needs to be:

1) With the passport, Canada still has 13 securities regulators, with 13 sets of laws, however harmonized, and 13 sets of fees;

2) The passport lacks national coordination of enforcement activities – making it difficult to maximize results on this critical part of the system; and,

3) The passport does not address our need to improve policy making.  It is still necessary to obtain agreement from 13 regulators to make changes to rules.

The vast majority of capital market participants and observers agree that we can no longer afford to sit back and watch our competitors pass us by.

We can no longer afford missed opportunities. Those who seriously considered all of the great advantages we have to offer in Canada, our educated labour force, our social benefits, our strong economy, and yet opted for a country with a more efficient market system.

We must move to a Common Securities Regulator now. The benefits are well known.

It will:

• lead to more investment and jobs;
• protect investors;
• save money;
• and give all regions a real say.

Such a solution would make the regulation of our markets more responsive and accountable by creating a decision-making body that would co‑ordinate the views of all jurisdictions promptly and fairly. 

Recent developments in global capital markets underscore the need for policy and regulatory capacity that can be applied quickly and effectively to address new and emerging issues.

A Common Securities Regulator would improve market efficiency and ensure the best use of money and resources by making the system more efficient to operate, lowering costs and making it more affordable for all who benefit from it, both those with capital to invest and those with businesses to build.

A Common Securities Regulator would improve enforcement and better protect investors with a common set of sanctions and remedies and better enforcement across the country. By serving as a single contact for law enforcement agencies, both at home and abroad, to share information and detect market fraud. By being able to set clear enforcement priorities across the country, while making sure investigation and enforcement resources are deployed efficiently.

A Common Securities Regulator would better serve our common interest by having a structure that would allow all regions of the country to participate in market regulation in a more meaningful and constructive way. By having a structure that would ensure broad and equal participation by all provinces and territories, with a strong on-the-ground presence in all regions with local expertise that would respond to regional needs.

A Common Securities Regulator would also represent an opportunity to move toward simpler, more principles-based regulation.  Canada needs a regulatory framework that is world-class but also adapted to the make-up of its capital markets, with both Canada-based global corporations and a large number of small and medium-sized businesses. 

Too many complex rules get in the way of both efficient financings and effective investor protection.  Western provinces have championed more streamlined, principles-based regulation.  Exerting further leadership in developing a single code for Canada, with the right balance of rules and principles, would help establish a clear competitive advantage for Canada in global markets.

A Common Securities Regulator would also allow Canada to speak with one voice on the international stage, enhancing the protection and promotion of the interests of Canadian market
investors and businesses.

For example, I personally have been championing the concept of free trade in securities with my counterparts in the U.S. and other G7 and international partners that share high standards of investor protection.  Under mutual recognition of each other’s regime, our investors would have better access to global opportunities, and businesses listed on our exchanges would have better access to global investors.  It is a win-win proposition and I am getting enthusiastic responses from my counterparts. 

Clearly, there will be a first-mover advantage.  Our securities regulators are engaged constructively but our capacity to implement a strategy and secure an agreement for all of Canada would be greatly enhanced with one regulator clearly accountable to negotiate on Canada’s behalf.  We don’t have that, and it clearly puts us at a disadvantage.

 

This sounds like a good story:

MINISTERS’ FRENCH LESSONS ON FRENCH RIVIERA ELITIST, SAYS NDP

NDP Official Languages critic Yvon Godin (Acadie-Bathurst) demanded the Harper Conservatives tell hard-working Canadians just how much the federal government is paying to send three Conservative cabinet ministers to the French Riviera to learn French.

“To ask average Canadians to foot the bill for three Conservative cabinet ministers to go to the French Riviera to learn our official language is an insult and elitist,” said Godin. “There are excellent French schools right across Canada where you can immerse yourself and gain valuable language skills, but apparently classes offered in our country aren’t good enough for Harper’s Conservatives.”

This summer, Conservative cabinet ministers Rona Ambrose, Jason Kenney and Bev Oda attended the Institut de Français, (view from the school, above) located between Nice and Monaco on the French Riviera, for a month-long language training session.

But aides for both Minister Kenney and Minister Oda said neither were in France over the summer. (Kenney is already fluently bilingual, incidentally, although many often take the chance to hone their French over the summer).

Minister Ambrose was indeed in France on a personal holiday for which she paid. Her spokesman confirmed that Minister Ambrose took a course at the Institut but that the Minister paid for that course with her own funds.

“We take issue with the NDP not checking the facts and making insinuations about questionable expenses of a minister,” said Pierre Florea, Ambrose’s communications director.

A four-week midsummer course at the school is 2,930 Euros (about $4,200 Cdn dollars) and accommodation at the school is an additional 450 to 2,200 Euros.

 

Elections Canada today published the official list of candidates for the three by-elections to be held in Quebec on Sept. 17.

For the record, in the last general election, the Bloc Quebecois won Roberval and Saint-Hyacinthe and the Liberals won Outremont.

The Conservatives think they have a decent shot in all three ridings but probably more so in Roberval-Lac St. Jean, which is next door to Labour Minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn’s riding. The Liberals hope to hold Outremont from a strong challenge from both the Conservatives and the NDP. The Bloc will likely not be a factor in Outremont but expects to hold the other two ridings.

Here’s the lineup from which voters will choose:

Outremont
Alexandre Amirizian (Canadian Action Party)
Romain Angeles (Independent)
Mahmood Raza Baig (Independent)
Jocelyn Coulon (Liberal Party of Canada)
Gilles Duguay (Conservative Party of Canada)
Jean-Paul Gilson (Bloc Québécois)
François Yo Gourd (neorhino.ca)
Jocelyne Leduc (Independent)
Régent Millette (Independent)
Thomas Mulcair (New Democratic Party)
François Pilon (Green Party of Canada)
John C. Turmel (Independent)

Roberval–Lac-Saint-Jean
Jean-Luc Boily (Green Party of Canada)
Louise Boulanger (Liberal Party of Canada)
Éric Dubois (New Democratic Party)
Céline Houde (Bloc Québécois)
Denis Lebel (Conservative Party of Canada)

Saint-Hyacinthe–Bagot
Bernard Barré (Conservative Party of Canada)
Jean Caumartin (Liberal Party of Canada)
Brigitte Sansoucy (New Democratic Party)
Michel St-Onge (Canadian Action Party)
Jacques Tétreault (Green Party of Canada)
Ève-Mary Thaï Thi Lac (Bloc Québécois)
Christian Willie Vanasse (neorhino.ca)

The Conservative MP for Burlington is a rookie named Mike Wallace. Wallace (left) and I were both at the University of Guelph together. He was a student politician and I was a student journalist (and a rather unsuccessful student politician).

I suspect that the student politicians and student journalists at Guelph today might take note of what Wallace just announced that will affect those at his alma mater:

GO Transit expands bus service to the University of Guelph

Canada's New Government, Ontario's Government and GO Transit, today announced the start of extended GO Transit bus service on the Milton Corridor to the University of Guelph… [Read the full release]

This bus service to the University will only cost taxpayers $4–million – $2–million from the federal treasury and $2–million from the provincial coffers. 

Wallace, acting on behalf of Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon, also announced an expansion of the Lakeshore West GO Train service. A new track will be laid in and the parking area at the Burlington, Ont. station of Aldershot will expanded. The federal and provincial governments will each kick in $24–million to this project.