Ontario Conservatives to dump radioactive waste in prime farmland

Doug Ford.

The name brings fear to the minds of many people in Ontario.

Doug Ford is the Premier of Ontario, and he is a jerk. A real nasty jerk. He wants to dump nuclear waste in Bruce County, close to the town of Teeswater. The Teeswater River (and the underground aquifer beneath the region) supplies the drinking water to:

  • Tens of thousands of people.
  • Dairy cows.
  • Water for agricultural farming (corn, potatoes, soy beans and more).
  • Water for Aquafina bottled water.
  • Cattle, pigs, turkeys and chickens. Bruce County is the Beef Capital of North America, but it also produces a lot of other meat products.

If you live Ontario you've eaten food many times from Bruce County. Guaranteed. You've drank the milk. You've eaten the cheese. You've eaten beef, pork, turkey and chicken. You've eaten the corn, the potatoes, the soy products. You've drank Aquafina water.

Even if you are a vegan and don't eat milk and dairy, you should still care where your soy products and other vegetables are grown and where your bottled water comes from.

And that is why you should care.

If you care about what you eat, then you should protect what you eat. Learn more at:

https://www.protectsouthbruce-nodgr.org/

If you care write to Doug Ford. Tweet him. Phone him and leave an angry voicemail.

Share this post. Copy/paste it to other websites. Share it on Facebook. Share it on Twitter. Share the memes below.

Show that you care about your food and where it comes from.

Protect your food and your health from Doug Ford.





Canadian government spying on you

THE NEWS

A top secret document retrieved by U.S. whistleblower Edward Snowden and obtained by CBC News shows that Canada's electronic spy agency used information from the free internet service at a major Canadian airport to track the wireless devices of thousands of ordinary airline passengers for days after they left the terminal.

After reviewing the document, one of Canada's foremost authorities on cyber-security says the clandestine operation by the Communications Security Establishment Canada (CSEC) was almost certainly illegal.

Ronald Deibert told CBC News: "I can't see any circumstance in which this would not be unlawful, under current Canadian law, under our Charter, under CSEC's mandates."

The spy agency is supposed to be collecting primarily foreign intelligence by intercepting overseas phone and internet traffic, and is prohibited by law from targeting Canadians or anyone in Canada without a judicial warrant.

As CSEC chief John Forster recently stated: "I can tell you that we do not target Canadians at home or abroad in our foreign intelligence activities, nor do we target anyone in Canada.

"In fact, it's prohibited by law. Protecting the privacy of Canadians is our most important principle."

But security experts who have been apprised of the document point out the airline passengers in a Canadian airport were clearly in Canada.

CSEC said in a written statement to CBC News that it is "mandated to collect foreign signals intelligence to protect Canada and Canadians. And in order to fulfill that key foreign intelligence role for the country, CSEC is legally authorized to collect and analyze metadata."

Metadata reveals a trove of information including, for example, the location and telephone numbers of all calls a person makes and receives — but not the content of the call, which would legally be considered a private communication and cannot be intercepted without a warrant.

"No Canadian communications were (or are) targeted, collected or used," the agency says.

In the case of the airport tracking operation, the metadata apparently identified travelers' wireless devices, but not the content of calls made or emails sent from them.
Black Code

Deibert is author of the book Black Code: Inside the Battle for Cyberspace, which is about internet surveillance, and he heads the world-renowned Citizen Lab cyber research program at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs.

He says that whatever CSEC calls it, the tracking of those passengers was nothing less than an "indiscriminate collection and analysis of Canadians' communications data," and he could not imagine any circumstances that would have convinced a judge to authorize it.

The latest Snowden document indicates the spy service was provided with information captured from unsuspecting travellers' wireless devices by the airport's free Wi-Fi system over a two-week period.

Experts say that probably included many Canadians whose smartphone and laptop signals were intercepted without their knowledge as they passed through the terminal.

The document shows the federal intelligence agency was then able to track the travellers for a week or more as they — and their wireless devices — showed up in other Wi-Fi "hot spots" in cities across Canada and even at U.S. airports.

That included people visiting other airports, hotels, coffee shops and restaurants, libraries, ground transportation hubs, and any number of places among the literally thousands with public wireless internet access.

The document shows CSEC had so much data it could even track the travellers back in time through the days leading up to their arrival at the airport, these experts say.

While the documents make no mention of specific individuals, Deibert and other cyber experts say it would be simple for the spy agency to have put names to all the Canadians swept up in the operation.

All Canadians with a smartphone, tablet or laptop are "essentially carrying around digital dog tags as we go about our daily lives," Deibert says.

Anyone able to access the data that those devices leave behind on wireless hotspots, he says, can obtain "extraordinarily precise information about our movements and social relationships."
Trial run for NSA

The document indicates the passenger tracking operation was a trial run of a powerful new software program CSEC was developing with help from its U.S. counterpart, the National Security Agency.

In the document, CSEC called the new technologies "game-changing," and said they could be used for tracking "any target that makes occasional forays into other cities/regions."

Sources tell CBC News the technologies tested on Canadians in 2012 have since become fully operational.

CSEC claims "no Canadian or foreign travellers' movements were 'tracked,'" although it does not explain why it put the word "tracked" in quotation marks.

Deibert says metadata is "way more powerful than the content of communications. You can tell a lot more about people, their habits, their relationships, their friendships, even their political preferences, based on that type of metadata."

The document does not say exactly how the Canadian spy service managed to get its hands on two weeks' of travellers' wireless data from the airport Wi-Fi system, although there are indications it was provided voluntarily by a "special source."

The country's two largest airports — Toronto and Vancouver — both say they have never supplied CSEC or other Canadian intelligence agency with information on passengers' Wi-Fi use.

Alana Lawrence, a spokesperson for the Vancouver Airport Authority, says it operates the free Wi-Fi there, but does "not in any way store any personal data associated with it," and has never received a request from any Canadian intelligence agency for it.

A U.S.-based company, Boingo, is the largest independent supplier of Wi-Fi services at other Canadian airports, including Pearson International in Toronto.

Spokesperson Katie O'Neill tells CBC News: "To the best of our knowledge, [Boingo] has not provided any information about any of our users to the Canadian government, law enforcement or intelligence agencies."

It is also unclear from the document how CSEC managed to penetrate so many wireless systems to see who was using them — specifically, to know every time someone targeted at the airport showed up on one of those other Wi-Fi networks elsewhere.

Deibert and other experts say the federal intelligence agency must have gained direct access to at least some of the country's main telephone and internet pipelines, allowing the mass-surveillance of Canadian emails and phone calls.
'Blown away'

Ontario's privacy commissioner Ann Cavoukian says she is "blown away" by the revelations.

"It is really unbelievable that CSEC would engage in that kind of surveillance of Canadians. Of us.

"I mean that could have been me at the airport walking around… This resembles the activities of a totalitarian state, not a free and open society."

Experts say the document makes clear CSEC intended to share both the technologies and future information generated by it with Canada's official spying partners — the U.S., Britain, New Zealand and Australia, the so-called Five Eyes intelligence network.

Indeed, the spy agency boasts in its leaked document that, in an apparently separate pilot project, it obtained access to two communications systems with more than 300,000 users, and was then able to "sweep" an entire mid-sized Canadian city to pinpoint a specific imaginary target in a fictional kidnapping.

The document dated May 2012 is a 27-page power-point presentation by CSEC describing its airport tracking operation.

While the document was in the trove of secret NSA files retrieved by Snowden, it bears CSEC's logo and clearly originated with the Canadian spy service.

Wesley Wark, a renowned authority on international security and intelligence, agrees with Deibert.

"I cannot see any way in which it fits CSEC's legal mandate."

Wark says the document suggests CSEC was "trying to push the technological boundaries" in part to impress its other international counterparts in the Five-Eyes intelligence network.

"This document is kind of suffused with the language of technological gee-whiz."

Wark says if CSEC's use of "very powerful and intrusive technological tools" puts it outside its mandate and even the law, "then you are in a situation for democracy where you simply don't want to be."

Like Wark and other experts interviewed for this story, Deibert says there's no question Canada needs CSEC to be gathering foreign intelligence, "but they must do it within a framework of proper checks and balances so their formidable powers can never be abused. And that's the missing ingredient right now in Canada."

The only official oversight of CSEC's spying operations is a retired judge appointed by the prime minister, and reporting to the minister of defence who is also responsible for the intelligence agency.

"Here we clearly have an agency of the state collecting in an indiscriminate and bulk fashion all of Canadian communications and the oversight mechanism is flimsy at best," Deibert says.

"Those to me are circumstances ripe for potential abuse."

CSEC spends over $400 million a year, and employs about 2,000 people, almost half of whom are involved in intercepting phone conversations, and hacking into computer systems supposedly in other countries.

It has long been Canada's most secretive spy agency, responding to almost all questions about its operations with reassurances it is doing nothing wrong.

Privacy watchdog Cavoukian says there has to be "greater openness and transparency because without that there can be no accountability.

"This trust-me model that the government is advancing and CSEC is advancing – 'Oh just trust us, we're doing the right thing, don't worry' — yes, worry! We have very good reason to worry."

In the U.S., Snowden exposed massive metadata collection by the National Security Agency, which is said to have scooped up private phone and internet records of more than 100 million Americans.

A U.S. judge recently called the NSA's metadata collection an Orwellian surveillance program that is likely unconstitutional.

The public furor over NSA snooping prompted a White House review of the American spy agency's operations, and President Barack Obama recently vowed to clamp down on the collection and use of metadata.

Cavoukian says Canadians deserve nothing less.

"Look at the U.S. — they've been talking about these matters involving national security for months now very publicly because the public deserves answers.

"And that's what I would tell our government, our minister of national defence and our prime minister: We demand some answers to this."

COMMENTARY

Honestly, we're not surprised. But we do think it is definitely illegal for the government to be tracking its citizens this way.

And if this is meant to curb terrorism, where is the proof that this actually stops terrorists?

Tories spied on private NDP meeting

CANADA - A budding coalition between New Democrats, the separatist Bloc Quebecois and Liberals is an exercise in nation building, NDP Leader Jack Layton told his caucus in a conference call covertly recorded by the government.

Layton's national unity musings were secretly recorded Saturday by the Conservatives. They held the tape for a day and then had an official from the Prime Minister's Office deliver it to various media on Sunday.

"The 'Coalition for Canada,' I love the idea – (but it) could be a deal-breaker for the Bloc," Layton is heard saying to laughter.

"'The Coalition for Canada and Quebec?"' he adds, to more laughter.

Layton, however, appears deadly serious when he pitches the coalition as a potentially unifying force in federal politics.

"Nothing could be better for our country than to have the 50 (BQ) members out of 75 who've been elected in Quebec actually helping to make Canada a better place. We just approach it on that basis and say, 'We're willing to make that happen. Here are the things we're going to be investing in and transforming together.'

"If they're willing to work with us, we're willing to accept that offer."

The NDP said Sunday it may pursue criminal charges after the Conservatives covertly listened in, taped and distributed audio of Saturday's closed-door strategy session.

There no wiretap crime under the Criminal Code of Canada if someone is invited to participate in a conference call and then releases the recording publicly.

A spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper said an unnamed Conservative had been "invited" to participate on the call.

"Maybe the invitation was meant for the Bloc, and they accidentally invited us," said Dimitri Soudas. The NDP deny any Conservatives were invited. The conference call was meant for NDP only.

Two disparate segments of the recording totalling about 15 minutes were delivered Sunday. The senior PMO official distributing the recordings suggested more will be revealed later this week.

The Conservative take is that Layton's comments show he began conspiring with the Bloc for months to bring down Canada's elected government – long before last week's economic update that precipitated the current crisis of confidence in the Harper minority government.

The recording is more ambiguous.

In a discussion over concerns that the Bloquistes will be "offside" on issues, Layton said that's already been taken into account and strategies have been developed to avoid policy conflict.

"I actually believe they're the least of our problems," he said.

"This whole thing wouldn't have happened if the moves hadn't been made with the Bloc to lock them in early because you couldn't put three people together in three hours.

"The first part was done a long time ago. I won't go into details."

Layton suggests reluctant Liberals may be a bigger problem, and he exhorts his MPs to organize public rallies this Thursday and not wait for other coalition partners to do the work.

"Chances are there are a bunch of Liberals in the other ridings on whom we want pressure placed," he's heard saying.

As far back as 2004, it's known that Layton, Duceppe and Stephen Harper – then the leader of the Opposition – held a "close consultation" on what would happen if they could defeat the Liberal minority of Paul Martin.

The three leaders co-signed a letter to then governor general Adrienne Clarkson asking her to "consider all your options" if the Liberal government fell.

And during last year's raucous parliamentary session, the Bloc and NDP regularly voted non-confidence in the Conservatives while the Liberals abstained or supported the minority government.

NDP MP Thomas Mulcair said the Tories are panicking and desperate to change the channel on their economic management.

The recording, he said, is a breach of parliamentary rules. NDP lawyers are examining if the tapes break the Criminal Code.

As for the substance of the call, Mulcair said the talks with the Bloc were perfectly normal consultations between parties in a minority government. They began only after the government's economic update was delivered last Thursday, he said.

Layton is heard downplaying the policy questions that could plague a coalition of such disparate party interests, saying everyone will have to curb their wish list.

"What we really want is just to get Harper out and get this new group in because it's going to be a hell of a lot better for everything we believe in. Correct? Correct!"

And he warned his caucus not to be defensive because the coalition represents the majority of Canadian voters.

"You can see where Harper's going here," said Layton.

"He's going to say it's the socialists and the separatists and the opportunists getting together. Those are their talking points and so we just need to push back."

Layton ridiculed the Conservatives over the issue Sunday night at an Ontario NDP event in Toronto.

"It's entirely possible the Conservative party is recording what I'm saying here right now," Layton told the partisan audience. "Here's what I have to say to the Conservative party tuned in: 'good riddance to you!' "

Breaking the Atlantic Accord

In 2005, Prime Minister Paul Martin signed the Offshore Agreements with Newfoundland & Labrador and Nova Scotia, guaranteeing that these provinces would receive 100 per cent protection from claw backs resulting from increased non-renewable resource revenue. The agreements were set to run from 2005 until 2020.

The Offshore Agreements are commonly referred to as the Atlantic Accord.

During the 2006 federal election campaign, Stephen Harper pledged, if elected, to uphold the accord.

In a letter to Premier Danny Williams of Newfoundland and Labrador dated January 4, 2006, Stephen Harper wrote:

“We will remove non-renewable natural resource revenue from the equalization formula to encourage the development of economic growth in the nonrenewable resource sectors across Canada. The Conservative government will ensure that no province is adversely affected from changes to the equalization formula.”

The Conservative MP from St. John’s East, Norman Doyle, in an interview with the CBC in October 2006, underscored that the Conservative government would honour the terms of the agreement, saying, “the Atlantic Accord will not be adjusted. It's written in stone.”

Mr. Doyle added, “…it's signed, sealed, delivered, and it's something that the province need not have any fear.”

A year after the Conservatives formed government, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty continued to assure the public that the agreements would be upheld in forthcoming federal budgets. Mr. Flaherty told reporters in St. John's, “I can say, as the prime minister has said, that we will respect the Atlantic Accords. That is firm; we'll continue to do that."

But in the 2007 federal budget, the Harper government introduced a fiscal cap that effectively eliminated the claw back protection negotiated in 2005.

It also required Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia to abandon the framework of the Atlantic Accord in order to benefit from 100 per cent exclusion of non-renewable resource revenue from the equalization formula.

Though the change in policy sparked outrage in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador, the Harper government maintained that it would not fix its broken promise.

Nova Scotia Conservative MP Bill Casey refused to vote in favour the 2007 budget and was expelled from the Conservative Caucus as a result. Mr. Casey explained his action saying, “It was obvious to me that we weren't going to get the accord restored. I told the prime minister I was going to vote against it unless it was restored, and I did. I just think the government of Canada should honour a signed contract, and if they don't, we haven't got much to work with."

Among Conservatives, Mr. Casey was alone in his rebellion, but not in his views. An unnamed senior Conservative admitted that “dropping a sledgehammer on two of the provinces that endorsed you at the last election is not exactly the way to say 'thank you' on a file that clearly touches a chord in Atlantic Canada.”

Editorial opinion in the region was also damning. One writer said, “whatever else you say about the Harper Conservatives — whether you believe they have broken their election promise or whether you believe they are outright liars — you can certainly say one thing: they can’t seem to get their story straight when it comes to how the federal budget will affect this province, and just what it is they plan to do about that.”

The most outspoken opponent of the federal government has been Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams. In a speech delivered on September 10, 2008, Premier Williams said:

“Stephen Harper's own campaign literature proclaimed, ‘There is no greater fraud than a promise not kept.’ He used these words as he successfully attempted to woo voters from this province to not vote for the opposing party. Naively we trusted him. He rewarded that trust with a broken promise. According to his own brochure, he is a fraud.”

Mulroney-Schreiber Scandal

The Mulroney-Schreiber scandal refers to the complex personal, political and business relationship between the Rt. Hon Brian Mulroney, 18th Prime Minister of Canada, and Karlheinz Schreiber, a German-born Canadian businessman.

At the heart of this scandal are the cash payments made by Karlheinz Schreiber to Brian Mulroney in 1993, allegedly agreed to while Mulroney was still Prime Minister, with the first of the three cash payments occurring while Mulroney was still a Member of Parliament. Mr. Mulroney contends these payments were for work he did internationally, lobbying on behalf of Thyssen Armoured Vehicles, a German company represented by Schreiber. Mr. Schreiber maintains the payments were for work Mr. Mulroney was to do lobbying the Canadian government. There is a question as to whether lobbying the Canadian government of Members of Parliament on behalf of the Thyssen corporation would have constituted a violation of the conflict of interest or post employment code in force at the time as well as the Parliament of Canada Act.

The Harper government had long been aware that allegations existed concerning Mr. Mulroney and his relationship with Karlheinz Schreiber. Prime Minister Harper was present with Mr. Mulroney at the Greenest Prime Minister Awards when Mulroney was questioned by journalists specifically about the cash payments he received from Schreiber.

Despite this, the Harper government continued its close association with Brian Mulroney, allowing him wide-ranging access to members of Cabinet, allowing him to be a successful advocate on many files, including telecommunications for his employer, Quebecor. Indeed, Prime Minister Harper claimed to regularly consult Mulroney as a political advisor, and Harper cabinet minister Marjory Lebreton was said to be in daily phone contact with Brian Mulroney.

On November 8th, 2007, Karlheinz Schreiber filed an affidavit in Federal Court in Toronto detailing his extensive relationship with Brian Mulroney over many years, including the meetings with Mulroney while he was Prime Minister, and the cash payments he made to Mr. Mulroney It was also revealed that Mr. Schreiber had made many of these same allegations in a March 2007 letter to Prime Minister Harper.

On November 9th, Stephen Harper called a press conference announcing that members of the government should cease their dealings with Brian Mulroney, and that he was engaging Dr. David Johnson to recommend whether a public inquiry into the allegations was warranted. Days later, after Mr. Mulroney himself said he welcomed an inquiry, Mr. Harper yielded to opposition demands and agreed to call a judicial inquiry.

Dr. Johnson reported on Monday, April 7th, recommending a limited inquiry into the affair. He even suggested the inquiry commissioner might want to make the hearings more "efficient" by holding parts of the probe in secret. Responding to the report, Government House Leader Peter Van Loan told reporters, "We will be acting on the recommendations that Professor Johnston has provided and a commissioner should be appointed very soon.".

The government then delayed appointing a commissioner for another 66 days likely to ensure that an inquiry could not be up an running until 2009, well after an expected fall election.

On June 12th, 2008 the government appointed Jeffrey Oliphant, associate chief justice of Manitoba's Court of Queen's Bench to head the judicial inquiry.

The Oliphant inquiry is not scheduled to begin until February 2009. Richard Wolson, the Winnipeg lawyer serving as chief counsel to the probe, says he and his staff face a huge amount of work compiling and analyzing documentary evidence before they can put any witnesses on the stand.

The Tory In and Out Scam

The "In and Out" Scam refers to a practice used by the Conservative Party during the 2006 election campaign. It is alleged the party’s national headquarters transferred money to local riding associations, who, through pre-signed bank transfers, immediately transferred the money back as payments for campaign advertising. Elections Canada has ruled that these ads expenses could not legitimately be claimed as expenses of the local candidates and the independent Commissioner of Elections is investigating whether this scheme allowed Stephen Harper's Conservatives to exceed national campaign spending limits by approximately $1 million. After the campaign, Conservative candidates who participated in the money transfers also attempted to claim taxpayer-financed refunds for 60 per cent of these national advertising costs, claiming they were "local" expenses.

In the course of routine audits of local campaign financing after the 2006 election, Elections Canada identified 67 campaigns that appeared to have participated in the scheme. In 2007, the audit led William Corbett Commissioner of Elections Canada to launch an investigation into the activities as it appeared that more that $1 million spent by the Conservative Party on national advertising had been transferred through local campaigns in an attempt to disguise the spending as local expenses.

In one example, the local campaign to elect now-Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon in his Ottawa-area riding of Pontiac appeared to partially underwrite television ads that ran in in the Quebec City market, nearly 500 kilometres away. As well, Elections Canada auditors interviewed numerous local Conservative campaign officials who said they did not know what type of advertising they had paid for, and that these transactions were arranged by the national party.

On April 15, 2008, the RCMP executed a search warrant at Conservative Party Headquarters on behalf of the Elections Commissioner in order to seize documents related to this investigation. Commenting on the raid in Question Period that same day, House Leader Peter Van Loan and Prime Minister Stephen Harper claimed the Conservative Party of Canada was “cooperating fully” and “provided every document that has been requested by Elections Canada…”.

The search warrant request states that the Elections Commissioner believes the Conservative Party of Canada and its official agent, the Conservative Fund of Canada, violated the Canada Elections Act. The warrant alleges that not only did the party exceed the maximum amount allowed for election expenses but the Conservative Fund may also have filed financial returns "that it knew or ought reasonably to have known contained a materially false or misleading statements."

Since August 2007, Conservative MPs have roadblocked all attempts by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs to investigate the alleged "In and Out" activities. On July 15, 2008, after almost a year of filibustering, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics began studying the advertising scheme. Testifying before the Committee, Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand said Elections Canada’s investigation showed the Conservative Party of Canada was alone in its “in and out” financing scheme taking them over the campaign financing limit. The Conservative party alone transferred money to local candidates and then back to the central campaign, often coupled with other factors including local candidates' lack of knowledge about the expenses and lack of documentation. With regard to the other political parties, Mr. Mayrand also confirmed Elections Canada had “not identified any other transaction or group of transactions in which all of the factors [evidence of campaign financing violations]... were at play."

In subsequent Committee hearings, Doug Finley, the Conservative campaign chair, was escorted out by security for appearing at a time in which he was not scheduled and after refusing to leave. Other Conservative witnesses, despite receiving summonses to appear, refused to show. Some witnesses claimed the Conservatives had contacted them and informed them they didn’t “have to come” or discouraged them from appearing. Critics slammed the Conservatives for their actions in Committee, calling them an attack on democracy. One former Conservative candidate testified: “When I joined that party, I believed its vision at the time. I came to the realization they don't have as much integrity as they claim."

Fired and Muzzled Officials

Prime Minister Harper has had frequent differences of opinion with high level bureaucrats and officers of Parliament. Almost invariably he has responded by muzzling, firing, or refusing to reappoint them to their positions, rather than allowing professional public servants to perform their duties on behalf of Canadians.

Confrontations between the Prime Minister and many of Canada’s senior public servants began soon after his first cabinet was sworn in and continued up until the dissolution of parliament.

* Spring 2006 – Allan Amey, President of the Canada Emission Reduction Incentives Agency, created to oversee federal compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, was fired and the agency dismantled.
* September 2006 – Yves Le Bouthillier, President of the Law Commission of Canada, fired after all federal government funding for the Commission was eliminated.
* September 2006 – Andrew Okulitch, scientist with the Geological Survey of Canada, fired for objecting to an order to turn federal correspondence into political propaganda by injecting a mandatory reference praising "Canada's new government." After much public outrage, the government was forced to reverse its position and reinstate Mr. Okulitch.
* September 2006 – Jack Anawak, Ambassador of Circumpolar Affairs, fired after his position was eliminated. As recently as August 2007, northern Canadian leaders were urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper to revive the role.
* September 2006 – Karen Kraft Sloan, Ambassador for the Environment, fired after her position was eliminated. Although the Conservatives tried to backtrack, claiming they made a mistake when they announced that they cut the position, the position remains unfilled.
* December 19, 2006 – Canadian Wheat Board CEO Adrian Measner was fired for refusing to support the government’s plans to end single desk marketing for barley. Furthermore, in the referendum calling for a single desk system, the Harper government refused to allow the CWB to choose sides.
* March 2007 – Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro "resigned" after several run-ins with Prime Minister Harper over investigations of the appointment of Trade Minister David Emerson and, when the Conservatives were in opposition, an affair involving MP Gurmant Grewal.
* March 2007– Jean-Guy Fleury, Chairman of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), resigned because of the government's attempt to politicize the IRB. Soon after, his entire Advisory Panel followed him, making it explicit in a public statement that they were quitting because of the government's actions.
* December 2007 – Yves Cote, Ombudsman for the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces, “resigned” only two years into a five-year appointment after months of not seeing eye-to-eye with the government. The Conservatives had also staunchly opposed his appointment when they were in opposition despite the fact that Mr. Cote was a career public servant with no connection to any party and had served the best interests of the men and women of the Canadian Forces for years.
* January 2008 – Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission President Linda Keen was fired for refusing to allow a nuclear reactor to operate under unsafe conditions.
* March 2008 – National Science Advisor Dr. Arthur Carty was marginalized, ignored, and ultimately pushed out of office by completely eliminating the position.
* May 2008 – Auditor General Sheila Fraser was told that all of her communications products must first be vetted by the Prime Minister’s Office.

Plagiarizing Australian PM John Howard

On March 17, 2003, former Prime Minister Jean Chretien announced in the House of Commons that Canada would not send troops to Iraq. That same day, U.S. President George W. Bush announced in an address to the nation that Saddam Hussein must leave Iraq within 48 hours.

The next day, on March 18, former Australian Prime Minister John Howard delivered an address to the Australian House of Representatives to express support for sending Australian troops to Iraq – one of only four nations in the world to do so.

On March 20, the United States-led invasion began – without the backing of NATO – with U.S. forces launching their “shock-and-awe” bombing raid on Baghdad.

Later that day, Canadian Alliance leader Stephen Harper – then leader of the Official Opposition – delivered an address in the House of Commons. It was in response to a motion of the Bloc Quebecois which had called for Canada to stay out of the war. He later voted against the motion.

Almost half of Mr. Harper’s speech was an exact word-for-word replicate of Mr. Howard’s speech given less than two days earlier.

Mr. Harper also used that plagiarized speech as a basis for several editorials on the subject.

Mr. Harper’s desire to join George W. Bush’s “Coalition of the Willing” was widely condemned. And history has shown that condemnation to be well-targeted.

Followers