My take on Senate reform

We need the Senate, but not as it is now. The current Senate is far too inefective, inefficient, and undemocratic. I don't agree with Stephen Harper much, but I do agree with him when he says the Senate needs to change. What makes something democratic? The will of the people. That said, the Senate needs to be elected, effective, and  accountable.

To start, Senate elections should be federally regulated by Elections Canada. It isn't up to the provinces to elect people to a federal body. Senate elections should be on a fixed term, say every 6 years. This will provide stability in Parliament. Next, the election should be by proportional representation. If a party gets a 20% of the vote, they get 20% of the seats. There should of course be limitations placed on this to protect the Senate from radical parties. So maybe a party only starts winning seats if they secure over 5% of the vote. The way this will work is each party that is running in the Senate election will put forward a list of the candidates in order of presedence. As voters, we will look at the list for our geographic area, whether it be a province or a region, and decide which candidates or party we support. If a party get 20% of the vote, and there are 105 Senators, the first 21 people on the list for that Party win seats.

The seats should continue to be geographically dispersed as well. It wont be easy to appease the provinces in this area. Perhaps a formula would need to be created that takes population and land mass into account. Something that will award seats fairly without making certain provinces *cough*cough* cranky. If this means increasing the size of the Senate, then so be it. We could also get away from awarding the seats by province. I don't think we need to get as specific as the federal ridings for House of Commons elections, but lets take Ontario for example: South Western Ontario, GTA, Central Ontario, Eastern Ontario, Northern Ontario. That's more specific than provincial, but less specific than riding.

Next, the Senate needs to be as powerful as the House. The governing party should still be the party that wins the House of Commons (which should also be election by proportional representation, but that's a different blog post!), and of course the budget bill should originate from the House, but the Senate should have the power to introduce and debate and other bills they see fit. And they should exercise this power. The Senate should sit as often as the House, and it should be able to amend House legislation without getting the stink eye from the House.

It's time we turn Parliament into the truly democratic, bi-camaral, institution its supposed to be. Elect and strengthen an accountable and democratic Senate.

Dear Afghanistan, we're not going anywhere yet!

The Conservative Government has finally unveiled the plan for our troops in Afghanistan, and surprise, surprise... we aren't going anywhere.

Canadian troops will no longer be used in active combat roles after 2011, rather the 950 troops will take on a strict training only role in the relatively safe city of Kabul. The Conservatives promise that not only will our troops not be used in combat, but they will only be training on safe bases, and will not be used in the dangerous Kandahar region.

Despite criticizing the Government for taking too long to outline their plan, the Liberals are generally happy with the decision. The plan takes into account many of the recommendations that the Liberals put forward, including the central idea that Canadian troops should remain in the country post the 2011 withdrawal date. The NDP however are not happy with the decision, and are asking the Conservatives to put the mission to a vote in the House. The Conservatives have retaliated saying that it is well within their authority to conduct training missions, and are pointing at the Haiti earthquake disaster for precedent. At the time, the Government sent troops to the Caribbean nation without a vote in the House.

I have to agree with the Conservatives and the Liberals in this matter: We can't leave the Afghan people this way. The Taliban Government has been toppled, but leaving the untrained Afghan military to keep them at bay won't work at all. The least we can do on our way out is to give them the training they need to keep their citizens safe, while they work to rebuild their nation.

We have been their for 9 years, and that is a long time. Over 150 Canadian soldiers have died, and that is far too many. The war is costing us over $1 billion per year, and that is far too much. But if we leave now, without training our replacements, will it all have been for nothing? I would hate to think that so many people have lost their lives for nothing.

Do we deserve to be Canadians?

Voting is a concept that many people just don't understand anymore. At one time, it was regarded as an honour and privilege to vote. Now, most people regard it as a chore... A voluntary civic duty that they can partake in only if they feel like it. How did this happen?



Imagine life prior to our democratic government. Before we elected our leaders they were merely appointed by the powers that be. And who were those powers? The unelected Monarch, i.e. the King or Queen. And you know how that King or Queen was chosen? Divine right. They were somehow superior to everyone else in such a way that they were "chosen" by God to lead us. The people that lead our country and governed all aspects of our lives were chosen, not elected, by another unelected person. Responsible government was virtually non-existent.



In the first election held in Canada, voter turnout was 73.1%. It has since fluctuated from the low 60's to the high 70's. In the last federal election, October 2008, voter turnout was a startling 58.8%. This number is so low that it is actually embarrassing.



The Fathers of Confederation worked extremely hard to bring us our democracy. Hundreds of thousands of people made sacrifices and worked very hard to achieve democracy in Canada. In fact, in other places in the world hundreds of millions of people, if not billions of people, have been killed fighting for democracy in their countries.



Canada already has a functioning democracy. We are not asking anyone to work hard or make sacrifices. We are not asking anyone to fight or die. All we are asking is that you take a few minutes out of your lives every year or so to vote.



In fact, we are not asked of very much in Canada. Follow the law, pay your taxes, fill out the census, and vote. Only three of those things are required. Following the law is a universal requirement everywhere in the world. Paying your taxes is also a universal requirement, and allows us access to necessary services. Filling out the census ensures that we get the right services. The last thing asked of Canadians is that we vote. It's not required, and no one will ever be forced to vote. We are asked to vote because it is arguably the most important thing we as citizens could ever do because this voluntary civic duty is the controlling factor of the three required duties.



As previously mentioned, the duties of a Canadian citizen are not extreme. They are little more than a minor inconvenience. None of them take a very long time, and many are so ingrained in our day to day lives that we don't even notice them anymore. The majority of us have no problem following the law, paying our taxes, or even filling out the census. Why do we have such a hard time voting. Especially considering all the social programs we receive as Canadians, such as healthcare, education, welfare, and police service. On a personal note, I would never be able to attend university if it weren't for the Government subsidizing over 50% of it, and financing the remaining amount through both loans and grants.



If we don't vote because we "don't have time" or because our "vote doesn't really count" we are insulting not just our history, but our future as well. As fewer and fewer people vote our government becomes less and less democratic. With each passing election as less people vote,  we move closer and closer to our undemocratic past, and further away from the democratic future our ancestors worked so hard to achieve.



When you think about it, we have a municipal election every 4 years, a provincial election every 2-4 years, and a federal election every 2-4 years. If we can't take the few minutes out of our lives to vote every year or so, then do we really deserve the social services we receive? Do we really deserve to be Canadian citizens?


--------------------------------------


Like this post? Vote for it on Progressive Bloggers!

Ignatieff Makes Personal Appeal

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff sent out an email to his mass mailing list today, with a subject line of "This is personal." Here it is:

My mother got sick with Alzheimer’s when she was in her 60s — early, in other words — and my dad took care of her at home. I’ve never admired my father more than when he looked after my mom, but it killed him, basically. It was tough, even with my brother, Andrew, stepping up, and our family and friends helping.

Like my Dad did, millions of Canadians care for family members at home when loved ones fall ill. They are a silent workforce, providing $9-billion in unpaid work each year. Many must use personal savings to survive, miss work or quit their jobs. Over half have household incomes under $45,000. Like the loved ones they are caring for, many of these caregivers are in the fight of their lives.

Yesterday, I announced a new Liberal Party policy to change that.

Canadians want to shoulder the responsibility of caring for their ill parents, grandparents, spouse or young children. But they also want a government that stands with them, a government that chooses families over corporate tax breaks.

That’s why the new Liberal Family Care Plan will introduce:

1. A new six-month Family Care Employment Insurance Benefit, similar to the EI parental leave benefit, so that more Canadians can care for gravely ill family members at home without having to quit their jobs; and

   
   

2. A new Family Care Tax Benefit, modeled on the Child Tax Benefit, to help low- and middle-income family caregivers who provide essential care to a family member at home.

Replacing the current six-week EI program, the Family Care Employment Insurance Benefit will let families claim up to six months in blocks over a year long period, and share it with other family members.

Meanwhile, the new Family Care Tax Benefit will help low- and middle-income family caregivers defray the cost of providing essential care to a family member at home. The new benefit will provide families that qualify with a tax-free monthly payment worth up to $1,350 per year.

During difficult economic times, governments — and Canadians — must choose.Stephen Harper and the Conservatives choose a $6-billion annual tax break for corporations. We choose families. We’ll keep the corporate tax rate where it is now, 25 percent lower than in the United States, and use some of the savings it provides to pay for the Liberal Family Care Plan.

I know this policy will help countless Canadians struggling to provide care for sick loved ones at home.

Thank you.

Michael Ignatieff

John Ivison of the National Post received this email, and he was less than pleased, stating that them email "reaches too far." He goes on to say that he thinks that the email is "manipulative, undignified and in poor taste." I couldn't disagree more! The email starts off on a personal note, and quickly progresses to a discussion on the Liberal's new home care plan. Ignatieff is using a personal story to attempt to connect to Canadians. He is not reaching for sympathy, but rather letting Canadians know that he sympathizes with them. He is telling Canadians that he knows what they are feeling, and he knows what they are going through. 


This personal approach is not overreaching at all. In fact, catching a glimpse into the personal life of a leader is a refreshing change, and allows Canadians to connect with him on a personal level. I think this email could prove beneficial for both the Liberals and Canadians.

Census vote!

The House of Commons will vote on a motion to call on the Government to reinstate the long form census, about 40 minutes from now. It is known that the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc will all support the motion, with the Conservatives likely voting against it.

At this point it is very likely that the motion will pass, however it is important to note that the motion is not binding. Because the census falls under the jurisdiction of the Federal government, it is not up to the House to control the census. All MPs can do is ask the Government, on behalf of the Canadian people, to reinstate the census. Harper's response: no. It is highly unlikely that the government will change their mind.

I was considering live blogging the vote, but I don't think it is really necessary since it is just a vote, and we essentially know which way everyone will vote.

As a side note, I will be live blogging David Johnston's swearing in ceremony on Friday, so check back then!

More information:

• Liberals move to reinstate long-form census (cbc.ca)
• Tories haul out 'coalition' label in census spat with opposition (theglobeandmail.com)
• Ontario, Quebec want long-form census reinstated 'as soon as possible' (theglobeandmail.com)

More Sports Talk in Quebec Politics

After reading an interesting article over on cbc.ca, it is interesting to note how much sports coverage is taking place at Parliament Hill these days and across many provincial political arenas. Oddly enough there have been a few stories on sports news channels these past couple of weeks that seemed more like parliamentary debates than that of the news surrounding current sports teams and leagues.

The aforementioned article points to the PMO and its comments towards Bloc Quebecois leader (provincially) Pauline Marois. The latter mentioned that she would like to see the Montreal Canadiens incorporate more Francophone players into their lineup. To which the Prime Minister responded that even though the team is one that unites almost all Quebecors it really should stay out of the political light and simply be left alone.

This story comes on the heels of a debate (which is still ongoing but has simmered for now) of federal funding for a new arena in Quebec City, which has been speculated to be built in an effort to attract an NHL team. Instantly a revive the Nordiques campaign started in not only the streets but in the political offices as well, as many MPs gathered and had photos taken wearing the vintage sweater.

While it is true that hockey is Canada's national pastime and regarded as a sacred institution in not only Quebec but across the nation, but where should the line be drawn between sports and politics. It seems one side already has drawn the line far away but the other just will not stay on its own side. Montreal Canadiens owner Geoff Molson stated following the most current incident, "We are in the hockey business and not into politics [...] I can tell you that we don't talk about politics in the dressing room."


So while Marious comments to the media stating the Habs are, "a symbol of our pride to succeed in this sports, and I think that Quebecors would like to have more Francophones in this team." most people including Harper, don't think that is the case, or like Geoff Molson, don't care. The result is a lot of people changing the channel on their television and switching pages in their newspaper to the sports section, where the real news and commentary about sports remains. Thus, leaving the politicians to once again return to what they are suppose to care about; that is running this country and/or its provinces and territories.

Tories take lead, or statistical anomaly?

The latest EKOS poll, released to the CBC, show that the Conservatives are holding a 32.4% lead, with the Liberals at 28.9%. The NDP are holding 16.6% support, while the Green Party maintains 10.7% and the Bloc are at 8.9%.

Normally, the statistics would suggest that the Conservative have a minor lead of 3-4%. However, if we take a look at the data from the past few weeks, we see that the data could be telling a different story.

The data from September 2 suggests that the Conservatives have 29.4% of the vote, while the Liberals have 29.1% of the vote. Even without the margin of error, the two parties were in a virtual tie.

The data from August 19 suggests that the Conservatives would win 32.5% of the vote, while the Liberals would win 27.9% of the vote. The 5% tory lead is barely statistically significant, and should thus be noted as relatively close to that of a tie.

Now, if we take a look at this weeks data, we see that there is perhaps another possibility. Because the difference is within the margin of error, it is fairly difficult for us to be sure that the Conservatives are in the lead. Perhaps they are, or perhaps the parties are still in a tie. The data speaks differently to each party, and is much too close to state that the Conservatives are gaining ground again.

Chart from CBC.

Where is the PM?

He hasn't been heard from in weeks! In fact, we have barely seen our elusive Prime Minister since the census scandal broke, or since the G20 for that matter. This of course raises not only the question of where he is, but also why he is being so silent.

Is it that he doesn't want to face questions about the G20 protests? Or perhaps he is avoiding the F-35 questions? Or the census questions?

Since the G20 protests, he has basically left the Toronto Police Service and Ontario Government to fend for themselves. Well that's not really fair; I guess Conservative MPs, presumably on orders from PMO, did prevent the Public Safety committee from launching a public inquiry into G20 security. Don't get me wrong, I fully support the Toronto Police Service. I think they did a fantastic job securing the largest city in Canada during some of the worst protests I have ever seen in this country. But it is possible, and even likely that some officers made mistakes, poor choices, and may have even abused their power. A public inquiry seems like the logical next step. Perhaps the PM thinks he is protecting his government, the Ontario government, and the police by preventing a public inquiry, but really all he is doing is hurting our democratic roots.

And what about the F-35s? Well we know that the government did not use the appropriate bidding process before awarding the contract to an American company. Opposition MPs were on them for it for a while, but staying out of the light seems to have worked on this front because we aren't hearing much about it anymore.

Then again, that is probably because everyone is focused on the census scandal. This is another issue that the PM has been oddly silent on. While his ministers have been rigorously defending the decision to scrap the mandatory long form census, the PM himself hasn't uttered a word about it. Why is he leaving his ministers to take the blame for it? Perhaps he realizes that this could haunt him in an election and is therefore trying to distance himself from it? Two things are certain; opposition MPs aren't backing down on the census, and neither is the Government. Who will win? Seemingly the Government, as it is within their power to make this change, but only time will tell for sure.

And now, the last question. Where is the Prime Minister? We know where the Leader of the Opposition is, as he travels across the country meeting Canadians. But where is the Prime Minister? He could be at his official country retreat, a cottage on Meech Lake, relaxing and soaking up the sun. Or perhaps he is relaxing in his official residence, 24 Sussex Drive. Or of course he could be working away in his office in Langevin.

Seeing as we haven't heard from him in so long, I'm inclined to believe that he is taking it easy somewhere, watching his government swaying dangerously close to an election.

Today is the day!

Today is the Great Canadian Census Debate, to use a name coined by a role model of mine, Kady O'Malley. The Industry committee will meet today to debate and hear from a long list of witnesses. I obviously won't be there, because I am not nearly that lucky. However, Kady O'Malley of the CBC will be liveblogging it, and CPAC will be carrying it live.

View Kady's live blog here, or on CBC Poltics.



View the live stream here or on CPAC [link removed].

Live stream removed for copyright reasons. Real Canadian Politics is working on achieving authorization from CPAC to broadcast the live stream. Until then please use the link above to view the stream on the CPAC website.
UPDATE: CPAC has informed me that I am permitted to link to their home page only, not to their watch now page, which is why I have removed the link above. They have also informed me that I do not have authorization to embed the live stream on Real Canadian Politics. I will be contacting the appropriate authority in Parliament to obtain permission to embed the video. To view the live stream I recommend you visit ParlVu, Parliament's live stream service, to watch the live stream.

Just a reminder, I do not claim to own either of the above streams. I am simply using them for informational purposes. If you are having trouble viewing either of the above stream I recommend that you visit their respective websites.

Real Canadian Politics is not affiliated with CBC or CPAC.

Proud to call him my Leader

I had a really enjoyable time meeting Michael Ignatieff today! The Conservatives like to say that he is an arrogant man, and while I didn't buy into that rumour before, I was still amazed by just how nice a guy he really is. Sure, the man is smart, but he is just a regular guy, like you and I. He talks, he smiles, he frowns, he laughs, he breathes. He even has a sense of humour.

I was so thoroughly impressed by this man, that I found myself soaking up every word he said, as if he were speaking to me personally. And for some of it, he was! He took the time to move though out the crowd and meet every person that was there. He even spoke to the protestors that were chanting, "Iggy, go home!" He responded by telling them, "I am home!"

While I didn't have an extended discussion with him like so many others did, I did shake his

hand. Twice to be exact. And both times he looked me straight in the eyes and spoke to me. He told me it was so nice to meet me, how happy we was to be there, and thanked me for coming out to see him. His handshake was firm, his eye contact unwavering, and his words were friendly.

He spoke to a variety of people, including a candidate for our Regional Council, a family with a baby, local business people, an elderly lady (who enthusiastically informed him that she would be voting Liberal), and even a young man just out of high school, too young to vote but extremely interested in politics, and passionately devoted to the Liberal Party.

When I saw Michael speaking to this young man, sincerely interested in the conversation, I realized something. I realized this tour is about more than vote; it's about meeting Canadians. From what I could tell, Michael was extremely impressed with this young man, and this young man was equally impressed with Michael.

Watching Michael interact with all these people, I realized that he is a different kind of Leader. He is a Leader that cares about all Canadians, he is a Leader that listens to everyones concerns, he is a Leader that has a lot to offer Canadians, he is a Leader meant to lead. A Leader to be the next Prime Minister of Canada.

Crossing my fingers!

To many people, the world of politics is boring all the time. But to the group of people that thoroughly enjoy politics, it is exciting and intense most of the time. So when a day comes a long when not a lot is supposed to happen, we take a deep breath and consider finally getting something done that doesn’t consider politics. For a career journalist, this may mean working on a piece regarding something other than politics. For a blogger who happens to have a job outside of journalism, this means getting some real work done. You know, work that actually pays.

Well today is one of those days. Not a whole lot is going on in Canadian politics. Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon is holding a press conference on new sanctions against Iran, but that really is all there is as far as scheduled events. In my riding it is a little more exciting as the Liberal Express finally makes it to Cambridge, but in terms of nationwide impact, little is happening. I will of course be live blogging the event (which is only supposed to a whistle stop) starting at 1:15pm ET. I will attempt to setup a “Cover-it-Live” liveblog, but if that doesn’t work I will of course be using Twitter.

Tomorrow should be a much more interesting day as the Industry committee meets to discuss the long form census.

In terms of Leaders, Harper is unheard from, Ignatieff is in Guelph, Cambridge, and Kitchener today, and Layton is in Winnipeg.

As long as the day is as slow as the schedule is, I might actually get some work done. Keeping my fingers crossed!

Liberal Express Q&A was a good time

Well I just got home from listening to Michael Ignatieff in Brantford, and I must say that I was thoroughly impressed. I saw regular people get up to the microphone and ask him questions, and I saw him give truthful answers. What really impressed me was how he was much attention he gave to everyone. No matter the age, gender, race, political affiliation, or financial status, Michael answered everyones question.

From the opening speech, to the questions, to the closing remarks, Michael spoke very clear, and engaged the audience by mentioning many different aspects of life under the Conservative party, and what life could be like with a future Liberal government.

I will be seeing him again tomorrow in my hometown of Cambridge when he stops at the Cambridge Centre mall to meet people. Hopefully this time I will have a live blog set up with Cover it Live, but if not, Twitter works.

UPDATED: Slow day?

Well I don't want to say it is going to be a slow day today, because I've said that before and was clearly proven wrong. From my vantage point however, it certainly seems like not a lot will be going on.

The Industry committee will be meeting to discuss the controversial long form census, but the powers that be have deemed it "in camera." Which means no media coverage. I am assuming the Kady O'Malley of the CBC will be making the trip to the Hill just in case of the unlikely event that they change their minds. I will be following her closely and if the "in camera" status changes, I will be sure to post it here.

Apart from that, the Liberal Express is in Quebec still, and is actually holding an interactive townhall. However, due to the fact that is in Montreal, it will probably be french which means little or no coverage from me as I regrettably am not fluent in our other official language.

UPDATE: The committee meeting today was a very short, in camera meeting. Committee members aren't saying who is invited, however it is fairly safe to assume that Industry Minister Tony Clement and the former chief statistician will be invited. Also, a short correction notice: Kady O'Malley of the CBC is off today, so therefore wasn't able to bring us updates. Karina Roman filled in luckily.

Libs behind Cons in poll

According to the latest EKOS poll, the Conservatives are ahead of the Liberals by 7 percentage points. The poll suggests that 32.4% of Canadians would vote for the Conservative Party while 25.5% of Canadians would vote for the Liberal Party. The Conservatives were ahead in every region of the country except Quebec according to the poll. The poll was conducted from July 14 to 20. This poll isn't looking very promising for the goals of the Liberal Express. Perhaps by the next poll we will see a bit of an improvement on the Liberal part as a result of the Express visiting a little more of the country.

On the census front, the Liberals have begun slamming the Government for its decisions, with Ignatieff claiming that the government wants to "fly blind." Liberal House leader Ralph Goodale is accusing the Conservatives of throwing Statistics Canada into chaos, with the Chief Statistician resigning over the census scandal.

Yesterday I informed you that the RCMP had cleared MP Helena Guergis, stating that the issues forwarded to them by the PMO contained no substance. Well CBC is also reporting that her husband, former MP Rahim Jaffer has also been cleared as the RCMP found no evidence of any wrongdoing by either of them. The Ethics commissioner is still investigating, but if that report is anything like this RCMP report, PMO is going to have a lot of explaining to do. And some apologizing. According to a statement from PMO, their decision to remove Guergis from caucus still stands, and they do not regret it.

WOW

WOW! What started out as a very slow day has turned into by far the most exciting day of the past few weeks! Emotions are all over the place for people tonight; even professional journalists can't keep it together.

First off, the RCMP has announced that all issues forwarded to them regarding Helena Guergis are unfounded. They have cleared the MP, and said no further action will be taken. This is good for Guergis, not so good for PM Harper. While this must provide some satisfaction for Guergis, this is one scandal that will follow her for the rest of her political life. It will certainly be interesting to see what happens in the next election.

Next, more census controversy as the Chief Statistician at StatCan was forced to cancel his town hall meeting explaining the agency's opinion on the decision to scrap the long form census, after Industry Minister Tony Clement issued a statement reminding everyone that Statistics Canada is not an independent organization, but is in fact an agency of the Government, and therefore has the same opinion as the Government. Several hours later, the Chief Statistician resigned in protest with the Government still unwavering in its decision. This marks the end of another great public servant.

This proved too much for some journalists. One journalist in particular, Andrew Coyne, National Editor of Maclean Magazine finally blew up on the Conservatives. I recommend visiting his Twitter page and reading his last few posts, as they are quite astounding. Mr. Coyne is one of my most inspirational role models in the journalism world, and he usually presents himself with the upmost professionalism. I do hope that he is ok, and I can't help but feel a little sympathetic towards him as in my opinion, he is mostly right.

Guergus innocent: RCMP

I just couldn't wait to post this despite the fact that not a lot of details are known. The RCMP has announced that it has completed its investigation in Helena Guergis, and has found no substance to any of the issues forwarded to them by the PMO.

More details to come.

CBC Story here.

CBC Politics blog here (slightly more detailed)

We get what we pay for

I just read an amazing blog post written by Alex Himelfarb. It really delivers a different perspective on Canadian politics, and what it means to be a Canadian citizen. While I was reading it, I found myself continuously (and surprisingly) agreeing with the author on all topics. In fact, I thought it was such a good read, I am posting it here. Please note that this was written by Alex Himelfarb, and I take absolutely no credit for it. I am simply posting it here for informational post.

What do the Omar Khadr case, the census controversy and taxes all have in common? All, I think, in one way or another, tell us something about the value of our common citizenship. With citizenship, as with most things, we get what we pay for. It seems today we are being asked to pay less and, no surprise, we are being offered less. Is that what we really want?

Let’s start with the census and the decision on the long form. We are being told that because some of us don’t like the intrusiveness of the long form of the census it is going to be made voluntary. We have seen from the outcry that the information loss is big and worrisome but, no, citizens will not be asked to make this concession on behalf of the public good. Indeed, apart from the universal requirement to obey the law, we Canadians have few explicit citizenship duties or responsibilities. We are asked to make few sacrifices. We have no compulsory service, no compulsory voting, as many other countries do. Certainly, every day, some Canadians are making sacrifices on our behalf, but most of us are required to pay little for the rights and privileges of citizenship. We ask of Canadians pretty much two things – pay your taxes and fill out your census.

How in the world did we get to the point that filling out the long form census is just too much to ask? I frankly cannot remember if I, personally, have ever had to do the long form. I’m old enough that I probably did and I hate forms enough that I may have blocked it from memory – but it simply cannot be too great a price to pay for being a Canadian citizen and helping to help ensure that all citizens share in its benefits. And my guess – the majority of Canadians would agree, even if, like me, they hate the questions.

Which brings me to taxes. How in the world did we get to the point that taxes are only seen as a burden from which to be relieved rather than a responsibility, a duty of citizenship – to safeguard our country and its values, manage the social and environmental commons, ensure that all citizens access to essential services and try as best we can to pass on to future generations a country at least as strong and healthy as the one we inherited? The conventional wisdom here is that talking about taxes is political suicide. Who likes paying taxes? Well, I wonder if a sustained dialogue on taxes and tax mix might not produce some surprises, at least over time. Would Canadians really oppose a “tax on pollution’? Just how low do corporate taxes have to be? And are those of us who benefit most and consume most willing to pay a bit more? After all, we are asked for so little in payment for our citizenship.

The census fiasco will put at risk the most vulnerable and our ability to measure and respond to their needs. Successive tax cuts for just about a decade make it harder to ensure universal access to essential services and address deepening inequality. In other words, the sense of social citizenship that arose in the seventies and eighties is at risk. Of course some Canadians welcome this, celebrate the shift from public to private, from social responsibility to self-reliance. But even those who have the thinnest notion of our common citizenship ought to be worried about the case of Omar Khadr.

Lawrence Martin and Andre Pratte have pretty much said it all. Bottom line: it doesn’t matter for the purposes of this discussion if he is guilty or innocent, a victim deserving of our sympathy or a villain worthy only of our contempt. What matters here is that basic rights, the legal rights of one of our citizens, are being denied. These legal rights are about protecting us and our liberty from the intrusive and coercive power of the state. We are all in trouble here – wherever we sit on the political continuum – if any one of our citizens is denied the right of a fair and just process when their liberty is at stake. When this happens, the value of our common citizenship is diminished. It has been said that the measure of a society is in how it treats its most vulnerable. To this I would add that an equally important but more difficult measure is in how it treats its most despised or reviled. Who knows who’s next?

Martin cries “shame” in his piece because polls say that most of us don’t care about Khadr. I am not prepared to believe that the polls give us anything more than a superficial snapshot on issues of such moral and emotional complexity. I am not ready to concede, as some have, that we have become so fragmented, so atomized, that we prefer such a thin and fragile notion of citizenship. On the other hand, when I put together the pieces I realize that I haven’t set out a very attractive political agenda: “Bring Khadr home.” “Let’s Raise Taxes’” “Give the Carbon Tax a Chance.” “Give Me Back My Long Form Census Questionnaire.” Not the stuff of a political campaign. It’s undoubtedly a tough sell, but wouldn’t it be nice to have a leader fight to enhance the value and meaning of our common citizenship, recognizing that we get what we pay for?

Jay Hill finished?

This just in: Conservative MP and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Jay Hill, has announced that he will not run for re-election. No word on who the Conservatives will appoint to Leader of the Gov. in the House should they win the next election.

Quiet day in politics

As slow as yesterday was, today is likely to be slower. No committee meetings, no press conferences, Liberals in Quebec, and the other leaders are no where to be found. The only remotely interesting thing happening is that StatsCan will be holding a town hall meeting today on the decision to scrap the mandatory long form census. But even that is internal only, meaning no press or public, only StatsCan personnel.

To combat this slow day, and show StatsCan we don't need their town hall meetings, CBC Politics will be hosting an online town hall meeting with a panel of experts. You can start submitting questions at 1 and the actual meeting will start at 2 with the panel of experts answering your questions.

Other than that, I fear that their wont be much to write about today. Enjoy the slow day people.

Industry meeting a success!

The Industry committee meeting today was a success. Yes all three of them! They were in camera unfortunately, meaning we don't know exactly went on. But we do know that the committee will reconvene next Tuesday, one week from today, to discuss the long form census. No word on the witness list yet, but we can probably assume that Industry Minister Tony Clement will be on it.