Sunday, October 05, 2008

Nanos Knows Best

Conservatives are losing ground compared to the last election. Who is picking it up? Answer: The undecided and the NDP. Conservative voters are looking for a new home.

Last Election / Today's Polls / Difference
CPoC..36.3 .......... 34 .......... -2 ....... CPoC
Libs..30.2 .......... 30 .......... same...... Libs
NDP...17.5 .......... 19 .......... +2 ....... NDP
Bloc..10.5 .......... 10 .......... same ..... Bloc
Green. 5.5 ........... 7 .......... -1 ....... Greens

We have no such thing as either an NDP surge, or an improving CPoC, or a surge in support for the Greens. At this point in the election, surges are not happening. We some undecided going to the NDP.

We do have steady support for the liberals and support loses for the conservatives going principally to the undecided. Some conservative voters are looking for a new home and are thinking NDP, or will not vote this time around. Liberal undecided tend to firm in the last week in the campaign - that is the question here.

Compared to this point in the last election, the CPoC is losing ground and that is significant with one week left.

If the economy continues to tank, all bets are off as the incumbent will have a material disadvantage on voting day. If the market firms in the next week, then the CPoC may get its soft support back.

It's the economy, stupid!


Eugene Parks
updated Oct 5 based on Nanos Numbers ending October 4th

Warning Bloggers: Scott Tribe and Steve Valeriote

Scott Tribe and Steve Valeriote edit the threads on their blogsites.

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Sunday, September 28, 2008

The meme works... as per Steve V sock puppet counter attack

Winning Opposition Themes

1. Federal Fudget Budget;
2. There is no future in Harpernomics;
3. Bush is gone; will Harper live on?

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Steve V - Conservative Sock Puppet Exposed

Steve V has left a new comment on the post "Please":

All you're proving is that your fucking crazy and people should run away...

What a batshit LOSER you are, and you wonder why no one pays attention.

Change your meds, maybe that will help you colossal moron.

I can't stop laughing :)

It takes a nanosecond


All of the above from Steve V - conservative sock puppet.

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Winning Opposition Themes

1. Federal Fudget Budget;
2. There is no future in Harpernomics;
3. Bush is gone; will Harper live on?

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Thursday, September 11, 2008

Is Mr. Harper a leader or a misleader?

Under Mr. Harper, Canada has lost hundreds of thousands of quality jobs in manufacturing and lumber. On health and safety, ignorance and denial escalated a nuclear safety issue into a world-wide medical crisis. Several Canadians died of Listeriosis because of Harper deregulation. Environmentally, Mr. Harper has become the world's pariah -- excepting the U. S. administration's approval.

Military deaths in Afghanistan escalated radically. The war is mismanaged.

Rather than governing well, Mr. Harper spent two years and millions in character assassinations and suing his opponents, including Elections Canada. Elections Canada ruled that Mr. Harper, 67 Conservative candidates, plus their financial agents violated election law. Mr. Harper says he is a law-and-order guy, but he did not play legally with our most fundamental institution -- democratic elections.

Now, Mr. Harper is spending millions to tell us he is a man that loves his children. However, in public life he has proven he does not love the truth, does not think the law applies to him, and is utterly incompetent at managing a government.

Mr. Harper is a misleader.

Eugene Parks
(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Collingwood Ontario

Saturday, September 06, 2008

Harper's Foul

What should the next federal election be about?

Some say the Liberals should still be accountable for a sponsorship scandal that happened more than a decade ago when attempting to fight separatism in Quebec.

We rightly sent them to the political penalty box for the foul and some want to keep them there forever.

In contrast to today, people are dying now of listeriosis because Prime Minister Stephen Harper deregulated Canada's principal meat packaging plant as a "test" project for further deregulation.

I'd say Harper's team deserves a game misconduct penalty and he deserves a lifetime suspension from ever playing again.

Political penalties should be proportional to the misconduct. The ultimate political referee, you and me, voters, should send PM Harper out of the political arena for good.

Eugene Parks

Prince Albert
Oak Bay

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Sunday, August 24, 2008

Mr. Harper wants your vote!

He needs
the attention.

(c) 2008 Victoria BC
PS: source of photo unknown to me.

Wednesday, August 20, 2008

Dysfunctional Leadership

The Province
Published: Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has threatened to call an election, whining "I don't want to govern over a dysfunctional government." OK, Harper should call an election and then explain why he could not run a respectable parliament.

We know the Liberals gave him a free legislative hand to do what he wanted, so we know they are not the problem.

The Tories produced a 200-page handbook for their own MPs, telling them how to obstruct, bully and otherwise make parliamentary committees, well, dysfunctional. His team has done exactly as ordered.

Why does Harper deserve a promotion to a majority government when he has failed to run a respectable minority government? Eugene Parks, Victoria

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Saturday, August 16, 2008

Civil Lawsuit with P Carpentry Victoria British

We hired P Carpentry to create a pass through window from our kitchen to the living and also to level our floors. After 4 weeks and a $20,000 dollar bill, which we feel is outrageous, this is what we saw. We are suing for reimbursement and damages because the floor is not level.

Civil Lawsuit with P Carpentry Victoria British

(c) 2008 Victoria BC

Saturday, December 08, 2007

Why China and India Laugh at Stephen Harper's Climate Targets

Canada has recently lectured India and China several times to clean up their environmental climate record. However, Canada has the worst energy-efficiency record of the G8 and is dramatically less efficient than our European Allies. Given the facts, Mr. Harper’s position that Canada will not sign on to absolute emission intensity targets until others do is laughable. Canada is number eight in the world in absolute total greenhouse gas emissions and among the very least energy-efficient countries in the world.

More notably, the climate issue is about an absolute total cap in emissions - not about becoming efficient at creating more and more climate changing greenhouse gases. Nevertheless, Harper hypocritically demands that others become more efficient.

Mr. Harper's duplicitous drenched arguments are embarrassing Canada around the world.

Stephen Harper has stated that climate treaties are useless unless the developing world comes on board. More plainly, Harper conservatives claim that the primary sources of climate altering greenhouse gas emissions are from the developing world - not from the developed industrialized world. In truth, greenhouse gas emissions from the G8 (including Canada) are greater than the combined absolute emissions from the rest of the world. Eight countries, out of 194 in the world, produce more total climate changing effects than the rest of the world combined (including China and India). Canada is number 8 in the world in total absolute emissions, hardly an insignificant contributor. See reference below.

Contrary to the false statements from Prime Minister Harper, the most significant source of greenhouse emissions is the developed world. The entire world must begin to work on the climate change problem but the principle source being the developed world with the resources to act immediately, Harper's all or nothing position is just plain wrong.

Blaming and shaming poorer countries for a problem that is not principally their fault does not get the climate change job done. Less shaming of others and more accountability should be Mr. Harper's first steps.

References:Canada is number 8 on the absolute emissions list:

GHG Total Emissions (Latest Year)

See UN report for all per capita: . Multiply the per capita numbers by population and sum G8 numbers versus the absolute sum of rest of the worlds emissions.

(c) 2007 Victoria BC

Tuesday, November 13, 2007

Governance not Gutter Politics

During the 1993 election, Kim Campbell’s personal attack on Jean Chretien’s face was resoundingly condemned by both the media and the public – ending the Mulroney era. But in just 15 short years, the public and the media are now tolerating paid adverting by Harper Conservatives aimed at assassinating the character of Stephane Dion – an action unprecedented in Canadian political history outside the confines of an election period.

If we are going to be subject to Harper’s never ending trashy-mouth advertising, could the media balance this with the facts of Mr. Harper’s actions? He ended all government environment-climate projects (cancelling the government’s green project), reversed position on Canadians on death row in the U.S., cancelled the Kelowna accord, cancelled Pine Beetle prevention funding, cancelled RCMP training courses, agreed to a 15% export tariff on softwood lumber and is failing to mitigate the dollar-evaluation monetary crises that is costing tens of thousand of manufacturing and forestry jobs. On the social side, he has failed to provide any meaningful healthcare initiatives or improvements. He has cancelled funding for the arts, social development partnership programs, the Canadian wildlife service, the CBC, youth employment, adult literacy programs, and climate awareness funding (to give you the short list of cancellations).

The Government of Canada's duty is to focus on good governance, providing fair and equitable programmes for all citizens. In contrast, Harper’s government is fixated on demeaning Stephane Dion, pre-programming voters for an election campaign not dealing with issues of consequence to the electorate. Rather we are being prepared for a Harper conservative campaign on "who makes the best Prime Minister?" in terms of image formulated from personal attacks.

(c) 2007 Victoria BC

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Karlheinz Schreiber

Eventually the investigation into "commissions" paid to Canadian government officials must lead to the question: Did Mr. Harper (the current PM) receive money from Mr. Big (Karlheinz Schreiber).

Mr. Big is in the habit of “donating” (read paying protection money) to conservative leaders. Note the photos of who Mr. Big rubbed shoulders with. That is the big story: i.e. was there money to Kim Campbell, Jean Charest, the BQ, and money to McKay, and Mr. Harper.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Thursday, November 08, 2007

Interest Rates and the Canadian Dollar

Canada's capacity to be a value-added manufacturing country is being disassembled.

Monday October 22, 2007 UAW local 222 circulated a green letter informing their members of another round of significant and permanent layoffs. Twenty-five years ago Oshawa was home to the largest single car plant in the world. Dimensionally speaking, Oshawa's GM plant is still the largest under-one-roof autoplex in the world. Nevertheless, today it is close to sitting idle. By the end of next year only about 5,000 employees will remain of the 10,000 from a year ago, and down from 20,000 of just a couple of decades ago.

Oshawa's manufacturing force is down 50% over two years and 80% over twenty-five years.

Paralleling Oshawa's story, Canada's manufacturing sector eliminated 400,000 jobs over the last three years. The cause of the manufacturing collapse is not our workers, nor the want of resources or capital, nor the ability to find customers (see note below).

National economic strategy is the cause of the collapse.

The Canadian dollar has risen nearly 80% in about six years. In the last three years the dollar has risen sharply, increasing more than 20% in the last year alone. Consequently, the Canadian cost of production - relative to U.S. customers - has inflated nearly 80% in just six years.

Management of the relative value of the Canadian dollar has demonstratively failed. Whether you are a radical socialist who believes in complete central management of the dollar or an absolute laissez-faire capitalist, the loss of quality manufacturing tells you economic planning in Canada is seriously flawed.

U.S. customers can no longer afford Canadian manufactured products.

After the 9/11 tragedy, the Bank of Canada (BoC) kept its interest rate more than 100% higher than the U.S.; today Canadian interest rates remain high in comparison to the American rate. Our money supply has likewise remained relatively restricted. The raw value of a Canadian central bank bond versus a U.S. central bank bond was kept high by the
Bank of Canada.

The Bank of Canada is significantly contributing to the demand for the Canadian dollar and its rise against the U.S. dollar.

Hindsight's lesson of our near collapse in Canadian manufacturing from
the rise of the dollar tells us that the Central Bank's policy is a mistake. The question going forward is how to set interest rates appropriately so as to reflect the true value of the Canadian dollar.

The Canadian dollar should be a reflection of the internal value of the Canadian economy (fair traded value), the value of externally traded goods (free trade value), and the future value of economic activity (interest value).

The calculation of the value at which to set the Canadian dollar is not necessarily as nebulous as it sounds and neither does it have to be so radically in error as in Canada for the last six years. For example, we can look at the calculated value the European Union or the United States places its dollar. Canadian interest rates can be set within the average of those major economies.

Canadian Central Bank Rate = (US Interest Rate + EU Interest Rate)/2 +/- 1%

Flexibility needs to exist to account for year-by-year variation and changes in economic value (which affects future value). Naturally, all central banks adjust the face value of its currency by changing interest rates and the amount of currency in circulation. There is a good faith goal to reflect value as demonstrated by the economy. owever, given the gross error of the BoC over the last 3 years, the BoC should no longer be allowed unlimited latitude to set interest rates.

More than a 1% variance should be justified to the Minister of Finance
and require written temporary permission.

The working class of Canada, particularly the manufacturing sector, is paying dearly for ivory tower mistakes at the BoC. The mistakes are needless as we can find sound company in the world's two largest currencies. We can chart our own course with some latitude (+/- 1%) but must remain grounded in economic realities as demonstrated by our own economy, the U.S. economy, and the European Union. Canadians deserve a stable economic playing field.
Footnote: The cause of the manufacturing collapse is not our workers, not the want of resources and capital, nor an inability to find customers. As recently as three years ago, Oshawa's plant was the world's most profitable autoplex with the highest quality and customer satisfaction ratings. Oshawa's truck plant won Best in Class. The car plant won the Harbour and JD Powers awards. The Buick Allure built in Oshawa tied the Lexes for top quality. Accordingly, billions of dollars have regularly gone into upgrading the complex. Surrounding the plant are world class suppliers like Magna Corp, Lear Siegler, Lasco steel (now in foreign hands), and hyrdo-power as cheap and reliable as is humanly feasible. Our manufacturers are not the cause of their own demise. Of course, employment remains statistically strong as quality manufacturing jobs are being rapidly replaced by lower paying service industry work or the selling raw resources to the US. Notably, the demand for oil is temporarily offsetting the loss of manufacturing jobs. Regardless, the loss of over 15,000 GM jobs in Oshawa directly translates to over 150,000 manufacturing jobs in Ontario. We are giving up manufacturing capacity in favour of selling raw resources.

(c) 2007 Victoria BC

Monday, March 19, 2007

The bloc will take the bribe

Governments often do not keep their promises and too often overspend. There's nothing "new" in this and no special skills are required.

Needed from our "new" government’s federal budget were clear signs of prioritization. What was delivered was spending in a random and feckless fashion in every direction designed to bribe us with our own money.

Reckless bribery is not what we need from our money; we need true environmental funding that has a plan attached. We need meaningful healthcare improvements. Genuine support for building a more energy efficient economy is needed. Our vulnerable need protection. Our cities’ infrastructure needs rebuilding. Brash bribery accomplishes none of those.

One thing from the budget taxpayers have gained. They will not suffer the expense of an unneeded federal election. Intended or not, the Bloc has been bribed enough to keep the New Government of Canada in office for a while yet.

(c) 2007 Victoria

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Can Mr. Harper stand on his record?

The coming election's question will be: "Based on his record, will you place your country's future in Mr. Harper hands?"

Recently, Mr. Harper positioned himself as tough on terror claiming the opposition was "soft" for voting down extreme anti-terrorist legislation. His view in 2002, however, was this:

" The bill is a mixture of the good, the bad and the ugly. It worries me a great deal how the government has addressed Sept. 11. It has not in fact addressed the concrete measures Canadians are demanding in terms of security: a stronger military, air marshals, dealing with the problems in the refugee- determination process - and yet they are willing to come up with sweeping and vague government powers to deal with unnamed terrorist threats." (Montreal Gazette 22 March 2002.)

Seeking to renew "the sweeping and vague powers" was a 180 degree turnabout for no reason, other than political posturing. The sun set on measures never used.

During the last election, Mr. Harper made five promises. The most prominent was the creation of the Accountability Act.

What became law fell short of Judge Gomery's AdScam Inquiry recommendations. Additionally, sections have not been put into effect yet. The result? The New Government is operating outside of a weak Accountability Act. Yet, come the election voters will hear "Promise made: Promise kept".

In terms of other promises, wait-times guarantees have not been met - neither have promises on Income Trusts - for example. And, in office Harper's government cancelled *all* climate change programs to the cheering of his conservative supporters. Now, under public pressure, he is promising to restore Liberal programs newly named, The EcoTrust.

Based on his record, Mr. Harper says anything to satisfy popular demand - but only keeps the promises that suit him. Hardly a record to return him to office.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Climate Change - Enviromental Solutions Exist

I've worked as an industrial scientist and was dismayed during my association with the CPoC to discover that they are sciences deniers (climate change being just one example; I'm sure you can think of other examples - think stem cell research, to instantaneous creationism, to medical approaches to addictions. etc.) Stephen Harper is not alone in his denial of science; the attitude is systemic and broadly applied within the CPoC.

For the record: Below are several energy sources that combined would eliminate the need for burning fossil fuels.
1. geothermic
2. hydro power
3. wind power
4. solar power
5. tidal power
6. agriculture (off grade products only)

We can also convert the above to fuels for mobility – such as hydrogen – that can power an entire economy.

Those in the CPoC who say replacement solutions for fossil fuels don’t exist are simply ignorant of the possibilities. You don't know what you are talking about.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Friday, February 23, 2007

Steve Harper and Public Disgrace

The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled 9-0 that the secretive security certificate program to detain terrorist suspects is unconstitutional. Stephen Harper’s demand that such measures continue, legally unbalanced by human rights protection, has been trounced by our Supreme Court. And, this week Stephen Harper’s own behaviour shows us why he is so wrong.

This week, Mr. Harper attempted to use parliamentary privilege to smear a member of parliament and his family in a disgraceful attempt to link an innocent man to terrorism. Concurrently, the Harper Tories have been airing attack ads against Ralph Goodale, alleging connections to crime even though the RCMP has completely cleared him of any wrong doing. And lest we forget, it was Harper who made outrageous allegations that Paul Martin supports child pornography. And further, it was Harper Tories who used parliamentary privilege to also smear and disgrace the innocent Mahr Arar - while the man was being tortured in a foreign country.

In public, Harper Tories have attacked the innocent. But its for the sake of the innocent, we require our laws to be balanced; to protect us against abuses like what we have publicly seen from Harper Tories. Further, secretive security measures are dangerous - especially in the hands of those who will so freely attack the innocent in public. And without constitutional protections, we are vulnerable to the private abuses of the capricious.

Rightly, the Supreme Court resoundingly ruled against security certificates. And, we should all take note of the public behaviour of those who have been, up to this date, unwilling to apply balance to such dangerous legal perspectives. Those who will say anything in public should be feared for what they may do in private.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Sunday, February 11, 2007

Harper cannot do math and politics at the same time

The Liberals had 13 years and didn’t get it done; so says Stephen Harper as he defends his own environmental record. But his math is as non-existent as his environment record.

The Kyoto accord was ratified in Canada in December 2002. The agreement became an international agreement on February 16, 2005. That means, the worldwide strategy for tackling climate change was in affect for just one (1) year while the Liberals were in power – not thirteen years. In truth the record is: the Liberals championed the cause of global environment action and did get that first step done through a global treaty on climate change.

In contrast, Stephen Harper’s record has been to fight global action on climate change while in opposition, then when in power his government removed Liberal environment programs from within Canada, which he is now re-offering under different names as future maybe-will-do-after-the-next budget plans. Just this past week Prime Minister Stephen Harper said, "No government in the world is going to jeopardize its short-term economic prosperity for the sake of long-term environmental action." The PM ought to know, however, the responsible position is that long-term environmental solutions, on issues like climate change, require both international and domestic action to begin in the very near-term (as the Liberals began through the Kyoto treaty and environment programs at home).

Now is the time to stop uncritically repeating the prime ministers misrepresentations of the record. Conditions in our environment necessitate leadership and action – not prime ministerial speeches loaded with evasive rhetorical decoys justifying inaction today because he thinks environmental issues are tomorrow’s problems.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Sunday, January 21, 2007

"New" Government's limited perspective

Canada's “New” Government was clear it would pursue environmental policy of its own making, no matter how half baked, under former Minister Ambrose. Harper-Tories cheered the dismantling of Canada’s environmental programs. Now, because of public pressure through opinion polls, a subset of dismantled climate-change programs is being offered under new names.

Mr. Harper in his Victoria announcement of potential environmental funding referred to oil, gas, and nuclear power as “conventional” energy sources. He ought to know, however, that Hydropower - a renewalbe source of energy - from Niagara Falls powered Ontario and half of New York’s rise to industrial greatness; that historically, human kind has relied upon windmills and watermills to power their activities; that the modern versions of water and wind power - wind-farms, hydropower, and tidal generators - are the most conventional sources of power we know – regardless of Harper’s “conventional” carbon burning perspective.

If Mr. Harper wants to be a true national leader he must develop a broader perspective on subjects he is addressing. He must understand climate change in its global context. He must approach energy systems in their full context. He must come to understand and engage the environment as a living ecosystem, not just as a power source. Effective national leaders must have historic, national, and global perspectives on the subjects they address.

Mr. Harper appears to lack this quality: his limited “conventional” energy perspective is inadequate.

(c) 2007Victoria BC

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Something Fishy about them Harper Tories

UVic Law Professor Hamar Foster wrote in the Times Colonist January 2nd 2007 ed. that in documents such as BC’s Douglas Treaties: in exchange for land, BC aboriginals accepted the legal right to both family and commercial fishing. In other words, BC aboriginals earned the right to control their historic fishing grounds and sell fish to white people, in exchange for some land.

In contrast I note that today, Harper Tories (led by both MP John Cummins and long-time Harper colleague Mark Milke) argue that BC aboriginals don’t have a treaty right to commercial fishing - just a fishing right for ceremonial purposes. Harper’s Tories argue it is racist to allow BC aboriginals their contract-treaty fishing rights. They ignore such rights as outlined in the Douglas Treaties, numerous treaty violations, and current legal standing acknowledged by the Supreme Court of Canada.

All race arguments rely upon the denial of facts. But, we should not be fooled by groundless rhetoric. When it comes to aboriginal contracts, race is not the issue.

Profoundly, Hamar agues, “Surely there is something very unfair about taking property away from people because of their race and then arguing that it is racist to give it back”. I believe, it is doubling unfair when the property is a right (such as a fishing right) paid for (with land) and then the property-right is not delivered. For Canada to be healthy society we cannot arbitrarily discredit what people have legally paid. Every one of us should be able to depend on the rule of law to honour both sides of contracts.

In fact, BC aboriginals have paid with land for the legal right to commercial fishing. They are willing to live within conservation limits. And, they are willing/wanting to sell what they catch at fair-market value to anyone that wants the product. The deal was good for BC when the Douglas Treaties were first created and the deal sounds legally sound and fair today.

PS: Being of true Tory decent, it pains me to see the like of Steve Harper so badly abuse the name.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Thursday, December 28, 2006

On the passing of Saddam Hussein

For the record: I'm ok with Saddam Hussein dying in the next few hours. But, I'm not OK with the extra 600,000 "collateral" Iraqis who died so our side could put Saddam to death. Neither am I OK with the 20 year old kids - of our neighbour to the south - fighting for their lives in the middle of an Iraqi civil war. Nor am I OK with starting a war under false pretenses to create the impression that a President is tough on terrorism. For that matter, I’m also not OK with elevated risk to Canadian 20 year olds in our own protracted war so a Prime Minister can look tough to so-called allies – real allies don’t expect that. Within hours, one sick totalitarian Iraqi madman will die; I wish the rest of the madness could also end – for the record.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Wednesday, December 27, 2006

The convention-donation-gate cover-up attempt continues

Pay very close attention to what the CPoC national office has just done to cover-up the convention-donation-gate scandal.

The CPoC head office now says that convention attendees made a donation *at* their convention; however, attendees already made a convention donation at the constituency level and were also paid expense to go (including the cost of the gate fee). See cheque-swapping story.

Get this point: CPoC members now have two (2) receipts to the same event plus were paid expenses in kind (which included gate fee).

To get out of the convention-donation-gate scandal, the CPoC national office is squeezing its local members with rev cdn jeopardy to balance CPoC federal books [as I predicted in writing 6 months ago.]. Steve Harpers is attempting to shift the burden of blame to individual members.

Will rev cdn and the members figure out the fraud? Connect the dots... they are all there in public now. Now that the CPoC has doubled up on the lie.

-> double receipts, gifts in kind for expenses and receipts, slush funds paying to get people to the same event.... why the fraud... why did the PM participate!!!

The CPoC has broken EC and Rev Cdn rules to get elected.

It's time to demand the PM resign.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

The Prime Minister broke the law... and more

The CPoC broke the law to win an election. Period. (See Globe and Mail)
-> The CPoC raised millions under the table.
-> They created third-party adverstising without declaring.
-> CPoC members cheque-swapped to gain a personal tax-advantage.
-> And, they used undisclosed additional sources of revenues and paid expenses to hidden parties (read slush funds).
The CPoC broke the law to get themselves elected. Mr. Prime Minister, will you do the honourable thing - for the good of our democratic system - and resign.

This story was broke first by Walkswithcoffee. See front page of Vancouver Sun. and see fake news.

(c) 2006 Victoria BC

Saturday, December 09, 2006

Dirty Environmental Politics

Politics gets dirty, literally, when politicians play the optics game with the environment when they should be supporting solutions. The New Conservative Government’s Environment Minister Rona Ambrose proposes a $300 million, 4 year, study to review 500 toxic chemicals. However, there are 23,000 chemicals on the official list of problematic chemicals. Just as Minister Ambrose pushed global warming targets out to the year 2050, she is pushing thousands of chemicals off to the side. You know environmental management is in trouble in Canada when a plan - to create a plan - may be underway that misses most of the point.

I’ve been and industrial scientist and still do some serious scientific work. To deal with dangerous materials there are professional standards such as: Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System Standards (WHMIS), Health and Safety Standards, Professional Society Standards, and Environmental Laws. Violating these has financial, professional, legal, and often personal health consequences. Professional approaches to management should be supported and improved.

For decades, Environment Canada and numerous provincial agencies worked to contribute to scientific standards and regularly update them. Today, Minister Ambrose is muzzling her ministry’s scientific opinion on gas emissions and she is performing an end-around on both the scientific and professional community that works to manage dangerous materials. The end result: 98% of problematic materials are off the list but Ambrose gets a photo op to claim she is against toxic chemicals. Orwellian double-speak at its best! And, at a cost of only $300 million, though some might argue it would be better spent through existing professional agencies.

References: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and google news


WHMIS (or Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System) - pronounced "WHIM-ISS" - is Canada's national hazard communication program for hazardous workplace chemicals. Established in 1988, WHMIS was developed (and continues to evolve) through a well-established consensus process in partnership between Canada's federal, provincial and territorial (F/P/T) governments, as well as with individuals representative of Canadian industry (i.e., suppliers and employers) and organized labour.

WHMIS is analogous to the American Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) administered by the U.S. Occupational Health and Safety Administration. After the HCS, Canada's was the 2nd such national workplace hazard communication system for industrial/commercial chemicals established in the world.

The hazard communication elements of WHMIS include appropriate labelling of controlled products and hazardous material, as well as comprehensive Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) and worker education and training programs.

WHMIS is implemented through complementary and interlocking federal, provincial and territorial legislation.

The Canadian Hazardous Product Act, Part II and associated Controlled Products Regulations, administered by the federal agency: Health Canada, require suppliers and importers to appropriately label controlled products and to transmit or obtain MSDSs as a condition of sale or importation. The legislation also places a defacto requirement on suppliers and importers to assess their products against specified hazard classification criteria established in the Part IV of the Controlled Products Regulations.

Occupational health and safety legislation, administered by each of Canada's F/P/T governments, require Canadian employers to ensure that controlled products are appropriately labelled in the workplace, that associated MSDSs are made available to workers, and that workers are educated and trained to ensure the safe storage, handling, use and disposal of controlled products in order to protect worker health and safety.

Canadian Health and Safety (Federal)

Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety
The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS) is the agency of the federal Government of Canada which seeks to promote safe and healthy workplaces and prevent work-related injuries and illnesses. Additional work in this area is carried out by provincial and territorial labour departments and workers' compensation boards.

CCOHS was created in 1978 by an Act of Parliament - Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety Act S.C., 1977-78, c. 29. The act was based on the belief that all Canadians had "...a fundamental right to a healthy and safe working environment." .

The Centre is governed by a tripartite Council of Governors representing government (federal, provincial and territorial), employers, and workers.

CCOHS seeks to make credible information about workplace hazards and conditions easily and widely accessible to all Canadians.

Services offered
Inquiry Service - the free, confidential, person-to-person information service for Canadians
OSH Answers Q&A on CCOHS website
Health and Safety Report free monthly electronic newsletter
Bringing Health to Work portal - information on creating healthy workplaces
Webinar presentations
WHMIS Classification Database
JobOne Canada website for new and young workers, addressing the high levels of injuries and illnesses suffered by this group of workers
CANOSH website
Canadian enviroOSH Legislation (plus Standards)
MSDS Management Service
health and safety pocket guides
CCOHS publications are offered in English and French and in several formats (print, CD ROM, DVD, Internet).

CCOHS collaborates with the Canadian Health Network to providing content and resources about occupational health and safety for the Canadian Health Network's website.

External links
CCOHS homepage
Inquiry Service
Bringing Health to Work Portal
The Health and Safety Report E-Newsletter
WHMIS Classifications Search
CanOSH - Canada's National Occupational Health Safety WebsiteWorker safety and health
Occupational safety and health Workplace wellness

Retrieved from ""

International Health and Safety:

(OSH) is a cross-disciplinary area concerned with protecting the safety, health and welfare of people engaged in work or employment. As a secondary effect OSH may also protect employers, customers, suppliers, and members of the public who may experience an impact from the workplace environment.

Since 1950, the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have had a common definition of occupational health. This definition was adopted by the Joint ILO/WHO Committee on Occupational Health at its First Session (1950) and revised at its 12th Session (1995): "Occupational health should aim at: the promotion and maintenance of the highest degree of physical, mental and social well-being of workers in all occupations; the prevention amongst workers of departures from health caused by their working conditions; the protection of workers in their employment from risks resulting from factors adverse to health; the placing and maintenance of the worker in an occupational environment adapted to his physiological and psychological capabilities; and, to summarize, the adaptation of work to man and of each man to his job."

The primary, and in the view of many, the most prominent reason for establishing occupational safety and health (OSH) standards is moral - an employee should not have to expect that by coming to work life or limb is at risk, nor should others be adversely affected by their undertaking.

A further factor that favours OSH is economic - many governments realize that poor occupational safety and health performance results in cost to the State (e.g. through social security payments to the incapacitated, costs for medical treatment, and the loss of the "employability" of the worker). Employing organisations also sustain costs in the event of an incident at work (such as legal fees, fines, compensatory damages, investigation time, lost production, lost goodwill from the workforce, from customers and from the wider community).

OSH standards are, generally speaking, further reinforced in both civil law and criminal law; it is accepted that without the extra "encouragement" of potential regulatory action or litigation, many organisations would not act upon their implied moral obligations.

Different states take different approaches to legislation, regulation, and enforcement.

In the European Union, Member States have enforcing authorities to ensure that the basic legal requirements relating to occupational safety and health are met. In many EU countries, there is strong cooperation between employer and worker organisations (e.g. Unions) to ensure good OSH performance as it is recognized this has benefits for both the worker ( throughmaintenance of health) and the enterprise (through improved productivity and quality). In 1996 the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (OSHA) was founded.

In the UK, health and safety legislation is drawn up and enforced by the Health and Safety Executive under the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. Increasingly in the UK the regulatory trend is away from prescriptive rules, and towards risk assessment. Recent major changes to the laws governing asbestos and fire safety management embrace the concept of risk assessment.

In the USA, OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, has been regulating occupational safety and health since the 1971. OSH regulation of a limited number of specifically defined industries was in place for several decades before that, and broad regulations by some of the individual states was in place for many years prior to the establishment of OSHA.

In Canada, workers are covered by provincial or federal labour codes depending on the sector in which they work. Workers covered by federal legislation (including those in mining, transportation, and federal employment) are covered by the Canada Labour Code; all other workers are covered by the health and safety legislation of the province they work in. The Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety (CCOHS), an agency of the Government of Canada, was created in 1978 by an Act of Parliament. The act was based on the belief that all Canadians had "...a fundamental right to a healthy and safe working environment." . CCOHS is mandated to promote safe and healthy workplaces to help prevent work-related injuries and illnesses.

Occupational safety and health may involve interaction among several technical disciplines, including occupational medicine, occupational (or industrial) hygiene, safety engineering, health physics, ergonomics, toxicology, and psychology.

Canadian News Sources

(Martin Mittelstaedt / Gloria Galloway G&M A1; Carly Weeks Ctz A3, EJ A6, VSun A4, CH A8, VTC A4, Gaz A14, NP A6, SSP B6; Bruce Campion-Smith TStar A4; Jon Willing TSun 4, CSun 13, ESun 22, OSun 10; Dennis Bueckert CP WFP A10, HCH A6, MT&T B1).

(c) 2006 Victoria BC