What if….

One night not so long ago I was in bed thinking instead of sleeping, which I seem to do more today than yesterday and I was thinking thus:

Power in the hands of a few people, or one person, has the ablility to be very destructive. It will overcome common sense, lead to acts of extravagant stupidty, blind ideology, destruction of values and to wars both within a country and in foreign lands.

Over the years checks and balances were created to protect against absolute power, but even those can be overcome as is now happening in Canada, where by mischance both the House of Commons and its Speaker, the House of Sober Second Thought and the courts have all fallen under the control of one man….Or have they.

This led me to write this letter to all the Conservative Party of Canada backbenchers on February 21st 2012:

The letter was entitled “What if”.

An open letter to Government backbenchers.


Some of you will not read this because I am not from your riding, but I hope most of you will as it is not an attack upon you or the government caucus to which you belong.


It is generally accepted that the power of government rests with the PMO and the Cabinet , but that is, in my view, an illusion. The power rests with you the “back benchers” because without your support the government and its agenda cease to be.


I have watched on CPAC as some of you read PMO statements and as you stumble over words like ‘democracy’ or phrases such as ‘represent your constituents’ (usually directed at the opposition members), I have to wonder if perhaps you are in entire agreement with what you are reading. Maybe you are but what if you are not? What if you question this whole represent your constituents thing?


The job of the opposition is to study proposed bills, offer suggestions or amendments to improve them in both the house and committee, or to vote against them if those improvement suggestions are rejected and they believe the bill to be bad for the Canadian people.


I would submit to you that your job as a government backbencher is no different.  I do not think your job is to just rise from your seat and vote when so directed by thePMO.


Being an MP is not an easy job; being away all week that the House is sitting;  being available to your constituents when you are home; sacrificing family life to live in a hotel or lonely apartment in Ottawa; working on committees and keeping up with what must be endless correspondence requires dedication, and I applaud you for that.


But is it not in the interests of your constituents to ensure that legislation is the best it can be for them? You were elected to be their MP.  If we look at the national average then 25% of eligible voters or 39% of actual voters in our current system elected this government. This means that 61% of the actual voters did not vote for you, yes in some ridings this was not the case but I am using the national average.  Does this mean that 61% of your constituents are not represented by you, and if so how democratic is that?


What if you actually went to the Liberal, NDP, or Green people who represent the majority in your riding and asked them what they think?  What if you actually represented your whole riding to Ottawa, not the government to your selected minority of the riding? That is your job, and if you do that why would you ever be rejected by the people or your party?


Democracy in Canada has been dead for years because we the people are not only under represented but are largely ignored except at election time, and it is, I think, because of fear of rejection  by the ‘party’ that causes MP obedience to the party line.  Yet the party of any government is made up largely of backbenchers such as you and without you they have no clout. If by standing up in the House, or in committee, and asking for the best for the people of Canada you feel you run the risk of being rejected by your party I have to ask:


Is this what you would be doing, going against the party or are you actually saying to the leader that you have a voice on behalf of all the people of your riding and you should be heard because your support is very important, actually vital, to the government?


I leave you with this thought. 

There is an opportunity to reclaim parliament, at all levels, for the people of Canada and it rests with you the backbenchers of this government to do this.


You have the power but will you use it?


Thank you for reading this.


Jeremy Arney

An extra 30 MPs is good for what? or whom?


Well like in so many other things Dictator Harper has rammed through his Bill C-20 to enlarge the House of Commons by 30 more MPs at a financial cost of about $100 million per election cycle and with only one thing to actually show for it.

Less representation for the people of Canada.

How can that be you may ask, well its actually very simple.
There is already no time for most MPs to represent what they think their constituents may think or feel, never mind what their party does, and closure is called more often than not, so where are the extra 30 voices going to be heard? And how can this extra number of MPs jostling for time be either fair, representative or even loosely democratic.

Oh wait a minute, they will probably all be CPC voices so it doesn’t matter, it’s just extra bums getting off the back benches to vote as instructed by Harper when the time comes.

This is another example of sleight of hand where the object is not allowed to be examined to carefully lest the public see what is really going on here.

Have you ever played “Find the Queen” ? well that is what’s going on here

Let it be said that I have nothing against real representation and would applaud it if it were happening here in Canada. It is not and will not under Harper, and with more MPs it will just get worse.

The financial shell game being played on Canadians is absolutely appalling. We
have the ability to be debt free in the eyes of the world, no compounding interest to international banks, no debt to the IMF, World Bank or Bank of International Settlements. Just a debt to ourselves through the Bank of Canada, and any interest we were charged by the BOC would be paid back to us again; so simple and so pure and yet so unfriendly to the IMF, etc., that we would never be allowed to do it.. The last country that tried to do this (Libya) Canada helped bomb into destruction and killed the leader at the behest of those same banks. In fact we “lead” the mission, if doing the bidding of the IMF, USA, Israel etc., can be called leading.


Back to those extra 30 MPs.

How can more be better in a restricted time and place?

Is quantity better than quality?

Is force better than serious contemplation?

Silly questions to ask the CPC as they have no voice,.

Silly questions to ask Harper because he will not answer.

Can you imagine Question Period with an extra 30 MPs to drown out questioners and hurl jeers and smears at them?

I have suggested to the opposition leaders that as question period does not elicit any real answers from any minister, including the head one, in this Harper Government that they should just get up and walk out for the 45 minutes of oral questions and do some work in their offices for their constituents instead of wasting time at a verbal bun fight.

That would be the day !

Meanwhile we are now stuck with an extra $100 million to be found, and you know that is coming from the pockets of the working stiffs, not the corporations who are getting yet another tax gift.


Letter to Minister of Justice for Canada

I am tired of the antics of the Canadian Minister of Justice who seems to think that he is the only person in Canada who is interested in and working for the victims of violent crime. This is obviously not so and I decided to look at his crime bills, designed to fill the new prisons which his government is building, and his claim that he is protecting victims.  There is the premise which he doesn’t seem to grasp which is that there are no victims until the crime has been committed so in order to protect potential victims the crime must not happen.  That I believe is way to deep for this excuse for a Justice Minister to understand. It is also curiuos that he is getting so excited about crime when crime is diminishing in Canada inspite of him.

Here is the letter I wrote challenging him.


Rob Nicholson
Canadian Minister of Justice.

Dear Minister,

I have watched you in amazement in committees and in the House demanding, posturing, spitting and exploding at the opposition parties and members of the House of Commons who were not instantly passing your Bills, which you claim are hard on criminals and helping victims; You are attacking and accusing the opposition of being soft on criminals, and uncaring about victims. It would make good theatre if it were not so out of place, misleading and factually untrue even in this current parliament, run by a government as arrogant, secretive, deceptive, divisive and dysfunctional as it is.

So I looked up all the bills you currently have before either house and there are 23 of them:
S-4, S-6, S-7, S-9, S-10, C4, C5, C16, C17, C21, C-22, C-23, C-23a, C-23b, C-30, C-39, C-48, C-50, C-51, C-53, C-54, C-59, and C-60. Of these 7 belong to the Minister of Public Safety but are in the same field as your bills.

I have attached a separate list in case you have forgotten some of the catchy, jingly names you have ascribed to these bills.

Bill S-7
(Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act)
gives victims the right to sue if they can wade through the complicated formula required to do so after the act itself.
Bill C-21
(Standing up for Victims of White Collar Crime Act)
Has provisions for restitution if there is any money recoverable.
Bill C-39
(Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act)
Gives victims the right to speak at parole hearings, is this really a benefit?

With the exception of Bill C-60 all the rest have absolutely nothing in them for victims, increased jail time maybe and less parole options for prisoners maybe, but for victims nothing at all.

Bill C-60
(Citizen’s Arrest and Self-defence Act)
finally allows an attacked person to protect their property and themselves without fear of being arrested and put in jail themselves for doing so. About time too.

So, Minister of Justice, I am calling your bullshit and bluster and asking you to tell me where these victims’ benefits are in these Bills which you demand be now passed through Parliament at breakneck speed even though you have been sitting on some of them for many moons, even years.

Jeremy Arney
CAP candidate for SGI in 2008

Bills before the Canadian Parliament from Justice and Public Safety that are supposed to protect victims.

S-2. An Act to amend the Criminal Code and other Acts
(Protecting Victims From Sex Offenders Act)

S-6. An Act to amend the Criminal Code and another Act
(Serious Time for the Most Serious Crime Act)

S-7. An Act to deter terrorism and to amend the State Immunity Act
(Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act)

S-9. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (auto theft and trafficking in property obtained by crime)
(Tackling Auto Theft and Property Crime Act)

S-10. An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts
(Penalties for Organized Drug Crime Act)

C-4. An Act to amend the Youth Criminal Justice Act and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts
(Protecting the Public from Violent Young Offenders))

C -5 An Act to amend the International Transfer of Offenders Act
(Keeping Canadians Safe (International Transfer of Offenders) Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-16. An Act to amend the Criminal Code
(Ending House Arrest for Property and Other Serious Crimes by Serious and Violent Offenders Act)

C-17. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (investigative hearing and recognizance with conditions)
(Combating Terrorism Act)

C-21. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing for fraud)
(Standing up for Victims of White Collar Crime Act)

C-22. An Act respecting the mandatory reporting of Internet child pornography by persons who provide an Internet service

C-23. An Act to amend the Criminal Records Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
(Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-23A. An Act to amend the Criminal Records Act
(Limiting Pardons for Serious Crimes Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-23B. An Act to amend the Criminal Records Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
(Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-30. An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
(Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-39. An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
(Ending Early Release for Criminals and Increasing Offender Accountability Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-48. An Act to amend the Criminal Code and to make consequential amendments to the National Defence Act
(Protecting Canadians by Ending Sentence Discounts for Multiple Murders Act)

C-50. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (interception of private communications and related warrants and orders)
(Improving Access to Investigative Tools for Serious Crimes Act)

C-51. An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Competition Act and the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act
(Investigative Powers for the 21st Century Act)

C-53. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (mega-trials)
(Fair and Efficient Criminal Trials Act)

C-54. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sexual offences against children)
(Protecting Children from Sexual Predators Act)

C-59. An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (accelerated parole review) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
(Abolition of Early Parole Act)
The Minister of Public Safety

C-60. An Act to amend the Criminal Code (citizen’s arrest and the defences of property and persons)
(Citizen’s Arrest and Self-defence Act)