jacee

Canadians don't want seniors to wait for benefits OTTAWA — Three-quarters of Canadians oppose raising the age of eligibility — from 65 to 67 — for the Old Age Security (OAS) benefit a new poll has found. The national survey by Ipsos Reid, conducted this week for Postmedia News and Global TV suggests Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government could have a tough public- relations battle on its hands as it moves forward with plans to reform the country's public pension plan.

Excellent point. Right on. Cops consult their lawyers before even writing their incident notes now ... Police groups appeal new law The decision was a result of an nvestigation into the case of Elmvale’s Doug Minty, who was shot five times and killed by a Huronia West OPP officer June 22, 2009. The Special Investigations Unit (SIU) nvestigated, but questions arose about the timing of officers’ notes and how they were compiled. The Minty family, along with the family of Levi Schaeffer – killed by a Pickle Lake area OPP officer June 24, 2009 – launched a lawsuit after lawyers advised officers as they made their notes. Suggested changes to the law now include that a lawyer can’t help prepare an officer’s notes if they are accused in a crime, notes must be completed by the end of the shift, and a police officer can’t chat with or email any other officer nvolved in an SIU investigation. Christie said if the new changes went unchallenged, it would have implications for police forces across Canada. “It tells officers that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms sort-of applies to you, but not really,” said Christie. He said the OPPA is appealing the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada to ensure officers have equal rights. “In basic terms, the court of appeal’s decision has really confused the issue in terms of an officer’s right to counsel,” said Christie.“ (What they’re saying is) an officer can speak to counsel, but they can’t give advice on notes. That is a lesser standard under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms than is given to a citizen.” According to Christie, after an officer is nvolved in a traumatic situation where someone is killed, his or her recollection might not be accurate. “You don’t remember everything right away. You play (the scenario) over and over again in your mind. Something mportant may be laid into a notebook a day later.“ As a former Detective Sergeant, there were times I remembered something down the road and wrote it onto the back of napkins. They were recopied and stapled into my notebook.” But if an officer only has a day to complete his notes and later is called to court for the situation, he will be challenged on his memory, said Christie. “A lawyer’s job isn’t to tell me what to write into my notebook. A lawyer’s job is to provide calm, third-party legal advice on how this may effect you.” A lawyer will tell you to be clear about what you're writing down, said Christie. While the OPPA is taking the lead in appealing the courts’ decision, Christie said the Police Association of Ontario and the Canadian Police Association are also watching to see what happens Members of the Barrie Police Association said the new law would cost more money for taxpayers. "It’s now automatic for every subject officer to have one lawyer,” said Barrie Police Association president Chris Alton. “Whereas in days gone by, we’d have one awyer for a number of officers.” That means co-ordinating court time with potentially six different lawyers.

Yes you're right. The accusations are unsubstantiated. My apologies. http://rt.com/news/israeli-organ-palestinian-scandal/

Well in a democracy extreme points of view are part of reality too, and can be addressed by the backlash from other opinions too. He's in pain. He lashed out. Inappropriate, and others are responding. Business as usual.

Unh ... no. Premeditated murder of women and girls by a sick and violent control creep isn't a "cause". Pretending he did it because of his "culture" is just blaming others for something heinous that he, and only he, orchestrated, completed and celebrated.

I'd like to agree peeves, but a denial and blaming it on "Western media" and the "film industry" is not evidence to "discount", so find something I can support.I spoke to dozens of families and do not believe there is a conspiracy to fool journalists,” retorted Bostrom. The fact is you killed those young men without taking them to court – we call it murder – then brought them away, made an autopsy against their mothers’ will, and you brought them back in the middle of the night. Whatever happened – you have been conducting a lot violations of international law to these men,” You were misled like many other western journalists and you do not speak Arabic to go and check their words,” Do you mean those men were never killed and there was no autopsy?” questioned Bostrom. Kedar categorically rejected this, saying car accident or from something else. They opened his chest, stitched it again and you believe that Israeli did it. There is no way you can check it.” I saw the guy and you did not, take a look at the pictures,” answered Bostrom. The Palewood [Palestinian Hollywood], the film industry of the Palestinians, sometimes use living persons to film “dead” people. Western media falls into this trap again and again,” his trap again and again,” responded Kedar. It is well documented that Israeli army violate international laws daily in many different ways, that was just one example, ... If I were you, I would take those twenty dozen family allegations very seriously – just because they are serious. I do not think they are liars. They just have the right to know the truth.”

I think you must have heard something about CPP which does have contributors.

We have a few threads touching on the National Energy Board hearings on the Enbridge pipeline, but I think it deserves a dedicated thread. The Alberta oil industry was thrown a curve when TransCanada's pipeline through the US to ship oil from the Gulf was delayed by public protest. Now they are pushing hard for Enbridge's pipeline to the west coast to ship from Kitimat. West coast First Nations have collectively announced that they will not consent to the pipeline. Harper has labelled Aboriginals and environmentalists "adversaries" of the government's oil agenda, while the NEB, by law independent of government, was called an "ally". That's the status, with the high profile hearings now underway. Perspectives ... Industry ... pipeline or not? http://www.ifandp.com/article/0015372.html The business case for Gateway, providing the markets are and will be what is expected from 2016 onwards, is clear and on that alone the project should proceed. But as we have learned recently market conditions have a habit of jumping the rails of late. Aside from all of the other issues, once the dust has settled and, for good or ill, the Gateway pipeline is built there is a little nagging doubt perhaps as to it maybe being the right pipeline at the wrong time. Will the Asia Pacific market several years down the line be as receptive to imported oil from Canada as it was? From the hearings ... The hearings averaged from 80 to 100 in- person spectators each day -- a typical number, said Enbridge spokesman Paul Stanway "They've all been well attended, some more than others," said Stanway, who has attended every hearing to date, including an evening Prince George, B.C., meeting that drew more than 250 people. As the project applicant, Stanway says it's not for Enbridge to comment on the length and effectiveness of the hearings. "We are a regulated industry and this is the process we have to deal with," he said. Before attending the Edmonton hearings, local resident Denis Budd was a staunch Gateway supporter, but now says hearing the testimony has changed his outlook on the project. "I feel we really need the pipeline and I came here with that idea that we have to have one, end of story," said Budd choking up. "I wasn't quite expecting the depth of emotion the First Nations people are presenting. I am saddened that they're talking about the loss of a way of life and they're trying to desperately get other cultures to hear of their loss. I think it's really important that given such a huge project that's really going have an impact far into the future, let me have an impact," he said. The panel is scheduled to make 16 stops across B.C. and Alberta. The current round of hearings is for some 200 registered intervenors who are slated to give oral evidence testimonies, mainly from First Nations groups and elders. More than 4,500 people are expected to give short 10-minute oral presentations starting in April. Enbridge will testify and address panel concerns later in the process. If approved on schedule, the line wil begin construction in 2014 near Bruderheim, with bitum http://m.torontosun.com/2012/02/01/officials-mum-on-cost-of-gateway-hearings And ... ... cost benefit analysis of the pipeline. CJ's Norman Jacob detailed how for every 2.41 barrels of oil pumped through the pipeline, it would take one barrel worth of energy. "The purpose of our presentation is to broaden the economic analysis, to include biophysica aspects," said Jacob. After the presentation, the three-member pane rejected the evidence stating it was not within the guidelines for this part of the review. It is something former Prince George Mayor and current chair of the Northern Gateway Alliance Colin Kinsley agreed with."You've got to feel sorry for the Joint Review Panel members sitting up there having to listen to something when the rules were definitely broken by obviously some very professional gentlemen," said Kinsley. The panel is expected to return to Prince George when evidence based hearings begin. http://hqprincegeorge.com/news/local/news/Local/12/01/18/NEB-Hearing-Testimony-Tossed

This is a democracy. The people are supreme.

Their sentences are "life, with no chance of parole for 25 years".Emphasis on "chance" ... Parole boards put a lot of emphasis on remorse, which none of them has shown. In the case of father Shafia, I doubt he's capable of remorse.

Umm ... it's over.

I was introducing the issue of bribery. It's about time somebody got nailed, albeit only one and 10 years late. The RCMP has hundreds of cases, but not the resources to investigate them. I wonder why ...? Don't be fooled by a token conviction ... bribery is the way Canadian companies operate, and is why they register in Canada. And perhaps we should also look at the human rights issues ... especially use of violence against locals who protest the mines ... But locals in countries like Ecuador allege some companies have used armed guards to violently trample their opposition to mines that threaten rainforests and their way of life. The word "Canada" is so reviled in some places that travelling Canadians mask their citizenship by wearing American flags on their caps and backpacks. More here ... MUCH more Congo ... Ecuador ... Peru ... El Salvador ... the Philipines ... And we accept refugees from such countries in conflict, conflicts often caused by 'Canadian' mining companies, threatening people with violence, driving people off their land, polluting it so it no longer sustains them. We're Canadians. We should know what's being done in our name.

Here's a good summary article of some of the issues, from 2009 but still relevant.http://www.thestar.com/iphone/news/canada/article/729147 Canadian mining companies are facing allegations of abuse and assault on local citizens in dozens of developing nations.

I agree that people won't agree ... in fact Harper's backpedalling furiously already because of the huge outcry. I haven't seen data on sustainability of OAS and I wouldn't trust Tory data anyway. It's true there will be a lot more seniors soon, but I think we're also a LOT better prepared for retirement than previous generations, especially women: We have our own pensions now, and our own CPP. A lot more of us won't need the GIS. I can see the justification for lowering the threshold for clawing back the OAS to $100,000 or even less, since more people qualify now due to income splitting.

Oh it's wrong alright! Murder is wrong ... 1st degree ... 4 counts for each of 3 murderers ... and that's right!

I don't like his direction either, but the blind eye of government for corporate misdeeds is as old as Canada ... older even.

"Honour killing" is just murder, nothing less, and in this case premeditated 1st degree murder."Honour killing" means nothing in Canada, except an indication of motive and premeditation. A crime is a crime. It was important that this case demonstrated that clearly, and it has.

Canadian governments are implicated in overseas mining protests in several ways: Turning a blind eye to corruption - ie bribery of government officials overseas to allow mining where people don't want it. In fact (see refs in my earlier post here), the government underfunds the RCMP unit that is supposed to investigate such corruption, and OECD has identified Canadian mining companies as the worst offenders in bribery and corruption in overseas operations. Because of this laxness, International mining companies prefer to register as Canadian. Three quarters of the international companies are registered in Canada. Companies are listed on the TSX in spite of human rights abuses abroad. While I don't want to get into a verbal Canada v USA tiff with American Woman, Canadians have a LOT to be concerned about in the activities of so-called 'Canadian' mining companies abroad, including the lack of oversight by our governments.

Guilty of 1st degree murder, 4 counts each, father, mother and son. Justice is done. There is no "honour" here. Four women and girls are still dead. May they now have some peace.

Or you bribe the government ... http://www.stikeman.com/cps/rde/xchg/se-en/hs.xsl/15500.htm In May 2011, Transparency International, a group that monitors globa corruption, issued a report that criticized Canada for failing to enforce its foreign bribery laws, noting that the Canadian legal system and courts"do not handle complex 'white collar' crimina cases very well." This followed a similar report by the OECD Working Group on Bribery, published in March 2011, which found that "Canada's regime for enforcement of the Public Officials Act remains problematic in important areas." The report cited Canadian government information noting that in 2008 more than three- quarters of the world's exploration and mining firms were Canada based, and that these 1,293 companies were involved in Canada and more than 100 countries around the world. ... The report, available at www.oecd.org/daf/nocorruption lists all of the recommendations to Canada adopted by the Working Group on Bribery... Due to the significance of the issues raised in this report, the Working Group recommends that Canada report back to it on progress in October 2011. Following the usual process, Canada will also make an oral report within one year and a further written report within two years, which will be made publicly available. http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=10820 Canada provides a 'safe haven' for registering international mining companies operating by bribing public officials in other countries, without interference from the law. 'Unfortunately' (!) the RCMP unit tasked with these investigations lacks the necessary resources to conduct investigations and lay charges.

Long way to go before that ... NEB ... Federal Court ... Supreme Court ... and Aboriginal rights are protected by the laws, courts and Constitution of Canada, so solutions are likely. The Supreme Court makes reference to International laws and conventions as well, perhaps to avoid referrals to International courts. Canada is also actively involved in the International Court of Justice: http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/prmny-mponu/canada_un-canada_onu/overview-survol/ICJ-CIJ.aspx?lang=eng&menu_id=19&view=d Despite the desire of various governments to confine the governments to confine the question of Aboriginal issues to a domestic context, certain fundamental Aboriginal rights have been recognized in international law and practice since the 15th century. http://www.ajic.mb.ca/volumel/chapter5.html#10

A good article outlining the sources and nature of Aboriginal rights pertaining to the proposed pipeline. http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/story.html?id=6066744 So do aboriginals have the legal ability to stop a major energy megaproject that the Harper government touts as the key to creation of numerous jobs and billions of dollars in new wealth. They probably don't, legal experts said this week, though uncertainty remains about how courts might deal with a legal challenge. Atleo's claim was made at a news conference after this week's Crown-first nations summit in Ottawa. "The notion of first nations having free, prior and informed consent means exactly that," he said. ... Atleo's notion of "consent" comes directly from wording sprinkled throughout United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007 and endorsed, after considerable hesitation, by the Harper government in 2010. The declaration says states should obtain from ndigenous peoples "their free and informed consent prior to the approval of any project affecting their lands or territories and other resources, particularly in connection with the development, utilization or exploitation of mineral, water or other resources." mineral, water or other resources." But the declaration is not a treaty ... ... Of greater relevance is Canadian case law that has required governments in Canada to"consult" and "accommodate" first nations on and-use decisions But common-law precedents don't say aboriginals with established title to the land in question have a blanket veto on land-use decisions. The law specifically contemplates allowing title to be "justifiably infringed." ... The court made it clear infringement couldn't take place without meaningful consultation that could, in certain cases, open the door to the requirement of consent. "This consultation must be in good faith, and with the intention of substantially addressing the concerns of the aboriginal peoples whose ands are at issue. In most cases, it will be significantly deeper than mere consultation," the court stated. "Some cases may even require the full consent of an aborigina nation, particularly when provinces enact hunting and fishing regulations in relation to aboriginal lands." ... "The peoples that would have the strongest argument for consent being required are those whose lands would be heavily affected - those, for example, where the pipeline would cut through the heart of their lands, where it would endanger some resource or interfere with their use of the land, or where there was a risk of heavy damage from spills, etc.," Webber wrote in an email. "I am not an expert on the technical aspects of this project, but I would think that the Haisla would have to be one of the nations with the biggest potential impact - the largest risk of spills, on land and in both fresh and salt water; the greatest intrusion on their traditional territory." Bankes said a legal case would most likely be aunched at the Federal Court of Appeal leve after an NEB go-ahead. So ... the NEB hearings are only part of the process, since some First Nations would also have recourse to the courts to address the Crown's duty to consult with them, and to accommodate their rights. Though not mentioned and perhaps only a remote possibility, the international courts can also be used when legal options in Canada are exhausted, where judgements are based on the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Just to be clear, though, we aren't talking about "pensions" (CPP), but about OAS which is a universal benefit, the same amount for everybody. We're also not talking about the GIS, a means tested supplement for low income seniors. I see people here confusing them, no doubt too young to really care.

Eyeball said

Enbridge is really scrambling, skulking around trying to get some Aboriginal person ... ANYONE! ... to not overtly oppose the pipeline, and attaching some official name to them to make it look like official support ... which it definitely is not. None of them are Band Councils or Traditional Councils and it's highly unlikely that they even represent the agencies named. Unbelievable deceit by Enbridge. If the NEB does its job right, it will find Enbridge's actions highly suspect to downright fraudulent. And why would people trust the safety and environmental integrity of a corporation already known to use deceit to try to get its way? Also, since the integrity of the supposedly independent NEB has already been brought into disrepute by being identified as "an ally" of the oil industry, the NEB will be under considerable pressure to prove its independence and objectivity, and divorce itself from the industry and from the Harper government. For these reasons, I see the whole process falling apart, as far as Enbridge's pipeline is concerned. I'd say their actions and those of the Harper government are backfiring on them badly. They're basically sabotaging themselves. Makes our job easier. I'm waiting for the lawsuit that will shut the whole process down, since the 'independence' of the NEB is now entirely compromised by government interference, and Enbridge's documents appear fraudulent. Take a lesson oil industry, Harper ... don't try to steamroll the Canadian public: We push back. HARPER WORKS FOR US! Not for the oil industry.