Tuesday, 22 September 2015

Stephen Harper and My Part in His Downfall (4), The Leader's Debate Sept 18

            The Leaders had a debate on Thursday.  I copied a transcript (courtesy of http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/tale-of-the-tape-transcript-of-the-globe-debate-on-the-economy/) into Word so I could do highlighting, word-finds etc and study it.

The Word file if you want to try the same thing is at https://archive.org/details/LeadersDebateSept182015TranscriptPerMacLeans

It was quickly obvious that each candidate had mantras to be repeated more or less frequently.  I think this is usual in all such presentations.  There would be plenty to learn from seeing them in an organized heap so I copied them into a spreadsheet with a column for each of the speakers so I could present them here separately.

The criterion of selection was nothing more than that an item should have a certain quality to it.  It’s hard to define exactly what that quality is.  Incantatory repetition is part of it, also a certain air of being intended to paralyze the mind and numb the senses, lastly each nugget should bear a disconnection with objective reality, a saying-nothing about the world.  They are statements that don’t have to be either true or significant in order to work.  For example, Mr. Harper comes back again and again to what a risky and unstable world economy we’re living in but that is a vacuous statement.  Any unplanned free economy would always be unstable and appear on the brink of collapse.  That’s what happens when people are free to spend their money as they like, innit?

I’m going to do another post about the BS items.  Just pointing out that the current list will have some overlap with it.

I will not impose any more comments on the material, except to note that Stephen Harper not once but twice says ‘Let me just correct the facts.’   This gives me a picture of being back in school with Mr. Harper as the teacher with a ruler in his hand and a bunch of misbehaving Facts standing in line with their hands extended, waiting for correction.

If any that I missed are posted in the comments I'll revise accordingly and credit the discoverer.

                                                                                                                                  
Nuggets from Justin Trudeau
-           Mr. Harper has not only the worst growth record on jobs - the worst job creation record since World War II; he has the worst record on economic growth since the Great Depression    
-           He has the worst job creation rate since World War II, he has the worst growth rate of any Prime Minister since the Great Depression
-           That's not what Mr. Harper has delivered. He has the worst record on growth since R.B. Bennett in the depths of the Great Depression
-           Mr. Harper talks about growth but he hasn't been able to get it done for ten years. He has the worst growth record in 80 years of any Prime Minister.
-           What we need - because Mr. Harper has been unable to deliver it, having the worst growth record of any Prime Minister since the depths of the Great Depression - is a plan to grow the economy.
-           We have low growth, you have the worst job creation record since World War II of any Prime Minister, and that's what Canadians are feeling.

and from Thomas Mulcair

-           Mr. Harper put all of his eggs into one basket, and then he dropped the basket.  Four hundred thousand well-paid manufacturing jobs lost on his watch
-           Mr. Trudeau is proposing to dump tens of billions of dollars in new debt on the backs of future generations
-    We want to drop the taxes of Canada's small and medium-sized businesses because they create 80 percent of new jobs in this country
-           Mr. Harper has dropped the taxes of Canada's largest corporations by tens of billions of dollars. If that was such a good idea to create jobs, how come we lost 400,000 well-paid manufacturing jobs?

 -           I'm tired of watching successive Liberal and Conservative governments dump these massive ecological, economic, and social debts on the backs of future generations
-           Stop leaving this massive ecological debt to - on the backs of future generations
-           the old Liberal approach of leaving tens of billions of dollars in debt on the backs of future generation(s).
-           We've lost 400,000 well-paid manufacturing jobs on Mr. Harper's watch.
-           our small and medium sized businesses create 80 percent of the new jobs in this country
-           I come from a family of ten kids.
-           I don't want to do like Mr. Trudeau, leave a massive debt on the backs of future generations
-           It's something that reflects exactly how I've been as a public administrator. I've been in public life for over 35 years.
-           We don't want to leave more billions on the backs of future generations. 
-           With their short-term approach, leaving tens of billions of dollars on the backs of future generations.
-           I do come from a very large family and times sometimes were tough, but I've seen what it is when people work together and they hold together.
-           I come out of provincial politics.  I know that it's part of my job, if I become Prime Minister, to sit down regularly with the provincial Premiers
-           When I was the Minister in Quebec, Mr. Walmsley, I lowered greenhouse gas production in our province every year
-           I used to be chair of the Quebec Professions Board. I've got a lot of experience on this.

and from Stephen Harper
-           We are living in a very challenged global economy. We have enormous economic instability out there
-           Living in a very unstable global economic environment
-           We're in a fragile global economy
-           You know, we heard the same, old story from the NDP on this.
-           In their platform yesterday, they put in a bunch of tax increases
-           This is the same story we had in Alberta when the NDP came to office
-          Move the energy sector or the Canadian economy forward ... in a challenged global economy
-           Running a deficit is not the kind of protection our economy needs right now. We're in an unstable global economy
-           Is the same, old NDP playbook. We saw it in British Columbia, we saw it in Ontario, we're seeing it in Alberta.
-           The reality of the NDP plan wherever it has been tried. And when we are in a fragile...
-           The same story we had in Alberta when the NDP came to office.
-           Let me just correct the facts.
-           Around the world where there have been all of these financial and other crashes
-           How do we in this unstable global economy continue to protect that going forward?
-           The kind of reckless approach that these two parties...
-           Tax increases on ordinary Canadian families who pay low taxes, or permanent deficits. These are risks we cannot afford and they're not good for homeowners.
-           Seen this NDP playbook everywhere.
-           That's what we had with the NDP in power in Ontario. That's what we had with the NDP in power in British Columbia, and we're seeing exactly the same story here in Alberta
-           In an unstable global economy we have ...
-           Look, the, the whole essence of Mr. Mulcair's plan is that he says he will balance the budget through tax hikes. That's what the NDP's tried everywhere. They left Ontario in a massive deficit, they left British Columbia...
-           Manitoba is in a massive deficit. Alberta's deficit got larger since they took office. The former Saskatchewan Auditor General says they left Saskatchewan in a deficit
-           In this unstable global economy, that is an important guarantee.
-           Not a risk you or ... our economy in this fragile ... economic environment...
-           Let me correct the facts.
-           Why would we return to deficits now when we have an unstable global economy
-           A terribly unstable and risky global economy.
-           Seven years in a row with nothing but economic crises around the world.
-           This fragile global economy.
-           Significant risks and significant challenges.

Wednesday, 2 September 2015

Stephen Harper and My Part in his Downfall (3): Information Sharing

I don't know how much there is to this theory but here goes anyway.

The first section of the Act lets these government departments send your information to each other if they think that will combat terrorism.  I found it hard to visualize what's wrong with these 16 departments sharing info with each other.  After all, it's all the government, right?

Personal information include data about the 'race, colour, religion, marital status, education, financial transactions, fingerprints, personal opinions, and others' opinions, of an individual.'  This is a select list from the Privacy Act.

At this point it began to seem a bit funny to think of all these details being passed around, unless the Anti-Terrorism Act included enforceable controls on what happens to information after it leaves a department but as far as I can find, it doesn't.

Part 4 of this section of the Act seems to contain the only rules covering this subject.

“4. Information sharing under this Act is to be guided by the following principles:
.
b) respect for caveats on and originator control over shared information is consistent
with effective and responsible information sharing;”

I can't follow the grammar of this, if you reword it the same idea goes:

“This is a principle:  respect for caveats is consistent with responsible and effective information sharing.”  Even then it doesn't quite add up to anything.

From what I've read, 'caveats' means something like a note attached to a file saying whether its accuracy might be dubious because it was procured through gossip, hearsay, torture, weak evidence, etc.

If that's correct, shouldn't the principle read "Caveats must be attached to any information distributed and the respective files must not be handed on to a third institution without permission of the originator.”?

That's more long winded but maybe Mr. Harper or a friend could fix it up.

Instead the clause just says Respect for Caveats is consistent with Responsible Sharing etc.  It doesn't go one to say 'All information must be shared responsibly etc.’, eg.

It's just another way of saying that respect for caveats doesn't contradict responsible sharing, i.e. it's just defining a concept by saying what is not excluded from it.  It doesn't even say what is included in the concept of responsible sharing or that responsible sharing is a good thing.

So if the security police overhear somebody gossiping about you and that gossip, who wanted revenge because you called Animal Control about their dog crapping in your rosebushes, says they heard you say you were so pissed off at your tax bill you were going to join Al Qaeda tomorrow, your alleged words could be put into a file without a note saying the words came via a nosy neighbour with their ear at your window; you could as a result, under other parts of this Act, be put on a list and not know about it, not be allowed to take a plane anywhere in Canada, and be at risk of having electronic bracelets put on your ankles and your computer's hard drive confiscated, and no government personnel would have violated any of the principles in this Act.  

I was going to do more but I’m out of time and a day late anyway.  I'll be back. 

Tuesday, 25 August 2015

Stephen Harper and My Part in his Downfall (2)


Bill C-51 was enacted earlier this year with the apparent intention of giving the federal government more power to stop terrorism while balancing that power with a respect for civil liberties.  Since there haven’t been any terrorist acts in Canada for years it would seem the government is doing a good job with the powers they have already, so I don’t know why they wanted more.  According to the papers the opposition proposed more than 100 amendments to the bill, of which the Conservatives accepted none but introduced four that they came up with themselves.

This Act allows government organizations, if they have files on you, to share them with each other, lets the government ground people who they suspect might be planning terrorism, without telling them, lets the government apply to judges to impose recognizances on possible terrorists and make them wear electronic bracelets etc, criminalizes any communication that promotes terrorism and allows the government to confiscate written or electronic materials that promote terrorism,  allows witnesses to give evidence against suspected terrorists without being identified or cross examined, allows the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to do James Bond type stuff (rather than being a mere intelligence agency), while letting them get warrants to set aside the Canadian Constitution (temporarily), allows the government to appeal any decision at any stage made by a judge in an immigration case if they don’t like the decision, while the right of the non-citizen to appeal is still restricted to matters of general importance, and allows the government to present information to a judge that that non-citizen is doesn't know about and so cannot contradict or challenge.  Seems innocuous enough but in fact it’s been a controversial subject.

A couple of fair and balanced reviews of the legislation by legal experts.


Craig Forcese and Kent Roach

Clayton Ruby and Nader R. Hasan
https://www.policyalternatives.ca/publications/monitor/bill-c-51-legal-primer

Lists are fun, so here's the Federal agencies who can hand your information around.

Canada Border Services Agency
Canada Revenue Agency
Canadian Armed Forces
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission 
Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Communications Security Establishment
Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Department of Finance
Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Department of Health
Department of National Defence
Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Department of Transport
Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada
Public Health Agency of CanadaRoyal Canadian Mounted Police

Monday, 17 August 2015

Stephen Harper and My Part in his Downfall (1)

Some people imply that Stephen Harper is a potential tyrant who only feels happy at moments of destroying forests, kneecapping his opponents, converting the atmosphere to carbon dioxide, or crushing the democratic rights of poor people.  This is almost certainly true but we can't be sure unless we look at the evidence, rather than leaping to conclusions.  It's time to take an objective, neutral look at this monster in human form and let the facts speak for themselves.

Since everybody else is busy campaigning that leaves only me.  I will post the results of my investigations, or something or other, every week every now and then until the election and that's my promise to you. Here's Part 1, next one's due on Tuesday the 25th.


I'm going to start with

I was going to start with the Security bill, figuring that one way to approach the man was to see how he was reflected in his legislation.  But the bill isn't a very revelatory document and it'll take more than a day of note taking to make sense of it and my brain needs time to recover anyway.  Bye for now.