It is about time. Most of the violent crime in our cities today is committed by “young offenders”. Anyone 14 or older should not be excused due to his or her age; young people today mature much sooner than in previous generations, and they certainly know the difference between right and wrong. When they kill or assault someone, they know exactly what they’re doing. And when you’re old enough to do the crime, you’re old enough to do the time – and to be named and shamed in public for what you did.

Stephen Harper’s plan for tackling those “young” killers and robbers will resonate well with most city people across Canada, because Canadians are sick and tired of violent youth crime:

The law will ensure that persons aged 14 and older who are convicted of serious violent offences (first- or second-degree murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, aggravated sexual assault, or other serious violent offences for which an adult would be liable to imprisonment for more than two years and in the commission of which the offender causes or attempts to cause serious bodily harm) are automatically subject to enhanced youth sentencing [up to 14 years for violent offences, and maximum enhanced youth sentences of life for first- or second-degree murder].  Further, upon conviction they will be named and a publication ban will not apply.

Bravo and bravo again!

In case anyone doubts the seriousness of violent crimes committed by teenagers should look at these stats:

While some crime rates have declined in recent years, violent crime among youth continues to be a serious social problem. In 2006, violent crime committed by young offenders was up 30 per cent from 1991. Almost 40,000 youth were accused of serious and violent crimes in 2006.

• Almost 160 were accused of murder or attempted murder.
• Almost 31,000 were accused of assault.
• More than 2,100 were accused of sexual assault.
• More than 4,500 were accused of robbery.

This post has been crossposted to my blog.

I have been asked to blog at Democratic Space as part of their coverage of the 2008 campaign. My goal is to provide a eye to the campaign from my corner of the world, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.

The Region of Waterloo takes in the cities of Kitchener, Waterloo and Cambridge, along with the rural townships of North Dumfries, Wilmot, Wellesley and Woolwich. Its urban areas are a hotbed of manufacturing and high tech industry and the area leads the province in having one of the lowest levels of unemployment. The Perimeter Institute, two universities and Conestoga College make this a strong academic centre as well, with Waterloo being named as one of the “most intelligent” cities in the world. And yet, the rural townships with their Mennonite communities, still have an influence in the character of the cities. We don’t have to drive far for countryside, and we are still known for our farms and food processing. Oh, and we have the largest Oktoberfest in the western hemisphere.

In 2004, the region passed a small milestone when the sprawling riding of Waterloo-Wellington was cut back to the region’s borders, forming the riding that would become Kitchener-Conestoga. This move gave the region four distinct ridings — the same as Prince Edward Island, the smallest province in Confederation (even though Waterloo Region has four times the population). It’s a small point, but it highlights the region’s growing sense of self — almost a provincialist sense of self, here.

(more…)

Well that’s a first: Hedy Fry out on the street campaigning. This morning on Nelson Street, adjacent to Nelson Park. If you’re supposed Honk 4 Hedy…I could hear the birds singing instead.

Well…she’s probably done this sort of thing before–several times before. But over the last 2 elections I’ve seen her more doing all-candidates meetings and a few high profile events to shore up her gay boy diva fan gurls (I’m a gay gurl guy…relax). Between 01 and 09 October there’s almost one all-candidates meeting a day, targetting queers, at-risk and street-involved youth, seniors, and families. As the campaign ratchets up a few notches each week I expect to see more of each candidate.

No sign (heh heh) of anyone else with regards to signs: Fry and Liberals are way ahead in total numbers. However that’s largely because a handful of houses in the West End (own West End house=buckets o’ cash=Liberal. Or Tory) are smothered in Liberal red. Still haven’t seen any signs for Mayencourt (Tories), Byers (Dippers) or Carr (Greeners). But sometimes those are rolled out en masse with about 3 weeks to go.

I find the buzz around Mayencourt perplexing. He’s not exactly wildly popular–having only won his MLA seat by 17 votes in the last provincial election–but the press are treating him like a star candidate. *scratches head*

For now. And that’s great, I feel for them and I don’t think he should be deported.

But I would really appreciate it if the government would stop trying to send my talented and hardworking friends from Rwanda and Iraq back where they came from as well.

 Earlier today, another blogger commented that none of the leaders will address immigration out of fear of public backlash.

Yeah… it’s time everyone got over that fear. This immigration system is something we need to deal with now.

Wow!

The Orange Room is the one-stop shop for anyone looking to find – and share – digital media related to the New Democrat campaign in this election.

Videos, photos, news, blog posts and more – whether you saw it online or created it yourself, this is your chance to be a part of the campaign.

Well, Jack, I am positively tickled orange by your Orange Room. This is a great example of what it means to be a political party in the 21st century. Kudos, kudos, kudos!

Let’s hope the Orange Room stays up also after the election.

i’m approaching my stint here as a riding blogger as a chance to chronicle my own decision making process, simply put i need to decide whom i’m going to vote for.

to that end today i interviewed Sharon Howarth, the green party candidate for toronto-danforth. i was curious about to see how well she would communicate the green platform, what personally was driving her, and i was also somewhat curious as to her feelings about running against a national party leader.

Sharon is, as all politicians must be, friendly in person . i came away from my interview with her knowing that she really, honest and truly, believes in her candidacy. when i asked her about the whole “running against Jack” issue her attitude she seemed puzzled that i even bothered to ask. she believes that the big three established parties have had their chance and why not give the greens a chance, especially consider the wonderful policy platform they have (ok i’m paraphrasing here, but you get the gist)

on a policy front Sharon opened with the green economic policies, while she didn’t (to her credit) accuse the liberals of stealing the green policy platform (cough cough green shift cough cough) you can see just where the original thinking came from. taxes on consumption and pollution with corresponding reductions in income taxes, to me it sounds like a great idea… however i’m curious about specifics and on that front i left unsatisfied. in particular i wanted to know how this taxation shift would look from an average persons perspective, would the new taxes and the reduced income taxes happen at the same time or are we in for a painful transition period, do our pay-cheques get bigger before or after prices rise? (Sharon promised me answers to that question, i’ll post them as a comment when they arrive)

(more…)

In what seems to have been a race anxiously waiting for a start, the candidates in Ancaster Dundas Flamborough Westdale (ADFW) will face the electorate for the first time together…Tuesday evening at 6:15, McMaster University’s Student Union hosting. Voters from the area will have 3 other opportunities in coming days to see what the parties have to offer in this “all-candidates meeting” format.

Expect incumbent David Sweet to stick tightly to the party (read Stephen Harper) line. Voters seem to have been convinced to expect little from Sweet, and he has delivered. Local “Sweetwatchers” have found him to be active in a number of pursuits related to his personal priorities while on the Hill, but not so much elsewhere. All in attendance will want to know more details from his time in Parliament. Communications to the Riding while in office seemed to have been written by Stephen Harper’s staff.

Gordon Guyatt has saved a great many trees (reused signs) over the years by continuing to campaign on behalf of the New Democratic Party through election after election. His professional accomplishments are well documented and when it comes to health care issues Dr. Guyatt ought to be able to take on any politician in a debate. Some polls suggest that Healthcare is near top of mind with many voters. A riding with a healthy number of older adults may reward Guyatt. It seems that on previous election nights support for this NDP perennial was always the decisive votes taken from one or the other of the Liberals or Conservatives.

The Green candidate Peter Ormond has had some campaigning time (but still runs a distant 4th in the experience department) having run for the Greens in a nearby riding recently. A hard group to read, the Green Party trade heavily on their outstanding leader’s accomplishments yet seldom step forward at the local level as a unified group to address issues in a riding that is clearly on the doorstep (or closer) of one of Canada’s premier environmental hotspots.

(more…)

I have to say, I was quite impressed by the pundit opinions in today’s Globe and Mail.

Let’s start with Lysiane Gagnon. She writes that there is no reason to fear a Tory majority. In fact, she argues, giving the Tories a majority would ensure the party moves into the mainstream, thus silencing any radical voices. Similarly, she says, forming the Official Opposition would do wonders for the NDP:

If it ever became the Official Opposition, its more wacky militants would be pushed aside and the party would soften its positions. Because its electoral base would be larger, and because it could envision the possibility of forming a government in the next election, the NDP would be naturally inclined to abandon its radical positions for more middle-of-the-road – some would say more responsible – ones. The NDP would undoubtedly go on promoting a left-of-centre agenda – just like majority Conservatives would promote a right-of-centre one – but it would have stopped being a marginal party out of touch with ordinary Canadians.

In her column today Gagnon really nails it, because her arguments also illustrate why the Liberal Party led by Stéphane Dion is becoming more and more unelectable, given its continuous shift further and further to the far left.

In a way, Gordon Gibson picks up on that theme when he writes that Canadians don’t really care who is in power, as long as things get done. The country could run itself, Gibson says, even if Canadians decided to vote for no government at all on October 14. In other words, given them a left-of-centre or a right-of-centre government, but stay clear of the extremists (Dion, in the current election roster).

(more…)

This is extremely funny:

The two men who say they’re the Conservative candidates in Calgary Northeast each held campaign kickoff rallies Sunday, each standing in front of blue signs, pledging allegiance to Stephen Harper and saying the other guy isn’t the real Conservative. Both campaigns also spoke of ethnic politicking: official Conservative candidate Devinder Shory said he won’t run his campaign “based on caste, creed or religion,” while the campaign manager of “independent Conservative” Roger Richard claimed Shory won his party’s nomination with non-citizen teenage voters and through other sketchy techniques.

So, which one is the real “conservative”? It probably won’t matter much because, as an idiom in some other languages tells us, when two scoundrels argue, the truth is revealed.

That leaves the candidates of the other parties: NDP, Liberal or Green.

If you can’t decide between the two “Tories”, may I suggest you mark your X next to the NDP candidate?

Tyler Kinch has been a fellow Alberta blogger for some time. Now, he’s branching out into active politics by running for the NDP in Calgary Centre.

He explains his reasons for running here.

This being Calgary and a federal election, the odds, unfortunately, are against Tyler, but I’ll keep my fingers crossed for him.

Good luck, Tyler!

Not to say they don’t exist. They do but Conservatives dominate the blogging scene. More on that at this neat feature at CBC regarding the online component of the federal election. H/T to Terry Seguin of CBC Fredericton’s Information Morning who mentioned this today (Two plugs for CBC in a week. Who would have thought?)

This actually comes a day after mikel pointed out in the comments of one of the blogs here that I had in the past mentioned there was a lack of left-winged blogs. Seems it’s a cross country phenomenon not just New Brunswick.

Why?

I don’t know. Conspiracy theories don’t wash since anyone regardless of their political stripe can start a blog for nothing except their time. In New Brunswick at least, many of the political blogs might favour conservative ideals but tend to lean towards being non-partisan instead of joining the Blogging Tories or Liblogs for whatever reason.

As I mentioned to Mike, maybe it’s because the Left already has most of the mainstream media so there’s little problem getting their voices heard. Maybe. Maybe it’s something else. Conspiracy theories aside, your thoughts?

Crossposted – Spink About It

While pretty much the entire country can agree that there needs to be some amendments, I can’t say Harper’s direction is the one we should take. I understand where he’s coming from, and the emotions that drive these amendments, but I simply cannot agree with them.

I believe in rehabilitative justice. Not the kind of rehabilitative justice that allows Karla Homolka to walk out of prison with a free university education, but the kind that would prepare prisoners for release and put them on a program to literally pay back their debt to society by working off some or all of the money spent on their imprisonment.

So, I disagree with Harper’s view that harsher penalities will deter crime. This is often used to advocate the death sentence, and as we can see with the United States, it simply doesn’t work that way. Violent criminals either act on compulsion, so they don’t think about the sentences, or they act with deliberation to avoid being caught, in which case they can obviously rationalize their need to be violent is greater than the risk of whatever punishment could be brought upon them.

But this is not new. I’ve always disagreed with views like this and I expected it to come up this election. Harsher penalties for violent crimes is always a hot button election issue. What I didn’t expect was amending the part of the YCJA that protects the identities of minor offenders.

I’m sorry, but if you are tried as a minor and sentenced as a minor, shouldn’t you be protected as a minor? If the crime is serious enough that you are tried as an adult and found guilty, then treat them like an adult and expose their name. But we can’t give judges the right to expose minors who are tried and sentenced as minors, no matter what the crime, especially for offenders as young as 14.

“In this new legislation, the main purpose will be not only to rehabilitate young offenders, but also to protect society, and the primary goal of sentencing will be to deter others from violating the law,” Harper said at an event.

Protecting the name and record of young offenders is a part of rehabilitation. It allows those who are successfully rehabilitated (and, like everything else, it is easiest to do this at a young age) to move on with their lives.  This proposal appears to include no other amendments that actually concern rehabilitation of young offenders.  I find that incredibly concerning.

As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, electoral reform is the most pressing issue facing the electorate – both those who still vote and those who have given up and no longer do.

Yet nowhere in the Liberal Party’s 66-page plan is there mention of electoral reform or proportional representation.*

How could a party claiming to care about making this country a “fairer Canada,” about “enabl[ing] every Canadian to realize their full potential” omit electoral reform?

How can they not see that a disenfranchised electorate means more and more citizens becoming disillusioned about and disengaged from their political institutions?

Under an eroding democracy, only the few can realize their potential – the corporate backers and moneyed lobbyists who stand closest to and pull the strings of those (seen to be) in power.

The voices of the many, the majority who vote other than for the party which forms government, are left out.

If we had proportional representation, then all votes would matter in this federal election. And if they did, then likely more people would return to the voting booth, more would become re-engaged not just federally, but locally and provincially.

Because then, we’d see that our opinion and voices do count.Instead, with our first-past-the-post system, there is a chance that Canadians will get the “majority” Stephen Harper has been threatening, and on the basis of less than 38% of the popular vote – not 50% + 1, as a true majority would warrant.

(more…)

Not bad for a guy who claims he could never tell a lie:

In a further attempt to recast the Liberal Leader, a second advertisement was released simultaneously, this one championing Mr. Dion’s fight to extend the Kyoto Accord in 2005 when he was environment minister. “This is Liberal leadership” and “Dion wouldn’t give up” are the two brand messages that viewers are meant to absorb. That commercial was scheduled to air on last night’s Emmy Awards.

Anyone who has followed Canadian politics for a number of years knows that this is a blatant lie. Dion, who always claims he is incapable of lying, has demonstrated with this ad that he can dish up some of the biggest lies imaginable.

Dion, when he was minister of the environment in a previous Liberal cabinet, didn’t care about the Kyoto Agreement or the environment. In fact, when he and his ilk were in power greenhouse-gas emissions went through the roof in Canada – while “evil” America substantially reduced its emissions. It is only now that emissions are finally coming down in this country – after a non-Liberal government was installed in Ottawa.

The ad, which mentions “Liberal leadership” on Kyoto and the environment, referring to Dion’s time as environment minister, is one big lie from beginning to end (emphasis added):

Dion Says Targets Can’t Be Met: Stephane Dion has conceded that a future Liberal government would be unable to meet its Kyoto commitment of reducing greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels. (National Post, July 1, 2006)

[...] As senior Liberal advisor Eddie Goldenberg admitted, the Liberals had no plan and weren’t ready to take any action on Kyoto: “Nor was the government itself even ready at the time with what had to be done. The Kyoto targets were extremely ambitious and it was very possible that short-term deadlines would at the end of the day have to be extended.” (Globe and Mail, February 23, 2007)

[...] In fact, Dion’s former cabinet colleagues like David Anderson and Christine Stewart have made it clear that Dion was not a supporter of Kyoto at all!

How exactly is having “no plan”, as Goldenberg put it, proof of “leadership”?

His own former cabinet colleagues have admitted that Dion never cared about these issues. He only discovered them during his Liberal leadership race when he realized he could paint himself green and sell his (Marxist) ideology without Canadians catching on.

As one Canadian voter puts it:

[H]ow was it that Dion was environment minister opposed doing anything to live up to the Liberal Party’s commitment to Kyoto – privately at the cabinet table. But on the other hand, in public, named his dog Kyoto to “demonstrate his commitment to Kyoto”?

Dion is the biggest emitter of hot-air gases in Canada, and given his bald-face lie in his latest TV ad, it is clear that he cannot be trusted.

Liar, liar, pants on fire!

There was an interesting discussion on CBC’s Sunday Morning last weekend amongst pollsters and a marketing professor from the US about attack ads. Mainly the discussion was about how well these ads work and why they work. Little was said about their value as a way of informing voters about issues. Little was said about the bearing of the truth or falsity of these ads on voter understanding of the isues or the candidates for that matter.

There seemed to be a view that if they either supported your base or discredited your opponents they were fine. It was even argued that these ads were informative and needed to allow voters to make informed choices! But if these ads distort, lie, trade on prejudice and so on how can it be said they are useful in  political discourse? There is a law in economics called Gresham’s Law. The idea is that if bad coinage circulates good coinage is withheld. The bad coin drives out the good. Is this law at work in political discourse?

Like many other voters I am disgusted by political ads which take comments out of context so as to mislead the public/viewer about opponents. But these are politicians, who we know rank just above (or is it below) lawyers in terms of public respect. They are trying to shape voters perceptions and get votes, not be truthful.

Journalism on the other hand is supposed to be about investigating the facts and presenting both sides of a story. It is all about context and getting as close to the truth as possible. In something as important as an election, we need the media to cut through the political spin, otherwise they are just as guilty of manipulation as the politicians.Unfortunately, our Canadian media seems to be failing us in this regard.

The most obvious case of this lack of media scrutiny was the coverage of the statement from Lawrence Cannon’s aide to an Indian band leader.Taken out of context, telling the Indians ”… if you are sobre and behave…” is insulting. In the context of prior incidents in which the police were involved because protesters showed up drunk and made threats, it is perfectly understandable.

And don’t tell me they don’t have the time to do this. Just watch the news on BBC or PBS, or read the Economist. Important stories get the time they need, and are not compressed into 30 second sound bites.

Our democracy depends on a properly functioning media acting responsibly and objectively to hold politicians accountable. If the media wants to become a US style circus where biased coverage is the norm, we will all lose in the end.

So the Liberals who “slayed the deficit monster” in the 1990’s are now making a whole bunch of spending promises, apparently greater than those of any other party. Yet they accuse the Conservatives of having moved Canada into a deficit. So if we are in deficit now, where is the money going to come from for all this new spending? Do the Liberals stand for balanced budgets or not? Didn’t Paul Martin lose the last election (in part) by making all sorts of promises that people knew he could never keep? No wonder voters are supporting the Greens and NDP who are consistent in their policy and spending announcements.

La population du comté de Vaudreuil-Soulange (partie 1)

Je dois leur donner cela; le journal local anglophone Hudson Gazette, malgré une évidente position fédéraliste, offre une couverture intéressante des présentes élections. De plus, sa section Race’08 Notebook donne un aperçu rapide (mais un peu biaisé) de la course dans le comté de Vaudreuil-Soulange. C’est ainsi que nous apprenons que Paul Martin sera présent à Pointe-Des-Cascade avec la candidate Libérale Brigitte Legault vendredi soir prochain. Une simple contribution de 150$ vous permettra de voir Martin faire la première sortie de sa cachette, après le scandale que vous connaissez. Par ailleurs, monsieur « Art-Peur » lui-même sera présent dans le comté vendredi dans la journée (Soit Vaudreuil ou Île-Perrot).

Quand je vous disais que le comté représente un secteur important pour les chefs et personnes influentes des partis… Or, le présent papier (et peut-être les suivants) s’intéresse à la diversité que l’on retrouve dans mon comté. Pour l’instant, il est question des populations plus que fédéralistes de Hudson (>5000 pers, 66% angl.) et St-Lazare (> 17000 pers, 36% angl.). Par leur grande proportion d’anglophone, il est évident que ces comtés apposent grandement leur X pour la fédération. Il serait surprenant que Meili Faille y dépense beaucoup d’énergie… Par contre, monsieur Massenet du parti Vert y trouverait peut-être son compte chez les plus jeunes. Or, au contraire de St-Lazare qui est caractérisé par une population justement jeune (moyenne de 36 ans), Hudson est peuplée en majorité par des 50 ans et plus. Il ne serait pas faux de prétendre que le type de réflexion qui ressort de la majorité votante de ce patelin ressemble au brûlot que le journaliste Peter Ratcliffe a pondu il y a deux semaines (malheureusement plus disponible sur leur site web). Qu’a-t-il dit, ce monsieur Ratcliffe? En gros, il voue une haine sans borne contre le Bloc Québécois, quitte à dire des inepties, voire obscénités qui heurte l’intelligence des lecteurs mais qui rejoint probablement l’électorat vieillissant de ces deux municipalités.

(more…)

Jack Layton, leader of the New Democrats, was back in Gatineau over the weekend to support NDP candidate Françoise Boivin. He even did some door-to-door with her.

The NDP believes that two of the three ridings in Gatineau are within their reach: Gatineau itself and Hull-Aylmer. Pontiac remains a Conservative/Bloc battle.

The New Democrats aren’t wrong to think they have a chance, both the Liberals and the Bloc, the previous occupants of these seats, are polling weakly and the NDP is polling strongly. The NDP had over 8,000 votes in Hull-Aylmer last time around (their best performance in the province), and their polling increase could give them up to 14,000 votes in the riding – within range of Marcel Proulx. In Gatineau, the NDP result wasn’t as good with only 5,300 votes, but Boivin ran as a Liberal that time around and garnered almost 17,000 votes, about 4,000 behind Bloc MP Richard Nadeau. If Boivin can hold on to a portion of her former Liberal voters and benefit from the increase in popularity of the NDP, she could put some pressure on Nadeau. On the other hand, the vote split will probably just help the Bloc MP.

Aside from Outremont, where Thomas Mulcair holds the seat, the NDP considers the city of Gatineau as their next-best-chance for electing a Quebecois MP. The party straddles a good portion of the left-wing clientele of the Bloc and the Liberals, so it makes some sense.

But the Bloc Québécois is no paper tiger. The Bloc has a history in the Outaouais region with Nadeau and former victories in Pontiac, and they have a good base of supporters. Nadeau had more than 21,000 votes and Raphaël Déry in Hull-Aylmer has almost 16,000 supporters of the party in 2006 to draw from. If the NDP manages to claw its way to second or even first in either of these two ridings, they will do so with a vast majority coming from new voters. It isn’t easy to convince voters to switch allegiance, especially when that allegiance is owed to a party like the Bloc who has a lofty goal. Sovereigntists have a sense of duty towards the Bloc and the PQ, and they aren’t easily swayed. And, as always, support for parties like the NDP and Greens fritters away at the ballot box. People talk big when polled on the phone, but the NDP vote is one of the most fragile.

In the end, voters in the Outaouais will remember that the Bloc provides the best chance for strong opposition. Proulx has been a non-entity in the House of Commons, and the NDP is a third-tier party with marginal influence on government policy. Harper has no illusions of taking votes from the NDP. The Bloc, on the other hand, has a large influence on the Conservatives, who try to steal as many votes from them as possible. The Bloc will speak up for the interests of Gatineau more than the NDP ever could, because the NDP is dependent on voters in Toronto, Halifax, and British Columbia – not those on Boulevard Maloney. And, most of all, the Bloc frightens the other parties into action. If the Bloc managed to hold two seats in the Outaouais, within eyesight of Parliament Hill, it will reverberate louder than any little aberration represented by an NDP surprise.

Richard Nadeau has been a vocal spokesman for the Outaouais region, far more than a Lawrence Cannon or Marcel Proulx. And with Raphaël Déry at his side, Gatineau would have a stronger voice than it has had for years.

 Cross-posted on http://sovereigntyenanglais.blogspot.com

DemocraticSPACE’s Update #5 (20 Sept) shows the Conservatives losing a bit of ground, and now 11 seats short of a majority. DemocraticSPACE currently projects the Conservatives with 144 seats on 37.3% support, the Liberals well behind at 89 seats and 25.6%, the NDP at 32 seats and 17.8%, the Greens at 0 seats and 10.3%, and the Bloc at 41 seats and 8.0% (32.2% in Quebec). See http://democraticSPACE.com/canada2008 for complete details, including regional breakdowns and riding-by-riding projections.