"If there was ever a Northern Alberta budget, this is it." Rona Ambrose

Symbolically, Parliament has already moved to Suncor's plant
 in Fort McMurray.

"The West wants in"! Substitute "West" by "Conservative Alberta" and this budget illustrates just how far "in" they are and how they've thrown everyone else out.

As Rona Ambrose expresses quite clearly, there is very little relief for much of the country but the region that is benefiting from the resource boom the most is being handed a sugary sweet budget. Alison at Creekside breaks it down for us:

The budget features "streamlining" environmental review processes, plus gives $8 million to the Canadian Revenue Agency to target registered charities that are "too overtly political", translation : "opposition from environmental groups to the massive Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline." New RevCan money will investigate "the extent to which these are funded by foreign sources."

But foreign tarsands-to-tanker funding from China is still a-ok, even at the cost of Canadian jobs...  

PetroChina bids to help build $5.5-billion Northern Gateway pipeline 

In Conservative Canada, we can't have environmental groups express dissent towards the Harper Government's policies, can we? But is that as far as we can go to push the tar sands on a reluctant public? How about we put restriction on the time it takes to review industrial projects? That's now part of the budget too!

What does the rest of Canada get?

British Columbia gets the middle finger as the Enbridge pipeline is pushed through before the population can vote-in an NDP government to boot-out Christie Clark.

Ontario gets a huge wave of public sector layoffs.

Quebec, in which Radio-Canada (CBC) is a highly valued commodity where its news division has maintained high standards as well as focus on international news and investigative reporting, the 10% budget slash will hurt a great deal.

Oh, and everyone in my generation gets to work 2 more years before retirement which every analysis says was unnecessary...

Of course, a great many pundits in the conservative media love the budget. No strategy to boost the manufacturing base, no strategy for value-added industries for our natural resources and a step in the wrong direction for sustainable development.

In Conservative Canada, the punditry nods favourably as the government devotes the bulk of its budget initiatives to blatantly reward conservative Albertans (certainly not the progressive ones) while the NDP is criticized for sending out regional press releases about the same budget to its constituency despite them being nearly identical in content.

Time To Rally Behind Thomas Mulcair And His Beard Of Courage

The New Democrats have a new leader. (h/t Jamie Masse)

The future of social democrats has been chosen and it is a bearded one!

Thomas Mulcair will lead the NDP as head of the Loyal Opposition.

Despite some skepticism by New Democrats, I suspect the Outremont MP will win them over when he leads a smart, disciplined and passionate Opposition to the Harper Government.

From his beginnings as President of l'Office des professions du Québec to today, it is unquestionable that Mulcair functions best when he's tasked with denouncing incompetence and abuse of power.

The current Conservative Party of Canada's agenda should be comfortably within his wheelhouse.

For all the doubts on his position on marijuana, it is almost identical to that of Jack Layton.

For all the doubts on his position on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it is almost identical to that of Jack Layton.

Follow Jack Layton’s policy of working with partners for peace and justice in Israel and Palestine, within a framework of respect for international law and UN resolutions including recognition of the right of both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace as independent states within negotiated and agreed-upon borders

There is no break with tradition and I think the most revealing aspect of his approach to leadership was when Peter Mansbridge read out the talking points that the Conservative Party of Canada had about him. He dismissed them ably and when asked whether he would take out advertisement to counter them, he said he wasn't initially inclined to do so but he'd discuss it with his caucus and the NDP strategists if this was a necessity.

It wasn't about him and he'd much rather put the spotlight on the many missteps by the Conservatives than make his leadership a personal pissing contest between him and Stephen Harper. However, if the Conservatives would be able to define him as they have previous Opposition Leaders, he would do what's necessary to bring back the focus on policy issues.

An even-handed and thoughtful approach.

I'm confident that Thomas Mulcair will win the confidence of all New Democrats with his leadership and hopeful he'll do likewise with the majority of Canadians come 2015.

Aveos: Denis Lebel More Or Less Says Chuck Strahl Lied To Parliament

Denis Lebel's formal salute to union workers involves another finger.

When Air Canada passed off its maintenance jobs to Aveos in 2011, there was a significant outcry about the move. Nobody at Air Canada wanted to go to Aveos which had financing issues as late as 2010. They were told to take the deal that would weaken their pension and benefits or risk layoffs. They took the deal reluctantly as they feared their jobs may be shipped to El Salvador.

In the 2010 recapitalization arrangement, Air Canada was still a minority owner of Aveos while its American creditors became its majority owners. Also, Air Canada outsourced 90% of maintenance jobs to the aircraft repair firm.

But we're supposed to believe that Aveos is not bound by the Air Canada Public Participation Act which stipulates that Air Canada must maintain aircraft heavy maintenance facilities or have such work performed at facilities in Winnipeg, Mississauga and Montreal.

In 2011, Aveos spokesman Michael Kuhn said that fears that jobs were in jeopardy was unfounded. Air Canada spokesman Peter Fitzpatrick agreed with the assessment.

The workers were doubtful but lo and behold, then-Transport Minister Chuck Strahl stood in front of parliament and reassured everyone when the NDP questioned the move:

Mr. Speaker, of course Air Canada continues to maintain its overhaul centres in Montreal, Winnipeg and elsewhere, as it is required to under the legislation. What is more, not only before the standing committee but in response to enquiries from my office, it has assured us that there will be no job losses. It will be expected to uphold the letter of the law and the spirit of the law and it has promised that it is going to do exactly that. -Chuck Strahl (March 2nd, 2011)

NDP leadership candidate Thomas Mulcair wasn't reassured and pressed the issue only to be replied by the same Chuck Strahl:

Mr. Speaker, I explain it like this. There will not be any job losses. Air Canada has said that it is going to maintain the overhaul centres in Winnipeg, Mississauga and in Montreal. It has to do so by legislation. It has promised both before the standing committee of the House and to me in my office that there will not be job losses. No job losses is a good thing.

The nice thing about it is that this government in this economy has created 460,000 new jobs since the lowest part of the recession. No thanks to the NDP, but those jobs are secure both at Air Canada and elsewhere. -Chuck Strahl (March 2nd, 2011) 

No job losses, you say? Maintain its centres in Winnipeg, Mississauga and Montreal, you say? Promise this a third time and it's downright biblical, no?

Employees would be given an option of transition to Aveos or remaining with Air Canada; either one. Further discussions would be required with the union, but the employees from Air Canada that elect to transition will receive the same salary, vacation benefits, pension and seniority benefits that they currently are entitled to. Once more, it promises that there will be no job losses.

I wish I could say this in both official languages, but the facts will not change. There are no job losses. -Chuck Strahl (March 2nd, 2011)

Chuck Strahl said it in front of everyone in the House of Commons: if those overhaul centres are not maintained, Air Canada is contravening the law.

That was a year ago. What does current Transport Minister Denis Lebel have to say about it?

There is no one that says they have broken the law. -Denis Lebel (March 21st, 2012)

The provincial governments of Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba are going to form ranks and do everything they can to stop the closures. So yeah, Mr. Lebel, pretty much everyone says they broke the law.

The 3,000 skilled workers across the country got a message today: the Conservative Party of Canada doesn't keep its promises and doesn't care if you lose your jobs.

Not much is being asked here from the Conservatives: back up your promises and enforce the law.

Julian Fantino Hates Canada According To Julian Fantino

Julian Fantino of February 13th, 2012 hates Julian Fantino of March 13th, 2012

Julian Fantino has been unequivocal: anyone that questions the purchase of the F-35 fighter jets hates Canada.

Let's sample some of his statements praising the F-35s, shall we?

The Government of Canada determined that the F-35 is the best and only aircraft that meets the needs of Canada's armed forces. (October 31st, 2011)

If the opposition had its way, it would cancel the equipment our air force needs and would put some 80,000 Canadians out of work. (November 15th, 2011) 

F-35s are coming off the production line. Pilots are flying the jets. Sixty-five Canadian industries are benefiting from the program. Jobs are being created. (November 15th, 2011)

The member opposite is engaging in fearmongering about the importance of the F-35 program, a program that is critical to managing Canada's sovereignty, supporting our military men and women and creating aerospace jobs for Canadians, in spite of the chirping from across the aisle. (November 23rd, 2011)

That's quite a sales pitch, Julian Fantino of late 2011! But let me ask you this: are we committed to buying these planes?

There is no intent to pull the plug on an asset that is so critical to Canadian sovereignty (October 28th, 2011)

Do you mean it?

The F-35 program is progressing well and on track. (November 3rd, 2011)

But do you really mean it?

Our program is on track and on time, and we are staying with it. (November 16th, 2011) 

Really really mean it? Or just really mean it?

Our plan is on track. (November 17th, 2011)

Is that a guarantee?

 I can guarantee that the plan is on track. (November 17th, 2011) 

Well thank you for clearing that up, Julian Fantino. Your ability to lay out the clear advantages of the fighter jet as well as easing our fears over cost overruns and technical malfunctions has been a positive force for stability regarding this tumultuous and conflicting issue.

So what say you on those that would question the purchase of these F-35s?

If our opposition members had their way, they would cancel the equipment our air force agrees is the best it needs to do its job in safety and to key effect. (November 16th, 2011)

Risking the safety of our armed forces? That is pretty cold.

The program is on track creating jobs right across the country, in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. Why does the member opposite (Matthew Kellway of the NDP) want to kill Canadian jobs? (December 12th, 2011)

Questioning the F-35 purchases is going to kill jobs, huh? What do you say to that Matthew Kellway that keeps asking you to develop a Plan B in case the F-35s prove too costly and keep malfunctioning?

Were it left to the NDP, we would have no assets in our military at all. (January 31st, 2012)

So questioning the viability of the F-35s is tantamount to stripping Canada's military of its assets? Sounds legit.

So to sum up: this is the best dang aircraft ever built. It will create 80,000 jobs. The F-35 is being rolled out of production lines and pilots are flying them. It's a program that is critical to Canada's sovereignty, our military and the aerospace industry. Whatever you may have heard about its troubles, the aircraft is guaranteed to be on track to being delivered to our military within its budget. And anyone that questions these facts risks the safety of our military, threatens to take away 80,000 jobs and wants to strip away all of the military's assets.

So imagine my surprise when one Julian Fantino said this: "We have not as yet discounted, the possibility of course, of backing out of any of the program"

I'm sorry, what?

"The decision, the determinate decision, has not as yet been made as to whether or not we are going to actually purchase, buy, acquire, the F-35" said Fantino of early 2012.

So let it be said that Julian Fantino hates Canada as determined by the standards established by Julian Fantino himself.

Harper-Fueled Parti Québécois In Majority Territory

Ideas that won't die: are you ready for a third referendum?

Stephen Harper is Pauline Marois's greatest political ally.

How else do you explain the Parti Québécois's rise from political grave? After the Quebec amphitheatre debacle, the caucus departures and the old leaders chiming in, calling for Pauline Marois to quit, the party now stands atop the polls.

So what happened? The Conservative agenda of Stephen Harper.

You might say that this is a rather simplified outlook to the complex political landscape of Quebec politics. Stephen Harper couldn't have single-handedly turned Pauline Marois's fortune around, could he?

Well, besides François Legault appearing very much like a political neophyte at the press conference launch of his party, the PQ didn't actually do anything. Oh, Pauline did write a strongly worded letter to the Prime Minister in order to meet with him regarding the gun registry.

Stephen turned Pauline down.

But Ms. Marois has been banging the anti-Harper drum for a few months now saying that the provincial Liberals haven't stood up to the Prime Minister. Well, considering the Conservatives don't listen to any of the Opposition parties, have imposed health care funding on all provinces without any discussions and labelled opponents of the tar sands as radicals and enemies of the state, there isn't any way one can stand-up politically to Harper Government that, so far, has yielded positive results.

It's worth mentioning that it was Quebec Justice Minister Jean-Marc Fournier that issued the most passionate plea to amend the C-10 omnibus crime bill and Jean Charest himself has been both dismayed and critical of the Harper government by declaring that politics in a democracy is more than just saying "I won. You lost. I get to do what I want."

Nevertheless, the PQ has been suggesting that the current balance of power between the Ottawa and Quebec City is slanted against Quebecers. Since no rational human being in the province of Quebec actually likes the Conservatives, the strategy is working like a charm.

In fact, the spokesperson of the PQ, Bernard Drainville, wrote a rather fiery letter to Quebec City newspaper Le Soleil entitled "Le Plan C". The title itself refers to the Chrétien Liberals "Plan B" that formulated ways to insure that Quebec would never seek out a third referendum (pro-Canada advertising in Quebec that didn't turn out so well as well as the Clarity Act among other things).

To boil it down, he points to five areas where the Harper Government has weakened Quebec:

• Political weakening: He points to the fact that Quebec has gone from 24% to 23% of seats in the House of Commons. It's his weakest point and hence why he puts it first and with hardly any details. He doesn't point to Quebec's demographic decline but then, his aim is not to give a balance perspective of the issue now is it?
• Fiscal weakening: The Health Transfer Payments that Ottawa has imposed on the provinces unilaterally with complete disregard for the age of each province's population which will cripple Quebec. The overwhelming response from non-subjugated (non-conservative) provinces is that the lack of flexibility will be bad news for the provinces especially for those with aging demographics.
• Economic weakening: He points to the $10 billion stimulus of Ontario's auto industry as well as the considerable sums to host the G8/G20 Summit. He notes that oil and gas producing province benefits from fiscal advantages compounded with the exit from the Kyoto Accord. Finally, there's the naval shipbuilding plan that saw the Davie Shipbuilding ignored in favour of BC and Newfoundland. Besides wanting a bit more stimulus money, the G8/G20 slush funds (gazebos!) came with some crazy police brutality (officer Bubbles!). As for the Davie Shipbuilding not getting one of the two contracts, I think that there's little doubt that their bid was by far the least competitive. It was fair and, in this case, out of the hands of the Conservatives as they had to influence in the decision on how to award the two contracts. The tax breaks that oil and gas companies do get, however, is a valid point.
• Judicial weakening: The C-10 Omnibus Crime Bill! Yeah, it's pretty terrible... can't disagree with him there.
• Social identity weakening: Unilingual Supreme Court judges and Auditor General is a sore spot for Drainville. Massive investments in the military, the rehabilitation of the image of the monarchy and the celebration of the War of 1812 (A conflict between the British and the Americans). This has been the hallmark of the PQ pitch. You're not represented here and it's gotten to the point where the values aren't just foreign but run counter to your beliefs and identity. They hammer the point home every chance they get but its overuse, as in the time where Gilles Duceppe deplored the fact that the NDP's whip is unilingual Chris Charlton. Really? You're upset that the whip of the party is an Anglophone? While Duceppe's criticism falls flat, the issues listed by Drainville has some resonance with voters.

He finishes by outlining how provincial federalists can stomp their feet and scream bloody murder all they want but the only effective way to counter an oppressive federal government like the Conservative is to outright take the power out of their hands through Quebec sovereignty.

The poor-handling of health transfers, the disastrous omnibus crime bill and the "royalisation" of Canada is out of step with Quebecers.

Right now, that message is gaining support and this was entirely predictable.

Congratulations Mr. Harper for bringing about the Zombie Apocalypse of dead ideas.

It's Time To Out-Troll Dean Del Mastro

Harper Government Super Troll

I give credit where credit is due: Dean Del Mastro is one hell of a troll.

During Question Period on March 6th, 2012, he's repeated a version of this statement 8 times:

The opposition paid millions of dollars to make hundreds of thousands of phone calls. Before continuing these baseless smears, those members should prove their own callers are not in fact behind these allegations.

It is mind-numbing to think that this man receives a six figure salary.

And regardless of the arguments put forth in front of him by the Loyal Opposition, he sticks to the script like the dedicated troll he truly is.

But, as Michael Den Tandt indicates, trolling IS the Tory strategy.

And so, my small but dedicated readership (and those of you that googled 'Krista Erickson naked pictures' only to find this blog so woefully inadequate to your desires), I ask that you treat a troll with all the respect he deserves: by making him a meme.

Dean Del Mastro deserves no less.

You can follow this link here and create your own caption. If you're a more creative type, you can seek out your own pictures of Dean as well. Although the one I have as template is a good one but there are others that are equally hilarious. (Quick technical note: If you use 'baseless smears' as your caption, you have to use multiple spaces between the words or else they'll look jumbled together.)

Whenever you have no good argument to use as a rebuttal, break out the Dean Del Mastro "Baseless Smears!" meme.

Now you might be thinking what's the value of turning Dean Del Mastro into a meme besides embarrassing a man that desperately needs to be embarrassed?

There are two objectives: the first is to counter the goal of the Tories of boring the Canadian public into apathy and the second is to make everyone aware that this isn't going away.

And if you do create your very own Dean Del Mastro Meme, please feel free to link it in the comments. The winner becomes my new BFF for 1 week.

Environment Canada Lends A High Ranking Bureaucrat To The Oil Companies For One Year

As a concession to having its environmental policies dictated to
by the oil companies, Environment Canada's logo remained larger.

Imagine if Peter Kent assigned a high ranking bureaucrat of Environment Canada to work with an alliance of environmental groups that would come up with environmental research and policies which would then be implemented on tar sands projects.

What would be the reaction? Environmentalists would be dancing in the streets.

The oil industry? Not so much.

The oil industry would denounce the move as the government putting the interests of environmentalists ahead of the economic well-being of Canadians. It would argue that the government should play a neutral role in weighing the proper balance between environmental stewardship and economic development.

But in Conservative Canada, the oil industry sets the environmental norms and the government facilitates it.

The news of the creation of the Canadian Oil Sands Innovation Alliance that will form a "collaborative hub" to share information and help advance research and technology to improve environmental practices sounds like great news on the surface. A so-called transparent commitment to deliver "best practices" to cleaning up the tailing ponds, reducing greenhouse gases and dealing with land and water issues by working with smaller firms, universities and the government.

Dan Wicklum, a high ranking bureaucrat for Environment Canada, will be the chairman of the Canadian Oil Sands Innonvation Alliance (COSIA) in one year assignment after which he'll return to Environment Canada. But as the Calgary Herald notes, he will be "answering to the companies who have placed him in charge."

As anyone who has ever worked in a large corporation will tell you, whenever the corporate headquarters asks that employees give suggestions on how to improve the "workplace environment" (AKA productivity), the detailed suggestion you enthusiastically put forward will be met with the response of "it's not economically feasible to do that."

Make no mistake, the oil industry has no intention of overhauling its practices. If some small firm or university scientist finds a cheap and cost-effective way to reduce pollution that would save them money from what they're currently doing, they'll do it. But "best practices" are those that are not going to chip away at their bottom line.

And what of the conflict of interest for Dan Wicklum? Will the projects that he's worked on during his time as chairman be scrutinized closely by others at Environment Canada or will they just be rubber stamped? The access he will provide in terms of contacts within the public service will give a strategic advantage over the environmental groups that may oppose these plans.

When Environment Canada is cutting its staff of 700 meteorologists, chemists, biologists and other scientists, can it really afford to send another to be subordinate to the oil companies?

We all know that the Harper government is little more than a tar sands lobby on trade missions.

Creating a revolving door between industry and government is just further evidence that the line has been blurred between the tar sands industry and the Canadian government.

Alongside RoboCon Comes "In And Out Part Deux"

RoboCon-zilla vs King In-And-Out in Ottawa: whoever wins, we lose.

Just when you thought the 2011 Canadian election couldn't be more fraudulent, the Conservatives have served up an old favourite from the year 2006: the In and Out Scandal Part Deux (Quebec edition)!

Quick refresher: in the 2006 election, the Conservatives had reached their $18.3 million advertising limit at the national level so they transferred $1.3 million to 67 riding offices across the country that hadn't reached their $80,000 limit. Those riding offices then returned the money to the national campaign office to purchase "advertising" that differed from the national campaign insofar as there was a small print at the end of the TV ad saying "paid for by...".

Think of it as political money laundering.

The result? The Conservative Party of Canada copped a plea deal and was fined $52K and the party's spokesman Fred DeLorey called it "a big victory" in an "administrative dispute".

This is what passes for contrition in the Conservative Party of Canada.

Now while this was playing itself out between the lawyers, the May 2nd, 2011 election was upon us. Most reasonable people would think that they would have avoided fraudulent election practices with the added scrutiny upon them. Most reasonable people would think that a party that rode the coattails of Adscam to power would know better than playing fast and loose with political money.

Most reasonable people, however, are not in the Conservative Party of Canada.

So Robocon took place and we know that thousands of phone calls took place during the election to mislead Canadians to the wrong polling locations. Shady practices at Conservative advertising firm "Responsive Marketing Group" (RMG) in its call centres have surfaced. And of course there's harassment of callers that try to pass themselves off as Liberal campaigners.

Now Le Devoir reports that several Conservative Party ridings in Quebec were given money from the party and then were asked to use that money to pay for RMG bills of $15,000.01.

Conservative candidate Bertin Denis of the riding Rimouski-Neigette-Témiscouata-Les Basques (catchy!) said "We had nothing to say about [RMG's] operations. They did not call us and they made no calls. I was not part of the survey, I was not consulted." Reporter Hélène Buzzetti then asked Denis's spokesman Ghislain Pelletier if the local riding received the results of the calls made by RMG? "Absolutely nothing, madam. If I were in a private company, I would have asked for a report."

Carol Néron, candidate for Chicoutimi Le-Fjord, explained that for the $15,000.01 bill, he only received polling results. 

In both the cases of Néron and Denis, the RMG expenditure was the largest for their respective campaigns. One claims he didn't get anything in return and the other only got polling results. (Sidenote: if a future Conservative candidate in Chicoutimi wants polling information for their election bid, send me a $15K cheque and I'll gladly tell you that you've got no hope in hell of winning.)

So the question is obvious: for whom did the RMG work for? The individual ridings or the national Conservative Party?

If it's the former, RMG is giving crappy service. If it's the latter, the Conservatives have some more explaining to do...

EDIT NOTE: After I posted my blog post comes news that Denis Bertin recanted his whole story. "RMG identified voters in my constituency." His press release comes after he met with Le Devoir and spoke on CBC radio and repeated his accusations. There are no details on the work that RMG did for his riding that, until this became public, was a big mystery to the candidate. If your campaign pays up to $15K to RMG and you can't figure out what they did for the riding until it makes headlines, then something is wrong here.