Continuing from my last post, I have to say that this weekend’s G8 and G20 protests and police responses both demonstrated a distinct lack of reverence. Where was the reverence by the protesters for the near-impossible task that our police were asked to do as protectors of the peace? And by the police towards the democratic expression of views by the protesters? That almost 900 people were arrested in the days leading up to and including the Summits is ridiculous. That there are people still being held in improvised and unlawful conditions is unacceptable.

First, I am horrified at the arrest, abuse, and detention of media representatives – a free and open media is essential to a healthy democracy. While I appreciate that throwing them in jail is one way to ensure that they get an excellent story, I believe it sets a horrible precedent and must be dealt with immediately.

Second, the policing does not appear to have been organized well. Of particular concern to me was the elimination of the ’safe’ protest zone at Queen’s Park. Far removed from the actual Summit area, I am still having trouble understanding why the police would (seemingly on a whim) decide to clear this area and send protesters scuttling through the downtown. It seems to me that keeping protesters contained in one safe area would have been a better idea. If the priority was the fenced-in area, why were they harassing protesters on the Esplanade?

I am also disappointed in the organizers who seemed to abandon the protesters after the planned walk during the day, leaving them in disarray and at the mercy of the more-prepared police forces who decided to start arresting later in the evening, after the vivid images of destruction were obtained (and played over and over and over).

But I am most disturbed by the ease with which our leaders surrendered our democratic rights in the name of ’security’. When I posted my concerns on Facebook the response was, generally, ‘Oh yes, that Harper is so horrible,’ followed by silence when I pointed out that my biggest concern was with McGuinty and the Liberal Party of Ontario’s move to enact secret police powers under the Public Works Protection Act. Though temporary, the arbitrary right to detain, search, and arrest civilians is a terrifying glimpse of just how fragile our civil liberties are. Rights that have been won through blood and struggle over the past several hundred years. To see them wiped away for the sake of a political summit is unforgivable. I look forward to the Charter challenges, and class actions suits, should they proceed, and to the explanation by our Leaders as to how they justify forfeiting my rights for their convenience.

It is the Police Chief’s job to recommend over-the-top security measures, he’s a cop. To be cliché, when your tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I get that. I have little problem with Blair’s strategy this weekend, though some of his tactics were very questionable. But it is the job of a politician, a strong political leader (and this goes for the Mayor, the Premier, and the PM!) to say, “NO! The rights of our citizens are more important than that. We need to find a way to protect both the fence and the people of Toronto, including those who are protesting.” That is the job of a Leader, and if our leaders are too weak, or too uncaring to do that, then it is time to start looking for new ones. Right now.

Finally, this weekend has added more strength to my belief that voting Liberal or Conservative doesn’t make a bit of difference – they both care little about democracy. We need electoral reform so that every vote counts equally, and we need it now. We have leaders who have no reverence for democracy, or for the rights of their citizens, and that needs to change.

While perusing my Facebook updates I came across an article about Bill C510 (Roxanne’s Law) from the National Post. The idea of the Bill is that it would criminalize the ‘coercion’ of abortion. Interestingly, Harper is reported to be voting against the legislation and strongly recommending that his caucus do the same, though it will be a free vote. If so, it looks like the government will be keeping their promise to not introduce or support anti-choice legislation. Cool.

Dammit Janet did a great job of breaking down why it is ridiculous to call it Roxanne’s Law. And in the Comments to her post SustainableFamilies wrote the following:

“But I would like, in my imagined utopia, for crisis pregnancy services to basically first ask a woman if she could have her DREAM situation… if she had support, resources, emotional support, financial support… would she want to parent? And if so, I would like for her to be offered all known parenting resources in the area.

Likewise. If she says there is no way, this is not what I want right now, abortion services would be offered compassionately and quickly (and affordably.)”

I love that vision. Is it only possible in a utopia? Or is it possible for family planning/crisis services to step beyond their own political positions and empower the young women who come to them to make the choice that is best for themselves?

Has anyone had good or bad experiences with these services that they want to share? I’d love to hear about it. I think it is important that those who are most vulnerable are given the power to create their own lives.

This is going to be one amazingly ’signature’ Conservative plan. No abortion – deep sigh but okay. But to not even include access to contraception as part of our super-duper G8 ground-breaking plan to improve maternal and infant health? I’m having a hard time imagining what will be in this plan.

Guaranteed access to:
Clean water? Not sure how they would do this…
Affordable medication? Nope, this would threaten pharmaceutical monopolies.
Nutritious food? Nope, this would interfere with free-market agribusiness.
Education? Nope, then women might learn about family planning and their rights.

Or maybe they’ll just make sure that every newborn gets a Tory-blue swaddling blanket and a booklet on how to keep their legs crossed in the future.

It was so fast I had to go back and read it again. On Tuesday during Question Period, Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe and PM Stephen Harper had a little exchange about oil and gas companies that caught my eye while reading the Hansard. (Yup, I’m totally poli-geeking out.) Here is the exchange under Oral Questions: Government Spending.

{snip}

Mr. Gilles Duceppe (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, BQ): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is quite right to say that this is a first: it is the first time I have seen a government abolish vacant positions.

The government could recover $3 billion if it prohibited the use of tax havens, but it prefers to abolish vacant positions. It could do away with tax benefits for the oil companies, which would save $3.2 billion, but it prefers to abolish vacant positions. It could cut military spending by $1 billion, but it prefers to abolish vacant positions.

Will the Prime Minister admit that what is lacking is not solutions, but political will?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper (Prime Minister, CPC): Mr. Speaker, obviously, the first step in abolishing positions is not to fill them. If the leader of the Bloc would care to suggest any other positions that should be abolished, I encourage him to do so.

The Bloc leader talks about subsidies for the oil companies. This government has cut taxes for all businesses in Canada, not just the oil companies. This is another example of grandstanding by the Bloc.

{snip, emphasis mine}

umm… I could be wrong here but I’m pretty sure that Mr. Duceppe was not talking about tax cuts for the oil and gas industry.

Actually, I’m almost positive he was talking about eliminating the incentives for oil and gas exploration and production that result in a more-than billion dollar subsidy for oil and gas companies and their investors.*

Sadly, none of that was mentioned due to the deft handling by Mr. Harper. Very impressive. And too bad that Mr. Duceppe couldn’t handle the pass.

*I’m not sure where Mr. Duceppe got the $3.2 billion figure from – let me know if you do.

“On his watch, the proportion of women on the government benches has fallen to 11 per cent, from 25 per cent under Paul Martin and 23 per cent under Jean Chrétien.”

I didn’t know that. How interesting. And distressing.

From this article by Carol Goar in the Star discussing Minister Guergis’ less than inspiring performance at the UN this week leading up to Monday’s celebration of International Women’s Day.

I was incredibly happy to hear the government state their commitment to investigating the ‘missing’ aboriginal women – over 500 of them now in both the throne speech and the budget.

I’ll believe it when it happens.

I was incredibly happy to hear the Mr. Harper’s primary objective as head of the G8 this year is to improve maternal and infant health.

I’ll believe it when the numbers change.

I’m simply passing this information along from the Facebook group, Proud to be a Member of That “Left-Wing Fringe Group” Called Women,* with the fervent hope that you will take action and write to your MPs, Minister Guergis and Mr. Harper. Our country has a very poor record when it comes to the treatment of aboriginal populations and aboriginal women have borne the brunt of this mistreatment.

Please help this group continue its work by making the Conservatives aware that we do care – about every person’s rights and dignity.

Thank you.

{snip}

{snip}

* The name of this group refers to a comment Mr. Harper made in a supposedly closed-door meeting in Thunder Bay where he commented on the cancellation of the Court Challenges program and proclaimed that they had shut down the influence of left-wing fringe groups. It’s at 3:40 of the video though you might enjoy his bragging about the cancellation of universal daycare at about 3:30. Sadly, one of, if not the major beneficiary of the Court Challenges program had been the equity and rights of women through many cases. It was a major loss to equity in this country and it slipped right by, almost un-noticed and un-challenged. We might as well change it to the Minister of State Against the Status of Women

[Letter number 2 in what will most likely be a series of Letters to the Editor of the Era-Banner that I am not allowed to send because I am a declared candidate for an election that will happen sometime in the future. I wish I had realized that when I declared for the Green Party I would lose my voice at the Era-Banner but such is life. Now I get to make my letters longer. Ha!]

Dear Editor,

Re: Voter turnout low because politicians lie, letter from Mr. L. Rothwell, Feb 11 / Re: If you care about democracy, vote, editorial, Jan 28

With all due respect to Mr. Rothwell I must challenge his hypothesis that when “80 per cent of voters… stay at home. Then, maybe, politicians will get the message.”

While there are a few directions my disagreement could take – including my belief that when 80% of voters stay home we will live in a true oligarchy where only the select few have any say in government and tyranny will reign and Canada will weep. Though, this scenario is fairly close to the mark with respect to municipal elections. Anyways.

That was not the point.

What I really wanted to dispute was Mr. Rothwell’s obvious anger towards ‘politicians’ and his categorization of them as “people who lack integrity and ethics.”

Of course, as a recently declared political candidate I take it a little personally that because of my political choice I suddenly have no integrity nor ethics. I actually consider myself to be a person possessing both integrity and a high ethical standard.

But that is still not the point, though closer to it. The point is – there are no politicians. There are merely people, just like Mr. Rothwell and myself, that have chosen to join in the political process.

Politicians are not usually born. They are made. They are people who have decided to pursue a public life – hopefully in the service of their country and the best interests of the electorate.

Do these people sometimes lose focus and become swayed by the pretty, shiny danglings of lobby groups? Yes.

Do they sometimes pursue power to the exclusion of everything else. Yes.

Do these people sometimes let us down? Yes. Often.

Do we have a democratic crisis in Canada? Yes. I believe we do.

But my point is that sitting at home and whinging about it is not the best use of one’s time.

Stand up. Get engaged. Make your voice count.

And if you can’t find a single political candidate that you can trust – then take the leap and become a candidate. For municipal, provincial, or federal politics quality candidates are desperately needed.

Of course, it would be super-spiffy if you would support me and my bid to be the first Green MP for Newmarket-Aurora, but if you can’t, then get your butt out there and run against me.

I also have an issue with your contention that “the population is a lot more educated these days.” Hardly. When the anti-proroguing rally was being organized most people did not even know that our democracy had been suspended. They didn’t understand what it meant. And they didn’t know why they should care. Some were happy to get the ‘liars’ out of Ottawa for a while. People know far more about what Britney Spears is up to than what our PM is doing showboating in Vancouver.

But that isn’t the politicians fault. If there are issues with our democracy it is because we expect ’someone else’ to take care of it for us.

We are the change we wish to see. We are the smallest unit of a democratic society. And it is up to us to keep it safe and keep it strong. If we don’t have anyone to vote for then it is up to us to find them – or to become them. That is what I did. And it is what I encourage everyone else to do.

That is why I am so proud of local organizers like Liz, Neale, Nick, Carter and everyone else who helped make the January 23rd rally such a success – and who are now organizing a public meeting in Aurora on February 25.

Holding the Line on Democracy will take a frank look at what is happening in our society and, hopefully, send people away feeling more educated, more empowered, and more motivated to take action to keep our democracy strong.

Mr. Rothwell, I am personally inviting you to join us. It’s kind of fun to be around other people who care as passionately as you obviously do.

… oh! Wait. It’s just our uterus’ that he cares about. Okay, no change there.

A funny thing happened a couple of weeks ago. In his inaugural speech as 2010 President of the G8, Mr. Harper proclaimed that he was very, very concerned about maternal and infant health and that, during his term, he was going to champion these two causes (Millennium Development Goals #4 and #5) and bring much needed attention and funding to them – on a global basis. No. Really. He said it.

Immediately, other commentators began to question his good intentions. Mr. Ignatieff, for one, thought it a bit odd and discussed how “Harper has made cuts to the status of women and equality programs, while salary gaps between men and women are increasing in Canada” and that, perhaps, Mr. Harper could “start showing at home in Canada the same commitment to women.”

And this is all well and good. I expect certain people to have problems with everything that Mr. Harper announces.

But when Stephen Lewis has problems with the same announcements, then my ears prick up. Why? Because I have seen no evidence that he is anything other than a profoundly humane and compassionate man in a very challenging and frustrating position, exposed to the most heart-breaking conditions on Earth and managing to carry on year after year. To him I listen.

His critique is that it seems odd that Mr. Harper would trumpet Canada’s burgeoning awareness of the issues of maternal and infant health when the G8 has been working on securing funding for the past year. Note that the MDGs were first developed leading up to 2000 with a due date of 2015 – sometimes it just takes a while to get the ball rolling, y’know.

In addition, Mr. Lewis noted that none of the other MDGs were mentioned and that it didn’t “include sexual violence, child marriage, sexual trafficking, female genital mutilation, economic autonomy, political representation, land rights or inheritance rights. It include[d] none of the panoply of women’s issues which consign women to subordinate positions around the world.”

Anyway, I’m sure that members of the G8 hope that Canada will stop actively opposing humanitarian causes and denying human rights and freedoms to as many groups as they possibly can. I wish I could believe Mr. Harper but I have seen no evidence that he cares about anyone except for white, straight males, and preferably corporate oil executives at that.

Especially since he considers women to be a ‘left-wing fringe group’.

The audacity of Mr. Harper is threatening to make my brain explode – is this his attempt at a kinder, gentler Harper to try and make us forget that he is a cynical, arrogant, autocratic leader who has shown only contempt for Canadian citizens and our democracy. Is this a reaction to the pro-democracy, anti-prorogue rallies that occurred all across Canada last month?

Probably. He honestly seems to believe that we will be easily lulled back to sleep with the belief that he is going to take care of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable citizens. When he doesn’t care about those same people right here.

How about raising the quality of life, or, heck, even the standard of living for our own aboriginal populations? How about taking care of the poorest and most vulnerable right here?

How about that Mr. Harper?