Archive for October, 2007

Straight-talk down under

Thursday, October 18th, 2007

When it comes to national security and fighting terrorism the Howard government in Australia doesn’t seem too concerned about putting aside political correctness.

AUSTRALIA’S Muslim leaders have been “read the riot act” over the need to denounce any links between Islam and terrorism.

The Howard Government’s multicultural spokesman, Andrew Robb, yesterday told an audience of 100 imams who address Australia’s mosques that these were tough times requiring great personal resolve.

Mr Robb also called on them to shun a victim mentality that branded any criticism as discrimination.

“We live in a world of terrorism where evil acts are being regularly perpetrated in the name of your faith,” Mr Robb said at the Sydney conference.

“And because it is your faith that is being invoked as justification for these evil acts, it is your problem.

Complete article.

Bravo!

Liberal woes laid bare

Sunday, October 14th, 2007

In a recent post by Victor Wong he draws attention to some of the navel gazing the federal Liberal party is enduring.

A quote from “Susan”, a disillusioned Liberal:

Then new people would join the Liberals and keep alive what the Liberals have always stood for: a strong united Canada, a strong central government that respects the provinces and works with them as a group, social justice, the Charter, peacekeeping not war making, genuine respect for women and minorities, medicare for all, daycare for all, government subsidized research and innovation, support for the arts, respect for culture, strong ties with Europe, caution in dealings with the US, and a deft hand at economic stability and innovation – among many other values and approaches.

Victor states:

The biggest problem with her “list of Liberal values” is that it’s all sloganeering: they all sound grand and appealing, but if you examine them closely you’ll realize that their actual meaning is so ambiguous as to be worthless, as a guiding philosophy. It also has the disadvantage of not being particularly distinguishable from other parties such as the NDP. Hence, it’s not compelling enough to really attract new members.

I’m not so sure that Liberal values even sound “grand and appealing”. It’s all pretty much thinly veiled anti-Americanism and socialism-light. Shudder.

The debate surrounding faith-based funding is not over

Sunday, October 14th, 2007

I don’t expect to see the faith-based funding issue in Ontario to go away quietly now that the election is behind us. John Tory not only let the genie out of the bottle as it related to the PC election campaign, he has also planted the issue squarely in the lap of the McGuinty Liberals to do something about the existing religious discrimination. Andrew Coyne posted an accurate assessment of some of the underlying motives (and the ugly side) of the debate:

Just to be clear — it probably is true that having kids of different backgrounds mix together at school contributes to greater social harmony. It’s also fair, in light of experience, to worry about what might be taught at the odd madrassa. What’s wrong is to draw a straight line from funding a few religious schools, with appropriate safeguards, to a total breakdown in social cohesion. What’s wrong is to whip this up into the single central issue of the campaign, as if there were some enormous crisis at hand. It’s the difference between legitimate concern and fearmongering — especially fearmongering directed, explicitly or implicitly, at a vulnerable minority. It’s the difference between statesmanship and demagoguery.

Source.

And now McGuinty will have to face increased pressure for withdrawing public funds from Catholic schools:

The new Liberal Government must not ignore the wishes of the distinct majority of Ontario’s citizens who, during the provincial election, expressed their objection to the funding of any faith-base education scheme through the public purse.

Failure to heed the voice of the people will be seen as much more than a necessary broken promise more like a democratic betrayal.

Source.

Good luck with that, Mr. McGuinty.

Thoughts on the Ontario election and referendum

Thursday, October 11th, 2007

The results of yesterday’s Ontario provincial election will return a Premier who broke almost every promise he made to us his last time out. The result has sent a message to politicians across the province – that broken promises are okay. Who sent that message? We the people.

Voter cynicism and apathy is at it’s highest level ever. We simply don’t care enough. I don’t know the exact figure but I’m guessing the turnout yesterday was around 50%. That’s not healthy.

Our elected leaders will start improving when more Canadians start getting up, paying attention, and casting ballots.

Thankfully the referendum question looking at reforming our electoral system was defeated. If there is a problem with our democracy it’s not so much “how” we elect members but rather “who” we elect as members.

For an interesting read on some of the reactions across Canada have a look at the comments posted on Small Dead Animals.

Let’s not forget

Monday, October 8th, 2007

With the Ontario election almost behind us, and with federal election talk heating up, let’s remind ourselves what was going on in this country leading up to the last election in 2006.

Linda Williamson gave us “218 reasons NOT to vote for the Liberals

Hat tip to Bruce Randall over at SDA.

Privatize the LCBO – What is the downside?

Tuesday, October 2nd, 2007

Having travelled a fair bit in the last little while, I’ve become increasingly disturbed by the LCBO monopoly here in Ontario. What’s with that anyway?

Chaired by a former director of the Liquor Control Board of Ontario, the review unanimously urged privatization as the best way to improve consumer service and choice without any loss of monopoly money to government. As for the booze babysitting role, “extensive government ownership and operation of the system are not necessary to maintain social responsibility,” it concluded

Source.