Saturday Morning Links

This and that for your weekend reading.

- Armine Yalnizyan points out what a "Buffett tax" could do for Canada:

Put Larry and his 99 fellow CEOs together, and they could put almost a 10% down payment on a national program to bring dental care to school kids. Canadians spend more than $13 billion on dental care, and cavities are 100% preventable. Talk about putting our money where our mouths are—the savings would be enormous.

But you don’t need to be a millionaire to make a difference. If the 8,000 Canadians who received stock options as part of incomes over $250,000 paid taxes on this money at the same rate as the rest of their income—treating executive compensation the same way you treat the income of any other working stiff—it would have raised $337 million for federal coffers in 2009, a down year for options.

Now take that argument a little further. Canada’s federal personal income tax rate is 29% on all incomes above $129,000. That’s much lower than the current top rate of 35% in the U.S.—a rate that’s likely to rise. A new bracket that taxed incomes over $250,000 at 32%, lower than the 33% rate applied to that income level in the U.S., would raise about $2 billion. That could pay for the federal share of a national child-care program.
...
A 35% tax bracket for Canadians whose income is higher than $750,000—the U.S. top rate, except there it’s applied when your income hits $373,650—would yield $1.2 billion. That, for example, could start to address all our aging nationwide wastewater infrastructure.

- But of course, the Cons have other ideas as to what's most important. And Vic Toews is dictating that provinces have no choice but to slash social spending in order to pay for new prisons required by the Cons' dumb-on-crime legislation.

- Rory MacLean reports on the need for a Saskatchewan provincial water strategy. But since a massive part of the problem arises from water wasted by the oil industry in Alberta, we can rest assured that Brad Wall's Sask Party won't have any interest in listening.

- Finally, Naomi Klein writes about the importance of Occupy Wall Street (the movement it's spawning around the globe).

Deep thought

Five months after the election of Canada's first-ever NDP official opposition at the federal level, it's now been declared conventional wisdom that the real opposition comes from provincial governments (who, last I checked, were limited in their ability to spend much time pointing out the federal government's failings since they have their own provinces to run) rather than Parliament.

And I'm only surprised it took so long.

Musical interlude

Faithless feat. Dido - One Step Too Far

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Both Parliamentary Budget Officer Kevin Page and Interim Auditor General John Wiersema are rightly ripping the Cons for their complete unwillingness to be honest about how they're wasting public money. But then, the Cons see a complete lack of accountability as a feature rather than a bug.

- Statistics Canada notes that major changes to the census are a bad idea even on a ten-year time frame. Which makes the Cons' last-minute evisceration of the long form look even more insane.

- Paul McLeod points out that the Cons' attempts to rewrite the outcome of provincial elections went far beyond mere endorsements and spin:

On Prince Edward Island, Liberals are quietly seething despite Robert Ghiz’s re-election with a majority government. They accuse the federal Tories, in particular Senator Mike Duffy and Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney, of trying to steal the election for the Tories.

The dispute centres on Kenney calling in the RCMP in the middle of the election campaign to investigate allegations of fraud and bribery around a provincial immigration program. The story was concurrently leaked to the Globe and Mail, which ran the piece on its front page.

The charges came from three former government bureaucrats. It was later revealed they were driven to a news conference by a Mike Duffy staffer.

- Finally, we'll have to hope that the workers injured in an explosion at Regina's CCRL refinery. But it's also worth noting that between the refinery fire and the death of a worker at an asphalt plant near Glaslyn, this week's news doesn't exactly speak well of the Sask Party's emphasis on voluntary safety in the workplace.

Friday Morning 'Rider Blogging

Sometimes, an ugly result on the scoreboard bears little resemblance to the actual flow of a football game. But last Saturday's annihilation at the hands of the Calgary Stampeders was not one of those games for the Saskatchewan Roughriders.

The 'Riders' offensive line was thoroughly ineffective throughout the game, leaving Darian Durant with few opportunities to make plays and likely contributing to a frustrating set of turnovers. And the team's defence looked pitiful trying to tackle Stamps running back Jon Cornish, who was able to strongarm most of the 'Riders' defenders and outrun the rest at seemingly every turn.

Which means that now is probably the time for the 'Riders to consider how to set themselves up for next year. So let's name some names as to what changes might be worth making as the season winds down.

The easiest calls are older players who were already of relatively little help to the 'Riders, and almost certainly won't be improving over the course of another offseason. The already-traded Jamie Boreham looks to be one example (and indeed it was odd to see the 'Riders' sign him in the first place with Chris Milo developing nicely over the course of the season), but there are plenty of other possibilities.

In particular, an offensive line with four starters and a top backup over 30 hasn't been able to keep up with opponents' defenders for much of the season - with the current tackles (Alex Gauthier and Dan Goodspeed) along with reserve George Hudson looking especially unlikely to contribute to the next contending 'Rider team. So now would seem to be the time to see what a substantial number of younger linemen can do given an opportunity to face regular-season gameplay - to establish themselves if they're ready, and to make it clear what positions the 'Riders need to fill if not. And the 'Riders' more versatile veterans like Gene Makowsky and Marc Parenteau can fill in the gaps for those who don't live up to expectations.

Similarly, veterans like Barrin Simpson, Jason Clermont, Graeme Bell, Ryan Dinwiddie, Dario Romero and James Robinson don't have much to prove or improve at this point. And while it's probably worth keeping at least the former four around as mentors and possible contributors next season, the 'Riders shouldn't be far from looking at their positions as valuable sources of playing time and experience for younger players.

Meanwhile, it's not as if the 'Riders are lacking for young talent to try out. There's effectively a full non-import offensive line sitting on the team's bench and/or injured list, and a defensive line waiting for its turn between the bench and the practice roster. The team has a number of skill-position non-imports who could expand their roles, with Scott McHenry and Jordan Sisco needing repetitions to get accustomed to the CFL while Stu Foord has yet to receive much of a chance to establish himself in the 'Riders' offence. And perhaps most importantly, third-string quarterback Cole Bergquist has been around the 'Riders for over two seasons and should be getting close to either taking over as the team's backup or making way for another prospect.

At the same time, a series of promotions from the practice roster to the active one will also open up plenty of space for new import talent. And the prospect of using the end of 2011 as an early start to training camp for 2012 for an unusually large crop of new additions could give the 'Riders a leg up on their competition.

Of course, the 'Riders almost certainly won't give up on 2011 until they're mathematically eliminated - and it could be that we'll see a late-season surge. But it's at least time to start planning to make the most of the chance to prepare for the years to come, and the season will look like even more of a waste if the 'Riders pair continued disappointment with a failure to plan for the future.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Adam Radwanski warns that Ontario's voters can't afford to stay home from today's provincial election.

- Jim Stanford calls out the Harper Cons and their right-win echo chamber for their baseless and gratuitous attacks on unions. But given the decades-old trend linking stagnant wages and increasing inequality to a reduction in union activity, I'm not sure it's such a bad thing for the progressive cause in the long run if the Cons continue to make it abundantly clear that they're dedicated to destroying organized labour and the greater equality and prosperity it stands for.

- Frances Russell rightly points out that while there's plenty to be proud of in Manitoba's provincial election outcome, the province saw a massive gap between its voting results and the resulting seat distribution - making for just one more data point in favour of proportional representation.

- Finally, Thomas Walkom notes that the Occupy Wall Street movement (which is making its way into Canada and elsewhere) looks to play an important role in shaping public discussion of our economic future.

New column day

Here, on how the small-c conservative wave that was projected as a possible consequence of a majority federal government has instead given way to a tide of voters rejecting the Harper Cons' mindset.

For further reading, Susan Delacourt and I both considered different "magic numbers" which could have changed the face of Canadian politics. Chantal Hebert makes a similar point to that made in the column. Update: And the Calgary Herald documents the Harper Cons' apparently-failing attempt to cheerlead Tim Hudak to power in Ontario.

Wednesday Evening Links

Miscellaneous material for your midweek reading.

- Erin compares the stimulative effects of Ontario's election platforms:

A multiplier is the amount by which a dollar of budgetary outlay increases Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The federal Department of Finance estimates multipliers of 1.3 for public expenditure, 0.9 for personal tax cuts and 0.2 for corporate tax cuts in the year after their enactment.

Applying these multipliers to Ontario’s election platforms suggests a GDP boost of $1.3 billion from the Conservatives, $1.4 billion from the Liberals and $1.8 billion from the NDP if corporate tax credits are treated as corporate tax cuts. Counting these credits as public spending brings the NDP’s stimulus to $2.3 billion.

Of course, all of the above multipliers would be lower in Ontario because it is smaller than the national economy. Proportionally more spending would flow outside the province than outside the country as a whole. The NDP’s Buy Ontario policy would limit this outflow by keeping a larger share of procurement spending inside the province.

Given higher outflows and lower multipliers at the provincial level, the federal government should take primary responsibility for using fiscal policy to manage economic demand. However, to the extent that Ontario provincial platforms can be evaluated as stimulus packages, the NDP proposal is strongest.

New Democrats would deliver the most stimulus and job creation at the lowest fiscal cost by focussing on measures with the biggest bang per buck: direct public investment and targeted tax credits. By contrast, Liberals and Conservatives have prioritized slashing tax rates on corporate profits, the least effective way to stimulate the economy.

- Andrew Steele is right to point out the need to treat voter suppression as the crime that it is. But it's equally important that those of us who value widespread participation call out attempts to suppress the vote through legislation and other means as well, rather than buying into the spin that we should value evidence-free assertions about a need to crack down over real access to the polls.

- CUPE notes that the Sask Party's rhetoric about privatizing surgical functions to increase the number of procedures performed has proven entirely false in practice, as millions of dollars in added funding (contingent on the money being siphoned into the private sector) have actually led to less surgeries being performed.

- Finally, I'm guessing most readers will already know about the Manitoba NDP's fourth straight mandate. But it's still a huge plus to see that the efforts to build a right-wing western bloc have hit a barrier at the Manitoba border - and hopefully we'll see even more pushback as the fall's election season progresses.

NDP Leadership Roundup

A few very quick updates since my last commentary on the NDP leadership race...

Martin Singh, Nathan Cullen and Paul Dewar are in, while Thomas Mulcair should be shortly (with Phil Edmonston's endorsement). Brian Topp's new endorsers include Libby Davies and Shirley Douglas among others.

But the most important development of the last little while is what seems to me a relatively surprising announcement that Peter Julian won't pursue the leadership. That's so both because he'd already managed to earn several key caucus endorsements, and because his combination of a British Columbia base, organizing experience in Quebec, the potential to win over ethnic communities around other urban areas and strong issue identification looked to give him as plausible a path to victory as anybody.

With Julian not running, several groups of voters who figured to end up in his camp may be up for grabs - and it's not at all clear that the candidates who have joined the race so far are great fits to win them over. Which means that I for one will very much be hoping for another larger name or two to enter the race.

Tuesday Afternoon Links

This and that for your Tuesday reading.

- Chris Selley points out the absurdity of Ontario's Libs and PCs both running away from the idea of a coalition just as needlessly as their federal counterparts. But let's remember that since the NDP spoke up for the idea of a coalition federally, the Libs were entirely comfortable taking a supporting role - so if Ontario's election produces relatively similar seat totals for the three main parties, might the NDP's willingness to consider a coalition actually give it the upper hand in forming government?

- The Cons are finding out the hard way that the type of evidence-free bluster that sustains their own party doesn't get very far with the likes of Elections Canada. And the NDP is nicely pushing back against the obvious implications of the Cons' central message control.

- Murray Mandryk notes that the Sask Party's determination to pick fights with Saskatchewan workers is leading to just as much posturing and bullying with unions who try to avoid conflict as with ones who are up for the challenge - leaving little reason for workers to take the former path.

- Finally, Andrew Jackson comments on Canada's shaky economic fundamentals - with a particular focus on how the trade-at-all-costs agenda pushed by the Cons and Libs alike has undermined our balance of payments compared to our international competitors.

On labelling

Aaron Wherry has noted that one Stephen Harper answer that struck me as shocking has in fact become a regular Con economic talking point. And it's worth noting both how inaccurate the line about an "expansionary" fiscal policy actually is, and the harmful effects if the public comes to believe it.

To start with, let's note that nothing in the Cons' fiscal policy has changed in the slightest since their June budget - which attempted to claim some job creation out of past stimulus spending, but contained at best some minor tinkering in terms of anything remotely aimed at increasing economic growth (particularly contrasted against the contractionary effects of actually cutting off stimulus programs).

In effect, the Cons have taken what they previous labeled as austerity and deficit-fighting, and simply declared it retroactively to be "expansionary".

Which figures to serve two purposes for the Cons. First, it gives them a position - however ill-founded - against the case for further stimulus that the opposition parties are rightly starting to make as the economic situation in Canada and abroad gets bleaker by the day. And second, if things do get worse, it sets them up to declare that expansionary policy has failed, and thus insist that the beatings have to intensify until morale improves.

And that's why it's particularly important for the opposition parties not to lose the battle of language over what the Cons have done to date. Simply put, the task for this fall should be to dredge up every available example of the Cons declaring their existing budget to be focused on austerity and cuts rather than anything "expansionary" - to make sure that both the Cons and their policies take the blame they deserve.

Light posting ahead

Gone a-conferencing until next Friday, with limited posting in the meantime. But that's fine, since there are plenty of provincial elections which should keep you busy in the interim.

Saturday Morning Links

Assorted content for your weekend reading.

- Trish Hennessy points out that there's a debt crisis facing many Canadians that will only be exacerbated by public-sector slashing:

1.57 Trillion
Canadians’ household debt in the second quarter of 2011, reaching an all-time high this year.
...
150.8%
Canadians’ household debt ratio to personal disposable income in the second quarter of 2011, higher than our U.S. neighbours.

148.7%
Canadian households’ credit market debt ratio to personal disposable income, second quarter 2011.
...
1 in 10
Number of Canadians who say even with a credit card or line of credit they would have trouble paying an unforeseen $500 expense.

- Janice Kennedy discusses the Cons' efforts to shout down anybody who expresses even the most reasonable disagreement with them:

If differing opinions were anti-Semitic, then half of present-day Israel could be considered anti-Semitic.

It's like the neo-cons' familiar "anti-American" label routinely hung on Canadians opposed to the most recent Bush administration.

A disparaging word about George W. and his cohorts, and - zap - you were anti-American. Trouble is, such reasoning would have made an awful lot of United States citizens anti-American.

But such charges effectively shut down debate. That's their value.
...
(D)on't hold your breath waiting for some version of Speakers' Corner here. Our neo-con overlords wouldn't stand for it.

They have no qualms about denouncing human rights commissions - which, for all their flawed mechanics, do try to correct wrongs - as "star chambers." As newspaper readers, some of them threaten to cancel their subscription when the paper runs columnists not on their wavelength. They delight in turning up their noses at "political correctness," instead of the, yes, sometimes awkward impulse to reduce the sum total of offence given in the world.

And they apparently relish shutting down, and shutting up, the opposition.

- Naturally I have some doubt about Skippy's claim that conservatism has ever particularly opposed lying, stupidity or creative math. But there's no disagreeing with the reality that any aversion to those problems is sorely lacking from the right on both sides of the U.S. border.

- Finally, the good news when it comes to diversity in candidates in Saskatchewan's provincial election: First Nations are better represented than ever before in the main parties' candidate nominations, with the proportion of aboriginals among the NDP's candidates actually exceeding that in the general population. But then there's the bad news: CBC notes that there's a long way to go toward anything approaching representative levels of women candidates.

Update: Let's add Paul Wells on the NDP leadership race:

The worst thing for the NDP would be a coronation. I’ve been an admirer of Topp’s intelligence and strategic sense since it became obvious, in 2006 or so, that Layton grew bolder and more sure-footed whenever Topp was on hiatus from his labour-union day job to whisper in the leader’s ear. In private, on paper, Topp is the closest any party has to Stephen Harper for political skill. But the things nobody knows about him are most of the things that matter in politics. Can he fill a room with his voice? Stand up to brutal attack? Persuade people who didn’t think they could ever agree with him?

The Liberal lesson is that a problem doesn’t go away just because you wish it didn’t matter. Stéphane Dion’s incomprehensible English was a really big problem. Michael Ignatieff’s eagerness to please was a really big problem. Jack Layton’s last gift to the NDP is this: they have more to lose now than ever before. They should kick the tires on Topp and Mulcair and everyone else, hard.

Musical interlude

Delerium feat. Sarah McLachlan - Silence

Parliament In Review: September 28, 2011

Wednesday's Day in Review comes a day later than usual. But I'll plan to stick to the new schedule for future editions, as the anchors which nicely point to interventions from the current day seem to have a habit of disappearing later.

The Big Issue

Once again, most of the day's debate was spent on the Cons' omnibus crime bill - with a few more interesting developments.

Paul Dewar and Joe Comartin both tried again to pass non-contentious parts of the Cons' crime bill while allowing for the rest to be studied. Francois Lapointe noted that no community should see the economic activity that comes from prison expansions as a net plus. Andrew Cash pointed out that overcrowded prisons will lead to dangers for corrections workers - which led to Scott Armstrong proudly pointing to the prison construction the Cons normally try to downplay. And Brian Jean became perhaps the first Con to admit that the bill might not be perfect - though whether he or anybody else will follow up by allowing anybody else to meaningfully discuss improvements is another question entirely.

But the quote of the day goes to Dave MacKenzie in offering up what seems to be the Cons' governing philosophy - on plenty of other issues as well as crime:

Justice is not done through an open door.

Which might come as a surprise to those of us familiar with the importance of an open court system precisely because a locked door tends to serve as a breeding ground for abuse - but probably hints at what we can expect in the years to come.

Imprudent Statements

John Duncan's answer as to why the Cons have no interest in improving services on First Nations reserves speaks volumes:

Hon. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, according to the Auditor General, the quality of life gap between our first nations and other Canadians continues to grow, and the government has not managed to work with the first nations to resolve the problem.

Will the government commit, through a new partnership among governments, to provide equal funding for services of equal quality, as called for by the National Chief, Mr. Atleo?

Hon. John Duncan (Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the government has a responsibility to treat taxpayer money prudently.
...
Mr. Speaker, the government has a responsibility to deal with budgetary items in a prudent way. We are doing that. We are sensitive to the needs of our first nations and aboriginal people.

I have had meetings in this regard and will continue to behave in a responsible manner.

That's Why They Didn't Ask You

It's been absurd enough to see John Baird jumping up to take questions directed at Tony Clement. But Wednesday saw that farce go to another level: when Charlie Angus asked repeated questions about Clement's actions in picking and choosing which source of funding might have been available to fund an arena project, Baird managed to have the gall to complain that the questions have nothing to do with Baird or his department. (Of course, no explanation as to why he rose to answer them was forthcoming.)

In Brief

Nycole Turmel challenged the Cons to act on the National Council of Welfare's report showing that investing in ending poverty would more than pay for itself. Joe Comartin introduced a bill to allow for single-event sports betting, while John Rafferty proposed legislation to protect a worker's job in the case of injury or long-term illness of up to a year. Scott Andrews quoted Opposition Stephen Harper to the effect that any minister accepting benefits from a Crown corporation benefactor is either extraordinarily unethical or extraordinarily stupid. Just in time for the Cons to endorse their provincial cousins, Andrew Cash pointed out that the two are repeating conflicting lines of spin on the state of the economy. And Francoise Boivin questioned the Cons' willingness to facilitate online hate speech.

Friday Morning Links

Assorted content to end your week.

- Dan Gardner rightly points out that the Cons' continued efforts to trash our parliamentary institutions now that they have a majority shouldn't come as any surprise - even if they still demand plenty of outrage:

Got that? If a member of Parliament insists on knowing the cost of the crime bill - fulfilling the most basic function of Parliament as guardian of the public purse - then he doesn't care about victims of crime. The swine.

This is the Harper government exactly as we have always known it.

If you are critical of the government's policy on Afghanistan, you support the Taliban. Question military spending and you hate the troops. Express concern about the cost of the crime bill and you don't care about victims of crime.
...
Want to debate the crime bill on the floor of the House? Too bad. Want to ask Tony Clement about his blatantly political misappropriation of $50 million, or the promotion of Tony Gazebo to a cabinet position which requires him to guard against precisely that sort of greasy-fingered management? Fugeddaboutit.

And then there was the bizarre decision of a Conservative-dominated ethics committee to examine the CBC's efforts to avoid access to information requests. How many other far more pressing matters are there in the ethics file? A dozen? And what is it the Conservatives hope to discover? New techniques for stonewalling access requests? Not likely given all the ways the government keeps information locked down. Observers were also stunned by the list of witnesses sought by the committee. Among many odd choices was a federal court judge called to discuss a decision he delivered last year - something which is never done because it violates the separation of legislature and judiciary. But why let the Constitution get in the way of a cheap shot at the CBC?

And in the same vein, Susan Riley has her own take on what Con majority government has meant:

Government MPs now dominate Commons committees and they have been busily burying leftover scandals, lingering embarrassments, and uncomfortable findings from previous auditor-generals' reports. They are excising troublesome items from committee agendas, sometimes behind closed doors, which means opposition MPs cannot even disclose what was said.

They are imposing closure on their controversial "tough on crime" omnibus bill, apparently; they know what the experts say, they know what the Opposition thinks and they don't care.
...
All authoritarian regimes find it more efficient to dispense with democratic protocol, but, while tempting, it can be dangerous - especially when this same impatience with criticism, and unwillingness to compromise, attends the introduction of new bills, or responses to unexpected events. Sometimes the devil is in the details; sometimes what looks like "common sense" - forcing prisoners to clean up city parks, say - is costly, dangerous and impractical.

Anyone who remembers the Chrétien era will recall that resistance was futile: what his close cadre of advisers decided became law and dissent, within or without, was ignored or ruthlessly shut down.

Harper used to hate that. Now he takes it a step further.

- And if Riley needed more examples of the Cons' abuses of their position, they continue to prove that they think accountability is nothing more than a punishment to be imposed on others - this time by simultaneously trying to tie up the Parliamentary Budget Officer with studies of every single private members' bill while holding their own government bills to a lower standard of study.

- pogge reminds us that while the Cons are pushing a myriad of questionable trade agreements, the Libs have proudly taken credit for their role in promoting one of the worst signed to date.

- And finally, the Star weighs in on why Tony Clement is unfit for cabinet.

Ostentation nation

Remember the dark days gone by when "gold-plated" political perks were only a metaphor? Because John Baird is apparently putting that long national nightmare behind us.

Unite the Left Behind the NDP

No longer just a post tag, now a reality.

Thursday Morning Links

This and that for your Thursday reading.

- Brian Topp highlights the fact that any shared sacrifice to address the Cons' carefully-fabricated federal deficit needs to include those who have the most to spare:

Instead of increasing revenues by cutting high income taxes, as promised, American conservatives tipped the United States into a permanent structural deficit – briefly mitigated by Bill Clinton’s administration, and then made worse by George Bush.

The harvest is a multi-trillion dollar public debt, accumulated even during periods of economic growth. Sapping the ability of the American government to respond to recession and economic shock – like the shocks facing the world economy today. In the process, as intended, we have witnessed on of the greatest transfers of wealth from the poor to the rich in world history.

Not in Canada? Like all other industrial economies, Canada foolishly mirrored American tax policy and has paid many of the same prices. The Conference Board of Canada recently reported that the gap between low and high-income earners is every bit as striking in Canada as in the United States. In our modest Canadian way, we too run structural deficits to pay for annual tax giveaways to those among us who need help the least.

Mr. Reagan's tax policies belong in his museum. If these times call for belt-tightening – a highly debatable proposition, to say the least – then let's start among those with the largest belts. A good place would be with a new top-tier income tax bracket, and a careful look at loopholes and giveaways that embarrass even American billionaires – some of whom are now leading the growing chorus for change.

- Aaron Wherry points out how Opposition Stephen Harper once decried the measures to stifle democratic debate that we're seeing from his government.

- And we can only speculate as to what Opposition Stephen Harper would have had to say about a single cabinet minister's use of $3 million worth of Challenger jet flights.

- Finally, Chantal Hebert rightly notes that Harper's grip on his party has only tightened since the Cons took a majority hold on the House of Commons:

In no small part, Harper survived (minority government) by putting iron-clad controls on his cabinet, his caucus and the civil service apparatus at his disposal.

But those who expected such controls to be relaxed under majority rule should think again.
...
The Conservative majority has also been flexing its post-election muscles in parliamentary committees.

Some of them are morphing into star chambers for the government; places where the Conservatives come to settle partisan scores.

In one instance, Elections Canada and other officials are being hauled in to discuss Conservatives charges that the NDP accepted illicit union contributions to finance its June convention.

In another, the Conservatives want rival journalists working for Sun Media to testify about the CBC’s ongoing battle with the Information Commissioner over access to the corporation’s records.
...
Be it by design or because circumstances impose it on the government, the energy that the Conservatives no longer have to spend on keeping Parliament on their preferred track will eventually be redirected to a more muscular policy agenda.

But expect MPs to be the last to find out.

New column day

Here, on how the Regina Food Bank's current crisis demonstrates the need for a social safety net that isn't so easily shredded.

For further reading...
- The Leader-Post has more about the problems now facing the Food Bank.
- The number of current Food Bank users - estimated at over 10,000 per month - comes from the Archdiocese of Regina.
- And the National Council on Welfare's recent report on poverty can be found here.