Category Archives: Uncategorized

Letter to Justin Trudeau about TPP and Bank of Canada

Dear Justin Trudeau,

 

May I as the interim leader of the Canadian Action Party congratulate you and your party on your success on 19th October 2015 due largely to the enthusiastic vision of hope and a bright future you portrayed for the country.

 

It was with great pleasure that I heard you say to your caucus:

“Regardless of the committee you’re on, the roles you have, regardless of party demands, regardless of everything else we do, your one job that you cannot ever forget is to be a strong voice in service of the people who sent you here.”

 

This was music to my ears as the Canadian Action Party has always agreed with this but have taken it a step further to say that we will represent all our constituents not just those who elected us. It was very refreshing to hear you say these words and this leads me to this.  On 19th October you and your party were elected to govern Canada on behalf of all of us not just those who voted for you, and therefore we as a whole country should be listened to and consulted on matters of national importance.

 

Since the government of New Zealand finally released the text of the Trans Pacific Partnership, I have been slogging though it paying particular attention to Chapter 28 which is entitled Dispute Settlement. 

What is particularly striking in this chapter, written largely by the international corporations that were invited to consult on this TPP, is that now any corporation within the TPP area can ‘pile on’ with any other corporation which makes a claim against perceived profit loss due to laws or regulations which might hinder that profit. This is done through something called third party:

“third party means a Party, other than a disputing Party, that delivers a written notice in Accordance with Article 28.13 (Third Party Participation)”

Article 28.13: Third Party Participation

A Party that is not a disputing Party and that considers it has an interest in the matter before the panel shall, on delivery of a written notice to the disputing Parties, be entitled to attend all hearings, to make written submissions, to present views orally to the panel, and to receive written submissions of the disputing Parties. Such delivery shall occur no later than 10 days after the date of circulation of the request for the establishment of the panel pursuant to Article 28.7.2 (Establishment of a Panel).

 

Whereas in previous investment agreements, disguised as  trade deals, dating back to the Free Trade Agreement between Mulroney’s Government and that of Ronald Reagan, only the corporations of the two countries in the agreement could launch a financial attack upon the taxpayers of the other country, now we have multiple corporations from multiple countries jumping on each claim.  This means that we simply cannot afford any laws or regulations that would offend any corporation anywhere in the Pacific Rim area.  Simply and astonishingly ridiculous.  Or as stated in the Vienna Convention On The Law of Treaties signed at Vienna 13 May 1959 Article 32 Supplementary means of interpretation, “(b) leads to a result which is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.”

 

It is also manifestly plain that this is nothing to do with a free trade zone as there are tariffs, quotas, import and export licenses, side deals, side agreements and many other impediments to a real free trade zone involved in this TPP agreement, all of which could lead to a dispute if a corporation (with third party hangers on) decides it can and should appeal to yet another monetary award panel due to perceived profit loss. Remember no court of law either domestic or international is involved here. Simply international corporate lawyers deciding how much should be awarded. This is simply a gold mine for corporations at the expense of tax payers of all the countries involved.

 

On page 1-3 of Initial Provisions and General Definitions, under Section B, Article 1.3 General Definitions there are three definitions which throw this entire agreement into the area of the ridiculous, even treasonous, typical of the last ruling regime in Canada.
national means a natural person who has the nationality of a Party according to Annex 1-A(Party-Specific Definition) or a permanent resident of a Party.

person means a natural person or an enterprise

person of a party means a national or an enterprise of a Party

 

To those of us who are aware that we are all actually natural persons, but with careful and considerable forethought that natural person state has been altered over the last few decades as Canadians have been, and are now being, created into artificial people by our government without the rights of natural persons. It is therefore somewhat disingenuous to expect us to accept that a corporate entity from one of the members of the TPP countries has been granted the status of a natural person with all the rights and privileges granted to natural persons, whilst we are not regarded in the same light by our governments. We are simply numbers expected to obey all laws and regulations without question and subject to fines and or imprisonment for failing to do so, but must also pick up the tab for those entities who attack our country for monetary gain..

 

The Canadian Action Party and I agree that this TPP scam should not be ratified and that all investment agreements dating back to and including the FTA with the USA should be scrapped and real trade deals signed in their place.

 

Point I am trying to make here Mr. Trudeau is that you will be globe trotting in the next few months to basically announce to the world that Canada is back as a sovereign country with the intent to be a real player for the people of the world, with the desire to help and be a country that can be relied on to be a good neighbour not a pugilistic war monger looking for a fight.   Is that your intent? I hope so.  Point is how can you do this if at the same time you are signing away our sovereignty and ability to make our own laws and regulations to corporations which care not one whit about people anywhere, only for their bottom lines.  This is what you will be doing by allowing Canada to be part of a faulty corporate investment deal called the Trans Pacific Partnership. 

 

The second point I want to bring up at this time is that both I and the Canadian Action Party applaud your intent to invest in Canada. Austerity never has been and never will be the way to prosperity in fact it leads to the opposite for the people of any country except those at the very top. 

I, and the Canadian Action Party, trust that as you will be using our own bank – the Bank of Canada – to finance these investments at a very low flat rate of interest rather than international banks and investors at a compounding interest rate.

As I am sure you are aware your new government is now under court attack by the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform (COMER) due to the Bank of Canada not being used as mandated by the Bank of Canada Act of 1935; you could not do better than to use this incredible jewel we, the people of Canada, possess to return us to prosperity, and receive a dividend from our bank at the same time.   Of course by doing so we will be in line for review panel challenges from corporate banks and investors all over the world because they will lose a very lucrative golden egg.  This is another reason why the Canadian Action Party would excuse Canada from all those investment deals which would enable such challenges on how we finance our own country.

 

I wish you well, and trust that you will bring about that change you often talked about, scrapping TPP and using our Bank of Canada would be two excellent ways to start.

 

Jeremy Arney

The end to First Past the post elections?

Sunny days to follow the last ‘first past the post’ election in Canada.

 

 

There has been a suggestion made to me that arrogance, hatred and contempt for any Canadian who is not a supporter of the Reform/Alliance/Cons is now a thing of the past and I am not afraid to say I just laughed at the concept.

 

I offer just a few snippets from Hansard re Oral Questions during the one week of December 2015 sittings of the House of Commons to back up my concept that this attitude has just changed sides in the House and not gone at all.   It is also a good indication that the answers to questions they ask will not be listened to any more than the questions they were asked before they were fired were listened to. The words have no meaning to them apparently.

 

 

 

Hansard QP 7th Dec

Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, in the past 15 years, three provinces have held referenda on electoral reform. In all three, voters rejected the proposals, so it seems a bit undemocratic, or even anti-democratic, for the government to assert in the throne speech that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first past the post voting system.

Would it not make more sense for the government, once it has designed a new system, to follow the example of British Columbia, Ontario and Prince Edward Island and allow Canadians to vote directly for or against the proposed new electoral system?

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, in this election, Canadians were clear that they were expecting us to deliver a change. This will be the last first past the post federal election in our history.

We have committed to listening to Canadians, not just in British Columbia but coast to coast to coast, and including them in a process and in the conversation that would change the history of this nation’s democracy.

 

 

 

Hansard QP 8th Dec

 

Mr. Blake Richards (Banff—Airdrie, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, some questions must be answered with a clear yes or no. Yesterday, the Minister of Democratic Institutions skated around the question when asked whether the Liberals would be holding a referendum on a proposed new electoral system.

Today I will ask a very direct question. After the consultations on electoral reform have taken place and a proposed new electoral reform system has been designed, will the government hold a referendum on that proposed new system? Yes or no.

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question, and I remind the 337 other members of Parliament in this House that what we committed to was an open and robust process of consultation. I will not prejudice the outcome of that consultation process by committing to a referendum.

 

 

Hansard   QP 9th December 2015

 

Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, last June, the Prime Minister offered this rationale for opposing a referendum, “electoral reform has had a lot of trouble getting through plebiscites”. No kidding. In 2007, only 37% of Ontarians supported MMP. How much better if we had not let that silly referendum prejudice the outcome of Ontario’s electoral reform process?

Fast forward to last October and the federal Liberals won only 39% of the vote. How exactly does 39% of the vote in an election constitute a better, clearer mandate for a specific form of electoral reform than 51% in a referendum?

(1505)

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, for the first time in 10 years, Canadians are being listened to. Canadians voted for change and they voted for a change in our electoral process. We will be delivering on that commitment. I will be working with the government House leader to convene an all-party parliamentary committee to review the various electoral reform options available to us.

 

 

 

Hansard QP 10th December

 

[Expand]

Hon. Steven Blaney (Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, when a government respects its democracy and wants to change it, it consults the people. Several provincial governments, including those of Ontario, British Columbia, and Prince Edward Island, have done just that. In October, just 27% of Canadians voted for the Liberal Party.

What will it take for the Liberal government to understand that it cannot change the basic rules of our democracy, which date back to the time of Confederation, without consulting the entire population?

(1445)

[English]

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, I can appreciate the member opposite’s new-found passion for public consultations.

Allow me to reiterate. In the months ahead, Canadians will have an ongoing conversation about electoral reform, a conversation that will answer many questions, not just one. I can appreciate that the party opposite may be uncomfortable with hearing a diverse range of views, but we are not.

[Expand]

Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, I am reliably informed that nothing is more diverse than the views expressed in a referendum.

In 2007, Ontario’s Liberal government consulted Ontarians in a referendum on electoral reform. It lost 37% to 63%, but the Liberal minister who administered that referendum still thinks it was the right thing to do. Back in June, she took issue with the Prime Minister’s undemocratic approach and said, “If you’re going to totally change the election system…I think it would have to be a referendum.”

However, what is the lesson the current Prime Minister has drawn from 2007? It is not to ask Canadians because they might not approve the system that his minions are designing.

Provincial Liberals do not fear a referendum. Why does the Prime Minister fear it?

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, allow me to try it this way.

As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that electoral reform measures, such as ranked ballot, proportional representation, mandatory voting, and online voting, are fully and fairly studied and considered. As part of that process, we are absolutely committed to ensuring that Canadians from coast to coast to coast are heard.

[Expand]

Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, the minister quotes from a platform that was supported by 39% of Canadians. She quotes from a platform as if that is the only reason anybody voted Liberal. Maybe she believes that.

However, Jonathan Rose, the expert who designed the electoral reform proposals that were put to Ontarians in 2007, also disputed the Prime Minister. He said, “I think it shouldn’t be a blue-ribbon panel deciding this, or politicians…it should be put to a national referendum for approval.”

If he is not afraid of it and if the Ontario Liberals are not afraid of it, why is Justin Trudeau afraid of it?

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

[Expand]

The Speaker: 

I know members are very spirited today. It is December and it is the season and all that, but let us remember that we do not use personal names here. We refer to titles, riding names and so forth.

The hon. Minister of Democratic Institutions.

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, we firmly believe that a decision on an issue as important as this deserves a thoughtful and comprehensive process. We will not prejudge the outcome of this process. Early in the new year, I will work with the House leader to convene an all-party parliamentary committee to assess all possible options and move forward.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

[Expand]

The Speaker: 

Order, please. As always, let us all try to restrain ourselves and listen to the other person’s argument, whether we like it or not, and sometimes we do not. However, let us try to listen and show respect for him or her, but also, more important, for this place.

The hon. member for Banff—Airdrie.

[Expand]

Mr. Blake Richards (Banff—Airdrie, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, it is clear, and the minister has made it very clear, that the Liberals are doubling down, and they will refuse to ask Canadians about fundamentally changing our electoral system.

This is the method of voting that we have used since Confederation. I am not talking about routine amendments here. There are three provinces that have all proposed fundamental change, and they all knew that it was important enough to put that question to a referendum. If the Liberals are so sure that they have the support of Canadians, why are they so afraid to put it to a referendum?

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, Canadians entrusted us with a mission to restore the integrity in our electoral process, to restore fairness, and to ensure that every vote counts. We will deliver on that process, and we have committed to engaging the people of our country, young and young at heart, in this engagement process.

 

 

Hansard QP 11th December

[Expand]

Mr. Andrew Scheer (House Leader of the Official Opposition, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, I just hope that Mr. Coderre’s friend was not there and on the clock.

As it stands now, the only vote the Liberals are planning to hold on changes to the electoral process is a vote in this House where they can use their majority to get their preferred outcome. Only 184 Liberals will get the final say on how 30 million Canadians choose their next government.

The Prime Minister has used language like “strong” and “broad consultations” when talking about electoral reform. We all know that the ultimate way of consulting Canadians is through a referendum where every Canadian has the right to be heard. Why would the government settle for anything less than the best, and not hold a referendum?

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, as I have been clear in this House all week, we will convene an all-party committee to review the process and to ensure that it is a collaborative one and a thoughtful one. We believe decisions on this issue deserve to be approached in such a manner, and I look forward to working with my colleagues opposite to make sure that the next electoral system we introduce makes sure that every vote counts.

[Expand]

Mr. Gordon Brown (Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, the member for Ajax said this week that to presume the outcome of consultations on electoral reform is nonsense, but that is exactly what the Liberals are doing.

They have already decided for Canadians that one option is not on the table, and they will not commit to giving Canadians a say in a referendum. Even if Canadians do want change, there is no consensus on what it should look like. All Canadians should get to make that choice.

Why is the government scared to let Canadians choose in a referendum?

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, if we want Canadians to trust that their votes really matter, we must be willing, as members of Parliament, to set aside party preoccupations and undertake a serious examination of the way elections work.

We want to explore this issue in the right way. That means that, before taking action, we are going to engage in a thoughtful and thorough process about the various electoral reform options available. Unlike the previous government, we have every interest in making sure that the voices of Canadians are heard throughout this process.

 

 

 

Later:

 

Democratic Reform

[Expand]

Mr. Scott Reid (Lanark—Frontenac—Kingston, CPC): 

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal plan for electoral reform without a referendum has been universally panned in the media. For example, theToronto Star states that the “government’s approach displays unprecedented arrogance.”

The Star is right for the following reason. If first past the post gives false mandates as the Liberals claim, then surely 39% of the vote under first past the post gives the Liberals a mandate to put options before Canadians, but nothing more.

Canadians themselves must make the final choice, and only a referendum represents a true mandate for any particular change to the present system. Is that not so?

[Expand]

Hon. Maryam Monsef (Minister of Democratic Institutions, Lib.): 

Mr. Speaker, it is essential that we begin a conversation with Canadians and parliamentarians about how we will bring our voting system into the 21st century. That is why we are bringing forward historic changes to the electoral system. We will engage Canadians in an open and transparent dialogue, and those in the House. The government has no intention of prejudicing that debate. We have every interest that all voices be heard.

I hope all my colleagues across the aisle will join us in this effort.

 

So what does all this mean ?

 

On the face of it some indignant people demanding that things be done differently than planned by a new government because they themselves didn’t do it that way!

 

But,

 

Let us go back just a bit and look at the doings of the last government – the Harper Government, a one man band government and certainly not the government of Canada.…

 

 

1st session 41st  parliament re 30 new ridings

C20

 

Were the Canadian people asked if this decrease in representation, but increase in  costs to the tune of some $11 million annually, was what they wanted? No they were not, and remember this was one of those time limited debates as well, and what was the real reason for adding these extra  30 MPs in most likely conservative areas?  To bolster their ranks of course and they anticipated winning 26 of the 30…..just how well did that work out? 

 

2nd session 41 parliament

C23 re new voting rules, also known as the unfair elections act.

 

This Bill was introduced with no consultation with anyone outside of Harper’s caucus, and quite likely not even some of them.  Elections Canada was not consulted, the opposition parties were not consulted, the Canadian people were simply and totally ignored, committees were a travesty with witnesses being harassed and badgered  – a normal tactic of Poilievre, who as usual was as arrogant as he could be in the House of Commons telling falsehood after falsehood and encouraging Brad Butt to outright lie in the House twice in one day in support of this monstrous bill.  The purpose of this Bill was not fair elections at all but to deprive thousands of voters of the right to vote.  Big increase in the number of voters in October so how well did that work out?

 

 

C37 new riding names

 

Well when the deed is done we might as well get the new names, but again how much consultation was done even on this simple process? It was a fractious mess all round.

 

 

C50 re Restriction of Canadians overseas voting ability.

 

I guess Poilievre was getting nervous that he hadn’t done enough to stop Canadians from voting so now he comes up with this lulu to stop or at least make it very hard for any Canadian living outside of Canada to vote.  This would include Embassy workers (yes we had a few left), Canadians who worked abroad including in the USA ( hockey players for instance), and construction workers for the famously corrupt and criminally destructive mining and banking companies. Consultation? What for when you have an established course you are following?  That course was of course to steal another ‘first past the post’ election.

 

 

In all these a examples of Harper’s conservatives new election laws,  lack of consultation looms over all of them, and the blind support of the puppets on the back benches. Of those perhaps the loudest of all were Scott Reid, Brad Butt and Gordon Brown.   Scheer was just treated like garbage b y his own party when he, as Speaker, tried to support the sending of Butt to a committee to explain his open outright lies to the House, and yet here he is parroting the party line!

 

So what kind of a message is this?  From MPs who didn’t, wouldn’t or couldn’t listen to the Canadians who lived in their ridings and who had hired them to be their representatives to Ottawa,  who are now crying foul within minutes of being put into opposition.   The sunny days government is attempting to reassure them that not only Canadians but they too will be consulted and yet because they couldn’t or wouldn’t do it themselves they are incapable of believing that a new group could be any different from them.

 

Any referendum is only as good as the question posed, and if there had ever been any thought by Harper’s bunch of even talking with Canadians they would know that.  It is not so much the question asked but more the way it is asked.

 

Have they not learned anything at all from what happened on 19th October 2015?

 

Jeremy

Open letter to treason stephen

AN OPEN LETTER TO TREASON STEPHEN HARPER

Mr. Stephen Harper.

In an ultimate act of contempt towards the intelligence of Canadians you have made an advertisement which is saturating both TV and radio and has you saying: 

“My opponents have made this election about me. It is not about me it is about you the Canadian people……”

Three lies in just that statement by you.  Your opponents have not made this about you, and you know that very well. You have made every election since 2006 about you. As for  the Canadian people you care not one whit about them do you?

You have made this election all about you since the death of Jack Layton and the election of Justin Trudeau as Liberal leader.  In everything you say about your opponents they are in your eyes inferior to you, when in fact anyone is better than you as you are the very worst Prime Minister Canada has ever had, and no Prime Minister in Canadian history has so openly hated both Canada and Canadians as you do. For you to say that this election is about Canadians is as ridiculous as the Unfair Elections Act being designed to increase voter turnout.

Elections are supposed to be about all the Canadian people electing a representative to Ottawa, and as a result of that a Prime Minister will emerge.   You have made this election all about the Prime Minister.  You have made it about you and you will lie, cheat and steal again to keep the position, and a certain portion of Canadians will be frightened enough by your fear tactics, and taken in by your deliberate lies about the alternatives  to vote for you rather than a real local representative to Ottawa, thus helping you to erode Canadians elections even more. A perfect example of your deceit is you calling an additional pension contribution a payroll tax. No one but a fool would equate a pension contribution with a tax.

THIS ELECTION IS ALL ABOUT STEPHEN HARPER

You are a religious bigot Harper, whose only real loyalty is towards the corporate profits of your puppet masters.

You have destroyed out parliamentary process; you have destroyed our social safety nets; you have depleted our national income whilst increasing our national debt; you have abandoned our vets, seniors, sick, homeless, aboriginal peoples, scientists, environment and even attacked our sovereignty through your corporate investment and profit protection deals disguised as trade agreements.

You have changed Canada from being a friend to the world to being a pathetic gunslinger without empty weapons. You promised to change Canada and you have done so with the same arrogant contemptuous hatred that you showed The House of Commons and the Canadian people in 2011 and ever since.

It is amazing to me that you can find 337 people to carry the Reform/Alliance/Conservative coalition banner and have to wonder what they have been promised, apart from a great paycheck and tax free pension of course, to act as your puppets. They have been discouraged from even granting interviews to those who are expected to hire them as employees. Which means their being hired or not is on your shoulders, and you say what again? This election is not about you?

Hopefully this time Canadians will see through your American Republican/Tea Party style of attacks, fear mongering and red herrings such as the niqab and they will send you and your party of robots into oblivion.   You deserve nothing less.

I am very aware that this letter, being one of dissent, makes me a target of your man Blaney’s police forces, who will probably be given the go ahead to shoot me on sight as a dissenter just like they did to James McIntyre of Dawson Creek. BC and Blaney applauded them. He is supposed to be the Minister of Public Safety not an applauder of wanton public killing.

Where has the real Canada gone under your horrendous leadership?

Jeremy Arney

Victoria BC

V9B 1N1

Wake up Canada !

Just what has this election of 2015 turned into?

Once upon a time Westminster style parliaments were created by people electing someone to represent them to that parliament.  There were a few rules about who could run and who could vote.   In fact the Magna Carta clearly stated that without representation no taxation was due.

“The demand for Representation has a long history going back to sections 51 and 53 of the Magna Carta, (June 1215) which says that there should be no taxation without representation”   Question for Harper and Poilievre: Dos that mean that all those you have denied the right to vote through the “Fair” Elections Act, and will do so on October 19th with your scrutineer antics at the polling stations, no longer have to pay taxes?

Today what we have in our election is the request to crown a temporary King, maybe one day it will be a Queen.

What is so sickening is the willingness of the Canadian people to fall for this, and to believe the lies, false promises, the red herrings, the manipulation of the media to feed them a story they think they want to hear.  For example the niqab story is a smoke screen for the destruction of freedoms and to create fear of one religious group by another. Either we have freedom of religion or we do not; and if we do not then ban them all. Could it be hiding something else? Yes indeed, after all the minister who is supposed to be in charge of public Safety quite clearly said:

“If you choose to express dissent then you can expect to face the full force of the law”…….Stephen Blaney after a cop murdered James McIntyre who was wearing an anonymous mask in Dawson Creek BC.

So we have a public safety minister clearly endorsing the cops murdering a man for  dissent and this is not even being mentioned, questioned or explained. No way as niqabs are much more important than the death of a dissenter!   Today’s Canadian accepts that!  What have we become?

The real issues are brushed over or just ignored.

Why for example would you even contemplate hiring, at a salary and pension far superior to 95% of those casting a vote, someone who cannot in fact represent you?  A question I have asked many people and it stumps them to the point of bluster and anger towards me for even making them think like that. 

But really why would you?

Are you happy with the thought that money that could be spent on sick seniors living in poverty; physically and mentally broken war vets; kids going to school without breakfast; homeless and starving people living in doorways; young people seeking work and/or an education to mention just few things, is instead being given to who you elect without any obligation to pay attention to you:  indeed their job will be to back the king of the lead criminal cabal, or the leader of the rival cabals and the very last thing they will  be allowed to do is express your wishes by their votes in the House of Commons.   The Green MPs will have no whip so to give them their due they might listen to you if they ever figure out how to do so.

The very idea that we need 338 MPs is absurd when with 308 only a very small portion ever got the chance to say anything.  When the entire process in our House of Commons has been turned into how quickly the King/Dictator can have his way, and oily, lying minions turn the process into a giant farce, from debates on bills from one liners to omnibus monstrosities having a time allocation; to committees with absolutely no mandate except to obey the King/Dictator; to Speakers who are overruled on House ethics when puppets outright lie not once but twice and how he can’t even be bothered to be in the chair to be so insulted and belittled and then do something about it; to when legislation is passed that will deprive Canadians of the right to vote (C23 and C50) or the right to freedoms of speech (C51). Both of these are in direct conflict with our constitution and yet unbelievably there are Canadians who are willing to vote to support the re crowning of this despotic King/Dictator.   I wonder what they will tell their grandchildren when they are asked “What part did you play in the destruction of Canada?”  Probably just lie as their ‘hero’ has taught them to.

Are the NDP and Liberals that much better?  Hard to tell but at least they don’t charge the media cash for the privilege of asking questions that they do not answer (I wonder if that is considered a political contribution), and in the case of the Liberals anyway they do get out and talk to the people; the NDP leader is a “rah rah” reader of massive cue screens, and refused questions when he appeared in Victoria BC for just over 20 minutes.   It is a giant con job people, with the real issues carefully glossed over or simply ignored or lied about.  The so called leader’s debates are a perfect example; more time is allocated to who will be on the debate than on the actual value of the debates, which are not really debates at all, simply an a opportunity to belittle an opponent.

“What is your vision for Canada and what are you going to leave your grandchildren” is a simple idea that it appears none of them want to embrace and nor, it appears, do you fellow Canadians.  They talk about economics as if they understand it and yet they have no clue:  tickle down austerity has never worked and never will, out of control spending combined with cutting taxes and borrowing to make up for it is even more foolish. The biggest crime of all is that we own our own bank and yet they all boycott it in favour of compounding interest borrowing from international banks and investors.  They all claim it will cause inflation to re instate the BOC as our money supplier yet it did not do so between 1935 and 1974 so why should it now?   Fear? Fear of an IMF, BIS reprisal such as happened in Libya? Maybe, but more likely it is the fear of being excluded from the trough in the form of directorships and patronage after they retire from pretending to represent you, the public. 

It is very possible that there are many good people running for a seat in our House of Commons, but it is unlikely you will find them among the ranks of those who will obey their leader rather than you.  There are hundreds of independents or small party candidates asking for the job of representing you, who would fall into the category of real representatives with a passion for Canada and its people, yet the names of the parties will turn you off in your search for a better lie.  The fact is that in a story told by Tommy Douglas called “Mouseland” our situation today is even more applicable than it was when he told it.

A leaderless mob of MPs doing what you ask of them, supporting good legislation and defeating the bad, really asking questions and listening to the answers of the experts in committees, refusing to let the constitution be destroyed and representing you sounds like heaven in Canada to me.  Party politics as practiced today in Canada is totally toxic and nonproductive, and yet we as a people accept it as a way of life.  Why are we willing to settle for so much less than mediocrity?

Thinking within the box by the Canadian people has led Canada to a very bad place, and staying within that box will improve nothing.   Think outside the box, as Canadians always did in the past, and Canada can and will be a wonderful country again.

Choice is yours really as it will be until it’s too late to realise it isn’t anymore.

Jeremy Arney

GG, PM and TPP.

What an appalling thought that a man whose hatred of Canada and his utter and arrogant contempt for the Canadian people makes him believe that during an election yet he can still try and give away Canada’s sovereignty. 

After some thought I decided to try this…wonder if David Johnston has the fortitude to do anything.

His Excellency the Right Honourable David Johnston
Governor General of Canada
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa ON K1A 0A1

 

Dear Governor General of Canada

I have a question and request for you:

This was taken from the Government of Canada website:

Our Country, Our Parliament

Overview of the Canadian Parliamentary System

Three branches work together to govern Canada: the executive, legislative and judicial branches. The executive branch (also called the Government) is the decision-making branch, made up of the Monarch represented by the Governor General, the Prime Minister, and the Cabinet. The legislative branch is the law-making branch, made up of the appointed Senate and the elected House of Commons. The judicial branch is a series of independent courts that interpret the laws passed by the other two branches.

Parliament itself is made up of the following three parts: the Monarch, the Senate and the House of Commons.

Canada is a constitutional monarchy, which means that we recognize the Queen or King as the Head of State, while the Prime Minister is the Head of Government.

 

Thus in the event that we are in an election period, as we are now, which means the Legislative branch does not actually exist,  does the outgoing Prime Minster and his equally outgoing Cabinet, all of whom are seeking re employment by the people of their ridings, have the right to sign or even decide anything not of vital importance to the safety and sovereignty of our country?

I am referring particularly to the signing of Investment Agreements with other countries that have not been presented to and debated by the Legislative branch and therefore not approved by any level of Parliament?

There are reports that the incumbent, but not yet re-elected, Minster of Trade is meeting with representatives of other countries with the intent to finalise and sign an Investment Agreement with those other countries of the Pacific Rim known as the Trans Pacific Partnership.

My understanding of this proposal to sign this agreement by the Trade Minster is that it is unconstitutional in that this agreement has not been presented to or approved either by the House of Commons or the Senate and is therefore not to be binding upon this Country, and that his signature at a time when parliament has been dissolved is basically illegal.

As the legal head of the country and the Queen’s representative I ask that you require of your incumbent Prime Minster that he ask his Minster of Trade to cease and desist in the signing of any agreement not approved by our parliament.

Respectfully,

 

 

Jeremy Arney

Interim Leader of the Canadian Action Party

#6, 3931 Craigowan Rd

Victoria BC

V9B 1N1

250-216-5400

Special delivery Mail

and

Electronic Copies to:

Submissions Form, Stephen Harper, Ed Fast, CBC News, CPAC, CTV, Wire Service Media, Globe and Mail, Toronto Star, Ottawa Citizen , Vancouver Province, Revelstoke Times, FreePress Winnipeg, Sun Winnipeg, The Agora, The Tyee, Express News, The Guardian (UK), ATV Victoria, Revelstoke Times, Times Colonist, Abbotsford Times. and more….

“What is physically possible, desirable and morally right, we can make it financially possible through the Bank of Canada.”*

Cariboo Legs

I received this from a friend not from the Council of Canadians because I don’t think they are aware that there are more than 5 or 6 registered political parties in Canada. Strange is it not?   I mean really all the non represented parties – except the Libertarians of course, want the Bank of Canada reinstated as the supplier of money to the Government of Canada so I suppose it is in the interest of the Council of Canadians to ignore us.
Anyway here is what i received and my reply to C of C.
—– Original Message —–

Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 12:08 AM
Subject: Caribou Legs delivers!
View in browser

Victoria Island

Dear Don,

4,400 kilometres.
110 days.
5 provinces.
… and 1 man on a mission!

Today, Indigenous ultra-marathoner Brad Firth – better known as Caribou Legs – accomplished two remarkable feats.

For one, he ran the equivalent of a marathon a day for 110 consecutive days. If that wasn’t enough, he also achieved his goal of raising much-needed public awareness and political will to restore federal protections for our endangered lakes and rivers.

Not to mention, he did it in the middle of a record hot summer and the closest federal election in a generation.

But he was determined to deliver your signed Pledge to Protect petition – and those from thousands of people like you who supported him and this important campaign.

Parliament HillSo I’m writing to celebrate this incredible day with you, and to thank you for believing in Caribou Legs and the Council of Canadians.

Over the course of his epic run, Caribou Legs crossed countless lakes, rivers and streams. And what kept him going was the thought that every one of them is likely among the 99% of all waterways across Canada that have been stripped of federal protection by the Harper Conservatives.

That, and knowing he had the support of kind people like you behind him was all the inspiration he needed to lace up those shoes every day and keep running.

Along his journey, he also witnessed first-hand the impact that contaminated water has on people and communities. “I’ve learned what people are going through out there. Some of the reservations in southern Canada have little to no access to clean water”, he told me today. “Every day, we all should do something to protect water.”

And today Caribou Legs delivered his powerful message to candidates from all parties who are right now scrambling for our vote this October: Pledge to protect our lakes and rivers!

On the steps of Parliament Hill, he and I delivered your signed petition along with 15,000 more from great water warriors like you!

We invited MPs from all parties to attend today’s petition delivery, and NDP MP Paul Dewar and Green Party candidate Colin Griffiths were kind enough to accept. They also each affirmed their respective party’s commitment to protecting our lakes and rivers to the crowd and media that gathered.

We have a lot more work to do between now and election day. And with your continued support, we’ll fight every day to keep water on the election radar.

Thank you again for all you do.

Garry Neil
Garry Neil
Executive Director

Petitions
CofC-logo-tagline-300.jpg
The Council of Canadians, 300-251 Bank Street, Ottawa, ON, K2P 1X3
1-800-387-7177 | inquiries@canadians.org |www.canadians.org
Facebook Page | @CouncilofCDNS
Unsubscribe | Email preferences

supporter

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG – www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6140 / Virus Database: 4419/10676 – Release Date: 09/21/15

Dear Gary Neil,
I received this amazing story this morning from a friend with whom I  correspond on a very regular basis, and I would like to congratulate Caribou Legs for his remarkable feat and the Council of Canadians for their support. It is indeed a story of one man’s passion for his country and the people and in fact all living things in Canada, and I have no doubt that it will have an impact upon Canadians but not on their employees in our parliament. I do not have Maude Barlow’s email address so perhaps you could pass this along to her please.
The Canadian Action Party is committed to bringing back environmental protection to all those lakes and rivers as well as the land itself and to working with all those of our First Nations, Inuit, Metis nations and peoples to ensure the recovery and future protection of our environment. 
We would have been very happy to have had someone there to greet Caribou Legs and make that commitment had we been invited to do so, and thus been made aware that the event was actually happening.
It is unfortunate that the small legally registered but as yet unrepresented political parties are ignored by the Council of Canadians because you would be a huge resource for us if we ever gain the balance of power in our House of Commons, and you could be  a great force for good in Canada and the introduction of democracy into what is nothing more than a one man, controlled by corporate power, show.  
Is it possible for you to imagine what would happen if the balance of power in our House of Commons was ever given to MPs who are not party leader controlled, who are not whipped but who vote as their constituents want, who reject any bills that are not of real benefit to Canadians, who in fact decide the laws based on what Canadians want and need, not on what is demanded by the corporate powers of the world?   Exciting ? A dream only? well maybe, but one I believe in on behalf of my great grandchildren, and their offspring if there are to be any.
Regretfully you just want to change the colour of the cats running the country instead of having we, the mice, control our own destiny
Jeremy Arney
Interim Leader of the Canadian Action Party
#6, 2931 Craigowan Rd
Victoria BC
V9B 1N1
250-216-5400
 
Attachments area
Preview YouTube video The Story of Mouseland: As told by Tommy Douglas in 1944

The Story of Mouseland: As told by Tommy Douglas in 1944

The election period started yesterday and the writ hasn’t even been dropped

27th January 2015

Well this week it all starts again.

 

The venom and hatred coming from the PMO will be ratcheted up and the willing puppets of the administration caucus will continue to try and complete their almost successful efforts to turn the Canadian Parliament into a pathetic, dysfunctional, laughable joke. Judging by the Statements by Members of Monday 26th January we are already in full PMO election slander mode.

 

For those who think those words might be harsh and not apply to all the CPC MPs, let me say this.

 

When the votes are taken they all stand one after another, laughing, joking, gesturing at each other to support the most destructive legislation ever passed in any parliament anywhere, never mind in Canada. Do not take my word for it. Watch it on CPAC or read the votes in Hansard. It is all recorded.

 

When legislation was presented to endanger nearly two millions lakes and rivers in Canada by removing them from their protection against toxic dumping afforded by the Navigable Waters Act, they stood like one and thought this was a marvelous idea.

When the Environmental Regulations were gutted opening the way for destructive resource extraction, again they stood and applauded with their votes.

When the vets were being treated like vermin, again they all stood 4 square behind their PM.

When one of their members (Butt) lied not once but twice in an attempt to support the Elections Act they all stood again to make sure he didn’t have to appear in front of a committee to explain his deliberate lies. Their Speaker was not even in the chair when his ruling was voted down.

 

This is not good governance.

 

This is aiding and abetting the destruction of our Parliamentary system.

 

This is not representative democracy; this is not freedom of speech; this is not freedom of thought; this should not be a source of pride in work well done.

 

This is slavish breaking of trust and I would say partaking in treason against the people of Canada.

 

What could cause men and women who might actually be reasonable human beings to act this way?   Surely it’s not just money?   But then again maybe it is. We did get an example of the way the CPC members think in the way Del Maestro manipulated the system to ensure he got a pension for a job he cheated to get! Just an hour or so before his future was to be put to the vote in the HOC and expulsion would mean no pension he resigned uttering more lies as he did so. Does this mean that the cost to Canadians is second to the financial needs of the Members of Parliament?

 

I will willing grant that being an MP, specially a real MP, is an arduous job. Away from home all week for most of them, long hours with meetings that have no meaning (committees) attempting to read omnibus bills in a matter of hours, and good luck in having any say on them. Being subjected to cat calls, jeers and kindergarten behavior

in the chamber, subject to a speaker who owes his job to a vindictive Canada hater so he is hamstrung in his actions and ignored or rebutted when he makes a ruling against the administration.

 

However when I was young an MP was a person one looked up to, rather like a policeman, as someone there to help not to destroy.   Times have changed and no longer can either the average policeman or MP be trusted at all.

 

As long as the PM is controlled by corporate interests and other governments (Israel for example) Canada is doomed to be a third rate country, with third rate citizens and with no influence in the world. It is regrettable to say the least that that is what Harper gives every appearance of desiring for us, whilst he sits on his pile of cash (I believe he will get an over $5 million golden handshake from you and I for destroying Canada) along with the multi corporate boards upon which he has earned a place by his perfidy.

 

Shame on all who support these actions.

 

Register to vote, get your ID in hand and make sure you give Canada a chance to recover by voting. By doing those two things alone you will be defeating a potential dictator who only wants CPC votes to count. Oh by the way vote on early voting days and avoid the CPC scrutinisers who will make your life miserable on voting day itself.

 

Our children, grandchildren and in my case now two great-grandchildren deserve soo much better than the last decade of darkness.

 

 

Jeremy

Bank of Canada slips into its new niche.

So here we go again, not that it has really stopped since 2006, but since 2011 the Canadian administration BS and bafflegab has gone hip high to an elephant.

 

On Wednesday 21st January 2015 the Bank of Canada confirmed again that it is now nothing more than an inflation watchdog. The Governor of the Bank of Canada has even proudly claimed that that is the Bank’s #1 priority  when he said on November 4th 2014, Standing Committee on Finance in response to a long garbled question by James Rajotte, and I quote from Hansard

 

“Tying that to the second half of your question is very important. The Bank of Canada has only one goal, and that’s to keep inflation on its target within a timeframe of around six to eight quarters. That’s our horizon of flexibility.”…..Hansard with my highlights.

 

 

Any economist, or for that matter teenager, knows that if you reduce your income and increase your expenditures you are heading for financial disaster. Regretfully there does not appear to be an economist (or anyone even with the acumen of a teenager) in the ranks of the present administration as they have from day one reduced Canada’s income by drastically cutting corporate tax rates, minutely cutting personal tax rates, reducing GST absolutely unnecessarily, increasing personal taxes by a thousand mini cuts such as  tariff increases etc., and their lavish expenses have skyrocketed. We need 30 more very expensive MPs , $16 dollar glasses of orange juice or million dollar ferrying of a security limo for presidential PM use in India to give just a few examples, in the same way we need holes in our heads. 

Well hold on Arney there was a melt down in 2008 wasn’t there?

 

Yes there was and it was categorically denied by the Harper government. During the 2008 election $75 billion was donated to our Canadian banks through the CMHA even while Harper and Flaherty were trying to say we were immune from the problems coming fast and hard at the rest of the world and claiming that our banks were rock solid!  This eventually topped out at a whopping $114 billion in 2009.

 

Two months later whilst still saying there wasn’t a problem Harper had to prorogue to avoid being defeated in the House and removed from power. He still could not see a problem!

 

So yesterday there he was answering questions about the economy and admitting that the price of oil was in fact costly to the Canadian bank account (Which bank are they using for their accounts by the way or are they all getting a piece of the pie)

 

So the price of oil has gone down substantially. Why? Not because it is now cheaper to extract it from the ground, transport the oil to refineries and turn it into a burnable fuel. No it’s because there is more oil available then there is a need for. A glut. Wonderful.

 

So will the price come up again? Most likely because the oil companies are too big to fail, and too blind to see the writing on the wall, and administrations such as that in Canada today will probably throw money at them that should be going to vets, seniors, the homeless, to help charities not cripple them, the infrastructure and the provinces.   Very likely that this is what will happen with Harper’s government because they are not interested in the health, fortune, wellbeing or standard of living of any Canadian who is not a card carrying CPC member and even they are often lumped in with the rest of us and told to fend for themselves.

 

Our manufacturing output is down because corporations like, CAT, Navistar (transport truck manufacturer), Kellogg’s, PACCAR( Kenworth and Peterbilt makers), Steelco, Alcoa, etc., have left the Canadian scene along with their lost jobs, union pensions and taxes.   I also understand that Bombardier are seriously contemplating moving lock stock and barrel to Mexico soon.   Now that one will really hurt.

 

So, is all lost?   Depends on how well the new ”UN”fair elections act works for the administratio with the extra tools they have given themselves to steal their 4th election in a row later this year.

 

If everyone in the country becomes registered to vote and obtains the necessary ID, then acts upon that right to vote no matter how much there is disruption at the voting places caused by the CPC scrutinizers who will try and create massive lineups and delays and make non CPC voters give up in disgust, we can get a real peoples’ government back. This distruption will be done with the aid of something called bingo cards which will tell them when their own supporters have voted and allow them to start causing a ruckus to prevent anyone else from voting.

 

If we believe that we all have the right to vote in spite of Harper’s government efforts to take that away from us, and exercise that right we can and will get rid of the worst Prime Minister, and his government, that Canada has ever had, and start the job of rebuilding what was once a nation to be believed in.

 

Of course I would want everyone to vote for the Canadian Action Party where we have Candidates as we are probably the only party which specifically wants to represent our constituents to the HOC not the HOC to our constituents. Where our MP votes will be free and caucus meetings an exchange of ideas not relaying dictums from above. Where the Bank of Canada will again be used to finance Canada’s needs at little or no cost and manufacturing jobs will return home instead of leaving for Mexico or somewhere else where labour is cheap and the products reflect that.

 

A country where once again Canadians can be proud to be part of it, and proud to help rebuild a country to help the world not cause wars, civilian deaths and destruction as in the case of Libya for instance. A nation whose standard of living was so far ahead of ours under Ghadafi until we destroyed everything he had built for his people from the safety of the air in the name of maintaining a no fly zone, turning them back into the stone age; where no government now exists and contestantly mercenary bands are fighting for control; where raping and civilian killings continue at pace, and their state owned bank has been replaced by  central bank sponsored by the IMF.

Some democracy we created there!

 So welcome Bank of Canada to your new role as inflation watchdog. Rest well for when we call on you to return to and fulfill your real role in Canada.

Join the movement to recover Canada in 2015.

Vote for CAP or anyone who will represent you to Ottawa, not Ottawa to you.

 

Jeremy Arney

Where have we been taken?

Maybe it’s time to look back a bit to see where and why we are where we are today.

 

We followed the USA inspired NATO invasion in Afghanistan, even though the Canadian People were not altogether behind it , thereby opening ourselves to the possibility of counter attacks on our civilians here in Canada.

 

We refused absolutely and completely to intercede in the Omar Kadyr affair particularly under this administration, washing our hands of him unlike every other country in the world whose citizens got swept up in the US net.

 

We supported and even encouraged Israel to slaughter the people of Gaza as and when they choose, and we supported their blockade of aid to those same people.

 

At the urging of the IMF we took part in a “NO FLY ZONE” over Libya which we quickly changed into an all out bombing of Libya to the point where our Minister of Foreign Affairs love for the so called freedom fighters gave them the ability, along with a huge loan from the IMF and the “donation” of a central bank controlled by the IMF, and support of the mercenary armed insurgence. to compete and win.  Eventually the Leader of the country was captured, tortured and killed and there was much rejoicing in Ottawa, in spite of the fact that we were signatories to the UN award for human rights endeavours by Libya just a few months before.

 

We cut off any diplomatic communications with who knows how many middle eastern countries, to show our administration’s disapproval of their behaviour. 

 

Our reputation in the entire Middle East region was and still is in tatters and completely un-Canadian.

 

Big brother says help and we leap in without parliamentary approval to send “advisors” to Iraq for 30 days.  Before that 30 days is completed, we are told by an announcement in another country, as is usual with this dictatorial PM, that we are now getting involved in a 6 month war, again without parliamentary approval.

 

When eventually this does come before parliament the only MPs who support this are the PMO puppets who always do what they are told, and we have the ridiculous Minister of war saying : “We have been very clear. What we did was get Parliament’s support. I think that is something different, something that we never saw before” Hansard recording of  Question Period  9th October 2014., completely forgetting that the Libyan affair got unanimous approval and lead us into war crimes against the Libyan people, where as this new war did not have unanimous approval.  What a buffoon.

 

Next we have two attacks on military personnel in Canada, neither of which do I condone by the way, but oh how convenient.   There does not appear to be any connection to ISIL by either of these attackers, but they were both mentally unstable and Muslim so that is enough evidence apparently for our war mongering PM to say they were radicalized by ISIL.  Where is the evidence of that?  The rational is obvious to create fear that we will be subject to lots of attacks and must give up our rights and freedoms to be safe!  Yeah, been there and seen that happen before.  What was it that crazy woman said in London after the underground false flag bombing attack: “I will gladly give up my rights to be free.”  Here we go again.

 

Some questions:

 

Where is the evidence that Martin Couture-Rouleau and Michael Zehaf-Bibeau were radicalised ISIL attackers?  

I have visited the CPC web site so does that mean I am now a mean spirited anti Canadian pro corporation bigot?

Where did Michael get his rifle from if indeed he was living in a homeless shelter? A Winchester 30-30 yet, not a cheap model and where did he keep it so the shelter was not aware he had it?

Was he being treated for his mental state, his drug problems and his criminal behaviour?

If he was known as a “druggy” with mental problems why was he not getting help?

How many more like him have been created by this administrations’ complete indifference to the plight of Canadian unemployed?

Since when does one’s religion automatically make one a radical in Canada?

Our PM claims to be some sort of christian, yet I know of no christian god who encourages war and killing, never mind hatred and contempt for fellow men be they from their own country or not; there are many clergy who preach that but gods?

As far as I know most gods seem to preach love, peace and tolerance, which is seldom shown by our present Canadian administration either here at home or abroad, why is that?

Whilst the leader of the administration was hiding in a closet, and the cabinet was trying to get in there with him, who was running the country?

Both the Privy council and the PMO can do nothing without his highness’s approval so who was in charge of the country? Beverly McLachlin? Did she know? Or maybe it was the HOC sergeant at arms. Did he know?  

How is it possible that so many bullets were fired before the “suicidal man” was killed?

What does that say for the marksmanship of the defenders of the parliament?

Why when the country is at war, was the security of parliament breached so easily?

Do the security people not understand that we are at war yet again under this adminstration?

If this is was what a mentally deranged individual can do, what happens when the real thing hits?

 

Who can be surprised that new legislation is in the immediate future to enable more invasion of privacy, supposedly for the betterment of our safety? Again convenient, no doubt part of the plan put into place months ago to go along with the escalation of observer status into war status.  Perhaps part of the plan to change Canada eh?

The country desperately needs the clear headed, people oriented thinking of the Canadian Action Party, not the whipped frenzy of our present non representative, undemocratic bunch of misfits.   

Vote for reality in 2015.

Jeremy Arney

Why do the UN let Harper in to talk?

New York City, New York 25 September 2014.

 

Words uttered by Stephen Harper, the leader of the Harper Government in Canada to the UN:

 

 

“And we feel strongly that no effort is ever in vain if it offers people an alternative to conflict and an opportunity to better their lives and those of their families.

“Canadians, therefore, seek a world where freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law are respected.“We hold these things to be intrinsically right and good.“

And we also believe that they are the necessary foundation for a better world for more people, necessary for prosperity, and with prosperity comes hope, and with hope, the greater inclination of free peoples everywhere to find peaceful solutions to the things that divide them.“Indeed, we believe that freedom, prosperity and peace form a virtuous circle. –

 

See more at: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/09/25/pm-addresses-united-nations-general-assembly-new-york-city#sthash.0qOzEDeV.dpuf

 

 

Well Stevie baby that doesn’t even apply in Canada does it?

 

Freedom:

From what? Lies, distortion and “misspeaks” in our very own House of Commons?  To protest without harassment from the militarised police? To live in harmony with our neighbours without regulations separating us? Freedom from spying without justification and without judicial warrants? Freedom of choice to ask our employees (MPs) to do something and expect that request to even be listened to?

 

Democracy?

Just how much democracy do we have in Canada where even our MPs cannot vote the way their constituents want them to? In the name of democracy, we exported just what to Libya apart from death to civilians and the bombing of their homes, schools, hospitals and even their water supply from air attacks? The word “democracy’ should choke in your throat.

 

Human Rights?

Tell that to our original people here in Canada and listen to them laugh !

 

Rule of Law?

Every Act you pass has removed the right of offenders to hearings in a court of law, because the “laws” are now controlled by regulations. These regulations when broken either deliberately or through the opaqueness of the regulations results in Ministerial review board hearings not visits to a court of law. So we have the ever expanding “rule by regulation” replacing “rule of law”.

 

And yet you claim to hold these things to be “intrinsically right and good”

 

 

.“Indeed, we believe that freedom, prosperity and peace form a virtuous circle. “

 

Where is that exactly? and for whom? Not here in our Canada which you have handed to the corporate interest of the world who, for the most part, are now free to challenge us at their corporate review panels every time they don’t make the profit they expected; thus the law courts are again bypassed. See your FIPA with China, Pacific Rim Partnership, CETA etc., etc., the list goes on and on.

 

It is bad enough when you lie to us your employers, but when you lie to the UN in our name you have shown us that you are just in way over your head.

 

Your idea, as a so called economist, is to hand the Canadian purse to international corporations and expect them to look after us !

 

I do not agree with or condone what you are doing to Canada Harper, and I am a long way from being alone in that sentiment. You claim to speak for the majority of Canadians, but you do not listen to anyone but your own base which at best now is 25% of Canadians. That’s a majority?   Your inability to be open and honest and clear to Canadians is the direct opposite to your ability and willingness to announce international and internal policies to overseas audiences prior to Canadians and only highlights your feeling of inferiority and yet contempt for Canadians here at home.

 

 

I will close with these words:

 

“Where human misery abounds, where grinding poverty is the rule, where justice is systematically denied, there is no real peace, only the seeds of future conflict. – See more at: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2014/09/25/pm-addresses-united-nations-general-assembly-new-york-city#sthash.0qOzEDeV.dpuf

 

Has it occurred to you that you were perfectly describing almost all of our reservations and downtown slums in every city in Canada? Where treaty rights no longer mean anything to you but are a nuisance; where promises made many years ago by our forefathers are broken systematically today with little thought to the results. Where the “rule of law” only applies in your administration’s verbal abuse of Canadians?

 

You may speak to the UN for yourself, but rest assured you do not speak for Canada or Canadians when you talk of freedom, democracy and peace and yet send war machines and military to attack civilians in other countries from the safety of the air not for the benefit of Canadians but for others. When did Canada start to need to hide beneath the skirts of our allies? Answer: since you became PM and replaced the Government of Canada with the Harper Government.

 

In absolute disgust at what you have done and are doing to Canada

 

 

Jeremy Arney