Gingrich Offers Advice on Mosque and Qur'an Burning

Newt Gingrich, former House Speaker who led the Republican Revolution in 1994 and a likely future presidential candidate, offered some sage advice for President Obama regarding the Ground Zero Mosque and the cancelled (for now) Qur'an burning.

Obama came out early in support of the Ground Zero mosque. In front of a Muslim crowd, and resulting in rounds of applause the once-exalted Obama likely misses, he clearly made the case for the mosque being built where it was planned and argued that no one should try to stop the Imam from exercising his right to practice his religion. Of course, Obama missed the point that no one questions the right the build a mosque there, only the sense of doing so.

However, when a man in Florida proposed a Qur'an burning, the President had no problem coming out clearly against this act, and he argued against the Pastor's right to express his views in this way. The President was right to speak out against the Qur'an burning. It was insulting, incendiary and insensitive. Quite like the 9/11 mosque. And this is where Mr. Gingrich had some words for the President. "It's wrong to burn the Quran and it's wrong to build the mosque at ground zero, and both should be stopped," said the former-Speaker. The President should have been as straight forward with the Imam as he was with the pastor and oppose both efforts on the grounds of good taste, sensitivity and common sense.

Advice the President should have heeded.

The Tamils Aren't Refugees

When the UN isn't on the side of the Tamil refugees, you know the refugee ships should be looked at with skepticism.

Sri Lanka's brutal 26-year civil war, one marked with ghastly terrorist actions by the Tamil Tigers (including the invention of the suicide bomber, a now widely used horror), finally came to a close last year. I therefore find it odd that in the year of the closet thing to peace the country has known in a generation, Tamil "refugees" are now arriving in Canada.

In July, the UN said that the country was no longer in such dire straits that refugees should be accepted no-questions-asked. Instead, now that the war is over, any refugee claims should be closely considered and evaluated on their merits. There are serious questions as to whether these people are Tamil terrorists, or terrorist sympathizers, a distinction which should mean little. There are suggestions that the Tamil diaspora in Canada, the largest anywhere other than Sri Lanka itself, is using this country to organize, fundraise, and recruit for a future effort to restart the civil war. There is also questions about Canada's Tamil population. As you'll remember, thousands of Tamils in Toronto shut down traffic in the city last year when the Tamils were being defeated in Sri Lanka. So many Tamils showed up to the protest that authorities noted that we didn't even know that many were in Canada. With these many questions, this much concern, Canada should be taking a much firmer approach with dealing with these refugee boats, of which there are already reports of two more preparing to depart Sri Lanka.

Racism is the go-to attack today

Read a great article today by Victor Davis Hanson about using the charge of racism to silence your opponents and critics. You can read it here.

"We live in a complex, multiracial and religiously diverse society. A majority of black voters in California opposed gay marriage. Most Muslims probably concurred. Some 70 percent of Americans expressed support for the Arizona law, an overwhelming figure that would have to include some Asians, blacks and Hispanics. White and Hispanic congressional officials have faced ethics charges, often more serous than those leveled against Rangel and Waters.
In other words, there is no simple ideological, racial or religious divide between a monolithic "us" and "them." Instead, we have devolved to the point where promiscuously crying "Bigot!" and "Racist!" signals a failure to persuade 51 percent of the people of the merits of an argument.
It is too often that simple -- and that sad."

Enforcement Works? Get OUT!

Stumbled across this article in the Vancouver Sun last week and couldn't beleive what I was reading. Just look at the headline "Vancouver's homicide rate on pace for record low due to anti-gang efforts." Note that due to in there? You mean, the enforcement of laws and punishment of criminals may actually reduce crime and recidivism? Who would have ever thought, eh? What I propose going forward is we try to apply this novel concept to drug dealers, murderers and thieves too. Maybe if our "justice" system--and nothing deserves those quotations more than "justice" in Canada--actually punished the people who steal our cars, shoot up on our streets and murder our neighbours, we might see even less of these crimes and people might begin to have more confidence in our legal system.

BC Lottery Lawsuit a Joke

A gambling addict in BC has filed a lawsuit against the BC Lottery Corp. because it didn't do enough to stop her from losing over $331,000 in its casinos. Joyce May Ross says she couldn't help herself from gambling and even though she signed up for the self-exclusion program, she was allowed to continue gambling. The self-exclusion program involves the gambling company putting your name on an exclusion list, taking your photograph and having you sign a contract agreeing to not enter a BC casino for 6 months, with penalties up to $5000 in fines available for those who go anyways. Sounds like a reasonable program to me. But Ms.Ross just couldn't help herself, and even though she had signed up for the program, sh went back to the casinos, over and over and over until she had lost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Now she's blaming the government and wants it to pay her back the money she lost. Can I get in on that? I dropped 60 bucks in a Wheel of Fortune machine and all I got was a smile from a digital Pat Sajak. There was no digital Vanna, or it was so waif-like that I missed it. But regardless, could I get reimbursed now too, now that I've had time to think about it and knowing that it didn't end with bells and whistles? I wonder if this lawsuit would still be waged if after Ms. Ross snuck back into the casino she had struck proverbial gold. I bet not and that's the safest wager around.

The NDP has predictably come a-running, backing this lawsuit with vigour. "She's a victim," they cry. "Oh horrors," they scream. "The government should have helped her," gaming critic Shane Simpson wails. Well, what about personal choice and responsibility? This woman chose to gamble. She made that choice besides not having the money for it, besides having been self-excluded, besides being told not to come back. She put the quarter in the machine, and she made the choice again, and again, and again and each time she sent the slots spinning, she made the choice again.

Is another government program really what we need here? More educational commercials? More money coming from hard-working taxpayers to fund some bureaucratic project to help people who don't even help themselves? Clearly, what is instead needed is an emphasis on personal responsibility. I know that in today's world, an especially in the Vancouver part of the BC part of the Canada part of today's world, personal responsibility is largely unheard of. We give hand-outs to everyone, treatments for everything, we are ordered to feel sympathy and understanding for all sorts of bizarre behaviour. But nonetheless, personal responsibility is what we need here and that is what Ms. Ross needed too. While it is easier to look to government to blame, to blame society, to blame addiction, to blame someone, anyone, other than yourself, the buck stops with you. And in this case, if Joyce May Ross had made the buck stop with her, she'd have at least one more buck than she has now.
www.thefledglingblog.blogspot.com

SarahPAC

sigh :)

Stockwell Saves the Day

Thank heavens there are some politicians who have their head screwed on straight and aren't steeped in political correctness. Today, Treasury Board President, MP Stockwell Day announced that the federal government would not be entertaining the idea of renaming the gem of Vancouver, Stanley Park, to Xwayxway Park. I must admit, if i wasn't the one who just wrote it, I would never have believed that last sentence. What kind of harebrained scheme was this anyways? What benefit would there be to changing a world-renowned name that is steeped in heritage and history. In fact, native leaders should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, as it betrays their own people. Aboriginals in Canada face myriad hardships and their communities are often plagued by problems. Whereas native leaders should be working on building up their communities, investing in their young people, and forging cultural and economic ties with other communities, they are instead spending their efforts thinking up red-herrings like this. All the name changes in the world, whether to Salish Sea, or Hadai Gwaii or XwayXway, won't solve the problems facing today's aboriginal and appeasement of this kind, where we try to symbolically make up for the past, accomplishes very little. The Conservative government lived up to its namesake today, and thankfully refused to throw away a century of history and tradition to score cheap political points.

Canada Day!

It is always nice to see Queen Elizabeth II in Canada to celebrate the birth of the country. So in honour of the regal, I hope you all have a wonderful Dominion Day!

Senator Oprah

Apparently Blago contemplated appointing Oprah to fill Obama's vacated Senate seat after he won the election. lol, I wonder what was his "ah-ha" moment that made him change his mind and instead tyr to sell the seat to the highest bidder? Oh, Chicago politics, ain't it grand? But it would have been worth it to hear a United States Senator shout, "You get a car, you get car. You get a car! YOU get a car!"

G8/G20 A Success For Canada

With the G8 and G20 summits now over, it is hard not to conclude that the meetings were a huge success for Canada and for Stephen Harper's government. Going in to these summits, Harper had three objectives: kill the proposed bank tax, get agreement to cut deficits by half by 2013, and secure funding for maternal health initiatives in the developing world without promoting abortion. With the debates over and the leaders departed, it is clear Harper went three-for-three. A uniform bank tax across the G20, as was proposed by the UK and US, was quickly abandoned and instead it will be up to individual countries to impose whatever taxes they wish, and Canada will, of course, levy no such tax. Coming into the summits, countries such as Germany were pushing for strict austerity measures while others, notably the United States, insisted that it was too soon to stop stimulus spending. Harper's proposal was to slash budget deficits in half by 2013, a "Canadian compromise" eventually agreed to by the other nations involved. And finally, the most lasting and positive outcome from these meetings will be the new funding secured for maternal and child health. This was, as Harper described, the flagship initiative of this G8 meeting, and it will see $7.3 billion spent over the next five years to help fight the eight million child deaths and 350,000 maternal deaths that occur every year, largely in the developing world. Of the $7.3 billion, Canada will provide a disproportionately large contribution of $1.1 billion, of which zero will go to fund abortions and will instead be spent on vaccinations, safe and sanitary deliveries, and life-saving medications and treatments for mothers and infants, precisely what Harper had been after. Even the protests ended up helping Harper by silencing the uproar over the security costs. Why do we have to spend a billion dollars on security? Because cowardly thugs hiding behind black masks insist on torching cars, smashing windows and breaking into banks. But in the end, these summits should not be remembered for the "protests" but rather for Canada's clear policy victories and leadership on the world stage.

G8/G20 Price Tag Not Out Of Line

The Parliamentary Budget Officer, Kevin Page, has reported that while the billion dollar plus pricetag for the G8 and G20 summits this week is staggering, it is NOT as out of line as the opposition claims. The non-partisan PBO (although Page is seeming to be becoming more and more politcal) says that the much-touted bills for other G8 and G20 summits are, as the government has insisted, are wildly unreliable. For example, the pricetag of $18 million for the Pittsburg summit does not include federal costs, national guard costs, or military costs, rather only taking into account the city of Pittsburg's costs. The fact is that we don't really know how much most other summits have cost as other governments have not been nearly as forthcoming as the Conservative government here has been. And yes, there may be unprecedented security but just watch the news coverage and you'll see the leagues of activists, provacateurs, protestors and anarchists who's insistance on demonstrating against everything necessitates this very security. Do you think if we did not see thousands of whiners fly into Toronto from around the world, perhaps we wouldn't need to spend a billion on security?

NDP Straddles Fence on Crown Surpluses

The NDP was railing yesterday about the transfer of $778 billion from ICBC's surplus to general provincial coffers. Mike Farnworth claimed the government had a "guilty conscience" after pillaging the crown corporation to fund other government priorities. So, if I am correct, the NDP now believes crown corporation surpluses should be distributed to back to their customers. How odd, considering that a few short months ago it was the NDP who was outraged over BC Hydro, BC Lottery Corporation, and ICBC spending money on 2010 Olympic marketing and promotions. The NDP of months ago demanded that this crown corporation money should instead be funneled to other government services such as education and health care. Hmm, that sounds an awful lot like what the government is doing with the ICBC surplus. In fact, ICBC will be dropping insurance premiums by almost 2%, beefing up its rainy-day fund, AND helping to fund other government services. Yet again, the NDP show that nobody talks out both sides of their mouths better.

What?! Maureen Dowd and I agree on something?

You're sure to hear an echo if you read Dowd's take on Obama's oil spill response along with mine.

Dowd's piece

Mine

Oil Rig Not The Only Thing That's Been Blown Up

The oil is still pumping out of the ruins of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico. Albeit, the oil is now mixed with the heavy mud being pumped into the pipe, but as of today, the "top kill", the latest in a series of everything-but-the-kitchen-sink fixes, has not worked. This spill has given credence to the environmentalists who claim that oil spills are a matter of "when" and not "if." They have also raised legitimate questions about regulation and safety precautions on off shore drilling platforms. But one other thing this spill has done is to expose President Obama as a mere shadow of the inspirational second-coming that many had hoped. That dream, which had been on life-support more or less since day one, has now passed on. Obama has been shown to be just like most other politicians, steeped in so many briefings and so much bureaucracy as to be detached from the reality on the ground. Much has been made of this spill being Obama's Katrina, a comparison that looks laughable on the surface. But Katrina destroyed what was left of George W. Bush's image as a down-home, compassionate guy. Remember all the talk about Bush being the one voters wanted to have a beer with? That died with Katrina. Obama has now been shown in a similar light. Gone is the inspiration, the colour, the energy. Obama is now cold, detached, indifferent. You can see it in the way he parses his words, in the way that even what is to be an emotional visit to the Gulf Coast is scripted, parsed and teleprompted. You can see it in the way he speaks now too. What was once great oration is now dull, meaningless and calculated. He bobs his head from left to right and then back again at such regular intervals that it leaves me convinced it must be timed and rehearsed: "Right teleprompter...one...two...left teleprompter...one...two..." Whereas Bush or Clinton would be down in Louisiana, knee deep in sludge, shucking oysters and hugging locals, Obama is at best, arms-length, approaching the oil spill as the lawyer and professor that he is. With the oil still pumping into the Gulf, the coming days will determine not only how long it mars the beautiful Louisiana coast, but also to what extent it stains this president.

HST Keeps Getting Better and Better....

...and I mean that in the most sincere way. I've been very clear about where I stand on the HST: I think it is a smart economic policy, which will boost competitiveness, drive job-creation, save government money, and strengthen our economy. And now I've found yet another reason to applaud this new tax policy. The government recently released a list of items that will be taxed and not taxed by the HST. (You can find that list here.) On that list, you'll see that when the HST starts on July 1, it will apply to adult clothes bought for children. Currently, if you buy adult clothes you pay the full 12% tax of GST and PST. However, if you claim you are buying the items for a child, you can save the 7% PST right at the register. With the HST, that will no longer be allowed and it's about time. Having worked in retail for years, I can personally tell you that this PST exemption was wildly abused. I know of countless times I removed the PST from an item that I knew was for the adult who was buying it, not their child. I had tourists coming to my store who could barley speak English, but were well informed to say "No PST". I distinctly remember thinking about all the money being lost to untruthful shoppers and I am thoroughly impressed that the government has abolished this practice. I am sure that some big-boned teenagers would really do need adult clothes will be put out by this change, but for the most part this is a smart move that will close a pretty big loophole for tax evasion that currently exists at every checkout and register in the province.

Britain Gets it Right.....Eventually....Sort of

It's been almost a week since the British elections and finally we found out who was going to be the new Prime Minister. UK voters delivered the Conservatives, under David Cameron, to power, a mere 21 votes shy of a majority. They ousted, unfortunately not zealously enough, PM Gordon Brown from office and despite all the sound and fury about Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg (Britain's Obama, they were told), even knocked his party down 6 seats. So here it was, after 13 years of Labour Party rule, which has seen increasing social breakdown, ever-ballooning debt, a growing nanny state and myriad other problems, the British voters had clearly voted for a change in government. How shocking it was to then see Brown try to hold on to power and form a deal with the 3rd place Liberal Democrats. This parallels between this UK election and our own most recent vote are striking. The Conservative party wins the most seats and votes in a minority government and the 2nd and 3rd place parties (in our case, the Liberals, NDP and Bloc) try to form a coalition. At least here, the people's clear choice was allowed a chance to govern first. I did not support the coalition, but at least it coalesced around real, salient issues in opposition to the government. Brown and Clegg's deal would have simply been a coalition of the losers--and would have been an affront to the voters. But, it all worked out in the end...sort of. Yes, the Conservative Party leader will be the next UK Prime Minister, but as Britain is about to find out, minority governments produce weak, watered-down governments and policies. At a time when the country is facing some real strife, some tough decisions, a minority government, even one propped up by a formal coalition, means decisiveness and commitment will be hard to come by.

The Greeks Have No One to Blame but Themselves

Yesterday, Greek protesters threw petro-bombs into a bank that was open for business and full of patrons. The protesters were decrying the austerity package the Greek government was going to approve and lead to slashing the public service, cutting the government budget, and hiking taxes. The Greeks have no choice here, the country is broke and on the verge of defaulting on its debt. This would drag the Euro down and likely topple the other debt-ridden countries, the aptly-named PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) and plunge the continent and perhaps the world back into recession and crisis. Those protesters, you know, the ones who have lived on a diet of milk and honey without worrying about the bill, they killed 3 people. The people trying to go about their daily lives, had to flee the bank as it burst into flames. Three souls couldn't get out the front and tried to make it to the roof. They were overcome by the smoke and flames.

For years, the people of Greece have demanded governments spend and spend and governments obliged. The Greek people now must pay the price for their unsustainable lifestyle. Greece is a country where more than a quarter of the economy occurs under-the-table, hidden from taxation; where the majority of people evade their taxes; where public service wages have risen an average of 30% since 2006; where people get bonuses for showing up to work on time; and where a socialist government has imposed huge taxes, spent wildly and stagnated growth. Sorry Zorba, but you have no one to blame but yourself.

Talk About The Revolving Doors of the Justice System!

Kash Heed the on again, off again, on again (and now off again) Solicitor General of BC has stepped down again. Kash Heed stepped down the first time because controversial (and it turns out, illegal) campaign literature attacking his opponent was sent out to voters in his riding. When this news broke, Mr. Heed did the honorable thing; Mr. Heed said he didn't know anything about the flyers, but stepped down anyways while a special prosecutor looked into it. Good job. The special prosecutor then came back and said Mr. Heed was clear of any wrongdoing, but several others involved in his campaign broke election laws, notably his campaign manager and his financial agent. Now, while this may raise legitimate concerns over Mr. Heed's judgement and his abilities to manage a campaign, let alone a ministry, the story should have ended there. Unfortunately, the premier reinstated Mr. Heed into cabinet a tad quickly it would seem, because the special prosecutor now has admitted a conflict of interest: the law firm he works for donated to Heed's campaign. Sigh. So Mr. Heed had to resign yet again, because the investigation may have been tainted. And thus, a scandal that should have died a quiet death has new life breathed into it. This really shouldn't have been a big issue but it fits the current narrative of a government in turmoil, a party on the ropes. The funny thing is that the government really did nothing wrong on this file. Mr. Heed resigned when he should have. An investigation was called. Mr. Heed was reinstated when he was found innocent. And with the new information, there really was no other choice but for him to resign again. But my, oh my, when it rains it pours.

Oxygen Masks for Pets

I think I pulled a muscle rolling my eyes over this one. The Toronto Fire Department has joined a host of others in now carrying pet-sized oxygen masks to the fires it attends. This is a great idea! When my neighbourhood is burning down, I certainly want to see a bunch of firefighters trying to fit oxygen masks on Fido, Polly and Mr. Whiskers. And according to the Toronto Star, the masks will even be "small enough to resuscitate a parrot." Thank heavens. I know firefighters have been saving pets from burning buildings for so many years that it's cliched, but this seems to be taking it a step far.

100 Mile Diet No Reason to Oppose Site C Dam

There's been the typical hue and cry from environmentalists and the constant complainers in this province about the news that the Site C dam is going to be built on the Peace River. What of the migratory birds? What about the poor ungulates--whatever the hell those are. (Apparently, ungulates are moose and deer and the like. In that case, absolutely stop a multi-billion dollar capital program to preserve the creature comforts of deer! Yikes!) The richest reason yet for opposing the dam is that it will flood hectares and hectares if land that could be farmed. That's true. 5400 hundred hectares of land will be flooded, but only a small fraction of that is arable land. But, as we all know (because its crammed down our throats at every opportunity) we should all be eating local and following the 100 mile diet. Forget for a second that the 100 mile folks wrote what is the most smug, self-congratulating piece of literature I've ever read and take a look at a map. The Site C dam would be built in the northeast reaches of the province. Even if all 5400 hectares of land could grow delicious grapes, crunchy almonds, ripe avocados, juicy apples, and plump strawberries, they would still have to be trucked hundreds of miles to get to the bulk of the population in the lower mainland. In fact, to get to where I'm typing now, it would have to travel over 745 miles! For that mileage, I could get produce from Washington, Oregon, and even half of California with a smaller "carbon footprint" than this so-called 'local' produce! There are plenty of concerns to take into account when building a large project like a hydroelectric dam but certainly the opinions of birds and the carbon footprint of leeks cannot be among them. BC needs power, BC has rivers, BC should build Site C.

Premier Right to Boycott Vaisakhi Parade

The annual Vaisakhi parade, celebrating the birth of the Sikh faith, went ahead this weekend in Surrey without participation from Premier Campbell and with condemnation from Surrey's mayor Diane Watts. The Surrey Vaisakhi parade has been a source of controversy in the last few years for having floats with images of known terrorists and murderers being celebrated as "martyrs" for the Sikh separatist movement. The reason for the snub this year was the outrageous remarks of one of the organizers that were aimed at MLA Dave Hayer and MP Ujjal Dosanjh. The organizer claimed that these two elected representatives were not welcome at the parade and if they chose to come, they should bring their own security as their safety could not be guaranteed. These comments display an alarming arrogance and hate that has no place in our communities. Hayer and Dosanjh are well known opponents of the kind of Sikh extremism and terrorism that many in the Surrey Sikh community sympathize with. These two representatives have faced repercussions for being moderate and peaceful before. Mr. Dosanjh was severely beaten in the 1980's for his moderate beliefs and Mr. Hayer's father was viciously murdered for being a moderate. This year, by threatening elected officials and refusing to remove the "martyr" floats, the parade has crossed the line. Premier Campbell was right to demand an apology from the organizers and when they outrageously refused to, he was right to boycott the parade. This type of behaviour is unbelievable and unacceptable. So let me paraphrase Mr. Hayer's comments from this weekend and direct them at the parade organizers: "This isn't India. If you are so concerned with India-stay in India." We must expect and demand that those who come to Canada to start a new life actually do so, and don't bring their bitter animosities and violent, extremist baggage with them.

Patient-Focused Funding The Way To Go

The BC government recently announced that it was moving towards patient-focused funding for the province's hospitals. This enlightened move is exactly the kind of thinking the province's health care system needs and is what Minister Kevin Falcon was brought in to do. Our health care system is largely unsustainable with long wait times, rationing of care and a $15 billion dollar price tag that takes up 40% of the budget. With the current block funding model, hospitals get given their budgets ahead of time and each surgery and stitch comes out of that money. With this system, there is no incentive for being efficient. In fact, this funding model creates an incentive to perform fewer and fewer procedures as to not blow through your yearly budget, creating a bizarre scenario where hospitals LOSE money for doing procedures. The patient-focused model announced by the government institutes some funding that follows the patient--it goes to whichever hospital performs the needed procedure. Thus, hospitals MAKE money when they perform more procedures. This injects a much-needed element of competition to the health care system and like most everywhere else the free market is unleashed, choice goes up and price comes down. With the new funding model, hospitals get rewarded with incentives and funding for excellence. For example, if a hospital's maternity ward is exceptional and attracts patients from far and wide, it will get rewarded for that. Unfortunately, the provincial NDP is opposing this new funding model, opting to sound the tired call for more spending and "innovation." One of these demands is unsustainable, the other an empty, meaningless buzz word used by politicians that are out of real ideas. This government plan is a much needed reform, one of several that we need, and will bring down costs, shorten wait lists and improve patient care

The Rich Should Pay Their Fair Share

How often have we heard that refrain, especially from Democrats in the US? Whenever there is a budget crunch, the answer is to tax the rich more. The health care bill just passed does this, taxing the top 2%. If only the rich paid their fair share, everything would be better, we're told. Canada's NDP loves this refrain as well. The Left would pay for everything by increasing taxes on the rich. After all, it is common knowledge that the rich, the top percentiles, don't pay their fair share of taxes. Of course, like most things that are "common knowledge," this too is wrong.
Look at the income taxes collected in the US for example. As a percentage of all income tax that is brought in, here's who pays what:

So, the top 20% of income earners pay over 83% of all the income taxes collected. That sounds like a fair share to me. After the richest 20% get through paying taxes, the government has only 14% to collect form the remaining 80% of taxpayers. What's more, look at the bottom 40%. These people actually receive more refundable tax credits from government than they pay, so as a whole, they pay no income taxes at all. That's 40% paying on average no income taxes while the top 20% pay the vast majority of all income taxes. The highest earning amongst us should pay more tax than the poor and middle class, but let's not indulge those who suggest that taxing the rich is the obvious and equitable way to raise revenue.

Chickens in the City

Vancouver is inching ever closer to allowing residents to keep chickens in their backyards. I'm not sure where I stand on this issue. In general, I am strongly pro-chicken. For a while, I had three chickens in my backyard in Surrey and have had a soft spot for the feathered purveyors of eggs ever since. When I'm at the Safeway, I buy the free range eggs so I know the chickens could run around like mine used to. And the anti-caged chickens wing of the animal rights movement is the one segment I support out of a movement I find grating and naive. My own chicken fancy leads me to want to support allowing chickens in Vancouver. That is, however, until I really recollect my own chicken rearing experience. Chickens are loud. Chickens are really loud. Vancouver is not going to allow roosters, but the male chicken is not the only one who lets you know when morning has arrived. Bright and early each morning, hens have to pass an egg and they let everyone know about it. We never got complaints in the suburbs, but that's because it was the suburbs. With large lots and big houses, there was space between our chickens and our neighbours. Vancouverites won't have that luxury living as close as they do there. Chickens also can attract mice, rats, and play host to a variety of germs and viruses including avian flu and salmonella. These microbial side effects are certain to be worse in the close confines of a city than they ever are on a farm or in the country. And finally, what happens when people get tired of their chickens or the chickens die? What's a person in the West End supposed to do with an unwanted or dead chicken? Well, Vancouver City Council has come up with the solution: a $20,000 compound for unwanted and abandoned chickens. That's a $20,000 tab to the residents of a city with ever escalating property taxes so that they can subsidize the irresponsibility of some of their neighbours. But despite this $20,000 halfway home for farm fowl, I expect this resolution to pass because it helps the city and its eco-Mayor achieve the self-created title of Greenest City in the World. I presume having chickens across the city is supposed to help cut the emissions from all those egg delivery trucks zipping to and fro in Vancouver? But regardless of these concerns, I think I'm going to enjoy this chicken experiment anyways. And what I think I'll like most is the image of all those smug, holier-than-thou, eco-Vancouverites cleaning out chicken droppings and collecting the eggs for their organic egg-white omelets out of the backside of a living, breathing creature instead of from the bright and clean shelves of their neighbourhood Whole Foods. Now THAT will be worth the 20 grand!

Preventative Treatment Not Always a Wise Investment

I often hear proponents of increasing health care spending arguing for more preventative care. "More diabetes tests, mammograms, PSA tests, gene testing, blood work ups" they demand. More power to them. Mammograms save lives. PSA tests can find prostate cancers early when survival rates are north of 90%. I like preventative treatments. However, those calling for them often parrot the same refrain: prevention saves the health care system money. This statement seems logical, it seems reasonable. It is also, unfortunately, not true. In many cases, preventative care ends up costing the health care system more than the illnesses they prevent would have cost. I dug up an old Charles Krauthammer article that I read a while back, and he explained it well: "Think of it this way. Assume that a screening test for disease X costs $500 and finding it early averts $10,000 of costly treatment at a later stage. Are you saving money? Well, if one in 10 of those who are screened tests positive, society is saving $5,000. But if only one in 100 would get that disease, society is shelling out $40,000 more than it would without the preventive care." Since you have to provide preventative care to everyone, even those who may have never gotten the disease in the end anyways, the preventative care will often drain more out of tight health care budgets than it saves. Why am I writing about this now? Last week, the Cancer Advocacy Coalition of Canada released a report calling for many health care innovations, including cutting-edge genetic testing for cancer. These gene tests, or 21-gene assays, can determine whether particular breast cancers will benefit from radiation treatment. Apparently, roughly 25% of breast cancers will not respond positively to radiation treatment, meaning it is essentially useless. Interesting stuff. The group goes on to argue, and the media reports, that Canada should have more access to these $4000 tests. By telling us which 1 out of every 4 breast cancers won't benefit from the $15,000 radiation treatment, these tests will save the health care system money. Got that? If we test all breast cancers at $4000 a pop, we will find out which 1 out of every 4can forgo the expensive $15,000 radiation treatment, thus savings our health care system a bundle. Let's run that math down one more time:
$4000 tests x 4 = $16,000
1 x $15,000 radiation treatment avoided for every 4 tests = $15,000
In the end, doesn't this particular preventative procedure actually cost the health care system $1000 more for every 4 breast cancers?
Now, albeit, this is a rather cold method of determining appropriate care. You could argue, and I would strongly agree, that the $1000 is money well spent for sparing women the agony of radiation treatment that's not going to do any good. Any innovation that can help in the fight against cancer is a welcome one, even if it costs more. However, I'd just rather here our leaders simply say that, instead of masquerading behind disingenuous arguments about "savings."

Earth Hour Dims to New Lows

British Colombians who participated in this year's Earth Hour saved the least amount of energy yet, achieving only a 1.04% drop in energy use. Earth Hour is designed to raise awareness for global warming--er, climate change, an issue I would have thought didn't need any further awareness. I think people are aware enough, I think fewer people this year care. Whether its the leaked Climategate emails showing that scientists fudged data and blocked any dissenting scientific opinions from being published, or its the Nobel-winning UN science team citing anecdotes, off-the-cuff comments and articles from hiking magazines as scientific sources, people have had their faith in the global warming threat shaken, and are accepting less the doomsday scenarios painted by environmentalists. To me, Earth Hour is yet another in a long-list of stunts that do little but grab headlines. After all, dimming the lights for an hour will do nothing to halt whatever climate change we may be experiencing. Perhaps this year's decline in Earth Hour savings is mere coincidence, the result of a few too many people watching a movie instead of genuflecting to this newest eco-tradition. But just maybe, the dim Earth Hour this year is due to people realizing that climate change is too complex an issue to be dealt with by do-gooder yet do-nothing stunts. Perhaps they realize that any reasoned debate on the issue doesn't revolve around the tar sands or the seal hunt or the Chicken Little posturing of the David Suzuki crowd, but rather involves painful trade-offs and implications for our future growth, prosperity and our very way of life and dimming the lights only dims the debate on these real-world obstacles and issues.

An Open Letter to Justice Minister Rob Nicholson

Mr. Nicholson,
I am writing to express my strong support FOR the extradition of Marc Emery. I understand that a small group of MPs, unfortunately including one of your own Conservative colleagues, has presented a petition to you and asked for you not to sign the extradition order for Mr. Emery. Mr. Nicholson, I urge you to sign that extradition order. Marc Emery is a cheap provocateur and a tacky rabble-rouser. He clearly was not satisfied with the kid-glove treatment he has been getting from Canadian authorities for years, which I also do not support, and smugly decided to try his hand at selling drugs across an international border into the United States. It is well within the jurisdiction on the United States to punish Mr. Emery for these actions and Canada must not stand in the way. If Canada is to continue to be taken seriously on the international stage, we cannot cheapen our diplomatic efforts by refusing to honour our extradition treaties. Under the Extradition Act, we would have to claim that the United States has conducted "unjust or undue or oppressive actions" in order to justify refusing the extradition request and that is absurd. Marc Emery is petty agitator who rolled the dice and must now face the consequences of his actions. Let us not legitimize his "activism" by refusing the extradition request.
Thank you,
-Cory Redekop

HST Opponents Should Come Up With The $1.6 Billion

The HST opponents are continuing to rally against the proposed harmonized sales tax that will come into effect on July 1st. Former premier Bill Vander Zalm is holding rallies across the province, the NDP is making political hay out of it whenever they can, the BC Restaurant and Foodservices Association is running ads and a website in opposition, and a petition will begin circulating in April hoping to derail the yet-to-be-written legislation. The BC Liberals, who were strangely silent on this issue for so long, have finally begun to fight back, explaining the myriad benefits that the HST will provide for the economy. The BC Liberals need to start demanding one other thing of the HST opponents: where's the $1.6 billion? The federal government gave BC a $1.6 billion payment to harmonize the federal and provincial sales taxes. With the province's budget bleeding red ink, I'd like to know where the strange bedfellows of the NDP and Bill Vander Zalm are planning on coming up with that money? Without the $1.6 billion, we'd be in an even bigger hole than we are now. And what about the tens of millions the government itself will save each year with the HST? Where will that money come from? And what about the billions in savings businesses and employers will get from the HST? What are the opponents' plans to cover all that? The HST makes both short term and long term economic sense for British Columbia and no Vander Zalm-NDP petition drive is going to convince me otherwise.

The 1990's is no excuse to ignore the deficit

With the federal budget out today, Canada is looking at 5 years of multi-billion dollar deficits still to come, going from a whopping 50 Billion this fiscal year to $27 billion next year to 17.5 billion the year after that and so on. To fight this ballooning debt, the Conservatives have sought to freeze departmental budgets and make some moves to tighten the fiscal belt, with much harder measures to come in following years. The reaction from the Liberals and NDP to this belt-tightening? They want to unbutton their pants and reach for seconds! The NDP is not supporting the budget because they want more spending on personal transfers, more spending on the environment, more spending on public sector wages, and the like. The Liberal leader, Michael Ignatieff, keeps insisting that there really is no deficit problem. After all, he notes, the ratio of debt to GDP is lower now than it was in the 1990's when the deficits were really bad. What Mr. Ignatieff fails to mention is that Canada had no choice but to tackle our deficits in the 1990's because Canada was about to have its bond rating reduced by international rating agencies. A lower bond rating means it would have been harder for us to get money to cover our deficits and we would have to offer higher interest payments to our lenders. We do not want to wait until we are back in that position before we start bringing the federal deficits and debt under control. We already spend over $30 billion a year servicing our public debt. That's money flushed away to our debt-holders that could go to any number of other programs. If we keep piling on billions to the debt just as interest rates rise from record lows, that debt servicing cost will rise. That's the real shame here as it literally forces future generations to pay for our spending. The Liberals and NDP should stop pushing for more spending and support the modest attempts to bring our deficits under control.

Government should heed CD Howe's Advice

On Tuesday, the C.D. Howe Institute, one of Canada's leading public policy think tanks, recommended the Bank of Canada perform several quick and sharp increases to the key interest rate starting in June. The institute suggests the central bank "implement a 50 basis point hike at every six-week meeting starting in July and continuing through until mid-2011." I, along with many Canadians from the finance minister to Maclean's magazine, have voiced concern with the huge debt loads Canadians have taken on laregly due to the run-away housing market and ballooing mortage payments. Interest rates are currently as low as they can go. That's not hyperbole either, the rates are at 0.25% right now--any lower and the banks would be paying you to take out a loan. Interest rates have to go up, they will go up, and they should begin as soon as possible. This would cool the housing markets, slow inflation (which stands at 2% at the bottom of shaky recovery)and set our economy on more sustainable groud. We've tended to use low interest rates for every economic application in recent years. Interest rates were lowered to fuel the economny in boom times, they were lowered to prop up the economy when cracks began to show, they were lowered when the economy tanked and now they've been pushed to rock-bottom levels to help propel a recovery. Talk about a panacea! Low interest rates are not the cure-all for our economic woes. Without action soon these record low interst rates will only lead to damaging inflation-as the recovery really starts to take hold and commodities liek natural gas and oil surge-as well as a further inflation of a housing bubble that's really going to sting when it pops.

Olympic Protesters A Sad Display

The 2010 Olympics kicked off yesterday with a great opening ceremony. However, during the final day of the torch relay, the route was interrupted several times by a sad display: olympic protesters. This ragtag group of provocateurs have been chomping at the bit to have their 15 minutes of fame and shine a light on their cause. And what is their cause? Well, judging byt the signs and placcards yesterday, it includes everything from homelessness to the oil sands, from native land claims to a corporate new world order. I even saw a "free Marc Emery" poster for god's sake. This isn't an organized protest against a particular issue, this is a group of rowdy anarchists and activists bent on complaining about something--the olympics is just the cause de jour. If we weren't hosting this international event, you can bet your bottom dollar they would have found something else to complain about. There will be no pleasing the constant griping of Vancouver's protesters. If the government gave them all a $1000, they'd demand more. If we build them houses, they'll march to City Hall for better furniture. If the skies opened up and rainbows and puppy dogs flooded the city, they'd probably be bitching about the bright lights and the noise. It's time we stop giving these people a soapbox everytime they demand one, especially when they don't even have a coherent message and there's nothing they can accomplish. The Olympics are here, that's certainly not going to change now. These "activists" had a city-wide referendum and numerous elections at all government levels to try and convince people of their beliefs. They didn't. People support the games. We can squabble over costs here and there, but the deed is done and the vast majority of people support it. Now here's hoping these fringe protesters don't get any more publicity during the next 2 weeks, lest the world leave Vancouver thinking all we have are pot-heads, drug addicts and whiners.

Hands Off My Coke!

A study from the University of Minnesota was released today which states that drinking more than 2 soft drinks a week increases your risk of getting pancreatic cancer. Since I live off a steady stream of cola, should I be worried? The study's author states that it isn't anything in pop specifically, rather it is the "high levels of sugar in soft drinks [that] may be increasing the level of insulin in the body, which we think contributes to pancreatic cancer cell growth." While the authors did test fruit juice (which is MORE sugary than most pop) and found no link, they did not test iced tea, coffee with sugar, flavoured waters, beer, wine or any of the other sweet beverages around. And if the sugar is the culprit, there is a lot of sugar in a lot of things. Did you have a glass of milk with breakfast? As much sugar in there as half a can of pepsi. What about some low-fat, prebiotic strawberry yogurt? You'll get more sugar there than in a can of 7up or Schweppes Ginger Ale. Put ketchup on anything? That's 5 grams a tablespoon. The list of items with sugar, whether added or natural, is a long one and any one of them could have similar pancreatic effects as pop. Finally, it is important to note the authors themselves point out that"people who consume carbonated, sugar-sweetened soft drinks on a regular basis tend to have a poor behavioral profile overall," meaning that it's most likely that the participants who got cancer in this study had poor diets and other contributing health and lifestyle factors besides a twice-weekly soft drink habit. Oh, and on top of that, some warn "that the study may be based on too few cases (only 140 participants developed pancreatic cancer) and that other risk factors such as smoking may have contributed to the results." Now, where's my Coke?

Micro Lofts Just a Micro Solution

Property developer Reliance Properties unveiled plans to build so-called "micro lofts" in Vancouver that average a paltry 270 square feet. Many claim that these smaller units, which will likely rent for around $750, can be a solution for Vancouverites of more modest means, especially students and single service-sector workers. These people, and frankly many more, are finding themselves priced out of the Vancouver market, which is now being dubbed the most unaffordable in the world. The entire region, and not just the downtown core either, has seen years and years of rising prices. This growth, in my opinion, is unsustainable. House and condo prices have exploded across the region; home prices have more than doubled in some areas. These micro lofts aren't much of a solution for the sky-high real estate market in Metro Vancouver. Instead, fiscal policies should be adopted by government to curb this growth before people must abandon the dream of home ownership and settle for renting or at best, cramped apartment living like pictured above, where the toilet is literally in your shower and your bed has to fold up inside the wall. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty opined last month that the federal government may take steps to cool the housing market, including shortening the allowable duration of mortgages (currently 35 years) or increasing the required 5% down payment. I urge the finance minister and the federal government to strongly consider doing both. The government needs to act to stamp down the runaway inflation in the housing market. Yes, require larger down payments. Yes, reduce the amortization period. I suggest also that it's time interest rates begin to creep back up from their current historic lows. The low cost of mortgages is a key driving force in the real estate market right now with people scrambling to buy-in while interest rates are as low as they are. Begin to ratchet those rates up and hopefully we can see home prices descend back to earth. If left unattended, as it has been for the last decade, real estate will continue to grow itself a nice shiny bubble that will burst just as Canada has finished climbing out of the great recession of '08-'09 and I'd rather endure the pain of deflating it now than wait for the 'pop'.

BC Teachers Start Annual FSA Bellyaching

It's that time of year again when BC grade 4 and 7 students write the standardized Foundation Skills Assessment tests, a reading, writing and numeracy evaluation. It is therefore also the time of year when the BC Teachers Federation and their legion of educators get out their self-serving soapboxes and start the annual season of FSA complaints. Each year BC Teachers come out in force to advocate against students taking this particular test. This year, teachers are not only advocating through the media their ideological position, they are also using students are conduits for handouts and letters aimed at getting parents to try and have their child opted-out. The BCTF argues that the FSA wastes classroom time, forces teachers to "teach to the test", and takes attention away from more effective learning tools like field trips, such as the annual trek of school aged kids to Playland amusement park that masquerades as a physics lesson, or a trip to an IMAX theater to watch a movie about warm water coral reefs, both of which are clearly educational goldmines! However, the BCTF's constant griping is wearing thin. The FSA is just one test of many that students must take throughout their lives. It tests kids for reading comprehension, writing skills and numeracy abilities, all things that teachers should be passionate about. Teachers should want to know how their school is doing in these areas and should welcome any such data. The FSA takes a total of 4 hours to complete, which is spread over multiple testing days. 4 hours out of 10 months of instructional time is hardly the waste of time the BCTF claims. As for educators having to "teach to the test," wherein they allegedly must forgo meaningful teaching and curriculum to help students prepare for the test, I would expect no less! The FSA asks questions such as this:

To make 2 dozen cookies, they need 350 g of chocolate chips.

What mass of chocolate chips is needed to make 15 dozen cookies?

. 1.875 kg
. 2.45 kg
. 2.625 kg
. 5.25 kg

I would expect 12 year olds to be able to answer this question. I expect teachers to have been teaching math skills such as this. If teaching this kind of math is the type of "teaching to the test" that the BCTF wants to get rid of, what kind of teaching do they want? More colouring? More field trips? More of the limp curriculum that has our kids lagging behind many other countries in basic skills? More of the kind of teaching that has resulted in 21% of kids, that's 1 in 5, not being able to answer this type of question, or write a proper paragraph, or understand the content of a short piece of reading, as the FSA results have shown? Dig a little deeper and you begin to see what all this bellyaching is about. The BCTF is a left wing entity with strong ties to the NDP. This ideology leads them to scoff at anything that resembles meritocracy, whether its standardized testing or capitalism. They ideologically oppose allowing some kids to succeed and others to fail. They'd much rather let everyone slide through with whatever hand-holding and educational pablum it requires. The BCTF announces proudly in a YouTube video that the opposition to the FSA is all about "social justice," yet another leftist plank they share with the NDP platform. Isn't it about time the BCTF and its teachers started caring a little less about politics and a little more about teaching?

A Spark Away From Disaster

On Christmas Day 2009, an Airbus 330 carrying 279 passengers exploded over the city of Detroit during its descent. Flaming debris showered down across city blocks and neighbourhoods many more people on the ground were killed as the wreckage fell. This is the scenario terrorists had in mind when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab tried to ignite explosives he had snuck onto the plane. Many people do not seem to understand the gravity of this attack. And that's what it was, an attempted terrorist attack. It was not a botched plan, or an uncovered plot, or a threat. This was an attack that would have, but for the chance failure of Abdulmutallub to ignite, killed hundreds, terrorized millions, bankrupt the aviation industry and likely plunged the US deeper into recession. For some reason, because this was a failed attack, many people are brushing it off and are moving on to complaining about the full body scanners and the country of origin profiling that is being implemented in its wake. Those people need to wake up and realize that this was an attempt organized by Islamic terrorists that was a spark away from fruition. I'm glad to see Canada taking the lead in installing the full body scanners that would have thwarted this kind of attack. Privacy concerns are legitimate, but largely overemphasized. The images are not as detailed as many imagine and aren't downloaded to some pervert's USB for fun time back at home. In fact, the person screening the images can't even see you--they're kept behind the scenes in a separate room. Also implemented is a list of countries from which travellers heading to the US will be doubly screened. Coming to New York from Libya, for example, will garner extra scrutiny. This kind of profiling should have been enacted years ago and it should be expanded to include all past trips as well. Check everyone's passport and if they've visited a "terror-prone" area-- recently been on a jaunt to the Swat region of Pakistan?--flag them for extra security. Almost all recent terrorists have been connected to these terror-prone states: the London bombers travelled to Pakistan prior to their attacks, the 9/11 hijackers visited and trained in Afghanistan, the mastermind of the Madrid bombings trained in Afghanistan and the Christmas Day bomber visited terrorist cells in Yemen. It's time the countries that foster this kind of extremism are flagged and those people travelling to, from and through them get the most rigorous security screening available.