Exit Stage Left Rothstein

New Marshall In Town Says Judges Must Focus On Applying Law, Not Making It

Jim Brown, Canadian Press
Published: Monday, February 27, 2006

OTTAWA (CP) - Judges should stick to the law and leave social agendas to elected politicians, says the man nominated by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to be the newest member of the Supreme Court of Canada.

Marshall Rothstein, the first high court candidate in history to face questions from a committee of MPs, tempered his remarks Monday by observing that legislation must always be measured against the Charter of Rights. But the overall tenor of his comments will likely ease concerns by some - especially Conservatives - about so-called judicial activism.

"I'm not sure that I would be comfortable thinking that judges should be advancing the law with a social agenda in mind," said Rothstein.

"It seems to me that the social agenda is the agenda for Parliament . . . . The court's job is really to take what you (MPs) say about social issues and try to interpret it as best we can and apply it to the facts."

Justice Minister Vic Toews, who chaired the committee, was pleased with that job description.

"I think one can say that Justice Rothstein understands very clearly what the role of a judge is," Toews observed after the hearing.

Liberal, NDP and Bloc Quebecois members, whether they agreed or not with Rothstein's judicial philosophy, all said he was obviously qualified for a seat on the high court.

The hearing was notable for its civility - a far cry from the circus atmosphere some had feared based on similar hearings in the United States.

Harper is expected to make Rothstein's appointment official on Wednesday.

The prime minister said last week he's been looking for judges who will "apply the law rather than making it" and who won't be overly "inventive" in their rulings.

Rothstein, a 14-year veteran of Federal Court, readily agreed when prodded on the subject Monday by Conservative MP Diane Ablonczy.

"If I've interpreted him correctly, I absolutely agree," he said of Harper's comments. "Those are all aspects of judicial temperament that I think are appropriate."

That doesn't mean laws should never be struck down for violating the Charter of Rights, he went on.

But judges must remember that "the statute they're dealing with was passed by a democratically elected legislature, that it's unlikely that the legislature intended to violate the Charter . . . and therefore they have to approach the matter with some restraint."

Real Menard, the Bloc justice critic, said it's obvious Rothstein is the very opposite of a judicial activist and that he's "uneasy with the idea of creating law."

Menard also expressed concern that the Winnipeg-born judge speaks no French and has no knowledge of Quebec civil law. But he welcomed Rothstein's promise to remedy both those problems as soon as possible.

Rothstein, 65, peppered his testimony with a series of folksy anecdotes, including a tale of a long-ago summer job on the CPR line between Vancouver and Winnipeg.
"I often say that I learned more about life working in the dining car than anywhere else,"he reminisced.

"Working for 36 to 48 hours at a stretch, in close quarters with nine or 10 other people, from different backgrounds, different education levels, different prejudices, is not always easy."

As a lawyer and judge in later life, he said, he's always looked for evidence of "hard physical work" when screening applications from potential law clerks.

Sue Barnes, the Liberal justice critic, called Rothstein "an excellent nominee" but was far less enthusiastic about the hearing process.

Nothing came to light that couldn't have been discovered by reading Rothstein's written judgments and law review articles, she said.

Joe Comartin, the NDP justice critic, said it was only Rothstein's "diplomatic" answers that prevented the hearing from degenerating into a political free-for-all.

The judge politely dodged a series of loaded questions about the federal gun registry, the controversial security certificates used to deport terrorist suspects from Canada, the nature and limits of free speech and the mechanics of federal-provincial relations.

His task was eased by the ground rules set out at the start of the hearing by Toews, who warned fellow MPs that Rothstein would have the final say on whether or not to answer any question.

"I think this is necessary, given the central, independent nature of the judiciary in this country and that we, as parliamentarians, must respect that independence," said the minister.

Constitutional expert Peter Hogg reinforced that message, counselling MPs to steer clear of hot-button issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage or the legalities of Quebec secession.

Nobody delved into those areas, but Menard did test the waters early by asking Rothstein what he thought about the contentious gun registry that the Tories have promised to abolish.

"I think it's really a political question, a question of policy," Rothstein calmly replied.

"I don't mind the question. It's just that you must understand, that's not my area, that's your area."

© The Canadian Press 2006

So What?

Did Trudeau not say that the government has no place to be in the bedrooms of the nation? Apparently those great words mean nothing, as this man was refused his chauffeur's permit because he was into BDSM... so what? It's not like he's going to go turn his vehicle into some kinky dungeon, dominating passengers with fuzzy pink handcuffs or whipping them with the leather whips hidden in the glove compartment box - why would it matter what someone is interested in? Who cares whether they're into a little bit of S&M, or even the "standard" missionary-style sex, do you think that anyone is really going to care? They're hiring the guy to chauffeur them from place to place, not me masochistic in the backseat behind tinted windows. I'll stand by what Trudeau said, "the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" ... or, any other place for that matter - let people do whatever they want.


Vancouver Asks B.C. Court To Stop Human Rights Hearing Into Sadism Lifestyle

Canadian Press
Published: Tuesday, February 28, 2006

VANCOUVER (CP) - The City of Vancouver is trying one more time to untie itself from a Human Rights Tribunal complaint connected to sadism and masochism.

The city is asking the B.C. Supreme Court to overrule the tribunal decision that it would hear Peter Hayes' complaint on the basis of sexual orientation. Hayes went to the tribunal alleging a Vancouver police officer denied him a chauffeur's permit because of his so-called BDSM lifestyle.
BDSM refers to bondage and discipline, domination and submission, and sadism and masochism.

The city wants the court to declare that sexual orientation is connected to gender and doesn't include behaviours or practices.

Rights tribunal member Lindsay Lyster earlier ruled the case should be tested under the Human Rights Code, saying it was clear Hayes suffered because he was denied the permit.

No court date has been set to hear the city's petition.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Mommy, What's A Sovereigntist?

Premier Jean Charest Promotes Sovereigntist in Minor Cabinet Shuffle

Canadian Press
Published: Monday, February 27, 2006

QUEBEC -- Quebec Premier Jean Charest fine-tuned his cabinet Monday, making room for a former sovereigntist who recently won a byelection and moving two other ministers to the government's backbenches.

"Our government is working well,'' Charest said at a news conference. "Our goal today is to strengthen this team.''

Raymond Bachand, who won a byelection last December as a Liberal in the Montreal riding of Outremont, becomes minister of economic development.

"My passion is economic development,'' Bachand, a former president of the Quebec Federation of Labour's Solidarity Fund investment arm, said at a news conference.

Bachand brings considerable business experience to his post, having held top jobs at Culinar, grocery chain Metro-Richelieu, and Secor. He was also a top bureaucrat in the Parti Quebecois governments of Pierre-Marc Johnson and Rene Levesque.

Two other ministers -- Thomas Mulcair, who held the environment portfolio, and Pierre Reid, who was minister responsible for government services, were bounced to the backbenches.

Charest denied Mulcair's departure was linked to his hardline stance with the federal government and said he was offered Reid's job but turned it down.

"There are no small jobs in cabinet,'' Charest said.

Mulcair was highly regarded by environmentalists and had a reputation for feistiness.

Former economic development minister Claude Bechard, considered a rising star in the government, takes over as environment minister at a time when delicate discussions are expected on climate change legislation with the federal government.

Henri-Francois Gautrin takes over as minister responsible for government services from Reid, who becomes a backbencher.

Reid, who was considered a star candidate when he was plucked from his job as rector of the University of Sherbrooke to run in the 2003 election, was not offered any other cabinet job. He had previously served as minister of education.

Charest says he made the changes to strengthen his government before an election call, which could come as early as next year.

One minister who was widely speculated to lose her job in a cabinet shuffle remained on the job Monday.

Carole Theberge, who has faced criticism over day care legislation, was kept on as family minister by Charest.

"She has been the victim, I think, of remarks that have been unjustified,'' Charest said. "She has my total confidence.''

© Canadian Press 2006

The Tribe Has Voted

SCOC Nominee Rothstein Grilled

Canadian Press
Published: Monday, February 27, 2006

OTTAWA -- Canada's newest Supreme Court nominee opened a hearing before a committee of parliamentarians Monday by telling a story of how working as a waiter on a railway dining car taught him about life.

Marshall Rothstein, 65, had the summer job on the CPR line between Vancouver and his native Winnipeg while attending university.

"I often say that I learned more about life working in the dining car than anywhere else,'' Rothstein said.

"Working for 36 to 48 hours at stretch in close quarters with nine or 10 other people, from different backgrounds, different education levels, different prejudices, is not always easy.

"You had to be flexible and accommodating or you couldn't survive. You had to be scrupulously honest about pooling your tips or you couldn't survive. It was long days on your feet; it was hard physical work.''

Rothstein, a veteran of the Federal Court renowned for his command of commercial law, said he's always looked for "hard physical work'' when screening applications from potential law clerks.

He said he does this "so they will appreciate what I have come to appreciate: the diversity of our population, how hard Canadians have to work to make ends meet and something of what it's like not to have the advantages they will have as a lawyer.''

Canada, he said in response to questions, is a bilingual and "bijural country -- and that is one of the great strengths of the country,'' referring to Quebec's separate system of civil law.

So is the fact that it is diverse, a "country of immigrants'' like his parents, who came to Canada from Poland and Russia before the First World War, he added.

Those strengths have also made Canada a tolerant country, said Rothstein, who does not speak French.

Justice Minister Vic Toews opened what he called "historic'' hearings into Rothstein's nomination by calling on fellow MPs to exercise discretion with their questions.

Ultimately, he said, Rothstein would be the one to decide whether the questions put to him by the unprecedented 12-member committee are suitable.

"In this particular case, the witness -- in fact, the nominee -- is in a very unusual situation,'' Toews said before more than three hours of questions were to begin.

"As a witness, he will nevertheless determine and have the final say on the propriety of questions that will be asked. I think this is necessary, given the central, independent nature of the judiciary in this country and that we, as parliamentarians, must respect that independence.''

While some contentious questions may be asked, he added, answers ``may not be given in full, or at all.''

It is the first time members of Parliament have questioned a nominee to the Supreme Court of Canada in a public forum, though they do not have veto power.

In a statement before questioning began, constitutional expert Peter Hogg told the committee that Rothstein could not explain his past rulings nor express his opinions on controversial issues such as abortion, same-sex marriage or the secession of Quebec from Canada.

"Those issues could come to the court for decision in some factual context or other and any public statements by Justice Rothstein about those issues might give the false impression that he had a settled view on how to decide the case,'' Hogg said.

It didn't take long before Rothstein exercised his right.

Bloc Quebecois MP Real Menard asked him whether he felt the gun registry was working. Rothstein said the registry is a political animal.

"I know that the question of the gun registry is a controversial one and I must say that I think it's really a political question, a question of policy,'' Rothstein said.

"I don't mind the question. It's just that you must understand, that's not my area, that's your area to determine those policies. If disputes are brought to a court, then that's when we get involved.''

Rothstein was chosen by Prime Minister Stephen Harper as a candidate for the high court last week from a short list of three people agreed to under a process started by the former Liberal government.

The committee will not decide whether he can sit on the high court -- that's Harper's prerogative.

Rothstein is to replace Justice John Major, who retired in December.

© The Canadian Press 2006

And I'll Cry If I Want To...

Needless to say, yet again I'm not a huge "fan" of our Prime Minister
Stephen Harper... in fact, even a month after the Elections, I still visibly shudder when he's brought up on the news... I'm sure that if he didn't have that evil smile and disgusting hair-piece, I wouldn't mind so much... or, you know, if he'd been a Liberal...

Hmm, that made me think... what would happen if Harper crossed the floor? Oh boy, wouldn't that piss off a whole bunch of people... that would make me giggle like a 12-year-old school girl...

Anyway... after reading countless news paper articles and watching who knows how many hours of news, I have come to the brilliant conclusion that this Conservative government is not off to a good start... thank goodness that I'm not a supporter, I would be hiding in a closet somewhere, crying in the dark.

First there was dear old Emerson, according to the article "Emerson, Harper Will Pay" by Richard Foot, many historians "say David Emerson's backflip into the Conservative cabinet is an unprecedented showof arrogance and a grave error by Prime Minister Stephen Harper", I could not agree more; it is (still) an outrage that a person could run for one party and express themselves in partisan terms, then jumping into the metaphorical bed a week later. One would think that an MP should be able to speak on behalf of their consituents, and have their support - I'm sure that Emerson has all the support he needs... from his mob of body gaurds and other goons, he sure as hell is not getting it in Vancouver where many voters are still protesting against him, demanding that Emerson return to Vancouver like a big boy and face a byelection. This says so much about all the preaching Harper did about "clean politics", does it not? Harper's crisp white shirts aren't so white now are they? Maybe some Tide and another election is the cure.

Then there was the idea of missile defence brought up, yet again - I cannot stress enough how stupid that idea is... I'm sure that I'm not the only one that thinks that this will just cause the beginnings of the next arms race...

You mustn't forget Flaherty's federal budget, which will rear it's ugly face pretty soon. Although Harper and his cabinet haven't been shy to say as to where they're going to spend the "big bucks", they haven't considered how much some of these promises are going to cost - I'm just a first year university student, but even I know that economic growth won't generate enough money to satisfy Harper's long list of shiney promises... yet Flaherty says that "he's confident that he can balance everything" - perhaps he can try to balance the boxes of Kraft Dinner and creamsicles he could buy on a student loan; better him playing around with play-money in a daycare then running the country into a deficit... deficit, what a wonderful FUN word... sure, the country needs a few dollars towards military, education, tax cuts, this and that - though they've pledged $5 billion on new military spending over the next 5 years, in addition to the $5 billion that had been promised by the former Liberal government... not to mention that Harper's decided to keep the Liberal child-care plan until March 2007, which will add a good $700million dollards to his cheques to send out to families for childcare starting in July. Good move, buddy... don't ya know money doesn't grow on trees? Or do they in Harper-Land?

I'm sure that you're getting the picture now... or at least... a well crafted finger-painted portrait of Harper's government thus far... we all know that I could babble for hours on end about all the stupid things that have been going on during this long month under Conservative leadership... but do you really want to sit on your ass that long reading it? I didn't think so - my fingers ache from typing anyway...

Drink Wine & Babble

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the provincial premiers had their first little get-together at 24 Sussex the other day... they claim that they "chatted about a range of issues, from Canada-U.S. relations to health care to native affairs and finances" (Canadian Press, Feb. 24), and said that they discussed post-secondary education just to keep university students, such as myself happy... in reality, it was to "get to know the new prime minister a bit better" - you know, discuss where to get the best pedicures and whether Ashley Simpson's latest cd was as good as her last one - "You make me want to la-la..." was probably sung horribly off-key after a few too many cups of port... perhaps a few shots of tequila.

Talk about the issues? I very much predict that the premiers and the PM had a few playful pillow fights - eastern provinces vs, the western provinces... most likely followed by insessant giggling and the braiding of eachother's hair... or lack there of - at least for Harper, I firmly believe that his "hair" is just a helmet-like hair piece...

Chatted about our relations with the U.S? About Policies? I'm sure that those issues may have sounded a lot like a group of teenage girls giggling having a slumber party:
Harper: Bush looks like a monkey doesn't he? A cute little monkey eating a bananna
Random Premier #1: Um... I think he's a moron
Harper: Geez dude, would you call me a moron too? Geez!
Random Premier #2: Not exactly... you haven't talked too much
Harper: I'm just shy
Random Premier #1: Shy? You're the friggin' Prime Minister of Canada!
Harper: I know but... I just... sometimes I just don't know what to say
Random Premier #3: You could always blurt out the first thing that comes to your mind
Harper: Nah, I don't think so... I don't think that my new communications person can portray that side of me effectively
Random Premier #3: Well... get a new one, silly!
Harper: Maybe I will, in the morning... I'd rather just eat my skittles and play monopoly
Random Premier #4: Sir, aren't we supposed to talk about social policies?
Harper: Shut up, I don't wanna.
Random Premier #4: Sir, I really think so... that's what we're supposed to do
Harper: You're just jealous because I won the pillow fight
Random Premier #4: No... I just think... tha-
Harper: Listen buddy, we're going to eat our cheetos, watch Survivor, then I'm going to go get my beauty sleep.

I'm sure that they really did talk about Canadian issues at some point... no one will ever know. And by no one will ever know, I mean us non-premiers and non-PM's.

So... Post Secondary Isn't An Issue?

Conservatives 'Snub' Premiers' Education Summit

February 24, 2006
Source: Liberal Party of Canada

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to ignore the meeting of Canada’s provincial and territorial premiers in Ottawa to discuss post-secondary education and skills training is “totally unacceptable,” Deputy Leader of the Opposition Lucienne Robillard said today.

“This snub shows that not only are post-secondary education and skills training not priorities for this government, but it also shows the lack of importance this prime minister places on having good federal-provincial relations. It is totally unacceptable,” said Ms. Robillard, a former Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada.

“Where is Human Resources and Social Development Minister Diane Finley? Where is Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong? Are they saying that they don’t care what the provinces and territories have to say about the direction they want to go in these key areas?
“At the very least, these ministers should be sending their own representatives to set the groundwork for a good working relationship with the provinces and territories,” said Ms. Robillard.

The summit is bringing together university officials, students, labour groups, and others to ensure there is common ground among those who have a stake in education and skills training and the politicians who fund it. The Council of the Federation invited all four federal political parties to participate, but only the Liberal and Bloc sent representatives.

MP Mike Savage, Liberal critic for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency and Chair of the Liberal Caucus on PSE and Research, said, “If provinces and territories are to help determine the future of post-secondary education and skills training in this country, isn’t it imperative that the federal government be part of this process?”

Mr. Savage dismissed Prime Minister Harper’s attempt to assuage the snub to the premiers by inviting them to an informal dinner at 24 Sussex tonight to hear their concerns.

“This is just not good enough,” said Mr. Savage. “The Canadian government needs to be a part of this process. They need to be at the table discussing post-secondary education and skills training with those who know first-hand what is required to make it a success.

“If this is an indication of what we can expect from Mr. Harper’s government with regards to federal-provincial relations, then this country is in deep trouble,” he said.

Harper, Where's My Baby?

Harper Government Ignores Needs of Canadian Families

February 24, 2006
Source: Liberal Party of Canada

OTTAWA – The Conservatives’ decision to terminate the day care funding agreements reached by the Liberal government with the provinces shows that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government are out of touch with the reality of hard working Canadian families, said Liberal Social Development Critic Dr. Carolyn Bennett.

As well, it would appear the Conservatives are also reneging on their election promise to send $1,200 annual childcare payments to families, said Dr. Bennett.

She pointed to Conservative Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s recent comments that child-care agreements will be terminated in favour of a “tax credit” for parents.

“A tax credit significantly waters down an already inadequate promise of about $20 a week that could only buy, on average, about one day’s worth of care,” said Dr. Bennett.

“The Conservatives’ decision to cancel our program will leave children, families and communities in the lurch. Today in Canada, 84 per cent of families with children have both parents in the workforce. Simply put, child care is an everyday necessity in Canada, and this is a reality the Conservative government needs to acknowledge.”

They also need clarify their election promise, she said.

“All along the Conservatives have been talking about cutting cheques to parents with small children. Now suddenly it’s a ‘tax credit.’ Did Mr. Flaherty misspeak, or was he trying to slip through the back door yet another broken election promise?

“If it is the latter, this is even more disturbing than their initial platform. The Conservatives need to clear this up immediately so that parents – and all taxpayers – know whether or not they were duped,” she said.

The dismantling of the ten existing early learning and child care agreements between Ottawa and the provinces means the loss of more than $4.3 billion in federal funding, Dr. Bennett said.

“In many communities, the shovels are

So, Gay Paratroopers Huh?

7 U.S. Paratroppers Charged With Having Sex On Gay Porno Website

Canadian Press
Published: Friday, February 24, 2006

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - The U.S. army has charged seven paratroopers from its elite 82nd Airborne Division with engaging in sex acts in video shown on a homosexual pornographic website, authorities said Friday.

Three of the soldiers face courts-martial on charges of sodomy, pandering and engaging in sex acts for money, said a statement released Friday by the military. Four other soldiers, whose names were not released, received non-judicial punishments.

The army has recommended all be discharged.

The charges do not mention the name of the site but the division has said previously it was investigating allegations soldiers appeared on a homosexual pornography website. A spokesman for the division said Friday the charges are a result of that investigation.

The military-themed website on which the army has said soldiers appeared does not make any direct reference to the division or Fort Bragg, a sprawling post about 110 kilometres south of Raleigh.

"As far as we're concerned, it's isolated to the unit and our investigation determined that these seven individuals were the only ones" involved, said 82nd Airborne spokesman Maj. Thomas Earnhardt.

Steve Ralls, a spokesman for a legal group that helps gays and lesbians in the military, said the charges indicate the soldiers' behaviour is "a much more serious matter than just their sexual orientation."

"I'm not going to make excuses for service members who are taking part in sexual conduct for money," said Ralls, who works for the Washington-based Servicemembers Legal Defense Network.

"It would be absolutely criminal, regardless of whether they were heterosexual or gay," Ralls said.

Earnhardt said the three soldiers charged criminally under the Uniform Code of Military Justice had been appointed military lawyers but the lawyers would be unavailable for comment Friday.

The three soldiers who face courts martial are: Spc. Richard Ashley, Pte. 1st Class Wesley Mitten and Pte. Kagen Mullen. The army did not release their ages or hometowns but said all seven paratroopers were members of the 2nd Battalion of the 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment.

The non-judicial punishment received by the four other soldiers included reduction to the rank of private, 45 days of restriction to the unit area, 45 days of extra duty and forfeiture of a month's pay.

The registered owner of the website's domain name lists an address in Fayetteville, N.C., the city that adjoins Fort Bragg. A phone number listed for the registered owner was not in service Friday and e-mails to the owner have been regularly returned as undeliverable.

The 15,000 paratroopers of the 82nd Airborne are among the U.S. army's elite soldiers, all having volunteered to serve in a unit that trains to deploy anywhere in the world within 18 hours.

The military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy states "homosexual orientation alone is not a bar to service but homosexual conduct is incompatible with military service."

Service members who violate the policy are removed from the military.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Bullets On Ice?

U.S Putting Missile Defence Talk On Ice (Ambassador Says)

Alexander Panetta, The Canadian Press
Published: Friday, February 24, 2006

OTTAWA -- The United States has no current plans to reopen missile-defence negotiations with Canada, U.S. ambassador David Wilkins said Friday.

"I know of no overture or effort being made by either side to begin the discussions,'' Wilkins said.

The former Liberal government, faced with intense public pressure, abandoned missile-defence discussions last year.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said he would be willing to reopen talks if the Americans make a formal offer.

But the White House appears satisfied to let the status quo reign for now, the ambassador suggested.

"That issue came up and Canadian officials decided,'' Wilkins told reporters after a speech to law students.

"And we move on from there and continue to work together on other issues and in other areas.''

Wilkins said Canada won't necessarily remain divorced from the project forever, but added in the next breath that the issue remains off the table.

"I'm not saying there won't ever be (discussions), but I know of no effort from either side,'' he said.

The U.S. stand could appear to be a stunning about-face for a Republican administration that has been all too eager to see Canada participate in the missile shield.

Barely a year ago, U.S. President George W. Bush was in Canada putting public pressure on Paul Martin to join the project.

Martin, who initially supported missile defence, capitulated to public sentiment and announced months later that Canada would remain out.

But the reality of the current U.S. stand carries a highly practical dimension.

The Tories could see their minority government destabilized by a debate on missile defence.

A vote in Parliament could very well backfire on the Tories. And if Harper proceeded without consulting Parliament, the opposition would likely threaten a confidence vote and could certainly use the issue to make political hay in the next election.

To boot, Canada's formal participation would be largely symbolic at this point anyway.

While they did not offer their political backing, the Liberals did agree to modify a Canada-U.S. agreement that puts the binational Norad system in charge of operating the missile shield.

Which means a joint Canada-U.S. system is in charge of monitoring for incoming missiles. Only the Americans at Norad headquarters in Colorado would be involved, however, in launching a counter-strike against them.

The U.S., which wants to build a global missile system, was hoping for Canada's symbolic backing to help sell the project internationally.

The current system consists of missile platforms in Alaska and California. Early test results have been spotty, but the eventual goal is to build a system that could knock incoming missiles out of the sky from any point on Earth.

The project has widespread support from both major political parties in the U.S.

In Canada, all parties except the Conservatives oppose it.

Wilkins' remarks came after he delivered a highly personal speech to law students about his impressions of Canada.

In his folksy southern style, the ambassador joked about embarrassing himself trying to skate on the Rideau Canal.

He joked about French lessons: "I'm taking them. They're not taking to me.''

He spoke of his pride at being able to call president Bush a personal friend.

Wilkins cracked that Nunavut is the only place in Canada where he doesn't get asked about softwood lumber. "There are no trees.''

He fielded almost a dozen questions from students. With equally colloquial grace, he sprinkled his answers to the often-difficult questions with diplomatic generalities.

The students cheered when one of their own cast same-sex marriage as a human rights issue and asked Wilkins how he felt about it.

The ambassador simply replied that South Carolina's legislature opposed gay marriage and introduced a law to that effect.

Then he urged the students to respect the opinion of U.S. voters and their legislators on that issue, even if they disagree, just like he respected the Canadian decision on marriage.

"That's what living in a free democracy is all about.''

© The Canadian Press

I'm A Big Kid Now

Harper Governent Puts Provinces On Notice About Day Care Cuts

Canadian Press
Published: Friday, February 24, 2006

TORONTO -- The new Conservative government has notified the provinces it will terminate child-care agreements signed by the previous Liberal regime as of next March.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says his government has a mandate to scrap the child-care deals with the provinces in favour of a tax credit for parents.

During the election campaign, the Conservatives promised to give parents $1,200-a-year cash for each child under age six.

It was unclear if Flaherty misspoke or was signalling a departure from the election promise when he referred to the payment as a tax credit.

While the Liberals signed various deals with provinces, Ontario's intergovernmental affairs minister, Marie Bountrogianni, says the change will mean the loss of 20,000 new child-care spaces for her province alone.

In Ottawa, the premiers are planning to tell Harper tonight they want him to live up to the day-care agreements.

Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba all signed pacts with the former Liberal government.

Toronto Mayor David Miller said Friday that Harper's cut in day-care funding will mean the loss of 6,000 new subsidized spaces "for the poorest people in the poorest neighbourhoods."

Bountrogianni said she'd hate to see Harper kill the plan by cutting its funding.

Ontario is committed to giving parents "one-stop shopping" at schools for everything from day care to before-after school care and breakfast programs, she said.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Did You Know Missles Cost Money?

Stay Out Of Costly U.S. Missile Defence System, Former Pentagon Expert Warns

Colin Perkel, Canadian Press
Published: February 24, 2006

TORONTO -- A former top Pentagon official is warning Canada not to join Washington's missile defence program, calling it a colossal waste of money that would make the country more vulnerable to attack, not less.

In fact, Canada should be leading international talks to prevent the weaponization of space, said Phil Coyle, who was assistant secretary of defence and senior weapons tester at the U.S. Department of Defence from 1994 to 2001.

"The concept of missile defence is quite seductive," Coyle said Thursday in an interview with The Canadian Press.

"(But) it's destabilizing, it's incredibly expensive, and it doesn't work."

A year ago, former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin pulled the plug on Canadian participation in developing and deploying a system that would, in theory, shoot incoming missiles out of the sky before they strike North American targets.

The decision drew pointed scorn from the American ambassador at the time, Paul Cellucci, who called it a "perplexing, astounding" and "disappointing" decision that amounted to Canada wimping out and hiding behind the skirts of the U.S. military.

"If there's a missile incoming, and it's heading toward Canada, you are going to leave it up to the United States to determine what to do about that missile," Cellucci said during a speech in Toronto last year.

"We don't think that is in Canada's sovereign interest."

The new Tory government under Stephen Harper has been musing about revisiting the decision; Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said Thursday he's willing to reopen the debate.

"In principle, I don't have difficulty, personally, with ballistic missile defence," O'Connor said.

Coyle, who is in Canada for a seminar on missile defence Friday at the National Press Club in Ottawa, warned against going that route.

"You don't get anything for your investment," he said. "All you get is a scarecrow defence."

Currently, Washington is spending about $10 billion US a year on the missile-defence system; two weeks ago, President George W. Bush asked Congress for $11.1 billion US for the program in 2007 - close to Canada's entire defence budget.

Despite the mammoth infusion of cash, Coyle said the system will never work.

Trying to hit an incoming intercontinental ballistic missile is like trying to score a hole-in-one on a green that's not only moving at 15,000 miles per hour, but also covered with holes identical to the one you're aiming at, he said.

He also said the threats the Pentagon cites as its justification for the program are bogus, warning that the system would inevitably spark a new arms race and lead to the weaponization of space.

"That's where Canada has drawn the line and it's a practical place to draw the line," Coyle said.

Taking part would increase the likelihood that friendly countries such as China would regard Canada with increased hostility, while refusing to get involved would not hurt our relations with the U.S., he added.
"Canada's place in the hearts of Americans is secure," he said.

"There's no country in the world that is as well regarded, admired and engenders as much affection in Americans as Canada does. Nothing is going to change there."

That affection also makes Canada ideally situated to persuade the Americans to rethink their plans, Coyle added.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Harper, You're Not As Accountable

Emerson Spends Taxpayer Money to Avoid National Media

February 23, 2006
Source: Liberal Party of Canada

OTTAWA – The Harper government’s crisis of accountability increased today as they used Canadians’ tax dollars to fly civil servants to Vancouver, allowing David Emerson to avoid political embarrassment and scrutiny by the national media, said Ujjal Dosanjh, Member of Parliament for Vancouver South.

“Prime Minister Stephen Harper's appointment of Mr. Emerson to his cabinet has already created a crisis of accountability in the Conservative government - and Mr. Harper has exacerbated the problem by keeping Mr. Emerson hidden from the national media since his controversial appointment,” said Mr. Dosanjh.

It is highly unusual, and costly, to dispatch civil servants to hold briefings in a Minister’s riding outside of Ottawa. Despite this, several senior civil servants from the Department of International Trade have been flown to Vancouver to brief Mr. Emerson since he left Ottawa under fire for switching parties immediately after the election.

Mr. Harper promised Canadians a new government solidly grounded in ethics and integrity. But only one month into his mandate and he has already broken numerous campaign promises, jettisoned his principles, and shaken the trust placed in him by Canadians.

"This irresponsible move is further evidence that this is the pattern of behaviour we can expect from a Harper government,” Mr. Dosanjh added.

“Mr. Harper is so intent on keeping Mr. Emerson away from the cameras and microphones in Ottawa that he is willing to ask the taxpayers to pay for his evasive maneuvers. This is clearly a case of tax dollars being used for political gain, allowing Mr. Emerson to weather this political storm in his own riding.”

This is yet another example of the virtual invisibility of Mr. Harper and his ministers over the past month, as they play hide-and-seek with the media and the Canadian public.

Mackay You Goin' Down Dude

Again, "Me Likes Guns"

O'Connor Willing To Re-Open Missile Defence Debate

John Ward, Canadian Press
Published: Thursday, February 23, 2006

OTTAWA -- Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor says he's willing to re-open the controversial debate on ballistic missile defence.

However, the minority Conservative government would eventually put the question before the Commons and since all three opposition parties have opposed the idea in the past, the concept is likely dead before it starts.

''It would really, ultimately, be up to a vote in Parliament,'' the minister told reporters Thursday.

The previous Liberal government seemed to favour participation in missile defence, which was a key policy for the Bush administration. The Liberals eventually made a U-turn and said no.

But O'Connor has a different view.

''In principle, I don't have difficulty, personally, with ballistic missile defence.''

The plan involves a limited number of missiles intended to knock down a small strike by terrorists or a rogue state. It isn't designed to foil a mass attack by a major power.

The Americans would have to re-open the issue by again inviting Canadian participation, the minister said.

''Our policy is the fact that the Americans would have to approach us to participate in ballistic missile defence, then we would enter into negotiation.''

Opponents of the missile plan say it won't work and risks kicking off a new international arms race.

Supporters say it could offer some protection against a terror strike, it would improve Canada-U.S. relations and since the Americans have asked for neither territory nor money, it would be cheap.

The Liberals, the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP oppose the idea and could easily out-vote the minority Conservative government on the question.

O'Connor made the missile defence comments after delivering his first major speech as minister.

He told a conference of defence groups that the Tories plan to carry through with their ambitious election promises, including 13,000 new regular soldiers, new icebreakers and a northern port, new transport planes and infrastructure.

''We made a number of commitments in that platform and we intend to implement every one of them,'' he said.

He said the policy is simple: ''It's about having a three-ocean navy, a robust army and a revitalized air force.''

The Tories promised more money for defence and O'Connor said that will start soon.

''The Conservative government will provide new funding for National Defence in the upcoming federal budget.''

He wouldn't say how much will be in the first budget, but added he's sure the cash will be there.

''The prime minister has assured me that over the next few years we will get the money necessary build the armed forces the way we planned.''

O'Connor, a retired armoured general, got a warm welcome from the audience of serving and former officers, defence contractors, analysts and academics at the annual meeting of the Conference of Defence Associations.

They seemed especially pleased when he said he will tackle the Byzantine procurement system at Defence, which can take a decade or more to deliver new gear.

''Our armed forces can no longer afford to take years and years to obtain major pieces of equipment,'' he said.

O'Connor's promises were welcomed at the conference, but got short shrift from Bill Graham, leader of the Liberal opposition.

Graham, himself a former defence minister, said the Tory promises are too expensive and will run afoul of fiscal realities.

''The cost factor will be very substantial, far in excess of anything that they talked about,'' he said.

''I think we'll see there's a difference between their rhetoric and what the finance minister will have them achieve.''

© Canadian Press 2006

Sir, Are You Sure You Need Another?

Red Rover, Red Rover, I Call Rothstein Over

Harper Nominates Marshall Rothstein As New Supreme Court Justice

Canadian Press
Published: Thursday, February 23, 2006

OTTAWA (CP) - Marshall Rothstein of Winnipeg has been named as Prime Minister Stephen Harper's nominee to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The Federal Court of Appeal judge has agreed to face a first-ever public hearing before Harper confirms his appointment to the country's highest court.

"Marshall Rothstein's candidacy was scrutinized by a comprehensive process initiated by the previous government that included members from all the political parties," Harper said in a prepared statement.

"I believe he has the qualifications necessary to serve Canadians well from the country's highest court."

Rothstein, 65, specialized in commercial law in private practice before he was named to the Federal Court's trial division by Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative government in 1992.

He was elevated to the court's appeal division by the Jean Chretien Liberals in 1999 and has presided over a wide range of cases.

The Supreme Court overturned Rothstein's most celebrated ruling - the case of the so-called Harvard mouse, a genetically engineered rodent developed at Harvard University for use in cancer research.

The new judge will be the first in history to appear before a parliamentary committee - in a televised, three-hour hearing set for next Monday - to field questions from MPs before taking a seat on the court. Justice Minister Vic Toews will chair the 12-member, all-party panel.

"I am looking forward to watching the ad hoc committee's work and listening to Mr. Rothstein's answers," Harper said. "This hearing marks an unprecedented step towards the more open and accountable approach to nominations that Canadians deserve."

Harper has billed the hearing as an effort to bring "openness and transparency" to the judicial selection process.

Critics say it threatens to politicize the judiciary and spark the same kind of partisan bickering that has marred similar hearings in the United States.

Unlike the American process, however, the Canadian committee will have no veto power. Under the Constitution the prime minister is ultimately responsible for Supreme Court appointments, no matter who he consults along the way.

In addition to Rothstein, the others on the short list were:

-Peter MacKinnon, 58, former dean of law at the University of Saskatchewan, now president of the same school. The husband of former NDP provincial finance minister Janice MacKinnon, he has never held judicial office.

-Constance Hunt, 56, who specialized in resource law in private practice, then served as dean of law at the University of Calgary. She was named to Alberta Court of Queen's Bench in 1992 and Alberta Court of Appeal in 1995.

The list was supposed to be confidential, with only the winner's name made public, but was leaked to the media earlier this week.

The nine-member Supreme Court was left one judge short with the retirement in December of Justice John Major of Alberta. Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin had made it clear she wanted the bench back to full strength in time for the spring term that opens April 10.

Rothstein was widely seen as the favourite of the three short-listed for the post.

Considered one of the bright lights of Federal Court, his cases dealt with everything from immigration to national security, access to information, environmental regulation, trademark and patent disputes, taxation and contract law.

Rothstein wrote the majority opinion in a judgment that granted Harvard a Canadian patent on the mouse - dismissing arguments by church groups and environmentalists who contended that living animals should not be subject to patents.

The Supreme Court overturned the ruling in a 5-4 split decision in 2002.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Not Quite Home Sweet Home

Emerson gets on-the-road briefings while weathering political storm in Vancouver

Published: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

OTTAWA (CP) - A handful of civil servants have been dispatched to Vancouver in an unusual move that allows Trade Minister David Emerson to receive transition briefings while he weathers a political storm in his riding.

At least seven high-ranking bureaucrats from the Department of International Trade have joined Emerson since he left Ottawa while under fire for switching parties immediately after the election, The Canadian Press has learned.

Emerson had been avoiding the national media for days and went home while many of his constituents clamoured for a by-election.

Government officials could not put a price tag on the travelling transition briefings.

Emerson has received briefings in his regional office from deputy minister Rob Fonberg, as well as several assistant deputy ministers and other top-level staff.

"It will cost something, I'm sure," one government official said.

But another government official said the final bill would be modest.

Almost none of the bureaucrats have been lodged overnight in Vancouver and several have only made same-day stops while travelling back and forth from events in Asia, he said.

Trade spokesman Andre Lemay said transition briefings are exhaustive and must be done in person. Given those constraints, he said the cost will be reasonable.

"You can't do this over the phone," Lemay said.

"The senior managers that were going out or coming in were basically asked to stop in Vancouver to meet with the minister.

"So it's not like we sent seven people from Ottawa."

The official reason given for Emerson's departure to Vancouver was that he needed to work on regional files. His ministerial portfolio includes the Pacific Gateway and the 2010 Vancouver-Whistler Olympics.

"Since the House (of Commons) is not sitting, he has to tackle those files in B.C., obviously," said one government official.

"It would be awkward if he was getting briefed in Halifax, or in Parry Sound-Muskoka while he was vacationing.

"The minister is not on vacation."

Federal officials couldn't say whether any other ministers had such similarly sized contingents following them home.

But one admitted his own skepticism that Emerson needs to be in B.C. to work on provincial issues.

"I suspect he is meeting his constituents because there's a lot of flack coming out of there."

The Opposition Liberals have their own theory: that Emerson was asked to avoid microphones and cameras for a while, and it's now costing taxpayers money.

"It could be perceived that he's hiding from the national media," said Liberal spokeswoman Susan Smith.

"It's a pattern from Mr. Harper. It's a pattern from Mr. Harper's ministers."

Under the Liberal government ex-trade minister Jim Peterson got all his transition briefings done in Ottawa, said former aide Jacquie Larocque. And when he travelled he would prefer holding conference calls instead of displacing even two bureaucrats, she said.
But Lemay said it's easy to get briefings done on a same-day trip while ministers work in their ridings.

He said the sessions each last several hours while a revolving door of experts delivers lessons on the finer points of a minister's file.

Peterson, for instance, got five separate briefings on softwood lumber alone during his tenure as trade minister.

One was a blow-by-blow chronology of the Canada-U.S. dispute. One described key provincial players on the file. Another listed important contacts in Washington.

"Briefings aren't given for days and days on end by the same people. They're not all in the same room at the same time," Lemay said.

There were also separate briefings on free trade: How is NAFTA working? What about Canada's other free-trade agreements? What other trade deals is Canada seeking?

Peterson also sat in for a briefing on science and developing technologies.

Lemay noted that Emerson has already had a strong head-start learning his files and knows them well for a rookie trade minister.

He was a leading softwood-lumber executive before entering politics. That was 20 months ago, when he was named minister in Paul Martin's Liberal government.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Oh My, There's A Leak

Harper's Supreme Court shortlist leak draws fire

Jim Brown, The Canadian Press
Published: Wednesday, February 22, 2006

OTTAWA -- Stephen Harper may have got more than he bargained for in promising to bring openness and transparency to the selection of judges for the Supreme Court of Canada.

As the new Conservative prime minister pondered his first nomination to the high court, his short list of candidates was already in the public domain Wednesday.

The names are:

- Marshall Rothstein of the Federal Court of Appeal, considered by many to be the front-runner in the unexpectedly public horse race.

- Peter MacKinnon, president of the University of Saskatchewan and a former dean of law at the same school, but a man with no judicial experience.

- Constance Hunt, a former resource law specialist and onetime dean of the University of Calgary law school, who now sits on the Alberta Court of Appeal.

The list, drawn up under the former Liberal government, was a closely guarded secret for months. But it leaked to the media within hours of Harper's disclosure Monday that he was about to make a choice.

The official announcement is to come Thursday.

The nominee will then face an unprecedented public hearing next Monday before an all-party committee of MPs before ascending to the bench.

Harper's's decision to hold such a hearing had already generated controversy and sparked fears that he was politicizing the judiciary.

But some in the legal community were more upset by the leak of the short list, a development that they say could deter well-qualified candidates from coming forward in future.

"It's one thing to appear before a parliamentary committee,'' said Henry Brown, an Ottawa lawyer and Mulroney-era Tory cabinet aide who now practises frequently before the Supreme Court.

"It's something else to get involved in a public shooting gallery that produces winners and non-winners. A lot of good candidates might not want to get involved in that.''

Patricia Hughes, the current dean of law at the University of Calgary, termed it unfortunate that the list had got out.

"I would not like to see this become the norm, that we start throwing out names publicly,'' said Hughes.

`Are we trying to say it's a sort of election? I don't find it to be a very elegant way to select a member of the top court of Canada.''

Not everyone agreed with that assessment.

Chris Axworthy a former NDP attorney general of Saskatchewan who ran unsuccessfully for the federal Liberals in the recent election, was unruffled by the leak.

"People who want to be justices of the Supreme Court of Canada should be willing to stick their necks out once in a while,'' said Axworthy. "If you're interested in the job maybe you have to let the world know.''

Aides to Harper say it wasn't the Prime Minister's Office that leaked the list. It was their intention to make only the final choice public, sparing the other contenders from media and political scrutiny.

© The Canadian Press

Yay For Liberals

Liberals Will Not Prop Up Conservative Government: Bill Graham

February 16, 2006
Source: Liberal Party of Canada

It will be up to the NDP and Bloc Québécois – not Liberals – to prop up the Conservative government, Opposition Leader Bill Graham said.

In media interviews on February 16, 2006, Graham said that while the first priority of Liberals will be to work constructively with the other parties to make this parliament work as best they can, they will not be afraid to defeat Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s minority Conservative government if need be.

Graham said that Liberals were elected as the Official Opposition and they will oppose in an “effective and principled” manner. That means opposing Harper’s government if he refuses to accommodate Liberal positions on key issues such as child care and income tax cuts.

If they don’t accommodate these very important programs, they must turn to the NDP and Bloc for support in the House of Commons, since they are the ones who triggered the last election out of political opportunism.

“We’re not in the business of propping up the government,” he told the Globe and Mail. “We’re the Official Opposition. And that is our role, and we will stick to our points where they are important to the future of the country.

“Other parties will have to decide whether they want to compromise on this, because they’re the ones — the Canadian public very well knows — that put us in this position. They’re the ones that created the Harper government. They’re the ones that are going to have to accommodate it.”

But Harper, as leader of a minority government, has to accept the fact that he, too, must be willing to compromise “if he wants to continue to be the Government of Canada,” Graham said.

He said Liberals intend to push for its national early learning and child care program over the Conservative plan to send roughly $100 a month to parents.

He said he found “astonishing” the NDP’s “chutzpah” of proposing a subsidized plan in the coming session of parliament, since they killed such a plan in the first place by forcing the election.

If the Conservatives nix the Liberals’ income tax cuts in favour of a GST cut, Liberals will also be loudly speaking out, Graham said.

“When they find out the consequences of this, people are going to be astonished,” he said.

Graham assured his party that he will do his best to keep the opposition together through any leadership contest.

Politicize This Harper!

Harper to Politicize Supreme Court Appointments

February 20, 2006
Source: Liberal Party of Canada

The Conservative government announced today that, for the first time in Canadian history, the next judicial appointee to the Supreme Court of Canada will be questioned by a public parliamentary hearing. Although Conservatives promised a free vote in the House of Commons on the appointment of new Supreme Court justices during the election campaign, they will now appoint an ad-hoc parliamentary committee to question the new appointee.

Many legal scholars and jurists –including Justice Bora Laskin, Justice Antonio Lamer and Chief Justice Beverly McLaughlin- have long maintained that publicly cross-examining judicial nominees could lead to a U.S.-style appointments process which will politicize the bench.

Although the next Supreme Court nominee will come from the shortlist of independent candidates put forth by legal experts, Minister Vic Toews and Prime Minister Stephen Harper have made it no secret that they wish to appoint judges who are more favourable to the social conservative viewpoint in the future.

In a speech entitled "Abuse of the Charter by the Supreme Court”, Mr. Toews told his audience:

"The lessons that should not be lost on those who want to see specific policies
implemented in the country is that it is not enough to gain a majority of the
votes in parliament, social policy in this country requires the approval of the
judiciary it is for that reason that my party has been so adamant that the
process for appointing judges needs to be opened up."

Similarly, during the election campaign Prime Minister Harper told reporters:

"The reality is that we will have for some time to come a Liberal senate, a
Liberal civil service, at least senior levels have been appointed by the
Liberals, and courts that have been appointed by the Liberals. So these are
obviously checks on the power of a Conservative government." (CPAC, January 17,
2006)

Minister of Justice Toews has repeatedly shown a lack of respect for Canada’s highest judicial body when the court’s decisions do not coincide with his own views.

For example, in a 2003 "broadcast ministry" run by Concerned Women for America (CWA), Mr. Toews discussed the judiciary's same-sex marriage "agenda":

"We have seen these radical liberal judges who have their own social agenda
coming to the bench and forgetting that their responsibility is to interpret the
law and not to make law. And so we are very, very concerned about that."

The Supreme Court is an independent judicial body and judges should be selected based on the over-riding principle of merit and not on the political leanings of the government of the day. As Liberals, we are highly skeptical of a public hearing process that could become politicized and impinge on the dignity of the Supreme Court.

Canada’s Constitution calls for a clear separation of powers between Parliament, the Executive Branch and the Judiciary. By politicizing the appointments process, the Conservative government is blurring this Constitutional line in order to clear a path for their right-wing social agenda.

The Bloc? Really?

Bloc In No Rush To Topple Conservatives
Philip Authier, CanWest News Service
Published: Tuesday, February 21, 2006

MONTREAL - The Bloc Quebecois says it is willing to give the new Conservative government a chance to govern and is in no hurry to bring it down.

But Bloc house leader Michel Gauthier said it would be wrong for the Conservatives to take his party's support for granted and the party will evaluate its endorsement of government initiatives based on its usual criteria of whether a proposal is good for Quebec.

The Tories, he said, seem more open to Quebec's needs than the Liberals and that is worth noting.

"The idea, at the start, is to allow the government to function a certain amount of time," Mr. Gauthier said in an interview. "We intend to defend Quebec's interests on every occasion, but for a minority government to work two things are needed: compromises on the part of the government and compromises on the part of the opposition.

"They give me a better impression than the Liberals. They say they know they are a minority government and know they will have to behave like a minority government. For me, that is the ABC of success," Mr. Gauthier said.

Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe has always said the party will examine government moves based on whether they are good or bad for Quebec. Mr. Gauthier said so far the Tory approach toward Quebec has been to show more openness than the Liberals.

© National Post 2006

Beware: Rebel Backbencher

Rebel N.B. backbencher contradicts premier on reasons for defection Chris Morris And Kevin
Published: Tuesday, February 21, 2006

FREDERICTON (CP) - The rebel backbencher who has plunged New Brunswick into a political crisis is challenging Premier Bernard Lord's version of events leading to his defection.

Michael (Tanker) Malley met Tuesday with reporters for the first time since announcing last Friday that he would leave the Conservative caucus to sit as an Independent - a move that turned Lord's majority government a minority, prompting speculation about a spring election.

While Malley said little, both when he was confronted in a hotel parking lot and later in the provincial legislature, he disputed Lord's claim that he had demanded personal favours in exchange for maintaining his allegiance to the ruling Tory party.

"In all honesty, I never had a list of demands," said the burly, former school bus driver from Miramichi, N.B. "That's his (the premier's) version. My version - I didn't make any demands."

Lord said that during a private meeting with Malley last Friday, the backbencher - angry at being passed over for a cabinet post - sought benefits for himself and his friends, including the appointment of Cleveland Allaby, a Fredericton lawyer, as a judge in Miramichi.

Allaby, a good friend of Malley's, was with him at the New Brunswick legislature on Tuesday as he signed the papers to become an Independent.

Allaby said he never asked Malley to make such a request.

After signing the papers, Malley attended a meeting of the legislature's public accounts committee, where he sat on the opposition side.

"I never thought I'd see the day that I'd sit on the opposition side, anyway not this soon," Malley said following the meeting, where he was visibly tearful.

"I'm a tough Miramicher. I've always fought for what I believe in. I always believed you were hard on the issues but easy on the people."

Malley said he quit the Lord government because he considered it unfair and insulting of the premier to, once again, pass him by for a cabinet post.

He said the city, which is going through difficult times due to the downturn in the pulp and paper industry, desperately needed a voice in cabinet.

Malley was the Conservative government's only member from the region.

"I know I'm not a doctor or a lawyer or a school principal, but the people put me here," he said.

His defection sets the stage for a provincial election in New Brunswick, possibly as early as April.

The 27-member Conservative caucus now can be defeated by a combined vote of the 26 Opposition Liberals and two Independents.

The Liberals already have said they're ready for an election, and NDP Leader Alison Brewer, whose party does not hold any seats in the legislature, said she is looking forward to a campaign.

"There's change in the air," Brewer said, adding that New Democrats are putting an election team in place. "There's widespread dissatisfaction with Bernard Lord's leadership."

© The Canadian Press 2006

Me Likes Guns And Stuff

New defence treaty with U.S. to include maritime surveillance: minister
Published: Monday, February 20, 2006

HALIFAX (CP) - A new North American defence treaty with the United States will not compromise Canada's control over its own military, nor will it mean automatic adoption of American plans for a ballistic missile defence system, newly appointed Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said Monday.

The existing binational agreement on continental air defence, the North American Aerospace Defence Command or NORAD, will be expanded to include maritime surveillance, the minister said following a tour of the sprawling navy dockyard in Halifax.

But O'Connor, in his first public statement since being appointed to the defence portfolio, downplayed the significance of the new treaty, dismissing the suggestion that it could lead to U.S. warships patrolling Canadian waters.

The agreement will mean "merely a transfer of information," he told reporters in the hangar deck of the Canadian frigate HMCS Halifax.

"It doesn't change our responsibility as a country. We have to look after our own sovereignty. We have to deal with any threats coming from the sea."

Once ratified, the new treaty would allow for intelligence on shipping data and threats to the sea lanes to be piped directly into NORAD headquarters, which is jointly staffed by the Canadian and U.S. military at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, Colo.

The expanded pact is expected to be ready for signing in May, when the existing treaty expires, O'Connor said.

NORAD was founded in 1958, at the height of the Cold War, to counter the threat of Soviet nuclear bombers and missiles. Since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, there's been increasing pressure to modernize the organization's role in order to monitor all external threats.

Critics have said an expanded air defence treaty could inadvertently sweep Canada into the U.S. government's controversial and largley unproven ballistic missile defence program.

The U.S. proposal envisions a series bases across the continent, where small missiles could be launched to shoot down ballistic missiles fired at North America by rogue nations.

O'Connor said the Conservative government's position on missile defence has not changed since the federal election campaign.

"If the Americans approach us to negotiate ballistic missile defence, we would enter into negotiations," he said.

"If we perceive this to be in our national interest, we would bring this to Parliament and Parliament must approve our participation."

A year ago, the former Liberal government turned down Washington's formal request to be part of the program, but changes made to NORAD agreement last summer allow its radar to track incoming missiles.

© The Canadian Press 2006

Canada SCOC Nominees Auditions

SCOC Nominees to Face MP Questions
Jim Brown, Canadian Press
Published: Monday, February 20, 2006

OTTAWA -- In a historic change, nominees to the Supreme Court of Canada will face questions from an all-party committee of MPs, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced Monday.

But MPs won't have the power to veto candidates under the new process -- the prime minister will still have the last word.

Harper, outlining his reforms at a news conference, sent mixed signals on what he hopes to accomplish.

He insisted his plan won't unduly politicize the selection of a new judge to fill the one existing vacancy on the nine-member high court.

In fact, he said, the approach he's taking will amount to "the least partisan process in history."

At the same time, however, he declared that his preference is to find a judge who will "apply the law rather than make it" -- a common theme among right-leaning politicians who have long railed about liberal-minded judicial activism.

The main point Harper returned to again and again was the need for greater transparency in deciding who sits at the top of the judicial pyramid.

"For the first time in the history of Canada, the next candidate for the Supreme Court will have to answer questions that will be posed by the House," he said.

"The nominee will speak to Canadians and Canadians, through their elected representatives, will be able to learn more about the candidate."

The prime minister said he will announce a nominee on Thursday to fill the current vacancy, and a special Commons committee will hold three hours of televised hearings next Monday.

The new judge is to come from a short list of three names prepared for the Liberal government just before the election campaign which brought Harper to power.

The political parties in the Commons will have until Wednesday to name MPs to the new committee. Harper said the committee will reflect the makeup of the Commons so that no party will have a majority.

The nominee for justice will make a formal statement to the MPs before questions begin.

Constitutionally, the prime minister has the last word on selecting justices for the high court and that won't change. But Harper said he will take the committee's deliberations into account in making his final decision, which is to be announced March 1.

The spring term of the Supreme Court opens April 10, and Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin made it clear she wants the one vacancy on the high court filled well before then so the new justice is ready to assume a full workload.

While some, including McLachlin, have said grilling potential justices risks politicizing the bench, Harper said the new process will make the appointment more transparent.

An initial list of six candidates was handed to an advisory panel made up of MPs from all parties -- including Vic Toews, who now is justice minister -- as well as retired judges, lawyers, academics and lay people.

That panel whittled the six down to a short list of three just before the federal election was called in November and Harper will pick from that trio.

Harper says that since those nominees are acceptable to both Liberals and his government, there is unlikely to be controversy about the final choice.

The question of whether to institute public hearings for judicial appointees in Canada has been debated for years. Opponents fear the process might become turn into an American-style political fight.

Former prime minister Paul Martin toyed with the idea of public hearings when he was in power but backed away in the end, partly because of adamant opposition from his justice minister, Irwin Cotler.

The short list remains a secret, but legal scholars have speculated freely on who might make the best Supreme Court judge.

Among those often mentioned are Justices Georgina Jackson and Robert Richards of Saskatchewan Court of Appeal, Marc Monin of Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, and Barbara Hamilton and Richard Scott of Manitoba Court of Appeal.

By tradition the judge who replaces Major will come from one of the Prairie provinces.

© Canadian Press 2006

Austrian Nordic Team Searched For Drugs

Stephen Wilson, Associated Press
Published: Sunday, February 19, 2006
Source

TURIN, Italy -- Italian authorities seized materials in a surprise late-night sweep through the living quarters of the Austrian biathlon and cross-country teams, the first ever police anti-doping raid on Olympic athletes.

While Italian police searched the residences late Saturday and early Sunday morning, the International Olympic Committee also conducted unannounced, out-of-competition drug tests on at least six Austrian cross-country skiers and four biathletes. Col. Angelo Agovino, commander of the Carabinieri police force in Turin, said later Sunday that officers "confiscated material of various origin . . . which will have to undergo laboratory analysis."

No test results have been announced, and the Austrian cross-country relay team competed Sunday morning in the men's 4x10km relay, finishing last out of 16 teams.

"We were surprised in our room," team member Juergen Pinter said. "Suddenly the police came in and didn't let us leave on the night before the competition. This happened without any positive result from doping control in the team. There's definitely no doping in the Austrian team. It's crazy."

The probe began when the World Anti-Doping Agency discovered blood-doping equipment in Austria connected to Walter Mayer, an Austrian Nordic team coach banned from the Olympics for suspicion of performing blood transfusions at the 2002 Salt Lake City Games.

WADA learned that Mayer was with the team at the Turin Games and notified the IOC.

"The fact he was in the same area as the athletes created quite some concern to us," IOC medical commission chief Arne Ljungqvist said Sunday.

The IOC tipped off Italian police to Mayer's presence. In separate operations, IOC drug-testers went to the Austrians' lodgings - outside the official athletes' villages - to conduct surprise tests while Italian police swept in to look for drugs and doping equipment.

"We never asked the Italian police to take action," Ljungqvist said. "We informed them that we would conduct testing on the evening of the 18th and they decided to take action at the same time."

Mayer was not found during the overnight raids in the mountain hamlets of San Sicario and Pragelato, where the Nordic teams are staying. He was no longer in Italy as of Sunday, said Mario Pescante, IOC member and government supervisor for the Games.

"It's true that Walter Mayer slept in our accommodations here the night after he arrived, but only then," said Alfred Eder, a trainer for the Austrian biathlon team.

Mayer and Volker Mueller, the German chiropractor who prescribed blood treatments in 2002, were banned by the IOC from the Turin Olympics and the 2010 Vancouver Games.

At a news conference Sunday, Ljungqvist held up a photograph showing Mayer in an official Austrian Olympic biathlon team photo.

He said the IOC had information that Mayer had been staying at lodgings "adjacent to if not included in the Austrian Olympic ski team." While Mayer's presence in Italy didn't break the IOC ban, it violated the "spirit" of the decision to keep him out of the Games, Ljungqvist said.

"He has no Olympic accreditation and the IOC can do nothing about how and where he travels," he said.

Despite the ban, Mayer remains head coach of both the cross-country and the biathlon team, said Austrian cross-country spokesman Eric Wagner. He said Mayer had been at the Games in private capacity and contacted the team as recently as Saturday.

Ljungqvist said the IOC had no information on the result of the police raid and investigation.

"We will wait for the results of the raid with great interest," he said.

The results of the IOC doping tests on the Austrians would be known within two days. The athletes took urine tests covering the "full menu" of banned substances, including the endurance-enhancer EPO, he said.

The Austrians reacted angrily to the raids, saying the athletes were treated "like criminals."

"They checked every drink, every food, and they took a lot of stuff with them," Wagner said. "They came around 9 and stayed until 12, and then took the athletes away to be tested."

Ljungqvist said the athletes co-operated with the testing, and he dismissed complaints from some Austrian officials that the raid was unwarranted.

"'It was perfectly necessary," he said.

IOC president Jacques Rogge met with Austrian Olympic officials Sunday to discuss the situation.

"We're here in order to protect the athletes," said Heinz Jungwirth, secretary general of Austria's Olympic committee. "We raised an objection with the IOC and will proceed against this with all means at our disposal."

WADA chairman and Montreal lawyer Dick Pound said he wasn't surprised by the Austrians' protest.

"On the other hand they've been playing with fire in having an association with this guy," he said.

Pound also defended the decision to conduct the raid and tests in the late-night hours.

"If you happen to be concerned about microdoses of EPO, that's the time to find it," he said.

The Turin Olympics feature the most rigorous drug testing in Winter Games history. Earlier in the week, a Russian biathlete was stripped of her silver medal and expelled from the Olympics after testing positive for an illegal stimulant.

The involvement of Italian police is in line with the country's anti-doping laws, which treat doping as a criminal offence. Any doping case would be investigated and prosecuted by Italian magistrates.

While police are not expected to go into the athletes' villages to make random searches, they are free to do if they have information of drug trafficking or dealing.



© Associated Press 2006

Next Liberal Party Leader? (Part 1)

I've heard hear and there for the past few months that Ignatieff could be a good canidate for leading the Liberal Party...

Michael Ignatieff, prominent Canadian author and academic, was first elected in 2006 as the Member of Parliament for Etobicoke Lakeshore.

Son of a distinguished diplomat George Ignatieff, Mr. Ignatieff is the former director of the Carr Centre for Human Rights and Policy at Harvard University. He is one of the most influential voices in the global debate on human rights, as well as the distinguished author of an acclaimed biography of British academic Sir Isaiah Berlin and such award-winning works as The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror.

Mr. Ignatieff received a degree in History at the University of Toronto and a doctorate at Harvard University. He is a former Senior Research Fellow at King's College, Cambridge, and has held teaching posts at Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, the University of California, the University of London and the London School of Economics.

Mr. Ignatieff has written extensively about the challenges Canada faces in the 21st Century and the urgency of making Canada’s voice strong and credible on the international stage. In his keynote address to the Liberal Party of Canada’s Biennial Policy Convention in March 2005, Mr. Ignatieff stressed the importance of remaining true to our cherished Liberal values – “generosity, unity, sovereignty, justice, and the courage to choose, the will to govern.”

He is a recipient of the Governor General’s Award for Non-Fiction and the Heinemann Award, and was shortlisted for the prestigious Booker Prize for Fiction and the Whitbread Novel Award. Mr. Ignatieff has also been a regular broadcaster and critic on television and radio.

In 1997, Maclean's magazine named Ignatieff in its "Top 10 Canadian Who's Who." In 2003 Maclean's also named him Canada's "Sexiest Cerebral Man" because of "his made-for-TV looks and effortless eloquence."

Source: Liberal Party of Canada

Why Did The Chicken Cross the Boarder?

Apparently the "H5 subtype of bird flu was found in a dead wild duck in France, and officials said it was almost certainly the lethal H5N1 strain" (Canadian Press, Feb 18 2006)... to bring some light and perhaps the next famous conspiracy theory, I would like to propose that Big Bird, that giant evil yellow bird from Seaseme Street is behind it... something just screams "BIG BIRD DID IT!"... occassionally they try to teach kids some french words, or at least to count to ten.... ergo, Big Bird sent the bird flu to France... I have yet to work out all of the kinks in this theory, but I think that giant fucking yellow bird is behind it all...

France Reports First Case of H5 Bird Flu

Lethal H5N1 suspected, Canadian Press
Published: Saturday, February 18, 2006

PARIS -- The H5 subtype of bird flu was found in a dead wild duck in France, and officials said it was almost certainly the lethal H5N1 strain.

If confirmed as H5N1, it would be France's first case of the disease that has swept from Asia to Europe and Africa, and raised fears of a worldwide flu pandemic if it mutates into a form that is easily transmitted between humans.

Agriculture Minister Dominique Bussereau, speaking to reporters Saturday, said final test results to confirm whether the duck found in the southeastern Ain region was infected by H5N1 were expected at 3:30 p.m. on Saturday.

President Jacques Chirac, speaking to reporters during a trip to Thailand, called for a calm but serious approach to the bird flu case.

France, the European Union's leading poultry producer, is already on alert to try to ensure that avian flu does not spread from the wild, where the disease is not unusual, to its 200,000 farms that raise 900 million chickens, turkeys, ducks and other birds each year.

The speed of the announcement that the duck had died of H5 - just a few days after the duck was found - was seen as a measure of the effectiveness of French surveillance and testing procedures.

''French authorities should be encouraged for reporting this so quickly and this allows them, as well as local farmers, to take extra monitoring precautions,'' Alex Thiermann, an expert for the World Organization for Animal Health in Paris, said in a telephone interview.

The suspected case of H5N1 was reported two days after France announced new anti-bird flu measures, ordering all poultry to be either vaccinated or confined indoors.

Bussereau said some 900,000 birds in France would be vaccinated.

In line with new EU anti-bird flu measures adopted Friday by the European Commission, a three-kilometre protection zone was in force around the spot where the duck was found in a bird reserve on the Dombes plateau, some 30 kilometres northeast of Lyon, France's third-largest city.

Veterinarians were checking poultry in the zone, while the movement of live poultry to and from the area was banned and wild birds were being watched more closely, the ministry said.

The Dombes plateau has about 1,000 lakes and is a favored stop-off for migrating birds.

The diseased bird was one of seven dead ducks found on a lake last weekend and handed over to a laboratory on Monday, Catherine Dupuis, the local director of veterinary services, told the AP.

© Canadian Press 2006

The Clock Ticks

• 
  Harper’s Crisis of Accountabilty Grows
  Source: Liberal Website
  February 17, 2006
  
  
  
  As the second week of Stephen Harper’s new government draws to a close, the Conservatives’ crisis of accountability has spiralled further out of control.
  
  The latest example of the Prime Minister’s accountability flip-flop is the appointment of former Conservative MP and campaign co-chair John Reynolds to the Privy Council. The title of privy councillor is normally held by cabinet ministers and parliamentary secretaries who advise the Governor General on classified government business.
  
  Mr. Reynolds now works as a “senior strategic advisor” to one of Canada’s top law firms. As a Privy councillor, this backroom insider will have access to classified cabinet documents, even though he is paid to give CEOs advice on how to lobby the federal government.
  
  Mr. Harper’s Accountability Act was the cornerstone of his election campaign. One of it key elements is to “crack down on the revolving door between ministers’ offices, the senior public service and the lobbying industry”. By appointing a lobbyist and close friend to the Privy Council, Prime Minister Harper has clearly violated his own Accountability Act.The ethics watchdog group Democracy Watch –which endorsed the Conservative accountability package during the election campaign- has now lashed out at Prime Minister Harper.
  
  Duff Conacher, co-ordinator of Democracy Watch, recently told the media: “Stephen Harper proved with some cabinet appointments that he is a hypocrite and, by failing to keep the pledge to close the loopholes in the ethics code, he showed that he is a liar.”
  
  Ethics watchdog groups and the Canadian people have good reason to be concerned about Mr. Harper’s increasingly unaccountable behaviour. After two weeks as Prime Minister, Stephen Harper has:
  
  - Appointed his unelected Quebec campaign co-chair Michael Fortier to the Senate and the Cabinet as Minister of Public Works, after campaigning for an elected senate;
  Overseen the appointment of Fred Loiselle, who was involved in an electoral fraud scandal in Quebec in 2000 as Mr. Fortier’s chief of staff;
  
  - Appointed Gordon O’Connor, a former lobbyist for the defence industry, as Minister of Defence;
  
  - Appointed the Liberal-elected MP David Emerson, as Minister of International Trade, despite his own party’s activism against floor-crossing in the House of Commons; and
  
  - Campaigned to strengthen the role of the Ethics Commissioner but refused to be interviewed by the Commissioner’s office for his role in the Gurmant Grewal taping affair.
  
  As each day goes by, the Conservative government grows more and more unaccountable. This outrageous behaviour may just be the reason why the Prime Minister is refusing to talk to the media.
  
  Mr. Harper, you can’t hide forever.
  

Harper, Are You Really A Moron?: Part II

Harper Considering Afghanistan For First Foreign Trip
Canadian Press
Published: Friday, February 17, 2006
Source: Canada.Com

OTTAWA -- Stephen Harper is considering one of the most chaotic corners of Afghanistan as a preferred destination for his first prime ministerial foreign trip.

Perilous, sandswept Kandahar is being weighed against a more genteel option -- visits with the presidents of the U.S. and Mexico -- for Harper's first trip abroad.

Harper is expected to make all those stops eventually. He began pondering the Afghanistan option in the days after his election win.

In a post-election briefing with top military brass, Harper was urged to visit Canadian troops stationed in the southern Afghan city.

The prime minister was told that such a visit would send a strong message about his commitment to the military, and about Canada's desire to make a difference in the world.

Officials in at least two federal departments said Harper has expressed support for the idea -- without committing to it.

"Everybody's talking about it,'' said one federal official.

Another official said he found it significant that the one foreign country Harper mentioned in his Jan. 23 victory speech was Afghanistan -- not the U.S. or any other European ally.

He followed up that election-night address with a speech days later to a group of Canadian election monitors preparing to leave for Haiti.

"Canada may not be a superpower -- but we stand for higher values to which all peoples aspire,'' Harper told the audience.

"And it is important that our actions as Canadians promote these values in all corners of the Earth.''

He cited freedom, democracy, the rule of law, human rights, and compassion for the less fortunate as core values Canada can export.

Afghanistan and Haiti are at the front lines of Canada's democracy-building efforts.

The Conservative platform calls for an additional $5.3 billion in military spending over five years and 13,000 more regular forces.

In Kandahar, Canada's military presence is being increased to 2,200 this month in an effort to improve security in the longstanding Taliban stronghold.

The posting is considered far more dangerous than Canada's earlier mission to the capital Kabul.

Last month a Canadian diplomat was killed and three Edmonton-based soldiers were seriously injured when a suicide bomber attacked their convoy.

The Jan. 15 attack was one of two insurgent strikes against Canadian troops within a week. Nine Canadians have been killed in Afghanistan since early 2002.

Officials in the Prime Minister's Office said they had not heard of any plans for a trip to Afghanistan.

However, they said visits with Canada's NAFTA neighbours -- the U.S. and Mexico -- appeared to be in the cards.

Harper is expected to take his first foreign trips before Parliament returns April 3.

His first visit with Bush is being scheduled for late March. It may come during a White House stop before or after Harper meets with the U.S. president and Mexican president Vicente Fox in Mexico to review the continental relationship.

Canada's relationship with the United States soured at the executive level under former prime minister Paul Martin.

U.S. ambassador David Wilkins took the rare step of publicly rebuking Martin in the middle of the election campaign, accusing the Liberal leader of trying to score electoral points by pummelling the United States.

The Canada-U.S. relationship has bedevilled prime ministers since Confederation.

Canadian political leaders have been forced to walk a fine line between conducting good relations with the country's largest trading partner and appearing to cozy up to a country whose policy aims can run counter to Canada's.

During his first news conference after being elected, Harper tried to draw a distinct line in the relationship. Unprompted by a query, he said he would be making his own policy decisions rather than taking his cue from the U.S. ambassador.

A day earlier, Wilkins said he saw no need for the new Conservative government to enact its platform commitment to assert Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic by increasing patrols in the polar region.

© Canadian Press 2006