The PMO has all the power in Canada.

http://youtu.be/pEsCPi-BOXA

The PMO has all the power in Canada.
Its his show and his show alone.
And on that point there is no debate!!

The house of commons is nothing more than a bad show, to make the people feel like they have a democracy. When the truth is we have an elected dictator.

http://www.hrsolidarity.net/mainfile.php/2000vol10no09/708/

Elected dictatorships are those where dictatorships cleverly masquerade as democracies. In elected dictatorships, regular elections are held, a docile and subservient press is maintained that purveys lies and fear to intimidate the voters to support the ruling elite. The ability to pull off this masquerade of pretending to be democratic makes elected dictatorships difficult to eliminate.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/23458

Canadians are so fed up with smarmy politicians talking out of both sides of their mouths, ... Canada is in dire need of politicians who believe in government of, for and by the people, but we won’t get it so long as we allow our leaders to wield dictatorial powers

http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Parliament+become+irrelevant+under+Harper/5815682/story.html#ixzz1fsmFygYD

A better comparison to the Canadian situation might be Russia, where Vladimir Putin is able to act without concern for the formal role of institutions, although in Canada there are a series of extra-governmental actors

And we have watchdogs - the auditor general, the parliamentary budget officer and the like - but according to a count by Queen's University Professor Ned Franks, Harper has fired or forced out 10 watchdogs, which tends to cow the others.

The only way this near absolute power held by the PMO can be countered is by the Provinces taking a very strong stand, which may include exercising their sovereignty.

This is the power the Provinces have. It is a very important power which can be used.

Destruction Conceived by the Corruption of Justice

In international news, early this week Bush and Blair were convicted for war crimes by a less court in Malaysia. But even as alleged criminals do they really have anything to fear. Even as criminals they will mostly like go unpunished as long as the ICC can be vetoed by any of the UN Security Council members. The same is unfortunately true of Harper's Government involvement in torture and corruption of justice.

As long there is no accountability before the Law, justice has been corrupted. The corruption of justice destroys a people.

Amos
Ezekiel
Hosea
I purposely have not given verse references, because without reading with a searching mind you will not understand the destruction conceived by the corruption of justice.

"some critics have suggested that Article 16 does not go far enough and in fact undercuts the role of the P-5 by requiring an affirmative vote to stop the prosecutor.(72) The Security Council only has the power to allow an investigation or prosecution to continue, but not to stop one. Conversely, others have expressed fears that the Security Council’s deferral power could eviscerate the independence of the prosecutor and the Court.(73)"

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/researchpublications/prb0211-e.htm#jurisdiction

“If some States are able to use the ICC for their political motives, or if some individuals are beyond the reach of the ICC because of their position within a State, the Court will lose credibility, human rights will continue to be violated, and democratic development will be stifled. We understand that some States propose granting the Security Council sweeping powers to determine the docket of the Court. The granting of such powers to an essentially political body is incompatible with the establishment of an effective judicial body. The Court requires total independence in order to guarantee that the highest standards of international justice are respected.”

The Monarchy powers the PM currently enjoys MUST be removed.

Quebec is considering sovereignty to escape Harper's tyrannical rule.

"This isn't a tough-on-crime measure we're seeing today — it's a tough-on-democracy measure," Quebec Justice Minister Jean-Marc Fournie

He said he will now study all measures available so that Quebec can maintain its own approach to crime-fighting.

Quebec says it can't understand why, with some of the lowest crime rates in the country, its own lenient approach would be ignored in favour of expensive policies that have failed elsewhere.

"This is a clear illustration — yet another illustration but a very, very serious illustration — of the major dysfunction that the Canadian federation can cause," said PQ justice critic Veronique Hivon.

Harper is not tough-on-crime. If he was he would demand full investigation into Afghanistan corruption and relate torture, G20/G8. He would not game the election spending regulations in clear violation of their legal intent.

Harper is tough on democracy.

Write your provincial MPP, and ask them to seek sovereignty to escape Harper's tough-on-democracy.

Tell them you do not want the Federal Government and Secrete Police of CSIS systematically secretly monitoring your every action without cause. You do not want to be secretly detained without warrant and intensely questioned without a reason given for doing so. You do not want the Government using copyright legislation as a means of restricting access to its documents and denying accountability.

Demand full disclosure of pre-election political advertising. Demand full disclosure of all media financial transactions.

Democracy only works when an informed public votes in fair elections. Democracy does not work when elections are bought.

Stop undue influence and conflict of interest, Demand a permanent ban on X politicians from becoming lobbyist.
Demand the monarchy powers the PM currently enjoys be removed. These unrestricted powers to appoint and influence appointees, removes all accountability and provides the PM dictatorial powers.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/quebec-harper-government-tough-on-democracy-not-tough-on-crime-134071723.html

High land cost caused by expanding suburbs have push farmers off most of the number one farm land in BC.

High land cost caused by expanding suburbs have push farmers off most of the number one farm land in BC.

BC produces less than 50% of its food. A large part due to the best farm land in BC lost to suburban sprawl. http://www.smartgrowth.bc.ca/AboutUs/Issues/AgriculturalLand/tabid/111/Default.aspx

http://www.metrovancouver.org/planning/development/agriculture/AgricultureDocs/Local_Government_Policy_Options_to_Protect_Agricultural_Land.pdf

agriculture on a small land base point to one of the primary challenges facing the viability of farming the most fertile soils in this province: land use conflicts between agricultural and urban uses. Both because the land market values farmland for its non-farm uses, particularly residential and industrial uses, and because of the prevalence of conflicts that result from different land uses in close proximity to one another, the agricultural importance of the land is undermined. Farmers cannot access land for agriculture because of its cost and there is a shortage of land for leasing due to non-farm uses.

Farming in the South Coast area is also characterized by relatively low gross farm receipts due to these land costs,

Both of these characteristics – high land prices and low gross farm receipts – discourage capital investment and product innovation, and prevent new farmers from entering the market

-------------------
Farm land can only be preserved if it priced so that farmers can profitable earn a living farming.

The agriculture land trust fund which must be paid into when taking agriculture land out of production, would create a price buffer between the price of land seen by developers and farmers. Using this trust fund to pay for fully reclaiming farm land would provide a means of cleaning up sprawl slum.

Unfortunately, many farmers are highly indebted and depend on increasing land values to avoid foreclosure. The introduction of an agriculture land trust fund would reduce the price paid for agriculture land. Farmers must be protected from this devaluation. How??

Americans made two mistakes which squandered their advantage in Afghanistan.

Americans made two mistakes which squandered their advantage.


"People welcomed the Americans [because] they saw them as their liberators. There was no room for the Taliban to stage a comeback immediately."


"I think the Pakistani military... tolerated the Taliban and also helped them”
Hasan Askari Rizvi Defence analyst

By 2006, however, the Taliban had infiltrated large parts of the south - especially the provinces of Zabul, Kandahar and Helmand.

By 2008, they were spreading out north towards Kabul.

Brig Shah says the Americans made two mistakes which squandered their advantage.

"They focused on military objectives instead of stabilisation and development. And they soon went to fight a war of choice in Iraq, abandoning the war of necessity that had brought them to Afghanistan."

The lack of reconstruction, and rampant corruption among government officials at a time when millions of refugees were returning from Iran and Pakistan, led to widespread disenchantment and fuelled insurgency, he says.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-15132461>

Dick Cheney foolish defends the use of torture.

Terrorism feeds on misery, corruption and HATRED!


With reduced corruption the Afghan government would have been able to win many hearts and minds of the Afghan people and police itself. Reducing the world terrorism threat.

The decision to use torture and support the corruption of justice required to make torture possible has been a strategic blunder. Rebellion against the corruption within the Afghan Government gives the extremist terrorist more than enough support. We have wasted untold billions. We have wasted what was probably our only chance to bring lasting peace to Afghanistan and reduce the threat of terrorist who feed on the misery, corruption and hatred.

Torture is corruption of justice. The hatred created by torturing for information is beyond our comprehension.

Through the misery, corruption and hatred created through torture, Dick Cheney is a danger to all.

Loopholes in Canadian conflict of interest regulations

Loopholes in Canadian conflict of interest regulations allow telcos to buy influence in Federal Conservative government policy making.

http://www.bclocalnews.com/okanagan_similkameen/kelownacapitalnews/news/124984399.html
“As you can see, it is illegal to take improper advantage of your former office, especially by giving advice on matters you dealt with, and especially by giving advice using secret, privileged information you obtained while in office,” Conacher told the Capital News in an e-mail.
But Conacher is concerned by what he calls “loopholes” in the current federal laws governing lobbyists because neither the federal Commissioner of Lobbyists, nor the federal ethics commissioner audit or inspect the activities of former ministers, staff or senior officials to see if they are following the rules after leaving office.

Loopholes in the current federal laws governing lobbyist allow the near monopolist telcos to use former Industry Minister Jim Prentice and former Conservative MP Stockwell Day to obtain special access to the Conservative government policy making.

Corruption and democracy: Political finances - conflicts of interest - lobbying - justice (2008)
ISBN 978-92-871-6355-4
ISBN : 978-92-871-6355-4PDF
http://book.coe.int/EN/ficheouvrage.php?PAGEID=36&lang=EN&produit_aliasid=2294

Conflict of Interest polices and Instruments (page 90)
- restrictions and control of post-employment business and NGO activties

MP Don Davies incorrectly blames the Liberals for Harper majority

In a letter www.straight.com NDP MP Don Davies blame the Liberals for Harper majority. The Contempt of Parliament by the Conservative Government, could not be ignored by the opposition Political Parties and as result the opposition voted against the budget causing the May 2011 election.
http://www.elections.ca/res/loi/his/2000/TabOffences_e.pdf

On March 21, 2011 a House of Commons committee ruled that the Harper government was in contempt of Parliament – an offense against the authority or dignity of Parliament, including disobedience to its commands or libel against it or its Members. Punishment for such an offense may take a variety of forms, up to and including imprisonment.

On March 25, 2011 the finding of contempt led to a motion of non-confidence introduced by Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff. The NDP and BQ supported them, which resulted in the adjournment of the 40th Parliament of Canada, and made Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government the first to fall on a charge of contempt of Parliament.

The prime minister of a minority government only holds his or her office as long as the “confidence of the house” is maintained. If members of the lower house lose faith in the leader for whatever reason, they can call a vote of no confidence and force the PM to resign. Such a vote of no confidence was made against Stephen Harper on Friday March 25, 2011. That vote not only declared that Stephen Harper no longer had the confidence of the house but the house also found Stephen Harper guilty of the serious offense of contempt of parliament. Contempt of Parliament is the crime of obstructing the parliament in the carrying out of its functions, or of hindering any Member of Parliament in the performance of his or her duties.

NDP MP Don Davies is correct that the Conservatives won their majority in the pre-election campaign before the election was called.

In Canada pre-election campaign advertising is unregulated. The Conservatives won in the before the election was called with massive advertising. All they had to do was make sure corruption was not the only focus during the short election campaign. and they could carry their success in the pre-election to the polls. The removal of public political financing as has occurred in the June 6th budget will only lead to greater political favoritism and corruption of the public trust.

I bring to your attention the well documented findings of:

Corruption and democracy: Political finances - conflicts of interest - lobbying - justice (2008)
ISBN 978-92-871-6355-4
The Council of Europe Publishing

The effects of unregulated political financing is summarized on page 34. I also highly recommend reading the whole book.


At the same time, unregulated political finances carry considerable risks

- they exacerbate political inequality. The principle of "one person, one vote" is compromised by unequal influence bought through contributions. Financial contributions create an uneven playing field where big money (often coming from the corporate sector) has an undue advantage. Interested money may override equal voting rights and equal access to decision makers and elected office;

- political money may buy access to office and access to decision makers. Those in a position to contribute have a greater chance to be heard by political decision makers. And those able to finance political parties and electoral "pre-election" campaigns have bigger chance to secure places on election lists of established by political parties;

- elections may represent less a competition of political positions and ideas and more the ability of political parties and candidates to raise funds, leading to an arms or propaganda race disconnected from political debate;

- political parties and politicians risk being co-opted to represent and pursue particular interests rather than the common public interest. They are more accountable to those who pay than to their constituency. This risk is particularly great if parties rely on a small number of donors only. Parties relying on private funding may have a weaker connection to their voters and are less connected to party members. Party leaders may transform contributions into political capital to secure control over their party;

- unregulated political finances are not transparent. It is thus impossible for voters to determine whose interests politicians are representing, and to hold them accountable.

In Canada pre-election campaign advertisement spending is unregulated.

I bring to your attention the well documented findings of
Corruption and democracy: Political finances - conflicts of interest - lobbying - justice (2008)

Author(s) :
Alexander Seger, Drago Kos, Alvis Vilks, Ömer Faruk Gençkaya, Manuel Villoria Mendieta, Alan Doig, Siim Kallas, Rogier Chorus, William Dinan, David Miller, Pim Albers, Nihal Jayawickrama
ISBN 978-92-871-6355-4



In Canada pre-election campaign advertisement spending is unregulated. The removal of public political financing will only lead to greater political favoritism and corruption of the public trust.

The effects of unregulated political financing is summarized on page 34. I also highly recommend reading the whole document.



At the same time, unregulated political finances carry considerable risks

- they exacerbate political inequality. The principle of "one person, one vote" is compromised by unequal influence bought through contributions. Financial contributions create an uneven playing field where big money (often coming from the corporate sector) has an undue advantage. Interested money may override equal voting rights and equal access to decision makers and elected office;

- political money may buy access to office and access to decision makers. Those in a position to contribute have a greater chance to be heard by political decision makers. And those able to finance political parties and electoral "pre-election" campaigns have bigger chance to secure places on election lists of established by political parties;

- elections may represent less a competition of political positions and ideas and more the ability of political parties and candidates to raise funds, leading to an arms or propaganda race disconnected from political debate;

- political parties and politicians risk being co-opted to represent and pursue particular interests rather than the common public interest. They are more accountable to those who pay than to their constituency. This risk is particularly great if parties rely on a small number of donors only. Parties relying on private funding may have a weaker connection to their voters and are less connected to party members. Party leaders may transform contributions into political capital to secure control over their party;

- unregulated political finances are not transparent. It is thus impossible for voters to determine whose interests politicians are representing, and to hold them accountable.

Public Party Financing and Democracy

It is time people read a few books on the subject before they mouth off. Stephen Harper is hoping people have forgotten how to read or cannot remember why Public Party Financing was introduced.

Lets start with this book

Corruption and democracy: Political finances - conflicts of interest - lobbying - justice (2008)
Author(s)

Alexander Seger, Drago Kos, Alvis Vilks, Ömer Faruk Gençkaya, Manuel Villoria Mendieta, Alan Doig, Siim Kallas, Rogier Chorus, William Dinan, David Miller, Pim Albers, Nihal Jayawickrama
ISBN 978-92-871-6355-4
Format : 16 x 24 cm
No. of pages : 220
Price : € 28 / US$ 42

This title is available in PDF.
ISBN : 978-92-871-6355-4PDF
Weight : 1364 Ko
Price : € 19 / US$ 29

Synopsis

Political corruption is an important challenge that democracies in Europe are confronted with. It contributes to the decline of citizens’ trust and confidence in democracy and weakens democratic principles and processes. Key areas of concern include:
- Political finances
- Conflicts of interest
- Lobbying
- Undue influence on the justice system.

This book contains contributions on each of these topics. They identity risks that corruption poses to the future of democracy in Europe, and they propose a wide range of measures for action which are not only aimed at preventing political corruption and enhancing transparency and accountability but also at rebuilding confidence in democracy.

http://books.google.com/books?id=yjmC0OvU0AIC&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=public+party+financing+democracy&source=bl&ots=nyTLZykQBQ&sig=jBM9Cbs-bn-7LlZNUtri8mKl7_c&hl=en&ei=QIAxTZOSKpD6sAPmxMmEBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CE0Q6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=public%20party%20financing%20democracy&f=false

You can find this authoritative book on the Corruption and democracy: Political finances

http://book.coe.int/EN/ficheouvrage.php?PAGEID=36&lang=EN&produit_aliasid=2294

or borrow this book from a library
...
http://www.worldcat.org/title/corruption-and-democracy-political-finances-conflicts-of-interest-lobbying-justice/oclc/225866717&referer=brief_results

select find library

type in your city name