Pie Palace

I occasionally get emails regarding the Asperger test hosted here on PiePalace. Some of them are heartbreaking:

I am trying to find information on how to test my son for Asperger’s. [... he has a hard time socializing... has difficulties with kids his own age...] Our insurance does not provide for testing and I can not afford to have him tested.

I know Canada’s health care system has problems, but at least anyone can get their kid in front of a doctor.

Years ago, I contributed policy to the Green Party of Canada on media. In it, I stated (words to the effect of) “media is a business like no other, it has a responsibility to be profitable, but more importantly, it has the responsibility to hold our public offices to account.” The policy items were my rough attempt to discourage the rise of large media conglomerates, and to support regional media outlets.

Yesterday, one of CTV shut down evening newscasts in Ottawa, and did similar things in Barrie, London, and Victoria. In doing so, they have cost Ottawa yet another media outlet, and yet another avenue for paid journalists to keep our politicians, bureaucrats, and corporations honest. Coincidentally, kottke.org has linked to a story describing how the cuts to Baltimore’s daily newspaper has made the police force less accountable:

Half-truths, obfuscations and apparent deceit — these are the wages of a world in which newspapers, their staffs eviscerated, no longer battle at the frontiers of public information. And in a city where officials routinely plead with citizens to trust the police, where witnesses have for years been vulnerable to retaliatory violence, we now have a once-proud department’s officers hiding behind anonymity that is not only arguably illegal under existing public information laws, but hypocritical as well.

And this isn’t just an American problem. As the Dziekanski enquiry is proving, Canadian police reports can sometimes differ dramatically from reality. Without an engaged, and well funded press, there will be no one to hold these officers to account.

What solutions do we have? A CRTC-mandated carriage fee for cable broadcasters? Preferential tax treatment for smaller news organization? Increased funding to public broadcasters? There are solutions, but we, as an electorate have to wake up to the fact these cuts don’t just cost jobs, they are a danger to our public institutions.

And Happy Festivus!

I’m an atheist¹ but I really do enjoy the Christmas season. It has everything I love: snow, time off, parties, a reason to see friends, and an excuse for binge drinking. Given the length of the Ontario winter, I’ve always thought that we should have Christmas sometime in late January, but I’m rarely consulted on these matters.

Here’s the first (and possibly last) Annual Pie Palace Gift List

Canadian Electorate

Over the past year, Canadians have stayed away from the polls in droves, and expressed consternation when opposition parties did their job and opposed poorly considered legislation.

• What they want: A Prime Minister like Barack Obama.
• What they deserve: A remedial civics lesson, explaining why voting is important, and the role of the opposition.
• What they will get: A Prime Minister like George Bush (namely Stephen Harper).

Iraqi Shoe Thrower

Muntadar al-Zaidi threw his shoes at George Bush, yelling “This is for the widows and orphans and all those killed in Iraq.” An event already immortalized across the intertubes by numerous animated gifs and at least one (crappy) flash game.

• What he wants: Stability in Iraq. (presumably)
• What he deserves: Stability in Iraq, and a new pair of shoes.
• What he will get: A long jail term, likely with abuse. (It looks like the abuse has already started)

Green Party Candidate Jen Hunter

Poor Jen. She ran as Green Party candidate in Ottawa-Centre during the 2008 federal election, getting 9.9% of the vote. If she’d gotten an extra 38 votes, she would have gotten 10%, and Elections Canada would have refunded 50% of her campaign expenses to the party.

• What she wants: A seat in Parliament.
• What she deserves: 39 more votes.
• What she will get: A new iPhone, and possibly a scarf.

OC Transpo’s Bus Drivers

Poor bus drivers. They just want their 7% raise over three years, and a contract that will allow them to set their own hours. Is that too much to ask?²

• What they want: A 7% raise, byzantine scheduling rules that favour drivers with seniority, and a pony for every driver.
• What they deserve: Better public relations.
• What they will get: Back to work legislation.

Stephan Harper

This year has been a bit of a roller coaster for the leader of Canada’s least disliked party. Breaking his own law and calling an election early, getting dissed by the Parliamentary auditor he appointed, almost losing the House when his poorly planned fiscal update backfired, and doing anything necessary to hold onto power.

• What he wants: A majority. And a pony.
• What he deserves: Visits from the Ghost of Christmas Past, the Ghost of Christmas Present, and the Ghost of Christmas Future.
• What he will get: A visit from the Ghost of Joe Clarke.

This post is a tardy addition to A&J’s Ottawa Blogger Virtual Christmas Party.

Image credit: AP and AbstractionReaction. Used without permission.

1. Agnostic, to be exact. But “agnostic” sound too noncommittal for my taste. It would probably be more accurate to say that I’m committedly unconvinced of the existence of any higher powers. (back)
2. I’m not sure how I feel about the strike. The union is doing a terrible job at getting their side of the story out. As a bus rider, I want the drivers to be treated fairly, and service to resume – but it’s hard to tell if the drivers’ demands are fair, when I can’t find out what they are. (back)

I’ve always voted for hope. Every time I’ve walked into a polling both, I’ve said to myself: “what do I want the future to look like?” I have a soft spot for sustainability and social justice, so I’ve usually given my vote to the Green Party. But thanks to yesterday’s fiasco at Governor General’s, I don’t want to play nice anymore. I want to punish Stephen Harper.

I feel like voting strategically for the first time in my life. I just want to see Stephen Harper fail.

Democracy can only thrive under the rule of law. In the case of a parliamentary democracy, such as Canada’s, the “rule of law” is a set of polite conventions that every parliamentarian is expected to follow. A party cannot govern without the tacit support of 50%+1 of the sitting MPs. If a party loses that support, the Governor General may either choose to trigger an election, or allow a coalition of other parties to take the reigns of power. This week we’ve seen Harper running scared. Instead of losing his minority government he first delayed a non-confidence vote that would have toppled him, then prorogued the House of Commons.

This is not how our Parliament is intended to work. When a politician knows their time is at an end, they should gracefully step aside, regroup, and attempt a come-back. Not take their ball and go home.

From my perspective, it looks like Harper values power more than anything else. He’s hoping that a two month break will be long enough for him to gather enough popular support (by demonizing Quebec) that he will get a majority in a mid-winter election.

In the background, our economy is slowly grinding to a halt as the Canadian dollar falls, tens of thousands of jobs are lost, and the government hemorrhages money due to fiscal mismanagement.

Photo credit: harperdictatorship.ca.

In 2000 the Conservatives made a deal with the Bloc Quebecois. The Bloc agreed to support the Conservatives, if they could pull together a minority government. Thanks to some deep investigative work by the tireless Pie Palace Parliamentary Bureau¹, we are able to bring you, dear reader, a copy of that very agreement.

Here’s are the highlights:

We, the leaders of the Canadian Alliance, the Bloc Quebecois and the Progressive Conservative Party, have met and agree that Canadians have delivered a clear message in the election held on November 27, 2000: [...]
Canadians also made it clear by their votes that they desired ___ Members of Parliament from the Canadian Alliance, the Bloc Quebecois, and the Progressive Conservative Party to govern. [...] we will be required to govern by consensus.

And here’s the original document, from our shadowy parking-lot dwelling informant.

Of course, this wouldn’t be such a big deal, if it weren’t for the bruhaha that the Conservatives are tossing up about the deal.

1. Yes, it was emailed to us out of the blue, but it is from a reliable source. Regardless, please take it with a grain of salt. (back)

CBC’s Canadian doctors should face regular testing: medical school head is a great example of poor journalism. The gist of the article is simple: a doctor has recommended that Canadian doctors should be periodically recertified. The journalist has found another doctor else who says “No! doctors shouldn’t be retested.” Without talking to the journalist, we can’t tell if that was to create a sense of conflict, or to make the story more “balanced.”

There are three problems here:

1. The No doctor’s statement:
   

   What we do every day is not really a book learning thing, [...] To say, in fact, that because you pass an exam makes you a good physician every 10 years is absolutely wrong.

   is exactly refuted by the CMAJ editorial:
   

   In Quebec, investigators found that family physicians’ scores on their certification examination and Medical Council of Canada Qualifying Examination were related to provision of quality care after 4–7 years in practice. More recently, Holmboe and colleagues found that physicians’ scores on the American Board of Internal Medicine’s Maintenance of Certification examination was associated with higher rates of performance in care for Medicare patients.

   which goes on to cite the studies in question.
2. The Yes doctor, Wendy Levinson has qualifications as a medical instructor, and appears to study how patients interact with their doctors and is a chair at department of medicine.
3. Meanwhile, the No doctor, Howard Conter does not appear to have any any relevant publications or appointments.

News stories like this are important. They get people to think about how healthcare is delivered in Canada, and how that can be reformed. It’s a pity that the story took the form of “she said, he said” instead of dipping into the empirical studies behind the editorial.

The election is over. The NDP and Conservatives gained a few seats. The Liberals lost a few. The Greens doubled their percentage of the popular vote (6%, up from 3%). The only way I can describe the the last 35 days is as a waste of time. The next time Steve-o decides to call an election, Governor General should look to the other parties to form a government.

Anyone who read this blog in the summer of 2006 will know that Elizabeth May was not my first choice to lead the Green Party of Canada. That was two years ago, and I’m not good at dropping grudges, but here’s why I think she’s doing a good job now:

She represents

The Green Party has some pretty complex ideas. Tax shifting is probably the easiest to understand. Things get more complex when someone asks what the Green Party actually stands for. Elizabeth has been able to articulate our stance on a number of positions (a UN mission in Afghanistan, devaluing the Canadian dollar, and electoral reform) in an accessible manner. No, it doesn’t subject the viewer/listener/reader to a long and fairly dry discussion on what we stand for, but it does explain what we want on those issues, and why that’s a good idea. ¹

Shes reasonable

Thursday night’s debate was a great example of Elizabeth looking good. Her arguments were succinct, direct, and researched. She presented the Green Party position with a minimum of complexity. She makes the Green Party look a little bit more respectable.

I certainly don’t think we’re going to win this election. I’m not even sure if we’re going to win a seat. But I do think that Elizabeth is making the Green Party more attractive to people who wouldn’t have considered us as an option in the past. The test will come in longevity: will Elizabeth be able to keep people interested in our party long enough to dig deep and get the goods on what makes us different?

Image by rjmoorhouse, used without permission.²

1. If someone asked me what the Greens stood for, I’d say something along the lines of “we want to change some of the basic choices that our society has made over the past hundred years, to make Canada more egalitarian, more democratic, and more sustainable.” Now, that doesn’t answer many questions, (and it isn’t supposed to) but it’s honest. (back)
2. Yes, that means I’ll take it down if requested to do so. (back)

Imagine my surprise, dear reader: standing on the bus, listening to the radio, only to hear that the Green Party will be on the televised debates. I almost dropped my skateboard.¹

I’ve been involved in four elections as a Green so far, and I have to say that I have a weirdly confident feeling about this election. The Greens are getting pretty good coverage nationally, and in our riding. We’ve (just) gotten into the national debate. People are asking, left, right, and centre for Green signs. In Ottawa-Centre, we’ve already gotten more volunteers than we had last election.

Congratulations to everyone who sent an email, made a call, and signed the online petition. You’ve shown that the electorate can take on a media consortium, and can make politicians do the right thing.

Photo Credit: ItzaFineDay.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dwarf (back)

I really shouldn’t be surprised:

The Green Party isn’t being included in the debates because three of the four establishment parties don’t want the Greens there. I’m surprised that they cared enough to threaten to pull out.
(Update: Edited for style)