Taking a wee break for a couple of days ... see you soon.

Canadians are an interesting bunch.  What has finally got us seriously riled – and I mean seriously: phone-ringing, letter-writing, tweet-zinging, blog-spitting riled – with the Harper government?  It’s not the G20 security measures or backdoor legislative trickery through bogus budget omnibus bills (though you’d be forgiven for thinking that either of these should ignite popular opposition).  No, what’s done the trick and made Canadians sit up and take notice is (wait for it) … the death of the mandatory long-form census

.

Can’t get much more Canadian than that!  Threaten our civil liberties and undermine our democratic institutions, but don’t mess with the census!  Even the statisticians, economists and think tanks of all political suasions are vocally miffed.  As the Ottawa Citizen put it, “When the number-crunchers get angry, governments should know it made a mistake.”

Curiously, it was only last year that Minister Finley, in a letter to the Senate, bragged about the value of Canada’s “household surveys”.  She called them a “central source of information” (see page 7).   It turns out that Ministers Flaherty and Clement agree.  The decision was Prime Minister Harper’s, and his alone.

Of course, killing the census is simply another example of Mr. Harper’s proclivity to refuse to engage in evidence-based policy-making, informed legislation or even ministerial input.  After all, who needs facts when you have ideology?  And who needs Ministers when you have autocracy?

Corporate Ethics International (CEI), a San Francisco organization, has launched a billboard campaign urging Americans not to travel to Alberta because of the oil sands.  Powerful imagery underscores a potent message:  "Alberta – the other oil disaster".  It's a clever ploy, I must admit.  So clever, that it's left me (almost) speechless.  How does one combat this kind of hyperbole?

The Calgary Herald tried rebutting the message this morning.  Unfortunately, it took the all too predictable path of hurling insults back at CEI, listing numerous environmental probems endured by long-suffering Californians.  No doubt the Herald has its facts right, but its perorations give little more than a momentary satisfaction, like a child having a temper tantrum. Somehow we have to get past serial name-calling incidents.

At the core of CEI's message is an honest belief that the world must wean itself from a deep socio-economic dependence on oil.   I don't disagree with that aspiration.  But CEI seems to think we can achieve it overnight, and that is quite simply impossible to do without serious disruption to our quality of life.  It's high time we had a frank and open public discourse so everyone can fully understand what it will take to make the transition.  Only once we're all on the same page will we be able to make true progress.

Ned Franks said it again this morning:  “Omnibus bills subvert Canada’s legislative process.”  The latest such monstrosity, Bill C-9, earned a record of sorts.  At 2,208 clauses, with 883 pages, and covering 90 or so separate acts, it was longer that any of its predecessors.  Bigger, but not better.  Fully half of the government’s agenda is likely to be contained in this one bill – and all those provisions passed by in a blur because “Parliament cannot study them properly.” 

Mind you, that state of affairs appears to suit quite a few people in the current government.  The less dissent they encounter, the better they seem to like it.   Senator LeBreton (ON), for example, stopped reading her script Monday night long enough to take what she obviously felt was a serious jab at Liberal senators (scroll down to the 1900 mark).  “They do not support Michael Ignatieff. They are seriously questioning his leadership,” she taunted. “They would return the bill to the House of Commons and ask him to undo what he did.” 

Well, of course!  That’s what senators do,  ... we offer sober second thoughts.  At least, we all used to do that.  Goodness knows what the new senators will do if they’re being taught they have one option and one option only – obedience to the party leader.  Talk about a backbench mentality ...  one wonders how they could possibly tolerate such a diminished role.

3:00pm:  Closure Motion -- Senator Comeau moves the closure of debates and then sits down without saying another word!  I guess they really are averse to debate ....

So now Senator Cowan speaks.

3:23pm:  Senator Cowan (NS) is delivering a well-written speech.  Senator LeBreton (ON) is heckling as she reads along (at least I assume that's what she's reading).  So far, the main thrust of the speech is to point out flaws in the 4 parts of Bill C-9 that the National Finance committee deleted.
 

"Parliament has a duty to carefully scrutinize legislation"

3:33pm:  Senator Cowan thanks the Committee, mentioning both the chair and vice-chair by name in a nice non-partisan way.  We applauded ... well, some of us clapped.  Not one person on the Con side joined in.

3:41pm:  Senator Murray (ON) is now on his feet.  He says he's never in his long career seen the gov't introduce a motion without speaking. He then dryly comments "I can understand their embarrassment in this case", clearly tongue in cheek.

Now he's shining a light on how the gov't is using the budget secrecy convention to avoid consultation with Canadians.  That's an abuse of process of the highest order, he declaims.  We must stop it! If we don't, we're letting the gov't "make monkeys out of us" (more heckling from the Con benches once again)

3:56pm:  Senator Day (NB), chair of the committee, now gives us the background.  The Cons have, he tells us,  broken an agreement.  A month ago, everyone agreed they'd report back on July 9 (last Thursday).  They did that.  The deal was that we'd debate and be out after two days.  So why this draconian closure motion?

Still no-one from the Con benches gets up to speak.

4:00pm:  It was just my turn to speak.  I remarked how astonished I was over the governments manoeuvre of procedure to prevent debate and amendments on to the bill.  Shortly after an interview on the Rutherford show – incidentally  Rutherford was appalled that the government would suggest going to an election over the budget, so boring he said – I was emailed by a Canadian – Albertan,  who shared these comments with me:

Senator McCoy
 
I heard you on with Rutherford making the point that the electors were not being heard with regards to a current bill.  Actually, the voice of the people is ignored in practice as business as usual.  Maybe the Senate could be the agent of change to correct this deficiency in democratic practice that could impact politics for the better.
 
To continue with the same game plan and the same players and expect significant improvement for those who are affected is foolishness.  The first priority of a politician is to protect his/her career so the deck is stacked against the interests of the elector in favor of special interests that will serve priority one.  Since senators don't need to game the electorate nor do they need to do the bidding of special interests they are uniquely positioned to put ear to ground and listen to the folks.  We don't need two chambers in government tripping over each other while ignoring those who pay the bills. 

The childish antics regularly displayed in the House of Commons need not be repeated in the Senate.  Were the Senate to behave in a manner that would establish a reputation for inclusive and civil discourse it would earn respect and promote participation by the real stakeholders, the taxpayers.
 
Goodwill and service are sadly lacking as principles practiced in our current political system.  The Senate could be an effective agent for change were it to lead the way for citizen participation.
 
Being an Alberta senator and a woman you have a political heritage that has proven to be an effective agent for change so I encourage you to keep the drive alive in the best of western tradition. 

I hope that my colleagues, who will end up voting in favour of this motion, can sleep at night knowing they are letting down Canadians!

4:03pm:  Still no gov't contribution to the debate.

Senator Fraser (QC) speaks, and then Senator Tardif (AB). 

But no Cons -- not a word.

4:15pm:  Now Senator Baker (NL) gets to his feet. Once again he decries the gov'tal lack of respect for Parliament.  He also raises a point that the committee did not have time to consider in depth.

If Senator Day is right that further amendments will not be allowed during this debate, then Senator Baker will be snookered.  No wonder Senator Murray calls it (as I do as well) an abuse of process!

4:29pm:  Senator Mercer (NS) now rises ... a difficult thing for him to do because he got out of his sick bed to be here.  Again he cries foul -- "Parliament is being muzzled!"

And even now, the only thing we hear from the Cons is heckles.

4:46pm:  Senator Ringuette (NB) gives it a go ... she hopes the Con senators can live with themselves after this.  Next Senator Dyck (SK) berates them.  "It's a privilege to speak.  You dishonour Canadians by not explaining why you're doing this.". Senator Cools (ON) echoes her.

And then it's over.  The vote will be in an hour. 

6:00pm:  The vote on the motion was 48 in favour 42 against.  The motion passes and we now debate the budget at third reading for six hours or until there is no one left to speak.  Signing out for now!  
 

"An Iranian woman faces death after having been tortured for alleged adultery."  Her name is Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, and her plight has sparked an international campaign against barbaric treatment of women. 

You can add your voice to those of many others who are loudly protesting.  Sign an online petition here.

The Senate’s National Finance Committee split the government’s omnibus budget bill this morning.  Stripped from the bill were four parts:  Canada Post, the sale of AECL, retroactive tax provisions and the Canadian Environmental Assessment (CEA) Act.  The vote at committee was 6 to 6 – tied votes in the Senate are taken as a negative vote overall. Senator Murray (ON) took the lead, following through on his campaign to split the bill in order to allow Canadians more time to participate in the debate.

The Senate as a whole convenes this afternoon at 1:30 pm.  The government is expected to move for closure on debate, meaning we’ll come back next Monday to finalize proceedings on the omnibus bill.  I’ll keep you posted on how things go this afternoon.

UPDATE 3:30 pm:   The Senate will reconvene on Monday at 2 pm.  Two and a half hours have been set aside for debate on the government's closure motion,  If it passes, then debate on Bill C-9 will be cut off after six hours.  Final votes will be held either on Monday or Tuesday.

Conservative Senator Dick Neufeld (BC) startled a lot of people in the Red Chamber today when he declared against an elected Senate.  "The appointment process is quick and cheap," he said to thunderous applause from across the way.  "You can have regional representation and do all kinds of things." Despite heckling from the benches beside him, Senator Neufeld stuck to his theme.  "It is time time to quit kicking the Senate.  It is time to start talking about the good things we do."  As Senator Munson (NS) quipped at the end of the speech, "It was worth it to stay the summer!"

Dissension in the ranks?  No, said Senator Neufeld when I congratulated him after his speech.  "It's just that I have my own views."  Aha, independence of thought – exactly what we want in a chamber dedicated to sober second thought.  Well done, Senator – and welcome to Canada's best kept secret, our national Council of Elders.

Dr. Sylvia Earle is an oceanographer once dubbed "Her Deepness" by the New Yorker.  Yesterday, as I listened to her interview on BBC Radio 3's Night Waves, I could understand why.  Compassionate humour played right alongside intellectual rationality as she eulogized the great oceans and explained how they play such a critical role in the carbon cycles of our world.

If you can spare three quarters of an hour, do tune in to the interview.  If nothing else, skip through to about the 35 minute mark and listen to Dr. Earle's observations about the Gulf of Mexico disaster.  "It's all a big experiment," she says of the clean up efforts.  If she had her way, instead of putting a man on Mars, we'd be better off spending billions on underwater technology.  Considering that oceans are responsible for "one out of every five breaths we take", I believe her.

Todd Hirsch is an educated man.  His daytime job is senior economist at ATB Financial (formerly known as the Alberta Treasury Branch, our very own bank created in 1938 by William Aberhart to thwart the evil machinations of eastern Canadian financial institutions ).  So when Mr. Hirsch laments "no one’s telling the complete truth" about the oil sands, everyone should listen up.

That's the problem with spin-doctoring.  As he says, "Both [environmentalists and industry] are busy 'educating the public' on what they want us to believe. Yet sadly, we’re left not knowing what to believe at all."  Unfortunately, the same may be said about government efforts to sell the sands.  It's unlikely, for example, that the Alberta Premier's $55,000 open letter in the Washington Post is going to sway too many Americans.  

Obviously the main players need to improve their game.  What we need is an energy narrative that tells the whole story, and authentically presents thorny issues at the same time it praises the sweet smelling roses.  Likely that will require some kind of joint effort by ENGOs, industry and governments. The Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement presents a useful model.  Although it took two years to negotiate and was done without governmental participation, at least it shows what can be achieved when people get truly serious about forging a common future.

I‘m still in shock.  Like Alice Through the Looking Glass, my whole world has gone topsy turvy.  I used to be proud of our human rights record.  But after 1,000 G20 protestors, journalists and sometimes innocent bystanders were forcibly and summarily detained on the weekend, I’m still waiting for at least one major political leader to take a stand.  Instead, we hear from Iran! 

 
I grant you the police had a tough assignment, namely to ferret out violent protestors from Canadians ‘speaking the peace’. But letting black-clad ruffians run free right under their noses on one day, and deploying indiscriminate detention later that afternoon and all the next day is not good enough. “Kettling” – the now famous tactic used by G20 forces to corral crowds for hours with no avenue for escape – and imprisoning hundreds in makeshift cells is neither democratic nor an effective means to quash legitimate protest  (as subsequent demonstrations have proven). 

Now we hear that the police even went so far as to stretch the search and seizure rules. A new provincial regulation permitted indiscriminate searches, but only inside the security fence. The cops deliberately told everyone at the last minute that the new rule applied outside the fence as well.  Why were they allowed to misrepresent the facts?

I commend Police Chief Blair for undertaking an internal review of police action during the summit.  But it’s not enough.  Either the Premier or the Prime Minister should also call for a public inquiry.  We Canadians need to look ourselves in the mirror, and reclaim our proud record of human rights and civil liberties.

An~gel: an affluent individual who provides capital for a business start-up.  Unlike venture capitalists, angels typically invest their own money.  Often they get together in what they call Angel Venture Forums.  The Sophia Business Angels are one of Europe's most influential display of angels at work.

So where am I going with this?  Well, just 10 days ago, the Sophia Venture Academy voted a Calgary firm the "Most Investable Company" on offer.  Genesis Technical Systems Corp. took the prize for its Internet technology.  Something they call "DSL Rings" enables telephone companies to re-use copper wires to bring high-speed broadband service to rural and remote areas at a much reduced cost.

This is very good news, indeed.  Coincidentally, the Senate tabled its Digital Canada.ca report on virtually the same day that Genesis won its award.  It called for a massive investment in rural and remote Internet access.  Now we have a home-grown answer to their call, and a surprisingly inexpensive one.  What could be better?

UPDATE June 30, 2010:  Finland has made broadband Internet access a human right.  H/t @ryhicks for pointing us to this article which reports that every Finnish telecom "will be obliged to provide all residents with broadband lines that can run at a minimum 1Mbps speed"  as of July 1^st.  How's that for raising the bar?

The G20 communique reads like a style guide for political obfuscation.  Yes, everyone committed to halve deficits by 2013.  But so what?  We all know how this kind of mega-promise turns out to lack substance when the due date for performance rolls around. 

Furthermore, "[t]his is an easy task," according to the Economist. Even "America is on pace to cut its deficit in two by 2012, mostly thanks to recovery from recession."  Others, like Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman, believe it's the wrong task entirely.  "It is," he says, "the victory of an orthodoxy that has little to do with rational analysis, whose main tenet is that imposing suffering on other people is how you show leadership in tough times."

The real kicker is paragraph 14.  After all the confusing (and contradictory) rhetoric about increasing jobs and decreasing spending, the communique finally acknowledges that "these measures will need to be implemented at the national level and will need to be tailored to individual country circumstances."  Right.  Already the G20 countries are orchestrating their multiple escape hatches.  Style over substance, indeed.

For the past two years, Alberta's major emitters have been required to meet greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets mandated by the Alberta government.  Companies exceeding their target are deemed in compliance if they pay $15 per tonne of excess CO₂ into the Climate Change and Emissions Management (CCEM) Fund.  The accumulated funds are then given to an entity called the CCEM Corporation (CCEMCo) for redeployment.

According to CCEMCo's business plan (which expired on May 31, 2010), the corporation expected to receive $120 million in its first full year of operations.  It also warned that it would not be allocating any project funds that year, but would spend about $5 million in start-up costs.

So it was good to hear, this week and last, that CCEMCo had finally issued its first grant awards.  A total of $43.2 million was dedicated to 11 energy efficiency and renewable energy projects.  Grant recipients include Suncor ($790,000 to develop a roadmap for reducing oil sands GHGs) and ENMAX, an electric utility owned by the City of Calgary ($14.5 million to "deliver 9,000 turnkey home generation solutions to residential customers").   CCEMCo also issued another $40 million call for proposals, focusing this time on "industrial production and processing" projects.

In many ways, the whole CCEM scheme resembles a pilot project for what might be expected under an industrial carbon tax regime.  Monies are collected, and then recycled back into targeted initiatives, many of which are sponsored by the same corporations that pay the tax.  It should come as no surprise that Rick George, Suncor's CEO, is now publicly endorsing a carbon tax. 

No, the image to the left is not Justin Trudeau on a bad hair day.  It's the front page of what Senator Dennis Dawson (QC) dubbed the Senate's first ever web-based report.  Released last week to generally affirmative reviews, Digital Canada.ca calls upon the government to devise a strategy for an "inclusive digital society". 

The committee declared that Canada needs to ensure universal access, which they defined to mean access by 100% of our citizens.  To help achieve this ambitious goal, the government is urged to dedicate proceeds from spectrum auctions to fund high-speed Internet access in all rural and remote areas.  

Ultimately, the committee wants to see government totally open to citizen access via Internet.  That's a tall order, no doubt, given the current state of digitalization within our bureaucracy, not to mention the current mentality of the bosses.  Estonia has done it, but then they started from ground zero after the Russians left.  Latin American countries are also well on the path to delivering open government, but again they enjoy the "advantage" of not having to dismantle too much in the way of functioning systems.   Still, we need to get started.  As Estonian officials told the committee, we don't need to completely replace our current system in one fell swoop.  Instead, we can initiate a series of project based developments.  Putting all the stimulus spending data online would be a good place to start, for example.  Just a thought ….

Richard Fadden, the great CSIS spymeister, has told Peter Mansbridge that he's worried.  Apparently, "some political figures … have developed quite an attachment to foreign countries." How, precisely?  As far as I can tell, it's because they've visited said countries several times and their activity has given rise to speculation about "economic espionage", a pernicious evil that's keeping him awake at nights.

Good grief.  Could someone please explain that Canada needs to promote healthy economic relationships with trading partners all around the globe?  That you don't do that by sitting in a bunker lulled into a sense of pseudo-reality beside some kind of fake lake?  

Perhaps we should just send him a copy of Open Canada: A Global Positioning Strategy for a Networked Age.  It's a call to action published by the Canadian International Council, a think tank endowed by James Balsillie of blackerry fame.  "There is no limit to the connections Canada can have," say the GPS panelists.  They revel in the prospect of nurturing a profusion of productive relationships, citing our diverse cultural tapesty as one of Canada's greatest strengths. 

Please, Mr. Fadden, reach beyond the politics of fear.  We don't need posturing in the wake of the Major report, or the spending of $1 billion for a mere seven days of security at the G8 / G20 meetings.  And we are certainly not filming a James Bond movie.

UPDATE July 3, 2010: Senator Colin Kenny (ON), former chair of our National Security and Defence Committee, today entered the debate with a different view.  Food for thought ….

No wonder six federal ministers fanned out across Canada last month to announce a mere $20 million a year funding for new air cargo screening procedures.  They must have known Jack Major would soon be condemning current practices, not to mention decades of neglect regarding aviation security programs.

In a nutshell, Mr. Major adopted our Senate National Security Committee's description of the current status of aviation security.   It's like "a house in which '…the front door…[is] fairly well secured, with the side and back doors wide open'," he says, quoting the senators' pithy analysis (see page 177, Volume 1).  While passengers are subjected to excruciating scrutiny, the non-public areas at all airports are left virtually unprotected.  Anything could happen, and who would know until it's too late?

Not to worry.  John Baird's junior minister, Rob Merrifield, has gone into full flight on the damage control front.  Just three days before Mr. Major released his 3,926 page report, Mr. Merrifield launched a full-fledged review of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority (CATSA).  He will also "encourage suggestions or comments on areas of possible improvements relating to ... Canada's aviation security system."  Pardon me?  Surely Mr. Major has given us enough to be getting on with – namely 29 detailed recommendations covering 15 pages of Volume 4 of his report.  Come on, Mr. Baird, enough already.  As Nike would say, "Just do it!"

Senator Lowell Murray (ON), our longest serving senator, is leading the charge against Mr. Harper's latest omnibus bill.  He vigourously objects to the burgeoning practice of stuffing a budget bill with non-fiscal statutes in order to avoid parliamentary review.  Last Saturday on The House (about 4/5 of the way through the broadcast), he explicitly pointed his finger at opposition parties in the House of Commons calling their failure to split Bill C-9 an "abdication" of responsibility. 

His campaign for senators to take up the slack and do our parliamentary duty the way we're meant to do may in fact be gaining momentum.  Certainly I support him, and I've had brief conversations with one or two others who seem to be leaning in that direction as well.  Senator Pierrette Ringuette (NB) is also on record lending her vociferous support.  Let's hope we can muster the numbers when the bill finally reaches the Senate.  As the Star said this morning, it "would be a fitting riposte to a Prime Minister who flouts democratic tradition."