"Let's stop racism"...

UPDATE**** Vellecotte steps down as chair...woohoo...

Looking at my neon pink "Let's STOP racism" pin from the 90's makes....I feel a little alarmed when the people who Harper is supporting are people who are publicly known for their racially derogatory comments…

-Maurice Vellecotte, MP is Stephen Harper’s choice to lead the Commons aboriginal committee. He supported the police officers who were embroiled in the hate act of leaving an Aboriginal man out to die in the winter temperatures.

-Mr. Morgan was recently given the post of public appointments commission. He blamed immigrants from certain regions of the world for violence in Canada. He specifically named Jamaican and Asians for ethnic violence in Canada.

Why is Harper’s Conservative government rewarding people who make racist comments?

Racism is a serious issue in Canada and I don’t understand why a Prime Minister would promote individuals that exude racial attitudes.

If “Standing up for Canada” means putting racist people into positions of power…then next election we should be moving Canada forward, not backwards.

S.

Marchers protest Vellacott nomination
The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
Saturday, April 29, 2006
Page: A9
Section: Local
Byline: Sarah MacDonald
Source: The StarPhoenix

About 100 people marched from the First Nations University of Canada's Saskatoon campus to MP Maurice Vellacott's office Friday afternoon to protest his nomination as chair of the House of Commons committee on aboriginal affairs and northern development.

Carrying signs with slogans such as "Vellacott denies the facts," "Treaties came before Canada" and "Stop racism from Saskatoon to Caledonia," participants also rallied in support of the members of the Six Nations First Nation involved in a standoff over disputed land in Caledonia, Ont.

"We just thought we would put the two together because if he got the chair, what would he do at Six Nations?" said Darlene Okemaysim, one of the march organizers. "What would he do in Saskatoon to improve police- Native-white relations?"

Those involved in Friday's rally were concerned that Vellacott may not be the best choice for chair of the committee. His support of two police officers who were fired for dropping off an aboriginal man on the outskirts of Saskatoon in -25 degree weather, and his recent allegation that Native people had a drinking shack outside of the city, were criticized by protesters such as Colleen Thomas.

"We don't feel that he's ready to be the champion of our cause at this point. We don't want him there until he's willing to enter into a relationship with us where he's learning and we're the teachers," said Thomas, who is from the Witchekan Lake First Nation.

"I'd be willing to meet Vellacott halfway, if he would be willing to do that, and that's why I'm walking to his office today," Thomas said, her voice cracking with emotion and tears forming in her eyes.

Vellacott's knowledge of aboriginal issues has also been questioned.

Gary Merasty, a Liberal MP from northern Saskatchewan who is also on the aboriginal affairs committee, said that in all of his years in aboriginal politics, he had never known Vellacott to advocate aboriginal issues.

"With respect to his depth of knowledge, I'm not sure that he has the necessary experience. Some of his views may affect his ability to perform as a fair chairman," said Merasty.

The election of the committee chair takes place Monday afternoon. Any of the 12 members can put their names forward to be elected chair. Merasty's name isn't on the list, but Vellacott was nominated by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Vellacott couldn't be in Saskatoon to meet with the people protesting his nomination, but he sent a letter defending himself.

In the letter, Vellacott said he is committed to aboriginal issues and that the march was a result of misrepresentations of his position on aboriginal affairs by "the media and a number of my political adversaries."

He wrote that his assistance of the two former police officers involved in the Darrell Night case would have been the same had those officers been aboriginal.

"I would have attempted to help them too," he wrote.

In an interview from his Ottawa office, Vellacott said a conflict in schedules prevented him from being in Saskatoon Friday but he would be open to meeting with the people one-on-one.

"I think that probably does a whole lot more to engender a little understanding than hollering into a megaphone," he said.

samacdonald@sp.canwest.com

Freedom of Association....

It's interesting to realize that a purposed further cap on political donation can place limitations on your freedom of association....I think if a person wants to donate their hard earn money because they believe in a cause....by all means....

The $5000 limitation is not great either, but at least a person could attend all of the events in a year, if they so chose. $1000 wouldn't allow you to attend all of the events.

S.


Proposed $1,000 cap on political donations may violate charter
National Post
Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Page: A4
Section: Canada
Byline: Allan Woods
Column: National Report
Dateline: OTTAWA
Source: CanWest News Service

OTTAWA - The Conservative government's proposed $1,000 limit on individual political donations spelled out in the Accountability Act could violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to electoral law and political financing experts. Interviews with lawyers, interest
groups and academics suggest that measures to reduce the amount people can give to political parties to $1,000 from $5,000 may interfere with the right to freedom of speech. "It's not only about freedom of speech. It's also about freedom of association," said Scott Thurlow, an Ottawa lawyer familiar with party financing legislation passed in 2003 by the Liberals that capped individual donations at $5,000. "If I make my $1,000 contribution to the Green Party, and the Green Party has another event that I want to go to, I can't go to it because I've already made my contribution to them."

Mr. Thurlow said he is supportive of the bulk of the government's wide-ranging attempt to clean up the federal government -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper's first piece of legislation -- but said there is "no doubt in my mind" that the political financing measures constitute a constitutional violation, and he is not alone. "It's my money and my property and I don't think the government should be able to tell me what to do with it," said Gerry Nicholls, head of the
National Citizens Coaltion, an advocacy group that Mr. Harper himself used to lead.

Killing Kyoto

Meeting the targets of Kyoto is not easy nor is it cheap, but that doesn't mean that we should strive for it. The Kyoto accord is an international agreement that Canada has signed on to and it should be respected. I think it would be a disgrace if Canada announced that we no longer work on our commitments.

Sorry Ambrose, but you are wrong on this:
"Canadians need to talk about "action and solutions long term. We need solutions that are out by 50, 100 years, not two years, five years."

We need action NOW. Yes, we need long term solutions, but we need to make head way now. I would like clean air and drinking water for my children, not just their great grandchildren. There are no golden solutions and no quick wipes for environmental damage but we need to take steps forward, not backwards.

The UN Climate Change Conference was not a waste. It was at meeting of the minds, discussion on our future, and raised public awareness on environmental issues to a new level. The conference sought out important issues and foster team work on a global scale. If that is not important to the Conservatives, I shudder at the thought of the future of what our environment will be.

It' won't be easy to meet our targets, but we should at least try. To strive for a goal is better than to sit back and witness more damage. Kyoto is not perfect, but it's a statment. It says that Canadians are trying to work towards cleaning our environment. To say we shouldn't even try to make our country’s environment cleaner is anti-Canadian.

Meet our targets.

S.

read the article

PMO won't lower flag in honour of soliders

Ugg this article irks me. Lowering the flag is a symbol of respect, not political retoric. This is just another example of the PMO trying to make petty changes to flex their muscles. I'm sorry but this is disrepectful to the Soliders who fight for our country.

The next thing Harper will tell us is that he's changing the Red and White Maple Leaf to Blue and White.

S.

Tories won't lower flag for troop deaths: Casualties in Afghanistan to be honoured on Remembrance Day: Defence minister
The Ottawa Citizen Wednesday, April 5, 2006 Page: A8 Section: News Byline: Joshua Errett Source: The Ottawa Citizen

The decision to stop lowering national flags to half-staff when a Canadian soldier dies in Afghanistan is a return to an 80-year old tradition broken by the previous government, Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor said yesterday.

"For the last 80 years, our national tradition has been to honour all (Canadian troops killed in service) on the same day in a national Remembrance Day ceremony," said Mr. O'Connor.

But during the tenure of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin, the Prime Minister's Office requested that Canadian flags at government buildings and on the Peace Tower be lowered when soldiers are killed in Afghanistan. Stephen Harper's Conservative government -- citing Canada Heritage flag-lowering protocol -- will not make those provisions.

"We've reverted back to the tradition," said Defence spokesman Jae Malana, adding that it was previous Liberal governments that broke tradition, not the current Conservative government.

Mr. Malana said the official policy is not to lower flags for every casualty unless the Prime Minister's Office makes a request.

The three soldiers who have died in Afghanistan since Mr. Harper took office have not had flags lowered on all government buildings, most notably the Peace Tower.

Mr. O'Connor said that "the protocol clearly states" flags will beonly be half-staffed for a soldier's death in specific locations: thesoldier's operational base, home base and the National Defence Headquarters, from the day of death to the day of the funeral, and all flags within the soldier's service (Army, Navy or Air Force) on the day of the funeral.

Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh said the previous Liberal governments recognized that protocol, but lowered flags regardless.

"It was appropriate to change that," said Mr. Dosanjh. "I believe lowering the flag is the least a government can do."

The Liberal government began the flag-lowering policy in 2002, when four Canadian soldiers died in a friendly fire incident with a U.S. pilot in Afghanistan. The policy continued until last month, after the Conservatives took office.

But Mr. Dosanjh said the issue should not become one of partisanship.

"The fact that the Liberals started the tradition of flags at half-mast for every soldier is not the point," he said. "And it should not be a political point.

"That practice should continue."

you write the story, you do the time

Now that the speech from the thorn has been delivered…I wonder which journalist the Conservative MP Colin Mayes will want to see jailed. Which reporter will dare criticize and attempt to deliver a news report on the speech …their watching you Taber, Duffy, and Fife…if you write the story, you do the time.

Effective and open accountability…I think China’s government is taking notes.

Oh and Mayes is no longer available for comment…please direct any questions about any department, member, any thing conservative, or even constituency must be directed through the PMO.

Harper tightens muzzle