Showing posts with label parliament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label parliament. Show all posts

Monday, January 27, 2014

Canada Post Cancels Home Delivery? Maybe Not...


Last month, Minister of Transport Lisa Raitt announced that Canada Post will be ceasing all door to door deliveries of mail.  The operations are to be suspended over a 5 year span, as community mailboxes are erected throughout the country.

Conveniently, Ms. Raitt made said announcement days after Parliament ended for the Christmas session, effectively ending any form of debate on the issue.  I suspect, the announcement was also made as close to Christmas as possible, to minimize media coverage as well.  However, it seems as though the Conservative Government under estimated the passion of Canadians for the service.

Deepak Chopra: Mail Scrooge?

Numerous MP's returned to the Parliament for an emergency session, and simultaneously hauled in Deepak Chopra, the CEO of Canada Post to explain his rational for why ending home delivery was necessary.

Chopra came up with a series of fantastic answers to the MP's grilling session.  At one point, he suggested that the feedback he had been receiving from Canadians was positive, and that Canadian seniors have told him they welcome the opportunity for more fresh air and exercise by walking a few blocks each day to retrieve their mail. 

Chopra and Raitt indicated that the end of mail delivery to our doors was necessary, as Canada Post is facing a $100 million deficit for the year, and the projections for the next five years look even worse.  Not surprisingly, Chopra dodged a series of questions in which he was asked point blank if he received a bonus in the last year, and exactly how much his bonus was.  The closest he would get to providing an answer, was to say that his salary is "a matter of public record".

Well I agree!  His salary SHOULD be a matter of public record.  However, it is not.  Most Canadians would never have known that Chopra's salary is nearly $500,000 a year, or that his bonus was paid out at 33% for an additional sum of close to $200,000 unless NDP MP Paul Dewar hadn't stated so during this parliamentary committee meeting.  In fact, in 2012, the Toronto Sun filed an access to information request for a number of bonus payouts to Canada post employees over the previous four years.  They also asked for a breakdown of how much was paid out to 23 members of the executive committee.  All of the individual payment numbers were refused based on "issues of privacy".  What they DID find out was that 7,402 Canada Post employees were paid some sort of bonus during the time period, including all 23 members of the executive board.  Clearly his salary and bonus is not a matter of public record.  It should be noted that Canada Post posted a net loss before taxes of $327 million in 2012.  A significant portion of which came because of a 25 day strike by postal workers.

I find it rather objectionable that anyone received a bonus when the company is bleeding money.  While good personal performance should be rewarded, it should not be done so when the company is hemorrhaging money.

A number of ways Canada Post could increase revenues was suggested by the parliamentary committee, including offering banking services at its branches in remote locations, or small towns where regular bank branches do not exist.  A wise suggestion.  The Swiss Postal service implemented this service several years ago to great success.

While the Conservative Government seems intent on ramming through the end of mail delivery as we know it (the first communities to lose this service are scheduled to be announced this summer), there may be some hope after all.

Thomas Mulcair: Defender of the Post

Thomas Mulcair, leader of the NDP, and Olivia Chow, Transportation Critic are set to introduce a motion in the house tomorrow declaring home mail delivery an invaluable service to Canadians.  They will force a vote on the matter, which should be an interesting political stone to throw.  An election will be held next year.  Forcing MPs to effectively vote for or against mail delivery will no doubt come to haunt some MPs who find themselves in tight electoral races in their own districts.  And you can bet, the NDP will make it very public come campaigning time which Conservatives voted to kill off their constituents delivery.  

It will all play out in the Commons tomorrow, and it should be interesting to see if Stephen Harper cracks the party whip, or if he lets MPs vote on their own.  I would suspect that independent voting will mean that the NDP motion will pass, which will likely see the plan of killing mail delivery dead on the floor.  If the whip is cracked... well... I guess we will see who will survive re-election.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Rainn's Christmas Message


So you may have noticed that I took some time off from blogging the last three months.

I decided that I needed a bit of rest from the blogging, and felt especially after the death of Jack Layton that some introspection was in order.

I spent most of my time focusing on photography, and meeting new people. It is easy for us to lose sight of some things that are very important when we spend so much time on the web. Granted we communicate with others through email or social networking, but none of it can replace good old fashioned human interaction.

I did some small projects through my real life work to help fund raise for Habitat for Humanity, I also took a short time off in September to go to Las Vegas, and will hopefully be there again in January or early February to finish off my long awaited project; The Ultimate Guide to The Las Vegas Strip.

As Christmas approaches, I am reminded of the things that I am thankful for in my life, such as my friends, the roof over my head, the fact that I have gainful employment, and my personal freedom and liberties.

These same things that I am so thankful for also remind me that I have an obligation. I am obligated to ensure that I am a good friend. I am obligated to do my best at work. I am obligated to look after my health, so that I can be an effective friend and worker. I am obligated to help others less fortunate than I.

I am also obligated to do my part to steer (or in some cases fight) the government when it is not acting in the best interests of Canadians.

The last item is key. Our government shapes our lives and our futures. It impacts people not only in Canada, but in any number of nations that we do business with, give aid to, have war or peacekeeping efforts in.

Unfortunately, our government has been a bit like a masquerade ball lately. Everyone is in disguise, motives are not clear, and you never know if the person you are speaking with is true or false.

I also recognize that I am one person. There will be no Federal election on the immediate horizon, so I can not change things simply with my vote. So I will continue to discuss the hot button issues here on my blog. I promise to look at things as unbiased as possible (I am human after all). I promise to tell only the truth, and to report only accurate facts as I can find them out.

This Christmas, I encourage you to think about this great country we live in (or whatever country you may hail from, if not Canada). Take the facts in, and decide for yourself what Canada should be and where we should be headed. I encourage you to act! Find a way to effect change! Write letters to your Members of Parliament. Write letters to the editor of your local news paper. Start a blog! All of these things make a difference. Especially if enough of us do them.

The time for Canadians to be passive is gone. It is time to take the reins of our Nation and move forward!


Subscribe to Thoughts of Rainn

Thursday, March 31, 2011

Patriot Games: Election 2011

Not even a week has passed since Canada's ruling government was toppled, and already political posturing and scandals abound.

Last Friday, in an historic move, the Conservative Government was found in contempt of parliament on scandals of hidden costs of military jets and corporate tax cuts, to lying cabinet ministers and document doctoring.

Not 10 minutes after the final session of Parliament wrapped up did Stephen Harper's attack dog, John Baird, begin his annual fear mongering session on national news magazine's cameras declaring a conspiracy by opposition parties to form a coalition government that would throw our country into economic and political fires of Hell.

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff did his best to answer reporters questions about the possibility of a coalition government with the NDP without actually giving a yes or no answer. He did this for a couple of days then finally broke down and gave a resounding "NO!" to the question.

Michael Ignatieff Plays Dumb: "What's a Coalition?"

This likely indicates that the Liberals will be running an all-or-nothing campaign on the election trail, as I believe a coalition had being enthusiastically discussed prior to the government falling. Now that Ignatieff publicly stated that no such agreement would occur after the election regardless of the results, it seems likely that his career would be quickly eviscerated should he go back on his word.

Since coalition is out of the question now, this puts the Liberals in a pressure cooker to perform drastically better than the last election, if not actually form a government. It is unlikely that Ignatieff would be allowed to keep his job as Liberal leader if the party fails to gain a significant amount of seats in the House.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper seemed to be sitting pretty for the first few days of the campaign while the heat was on his arch-rival. Until Sebastian Togneri turned up like a bad penny again.

You may remember Togneri's name. He was a high ranking government aide for many years until he was forced to resign over allegations of interfering in several requests for government information made under the Freedom of Information Act.

Very recently, even Conservative Minister Rona Ambrose had no choice but to call for an RCMP investigation into Togneri's interference with the requests for information. (Though, I find it odd that the RCMP were called in a year after Togneri's resignation). Unfortunately for Stephen Harper, the request for an RCMP investigation coincided with a Parliamentary inquiry into Minister Bev Oda's alleged altering of government documents.

Well, now Togneri's name was in the media again, as some lucky reporter discovered that he was working on the campaign for Conservative hopeful Ryan Hastman in the Edmonton Strathcona riding.

Linda Duncan: A Little Orange Fish In A Big Blue Sea

Hastman has a somewhat uphill battle in front of him to begin with. In the 2008 election, NDP candidate Linda Duncan wrestled the riding away from Conservative incumbent Rahim Jaffer (after Jaffer himself suffered several political scandals). From all accounts, Linda Duncan, a long time Edmonton Lawyer is well liked, and has been made high-profile by the NDP since it was the first time an Alberta riding has been anything but Tory blue since the Anne McLellen days.

Unfortunately for Hastman and Stephen Harper, it doesn't look good having a disgraced government aide currently under police investigation helping out with a new Conservative candidate's campaign.

Things turned from bad to worse for both Stephen Harper and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff the last two days as Green Party leader Elizabeth May burst on to the scene in a blaze of controversy, fighting for her political rights.

Elizabeth May Is Going To Debate Your Ass Off. Deal With It.

You may remember from the 2008 election, when the Green Party was just starting to gain credibility and a lot of media attention, that the Canadian Broadcast Consortium (basically a handful of executives from Canada's 4 main TV networks) decided that May would not be entitled to participate in the electoral debates. This prompted a huge public outcry, and a chance for all party leaders to look like the good guy on national television by stating that they believed May should be included in the debate. Finally the consortium relented, and May had her day in the spotlight. (She actually did quite well- check out my review of her performance here.)

This week, for some bizarre reason, the consortium again decided that May, despite being the leader of a national party that received 6% of all votes in the last election (that's 1 million votes - more than the Bloc Quebecois received) and that runs a candidate in every riding across Canada, was not worthy of participating in the debates because her party does not have a current, elected MP.

Let's not bother taking into account that the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance Party, which are now both known as the Conservative Party, did not have elected MPs either during their first elections, but were still allowed to participate in the debates.

May has since launched a very public battle against the Consortium, and has retained a high profile lawyer to argue her case to the courts to sneak her way in to the debates.

This is particularly bad news for both Ignatieff and Harper. Partly because May seems to be very good a debating, and neither man likely wants her there. That being said, since Harper endorsed her presence in the last election, he can hardly say that she isn't entitled to be there for this election. He has since said he is open to her being there, but that all parties should submit to the rules put forth by the Consortium. Ignatieff on the other hand, has his barrels firmly aimed at Harper, and the more people included in the debate may lead the public to decide that there are other voting options rather than just the Liberals or the Conservatives, as he has been trying to prove in the media all week.

Foolishly, after May made her public tirade about not being included in the election debate, Ignatieff stated he was most keen on having a second debate televised solely between himself and Stephen Harper. Harper seemed keen on the idea as well, and all but issued a public challenge to his rival. Ignatieff then ran in front of the nearest camera and said it was on. However, as media attention intensified around May and her rhetoric of the debates being anti-democratic for shutting her out, Harper quietly back-peddled on his two-man debate idea. This gave Ignatieff an opportunity to call Harper "chicken", but also gave the impression of him being an elitist.

So to recap, in the last two weeks or so, we have had the government charged with contempt, allegations of creative bookkeeping, Ministers engaged in doctoring documents, police investigations, candidates receiving help from disgraced government aides, finger pointing at undemocratic television execs, threatened legal action, political threats and challenges, and a good deal of back-peddling from most of the party leaders. And we've just gotten started. Imagine where we will be in another 4 weeks!

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Michaelle Jean Talks About Prorogation

Today the outgoing Governor General of Canada briefly discussed her decision to prorogue parliament (for the first time) in 2008.

You may remember the time of political crisis when the 3 opposition party leaders decided to oust Stephen Harper from the Prime Ministers Office and form a coalition government. (You can read my previous post from December 2008 here:http://thoughtsofrainn.blogspot.com/2008/12/harper-prorogues-parliament.html)

There was a certain amount of outrage at the time when Michaelle Jean bowed to the request of the Prime Minister and agreed to the suspending of parliament. This effectively allowed the government to unexpectedly adjourn the session of parliament, and there by dodged the bullet of a non-confidence motion from passing.

Regardless of whether or not you agreed with the decision, since it was a precedent setting course of action (as no other Governor General had made a similar ruling, and the fact that it prevented the opposition from tabling a confidence motion) the people of Canada were owed an explanation as to why and on what merit her decision was made.

We still have not received a justification.

Personally, my biggest problem was not so much with the fact that it saved the current Conservative government but the fact that the action prevented democracy from occurring. There are reasons as to why a process is in place for what should occur if a confidence motion does not pass. It means that the ruling government has lost the confidence to govern, and that either an election be held, or an opposition party take the reins. In all fairness, Michaelle Jean took that democratic process away from the people.

And for that we are owed an explanation.

Unfortunately, during her conversations regarding her choice, she still has not offered any reasonings. (No doubt waiting until she releases a new book about her time as Governor General.)

What she DID say was that she felt her decision had a positive spin, in that it forced a national discussion and led Canadians to learn more about their "democracy".

I find her comments insulting and laughable.

I am glad to see the woman go, and I look forward to the next Governor General. Frankly, I think anyone could do a better job.

Thursday, December 04, 2008

Harper Prorogues Parliament

So Harper successfully managed to petition the Governor General to prorogue Parliament until the end of January.

I have difficulty believing that this is in the best interest of the Nation, rather than the Conservative Party of Canada.  How, when Canada is facing an economic crisis, is it worthwhile to STOP working for two months, rather than let a coalition of people get to work and deal with the problem?  

This is purely a move on the Conservative Party to retain power, rather than to help the Nation.  

And shame on the Gov. General for bending to the will of Harper.  Granted the Gov. General position is primarily figurehead status, and has little real power in our current political system.  But considering that this is probably the first time in nearly a century that the Gov. General had a decision to make that actually effected all Canadians, she should have taken a different course of action. 

Since this was relatively uncharted territory in the History of Canadian politics, the Governor General SHOULD have consulted the British Monarchy for advice on how to proceed.  After all, that is her job.  She is a representative of the Queen.  Do not mistake her position as a Regent.  She is not to rule, but rather to represent the Queens authority.

Not only did Governor General Michael Jean NOT consult the Queen when making her decision, but now she has set a very dangerous precedent for future minority governments.  By choosing to prorogue Parliament, she has allowed any minority government to halt parliament whenever they may risk falling to a motion of confidence.  This gives almost any minority government an inexcusable amount of power.

So now, we wait another two months while the Conservatives wage a multi-million dollar propaganda campaign against the coalition, and the economy will continue to crumble.

I would like to be able to sit in a room with Stephen Harper for just 10 minutes, so that I might begin to understand his line of thinking.  The Conservative economic update not only lacked a stimulus package for Canada, but also included eliminating the right of Unionized public servants to renegotiate their contracts (granted I think most of them are already over paid, but they should still have the right like everyone else does), and limited the ability of women to sue for pay equity, but it also eliminated the political subsidies provided by Elections Canada to all of the political parties.  

Regardless of whether or not you feel the political parties should receive subsidies to help them focus on working, rather than fundraising, Harper had to know it would cause a political backlash.  And to save $26 million?  It's a drop in the bucket compared to the billions the economy needs in investment.  I have a hard time believing that Mr. Harper sat at his desk, feverishly looking for an area where he could save a few pennies.  I have a feeling it had more to do with the ability to potentially cripple his opponents under the guise of 'cost cutting'.  I think he expected it to go over better than it did.  But, if I am correct and that was his real motivation, I think the man is too stupid to be allowed to be Prime Minister!  Forcing your political competitors into virtual bankruptcy does not show good faith.  Especially to voters that you haven't convinced yet to agree to your way of thinking!

I would strongly suggest removing the man from leadership of the Conservative Party before he causes more political fallout.  Oh, that's right.  We can't.  Parliament has been suspended!