• Amendment 1: Elimination of the National Revenue Committee and Appointment of Chief Revenue Officer
  Yeah, whatever… nothing too interesting here. 
• Amendment 2: Registration of supporters of the Liberal Party
  
• Amendment 3: Participation of supporters in Leadership Vote
  I see no point to this. Party membership is a minor $10 per year. If someone cared to vote for party member they can easily. I think this will too easily open up for anyone and everyone to be “supporters” and leave the party susceptible to Conservatives and New Democrats who wish to vote in the party leadership.
• Amendment 5: Annual strategic plan and annual report  tabled by the National Board of Directors
  Whatever .
• Amendment 6 (regarding candidate nominations)
  No idea what this means.
• Amendment 8 (regarding the addition of the National Policy Vice-Chair to the Policy Approval Subcommittee)
  See above.

DEFEATED AMENDMENTS

• Amendment 4: Participation of supporters in candidate selection meetings of their EDA
  I’m glad at least supporters cannot choose who runs in the riding.
• Amendment 7: Removing the Leader’s veto over the content of the Policy Platform
  Restricting powers of the party leader would be a good thing.
• Amendment 9: Election of Executive Officers using a “one member, one vote” system
  Who the fuck said no to this?
• Amendment 10: Prioritization of policy resolutions using a weighted “one member, one vote” system
  Again… democracy?

They also voted on policy items, such as…
Legalizing and regulating marijuana. A whole 77% voted in favour of this… I fucking agree. I don’t smoke it, but I don’t care if someone above the age of majority does.
Ditching the monarchy. My opinion on the monarchy is that it’s too difficult to ditch, and not worth the effort. Constitutionally to change to the role of the monarchy or Governor General in Canada, we must have support from 100% of the provinces… there is no way in hell that will happen. Nearly every time the Constitution was opened to discussion since Confederation has been a nightmare. Don’t fucking do it. Sure, it costs us some money, and sure Lizzy serves no real purpose, but I don’t care.

That’s about all I paid attention to.

This month I turn 30. To mark such a remarkable event, I’m spending every day of October drenched in awesome-sauce.

Last night I went to a weird alley in Kensington which in turn led to a staircase up to a strange bar I’ve never been in.  It was a packed house where Rob Benvie of Thrush Hermit fame was to be reading from his new novel. I didn’t quite understand why the place was so packed, but I quickly found Natalia and Tim and hung out with those two for a while. After hanging around for a while, we spotted Val, in the audience, and chatted with her. Turns out she’s in a choir called Choir! Choir! Choir! who were performing that night. In addition, about 70% of the audience were also in Choir! Choir! Choir!

Benvie read a portion of his book, and I still hate being read to. It’s this weird problem I have, nothing against his prose. As he was finishing his reading, Choir! Choir! Choir! made their way up on the stage, and packed it like sardines. Suddenly the bar seemed empty. They performed two songs from the 1990s (when the book is set), one I didn’t recognize, and “Waterfalls” the TLC song, not the Paul McCartney song.

After that Benvie read more from his book, and shortly afterwards, a new band took the stage featuring Matt Murphy of Super Friendz/Flashing Lights fame. They played a handful of songs that were okay, but didn’t sound too tight. There was a large amount of feedback, leaving much of the audience with fingers in their ears. Who goes to club shows without earplugs? It really wasn’t anything special.

From there I had a quick walk up Augusta to College where I went to Rancho Relaxo. Closing the night at Rancho was Different Skeletons, a band featuring three awesome dudes, two of which are named Daniel. Unfortunately there were still two bands playing sets, and they both kinda sucked. So I spent those hours talking with Different Skeletons, their ladies, and other assorted friends.  Most of the time was with Julie and (drummer) Dan¹. I’ve known Juile for years now, and about a year ago, she and Dan had a party at their place. I was chatting with Julie in the hallway, when Jamie walks by. Turns out that Jamie and (guitarist) Daniel’s band Fat City had lost their drummer and now formed Different Skeletons with Dan. It was slightly to weird to see two very distinct aspects of my life merge in an unexpected way, but it made for more opportunities to hang out with friends.

Different Skeletons then set up their gear on the dance floor, and performed a set which was sloppy at first, but got much better as the band went on. Dan’s drums were super loud, being immediately beside the audience, but fortunately ear plugs were invented. At first you couldn’t hear Jamie’s guitar, until about halfway through his songs². The performances got better until their poorly attempted cover of Joel Plaskett’s “Nowhere With You.” All in all a fun set.

After an hour or two of goodbyes, I realized that the TTC was closed, and I didn’t want to cab back home, so I started walking east along College. From there I went to Queen’s Park. The Legislature is beautiful at night. I wandered the grounds of the Legislature and looked at the many statues in Queen’s Park.

From there I continued walking east, until I collapsed in my bed.

1. Julie pops up from time to time in the site header, she’s the cute super-skinny girl. [↩]
2. Jamie and Daniel swap guitar and bass, playing one person’s songs, then the other’s. [↩]

This month I turn 30. To mark such a remarkable event, I’m spending every day of October drenched in awesome-sauce.

After work, I went to Jackman Public School and voted. YES! My candidate won the riding.

I then dined at Toronto’s best restaurant, The Old Nick.

From there I chilled until it was time to head to the Horseshoe where rock and roll was to be had, and rock and roll was had. I saw Entire Cities (who I nearly called The Entire Cities). The were fun as usual. It felt like old times as I think the majority of the songs were from Deep River, their previous album. They sounded good, and Simon’s sporting a lovely beard now. I wholeheartedly approve.

I’ve learned through my years how to work at concerts, whether it’s answer support calls from teachers while sitting on the floor of the Mod Club, or answering emails on my cell phone. So, even though it’s report card time, I felt okay going out. What was weird was working, rocking, and also following the election.

WOO! Liberal Minority! I like minorities. People have to work together. I like McGuinty, he hasn’t been a bad leader.

Today was a productive day.

Councillors Mary Fragedakis and Paul Fletcher of wards 29 & 30 respectively held an information meeting today in Eastminster United Church. During this event they had speakers from many organizations, including the Toronto Library, Animal Services, and many other fantastic Toronto services speak about the KPMG report’s recommendations for service cuts.

This event was simply the left preaching to the left. It was good to hear from these organizations, and give faces to the proposed cuts. Sadly all they talked about was “SAY NO TO CUTS!” It wasn’t anything to motivate those already against the cuts, it did nothing to move the masses. So I asked a question… well, two.

1) How are the politicians and the activists represented going to work with others to find a medium ground, to compromise?

2) Yes we can contact our councillors, who agree with us, we can contact the Mayor’s office, who will ignore us, we can sign petitions, but what can we do with this massive group here to make a change? How can we mobilize?

Councillor Fletcher answered the second question with the usual rhetoric, getting friends and family outside of the ward to contact their councillors, coming to city council, holding up signs. All good and useful ideas, but nothing that will move the masses. Nothing that will convince the “mushy middle” they so much deride. The first question, she didn’t even touch. She told me we had to move along to the next person.

After the event, I talked to my councillor, Ms. Fragedakis as someone asked her how to get the “mushy middle” to see the “correct” side of the picture. I then asked, “how can we get the ‘mushy middle’ to our side of the picture if we cannot work with them, and compromise to find solutions?” Fragedakis’ response was simply that the left is right, and that we have to convince them to our side.

And ladies and gentlemen, this is why I hate party politics. You have people who are living and breathing the party manifesto and putting that ahead of reason. Yes I’m against Ford’s cut, but Toronto MUST balance it’s budget, why? Because we HAVE TO BY LAW! We cannot, under provincial law, run a deficit. So we have to work with the Fords and Mammolitis to find a middle ground to our budget problems.

One of the speakers there was Mr. Peter Tabuns, who is running for re-election to represent Toronto-Danforth in Ontario’s provincial legislature… Queen’s Park¹. He spoke well, and he spoke of getting the province to return to the days of Bob Rae, when Ontario subsidized the operational expenses of the TTC. He spoke well, and he spoke convincingly, and he enticed me to want to vote for him. But how can I do that, if I haven’t yet spoken to the Liberal candidate in my riding, especially because of my dislike of Ms. Howath, the leader of the NDP?

Well, it just so happens, that on my walk home from Eastminster United Church, I ran into Marisa Sterling, who is vying for a seat in Queen’s Park.

It was nice to be able to talk to her. It was disappointing, however. She seems to think that representing the city’s needs is the job of Toronto councillors, and that representing Toronto’s needs provincially is not the job of an MPP elected in Toronto. I have to say that she’s wrong. I have to say that the single job of an MPP or an MP elected to represent Toronto-Danforth in their respective Parliament, is to represent Toronto-Danforth in their respective Parliament.

The Liberals aren’t right, the Conservatives aren’t right, the NDP aren’t right, the Greens aren’t right. No one is 100% right, and we must work together to find a compromise.

1. For to two people who didn’t know that. [↩]

Today’s a sad day for Canada, the left-wing, and Toronto-Danforth, the riding where Mr. Layton represented my neighbours and myself.

I never found myself in full agreement with Layton, or his party, but I had respect for what he did. I always found him a better leader of the NDP than as an MP. While I might have disagreed with him at times, or get infuriated by canned replies to my letters, I always felt he was a good voice for Canada’s left, especially when the Liberals failed, leader after leader.

Unfortunately, in Layton’s battle with cancer, the latter won. He’s missed by many. My riding has no voice in Parliament, and worse, the majority of Canadians who did not vote for the Conservative Party of Canada have no voice in Parliament.

To his family and friends, all of Canada sends their regrets and sympathies.

To Jack, you changed Canada, both politically and socially. You made the NDP a viable alternative, you fought for social justice, and you always did it with a smile on your face.

This truly is a “hashtag fail.”

The history of the modern Western nation-state is built on three founding monolithic mythologies; race and language and mythology itself. After the murderous disasters of the twentieth century, the race element has been happily downplayed, but it is still there as an unspoken assumption. In this model a real nation-state comprises these three elements and must have a singular face. The very idea of a nation-state intentionally built on ideas and a multiplicity of races, languages and myths doesn’t fit into the historic Western framework and therefore cannot be real. And yet what began to emerge in April 1839 was exactly that alternative model.

- John Ralston Saul on the reform movement of the newly united Canadas

Late last night US President Obama announced the death of Osama bin Laden, a man wanted for the horrible, horrible crime of killing thousands in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. We all know this.

President Obama said:

So Americans understand the costs of war. Yet as a country, we will never tolerate our security being threatened, nor stand idly by when our people have been killed. We will be relentless in defence of our citizens and our friends and allies. We will be true to the values that make us who we are. And on nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to Al-Qaeda’s terror: Justice has been done.

I think Mr. Obama is wrong in his speak, as it seems he is using “justice” as a synonym for “revenge.”

The dictionary built into my computer says this about justice:

justice |ˈdʒʌstɪs|noun

1 just behavior or treatment : a concern for justice, peace, and genuine respect for people.• the quality of being fair and reasonable : the justice of his case.• the administration of the law or authority in maintaining this : a tragic miscarriage of justice.• ( Justice) the personification of justice, usually a blindfolded woman holding scales and a sword.

2 a judge or magistrate, in particular a judge of the supreme court of a country or state.

That does not to me mean justice. Justice would be the capture, trial and conviction, and punishment under the law. Mr. Obama’s actions were revenge, plain and simple, and while I cannot fault the American people for celebrating this feat, I cannot call it justice.

I watched in horror as the western world changed for good on September 11, 2001. I watched, in shock, and sadness, as people jumped to their deaths from the World Trade towers. I watched the buildings collapse, I watched the news of the plane crash in Pennsylvania, and the crash into the Pentagon building. I, along with millions others, watched the transmission of the deaths of thousands.

I, however, cannot celebrate a man’s death.

As you all know, on May 2nd Canadians will go to the polls and cast our votes for Canada’s 41st Parliament. We will send 308 Canadians to Ottawa to represent us in the House of Commons. An election should be a question of what do you want for Canada’s future? What course do you want to put the nation on? Where do we see our country over the next four years, and beyond? More importantly…

What are our democratic principles?

This election is not about the economy, this election is not about coalitions, this election is simply about what we as Canadians see as our democracy. Peter Russell puts it quite well in the clip below, the current government has done anything in its powers to centralize power in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), remove the authority of the Cabinet, disrespected Parliament, denied access to information, and alienated the Canadian people.

I posted some ideas on this in a previous post, but I’m going to post it again. I feel that these are issues that Canadians need to talk about, these are issues that we must face as our democracy changes, and cruel political games take precedence over “Good Government.” Mr. Ignatieff wants us to rise up, but he comes nowhere close to discussing any of these needed reforms. Mr. Ignatieff wants us to rise up, but he doesn’t inspire the Canadian people. Mr. Layton is not an ideal Member of Parliament, his communication with his constituents is sorely lacking, however he at least touches on a few of the following items, but usually in the wrong direction¹.

• Corporations shouldn’t be allowed to donate to political parties. (Chretien did this, hooray!)
• Clear and concise guidelines for the reserve powers of the Crown and how it can be implemented by the Governor General.
• Petitioning the Commonwealth to revise the Statute of Westminster to no longer show gender and religious precedence so that the Heads of State reflects the “Just Society” we have created.
• A democratic Senate responsible to the People, rather than the parties who appointed them, while still being distinct from the Commons. Whether the best bet is an independent Senate or term limits, I’m not sure, but a means to make the Senate responsible to the provinces they represent.
• Decentralize the government from unelected partisan employees in the PMO and return powers to the elected government Ministers.
• Clear laws on proroguing parliament, and thorough review of potentially undemocratic laws.
• Clear and enforceable laws governing when the Prime Minister can drop the writ.
• A better election system than First Past The Post, and a thorough investigation into the possible choices, along with clear and concise advertising to allow the general public knowledge on how the chosen system works.
• After a choice for Governor General has been thoroughly vetted, a vote in the Commons before presenting the choice to the Queen.
• Open and clear discourse with the Canadian People.

1. Mr. Layton wants to eliminate the Senate, rather than reform it. [↩]

I can’t believe coalitions are still being discussed. Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff categorically rejected the concept in his open letter on the first day of the campaign. However in last night’s debate, Conservative leader Stephen Harper decided that it wasn’t good enough, as Mr. Ignatieff pointed out that whoever wins the most seats, must then try to gain the support of parliament.

Is Mr. Harper completely out of his mind? Does he have no understanding of our parliamentary democracy whatsoever, or is he just lying to the Canadian public? Every party that is asked to form government, whether it be a majority or a minority, must then ask for the confidence of the House of Commons by passing the Throne Speech.

It’s very simple, to have the moral authority to govern, one must have the support of the majority of the Canadian people, as represented by their democratically elected Members.

Sigh.

The worst part is, for once, I don’t believe that Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe won the English-language debate, instead I think Mr. Haper did. He was able to remain cool and calm while the other party leaders were shouting, and making jack-asses of themselves. The worst, I believe, was when they discussed the recent leak of Auditor General Sheila Fraser’s report on Canada’s misspending during the G8/G20 summits. Ms. Fraser already informed the world that she cannot release the report, as she reports to Parliament, and Parliament is not in session. While Mr. Harper was trying to explain this, the other party leaders were shouting, “release it! Release it!” Acting like school children.

Leader of the New Democratic Party, Jack Layton¹ gets the award for Worst Old Person Trying To Be Hip. I’m sorry, “hashtag fail?” “Bling?” I hope to never again see an old white man say “bling.”

I believe Mr. Ignatieff was strongest when speaking of immigration, a point at which when Mr. Duceppe was weakest. Mr. Ignatieff took a strong stand of immigration and criticized the current Conservative Government’s policies. As the majority of Canadians come from immigrants², it’s an important issue. Canada relies on immigrants, as we’re too smart, and use condoms³, so we must as a nation look outside our borders to expand our population and economy. As a nation we’re proud to be a cultural mosaic, rather than a melting pot⁴, and as such we’re always happy to see cultures retain their heritage while joining Canada’s ever-changing culture.

1. Who is also a candidate in my riding, Toronto-Danforth. [↩]
2. All non-First Nations and Inuit. Some of us more recently than others. [↩]
3. All the fun, none of the mess. [↩]
4. Like our neighbours to the south. [↩]

Last night during the Oscar broadcast, the Conservative Party of Canada ran this advertisement. I’ll let you watch it before we continue.

I’m tired of these attack ads, but not because they’re rude and base-politics, but because it’s insulting to me specifically. The Conservatives are mocking the leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition for saying, “I wish my country were a little better.” I too wish my country were a little better, and it has nothing to do with who is leading our nation, it’s not a question of Harper vs. Ignatieff, it’s the simple fact that Canada is not, has never been, and will never be perfect, and so we cannot let that status quo be “good enough.” We must strive to make Canada the best it can be, and we all know that the best Canada can be is incredible.

I could discuss the whole “peacekeeping reputation” that they allude to in the ad, at which I’d simply say, look at the past two decades of peacekeeping, either it was non-existant or it was painful. That, however, is not the point. The point is simple, do the Conservatives believe that the status quo is good enough? If so, why are they reducing corporate taxes? Why recklessly spend undisclosed billions on fighter jets, and new prisons, and further deepening Canada’s structural deficit?

Maybe it’s not a wish for the status quo, but instead a wish to further hurt Canada both domestically and abroad?

Either way, I will offer my kudos to Mr. Harper for his recent financial actions against Gadhafi, and will cite this as an example of making Canada better.