Angry in the Great White North

Oops: Liberal nominee Gerry Samson can't sell Green Shift (except to stealth Liberals)

2008-07-24T12:31:15-05:00

Yet again, Liberals are undermining Stephane Dion's attempt to sell his carbon tax plan (aka The Green Shift) to Canadians.

This time, we have Liberal nominee Gerry Samson in Stormont-Dundas-South-Glengarry admitting, on the record, with Stephane Dion in the room, that Samson can't get local residents to believe him when he tells them that they will benefit from Stephane Dion's new tax.

Well, one guy in the audience loved the idea of the carbon tax. But then as it turns out, he's a local Liberal Party riding association activist. Of course, that wasn't mentioned in the media report. He's described as just a local resident who was really impressed with Stephane Dion.

First we had Liberal MP Ken Boshcoff explain how Stephane Dion's carbon tax is really just a way of moving money from Alberta and Saskatchewan to Ontario and Quebec to pay for social programs.

Then we had Liberal MP Martha Hall Findlay explain how Stephane Dion's carbon tax might or might not affect emissions, and that there is simply no way to tell.

Then we had Liberal MP Ralph Goodale explain that most of the oil taken out of the ground in Saskatchewan won't be taxed at all.

Now we have Liberal nominee Gerry Samson in Stormont-Dundas-South-Glengarry. His revelation? That no one believes him when he tries to sell Stephane Dion's carbon tax as a financial windfall for Canadians:

“It’s the right thing to do,” Dion said during a speakers forum at the Best Western Parkway Inn. “Canadians want to act on climate change.”

However, during a question period following the speech, local Liberal nominee Gerry Samson told Dion he’s having trouble selling the “Green Shift” plan to people in Cornwall and S, D and G.

“They (people) seem to not believe the tax shift is going to benefit them” Samson said. “They just don’t seem to believe it.”

Yikes. And with Stephane Dion right there in the room! So, of course, the reporters go over to Stephane Dion for an immediate comment. Caught unprepared by Gerry Samson's admission, Stephane Dion's response seems to be that Gerry Samson hasn't spoken to the right people:

When asked about Samson’s comments prior to leaving the event, Dion said the response he received at the Cornwall event was similar to what he’s seen elsewhere in the country. The party leader said he didn’t know how many people Samson spoke to.

I'm guessing that Gerry Samson won't be allowed to share a room with Stephane Dion with the media present anytime in the near future.

As a way of comparison, Stephane Dion seemed to have little trouble winning over this crowd to his plan for a carbon tax:

Judging by the applause, Dion’s speech and responses were well received by the roughly 110 people who were in attendance at the event, which was hosted by the Cornwall Carbon Reduction Initiative (CCRI).

The Liberal leader’s plan hit home with Ernie Schaefer, one of the local residents in attendance. Schaefer believes the plan could help bring the public together on a very critical issue.

“The plan he’s advanced is dealing with a question we cannot afford to ignore any more,” Schaefer said. “It’s credible and completely thought out. It’s an action plan that works.”

Clearly, Ernie Schaefer is sold on it. He's just one of your local residents, after all, wowed by the plan presented by Stephane Dion at the podium that evening.

Ernie Schaefer is the only audience member interviewed and quoted in this story.

Just an average guy...who is also an active member of the local Liberal riding association:

Stormont-Dundas-South-Glengarry 2007 Activity Plan

Activity Plan / Plan des activités

Prepared at an adhoc meeting of members

Rédigé par un comité adhoc des membres

Tom Manley, Dianne Poirier, Claude Poirier, Davy Coyle, Denis Sabourin, Organzeb Malik, Ernie Schaefer, Steve Caza, Martial Mbadifeina, Larry Berry, Larry Fisher, Carrie Manley, Claude Delorme, Paulette Hébert, Mahmood Shafqat.

Funny that Ernie Schaefer didn't identify himself as a Liberal Party member and Liberal riding association activist. Too bad the paper didn't figure that out before labeling him as just "one of the local residents".

Maybe Gerry Samson really is having trouble selling the carbon tax to people. At least to people who aren't Liberal Party members who enjoy posing as average citizens with no obvious party affiliations.

Which makes me wonder...just how many of the other 109 people in attendance were like Ernie Schaefer -- active members of the Liberal Party trucked out to fill chairs and spout out praise to the local press?

Maybe Schaefer was the only one. And it was pure luck that the only active Liberal Party partisan in the crowd was the only one who got himself interviewed and quoted in the only story written about this event, without revealing his link to the Liberal Party.

It all sounds a bit dishonest when I write it up that way. Just assume for a moment that this was not luck, but an orchestrated bit of media manipulation. If Canadians are really warming up to Stephane Dion's idea of paying more for everything, then why would the Liberals resort to playing tricks like this?

Playing tricks on the media to sell the tax trick. Cute.

Maybe we should come up with a name for this sort of thing. Call it Stephane Dion's Green Shiftiness.

Addendum: I wonder if Gerry Samson was in on the joke.

A random thought: If it turns out that the Liberals are playing games in promoting their "Green Shift", it only strengthens Jennifer Wright's position that the Liberals are undermining her Green Shift Inc.

Stephane Dion selling the carbon tax

2008-07-23T22:53:27-05:00

Can Stephane Dion sell the carbon tax?

The question is misleading.

The real question is this.

Can Stephane Dion sell the carbon tax without alienating everyone around him?

Sometimes the real story is hidden behind the "human interest" piece.

In this case, the human interest bit is about Gabrielle Arkett being deeply disappointed about the brief contact she had with Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion:

She was introduced to Liberal party supporters but felt they were pushy and talked at her, not with her, as she was whisked around a portion of the renovated Festival Theatre lobby.

The biggest frustration was a quick handshake and photo with Mr. Dion. She was hoping to ask a few questions that she spent a fair amount of time formulating with her dad.

To be fair, I bet there are stories like this about every political leader. He or she breezes in, a quick photo, and onto the next extended hand.

Perhaps Arkett's expectations were set too high, but then who isn't idealistic at 15?

But for Arkett, this was not the only disappointment. Just the biggest one:

The Liberal leader was in the area recently to talk about the Green Shift, the Liberals’ new environmental plan promising taxes on pollution and a reduction in income tax.

The 15-year-old said she didn’t feel that Mr. Dion sufficiently explained the Liberals’ new plan in a brief, eight-minute address.

A portion of his speech was spent attacking Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

“I had no idea what the Green Shift was at the end of it,” the Central Secondary School student said.

“Copies (of the Green Shift) should have been handed out so people could ask good questions.”

Ms. Arkett said advertising the event as town hall discussion was misleading because there was not enough opportunity to ask questions about the Green Shift and other topics.

Is this the grand communications plan that would sell Canadians on the carbon tax by the end of the summer?

Hand out the pamphlets. Speak incomprehensibly for eight minutes. Spend three of those eight minutes trashing the Stephen Harper. Leave before the questions start.

Remember that the carbon tax plan includes an escalating tax on emissions applied on certain fuels at certain points in the value chain, three distinct tax bracket cuts, and a myriad of credits, benefits, social programs, and technology funds. What it doesn't include are predictions or goals for how emissions will be affected.

After watching Stephane Dion breeze in and out, I doubt many people had any real idea what the carbon tax is going to do, expect make everything more expensive. Gabrielle Arkett got it right, I think. Stephane Dion ought to have treated Gabrielle Arkett with more respect. She's a very perceptive person.

Note: Gabrielle, if you actually read this, don't be so surprised about Stephane Dion's reaction. Stephane Dion has two reasons not to spend more than a moment with you. First, you don't vote. Second, you can't help with Stephane Dion's leadership debt. Come back in a few years holding a cheque, and Stephane Dion will gladly listen to your questions.

Stephane Dion? Oh.

2008-07-22T09:46:33-05:00

Stephane Dion is mistaken for a popular local politician. When the mistake is corrected, enthusiasm for being in such close proximity to that carbon tax guy drops dramatically.

Hey, it's just an anecdote, so don't read to much into it. But it is funny.

What's more interesting, though, is that the story became ammunition in a Liberal-versus-Liberal infighting.

Is this a hint of how much Canadians are really fretting about global warming?

Or just a sign that Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion couldn't get arrested in some parts of the country even if he tried?

In any case, Stephane Dion runs the risk of being known simply as "that tax guy", if he is recognized at all:

Federal Liberal Leader Stephane Dion blew into town in a carbon-free vehicle last week. Well, we're not sure but we assume he wasn't blowing any extra tax out of his exhaust.

After an interview at the ol' T&T, Dion and local MPs Brian Murphy and Dominic LeBlanc were next to the Transcript building on Bonaccord Street when they were spotted by a woman crossing the street.

"Oh my goodness, isn't it wonderful to meet Brian Murphy and George LeBlanc at the same time," she gushed.

Um, this isn't Moncton's new mayor, Smilin' Brian politely corrected her. "It's our federal Liberal leader, Stephane Dion."

The woman looked puzzled for a moment, said 'Oh', and moved on.

Perhaps Dion should take that as a sign of his popularity now that he has donned the armour of 'Carbon Tax Man'.

What is really funny is that this is not lost of Liberals. Someone posted this as part of a discussion on a Liberal Party policy forum:

Dion was actually here in my city last week. On the street no one knew who he was, even though he was with two local liberal MP's. When they would intoduce him there would be a polite "oh" and then walk away. Green shift is not going over well me thinks.......

OK, it wasn't so much a discussion as it was a shouting match between anti-carbon-tax Liberals and pro-carbon-tax Liberals, with a generous helping of Alberta-bashing tossed in for good measure.

I don't know if that person was re-posting the story from that article (and adding embellishments by suggesting multiple persons didn't recognize Stephane Dion and were unimpressed to find out who he was) or if this person had better information of what really happened on the street. But clearly there is a fight going on inside the Liberal Party, and stories like this are providing ammunition to Liberals who want to see this carbon tax plan go away. Maybe Stephane Dion too.

Oops: Liberal MP Ralph Goodale explains how most oil consumption will not be taxed

2008-07-20T14:39:13-05:00

Is Saskatchewan going to hurt badly by Stephane Dion's carbon tax? Well, Stephane Dion admitted as much, but Liberal MP Ralph Goodale has taken the time to explain this more clearly.

Don't worry, he says.

Almost all the oil taken out of the ground in Saskatchewan will be consumed and turned into carbon dioxide emissions without a dime of tax being applied.

Oil company profits are safe!

You might wonder how this helps the environment. On the other hand, you might have stopped asking that question after Liberal MPs Ken Boshcoff and Martha Hall Findlay have already explained that no one expects any actual environmental benefit from the carbon tax.

First we had Liberal MP Ken Boshcoff explain how Stephane Dion's carbon tax is really just a way of moving money from Alberta and Saskatchewan to Ontario and Quebec to pay for social programs.

Then we had Liberal MP Martha Hall Findlay explain how Stephane Dion's carbon tax might or might not affect emissions, and that there is simply no way to tell.

Now we have Liberal MP Ralph Goodale explain that most of the oil taken out of the ground in Saskatchewan won't be taxed at all.

Yes, you heard that right.

Most of that carbon emitting oil in Saskatchewan won't be taxed. The emissions will go into the atmosphere without raising a dime of revenue to be returned to Canadians through tax cuts or social programs.

But profits from the sale of that oil will flow to oil companies without any problem. Indeed, the business tax cuts in Stephane Dion's carbon tax plan are likely to make those profits higher.

And this helps how?

The Liberal Party's proposed "Green Tax Shift" is raising many concerns in the oil rich provinces of Saskatchewan and Alberta. So, former Liberal Finance Minister and Wascana MP Ralph Goodale was in Moose Jaw this past week explaining the plan.

He says in principle the proposal is to reduce the burden on "good things" like higher incomes and shift some of that load over to things you'd want to discourage like pollution and waste. Goodale also says it's important that people in Saskatchewan understand what's being proposed.

"A significant portion of our oil and gas production in this province will end up being exempt from a carbon tax because it is largely put into a pipeline and exported right out of the country without ever being burned on the Canadian side, so there are no emissions on the Canadian side and therefore about two thirds of our oil and gas industry would be exempt from a carbon tax proposal" Goodale said.

So let's get this straight. I pull great blobs of oil out of the ground in Saskatchewan. As long as it is not sold in Canada, Stephane Dion's carbon tax is not going be applied. As it is, most of it isn't sold in Canada already. Should one day Stephane Dion get the opportunity to inflict this new tax on Canadians, Canadian producers will do well to sell all their product to the United States to avoid the tax and maximize profits, as Ralph Goodale has been so helpful in explaining. That means the oil will be consumed and converted into emissions without Stephane Dion's carbon tax doing one jot of environmental good.

I suppose Ralph Goodale is simply confirming what Ken Boshcoff and Martha Hall Findlay have already said.

Stephane Dion's carbon tax isn't going to do any good for the environment.

So what's the point of this tax again?

Addendum: I don't know if "Green Tax Shift" is just a phrase used in this story, or if it is a hint of how the Liberals plan to resolve the lawsuit with Green Shift Inc.

Time to Wade into the Pilot Seniority Problem at Air Canada

2008-07-20T13:22:13-05:00

Is it time for the government to get involved in the ongoing labour dispute at Air Canada? With the troubles plaguing the airline, this is one issue that could be resolved. And ought to be.

Before I wade too deeply, however, a little background should be offered. Some readers might be too young to remember but there used to be two major airlines in Canada. There was Air Canada and Canadian Airlines. Air Canada ultimately bailed out the money-losing Canadian Airlines by merging the companies. The Liberal government rejoiced and approved the merger as they didn’t want to open up our skies to foreign competition.

With that merger came the problem of what to do with the pilots. Pilots live by a strict pecking order defined by seniority. Generally I dislike seniority-base systems, since it rewards staying power instead of skill. But certain professions stand apart. The skill spread between individual airline pilots is small, as the level of responsibility assigned to a pilot is such that there can’t be much room for anything less than near perfection. Since general skill level and professionalism is essentially constant, seniority becomes the obvious way of ordering pilots.

So seniority is the means by which pilots are distinguished, and the problem of how to deal with pilot seniority at Air Canada has dragged on for years – which brings us to today. A fair and balanced seniority integration system still hasn’t been implemented. The pilots are still at each other’s throats over the issue, the price of jet fuel is going up, security costs have not let up, large foreign airlines are looking for merger and takeover opportunities to help survive the turmoil, and Stephane Dion is looking to make things worse with his carbon tax.

Is this a crisis? Maybe not quite yet, since the pilots bargaining agreement with Air Canada isn’t up until June 2009, but the clock is ticking. How can Air Canada fly if its pilots can’t agree to a seniority list? One set of pilots seems to have won the lottery and don’t intend to deal away their winnings to the benefit of the original pilots at Air Canada.

How did this seniority issue become such a mess?

In 2001, arbitration took place and Morton Mitchnick designed a scheme to merge the seniority levels. Well, the Canadian Airlines pilots hated it, and the CIRB agreed that Mitchnick had weighted the seniority of Air Canada pilots too favourably. The CIRB was chaired by Paul Lordon at the time. Remember that name. So, in 2003, it was sent back to arbitration. Lordon set out specific principles and directions to be followed for the next round.

Brian Keller chaired the next arbitration. Unfortunately, Keller didn’t follow the principles Lordon directed were to be followed. In fact, out of the three arbitration panelists, Mr. Keller’s voice was the final decision and the other two members disagreed with the Mr. Keller. Keller, effectively, took the pendulum and swung it hard in the other direction, treating the seniority of Canadian Airline pilots with much for favour and literally discounting the seniority of the original Air Canada pilots. Nice. Imagine working somewhere and slowly moving up the depth charts and then one day someone says, “Sorry, we’ve just discounted your seniority and given your job to someone from another company with less seniority. You will be paid less, you may see your kids and family less because you’ve got to work more days per month – and of course your pension won’t be as much. Have a nice day.”

Seniority is a big deal for pilots. It’s not about bragging rights. It has serious consequences on their careers and on their lives. Any changes and adjustments have to be handled very delicately.

Needless to say, there were a lot of disgruntled pilots. After Lordon retired in 2003 the CIRB acted as though it was tired of listening to the case and the courts just kept deferring to the then tribunal (full of Liberal political appointees) – even though 2 of 3 panelists on the Keller arbitration disagreed with Keller’s decision. More frustrating was that Keller’s decision blatantly disregarded the directions that it was to have received from the Paul Lordon of the CIRB –namely pilots who flew similar aircraft were to be grouped together and the integration date was to be 2000. When Keller implemented a punitive seniority “discount” on original Air Canada pilots and then moved the integration date of the pilots from 2000 to 2003 – it seems rather evident that a couple of key CIRB direction were broken.

I have no idea how Keller’s decision was allowed to stand in the face of the ignored Lordon direction and despite the fact that Keller was not supported by his fellow co-panelists.

Yet the Keller decision is still in place. The passage of time has not soothed the pain. Actually, since we’re talking about seniority here, the passage of time is probably making things worse for pilots who feel cheated. Lordon has since left the CIRB, but the former head of the CIRB was retained to look at the decision again. With an opportunity to undo the damage inflicted by Keller, Lordon made two fundamentally clear recommendations: (1) dump the punitive seniority discount applied to original Air Canada pilots and (2) move the merger date back to when the merger actually took place in 2000, not 2003:

The panel headed by Paul Lordon, former head of the Canadian Industrial Relations Board, says the often bitter impasse can be resolved by tinkering with the original arbitrator's ruling issued nearly five years ago.

The Air Canada Pilots Association-commissioned panel included two of its members but was boycotted by the former Canadian Airlines pilots.

The recommendations would involve removing a seniority discount applied to original Air Canada pilots and use of a 2000 merger date, as opposed to 2003 included in the Keller award that caused Air Canada pilots a five-year career disadvantage.

Panellist Serge Beaulieu said the proposed changes would allow Air Canada pilots to gain seniority while preserving the positions of former Canadian pilots by freezing their ability to gain seniority credits.

"It's not punitive to anybody," he said in an interview with The Canadian Press. "It's the right thing to do."

The Lordon report was tremendously significant. It could have simply stated that new negotiations were required. But Lordon took the step of recommending that the Keller decision ought to be modified instead ahead of new negotiations.

The recent Lordon Report recommendations ought to be taken under careful consideration by the federal government as well as the current members of the CIRB.

Let us not forget that Air Canada is a creature of the federal government, since competition rules had to be suspended for the Air Canada and Canadian Airlines merger to take place in the first place. Furthermore, the reason that Air Canada and Canadian Airlines merged was because the Liberals wanted to keep out foreign competition. Who needs free trade agreements when protectionist policies buy so many more votes? The federal government and CRIB have a role to play to clean up this mess. Paul Lordon has started the ball rolling in an attempt to find a fair and balanced seniority system – after all – this all he sought when he sent the Mitchnick award back to arbitration, which unfortunately ended up with the flawed Keller decision. It’s time we take notice of this matter before the pilots are back at the table with Air Canada in 2009 – who knows what the future holds at that time? But it doesn’t look like clear skies are on the horizon. Our airline system is far more important, I think, than getting worked up over text message fees.

Blair Wilson and the anonymous letter

2008-07-20T07:29:31-05:00

Yesterday I wrote that the story of Blair Wilson was coming to a close. I think that's likely to be true, but today I have to point out the Blair Wilson is putting up what might be a last minute fight.

Part of that is what might be an attempt to alter the understanding of what started the Elections Canada investigation in the first place.

Blair Wilson was a Liberal MP who has been sitting as an independent since allegations of election misspending and of personal lawsuits were made public last October:

Media reports in October quoted Liberal insiders who worked for Mr. Wilson as saying he failed to report all his spending and made election purchases with cash, leaving no paper trail.

In October, Mr. Wilson stepped down from his position as revenue critic for the Liberal Party over financial allegations by his father-in-law Bill Lougheed.

Elections Canada has found him guilty of three violations, but a letter of compliance means there won't be any prosecution.

Blair Wilson was spinning this as an exoneration, and also making statements to the effect that he was the driving force behind the Elections Canada investigation:

He added that there was a list of allegations and the Elections Canada findings clear him of most of them.

“I definitely agree [to accept the three charges]. Honest mistakes were made; it was a long campaign and campaigns are complex,” said Mr. Wilson.

Mr. Wilson said he had himself initially approached Elections Canada to launch a review of his campaign expenses, contrary to reports that it had stemmed from an anonymous complaint.

Now that's news to me. Here is the timeline regarding the anonymous complaint and the investigation.

October 24: Date on the anonymous complaint addressed to Elections Canada:

Letter of Complaint

October 28: Blair Wilson says he has not heard from Elections Canada:

Last week, a citizen in the riding filed an Elections Canada challenge to Commissioner William Corbett to have Wilson's campaign expenditures investigated. "The election result was very close and had Mr. Wilson actually only spent what he was allowed to, he may well have lost. In the interest of a fair and accountable democratic election process, Mr. Wilson's campaign must be investigated," the submission alleges.

When asked about the status of the investigation, Elections Canada's Diane Benson said: "The Commissioner of Canada Elections never confirms or denies complaints or investigations."

When asked to comment on the allegations about campaign expense discrepancies, Wilson said, "These are just unfounded allegations.

"The only thing I can say is I had a very good fiscal agent that filed all the necessary documents. I have not heard anything with respect to these allegations from Elections Canada to date and if and when I do hear from Elections Canada, I'll have more to comment on."

October 28, 9:48pm: Blair Wilson first refers to an investigation:

The federal Liberal caucus has lost Liberal MP Blair Wilson. He resigned Sunday after being accused of not disclosing all of his expenses during the last election campaign. The representative for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast has stepped down from his post as the Liberal national revenue critic.

Wilson said he's taking this action for the good of the party and believes the allegations will be found to be baseless. He has asked Elections Canada to launch a formal review. Elections Canada records show that Wilson reported expenses of $82,303.71 for the 2006 campaign.

None of this actually refutes the Blair Wilson's claim that he initiated the investigation, but even then it would be splitting hairs. The only reason he would have initiated the investigation, if indeed he had, is because the anonymous complaint caught the attention of Elections Canada and, perhaps more importantly, the media.

At best, Blair Wilson is splitting hairs. At worst, he is engaging in some revisionism as part of his effort to rehabilitate himself and get back in the good books of the Liberal Party:

B.C. MP Blair Wilson says he wants the Liberal Party to reinstate his membership following what he describes as his exoneration by Elections Canada into whether he violated federal election rules on campaign spending.

Mr. Wilson, who currently sits as an independent, said during a phone interview on Saturday that he was “happy and relieved” by Election Canada's findings.

“I'm confident that since I've been cleared ... the National Liberal Caucus, the leader of the Liberal Party, and all good Liberals will support me in my cause to join the [caucus], and that they will also support me as the Liberal Party's next candidate,” he said.

The first formal opportunity Mr. Wilson will have to put his case to the Liberal Party leadership is during the party's national caucus, which is scheduled for Aug. 19.

We might not have to wait until August 19. Quick on the heels of Blair Wilson's public announcement that he would be trying to get back into the Liberal caucus, he announced that he would be holding a news conference. You have to recall that from the Liberal Party's point of view, Blair Wilson's problem is that he did not disclose the financial disputes he had been having with his family and former business associates, which is a separate issue from the election misspending. Blair Wilson's news conference is scheduled for later today, but I'd be surprised if it amounted to good news for his political future:

West Vancouver MP Blair Wilson has called a news conference today to make an "important announcement about his future."

Chris Freimond, his public relations representative, wouldn't elaborate on what the MP for West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country was going to say.

Wilson, who was investigated by Elections Canada following a Province special investigation into his past business dealings, debts and family disputes, was drummed out of the Liberal Party in December when Leader Stephane Dion told him he couldn't run as a Liberal in the next federal election after the probe into his failure to disclosure his past legal and financial woes.

So we can take bets:

Blair Wilson is about to announce his return to the Liberal Party.
Blair Wilson is about to announce his switch to the Conservatives / the NDP / the Green Party / the Trotskyist League of Canada.
Blair Wilson is about to announce that he is resigning immediately to return to private life.
Blair Wilson is suing the Liberals to take him back.

If Blair Wilson is resigning, then his bit about starting the Elections Canada investigation into himself has to be be one of the shortest attempts at political rehabilitation on record.

Blair Wilson story coming to a close

2008-07-19T07:00:07-05:00

Blair Wilson had admitted to violations of the Elections Act, but there will be no prosecution. It is also likely that there will be no seat for Blair Wilson once this parliament rises for the last time.

Former Liberal MP Blair Wilson became an independent following charges that he had violated federal election spending rules. Blair Wilson has admitted to some of those violations:

B.C. MP Blair Wilson has admitted to violating federal election rules by failing to disclose election spending and accepting the donation of 144 umbrellas during the last election campaign.

Elections Canada announced yesterday that Mr. Wilson has acknowledged three violations of the Canada Elections Act when he ran for a seat as a Liberal in the 2006 election.

The West Vancouver MP admitted that neither the 144 printed umbrellas, worth about $711, nor the $9,000 he spent on brochures, business cards and Christmas cards, were declared as election expenses.

Following up on an anonymous complaint, Elections Canada said Mr. Wilson also failed to appoint an official agent and auditor before accepting a contribution or incurring an electoral campaign expense.

The anonymous complaint and the evidence submitted to Elections Canada was made available to me in November 2007, when the allegations were first made. You can see that material in these posts, including the evidence of the umbrellas and the printing.

The Charges Against Blair Wilson:

The Charges (The letter of complaint)
The Cowrie Street Office (The Cowrie Street evidence)
The Marine Drive Office (The Marine Drive evidence)
Printing (The Printing evidence)
Canada Post (The Canada Post evidence)
The Umbrellas (The Umbrellas evidence)
The Coast Reporter (The Coast Reporter evidence)
The Whistler Question (The Whistler Question evidence)
Jamey Kramer (The Jamey Kramer evidence)
Conclusion

The case has been resolved with a notice compliance, essentially a promise to follow the rules going forward, so there will be no prosecution by Elections Canada.

Unfortunately for Wilson, it doesn't seem like the Liberals will allow him to run as the party's candidate in this riding or any other.

The Conservative Boxes: A good show for the cameras on the way out, then quietly returned

2008-07-18T14:57:15-05:00

Seventeen boxes of sensitive Conservative material related to the In-and-Out affair being removed from Conservative Party headquarters by grim-looking Elections Canada officials.

The images from last April were quite powerful.

Would you like an update? Well, for one thing, the boxes didn't leave the building, at least not until the relevancy of the seize material was determined.

And that determination was that over 85% of the material had nothing to do with the question of advertising financing in the 2006 election. That material has been returned, but without a phalanx of cameras recording the march back into Conservative Party headquarters.

And the rest? Virtually all of it was material Elections Canada already had.

Makes you wonder just what the point of all this was. Just to put on a good show for the cameras?

For quite some time, I've known that the boxes taken by Elections Canada officials during the April visit to Conservative Party headquarters didn't actually get very far.

Sorry, but I really couldn't say anything.

Indeed, the boxes stopped well short of the door as Conservative Party lawyers challenged Elections Canada on the relevance of the material taken to the so-called In-and-Out Affair.

You have to remember that Elections Canada made off with a huge amount of material:

Conservatives party operatives and those in government interviewed for this story said they are trying to determine what classified material Elections Canada might have seized - and worrying that it could be released in a court case.

After two days of unfettered access to the party headquarters, Elections Canada made replicas of all their computer hard drives, carted off 17 boxes of documents, and copied all of the party's emails, Tory officials said.

Polling and advertising data, voter information, and documented descriptions of the party's electoral tactics are all among the things that would have been stored at Tory headquarters.

The Conservatives initiated a fight on this point:

The party said Thursday that 17 boxes of documents, five envelopes and seven computer hard drives contain privileged legal advice and material that's irrelevant to an Elections Canada probe.

The allegedly irrelevant material is believed to include copious emails that have nothing to do with election spending.

"I can't get into the specifics," [Conservative spokesperson Ryan] Sparrow said, "but I can say that our lawyers are working with Elections Canada on this matter."

Well, chalk this one as a win for the Conservatives. Nearly everything had to be returned, deemed irrelevant, and what they kept was, by and large, stuff Elections Canada already had. From an email:

The vast majority of what was seized was returned since it was not relevant. The vast vast majority of what they retained is information we had provided them already. We have nothing to hide.

What is a vast majority? We're talking something like 85% of the stuff lugged out of the offices by Elections Canada investigators had nothing to do with the investigation, and is no longer in the possession of Elections Canada.

To be more accurate, it was never in the possession of Elections Canada, but in limbo while relevancy was being determined.

But I bet it made for great television watching box after box come out of the office. Canadians assumed that Elections Canada now had more evidence of Conservative wrongdoing than you could shake a stick at.

Seventeen boxes? Who knew Conservatives were hiding so much?

I mean, it's not like a trained investigators would seize material that was irrelevant or already in their possession. You'd expect some material would be taken in error, but virtually all of it?

Except that's exactly what seems to have happened.

The parade of boxes was just eye candy for the cameras. Canadians didn't get to see almost all the boxes come back.

After returning all the stuff that should not have been taken in the first place, virtually everything that remained was stuff Elections Canada already had.

Take away the irrelevant stuff, and take away the stuff the Elections Canada already had, and you end up with an unimpressively small pile. No one has suggested the Conservatives would not have handed over that material had Elections Canada bothered to ask for it.

All in all, the "raid" was an impressive media event, but legally, it seemed to accomplish nothing.

Unless the point was to stage a media event and derail the deposition of Elections Canada officials that had been scheduled for the next day. If you believe that, then grabbing all that material made sense, if just to get it out of the hands of the Conservatives for a short time, and force the Conservative Party to fight to get its property back. So what if the material ultimately had to be returned. The raid served its purpose, unrelated to the gathering of evidence.

If you believe that.

Stephane Dion: Thief

2008-07-17T21:59:42-05:00

Some strong language from Jennifer Wright, the head of Green Shift Inc, the company suing the Liberal Party over the use of the name "Green Shift".

The local community paper from where I grew up, The Etobicoke Guardian, has a piece about the Green Shift lawsuit:

The Liberal Party of Canada is being sued for $8.5 million by a Bloor West company over the name of the party's new carbon-tax plan for the environment and economy: Green Shift.

Jennifer Wright, who launched her business Green Shift Inc. in 1999, said she didn't want the matter to go to court but when the Liberals ignored her repeated requests to drop the name from their campaign, she felt she had no choice. She claims their use of her company's name damages it's reputation of being independent and environmentally-centred. Her office has received many calls from confused customers who want to know if her company is connected to the Liberal Party.

Is there a chance for the Liberal Party and Green Shift Inc to find common ground? Anything is possible, but the raw emotion is going to be hard to overcome:

She said the Liberals called her the evening before Liberal leader Stephane Dion launched his Green Shift campaign last month.

"They said 'hey, you're probably going to get a lot of extra hits on your website', as if this was a good thing," she said.

She said for about a week she didn't take any action, because she wanted to give the Liberals time to reconsider.

"I think they just thought this is a small company, and we want this name," she said.

Wright said the company has made an effort to stay independent, to preserve its integrity. Dion told Toronto media last week, that he'd be willing to work with Wright. But Wright said she isn't buying it.

"It's as if someone broke into your house, and then turned to you and said, oh it's okay you can live here (with me)."

Arrogant.

Bully.

Thief.

If that's what Jennifer Green thinks, this suit is not going away any time soon.

Yasmin Ashareh: Application for a publication ban covering William Imona-Russel

2008-07-16T07:56:38-05:00

One of the stories that has gone dormant for almost a year is the case of the murder Yasmin Ashareh.

Well, it was come back with a vengeance.

As a way of review, recall that Yasmin Ashareh, a 20-year-old single woman living by herself, was found murdered in the Rexdale area of Toronto last summer.

Her body was in a duffel bag. Her throat had been cut. Because of a missed pickup, her remains were found outside the John Garland Boulevard rooming house where she lived.

Her case attracted quite a bit of attention. The means by which she was killed was unusual. Throat cutting has a ritualistic element to it. She was a Muslim, and some in the media and online speculated on whether this was an honour killing. Her family was from Somalia.

Her father was not in Canada, though. He had left his family years earlier to return to Somalia. Readers of this blog learned that Yasmin was, in fact, the daughter of Awad Ahmed Ashareh, the Minister for Justice and Religious Affairs in the Somali state of Puntland, and subsequently a member of the national government. Her relationship to Ahmed Ashareh was later confirmed by the mainstream media.

At last check, Awad Ahmed Ashareh was working with fundamentalist Islamist rebels in Somalia to integrate them into to government, even cabinet posts.

That connection gave cause to some Somali's to think that Yasmin Ashareh got what she deserved.

The plot thickens.

Still, Toronto police made it clear that this case had no religious or political overtones. Instead, they arrested a Nigerian who lived in the same rooming house, a man by the name of William Imona-Russel.

Police would not elaborate on the relationship between Imona-Russel and Yasmin Ashareh, or on the motive, or on the evidence that supported the murder charge.

If you read the Yasmin Ashareh posts on this blog, you'll realize that I have a lot of doubts about this case.

Imona-Russel was out on $1000 bail for having allegedly raped a woman. But even that case is not straightforward. Indeed, a careful reading suggests even more questions in my mind.

Not convinced? Well, how about this? Before arresting Imona-Russel, police admit to having Imona-Russel under surveillance for several days. Why? We don't know. The police won't explain why they had him under costly surveillance, what they hoped to learn, what they did learn, if anything, and what prompted them to terminate the surveillance and arrest him.

I wonder if the police hoped Imona-Russel would lead them to someone connected to the crime somehow. People in the area have contacted me to say they heard two men arguing the night Ashareh was murdered, as well as the sound of furniture being moved. An acquaintance of Imona-Russel contacted me to tell me Imona-Russel was no angel, but he was shocked at allegations of murder.

As late as October, weeks after Imona-Russel's arrest, police were still canvassing the neighbourhood.

All this adds up to nothing if the police had found the bloody knife in Imona-Russel's kitchen with his fingerprints all over it, but then there was a publication ban on the evidence.

A publication ban on the evidence? Why? So we would not know how much evidence the police had? Or how little? Even straightforward information, like where her identification was found (with the body, in her arpartment, in Imona-Russel's possession, or somewhere else altogether) is being treated like a state secret.

If it was a slam dunk, you would expect that the case would have been pleaded out by now.

Then last night, I got this email, and it makes me wonder just what is going on in this case:

I am one of the lawyers assisting Mr. William Imona-Russel with his charges. I am writing to advise that we will be bringing an application for a publication ban in this matter. If you wish to apply to the Court for standing to argue a position with regards to this proposed ban, please provide your legal name and your address so that we are able to serve the application and our materials on you.

One of the lawyers? How many lawyers does he have? Clearly he is fighting the charges, and part of the strategy is to shut down media coverage, commentary, and speculation.

Needless to say, I was floored by this one.

I'm trying to get in touch with the reporters in the mainstream media who were also covering this case to see if they had been contacted regarding a publication ban on this case.

Publication bans can be retroactive, so depending on how this plays out, I might have to pull down the stories for the duration of a trial. Of course, that doesn't mean I won't be following the case, just not publishing further stories on it, until the case is resolved.

Stay tuned.

Disturbing details from Toronto Police about man charged with sexual assault and incest

2008-07-15T14:54:32-05:00

A disturbing report from Toronto Police. And I'm surprised at the amount of detail they're releasing.

From the Toronto Police Service, via an email alert from 33 Division:

An 18-year-old man has been charged in a Sexual Assault investigation.

It is alleged that:

between June 1 and July 1, 2008, the accused used his spiritual position within his faith community to gain the trust of two women, aged 41 and 18, and a 15-year-old boy,

the victims believed that there were dire consequences to their non-compliance of the accused's demands,

the victims complied out of fear.

Nyron Gill, 18, of Toronto, is charged with:

two counts of Sexual Assault,

Incest,

Invitation to Sexual Touching.

He appeared in court at 1000 Finch Avenue West, on Wednesday, July 9, 2008.

Investigators believe there may be other victims.

Anyone with information is asked to contact police at 416-808-3305, Crime Stoppers anonymously at 416-222-TIPS (8477), or online at www.222tips.com.

To give his name and age is what surprised me, given that he's been charged with incest and that one of the victims is only 15 years old (it isn't clear that this young man is an incest victim). For people who know Gill, even in passing, this might be enough to identify the victims, and usually the police avoid giving out identifying information like this.

Maybe it's the possibility of other victims that is the overriding concern.

It's also a tricky issue, because "Nyron Gill" is also the name of a part-time music producer and student who is also 18 and also from Toronto:

I'm Tha C.O of Blackout Mob Street Unit Souljhaz Entertainment produced for more then a dozen groups, looking for some serious groups to have a better understanding of this music field.

Tha Teams doing more then big thing above ur average street team ya dig scream at us cheaa

Interests

Technology

Sports

Cars

Humour

University

Computers

Films

Sexuality

Internet

Business

DJ

Music

Not sure what all that meant. Maybe the police figured the name was unique enough not to be shared with anyone else, and certainly not with someone of the same age and from the same city.

Stephane Dion: Underwhelming performance in Guelph

2008-07-14T19:38:57-05:00

Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion was in Guelph this past week.

It was not an impressive performance.

First of all, there was a sort of environmental tunnel vision at play. There are a myriad of issues facing the people of Guelph. But from Stephane Dion, they get the only one answer you get from the Liberal leader these days: the environment!

There weren't enough chairs. Then the room wasn't big enough. The first question was a real lowball. And no matter what was asked, the answer related to climate change.

To be fair, though, this was never about Guelph or local issues:

If you're concerned about your lack of representation federally -- Guelph hasn't officially had an MP for more than three months, and for some time prior to that, had one who participated little in the goings-on at the House -- you would have been better off not holding your breath.

"This is not about [federal Liberal candidate Frank Valeriote]; this is not about this riding -- this is about national issues and the Liberal response to national issues," said host Don Drone, director of the Wellington Catholic District School Board, of which Valeriote was formerly chair.

"I enjoyed a lot to work all these years with [retiring Liberal MP] Brenda Chamberlain," was about all Dion told the crowd about local issues.

Later, when asked by a reporter, he said this: "Brenda did a great job for years."

Brenda Chamberlain did not show up.

I wonder what she would have been driving if she did. I ask because the Guelph Mercury made note of what Stephane Dion is driving around in these days:

Before he arrived, someone was speculating that Dion would come in a Smart car. Instead, he arrived in a red minivan.

I hope it wasn't a Liberal speculating. I can only imagine the disappointment.

Contradictions about the Cadman tape?

2008-07-14T09:37:33-05:00

More news from the saga of the Cadman tape.

According to the headlines, a third expert is contradicting the claims made by two other experts that the tape misrepresents a conversation between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and reporter Tom Zytaruk.

The headline is an attention grabber, but the the truth is that the third expert is not willing to come to the same conclusion has the first two experts without access to the original tape and the original recording equipment, something Tom Zytaruk is not willing to grant. He does say that there are irregularities in the recording though.

Not actually a contradiction as I read it.

As you know, the Liberals are being sued by Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The Liberals accused Stephen Harper of being party to an alleged May 2005 bribe attempt aimed at the late Chuck Cadman.

Cadman died in July 2005. In September 2005, Stephen Harper, still opposition leader, was interviewed by Tom Zytaruk in the driveway of the Cadman home.

On that tape, or so some people say, is an admission from Stephen Harper that he knew of the alleged bribe.

The Conservatives have countered with two different analyses that establish that the tape was edited at key points.

The experts who came to that conclusion have filed independent affidavits. Their conclusions were pretty damning:

One of the initial two experts, the head of Owl Investigations Inc. in Colonia, N.J., said he concluded "with scientific certainty that this tape has been edited and doctored to misrepresent the event as it actually occurred."

The other, Alan Gough, a former TV producer who provided video and audio forensic services to the Toronto police force before becoming a "truth verification" expert, said Mr. Zytaruk's interview "is not a continuous recording of one conversation."

But apparently there was a third expert. According to the Globe and Mail, he contradicted the first two:

A former FBI scientist[, former FBI special agent Bruce Koenig,] hired by Stephen Harper's lawyer in the Prime Minister's $3.5-million lawsuit against the Liberal Party has contradicted two other experts who said an audiotape at the centre of the legal action was doctored, court documents reveal.

So by contradicted, I would assume that Koenig is saying the tape wasn't altered.

That would be a contradiction.

Well, not quite.

He doesn't support the conclusions of the other experts, but he's not saying they're wrong either. He's just saying that he won't come to a conclusion without the original tape and the original equipment used to make the recording:

Mr. Koenig reported irregularities in the copy tape and portions where an earlier recording had been taped over, but concluded Mr. Zytaruk's original recording, his tape recorder and an external microphone if Mr. Zytaruk used one "are required to conduct a conclusive authenticity examination in a forensic audio laboratory."

That kind of examination is required to "scientifically" determine whether the original information is truly original or has alterations, such as deletions or additions, Mr. Koenig said in the report he submitted with his own sworn affidavit.

So let's be clear. Koenig did find the same irregularities. He might have what he would call an unscientific opinion about the veracity of the recording, but he is only willing to offer a scientific opinion, and he does believe he has what he needs to do that.

He won't go any farther until he has the tape, and the same equipment used by Zytaruk. Koenig is former FBI, so he's used to the luxury of field agents serving warrants and confiscating evidence to be analyzed.

This is a civil suit. Zytaruk and his publisher refuse to release the original tape, but were happy to sell copies for $500 each. They insist that the copies are accurate reproductions of the original, but then they haven't sworn out affidavits to that effect.

Koenig might still get his chance to get the original tape and the original recorder is sealed plastic baggies accompanied with photographs of where they were found, with those little L-shaped rulers they use to establish scale, but it might take a while. The lawsuit won't go in front of a judge until September.

Koenig has done nothing wrong, and he certainly is under no obligation to render a conclusion if he feels that the evidence he has to work with is incomplete in some way. But though he is not ready to support the conclusion, I think that's a more than a few steps away from contradicting the conclusion. Indeed, Koenig is clear in his statement that there is reason to be concerned about the tape copies that he has to work with.

Not enough to support the scientific conclusion that the tape is misrepresenting the conversation in Koenig's opinion. But he's not contradicting the evidence of irregularities and taped over portions.

Oops: Liberal MP Martha Hall Findlay admits to Liberal greenwashing

2008-07-13T10:10:37-05:00

Liberal Party MP Martha Hall Findlay talks about Stephane Dion's plan for a carbon tax. The carbon tax will save the planet, right? We'll be encouraged to consume less energy, right?

According to Findlay, there's no way to really know, or to be sure if it's really working.

Still, that's no reason not to impose a tax on Canadians.

Martha Hall Findlay explains the priorities behind Stephane Dion's carbon tax:

Findlay, now the MP for the riding of Willowdale in North York, spoke passionately to her party faithful at the Best Western Parkway Inn about the carbon tax strategy that has dominated the media in recent months.

The new taxes from Liberal leader Stephane Dion's plan are expected to generate more than $15 billion in revenue in four years. But the plan is intended to be revenue neutral because it will cut income taxes and increase family support payments.

Findlay said it's impossible to calculate the emission reduction numbers at this point, "because energy prices have gone up so much, we don't know how the shift will affect consumption," she said.

So let me get this straight. Martha Hall Findlay gets an opportunity to explain the Stephane Dion's plan to save the planet from global warming through a tax.

And the best she can come up with is that it might not actually have any effect? That consumption is already being affected so much by pure market forces, that the effect of a carbon tax might be negligible as far as consumption is concerned? Even if there is a drop, there is no way to allocate a consumption drop between fuel price increases and the carbon tax?

Well, if you have no confidence that a carbon tax will actually affect carbon consumption, then why proceed?

Liberal MP Ken Boshcoff brags about all the money that the carbon tax will shift out of Alberta and into Ontario. Liberal MP Martha Hall Findlay makes it clear that the Liberals are proceeding with this massive inter-provincial money shift without any idea if it will have any environmental impact.

Two Liberal MPs, two admissions that the Liberal carbon tax has only a tenuous connection to the environment. It might work. It might not. No one really knows.

But that's OK, because the one thing we know for sure the carbon tax will do is cost Canadians billions in tax money, billions the Liberal can use to fund new social programs. According to Boshcoff, it's about pulling money out of Alberta to hand over to Ontario voters. To potential Liberal voters.

Indeed, if carbon consumption isn't affected, as Martha Hall Findlay admits is a possibility, those billions of vote-buying dollars will continue to roll in.

And if carbon consumption drops by accident, that's OK. The carbon tax can always be cranked up to keep those vote-buying revenues steady.

Hey, maybe that's what "revenue neutral" means. If Stephane Dion gets his carbon tax, revenues for Liberal government spending is guaranteed never to dry up, and those loyal Liberal voters will keep coming back for more Alberta-funded largesse.

It's just a tax. The whole environment thing? It's just greenwashing to mask the bitter taste of cynical regionally-divisive tax on top of all the others we pay even as oil costs go up and up.

More at the Alberta Aardvark.

Oops: Liberal MP Ken Boshcoff admits to Liberal greenwashing

2008-07-12T07:47:55-05:00

Liberal MP Ken Boshcoff has let the cat out of the bag. Apparently Stephane Dion's carbon tax program is just a big vacuum designed to suck money out of Alberta, pass it through Liberal government social programs, and put it in the pockets of whomever the Liberals deem worthy of receiving the cash.

The whole "environmental" thing is just words slapped on to make the tax grab more palatable. That's called "greenwashing".

You know, this just makes Jennifer Wright's argument that her company is being damaged by the Liberals lifting the name "Green Shift" all the more compelling.

Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion's "Green Shift" is nothing like Jennifer Wright's "Green Shift".

Jennifer Wright's "Green Shift" provides services to companies wanting to be more environmentally responsible.

Stephane Dion's "Green Shift" is about taxing the hell out of Alberta and handing the money to Liberal client groups via new social spending programs:

An Ontario Liberal MP said Friday his party's Green Shift carbon-tax proposal will raid Alberta's energy riches and transfer wealth "from rich to poor, from the oilpatch to the rest of the country."

Ken Boshcoff, MP for Thunder Bay-Rainy River, rekindled memories of the controversial national energy program when he stated on a blog post that the Grits' Green Shift program will inflict financial pain on Alberta and its oil and gas industry.

Failing to say much about any environmental benefits of the plan, Boshcoff proudly proclaimed on a political news blog that the Green Shift is the "most aggressive anti-poverty program in 40 years," which will target wealthy provinces -- particularly Alberta.

"The shift will transfer wealth from rich to poor, from the oilpatch to the rest of the country, and from the coffers of big business to the pockets of low-income Canadians," he said in a post on NetNewsledger.com.

Needless to say, Albertan MPs are not impressed:

Calgary Southeast MP Jason Kenney, the federal Conservative pit bull on the Green Shift, said Boshcoff's comments reinforce what the government has argued for weeks -- the carbon-tax plan amounts to divisive politics trying to pit Alberta against other parts of Canada.

"It reveals the real plan here, which is a massive new tax in order to finance increased social spending," Kenney said. "When you scratch below the surface, what you see here is a discredited, old, beggar-thy-neighbour, class-warfare politics."

It certainly makes it unlikely that Alberta or Saskatchewan voters will give the Liberal carbon tax even a moment's consideration.

The real question is whether voters in Ontario would vote for a Liberal carbon tax even if it is generally accepted that it has nothing to do with the environment. Some will, of course, but more than a few will feel cheated by the harsh truth that the Liberals have undergone a "greenwash", and not a very thorough greenwash at that.

And I think that hurts the Liberals on another front. Not only does Boshcoff's admissions make it harder to sell the carbon tax to the electorate, it makes it harder for the Liberals to defend against Jennifer Wright's $8.5 million lawsuit. At the heart of the lawsuit is the contention that her company, Green Shift Inc, is being damaged as the word "Green Shift" becomes associated solely with the Liberal carbon tax plan.

Part of the Liberal defense would be that since both Wright's company and the Liberal carbon tax are promoting environmental benefits, that association can't possibly be damaging.

That part of the defense has been dramatically undermined today by Ken Boshcoff's greenwashing admission.