politics

So now what?

Tuesday, November 27th, 2012

Now that the hubub over Rob Ford is dying down Toronto needs to start thinking about what happens next. Rob mentions he will fight the ruling “tooth and nail”.

He has also mentioned he will try to run in a by-election, although the city lawyer believes he may not be eligible until 2014.

If there was a by-election in a month two potential front runners would be Adam Vaughan and Olivia chow.

Adam Vaughan is the councillor for Ward 20 Trinity-Spadina and has been involved in politics for about 20 years. The best clip I have seen of Adam and his particular brand of politics is in this clip of him discussing privatization with KPMG after Toronto looked at the privatization of TTC streetcars

His biggest opponent and coincidentally his predecessor for Ward 20 councillor is Olivia Chow, wife of the late Jack Layton leader of the NDP. Olivia is currently the MP for the Trinity-Spadina area. She has lots of experience in Toronto politics. Here is a clip of her speaking out for equal marriage (love the fact Jack is sitting in front of her).

Toronto needs to pick itself up, dust itself off, and try to make up those lost two years when Rob Ford was our mayor. We need to learn from the mistake of putting too much stock in the sound clip “gravy train!” and realize that respect for tax payers should not come at the cost of self respect.

Toronto needs to elect a mayor who loves Toronto. Who loves ALL of Toronto not just parts of it; loves Chinatown, and little Italy, loves Danforth and the Beach, loves Markham and Scarborough. We need a mayor who appreciates the suburbs and the urban areas and wants to see Toronto move forward towards the unique city it is and can become.

Share

Democracy schmocracy

Monday, September 10th, 2012

Anytime the US has an election things get interesting. The bi-polarism of their electoral system cannot help but stir up the country much like hot and cold air make a tornado in a trailer park. What I find interesting is the notion that one must be a citizen to be able to vote, and yet so many do not participate. What is it about citizenship that magically confers the right to determine who leads? And what is it about elections that makes people apathetic? Republican Governor Rick Scott stated “The right to vote is a sacred right, We gotta make sure a U.S. citizen’s right to vote is not diluted.” Diluted by illegal immigrant votes one presumes.

I wonder however what happened to “no taxation without representation”, which one will remember, was the rallying cry of the American Revolution. The Republicans recently started several dragnets to thwart Democratic leaning Hispanics and Blacks from voting for Obama. I guess if you can’t win ‘em over with your billionaire policies you have to stop them from being able to vote in the first place. The dragnet turned up only one illegal immigrant, a Canadian, who had voted in 2004 and 2008 after moving to Florida. I would ask, why shouldn’t immigrants to able to vote? They get taxed, shouldn’t they get representation? Now I am not talking about people who enter the country through fraud or sneak in, but real landed immigrants.

Consider the amount of taxes paid by the GE corporation in 2010, $0.00. In fact it received a 3.2 billion dollar refund from the IRS. It has spent almost 12 million dollars lobbying in Washington so far in 2012. Clearly they have representation, in fact corporations have more represent than real people.

Here in Canada 3,100 people have been stripped of their citizenship because of fraudulant entries. The National Post reports, “Often facilitated by immigration consultants, this type of fraud has allowed foreigners to sponsor relatives and qualify for Canadian passports, benefits and the right to vote — all without ever having lived in Canada for any significant period.” Again that “right to vote” comes up. Considering that only61% of Canadians eligible to vote actually did in the last federal election. in the US, the last Federal election had about the same turnout. Compare that to Australia with a stunning 93.82%. My folks always told me, “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain.” Can you complain if you don’t have the right to vote?

I think in reality if we looked at why people become citizens, voting is fairly low on the list of reasons. I am pretty sure you will find things like security and opportunity are higher on the list. And there is nothing special about citizenship. Most of us didn’t do anything to earn it, we were simply born here. Anyone who lives in this country should have the ability to vote. If we tax them, they should have representation, but it should come with the expectation of participation.

Voting should be a sacred duty, not a sacred right.

Share

Pride funding in jeopardy…again

Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012

The city of Toronto is again threatening the funding of pride if the Queers Against Israeli Apartheid marches.  Councillor James Pasternak likens the group to bullies, ”I think I’m looking for some leadership from Pride to finally say ‘No’ to this kind of bullying and demonization. We don’t pull funding just for the fun of it. If Pride feels that supporting QuAIA is more important than a cultural grant then that’s their decision.”

The group’s participation put the $100,000+ funding in jeopardy.  This is of course a red herring.  City Hall doesn’t give a shit about gays and would happily pull funding for the fun of it if there wouldn’t be a massive back-lash.

Please don’t think I’m an anti-Semite, or even anti-Israel.  I just think the city should stay out of it rather than getting involved in a very, very complicated situation.

By fighting against the QuAIA, the city is basically throwing it’s hat in the Jewish corner.  We all know how strong the Jewish lobby is; it makes the “gay agenda” look like a kid’s tea party.  The city has no business siding with one group or the other as long as no laws are broken.

Using gay Pride as the lightning rod allows City Hall to smack the gays while supporting their friends and all the while  ignoring the fact that Pride brings million of dollars into the city.  A benefit the city reaps, not the gay community.

Not to mention the fact that Pro-Isreali groups are in the march as well.  And so they should be!  Pride should be about freedom of speech and being proud of who you are.  Being pro-Jewish doesn’t make one Anti-Palestinian.  And speaking out against Israeli Apartheid, real or imagined, is not the same as speaking out against Israelis.  The city manager agreed that the phrase “Israeli Apartheid” does not violate the city’s anti-discrimination policy, so really the city has no business getting involved.

The  Jewish Defence League protested at Pride offices, which apparently degenerated into name calling and anti-gay slurs.  What are clearly signs of hate speech, likening Palestine to a plague, (ironically the same language used against Jews) and yet there is no protest from city hall, no outcry.  Why not?

The JDL’s facebook page also posted, “During the Nazi Era, many high-ranking Nazis were gay.” Which is clearly a stupid analogy.

Xtra, the queer newspaper reported: “That statement is ‘inane, meaningless and nonsense,’ says Canadian Jewish Congress CEO Bernie Farber. ‘Is the JDL trying to suggest that gays and lesbians are Nazis?’…’They shouldn’t be protesting Pride Toronto, anyway,” says Farber. “They should be protesting QuAIA.’”

Gay pride is about protests.  It started as a march through the streets of New York to protest the unfair treatment of gay men by police at the Stonewall Inn in 1969. And if it wasn’t for those drag queens and rent-boys taking a stand, we wouldn’t have a gay-rights movement and same-sex marriage today.

Toronto held its first Pride three years later in 1972. We now mark the infamous Stonewall Riots every summer with a parade through town. If you don’t like a groups politics, then just ignore them.

Share

CBC Cuts

Wednesday, April 4th, 2012

The CBC has just received another 115 million dollar budget cut in the latest federal government budget. Faced with this significant shortfall in funding the CBC is now in a position where it has to trim another 650 jobs.

I think former CBC president Robert Rabinovitch put it best, “This is a death by a thousand cuts. At what point does the CBC become totally irrelevant? A back door way of destroying public broadcasting.”

The conservative party doesn’t want to be seen axing the CBC so they chip away at it slowly. It is interesting to watch the public reaction because it is very mixed.   Some people cite the CBC’s “liberal bias” as their reason for rejection, while others feel that makes it worth saving. Funny thing is, I think if you counted the number of Conservative articles and the number of Liberal articles they are probably even. Some people want to gut it, and others think it is a notional treasure.

Love it or hate it, the truth about the CBC probably lies somewhere in between.

The Toronto star has even built an entire website to the CBC. However, the message from it is very mixed just like the response from the public.  On one hand they have a page that notes the CBC receives less funding than public broadcast in other countries (Italy, Australia, Japan, Ireland, France, Belgium, Spain, Austria, Sweden, U.K., Finland, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland and Norway) but a little more than New Zealand and U.S.  They also note that  86% of Canadians say they regularly watch CBC, 42% regularly listen to CBC radio and 40% visit the website.  Which would seem they are in favour of Mother Corp.

Yet in the same  breath Torstar has confusingly hired Kai Nagata to mimic Rick Mercer’s style in a segment called “Canadian Broadcasting Consultancy” where he basically attempts to poke fun at the CBC with titles “CBC, meet the internet” completely ignoring the fact the CBC has been on the internet for over 15 years, has millions of pages, thousands of audio and video streams and hundreds of micro-sites, instead focusing on trying to find a single clip from the National in the archives from 1993.

First he is upset he needs a plugin to view it on the archives site, and then, unable to play it he looks in the internal search, where he gets exasperated and finally goes over to Youtube as if to show how poorly CBC does it’s job. However if he had simply searched “peter mansbridge internet in 1993″ in Google, like everyone else on the planet, it was the first result.  I would like to provide Mr. Nagata with a little education of his own.

Or Another webisode entitled “Keep it Cool”, about how the CBC should be open with it’s information about how it spends the funding.   What is lost on some people, is that Torstar wants to use this information as a commercial and tactical business advantage, not because they really care about how the money is being spent.

For example, Mr. Nagata specifically mentions Peter Mansbridge’s salary. Explain to me why anyone would need to know how much Peter Mansbridge is getting paid.  It might not be a matter of National security, but that is Mr. Mansbridge’s personal information and I think he has the right to his privacy like everyone else.  They could say they spend a certain amount making the National, or this is what is spent on programming but what Peter Mansbridge actually get’s paid is nobody’s business.  It doesn’t affect the CBC’s budget, it doesn’t affect how they program their shows and it doesn’t affect how much we pay in taxes.

As an tangential observation I noticed that in the videos Kai Nagata is wearing the same clothes in every segment.  I realized that he just set a camera up on a rooftop and filmed all the clips on a single day, I feel a little cheated by that, it makes it seem cheap for some reason.  A good producer would have had him change shirts to at least maintain the illusion they were making an effort. Instead they come off as short, pointless rants from a bitter ex-employee.

Speaking of former employees, the Toronto Star also provides a friendly plug to Richard Stursberg, former VP of English services and his new book.  Stursberg did try to shake things up, I will give him that, but there is no shortage of people bitter with the CBC, or former employees who can point out what is wrong with the place. They even have their own website, the tea makers, although it seems all but abandoned now. The website name comes from a Clash song, but for some reason it seems properly Canadian to me.

Who knows, one day I might even join them. But rather than looking at what is wrong with the CBC, (and there is no shortage of those) I try to look at what is right with it.

1) CBC is Canadian television.  Look at the programming on CBC: 22 minutes, Arctic Air, Canada’s Smartest Person, Hockey Night in Canada, Heartland… the list goes on.  Look at the programming on CTV: Hot in Cleveland, American Idol, CSI New York… One is Canadian Television, the other is American Television in Canada.

2) CBC Radio.  CBC radio is extremely important in the rural areas.  It helps connect those communities with the major centres both culturally and in terms of current events.  Many times when I was tree-planting the only station that was available was CBC, and let me tell you it was a God-send.

3) CBC Kids programming.  I don’t know anyone my age who doesn’t get a little misty eyed when talking about how much they love Mr. Dressup and the Friendly Giant.  While the kids programming has changed it still evokes that strong sense of attachment.

4) CBC people.  Some people are devoted CBCers.  They drank the kool-aid, and I envy them for it.  You will find people at the corp who have been there for 25+ years, worked in a variety of roles in almost every department. People who remember when CBC.ca first launched, when the first digital stream went out, when vinyl was retired.  I even think there might be some who remember when the Leafs won a cup. You don’t get that kind of devotion unless you have a pretty compelling mission.

CBC is worth protecting, and funding.  In my humble opinion, if we want to make it better, do away with advertising all together fund it completely. Get rid of the ads, and focus on top quality content. Don’t try to do everything for everyone, make the tough content choices that help bind the country together.

CBC radio and television is at it’s best when it is bringing culturally relevant programming to Canadians. It may not be the most marketable, or the most popular, but that is not what the CBC should be.  It should never pander to the lowest common denominator.

 

Share

Toronto Zoo: homophobic or just plain wrong?

Wednesday, November 9th, 2011

The Toronto Zoo has decided to separate their two gay penguins, Pedro and Buddy. Apparently the zoo wants to force them to be straight and to pair bond with females.  You would think that in this day and age, and in this city (home of the best gay Pride parade in the world) the zoo could be a little more enlightened.

Now in the Zoo’s defense they claim it is to help the survival of the endangered species, but what if they don’t get on with girl penguins?  Their separation will cause them undue stress and anxiety all because someone has it in their head that boy penguins should like girl penguins. What are they going to do, send them to a Christian anti-gay camp to be “fixed”?

Look at these two birds kissing and tell me why the fuck they shouldn’t be allowed to be together?

Look at this one, he it totally checking out his ass!

And it’s not like they couldn’t do their bit to save their species…

The zoo in Bremerhaven Germany has gay penguins and the two males, Z and Veilpunkt are happy rearing their own chick after being given an egg that had been reject by their biological “hetero” parents.

“Since the chick arrived, they have been behaving just as you would expect a heterosexual couple to do. The two happy fathers spend their days attentively protecting, caring for and feeding their adopted offspring.”

Perhaps they should force the hetero penguins to attend parenting class…

Seriously what’s next for the Zoo, the black rhinos can’t hang out with the white rhinos…

Share

Why Rob Ford’s obesity matters

Friday, August 5th, 2011

I am a big man. I have weighted as much as 250 lbs (a quarter ton!) at a time in my life.  I am married to a big man, and find most big men attractive. And like most big people I have struggled against my weight all my life.  And also like most big people I can come up with 100 excuses for why I am the size I am.  ”It’s genetics”, “I’m big-boned”, etc.  But the truth is it is a fight I will always have until the day I die. The question is will I die because of my weight or not.

Despite sharing this struggle this I am (not so secretly) prejudiced against most obese people.  I suppose I should have more compassion, but I would sooner vote for someone handicapped than someone over-weight.  Someone handicapped either through birth or through an accident, presumably cannot help it.  I am sure that most handicapped people would correct their situation if they could.   I cannot imagine there are too many blind people if offered the ability of sight would turn it down.

This is not the case with many obese people.  If you offered most fat people the ability to be skinny they would take it.  But they are unwilling to work for it.  Most over-weight people could help it if they choose and we, as a nation, are getting bigger.  Now we have people so large they are required to purchase two airplane seats.  There is no sugar-coating this, but big is not necessarily beautiful.  Here is a simple rule of thumb for men: If you look down and can’t see your penis because your stomach is in the way, you have a problem.

If someone is large and fights it, then that is something I can get behind.  I can vote for a person like that because they are willing to take on a challenge and a struggle.  Take Bill Clinton for example, despite being President of the America still found the time to jog.  It would have been really easy for him to go to pot and lord knows he was busy and could have had a legitimate excuse, but he understood it was important for him, his family and his nation that he exercises. Most successful leaders do and they lead by example.

What kind of example is Rob Ford providing?

How can anyone expect a mayor to care for a city, when he clearly doesn’t even care for his own body. Rob Ford is sort of active in sports, that is he coached a football team. But it is hard to respect someone who orders kids to do laps while not being able to run one himself.  Personally I would find Mr. Ford much easier to relate to if he was seen running once and awhile, or cycling or even strolling.

I don’t it is overstating the importance of this. By running, Bill Clinton was showing his nation, his people whether they voted for him or not, in every state red or blue, that personal health is important. Not to mention the health benefits, physical and mental, that such activity would bring to his office.

(photo by: Peter J. Thompson)

Now many people might think I am being unfair.  The right-wing media and the “Ford Nation” certainly jumped on anyone who called him “fat”. There is no hiding the fact I do not like the man.  (I do not like his methods, his politics, his demeanour.  I don’t like the way he represents the wealthy fat-cats at the expense of those already marginalized.)  And perhaps I am; but I don’t think it is going to far to expect elected officials to be role models and Rob Ford sends a poor message when it comes to personal health.

Share

TTC sells off naming rights cheaply

Thursday, July 7th, 2011

The CBC reported that the TTC has sold the advertising rights, including the naming rights for the subway stations to Pattison advertising for 324 million dollars for the next 12 years.

This reflects very poor judgement on the part of the TTC who have grossly undervalued the advertising properties of our transit system.  The TTC itself reports it’s ridership to be approaching 500 million per year.

With the $324 million being divided over the next 12 years that averages to only $27 million per year. This means Pattison advertising is only paying about $0.06 per rider/per year to bombard a captive audience with ads. Google can’t even beat that rate!

To put this into a little perspective; the operating budget for the TTC is 1.4 billion a year. Twenty seven million dollars is a drop in the bucket and means the advertising sales will contribute less than 2% of the over-all operating budget not including the expenses they incur.

The naming of stations by corporations not withstanding, this would suggest either very poor judgement or some form of corruption.

Share

We are Equals?

Monday, March 7th, 2011

Dame Judi Dench and Daniel Craig are part of this incredible public service announcement about gender equality and www.weareequals.org I all I can say is Kudos to both of them. Very poignant and very well done.

Share

CRTC killing innovation

Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011

I had lunch yesterday with Chris Berry, and inevitably conversation drifted to the CRTC and usage based billing.  Usage based billing sounds like a good idea on it’s face.  Those who use it more should pay more, right?  We do it with electricity and natural gas, so it’s not like this is a revolutionary idea.  However we know that in some cases people resist usage based billing out of principle, for example with garbage.

Freakonomics radio produced a segment on trying to get people to throw out less garbage.  What is interesting about this is while most people did reduce their garbage with the pay-as-you-throw system, some started dumping it in the woods.  Studies have shown that people are more loss adverse than gain seeking.  Meaning people will try much harder to hang onto what they have than try to gain something new.

Take driving for example, how quick would you be to sign up for usage based driving?  Imagine your odometer gets read every year and you get sent a bill according to how much you drive.  Or we put toll booths up all over the place.  Most Canadians would balk at the idea, especially those who live in a rural areas.  It would seem that if you start with usage based billing then all is good but trying to switch later on is an issue.  Also, with most usage based billing, you only pay for what you use.  No garbage?  No charge.  That is not the case with the internet billing proposed by the CRTC.

The issue with the CRTC’s decision is three fold as I see it.  First, paying $2.00 per gigabyte is stupidly expensive.  It works out cheaper for Netflix or whoever to fill a hard drive and mail it than it to you than it would be for you to download their products.  Considering bandwidth costs (at most) $.05/GB there is no excuse for that kind of mark up.  Bell and Rogers are not offering to only charge you for the amount you use, they are wanting to charge you on top of what you already pay.  Regardless of the fact that you may have signed up years ago for “unlimited bandwidth”. We are supposedly living in an age where people can telecommute, and work remotely but at $1.50  per gigabyte we don’t.  It will not be economically sensible for me as an employee to ever work at home. Unless of course the company is willing to pick up the tab.

Secondly, producers already pay for bandwidth once. Take the CBC for example, you can watch episodes of Being Erica, or live HNL games online streamed to your computer.  I don’t think I am giving away any trade secrets when I mention the CBC spends a considerable amount of money on terabytes of bandwidth.  If the CBC spends money to serve it, and then you pay again to watch it, then we are getting dung twice for the content. Because the CBC and other content producers are able to offset their costs through advertising it’s okay to pay for content distribution, but if no one is willing to pay for the content because it is now too expensive to download, that model dies. no audience = no ad revenue = no content

Thirdly it kills porn  innovation.  I jest but actually lots major advancement in web technology arrived from porn.  Flash? – porn.  Video streaming? – porn. Online payment systems ? – porn.  Live chat? – porn.  In a world which is increasing it’s broadband capabilities, you have to wonder why Canada is attempting to stifle it.

It will kill the blossoming online gaming industry.  Why bother downloading a game from a service like Steam if a 25 Gb game is going to cost $50 just go buy it. Companies like Steam should be screaming at the CRTC that this will kill their business in Canada.    World of Warcraft?  I don’t think so, if playing for an evening is going to cost you $6 a night in bandwidth costs above the $18/month you are already paying.  I have a Flickr account with gigabytes of photos, it will now cost me more to upload and download my own files.  Uploading to YouTube, Facebook and on and on it goes.

There isn’t a pipeline clog as the communication companies would have you believe.  Any blockages are in the last 100 metres.  Meaning it is the cable in your house or apartment that is the issue, not the fiber optic networks.   We as Canadians payed to have the cables lines put in, not Rogers or Bell and as such we need to express to the CRTC in no uncertain terms we will not accept this sort of nonsense any longer.  It is time for Canada’s  to have real competition in it’s cable and communication markets.

http://www.antiubb.com/

Share

Toronto’s stupid lousy election

Thursday, September 16th, 2010

I’m having a tough time this year picking who I will vote for in the next election. All of the candidates suck. I mean really suck. Toronto’s biggest issue isn’t being elitists, or being hated by the rest of the country, it’s biggest issue is a lack of vision from our supposed leaders

Rocco Rossi is out, I simply cannot vote for someone named “Rocco”. It’s not an anti-Italian thing, I like Italians, I just don’t like the name “Rocco”. That and his big idea for the city is to have a suggestion box…no I’m not kidding, stop laughing. Oh, that and an eight kilometre expressway under the city. Ya, that’ll be cheap.

Sarah Thomson (who?) recipient of a glowing recommendation by none other than former inmate Conrad Black is running. But she’s not important enough, loud enough, or smart enough to get my attention. Perhaps I couldn’t hear her over “Rocco’s” stunning ideas.  I have no idea what her platform is, where she stands and I work for a freakin’ news agency.  Seriously if she does as poor of a job as mayor as she has getting her message out we’re all screwed.

Joe Pantalone is basically a shorter version of David Miller who’s he’s never met a special interest group he didn’t like.  Especially special interests like unions. If elected I predict he will drag this city into a socialist Hell that will make Prypiat look good in comparison. I’ll start looking for property outside Toronto if that happens.

George Smitherman is running and as a fellow friend of Dorothy’s would be the most likely candidate except for that damn e-health scandal.  I mean seriously how hard can it possibly be to put out a couple of RFP’s? That sort of lack of judgement is hard for me to forgive.  He’s figured out the “waste bad, transit good” mantra but I fear it will be too late.

And last but not least is Rob Ford. Ford is loud, brash, obese and just a little racist.  In fact he reminds me of Archie Bunker mixed with Rush Limbaugh. He hates gay and cyclists (ahem, not good for yours truly)

During a council debate on public-health grants for community-based AIDS-prevention programs, Mr. Ford says: “If you’re not doing needles and you’re not gay, you won’t get AIDS, probably.

“What I compare bike lanes to is swimming with the sharks. Sooner or later, you’re going to get bitten. And every year we have dozens of people that get hit by cars or trucks. Well, no wonder. Roads are built for buses, cars and trucks. Not for people on bikes. And my heart bleeds for them when I hear someone gets killed, but it’s their own fault at the end of the day.”

The quotes go on and on….

but he’s good with his constituent’s money, willing to trim the waste from city hall and ready to take on the unions.  He might be a bit of buffoon and the Sarah Palin of this election but by God I think he might win it.

So all in all it  is a matter of choosing not who will do the most good, but who do I think will do the least harm, to both myself and the city.   Where’s our Hazel McCallion, Toronto?

Share