David Akin’s On The Hill

The United Nations and many aid agencies were worried that the generous donations made by governments and individuals in the wake of the Asian tsunami might mean that other aid crises would get neglected. Well, it seems those fears were well-founded. Consider this statement, released today by the United Nations:

HUMANITARIAN APPEAL FOR CÔTE D’IVOIRE BRINGS IN ‘JUST OVER 0 PER CENT,’ UN SAYS

An international appeal for humanitarian assistance of over $39 million (U.S.) for Côte d’Ivoire has brought in “just over 0 per cent,” while a general appeal for all emergencies, except the Indian Ocean tsunami, has garnered less than 10 per cent of what was hoped for, the United Nations said today.

In response to the Côte d’Ivoire appeal for $39.3 million, the Netherlands alone pledged $181,000, “or about 0.05 per cent,” the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said.

OCHA has received $168 million of the $1.7 billion requested for emergencies outside of last December’s tsunami in the Indian Ocean. A donors’ conference for Sudan will take place next week in Norway.

Gathering less than 5 per cent of what was needed were Burundi, the Central African Republic, Chad, the Russian Federation for Chechnya, Côte d’Ivoire, Eritrea, Guinea, the Republic of Congo, Somalia and the West African region.

As the Conservative caucus is part of my beat here, I’m trying — lunch by lunch and coffee by coffee –– to meet all 99 members of the Conservative caucus. (If you’re a Conservative MP, feel free to phone me up if you’re looking for a lunch date today!) Today, in setting up some time to meet Charleswood-St. James-Assiniboia MP and Conservative health critic Steven Fletcher (left), I made the happy discovery that Steven and his staff maintain a blog. I now know of three MPs who keep blogs. Steven’s caucus colleague Monte Solberg has one and so does Liberal MP Carolynn Bennett. (If you know of more MP blogs, or even of blogs by provincial politicians, I’d love to hear about them.)

Fletcher’s blog, though, has some much better features than Solberg’s or Bennett’s. At Fletcher’s blog, readers can add their own comments. Moreover, Fletcher’s blog can also handle trackbacks.

 

Justice John Gomery has partially lifted a publication ban on some testimony given in front of him over the last few days. We have a report with some video from the inquiry at CTV’s site:

[Montreal ad executive Jean] Brault claims in his testimony that he systematically kicked back huge amounts of taxpayer money to the federal Liberal party, a deception he claims involved senior Liberal organizers and people close to former prime minister Jean Chretien.

His testimony detailed secret meetings, phoney paper trails, envelopes stuffed with cash and bogus billings.

He said there were phoney employees on the payroll at the ad firm Groupaction.
Brault said there was $1 million in kickbacks to the Liberal Party of Canada.
His reward, he claims, was $172 million in government business for his firm. [Read and see the rest]

My Globe and Mail colleague Tu Thanh Ha also has a  report online at the Globe and Mail’s site.

A Montreal ad executive at the heart of the federal sponsorship scandal says Liberal organizers pressed him into secretly donating more than a million dollars to them through various covert methods that included envelopes full of cash, fake invoices and putting phony employees on his payroll.

The devastating testimony Jean Brault gave at the Gomery inquiry had been kept secret until now because of a publication ban so it wouldn't prejudice criminal proceedings against him.

Mr. Justice John Gomery lifted the blackout.

Mr. Brault's testimony portrayed a broad pattern of deception that spanned years and involved several people, including senior party organizers, a brother and a friend of then prime minister Jean Chrétien and several past and current ministerial advisers . . . [Read the full story]

 

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) lifted key aspects of the license for CTV Newsnet today and provided it with more money for programming.

The key paragraph from the CRTC release says:

“The licensee is no longer required to operate CTV Newsnet in a 15-minute news wheel. In addition, the licensee may broadcast a limited amount of programming drawn from category 2 (a) (Analysis and interpretation).”

Senior CTV officials had outlined why this was important earlier.

When Canada's military wants to buy something, it has to do what every other
government department must do and get final contracting authority from the
Treasury Board Secretariat.
But a few minutes ago, in a speech to defence policy analysts, Defence
Minister Bill Graham wants the department to have the final say on strictly
military stuff. He said he's going to do some pilot project procurement this
way.
“The point of such an experiment would be to ascertain if this approach
would cut the costs associated with the procurement process, reduce
acquisition times and clarify accountability lines, while not diluting
accountability or increasing risk to the Crown,” Graham said.

Canada has undertaken a review of federal access to information laws. Federal Justice Minister Irwin Cotler tabled a series of recommendations at the House of Commons committee that studies Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics. The committee next meets to discuss these issues on Tues, April 12. Information Commissioner John Reid will be the key witness in front of the committee at that time.

Here’s the key changes tabled by Minister Cotler:

• Expanding coverage under the ATIA to more Crown Corporations and other entities, such as Alternate Dispute Delivery Organizations.
• Proposing the possible extension of the ATIA to the Office of the following Agents of Parliament: the Information Commissioner, the Privacy Commissioner, the Commissioner of Official Languages, the Chief Electoral Officer, and the Auditor General.
• Modernizing exclusions and exemptions relating to such matters as Cabinet confidences, among others.
• Updating current Access to Information processes such as fee collection and t ime limits for processing Access to Information and Privacy requests.
• Introducing new administrative reforms such as providing specific training in information management and disclosure of information to executives and public servants, and upgrading tools to assist institutions in processing access requests or to track timelines.

The government is distributing a discussion paper that looks at the framework for these changes and has also published a more comprehensive report on the proposed changes to the federal ATI legislation.

Canada’s federal government ranked number one for the fifth consecutive year in a 22–country survey that measures delivery of government surveys using emerging communication and information technologies. The United States federal government ranked second, followed, in order, by the federal governments in Denmark, Singapore, and Australia.

The study was done by consultancy Accenture which surveyed 9,000 adults in 22 countries.

Accenture said that, in general terms, governments around the world are still struggling to meet demands by their citizens for better customer service.

Here’s this from the Accenture press release:

To measure overall service maturity, an indicator of how well governments are delivering customer service, Accenture focused on four key aspects of service delivery: a citizen-centered perspective, cohesive multi-channel services, fluid cross-government services, and proactive communications and education.  The study found that while eGovernment offerings across the board are well advanced; with an average service maturity breadth of 91 percent, all countries have room for improvement to realize the broader goal of leadership in customer service. In fact the overall average customer service maturity score – which measures four key aspects of service delivery, including how well governments are delivering service across multiple channels – was just
39 percent. Only Canada has an overall customer service maturity score of more than 50 percent.

“Canada continues to set the bar in government service delivery for the rest of the world,” said Alden Cuddihey, partner, Accenture's Canadian Government operating group. “Despite being a leader, there are still lessons to be learned from the rest of the world, areas for advancement, and opportunities to reach even more Canadians through eGovernment services. Canada still has work to do to meet the growing service expectations of it citizens.”

The 22 governments included: Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States.  The research was conducted Jan. 3-17, 2005.

Accenture noted that despite the widespread availability and use of Internet-based communication tools, citizens were most likely to use the telephone to obtain services from their government.

The citizen survey found that while most citizens prefer a number of different methods of communicating with governments, they continue to rely on more traditional, offline channels. Despite the relative Internet savvy and familiarity with online government in some countries, the telephone continues to be the predominant means citizens use to communicate with government. Over the past 12 months, 57 percent of respondents had used the telephone to interact with government, as opposed to only 22 percent who had used the Internet. Yet despite its popularity, the telephone is consistently ranked as the least easy form of communication across all countries surveyed.

 

Canadians, by and large, do not need passports to enter the U.S. Similarly, U.S. citizens don’t need passports to get into Canada. That’s about to change. Today, the U.S. State Department announced that anyone looking to enter or re-enter the U.S., including its own citizens, will need passports or a similarly secure document. This measure will come into full effect by 2008. The State Department also said that these documents will have to be linked to fingerprints, iris scans or some other measurement of some body part or characteristic.

“Ultimately, all documents used for travel to the U.S. are expected to include biometrics that can be used to authenticate the document and verify identity.”

A few minutes ago, Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan said the Canadian government is reviewing its policy governing what documents Americans and others must present to get into Canada but she did say that, generally speaking, a system of reciprocity seems to work best, suggesting that, one day, Americans will need passports to get into Canada.

Here’s the statement from the U.S. Department of State:

 Media Note                                                                             
 Office of the Spokesman                                                                
 Washington, DC                                                                         
 April 5, 2005                                                                          

New Passport Initiative Announced To Better Secure America's Borders

                   
Initiative Designed to Expedite Travel in the Western Hemisphere While Enhancing Security                                                                     
                                                                                         
The Departments of State and Homeland Security announced today the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative to secure and expedite travel.  The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative will require all U.S. citizens, Canadians, citizens of the British Overseas Territory of Bermuda, and citizens of Mexico  to have a passport or other accepted secure document to enter or re-enter the U.S. by January 1, 2008.  

Currently, U.S. citizens, and some citizens of other countries in the Western Hemisphere are not required to present a passport to enter or re-enter the U.S. when traveling within the Western Hemisphere.  The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA, also known as the 9/11 Intelligence Bill), signed into law on December 17, 2004, mandated that the Secretary of  Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, develop and implement a plan to require U.S. citizens and foreign nationals to present a  passport, or other secure document when entering the United States.                    
     
To provide vital information to the general public, the Departments of Homeland Security (DHS) and State (DOS) are issuing an Advance Notice of Proposed  Rulemaking (ANPRM) on the plan to the public and requesting input and/or  comment on the suggested documents and possible alternative documents that can  meet the statutory requirements.A more formal rulemaking will be issued later this year following review of those comments to implement the first phase of  the initiative.This rulemaking will take into account comments received from  the advanced notice as well as soliciting further comments on the rulemaking  itself.
 
“Our goal is to strengthen border security and expedite entry into the United States for U.S. citizens and legitimate foreign visitors,” Homeland Security  Acting Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security, Randy  Beardsworth stated.”By ensuring that travelers possess secure documents, such as the passport, Homeland Security will be able to conduct more effective and efficient interviews at our borders.”
 
“We recognize the implications this might have for industry, business and the general public, as well as our neighboring countries, and they are important  partners in this initiative.The advanced notice of proposed rule making will  allow these affected publics to voice concern and provide ideas for alternate documents acceptable under the law,” explained Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs, Maura Harty.”The overarching need is to implement this  legal requirement in a way that strengthens security while facilitating the movement of persons and goods.”
DHS and DOS propose to roll out the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative in phases, providing as much advance notice as possible to the affected public to  enable them to acquire the necessary documents before the deadline.
As previously noted, the passport (U.S. or Foreign) will be the document of choice for entry or re-entry into the U.S.However, another document that we anticipate will be acceptable under the travel initiative is the Border Crossing Card, (BCC or “laser visa”).Currently, the BCC serves in lieu of a passport and a visa for citizens of Mexico traveling to the U.S. from contiguous territory.Other documents that we anticipate will be acceptable  under this Initiative are the Customs and Bo
rder Protection Secure Electronic Network for Travelers Rapid Inspection (SENTRI), NEXUS and Free and Secure  Trade (FAST) program cards.
 
Additional documents are also being examined to determine their acceptability for travel.The public will be notified of additional travel document options  as those determinations are made.The government would expect that acceptable  documents must establish the citizenship and identity of the bearer, enable electronic data verification and checking, and include significant security features. Ultimately, all documents used for travel to the U.S. are expected to include biometrics that can be used to authenticate the document and verify identity. 
             

There is much talk in Ottawa that there is an increased likelihood of a general federal election some time before the fall. The buzz is the result of testimony invariably described as explosive at the Gomery Inquiry, now holding hearings in Montreal. No one in Canada is allowed to report on details of the testimony of former ad executive Jean Brault for Justice John Gomery imposed a publication ban on Brault’s testimony in order to protect Brault’s rights to a fair trial. Brault faces criminal charges in connection with the Adscam scandal and his trial is set to begin on May 2.

Yesterday, though, several politicians weighed in on the likelihood of an election happening soon.

Here is Prime Minister Paul Martin in the House of Commons yesterday:

Paul Martin, Prime Minister:

Martin: The fact is that Canadians do merit having the facts and should have the facts. That is why I called for the Gomery commission. That is why this government put that commission in place. It is precisely to have those facts. That is why there should not be an election until Justice Gomery has reported, because Canadians deserve to know the facts.

Here are the questions put to various MPs by reporters in the foyer outside the House of Commons and their responses, which have been lightly edited:

Leader of the Opposition Stephen Harper was asked about an election on March 24:

Question:  Monsieur Harper, est-ce que vous croyez que ça justifie une élection cette fois?

Stephen Harper:  C'est une décision pour le premier ministre. C'est le premier ministre qui décide de déclencher des élections. J'ai dit clairement, et ce n'est pas une grande surprise, je n'ai pas l'intention et je parle pour le parti, je suis certain, que nous n'avons pas l'intention d'appuyer un tel amendement, un amendement dangereux qui donne un pouvoir sans limite au gouvernement de faire des politiques de Kyoto sans l'appui du parlement.

The decision to call an election is a decision of the prime minister. He will have to decide whether this or any particular element of the budget is worth calling an election over. I will tell you that that is his decision, but we will not be intimidated into supporting a provision that is so dangerous. This is an attempt by the government to get unlimited power to declare any element of the Kyoto plan to affect any industry that will pose multimillion dollar fines on any basis without any parliamentary approval or discussion whatsoever and it is completely unacceptable.

Others spoke about this Monday:

Jean Lapierre, Liberal MP and Transport Minister

Question:   Pensez-vous qu'en élection les gens vont voir la différence entre les bons libéraux et les mauvais libéraux?

Lapierre: Je pense qu'en élection la vérité a toujours sa place et pas seulement en élection.  On a demandé les travaux de cette commission-là justement pour s'assurer que la vérité sorte.  Maintenant s'il y a des choses qui ont été faites au détriment du Parti libéral, ça ne peut pas que des milliers et des milliers de militants libéraux soient tous aspergés de la même odeur parce que certains individus auraient pu abuser.

Diane Ablonczy, Conservative MP

Question:  Do you think what is unrolling at the Gomery inquiry is grounds enough for an election?

Ablonczy:  Because I can't comment on anything that might have come out in Gomery I can't answer that question at this time.

Question:   Does it make it more difficult to argue for an election when the Prime Minister comes back at you that if you do attach this high priority to Justice Gomery's work that he should be allowed to finish his work before there would be any election?

Ablonczy:  Well again, I think you have to ask the Prime Minister what he meant by that but it's very clear that Justice Gomery is in fact getting to the bottom of things and I think that's reassurance to all Canadians and that's what we had hoped would happen.

Question:   You're not just an MP, you're a politician.  So what do you tell your political workers back home?  Are you telling them to get ready?

Ablonczy:  I have told them ever since the last election that there could be an election at any time and to be on a constant state of yellow alert.  So that's where they are.

Question:   Would you rather wait until the Gomery report is out?

Ablonczy:  I think Canadians will be making judgements all the way along and a number of things could trigger an election.  So, you know again that's only one aspect of it.

Question:   Should there be a discussion at your Wednesday caucus meeting on if the Gomery proceedings are actually having an influence on whether there should be an election or not?

Diane Ablonczy:  Well again that's a hypothetical question.  So I'll have to pass.

Brian Pallister, Conservative MP

Question:   In terms of the [publication] ban, once it gets lifted what do you anticipate might happen?

Pallister:  Well I don't want to speculate.  I think there's enough of that going on certainly.  I guess there was already an underlying concern about the level of corruption and how much it might have permeated the government but with, you know, the rumour monguering that's going on right now I don't want to add to it.  I want to wait and find out what the facts are.  Obviously if they're strongly critical of the government then it will have an influence on the likelihood that something may occur as a result and one of the things that may occur as a result would be an election naturally. It's unfortunate that obviously it's bad for all elected people I think when you see this kind of thing, at least what's alleged happening.

Question:   But it's good for Conservatives?:

Pallister:  Oh certainly, it's good for Conservatives.  Obviously people are looking at the Conservative Party as an alternate now especially given our recent successful policy conference.  I think that the authority we have now to put forward a very clear and coherent plan to Canadians that it will be very difficult for the government to cast aspersions toward and fear monguering just won't work in the next election campaign the way it has in the past couple.  So, I think all of that speaks well of the Conservative Party as being able to form the government after the next election.

Jack Layton, NDP Leader:

Question:   Quand est-ce que les élections devraient avoir lieu selon vous?  Est-ce qu'on devrait attendre la fin de la publication du rapport de Gomery avant de tenir les élections?

Layton:  Alors c'est vraiment une question hypothétique.  On va voir.  Mais moi je pense que les Canadiens et les Canadiennes ils veulent que nous travaillons sur les questions importantes maintenant.  Ce sont la pollution, le dossier de Kyoto et toutes sortes d'autres initiatives. 

Question:   Wh
at about election readiness? Are you making any attempt to be more ready than you were a few weeks ago?  Are you looking at Gomery as a possibility that a snap election could be called?

Layton:  Well, any political party is always aware of the circumstances on the go at any given time and you're always prepared. We always stand at a state of readiness but the key thing is I don't think Canadians want an election.  They want to see the House of Commons get down to work.  We think at a bare minimum there ought to be something done about pollution and Kyoto.  We think that there ought to be come progress on a whole lot of key issues and that's what people sent us here to work on and right from the get-go that's been our approach.

Below are two e-mails released by ABC News today about Peter Jennings. Jennings, a Canadian, will soon start treatments for lung cancer. The first is from ABC News President David Westin.  The second is from Jennings himself:

David Westin statement:

This morning, Peter Jennings told his senior staff at World News Tonight
that yesterday afternoon he was diagnosed with lung cancer.  I include
below the full text of Peter's note to the group of people with whom he
works most closely.  He will begin outpatient treatment next week here in
New York.  It's both Peter's and my expectation that he will anchor World
News Tonight during the period of treatment to the extent he can do so
comfortably; but, we should also expect him to be off the broadcast from
time to time, depending on how he feels.  Charlie Gibson, Elizabeth Vargas,
and others will be substituting for Peter as necessary and when their other
responsibilities permit.

All of us at ABC News have watched over the years as Peter has led us on
various assignments with strength and with courage.  We've done our best to
support him in these endeavors.  Now, this Peter's been given a tough
assignment.  He's already bringing to new challenge the courage and
strength we've seen so often in his reporting from the field and in
anchoring ABC News.  I know that all of us will give him every bit of
support that he needs and asks for.  Peter will once again lead the way,
but we will stand with him at every turn.

Peter Jennings e-mail:

Dear All — Forgive me the group mailing, but it seems the easiest way to
tell a lot of people I care for…about a change in my life.

I have been diagnosed with lung cancer. Yes, it was quite a surprise.

As you all know, this is a challenge. I begin chemo-therapy next week.  I
will continue to do the broadcast. There will be good days and bad, which
means that some days I may be cranky and some days really cranky! Almost 10
million Americans are living with cancer. I am sure I will learn from them
how to cope with the facts of life that none of us anticipated. In all the
years I have worked here I have had the most outstanding support from this
news division.

Hundreds of you have been like family. It feels good to have such a family
right now.

Peter