Where is all this Going?

I was reading the polls again. Big mistake. Polls will drive us crazy and I am not sure if anything really meaningful can be learned from them.

The overnight Nanos poll would tell us that the Conservatives are up in the polls but their methodology is a bit wonky. The question asked is not who would you vote for but, "For those parties you would consider voting for federally, could you please rank your top two current local preferences?" I don't know what that really tells us except that outside of Quebec no one is voting Bloc.  On second thought I guess it doesn't even tell us that. In any case that poll, shows the Tories gaining ground.

However, if the question asked is Which of the federal leaders would you best describe as:    

1. The most trustworthy  
2. The most competent  
3. Has the best vision for Canada's future

Things come out quite differently. Harper has dropped considerably over the last few days.

The other thing I found interesting is that when it comes to issues, is that none of the leaders are talking much about is Health Care. That issue is at the head of the pack with The Economy running second.  

While  27% of Canadians apparently say the economy is the most important issue 30% of us say they see the economy growing stronger in the next year. So, Canadians care about it but are confidant it is ok. 

Harper seems to wants us to focus on his economic record and to worry about what might happen if he isn't re-elected. I can't figure out why. His record  isn't particularly good.

Harper plays an old game. In political science there is probably a name for it. It works like this. Even if it isn't true,  keep saying it is. Say it often and with confidence. Do that often enough, people begin to believe it. 

Even the media seem to buy in which, to me at least, is curious considering Harper's economic record lags far behind that of Paul Martin and Brian Mulroney.

The media refer to his economic credentials but in truth, Stephen Harper doesn't have the qualifications to teach economics in a community college. The Canadian economy weathered the economic down turn better than most in the G20 more as a result of banking regulations put in place by Liberal governments that my Conservative economic policy.

So we struggle along through an election campaign that already seems too long arguing about the economy, the tough on crime agenda, attack ads, fighter jets, the ignored veterans and corporate tax cuts. 

Did we need this election? Yes we did. Will it accomplish much? I wonder.

If anything this election will highlight to Canadians just how broken our democracy is. What we really need to to replace all the leaders except perhaps Gilles Duceppe. We then need to have a serious talk about a vision for Canada. We need to have a frank discussion about how to fix our broken electoral system. It is time to drag those old tired politicos into the 21st century. 

Truth in Advertising

I’ll be honest. I don’t watch a great deal of television. In fact I hardly turn the set on and the two hours I sat watching the Leaders’ Debate broke my evening watching record, for the year. What I do see on television is generally on those distracting screens which seem to predominate most bars these days. 

 
Last night after a film and poetry event in Regina, a few of us including the poets, went across the street for a beer. What drew my attention away from the conversation were the bright red and blue Conservative commercials attacking the Liberal platform and their leader, Michael Ignatieff. I want to make this clear. I am not a Liberal ( Liberal leaning readers of this blog probably just breathed a sign of relief) Even without the sound these ads were offensive.  

Now I do know that as hard as it seems for some of us to believe it, we do have a Canadian Code of Advertising Standards and I thought “Surely this must be over the line” So I looked. 

Under the heading Truth. Fairness. Accuracy advertizing standards says the Canadian Code of Advertising Standards is the criteria for acceptable standards for advertizing in Canada.

They apparently set the criteria for truthfulness, accuracy and fairness. Things were looking up. Perhaps I'd file a complaint.

Now I used to think that truth was truth – end of story, but I have come to understand that when it comes to telling stories, as the country and western song says “There are three sides to every story, yours, mine and the cold hard truth.”  Let me tell you. In political advertising, the cold, hard truth is hard to find.

Never the less I thought it might be a good time to bring, at least a few of the 14 clauses in the code to Stephen Harper’s attention because it seemed to me that the ads I saw broke quite a few of the rules.

Clause #1 under the heading Accuracy and Clarity says:

(a) Advertisements must not contain inaccurate or deceptive claims, statements, illustrations or representations, either direct or implied, with regard to a product or service. In assessing the truthfulness and accuracy of a message, the concern is not with the intent of the sender or precise legality of the presentation. Rather, the focus is on the message as received or perceived, i.e. the general impression conveyed by the advertisement.

(b) Advertisements must not omit relevant information in a manner that, in the result, is deceptive.

(c) All pertinent details of an advertised offer must be clearly and understandably stated.

(d) Disclaimers and asterisked or footnoted information must not contradict more prominent aspects of the message and should be located and presented in such a manner as to be clearly visible and/or audible.

(e) Both in principle and practice, all advertising claims and representations must be supportable. If the support on which an advertised claim or representation depends is test or survey data, such data must be reasonably competent and reliable, reflecting accepted principles of research design and execution that characterize the current state of the art. At the same time, however, such research should be economically and technically feasible, with due recognition of the various costs of doing business.

(f) The entity that is the advertiser in an advocacy advertisement must be clearly identified as the advertiser in either or both the audio or video portion of the advocacy advertisement.

Then clause #6, under Comparative Advertising it suggests:

Advertisements must not, unfairly, discredit, disparage or attack other products, services, advertisements or companies, or exaggerate the nature or importance of competitive differences.

And finally under #14, Superstitions and Fears:

Advertisements must not exploit superstitions or play upon fears to mislead the consumer.

You have seen these ads. What do you think?

So would or could the Advertizing Standards step in? 

Looking a little deeper you'll find that bottom line is that the code is not the law, as we might expect. Like so much Tory bafflegab the code is touted as “...the cornerstone of advertising self-regulation in Canada.”

Self regulation is no regulation. 

That is when I gave up.

Election Creativity

For an election campaign during which the candidates have scarcely mentioned the arts, there is a hell of a lot a election creativity out there. Some is subtle, some right off the wall. I particularly like this one.

Democracy is in Trouble

Get out and vote.

 One Election after another the number of Canadians who exercise their right to vote drops further and further. Not that you can blame them but, people it seems are becoming more and more disengaged from the process, fed up with the feeling that their vote doesn’t count.

Interestingly what seems to be missing from the discussion about why people don’t vote is input from the politicians. During the Leadership debate, Jack Layton was the only participant to even mention proportional representation; even then it was just for one fleeting moment. For the other three, it was as if Jack never even said the words.

During an election campaign you might think the leaders of the political parties would be crying from the roof tops “Vote. Vote. Vote”

Or, at the very least you would think, considering Canada’s dismal participation rate, Elections Canada should be engaged in a significant campaign to get people out to the polls.

The silence is deafening.

I don’t think Stephen Harper actually wants new voters added to the mix. He is hoping his tired old demographic gets off their couches and votes but, the hell with everyone else. Every party is trying to poach a few votes here and a few votes there. Harper wants the “ethnic vote”, The Liberals want the NDP vote. The NDP want the Liberals, and the Greens want a bit from everyone.

A majority of Canadians don’t want the Harper Conservatives but we might get stuck with him again. That government, despite Harper tells you, never represented a majority of Canadians and never will. Let’s be honest here. Neither will the Liberals.

When voters believe their votes won’t make any difference, or don't even count, they have little reason to bother. In my riding the Conservative candidate did get a majority in the last election, just over 50%. So what about the rest of us, the 48% that didn't want Tom Lukiwski? Take it from me, we have no representation in Ottawa. Our MP is invisible to us.That scenario is repeated all across the country. It doesn't make sense.

There is some hope however.

Stephen Harper tells us, again and again, that Canadians didn’t want this election. I think he is wrong. A record number of Canadians turned on their television sets to catch the leaders’ debate. In fact, 10,6000,000 Canadians tuned in to watch, perhaps not for the whole debate but at least for some of it. That is not bad for a debate that started before most people could make it home from work if they lived further from Ottawa than Western Ontario. Thousands of others watched in on line.

The media tells us that people are disengaged but, every single person I talk to is following the campaigns. The blogosphere, Face book, Twitter and YouTube have almost been taken over by the election. I am over whelmed by the amount of material being shared on line – opinions, rants, songs, photos, videos and news links.

I feel a shift. I no longer think a Harper majority is possible. He may hang on to a minority by the skin of his teeth, but that won’t last all that long. The opposition have to decide. Either sell out their principles and support Harper or for some sort of power sharing new government. For me, that would be an easy decision to make.

If nothing else I think the last few years of witnessing a broken parliamentary democracy have started to arouse the sleeping giant. Canadians are fed up. I believe that no matter if politicians like it or not, we will see some form of, much needed, electoral reform in this country.

So stand up, speak out and fight for change. Oh yeah, don't forget to vote

Why Would we Trust this Man?

Stephen Harper tries hard to make Canadians all believe that he is the one bastion of hope, standing tall against those who want to chip away at the very underpinnings of our democratic structure. I don’t think anything could be further from the truth.

From day one in this election Stephen Harper has raged on and on about the legitimacy of coalitions forgetting it seems that he was the first one to propose that option in our recent history. Harper has been saying, over and over, how it isn’t democratic to try and be Prime Minister, if your party came second in the election.

So, one of my favourite moments in the debate this week was when Gilles Duceppe shared with us the time and place where Harper had called Jack Layton  and him together to propose exactly that. If the opportunity arose, they would take Paul Martin down and to propose to the Governor General that he, Steven Harper take over as PM. Harper’s nose grew another inch right on the spot.

Harper gave us the clearest insight into his thinking when he rejected the opposition leaders’ arguments saying, “I simply don’t accept the truth of those attacks." Those were the most honest words spoken by our PM, this whole campaign.

I could go on and on and on. It come so naturally to him I am not sure he really knows he is doing it any more.

I cannot remember  being so disappointed in a Prime Minister in my sixty six years. It is time for him to go Canada.

Please vote..

Generally it is not a Good Idea to Misquote Fraser

On the day of the leaders' debate (Well most of the leaders anyway) I find the Shelia Fraser story about G8 spending the most interesting.

No, not the story about her being unable to release her investigation of G8 - G20 spending.

The Conservative members of a parliamentary committee looking into the costs around the G8 and G20 summits dropped a quote from Fraser into their report. The report Fraser as saying: "We found that the processes and controls around that were very good, and that moneys were spent as they were intended to be spent."

Apparently Fraser's quote which went back to 2004, actually referred to the previous Liberal government spending.

As you might imagine, Shelia Fraser was rather annoyed about the misrepresentation.

The Conservatives, caught yet again, have apologized.

It is all about trust, isn't it?

Is anyone still thinking majority?

OK Folks - Where are we?

I don't think I can say I have been watching this election campaign more closely than I have others but, no question, this one has has intrigued, mystified and annoyed.

I just have to assume that most people just don't pay attention.

Then there is the debate. Over a million Green supporters are denied the opportunity to see their leader in action by that infamous consortium of TV executives. The same members of television's brain trust, decided the best time to schedule the debate. If you live west of Manitoba there is not a chance that you can get home from work before the debate starts. Oh yeah, it also doesn't interfere with prime time which would erode high commercial revenue. Ask your self. What is more important.

I am no economist but...ask your self.
Does this make sense to you?

So, where are we going with all this? There are the polls but I am not sure the pollsters give us answers, or if they simply push voter's opinions in one direction or another. No matter which, I do find the trends troubling. I am not sure how Canadians can be so disconnected from reality?

So in my continuing efforts to get people to think about things before they vote, I suggest you take a look at what Some Guy has to say.

Seven Bridges Road

There Should be a Song

OK, enough about the election.

After a long, make that a very long winter, spring has arrived with enthusiasm in Saskatchewan.

Rather than staying home and watching the snow melt - which should not be diminished as a spring pastime - we decided to see how things were coming along outside the city. I am fond of driving down Seven Bridges Road (There should be a song, don't you think?) and into Lumsden. Unfortunately by the time we hit bridge one, or seven I suppose, depending on your direction, we hit high water.

We had no choice but to turn around and find another route.

Spring Run-off Just Before the Bridge

Henry Mintzberg on Sunday Morning

Listening to CBC Radio's Sunday Morning this morning I was taken in by Michael Enright's interview with Henry Mintzberg, who is Cleghorn Professor of Management Studies at the Desautels Faculty of Management at McGill University.

I have reproduced a part of his website below and encourage you to visit it.

If you missed the program on Sunday you can go to the Sunday Morning webpage and download it as a podcasts.

Henry Mintzberg

• This election is theatre: ignore the campaigns and the promises (which are just attempts to bribe us with our own money.) What matters is what the people who are elected can and will do. And that is best judged by what they have done.

• What the Conservatives have done suggests that, with a majority, our most cherished institutions―Medicare [PDF], the CBC [PDF], others―will be threatened. As a prominent minister was overheard just after the 2006 election: “If we get a majority, they won’t recognize this country.”

• Do not necessarily vote Liberal. Or NDP. Or Bloc. Or Green. Or Independent. If the majority of voters split their votes again, the Conservatives will go forward again. So please drop your party preference: this election is about the future of Canada. If you cherish what this country is, vote for whichever candidate in your riding has the greatest chance of beating the Conservative―in other words, the one who is ahead of these others.1 Consult the latest poll in your riding, or else see the results last time [PDF]. (See also www.Catch22campaign.ca. for information on this.)

• If enough people do this, we will likely end up with a coalition government, which could well be the best solution. (Recall that cooperation of the NDP with the Liberals gave us Medicare fifty years ago.) This election has to be about the country, not about its personalities. In fact, such a coalition may well prefer as prime minister someone who is not now the leader of any of the parties.

Facebook Creepers

The number of  You Tube videos on line about this election is quite inspiring particularly when the media suggests that the younger demographic doesn't plan to vote.

I know Harper, after three days of being embarrassed in the media, did apologize for his actions, I still find this one of the funniest out there.

The tag at the end says it was made by the Liberal Party of Canada. You never know with You Tube though. That might just be someone's idea of a joke or, it might indicate that the Liberals are way ahead in the social media game.

Lower Corporate Taxes not in my Economic Plan

Scrooge McDuck celebrates
Harper's corporate tax plan

I suspect that there are quite a few of us out here that have never thought, "What is good for business is good for Canadians." There are just too many examples out there that fly in the face of that axiom. The trickle down theory, just doesn't work.

The Harper Conservatives have made continuing tax cuts to big business the center-point of their campaign. They are trying to get Canadians to believe that, for example, despite obscene increases in oil company's profits, that sector needs yet again more cuts to the taxes they pay. Harper's Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty says that "...business leaders...have widely endorsed tax cuts as a job creation tool."  Come Jim, how dumb are you? What else would business say

In 2000 the corporate tax rate was 42%. Under the "Harper Government" they are down to 28% on their way to a goal of 25%. I would suspect that most Canadians are asking why, in this economic downturn more and more of the tax burden falls onto the backs of Canadian families. Harper says because his plan creates jobs.

I was happy to see that the Globe & Mail put the Harper gang's mantra, to the test.

What was revealed is that instead of investing all that new found cash into expansion and machinery which would create new jobs, business investment has decreased, in line with those cuts. Rather that acting as the custodians of  the economy, business has squirreled away billions and billions of dollars conjuring up images of business leader acting less like Daddy Warbucks, and more like Scrooge McDuck.

I am not against helping out business get ahead. There are plenty of good corporate citizens out there but, "no strings attached" tax cuts, is simply put, a dumb move.

Good to Hear From Joe Schlesinger

Joe Schlesinger was one of those old style reporters who told it as he saw it, not necessarily how the politicians and diplomats he covered over many years wanted him to see it.

Joe retired and is now a CBC, Foreign correspondent emeritus, and he has some ideas about our first past the post system.

This report is from the CBC News site

I have posted it hear without permission but, I thought you should read it.

De-clogging the veins of democracy


The problem is not minorities or coalitions, it is with how we vote


Joe Schlesinger

This election campaign's tug-of-war between the devil of a future dominated by minority governments and the deep blue sea of contrived coalitions is annoying enough to make many Canadians wish we had a better voting system.

It just so happens that there is such a system and it is closer to the old ideal of "one person, one vote." It is called proportional representation, or PR. And with so many Canadians disillusioned with today's politics, this may be a good time to take a closer look at it.

Our current first-past-the-post system is far from equitable and is quickly becoming ever more so.

On average, an MP from B.C. represents more than three times the number of constituents as an MP from PEI. A similar disparity exists between many ridings within provinces.

It takes far fewer voters, for example, to elect MPs in rural ridings than it does in cities and their suburbs. Unless tackled, this inequality is bound to rise as Canada becomes more urbanized.

Among those hardest hit would be the fast-growing ethnic communities concentrated in the underrepresented ridings of our largest metropolitan areas.

The discrepancy between rural and urban representation is also aggravated by several grandfathered provisions, some entrenched in the Constitution, that guarantee certain provinces more seats than the number of their inhabitants would warrant.

The Maritimes have 11 excess seats. Manitoba and Saskatchewan have eight and Quebec seven.

This leaves the fast-growing urbanizing provinces of B.C., Alberta and Ontario shy of their fair share in the 308-seat House of Commons.

A bill to increase Ontario's number of seats by 18, Alberta's by five and B.C.'s by seven was introduced last year. Vehemently opposed by the Bloc Quebecois, it died with the outgoing Parliament.

Too fair?

The biggest fault line in our electoral system, though, is that you don't need a majority to win — a third or even less of the vote will do.

Stephane Dion and Jack Layton trying to sell the idea of coalition government at a rally in Toronto in December 2008. It didn't really work out. (Mike Cassese/Reuters)

It is the kind of anomaly that has landed us in the controversy about the legitimacy of minority governments and coalition rule, and has no doubt put off voters and led to lower turnouts on election day.

Inequities such these have made PR the dominant voting choice of democracies everywhere outside of North America and Britain. It is used by more than 80 countries from the model democracies of Scandinavia in the North down to New Zealand and Australia in the South.

PR's attractions are obvious. The number of seats won accurately reflects the number of votes cast for specific parties.

There are no wasted votes. Minority parties have a better chance. So have independent candidates.

But there is such a thing as having too fair a system. For one thing, it almost always requires — oh, dreaded word — a coalition. Such coalitions can be unstable.

The instability trap

Israel is the best example. As little as two per cent of the national vote is enough to get a party seats in the Knesset. That may make for an all but perfect voting system. But not for stability.

In Israel, the need for coalitions turns tiny parties, some of them with as few as three seats, into the tail that wags the dog.

The current Israeli coalition of more than a dozen parties is totally dependent on the support of fringe groups that use their power to push through hard-line special interest policies that are not supported by the majority of voters.

Other coalitions, like the current British one involving Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron (L) and deputy PM Nick Clegg, a Liberal Democrat, are more stable. Though not always popular. (Leon Neal/Reuters)

It is no wonder then that the average lifespan of Israeli governments has been just 25 months.

The instability trap can be avoided by raising the threshold for winning seats.

Germany and New Zealand, for instance, have a five per cent threshold and consequently, for all the vagaries of coalitions, stable governments.

More importantly, perhaps, both have a modified PR system called mixed-member proportional representation or MMR.

In MMR, voting is held under the traditional first-past-the-post method. If a party wins more ridings than it is entitled to by its national PR share, it gets to keep these excess seats.

But additional seats are then allocated to the other parties to bring everyone up to the percentage of the overall national vote they received.

In Canada, the MMR system has been studied over and over again by several provinces. A form of MMR was even used in Alberta and Manitoba between the 1920s and1950s.

More recently, however, the system was rejected by PEI voters in a plebiscite in 2005, and a similar vote in Quebec has been shelved.

The veins of democracy

Changing over from the system Canadians have used throughout their history to the more complicated MMR method would certainly take some getting used to. But it could solve some of our current problems.

Take this election. Whatever comes out of it, the result will not be representative of Canada as a whole. Never mind minority governments, even most majority governments fall far short of being elected by an actual majority of Canadians.

In 1993, when Jean Chretien's Liberals reduced Kim Campbell's Tories to two seats, the Grits took only 41 per cent of the vote but ended up with 60 per cent of the seats.

It can also happen the other way around with the party that gets the most votes losing because, thanks to the unfairness of vote distribution, it has won fewer seats.

As for coalitions, the Liberal-NDP regime that has been bruited about would be just be another minority. The support of the Bloc would help keep it afloat, but it would also make it highly vulnerable to the Bloc's narrow interests and demands.

The plan now in the hopper, to add 30 MPs to the 308-seat House, can only go so far. Even if passed, it would only help correct the imbalance for a decade or so.

No one is likely to favour a bloated Parliament in which the only thing that changed was the ever-growing size of the chorus of backbenchers cheering and jeering on command.

Somehow, while we safeguard the splendid traditions of our parliamentary system, we must modernize it to make it more equitable and effective. If we don't, we could end up clogging the veins of democracy.

A hard look at our current system and replacing or combining it with a form of PR might be just the ticket for Canada in the 21st century.

We could always retain the Speaker's mace and 18th-century tricorne hat as a reminder of where we came from.

Why Would Anyone Vote For Tom?

My MP's campaign people called me up a couple of nights ago asking if they could depend on my vote. They obviously don't read their mail.

Tom  Lukiwski thinks the only reason we are in an election "...is because of the united coalition opposition..." He must not of been listening to what the Speaker had to saw about the "Harper Government's" conduct and I guess he slept through the vote which ultimately found that gang had acted in Contempt of Parliament. In one sense I guess you are right Tom. If you guys had a majority you wouldn't have to worry about democracy getting in the way at all.

This stuff might sell in Findlater, Grand Coulee, Regina Beach, Chamberlain, Eyebrow or Holdfast but it doesn't have legs here in the city.

Tom, according to Wikipedia, has built somewhat of a reputation on Parliament Hill for his ability to stall Parliamentary Committee business by filibustering. As an example he spoke for almost 120 minutes to prevent the Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development from studying a bill to implement the Kyoto Accord on October 26, 2006. Wait, if you are not proud enough yet hold on to your hat.

In Opposition MP, Lukiwski argued that non-renewable natural resource revenues, such as revenues from oil and gas, should be excluded from the calculations of the equalization formula. Lukiwski estimated that Saskatchewan would be between $800 million to $1.5 billion wealthier each year if non-renewable resources were removed from the equalization formula.

When the Harper Government reneged on their equalization election promise, Tom flip-flopped.

We can't forget Tom's homophobic remarks found on an old video tape in a vacated Saskatchewan Party office.

Tom hurried to apologize but never acted to make amends with the gay and lesbian community he had so insulted. I was never sure if Tom seemed contrite as a result of the fact that he had acted like a redneck or, that he was caught acting like a redneck. It is good to remember too, that Tom replaced another Conservative/Reform/Alliance MP who was drummed out as a result of his own homophobic remarks.


More recently Tom laid pretty low during all the debate about BHP Billiton refusing to comment until Harper said it was OK to do so.

He kept his head down over the stadium bid too.

A strong voice in Ottawa. I think not. Tom, along with the other 13 Conservative MPs are little more that mouthpieces for Stephen Harper. Tom won't speak until Stephen gives him the nod.

They will be happy to see the gun registry back on the table. That plays well with the rural voters that keep these guys in power.

Can you trust him? I think not. This bunch have done very little for Saskatchewan and should be thrown out on their ear.

The Best Election Poster So Far

Much has been said about the struggle to convince young voters to cast their ballots. This poster turned up in several places on the Internet today. I am not sure where it comes from but...I think it is the best so far.

Nanos sees Harper up Again

The   Nanos Nightly Tracking is a bit depressing. I saw it moving in the other direction. I guess this just reinforces the view that I am not the average Canadian.  I continue to despair about the future of the country.

Oh what the hell, It is still early in the campaign.

Harper Doesn't Think Canadians care about Contempt

He is wrong about that. We care deeply

So, Who is the Average Canadian?

For years pundits characterized Stephen Harper as a shrewd, crude and successful  political strategist.

• We all claim we hate his vicious political attack ads but like a train wreck, we all slow down and take a look. As much as we say we don't want that Republican style campaigning here in Canada, they seem to work.
• We gagged on the image of Stephen Harper as the caring cardigan wearing family man sitting in front of the fireplace when it contrasted to much with his cold, calculating agenda but, it got him re-elected.
• We have to admire his ability to turn a motion finding the "Harper Government" in contempt of Parliament into a partisan attempt to destroy his hard work, bringing the country back from an economic meltdown.

All this stuff works. Or does it?

Harper is gambling this election, that Canadians will be as outraged as he claims to be, about the possibility of a coalition government being formed, if he wins another minority. I don't think Canadians are half as dumb as Stephen Harper thinks they are.

When I was a young turk, and on some rant or other, an older but wiser colleague told me "Be careful Gord, you're starting to believe your own propaganda."  I think that is what is happening to Harper right now. It is a deep trap.

• As Stephen Harper goes on and on and on about coalitions as if they were evil personified. He thinks that Canadians forget that  he proposed collaborating with the Bloc to bring down the Liberal Martin Government.
• He forgets that there is television archive footage still available and now on You Tube where he suggests that a coalition of the right is needed to bring down the Liberals.
• He thinks Canadians are too dumb to research enough to discover that almost 70 countries around the world currently have coalition governments, including Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Germany, and the United Kingdom.

I have a friend who claims that Canadians are so disengaged from Canadian politics that they can't see the forest for the trees. That they spend their evenings perched in front of their television sets watching Fox news, Housewives of Orange County or Cops and don't give a fiddlers fart about what is happening here in Canada.  He might be right, but I don't think so.

I don't think;

• that Canadians are stupid. 
• Canadians are afraid of coalitions. 
• we are as disengaged as our Prime Minister things we are.

What I do think is that most Canadians;

• believe this election is necessary
• reject the law and order agenda
• are afraid of a Harper majority
• are not comfortable with the Conservative Party's vision for Canada
• are frustrated with Parliament now seems to be working
• want a cooperative and functional House of Commons

Then again I might be falling into another one of those traps. Not unlike Harper, I usually think of myself as the average Canadian. We are both probably wrong on that front.

We'll see in May.

Democracy Is all about Sharing Power

The Prime Minister warns us to beware of the “coalition threat”. The Leader of the Opposition swears he will not enter into a coalition. Is "coalition" a dirty word? Not to Canada's national citizens' movement for fair voting reform, which just released a map showing almost 70 countries around the world that currently have coalition governments, including Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, Germany, and the United Kingdom. The list makes the point that coalition and minority government are common in developed countries, most of which use proportional voting systems.

Bronwen Bruch, President of Fair Vote Canada says . "We think it's normal in this country for one political party to have all the power, even though most people voted against them.  Our winner-take-all voting system gives phony 'majority' governments to political parties with as little as 38% of the votes. But time and time again we see that single-party monopoly government leads to arrogance and corruption, whether it's a Liberal, Conservative, or NDP government.

"If we want politics to be different, we need a vote that makes a difference," she adds. "Proportional voting systems give each party power in proportion to the votes they receive. Since no party gets a majority of the votes, no party gets a majority of the seats. Parties must cooperate to get things done. It creates a more consensual type of government, and a more civilized style of politics."

"Once a party has a phony majority in Parliament, they are completely unaccountable," adds Wayne Smith, Executive Director of Fair Vote Canada. "As long as they maintain rigid party discipline, nothing bad can happen, so that's what they do. The Prime Minister of Canada has been described as an 'elected dictator', and Canadians are beginning to see that. More and more of them are demanding the power to hold political parties accountable, and are joining our movement for fair voting reform.

Join the thousands who are coming to the Fair Vote Canada  website and sign the  Declaration of Voters' Rights.

Why is this Election Important?

Stephen Harper doesn't want to talk about it but Canadians should never forget why we are having an election.

Following rulings by Speaker Peter Milliken, for the first time in Canadian history,the first time in Commonwealth history,  the government and a minister have been found to be in contempt of parliament for withholding information and misleading the house.

This election is about contempt

con·tempt  (kn-tmpt)

n.

1. The feeling or attitude of regarding someone or something as inferior, base, or worthless; scorn.

2. The state of being despised or dishonored; disgrace.

3. Open disrespect or willful disobedience of the authority of a court of law or legislative body.

Let's Turn that Decision Around - Again

You can't be serious Stephen

Here we go again. The Old Boys’ have been denied Green Leader Elizabeth May the opportunity to participate in the televised leaders’ debates.

Instead of speaking up to defend democracy, other party leaders seem relieved. Without May to point it out, it takes some of the heat off their own woefully inadequate environmental policies.

I know our first past the post electoral system does its best to cut out the smaller parties but you have to ask “What kind of democracy excludes a party with the support of one million of its citizens?”

What kind of democracy allows a handful of TV executives to decide that the Bloc Quebecois that only runs candidates in one province has more right to be in a national leaders’ debate than the Green Party with candidates in pretty much every riding across the country?

Don’t get me wrong. I want to hear what Gilles Duceppe has to say just as much as I want to hear from Elizabeth May.

In the last election, Canadians spoke out and our voices won Elizabeth her rightful place in the debates. We can’t believe that we have to rally on her behalf yet again. But we do.

Here’s what you can do:
Vote in CBC’s poll on whether Elizabeth should be invited to the leaders’ debates
Donate to support Elizabeth’s battle for inclusion
Sign the petition
Send a text message to the Chair of the Media Consortium, Mr. Troy Reeb of Global TV on his cell phone at 647-261-3752
Email the news directors of consortium members CBC, CTV, Global, TVA
Email party leaders Stephen Harper, Jack Layton, Michael Ignatieff and Gilles Duceppe
Forward this message to your friends and family

Collectively we can help Elizabeth May show Canadians why Greens belong in the House of Commons.

Let’s get on with it.

The Dipstick

It is how you check the oil you dork
Leader Post Photo

During Election Campaigns I feel almost compelled to mock public figures. With good reason I think. Election campaigns are not about substance or real policy or what candidates really stand for. It is all about tightly managed messages and photo ops of highly controlled "visits" to local business, universities and peoples houses.

Harper has been spending his days announcing new economic initiatives which are dutifully reported by every newspaper in the country. Everyone seems to miss the fact that if these new "gifts to Canadians" were real he'd have put them into the budget released not two weeks ago. I think Conservative policy wonks think them on the campaign jet as they wing their way back and forth across the country

So, I thought this morning offering in the Regina Leader Post had to be shared. Harper visited a boat sales shop and in an effort to look like he cares, seems quite curious about the marine engine dip stick. I know Harper doesn't drive his own car, the RCMP get him from place to place, and it must have been years since this "ordinary Canadian" checked the oil but in this photo it looks like Laureen Harper is explaining to Stephen what a dipstick is.

Here for Canada

It is the little things that tell you about a campaign.

Fair Vote Canada Predicts Election Outcome

Fair Vote Canada

Although the writ has barely dropped, Fair Vote Canada figures it’s not too soon to announce the results of the coming federal election.

The President of Fair Vote Canada, Bronwen Bruch says, “Our dysfunctional voting system throws up erratic and irrational results,” says “but some outcomes are sadly predictable.”

So, Fair Vote confidently predicts the following:

· Most Canadians will be “represented” in Parliament by somebody they voted against. Under the current, winner-take-all system, votes for losing candidates do not help to elect anybody and are essentially wasted votes.

· Canada will elect less than 25% women to Parliament. That’s about as good as it gets with our voting system. Fifty countries do better than we do in this regard, most of them using proportional voting systems. Every democracy with at least 30% women in its legislature uses a proportional voting system.

• The Conservatives will win every seat in Alberta, or all but one, with about 65% of the votes.
• The Liberals will win almost all the seats in Canada’s major cities, with about half the votes.
• The NDP will get one million more votes than the Bloc Quebecois, but the BQ will win almost twice as many seats.
• The Bloc Quebecois will win two-thirds of the seats in Quebec with half the votes. 
• The Green Party will get one million votes (enough to elect 25 Conservatives) but will not win any seats.

· Voter turnout will be the lowest in history, or close to it. When your vote doesn’t make a difference, why bother? Unprecedented amounts of negative campaign advertising will deliberately foster apathy and cynicism.

Our antique voting system is not really competitive, Two-thirds of Canadian voters already know who will be elected in their riding, before the votes are even cast. Really, it’s a tribute to Canadians’ sense of civic duty that any of us bother to vote at all

Off to the Races

Just watched the Harper Government fall. I have been waiting for months. We are off to the races and I have high hopes about what might happen.

Despite what the polls might say. I think this race is Michael Ignatieff's to lose. An election will be Canada's first chance to see him working on his feet. Best of luck to him.

Harper it seems will try and ignore his failure as a government and he will run on the economy and against the so called coalition. Pretty thin in my view. He claims Canadians don't want an election. I think he is wrong.

Some advice for Jack Layton. Stop pretending that you are going to be elected as Prime Minister. You and I and all of us know it isn't going to happen. The New Democrats can provide a strong voice from the left. A strong voice for humanity. Your role is to provide leadership on that front. Stop pretending.

Harper thinks there is a coalition and that coalition brought him down. We all know that is bull.  Arrogance  caused his government to self destruct.

So campaign as hard as possible but when it is all said and done if Harper is back with the support of 37% of Canadians. There are options. Use them.

Vision, or the Lack Thereof

I am not writing this, as just another opportunity to slag Stephen Harper, although I generally don't have a problem with doing that. What bothers me is that, on the eve of an election being called, neither Stephen Harper, Michael Ignatieff, Giles Duceppe, Jack Layton nor Elizabeth May are offering us any real vision for our country.

We have a new "stay the course" budget from Harper without a bold new initiative in sight. Sadly, I don't expect much more from any of the political parties as the campaign goes forward. Oh sure, they'll promise to tweak this and tweak that, to be more open and to rebuild Canada's proper role in things international. But what else?

We expect a campaign of slogans not substance. They will argue about who has been more bereft of principle, the Conservatives, the Liberals, the separatists or those socialist NDP. We'll argue about tough on crime agendas, accountability, fighter jets, arctic sovereignty and dirty oil. You can bet no will talk about the gun registry. Get ready for a campaign full of attack ads but lacking any plan which would plot a course showing how we will move forward, as a country.

My Canada cares about people, not slogans.

A Vision the Cares About People

I was taken by a story I read this morning in the Globe & Mail about the fact that in Denmark, seniors are entitled to free home care, around the clock if necessary. The basic service includes help with shopping, and cleaning but in addition, anyone 75 and older is entitled to an annual home assessment to determine if additional care might be needed. The Danes do this because they believe "It gives the elderly better well-being and healthier lives." The added result is increased life expectancy and fewer admissions to hospital and nursing homes.

My brother recently suffered from a health issue while visiting France. They were in a small village without any real medical facilities. After a call to the nearest hospital to seek advice a doctor quickly turned up at the house they were renting. He diagnosed the problem and prescribed medication.

He explained that it was better to have a few roving doctors treating patients in their homes than it was to overcrowd emergency facilities. His charge was modest and he went on his way and the medication took care of the problem in a few days..

A Canadian I know of who lives in Italy was recently visited by his father who became quite ill while he was there. So ill in fact, that he was hospitalized for three or four days.

When it came time to leave the hospital the expat asked how much they owed for his father's care. The response was "You owe us nothing." Questioned about how that was possible the hospital administration replied, "What kind of country would we be if we charged a visitor to our country for care he would have received free had he lived here."

Those my friends, are examples of vision at work.

What about Infrastructure?

I also noticed a story about the Gotthard Base Tunnel being built by the Swiss. Begun in 1996, the tunnel will be 57 km long, and will be the world's longest rail tunnel. It should become operational at the end of 2016. It's twin track will run between Switzerland and Germany and will accommodate both freight and high speed passenger trains.

Remember the Chunnel?

I got thinking about big projects on the go here in Canada and I couldn't think of any. Aren't we lucky Stephen Harper wasn't Prime Minister when we needed a national railway coast to coast or when we needed the St Laurence Seaway.

We have to ask how our government can boast about being so economically responsible while our infrastructure is crumbling. Everyone's focus is on reducing taxes and we are passing on the infrastructure problems to our children and grandchildren to pay for.

They have no vision.

Conservative Budgets out this Week

We are right in the middle of budget season. Both the Feds and the Saskatchewan government tabled their budgets this week.

I am quite taken by the fact that the media, particularly the CBC, is spending so much time and energy slicing and dicing the Harper Government's new offering, talking about what kind of impact it will have considering the fact that it hasn't a hope of going forward. The government will fall this week. No question.

If Harper wins another minority or, perish the thought a majority it will present a much different budget, you can depend on it.

What analysis I have heard sees the Federal offering as a kind of stay the course budget anyway. Pretty dull stuff. Not much to run on which will capture the hearts of Canadians except for a $75.00 rebate if you send your kids to music lessons. Pretty thin, I'd say.

I am always amazed at how the pundits continue to ignore the growing infrastructure crisis in Canada while praising corporate tax cuts.  It is a simple math economists don't seem to get. Pay less and promise more, Conservative economic policies don't work.

Here in Saskatchewan it is pretty much the same. The Saskatchewan party got elected at precisely the right time and the province is said to be booming so, these guys had a pretty good four years. Frankly I think it would have taken an idiot to fail in this economic climate. Brad has a few of those and still managed to come out smelling like a rose.

There really isn't too much worth commenting on but, I did like the following quote in the Leader Post obviously taken word for word from the press release "The provincial Budget released on Wednesday stated it will give beer off-sales retailers an extra $5.1 million to help remain strong contributors to the community"


I can't figure out how that works but it will certainly keep their small business supporters happy.

Regime Change

Ready, Set, Go

Everyone is doing it so Canada, don't miss this opportunity. The chance doesn't come often enough.

The "Harper Government" is set for a fall and although all the chatter is about the rejection of the budget, it isn't that at all. This government is going down over integrity, dogma, secrecy, lying, bullying, lack of vision, partisanship and corruption.

I wish I'd made a list. I know it would be as long as my arm but I am as bad as everyone else. I move from issue to issue forgetting fairly quickly what annoyed me last week as a new clumsy misstep grabs our attention.

We do remember a few like:

• Agriculture Minister Gerry "The Ritz Cracker" joking over listeria deaths.
• The stonewalling over Canadian soldiers turning over Afghans to be tortured.
• Using the unelected Conservative majority in the Senate to defeat a bill after it was approved by Parliament.
• The unbridled use of Republican style attack ads to attack the leader of the Liberal.
• The prorogation of Parliament by Harper in an attempt to save his own skin.
• The insertion of the word "not" into a document which it seems was approved by the minister in order to reverse that decision.
• Using Parliamentary staff and budgets to raise funds for the Conservative Party
• Ignore the law over election spending

Under Stephen Harper's leadership the Conservatives pandered to the anti gun control lobby, shunned climate change research and supported dirty oil and held fast to the view that lower corporate tax rates will solve our economic issues. They are soft of humanitarian aid,  overtly militaristic, most of their elected members are little more than mouthpieces for the Prime Minister's Office.

So this is our chance to make a real change. What do we want instead?

• Well, what if we had a Prime Minister who believed in and supported our arts and culture a  leader who saw the value of investing our tax dollars to support our writers, our poets, our artists and musicians instead of   and business, business and more business. Sorry, a $75.00 tax write-off for music lessons doesn't cut it.

• What if we had a Prime Minister who understood that poverty, homelessness, desperation and crime are all pretty much part of the same equation. Some one who was prepared to roll up his sleeves and work to solve those problems instead of just putting those who fall through the cracks in jail.

• What if we had a Prime Minister who believed that Canada should be a world leader in education and research?

• What if we had a Prime Minister who valued democracy, human rights and transparency, who was prepared to fix our broken electoral system, who believed in and supported out public broadcaster, who really believed in a Canadian style healthcare system.

What if? 

What if? 

What if?

What if we could believe any of the leaders in the running would bring us all that? They won't but getting rid of Harper would at least be a start.

If we can believe the Globe and Mail poll most Canadians want an election and I'm looking forward it. Anything that would put my MP, Tom  Lukiwski into the opposition back benches would be a positive thing.

Weighing in on the DST Debate

I was in Quebec a week or so ago when North America moved to Daylight Savings Time. In fact it was when most of the world moved to Daylight Savings Time, most of the world except for where I normally hang my hat – Saskatchewan.

Here in the, easy to draw hard to spell province, DST, or lack of compliance to the doctrine, is a big issue. Nothing will get some old codger quite so riled up as the thought of moving clocks forward, or back an hour, in the spring and fall.

When the Saskatchewan Party, defeated the New Democrats – not exactly a bunch which embrace a new idea themselves - they said the people should decide, and promised a referendum on the issue. Last week I was wondering what happened to that vote?

It seems that the Junior Minister of Time, Darryl Hickey decided that most people in the province don’t want DST so he decided to scrap the idea of a vote on the issue. Hickey is the intellectually challenged minister from Prince Albert who ran in the last election on a platform of “A vote for Darryl Hickey is a vote to keep the mill open” all this when his own party’s platform was to let the Prince Albert mill die. One of the Saskatchewan Party’s first acts after getting elected was to scrap the deal the NDP had made to try and re-open the mill. Perhaps the fact he got elected says more about the intelligence of Prince Albert voters than it says about Hickey’s ethics.

In any case, had known Hickey was in charge I would have given up all hope we’d spring forward long ago.

I will admit though, it is a divisive issue here on the flatland. The opposition mainly comes from people who have the flexibility to control when they do what, unencumbered by set work scheduled, older rural folks. They used to argue that all this change would confuse the farm animals feeding schedule. I never quite figured that one out.

Now the luddite’s rallying cry seems to be “We are already on Daylight Savings Time. No need to change”.

I for one miss being able to comfortably sit outside long into the evening. It gets cool here on the prairies once the sun goes down. Believe me when you spend what seems like half your life in the deep freeze, you want to savour every minute of a warm sunny evening.

And then let’s not forget the mornings. Without shifting the clocks sunrise comes pretty early. That is fine, who doesn’t like a long day but when the birds start their raucous chatter on the trees just outside my bedroom window at about 4:30, I’d like just a bit more sleep.

The Minister of Weasel Words

We could hardly call Bev Oda forthcoming. With steps that would Ginger Rogers envious we have watched Oda danced around the issue for weeks now. In fact. it took the Minister of International Cooperation, 14 weeks to finally tell a Commons committee who altered the infamous memo denying $7-million of funding to human rights group Kairos. The New Democrts call her The Minister of Weasel words" and subjected her to some very tough grilling about the whole matter.

It looked like her actions might bring the government down but "tough on crime" beat her to it. The Parliamentary Committee looking into the the lack of transparency around that issue has found the Government in contempt of Parliament earlier today. 

Unless the big talkers chicken out again, we just may be on our way to the polls by the end of the week.
If you are following the Oda story though, the Hill Times takes a good look at the "not" scandal in this week's edition.

Election Fever - or Not

Last week I'd have bet anyone $100  that an election is in the works. All the signs were there. The Bloc, Liberals and NDP seemed to be singing from the same hymn book saying "We've had enough" and even the "Harper  Government" seemed to be keen to get to the polls.

By this morning the pundits seem to think that things are shifting a bit. Some of them anyway.

Me? I'm chomping at the bit. Canada needs an election now if only to try and get Canadians to pay attention. The "Harper Government" is running amok and even if the opposition can't take them down, those thugs need a good swift kick in the pants.

I  know its all about the economy blah...blah...blah but some one has to remind Harper that if the Canadian economy is doing well it has little to do with his economic policy and everything to do with monetary and banking regulations put in and maintained by years of Liberal rule. Harper lucked out. The economic meltdown came before he could dismantle the regulations that saved his, and our asses.

We need a little public debate.

It is times like this that I revert to my "If I was king" persona. So here goes.

If I were directing strategy for the opposition I would bring this government at the soonest possible moment.

Harper might win another minority but I very much doubt he can do better than that. So be it.

Then at the first possible opportunity the opposition should simply bring down the government again. The day after the election would be good. The next thing that would happen is that the Governor General would be obliged to see if anyone else could form government. Not withstanding Michelle Jean ruling, that is his job.

The Liberals and the NDP should then step up and form a coalition supported by the Bloc and hopefully a few Greens. Harper would scream bloody murder but who cares? A Liberal/NDP coalition government would have more legitimacy that a Conservative Government that 65% of Canadians didn't vote for.

In the next four years Canadians would see that there is nothing wrong with coalition government. After all aren't Canadians supposed to be proud of our historical ability to find workable compromise. A coalition would work like minority governments are supposed to. They stay in power through co-operation.

After all. What we have now isn't working.

Let's get on with it.

What a Way to Spend an Afternoon

Before I retired I used to think I spent half my life in airport departure lounges so, today is like a flashback.

A couple of hours ago, I had what will no doubt be my last Montreal Smoked Meat sandwich for a while and climbed on a Rapidair flight to Toronto. We left late of course which was no big deal to me/ I have two and a half hours to kill in the GTAA terminal.

What strikes me is how little things have changed.  Oh OK, they now have free wifi but they still have the same old loop of 10 minutes of news, weather and sports. Same commercials, same stories, same forecast. It is like they think that all the other bored travellers and I will only be stranded here for 15 minutes or so. I am not sure how many time I have heard a report from a freelance reporter who "has just arrived in Japan" and who is updating us on the "growing nuclear crisis" there.  The CBC who packages this stuff, needs a reminder about what "live" means.

The food is just as bad and  as always, overpriced.

For my amusment I have been watching businessmen gestulating wildly as they talk loudly on their handfree cel phones. "Explain to me how they lost those files. Let me tell you! Heads will roll over this."

Airport groundworkers huddle in a corner working on their hockey pool, others move through the terminal in that measured slow walk designed to extend any coffee break by at least 15 minutes, flight attendents hurry in small groups hustling to their next flight and a harried gate attendent apoligizes over the intercom once again for the fact that my aircraft now has maintainence on board and that she doesn't have a clue how long it might be. Well I figure, better to find the problem on the ground and I hunker down into my book.

 Who knows.  I'll keep my fingers crossed. With luck, in another hour or so I'll be out of here.

If you are in Ottawa, Eat at the Whalebone

I have been in Ottawa the last few days visiting Morgan. It  has been almost 14 years since we moved west but I have been back more than a few times. I like this place.

Try Some Oysters

This evening Morgan suggested grabbing a bite at The Whalebone. It is easy to find on Bank Street. I'd never been before but, for certain, I'm going back.

It  is long and narrow and kind of hip and  funky. It was a Monday night so we didn't bother making reservations. We were offered a seat at the bar. I hesitated. I had hoped for a quiet tablet but, next time, I may ask for the bar as my first choice. The bar is where the action is.

The best thing about this restaurant, outside of the atmosphere and the staff, is the food. Whenever possible they use local produce and they follow the Vancouver Aquarium Ocean Wise program.

That program trys to remind us about the threat of that overfishing our oceans brings. The fact is, the world's marine life is quickly being depleted. They suggest  that the only solution is to turn back from the brink, and to begin consuming seafood in a sustainable manner. To help we all should buy species that are caught or farmed in a way that ensures the long-term health and stability of that species, as well as the greater marine ecosystem.

More and more good restaurants are signing on and the Whalebone is one of them.

Their menu changes depending on availablity. Tonight they had west coast oysters from Cortez Island and the east coast oysters came from New Brunswick. We has a couple of each and they were supurb.

I had the PEI farmed Halibut, thinly sliced potatoes cooked in duck fat with fennel, orange and celery on the side. Morgan tried the Quebec rainbow trout with Gallo mussels, Jersusalem artichoke, greens and mushroom. Both meals were a delight.

Next time I'm trying the octopus starter or perhaps the plate of 18 oysters.

If you live in Ottawa or close to the city or, if you are going to visit put the Whalebone on your list of places to eat. You will love the staff and the food is great. Tell your friends. I don't think you can go wrong.

Sit at the bar.

Stephen, Stephen, Using Tom. Have you lost your mind

I always wonder why the "Harper Government" has such a tough time with truth. The term "The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" seems like such a foreign concept when we are dealing with what these Conservatives did or didn't do, or what they might have done, or had a misterial aide do. It is all so confusing..

Most of us who are up and around and breathing have been following the famous "not" document. In December 2010 CIDA’s senior officials signed a memorandum recommending new funding for KAIROS before  someone overruled the recommendation by inserting the word "not"into the memorandum. Perhaps it was Bev Oda - she says not - or perhaps by someone else. Hard to tell actually. Speculation was/is that She thought long and hard, signed the document then Harper and his right wing buddies decided to trash KAIROS and something had to be done to over ride her approval. Who know what really happened.

House of Commons Speaker Peter Milliken concluded today that when reaponding to the matter, She mislead parliament. It is that pesky "whole truth" thing that catches them up.  Bev Oda breached Parliamentary rules. For all intents and purposes, he said Oda has been found in contempt of Parliament, a serious charge for any MP but particularly for a cabinet minister. It is too bad actually, I always thought Bev Oda was amound the best of a bad bunch.  In differant circumstances one might say"She was a good person but unfortunately she fell in with a bad crowd."

The "Harper Government" trundled out my MP Tom Lukiwski today,of all people, to try and explain the whole matter. Bad move Stephen Tom has no credibility, even down home on the farm. He did manage to get all the parliamentary reporters scratching their heads and twittering about it though.

Lukiwski said the document with the "not" inserted was meant only to communicate the minister’s decision. That it wasn’t intended to be made public - Well guaranteed he was telling the truth about that, They never wanted it public.

Milliken also ruled that the government failed to respond appropriately to requests made in the House of Commons for the full cost of the government's justice legislation - we can't forget tough on crime now - a failure that puts the government as a whole in breach of Parliamentary rules and in contempt of the House of Commons.

I think Little Stevie's "Harper Government" is trolling for an election. Trying to goad Iggy, Jack and Gilles to force one. Steve thinks Canadians don't care how dishonest his bunch are. He may be right.

Snow Snow Snow

I got to Montreal in snow although it had pretty much quit by the time we went to bed.

We woke up to a full blown storm.

We slogged off into the snow to a small cafe for their $5.09 breakfast special. Two eggs, baked beans, bacon, toast and coffee. A good deal in anyone's books.

Our entertainment during breakfast was across the street. An immigrant driver - only someone from "away" would wear a hat like that - got stuck in the snow. He was a little panicked. We figure his pregnant wife was in labour.

A police car, then another turned up and one cop got behind the wheel of the stuck van while the others pushed the van out of the snow bank. Then a fire truck  arrived on the scene. Everyone helped the very pregnant woman into a police car and away they went to the hospital, lights flashing and it was back to breakfast for us.

Montreal got 15 cm of snow but Sherbrooke, where I am heading today got 70 cm. Now that is a snow fall.

They saw it will take ages to get things cleared up.